What's new

UAD-1 Card Vs TC Electronics Powercore?

Depends - the option upgrade for the tc is sony oxford, which is pretty high tech stuff.

I don't think you could go wrong with either card, but personally I'm getting tired of the PCI trip so I'm thinking about native waves.
 
Funnily enough, Im about to purchase one of those cards.

A very experienced composer friend of mine told me the following;

Powercore has the better reverb

UAD-1 tends to have better quality compressors, eqs, etc.

Of course this is largely personal taste.

Two things I like about the Powercore over the UAD card is that it had a guitar modeller on it that sounds AWESOME.

You can also buy the Access Virus software to run off the Powercore card and that also sounds AWESOME. (I dont know many adjectives) :)

Oh, and a third thing; the Powercore has a very cool vocal channel strip. (Some or all of these things may exist on the UAD card, I havent checked it out fully yet.)
 
A friend of mine at Sweetwater Music told me that he's seen a lot of folks with both cards. If you can get past any PCI conflicts you would have the best of both worlds.

However...

If you get one of the cards (like the UAD) to handle EQs and compression, you could get a convolution verb like Waves IR. With the decreased hit on the CPU because the UAD is handling EQ and compression tasks you might be able to run more native plug ins - just a thought.
 
Scott & CJ,

I'll bet you're both right on about these cards.

I've been twisting in the wind over these two for the past few days.

Typically, TC has that clean, bright reverb sounds - the anti-Lexicon warm and fuzzy sound. I'm hearing that the UAD classic tube compressors and EQ's are the stuff to have.

Has either of you worked with the TC channel strip? From the lit I get the impression that it has a tube emulation mode. In reality is that any competition for the modeled versions of the the LA-2A and the Fairchild? (I have my doubts about that but hope always springs eternal.)

I really don't want to get another convolution reverb as I'm rather disappointed in their density within a mix.

Yes, both would be great but I'm trying my best not to make my G5 an unwieldly beast. Any real world knowledge on conflicts using both?

Best regards,

Jack Weaver
 
I would go with the Powercore card for a couple of reasons. First and most important it is being supported by third party developers more. Heck the Sony stuff alone is reason enough to go with the PC. Also there seem to be a lot less horror stories compatibilty wise with the PC.

Hope this helps!
 
In another thread, it shows that Han Zimmer used the Powercore firewire rackmounts instead of 2 digidesign pro tools systems when he scored King Arthur:

http://www.tcelectronic.com/Default.asp?Id=3682

In the article, pay particular attention to this statement:


"For each of the writing rigs, Zimmer used a dual-Opteron-based 128-input Nuendo mixing system to mix the output of the computers running GigaStudio, featuring RME Hammerfall DSP MADI cards and a TC PowerCore FireWire. These mixing systems provided a cost-effective alternative compared to renting or purchasing two Digidesign Pro Tools HD Accel systems with the same 96-input configuration used back in the LA studio, which was partly made possible because the PowerCore platform provides many of the same plug-ins previously available only to Pro Tools users."


Pretty amazing stuff, wouldn't you say? So essentially what it sounds like they're saying is that with a few Firewire PowerCore Systems one could compete with a Pro Tools system in the real world - a fact I find amazing price-wise - yet still without compromise.
 
Yes, powerwise absolutely.... however where PT still has the advantage is number of plugins and cross user compatibilty. PC has a long ways to go to catch up with the sheer number of plugins but in it's defense PT has been out for decades...
 
One issue I know of with the Powercore (and maybe the UAD-1 too) is that it clashes with Delta 1010 cards.

Apparently the Delta card hogs the PCI bus more than some other sound cards. It is very likely that it would cause problems with the UAD card too.

One composer I know had to put his Powercore card in a slave machine and access it via FX teleport. It wouldnt get along with the Delta 1010 in his host system.
 
I wonder if the Firewire version would prove less of a conflict than the PCI version (including UAD?)
 
Actually, it appears that the Firewire is around $500 more than the PCI card, roughly three times the Element card;

http://www.northernsound.net/Sales/processing/specialpurpose/tcelectronic/powercore.html (http://www.northernsound.net/Sales/proc ... rcore.html)
 
Dear Frederick,

In my case, I use a G5 (as I believe you do also) and when I was referring to conflicts I was meaning those problems caused by using both a PCI-based Powercore and a PCI-based UAD-1 within the same G5 chassis. But you bring up an interesting point. I might consider getting a UAD (of course, a PCI card) and a firewire Powercore.

Since I have my audio interface (Pro Tools 002R) on the FW400 and all my sample libraries on the FW800 chain - where would be the best place to put a FW Powercore?

Any help out there from anyone who has previously played the part of a willing guinea pig on this issue?

Thanks,

Jack
 
Donnie might help there since he has the TC but I don't know if its firewire... hmmmm
 
Scott Cairns said:
Actually, it appears that the Firewire is around $500 more than the PCI card, roughly three times the Element card;

http://www.northernsound.net/Sales/processing/specialpurpose/tcelectronic/powercore.html (http://www.northernsound.net/Sales/proc ... rcore.html)

Sweetwater (who's prices aren't the best) can drop $100 off this price. That's not the point though - I agree its expensive :(
 
Also, I wonder how this little jewel works into the puzzle, um ...solution?

http://www.tcelectronic.com/PowerCoreCompact

I'd didn't see anywhere in the lit that it wouldn't work on a desktop. Maybe I need to read further into it the multiple pages of info on it.
 
Jack Weaver said:
Also, I wonder how this little jewel works into the puzzle, um ...solution?

http://www.tcelectronic.com/PowerCoreCompact

I'd didn't see anywhere in the lit that it wouldn't work on a desktop. Maybe I need to read further into it the multiple pages of info on it.

This is cool - a small firewire version? Interesting.
 
Another (poor man's?) approach to offloading the DAW's CPU is to use FX-Teleport for convolution plugins. One of the (currently) two impulses in my mixer template runs on an old P3/733 file server. It's a long and dense impulse from Ernest that I use for brass and percussion. The latency is still very nicely in the ER region (1024 sample buffer).
 
CJ said:
Donnie might help there since he has the TC but I don't know if its firewire... hmmmm


Mine is the PCI version running on a dual G4. The other PCI slots I have are the RME 9652 which takes up two slots and the powercore. Seems like I vaguely remember having to move the PC around a slot or two to get it to work right. Since then though it's been rock solid.
 
Check this site out.
http://www.chrismilne.com/uadforums/viewforum.php?f=1&sid=5acfd3e84e9e313afa589e80f9ec1fe7
It has some threads about comparing the PC and the UAD. Of course since this is a UAD site it might be a little biased :?
The arguments are valuable anyway.
I use a UAD all the time. This is the best investment I ever made. Everything about the plugs is outstanding. The guitar module might not be as good as the PC (I haven't heard the PC guitar module yet) but I got some great guitar tracks from UAD Nigel anyway. A friend of mine has a 1010 on a PC and the UAD is giving him no prob.
When reading from most producers/engineers, the most important elements of mixing is EQ and compression.
Of course because of dry orchestral libraries, the reverb is important to some, in which case the UAD is not the best choice. For everything else, it is amazing. As soon as I can afford it, I'll get a PC as well.
 
Top Bottom