Reason 9.5 and my UAD issues...
Every time I load up any UAD effects plugin from my Apollo Firewire Interface it has latency issues in Reason 9.5 and sounds horrible. Not happening in Cubase 9 or Logic X. The Apollo interface itself is working great with Reason host and other plugs like T-Racks, Spectrasonics Trillian, Toontracks, etc.
Anyone else having this issue? Fix? I know it just came out but was wondering if this was just on my end?
Thanks!
Anyone else having this issue? Fix? I know it just came out but was wondering if this was just on my end?
Thanks!
Have you turned on latency compensation? Bottom right hand corner.
You can also do it from the Options drop down menu. If you're on a smaller screen laptop, you might not see it in the bottom right corner without expanding the window.
You can also do it from the Options drop down menu. If you're on a smaller screen laptop, you might not see it in the bottom right corner without expanding the window.
Delay Compensation is on, yes. It says, when I add say a Teletronix LA2A compressor "Computer too slow to play song".QVprod wrote:Have you turned on latency compensation? Bottom right hand corner.
You can also do it from the Options drop down menu. If you're on a smaller screen laptop, you might not see it in the bottom right corner without expanding the window.
I do not have this issue in any of my other DAWs/Hosts. Is there something I can do about it within Reason?
Seems there may be differing issues with UAD plugins. viewtopic.php?f=47&t=7501339. There may be some other threads about UAD in the beta forum (It's now public).
I felt compelled to reply here- mainly because I've had nothing short of a great experience with Reason 9.5, Apollo quad MK2 thunderbolt and 2012 15 inch MacBook Pro retina (the low end model that year).
The reason I wanted to comment is because I haven't heard much positive review on Reason and UAD. So far I've been able to use all of my plugins with 9.5 - and not even a hiccup. I haven't intentionally pushed the limits, but standard workflow for me involves anywhere from 3 to 5 UAD plugins per track - averaging track counts in the 8-12 track range. I give a positive review on this front.
As others have mentioned before, once you start using plugins side by side with rack extensions - you really start to appreciate the uniformity, simplicity and power of the RE. If UAD offered a RE version, you can bet I would choose that over the VST.
The reason I wanted to comment is because I haven't heard much positive review on Reason and UAD. So far I've been able to use all of my plugins with 9.5 - and not even a hiccup. I haven't intentionally pushed the limits, but standard workflow for me involves anywhere from 3 to 5 UAD plugins per track - averaging track counts in the 8-12 track range. I give a positive review on this front.
As others have mentioned before, once you start using plugins side by side with rack extensions - you really start to appreciate the uniformity, simplicity and power of the RE. If UAD offered a RE version, you can bet I would choose that over the VST.
Same problems herespikey wrote:Well, I wonder what's different (besides the obvious Thunderbolt vs Firewire interface) Yours runs fine, and mine stutters and stammers like the buffer is set WAYYY too small (it's not- I set it up to 1024 with the same results).
What type of UAD plugins are you loading? have you loaded DSP intensive UAD plugins? I want you to load those and tell us what you get.lofi1990 wrote:I felt compelled to reply here- mainly because I've had nothing short of a great experience with Reason 9.5, Apollo quad MK2 thunderbolt and 2012 15 inch MacBook Pro retina (the low end model that year).
The reason I wanted to comment is because I haven't heard much positive review on Reason and UAD. So far I've been able to use all of my plugins with 9.5 - and not even a hiccup. I haven't intentionally pushed the limits, but standard workflow for me involves anywhere from 3 to 5 UAD plugins per track - averaging track counts in the 8-12 track range. I give a positive review on this front.
As others have mentioned before, once you start using plugins side by side with rack extensions - you really start to appreciate the uniformity, simplicity and power of the RE. If UAD offered a RE version, you can bet I would choose that over the VST.
Don't use legacy ones. I can use legacy version and load like 20 and over 1176 to see one DSP bar on my system. use those DSP intensive one's and tell us what your result is. It is not about the number of UAD that you are loading. It is the quality and the DSP intensiveness.
Gulale aka Bereket
My guess is that the issue stems from Reason running all plugins at 64 samples buffer size. For the UAD that means it has to send a lot of small buffers all the time instead of sending some larger buffers some of the time back and forth between the DSP and the CPU.
That could be Norman, but I just want Reason to run UAD plugins like Cubase or Logic Pro does. There are No issues on those hosts. I am glad I'm not alone on this issue, and I'm sure they will fix it in time. At least that's my hope. I still don't understand how lofi has no issues and others like me do.
Well a software that is made for live rendering and modulation and a DSP system that relies on tunneling audio back and forth through hardware don't exactly mix well. Horses for courses.spikey wrote:That could be Norman, but I just want Reason to run UAD plugins like Cubase or Logic Pro does. There are No issues on those hosts. I am glad I'm not alone on this issue, and I'm sure they will fix it in time. At least that's my hope. I still don't understand how lofi has no issues and others like me do.
Just doesn't makes sense. If it works flawless on other DAWS then there must be a problem why its not the same in Reason 9.5 I hope they rectify it soon, I love the Reason workflow.
Well how does what I said not make sense? If its actually the case that Reason runs the plugins at 64 samples, which is very probable as it does so with REs and needs to do so because of how CV is integrated with audio, thats a good explanation. So you could compare the overall performance between DAWs at 64 samples buffer size.Blast wrote:Just doesn't makes sense. If it works flawless on other DAWS then there must be a problem why its not the same in Reason 9.5 I hope they rectify it soon, I love the Reason workflow.
Ok I see what you are saying but even so I can still get more out of S1 pro even at 64 samples.normen wrote:Well how does what I said not make sense? If its actually the case that Reason runs the plugins at 64 samples, which is very probable as it does so with REs and needs to do so because of how CV is integrated with audio, thats a good explanation. So you could compare the overall performance between DAWs at 64 samples buffer size.Blast wrote:Just doesn't makes sense. If it works flawless on other DAWS then there must be a problem why its not the same in Reason 9.5 I hope they rectify it soon, I love the Reason workflow.
normen wrote:Well how does what I said not make sense? If its actually the case that Reason runs the plugins at 64 samples, which is very probable as it does so with REs and needs to do so because of how CV is integrated with audio, thats a good explanation. So you could compare the overall performance between DAWs at 64 samples buffer size.Blast wrote:Just doesn't makes sense. If it works flawless on other DAWS then there must be a problem why its not the same in Reason 9.5 I hope they rectify it soon, I love the Reason workflow.
Again, I have tried over 5 DAWs normen there is no even a single CPU overload even on 32 sample and 16, let alone 64. I don't think it is hard to understand what we are saying either from our end. Reason is using the computer DSP every time you load UAD plugins and depending on what you load on UAD card will affect the computer CPU respectively. If you use legacy 1176 to see the bar in Reason will take you 20 to 30 instances I guess. If you use UAD DSP intensive plugins, Reason CPU bar will be full instantly. That doesn't happen in any of DAWs out there. I thought you new even the reason we are buying UAD cards other than the quality. It is obvious that to offload CPU from native processors. I will see you again when PH release a fix. It is broken. Period.
Gulale aka Bereket
Agreed. If there is no internal adjustment to be made in 9.5 to fix this issue with the UAD Interface/plugins, then yes it's a bug I think. Why? Comaprisons as to what causes this issue is fine, but the bottom line at this point is it won't work right for "lots" of us so far (and on a separate issue- I have far more money tied into the UAD hardware and software than I do with Reason). And since this problem "only" seems to exist in Reason 9.5 (for lots of us), and not on my legal and latest versions of Cubase 9x & Logic X, I would have to agree it's NOT a UAD issue. That leaves only one to point at doesn't it.I will see you again when PH release a fix. It is broken. Period.
Well its a failed investment if you want to offload, thats why ProTools added support for native AAX, you can simply run more instances for less money on a CPU. The only advantage is less latency (for UAD only with Apollo) and a hardware copy protection to sell expensive plugins (which undoubtedly are good quality).Gulale wrote:Again, I have tried over 5 DAWs normen there is no even a single CPU overload even on 32 sample and 16, let alone 64. I don't think it is hard to understand what we are saying either from our end. Reason is using the computer DSP every time you load UAD plugins and depending on what you load on UAD card will affect the computer CPU respectively. If you use legacy 1176 to see the bar in Reason will take you 20 to 30 instances I guess. If you use UAD DSP intensive plugins, Reason CPU bar will be full instantly. That doesn't happen in any of DAWs out there. I thought you new even the reason we are buying UAD cards other than the quality. It is obvious that to offload CPU from native processors. I will see you again when PH release a fix. It is broken. Period.
You still have to see that DSP load simply means time has been spent, that can be for anything and in this case its probably for sending small packets back and forth. It doesn't have to mean the CPU is actually doing much.
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests