Hmmm, maybe you should have read the manual of the plugin before you flamed it. Here's a copy right from the manual of the UAD VOG. The EQ circuitry is bypassed when Flat is enabled (red LED); the circuit is active when Flat is disabled (green LED) Hey look! Your flat button is set to RED.....derp. Whops!!! So what is blatantly obvious to me, is you have no idea what you are talking about.
Although there is certainly truth in what you are saying, if it is that simple for you to enhance bass frequencies the same way the plugin does ( especially for dialogue) why do you sound like Gilbert Godfrey on helium?
After testing your process I realized your point is one dimensional. As soon as I change frequencies in the VOG the resonance parameters shift. That means you emulated one fraction of the available effects ability. That is like claiming you can play like Charlie Parker because you can play middle C.
@NotRecordingReview - so what do you think of the what the manual says about "flat" Flat The EQ circuitry is bypassed when Flat is enabled (red LED); the circuit is active when Flat is disabled (green LED). When Flat is on, the dry signal path of the hardware is still being modeled and DSP is used. For true bypass, use the Power switch. - Maybe another test with flat green lit?
yeah you have modeled the static eq curve of the transformer but that is only part one.... the main usage of the plugin you have "BY-PASSED" so you are not using it correctly as you have it in bypass - which still models the static eq curve... maybe read the manual next time first lol!
it was in bypass mode the entire time.... he was only getting the static xformer eq curve which is still active even in bypass mode. - needs to read manual on this before 86ing it lol
I don't own vog... saw this video while searching out the software. A q response to constant pink noise is only representative of a small portion of any audio device. That's like saying two different microphones are the same because they share the same q. The fact that your so pissed about it... now that's comedy
This, I guess, is where you and I may disagree. We've got frequency response, distortion, and time. That's what defines what a device sounds like. If two different microphones measure identically in all those categories, those two mics will sound identical (at least in blind tests). Getting the frequency responses identical in the time domain is difficult in microphones. It's not difficult at all with EQ. It's basically an issue of science vs the magic of audio for me. In my view, UAD pushed the magic end (claiming the VOG can retune a tom) way too far in order to sell stuff most of us already have. Not everyone feels that's unethical. I can live with that, but I'm personally done with UAD even if I do miss their Maximizer sometimes. Yeah, I get laughed at all the time when I'm pissed. I wish I could do it on queue. I'd have a future in standup.
+recordingreview man you wouldn't have a future in standup, even if that was a joke - it's actually quite embarrassing, how you were talking etc, proper silly... dude, relax, VOG works and does what it says it does and I paid £50 odd quid for it... and yea, I use it on almost everything that requires a nice bump. Who cares if you can re-create the same with stock EQ? I don't. And to be honest, the comments are more funnier, and interesting than that video! I watched it and I wouldn't be surprised if you are a regular gearslutz (forum) member.... those guys just remind of this video. Really man, it's sad. And I'm sure you're probably a very pleasant guy in reality. Just that video, how you spoke and the slamming of UAD is a little OVER THE TOP, seriously, it's like you have a vendetta out on them lol. Fk it man, who cares? Really.... we all know what we were buying when we bought it right? Didn't you? You do have a 14 day demo period too! I mean, could you have not figured all this out BEFORE paying for it? And why did you buy it.... ah man... I can't really go on but the more I think about it the more I realise I am having more fun reading the funny replies to your ridiculous test. Tests are pretty hard to do right, in all honesty, those who said using noise is not the right way to test are right. But why did you buy it? Why did you buy something you knew what you were buying and could easily do it with EQ? That is the silly part. Be a gentleman mate, fuck it and who cares, UAD make quality software and that's fact. Top notch software and top notch customer service.
Hi Brandon - We've posted a full response to your video at your original posting on Recording Review. What the UAD VOG customer is buying for $149 is a near-perfect replica of the hardware, designed to quickly bump and shape your low end. In some DAWs adjusting the stock EQ to match the VOG would require setting up two separate filters, a cut and a peak, tweaking their frequency and slope as you go - these two filters adjust simultaneously in VOG with the turn of a single frequency knob.
The VOG does vary resonance as you shift through frequencies. That's not a typical feature on your standard ol' high pass resonant filter. Some with a bias towards the hardware unit or UAD will automatically consider that an advantage. It's certainly a subjective facet. I found it a disadvantage, but it's not why I was upset. Whether you believe this variable Q saves 10 seconds or costs 10 seconds isn't a significant enough deviation in my mind. I felt misled by the marketing.
The #s in the video were there to phase cancel with the VoG. They weren't chosen to sound particularly good. You simply want to use "High Pass 2" and then crank up the Q (usually the width of the boost or cut). That'll crank up the resonance.
UAD's marketing was radically too aggressive. Saying the UAD VOG can "retune a tom" implies that it's doing something radically different from what it actually does. I have no issue with the hardware version because few consoles have resonance controls on high pass filters. UAD tells us they make very special plugins. In this case, I already have 6 other EQs (most of 'em free) that do this resonance thing just fine. I would like to know what benefits I get in the UAD VOG that I don't get in the stock Cubase high pass filter.
Shayaan Ali Exactly! I haven't figured out the benefit of VOG either. I didn't get them to 100% phase cancel, but I did get over 30dB of phase cancellation. Calling UAD VOG and the stock Cubase EQ "nearly identical" is fair, I think.
recordingreview when i said littlelabs VOG, i meant the hardware version (as opposed to the UAD VOG). so i ask again - and i'm re-framing your own question here - what benefit do you get in the $400 hardware VOG that you don't get in the stock cubase high pass filter?
There #1 benefit of hardware is it's there. In other words, the thing works without a computer. Anyone mixing on an analog console with no plugins must utilize analog tools. That's why I don't have an issue with the hardware VOG. It serves a purpose to a totally different demographic where a person doesn't have access to the stock Cubase EQ. As for the benefits of analog mixing, that's up for debate. I don't like recalling analog mixes so that's why I mix ITB and I'm happy. My issues are not with my tools, at least. I'm of the opinion there is no reason why I would ever need the hardware VOG as I highly doubt I could pick it out over the stock Cubase EQ in blind tests.
Brandon Drury UA doesn't have an obligation to ensure there are no cheaper alternatives to the products they release, and only release products which are one of a kind. they are merely providing another option - one that a LOT of people are happy to have - and are not forcing you or anyone else to buy their plugins. saying the UAD VOG can retune a tom doesn't imply anything that it doesn't or can't do - you have only yourself to blame for feeling misled. they are hardly keeping the design of the plugin or the hardware that inspired it a secret, and anyone who does two minutes of research and utilizes the 14 day demo before purchasing would understand what it actually does.
shayeasy I agree, it's my fault for trusting that UAD and assuming they were always making tools that were helpful enough to warrant their high price tag. On the other hand, if I buy a $12 hamburger and realize all I was getting was a repackaged McDonald's burger, I'd be upset. The difference here is it's easy to detect when a $12 burger tastes like a Big Mac. The audio world is decidedly more subtle and trust seems to a bigger factor than sonic results. Everyone is free to do their thing, but for me UAD is no longer trustworthy. They have packaged a "generic" plugin with a hardware-style GUI, made sensational claims, utilized celebrity endorsements, and ultimately sold a tool that sounds no better than free stuff. I have no reason to assume that VOG is the only example. The implications that a UAD 1176 is superior to a $50 Stillwell Rocket, for example, are completely shot down for me now that trust is gone. Only after this transition does a person start blind tests and realize that the Stillwell Rocket is BIG TIME...maybe even "better" than the UAD 1176. Ultimately, I'm not on a crusade here. If a person is happy buying a Lexus even after they realize it's stuffed with Hyundai parts, I'm glad for them. However, I believe quite a few people would find this information useful when making purchases in the future.
Interesting. I've heard others not thrilled with the Shadow Hills compressor as well. Those specific things I find my hardware La3a to be great at just don't seem to be included in the UAD La3a.
I wanted get Little Labs Voice of god but I cannot afford an Apollo or satellite. Wish they had a Native version😢 Nothing besides Waves Rbass can compete with the UAD VOG unfortunately........☹ (Also tried Boz Digital Labs Bark of Dog)
I realize that you are skilled enough to recreate the effect with your stock EQ, but UA's goal was to emulate a piece of hardware. That hardware may sound like your stock EQ, but in the end, the plug does what it says. Much like RVox. It’s a simple compressor for vocals. I can get the same results from other compressors, but sometimes, it helps to pick something that works fast.
I don't understand how this test got the results you got... As a post pointed out, when the "flat" button is set to Red, the effect is bypassed. This I've verified by using the same settings you have in the video and phase canceling the original untouched signal. So that part is a fair criticism of the video, that the effect was bypassed. Assuming then that the effect was bypassed, what I don't understand is how when you invert a signal with Cubase's EQ on it, you're not then getting everything phase canceled EXCEPT the low frequencies being affected by Cubase's EQ. I'm sitting here with Cubase open, with the exact same settings on both VOG and Cubase stock EQ as the video, and I'm getting very different results, whether the "flat" knob is set to Red or Green - I can still very easily hear low frequency content regardless. Probably because with the settings he has on the VOG, the boost in resonance is happening at sub-40hz frequencies that my cans won't even produce. Either way, I accept that this test is very flawed by the fact that the VOG was bypassed. But can someone explain to me how the EQ on the duplicate channel is NOT being clearly heard in the video?
hmmm Download the manual VOFG. The circuit emulation and Unison technology for real time tracking from UAD does not compare to Cubase. Have an informed opinion before trashing a whole platform !
I got a $50 "coupon" from UAD and I was considering buying the VOG... luckily I did a little research and some testing on my own on some of my home studio tracks... I agree with Brandon... hold on to your money and dig into the tools you already have before throwing your cash at a sexy gimmick. Trust your ears. What is is. What isn't isn't.
Well, I wouldn't call a resonant high pass filter a "gimmick". It's a tool that should be looked at. My gripe is with UAD's marketing of the thing as if it is remotely unique and the kind of the thing that requires their DSP processor. For me, this one killed the notion of "magic" in UAD plugins....or anyone other plugins for that matter.
What is so stupid about this video, that people don't seem to get is, is you can take any eq and create the same curve with a generic daw eq, such as a cubase and they will phase cancel. Try it with the pultec, or the ssl plug in. You will see. Also the functionality in how the vog works with both the boost and cut occurring at the same time with one knob is a unique and functional carving advantage. Behind the plug in, the math involved in the VOG is much different than the Cubase. If you cannot tell the difference, and you can get the results you want with the Cubase, use Cubase. But to say you can mimic the amplitude vs. frequency curve of the VOG or an SSL eq or a Pultec or a Neve is not proving anything, except maybe you have too much time on your hands in your moms basement..
Saying that a resonant filter is "unique" in plugin land is a flat out misleading. Resonant filters are everywhere in digital land. (They are harder to come by in analog land.) You can insult me all you want, but it reflects more on your character than it does mine.
This video showed that they are close enough to the point where it doesn't matter. and frankly it holds true for a lots of other expensive plugins. You can say this guy is an idiot all day long but he showed what price you pay for blind faith. there maybe some crazy nasa class technology underneath but it doesn't matter since frequency response is the same (which also mean saturation character and resulting harmonic content also match). due to the huge amount of blind faith, people forget that in the end these brands don't give 2 cents worth damn about the people. 150 bucks is quite some money, especially for budding mixers. we should also suggest newcomers to think logically and spend wisely.
+Little Labs Pro Audio "maybe you have too much time on your hands in your moms basement.." Hi there, I have a question. Are ALL people who criticize your company or products basement-dwelling children, or is it just SOME people who criticize your company or products? Followup question, it's clear your company is in dire need of a PR team. I'll gladly draw a salary to simply not insult people, and by doing so I'll have already elevated your company's image.
I could dig a shallow grave for your dumb ass with a plastic fork, but id rather use a shovel..... God you missed the whole point. Personally I dont take advice from morons who wear their sunglasses in the studio. This video could be really helpful for someone who cant afford VOG, or UAD Plug-ins, instead, you're putting people down to make yourself feel better. I hope thats working out for you, p.s. get a haircut you fucking hippie.
So it doesn't completely phase cancel? That must be the coloration. I have it btw and it sounds diffferent than a lo cut filter with hi resonance. Bitch all you want, I like it.
I can understand you are disappointed, but maybe you could put up a music example instead of the two-minute explosion of grief. If it sounds the same I want to hear it. Thanx. P.S.UA call VOG a BASS RESONANCE plugin. Did you know "RESONANCE" is a common parameter of FILTERS?
he did the null test, what music you want more, what you think when hitting 200hz suddenly a genie will apear? the man just tried to do a service(to you and all) showing not all hype is true ok? i got a good nose for marketing like this, fuck WAVES and UAD and NI never bought/use anything from them, there are so many indie developers outthere making much much better work.
Cool to know you can replicate the effect with EQ, however, you did not prove they did not model analog distortion, the two signals did not cancel, there was still -50 or so left from a signal of -25 or so.. Just saying....
Thanks for the response. I have responded on my blog. Can we expect any other UAD tools to phase cancel with stock Cubase plugins with very minimal effort?
I've left UAD after spending TONS of money on cards/interfaces/plugs and use Slate exclusively. 300.00 annual for everything they have and will make is a great deal and they just smoke UAD offerings. ALSO strangely enough my system stopped choking when I did so with a loaded rack on every track and buss.
+Mike Gervasi the thing about slate that is a turnoff is that the fanboys act like slate plugs are a religion. And ilok that's an issue too. slate is the perfect example of how effective persuasive marketing can be.
+zeebazu I never go with the hype. It may lead me to try a company's plugs but I don't stick with ones that don't do it for me. iLok is also not a big deal to me. Protools needs one as do a LOT of plugs. The thing that sold me on Slate wasn't Slate, it was the results I got from using the plugs. I still use the UAD tape sims as they sound better than Slate's to me. 2 months since my original post and i still feel the same way.
VOG was and is available as hardware. The point on this plugin is well taken. There are many plugins that are simplified versions of compression and EQs. I may not purchase this one. If there is a specialized tool for a purpose that makes it easier to accomplish a task it can be justified.
here is the thing. You can do all you need and want to do with stock plugins. you don't need a grand worth of plugins to be "professional" Ghram from Recording Revolution has said that a ton of times. its like that telephone plugin that is 400 bucks. honestly. just give me a stock eq and put an high pass and a low pass until you reach that mid high sound of a phone call. with any tape machine plugin, you can get the same sound with an stock eq. just add a bit of warmth and highs. mostly a high and a low shelf and there is your virtual tape machine.
Yup, I agree. The big plugin companies are selling based on the idea that they are offering the ONLY way to get to Point B. VOG showed that UAD isn't doing anything "magical". If there ain't no magic, why do I need a DSP card? I don't. I sold mine.
True but for example the Logic stock EQ can sound too much phase shifted. There is nothing wrong to sell an EQ curve special if they label it as this. I love the Waves SSLs. Take the first Version of the UAD 1073, they claimed they nailed it. I own a nice clone by Vintage Design… they nailed nothing…. they just sold me a pure plain EQ curve. In other words a nice expensive JPG. I learned in the last two years that you can get better plug ins by in-depended programmers… one of my favorites is the Tonebosters ReelTape….
The concept of a resonant high pass filter is a GREAT concept. (Same thing with the resonant low pass filter). Pensado choose the $100+ UAD version because he's probably paid to in some way. Why he didn't use the free one in his DAW is the perplexing part. Of course, I hear that Pro Tools doesn't have a resonant high pass filter stock, which is another issue, I guess. It would be nice if Pensado was more responsible with his advice to broke people. He should have said, "He broke people, just use your stock one. People with money...also just use your stock one." SMILEY
If you want to believe that the UAD VOG is special, that's your business. If you want to disagree with me, I'm 100% cool with that and willing to discuss any issue you may have. However, if you are going to say I don't know what I'm talking about,, you could at least find a particular point you don't agree with.
I suspect plenty of big boys are using plugins these days. Pensado may love VOG, but that also means he loves the stock Cubase EQ, too. That's all. The resonant filters in both are 99.999999% the same.
Thanks for the reply. I think it would be worth doing again spending a bit more time to see if you could get it significantly lower. From other experiments with different types of product I can still hear differences at this kind of cancellation level, so I'm not entirely convinced.....Yet!
I don't have the UAD card anymore. However, I'd be SHOCKED if you could pick out the 1073 in blind tests. The ONLY thing the 1073 is doing to do is have fixed Q on the boosts/cuts and a very minimal amount of distortion. I saw the measurements on the Waves 550b recently and the distortion levels were -85dB below the dry signal. This explains why it's so incredibly difficult to hear this character in blind tests. The 1073 plugins may have more overt distortions....at least I hope so!
Well there’s also the fact that they are extremely slow at upgrading the CPUs on their devices. They have the who knows how old DSP-2 chip. Oh wow. How about AMD Rizen or intel i9?
i think now that there are so many free plugins available, its just everyone's responsibility to try and compare and use such techniques to actually find out if the price we are paying for such named plugins is justified. The ONLY way I see UAD can be pretty useful is if one would use it to save some CPU resources. Maybe pull the reverbs from the UAD card. I switched from Cubase to Reaper two years back and I am extremely happy with the stock plugins. Thanks Brandon.
All of these plugins are a ripoff as far as I’m concerned. This industry is driven by stupid people buying them. What about the music and musicians? You can have all the plugins in the world but if the music is shit the result will be…shit.
a much better and more convincing comparison would be to use the VOG, cubase EQ, and maybe even your bark of dog on something musical (bassline, voice, drums). people use and love the VOG because of the weight and richness it adds WITHOUT sounding artificial or forced - if you can achieve the same effect on a track or piece of music using those free tools, then you might have a leg to stand on.
I think using music would be more fun, but I don't have the UAD card anymore. I'm not sure exactly what "forced" or "artificial" is or how to measure it (either subjectively or objectively). I can't imagine if two processes phase cancel with a sine wav or noise that they'd react all that differently with music, but we won't know unless someone else conducts the test because my days with UAD are definitely over.
I'm on Cubase 6 still, but I'd imagine it'll work. The only problem is my demo for Voice Of God ran out and I'm not sure if I can export those settings. My test was straight forward. I just ran rendered noise (to be identical) through two tracks. One used VOG, the other used the Cubase EQ. I hard panned them so I could use SPAN to "draw" the line for each. It's a pretty quick process, actually.
also, it's a bass resonance tool that uses an advertised 1.4% of DSP, not really much to it in the first place. Compared to a Fatso, or Variable Mu that use up about 40% DSP of a chip, i would say they probably don't BS on modeling at the component level. Although Ableton can use 90% CPU with a 440hz sine wave so thats not saying much. The VOG just doesn't have much to it, hardware or software. I bet Mike Soldano owns a dual rectifier, albeit probably not the one he threw through the window in 1992.
Don't worry. I plan on getting quite a bit more phase cancellation. Boz Digital Labs has their Bark Of Dog plugin in beta testing mode and it offers quite a bit more resolution in the Q settings that the stock Cubase EQ. It's using the same off-the-shelf algorithm. I'll pull out an oscilloscope to make sure they are phase aligned as well. I suspect there may be a time component of a sample or two causing mischief.
I know very little about the hardware, but it's safe to say that all the VOG stuff is a resonant high pass filter. The steeper the slope of the filter, the greater the bump just above the cutoff frequency.
+Alex Niedt Well, I think the idea is that Bark Of Dog is a ripoff, too, (even at $0) when resonant filters are just about everywhere. SMILIE The point of the video was not that VOG is easy to clone, but that VOG is just a clone of a billion other EQs already out there.
Someone is butt hurt. Condemning all of UAD plugs because they made a plug in that sounds like hardware that a lot of people love because of the sound and the WORKFLOW. Nobody wants to mess around with a digital eq typing in numbers and trying to get the slopes to line up perfectly. Time is money and if people want a resonant filter that only has two knobs and takes 2 seconds to dial in, then there is a legitimate demand for this product., which makes UAD smart for being the first ones to deliver it. You sir, have failed.
I didn't condemn all UAD plugins. Their Maximizer is the best brickwall limiter I've ever heard. For anyone that prefers the two knob workflow on their resonant high pass filter, the VOG is certainly an option. However, stating it "sounds like hardware" is pure marketing regurgitation at least until we A/B it with the real thing. That, however, is irrelevant when the UAD VOG phase cancels so well with the stock Cubase EQ. My bet is both the UAD VOG, hardware VOG, and stock Cubase EQ all sound remarkably similar in blind tests. I guess I could buy a hardware VOG and test it. That would be fun. I'm "butt hurt" that UAD said using VOG was like "retuning a tom" when all they were selling was a resonant high pass filter that phase cancels with the stock Cubase EQ.
recordingreview watch UAD's VOG tips and tricks video. jonathan little from littlelabs demonstrates how to retune a kick drum. it's not just a marketing gimmick, it actually is capable of retuning with the frequency knob.
recordingreview And that's the problem. Mr. Little can call it "retuning" a kick drum all he wants, but all he did is EQ it. The pitch of the kick does not change when you high pass and boost elsewhere. Maybe I'm him too literally and he was just having a little fun with the English language. However, I think they implied the VOG did a bunch of "fancy" stuff that it simply can not do. If a person sees no foul in that, then call me an idiot. However, I'm positive that anyone with experience with resonant high pass filters is going to be VERY leery of selling out $100+ for yet another one.
recordingreview the audible/apparent pitch of the kick DOES change when you "EQ" it with the VOG. it's not just a "high pass and boost elsewhere" - it's changing the frequency of the resonant peak, and the way that resonant peak interacts with the original signal, that makes the VOG uniquely effective at this task. argue semantics all you want, but it does do what littlelabs and UAD claim it does, even if that doesn't meet your criteria.
shayeasy Out of curiosity, have you tried to match your VOG results with another resonant high pass filter? Even just looking at the frequency response of manipulating a track using VOG, it's clear to see that only two things are happening. 1) You'll see high pass filtering. 2) You'll see a bump due to resonance. We can call the benefits of these two things anything we'd like, but I'm failing to see how VOG is anywhere close to "unique". That is my qualm. Can you explain to me what facet of the VOG is NOT a high pass resonant filter?
Being very skeptical about UAD, I held out, I'm talking way back UAD-1! I didn't exactly believe the hype..... as one poster in the comments sections pointed out, "professional engineers using UAD..." (or along those lines) - these guys make a living out of using this stuff.... why would they use UAD is a question I asked myself. So.... after a lot of consideration and of course WHEN I COULD AFFORD IT... I said "f it" and went UAD and haven't turned back. I don't care if they are exact models, or the price tag is high - it actually does drop CONSIDERABLY during their little discount seasons, I don't care if VOG can be replicated by an EQ, it's a simple tool, it's something I use and I actually use a lot and it actually does what it is supposed to do... whether or not I can get the same result from using a stock/native EQ.... I couldn't give a shit. It's running off my DSP so free's up RAM/CPU on my DAW for use of other native plugins (which by goddamn I actually use too).... My point... who cares? It's your money! By the way, currently you can purchase the VOG for less than £59. I really don't think that's a rip off. Honestly? You get one takeaway, some petrol for your car, make a phone call and your 59 quid is gone. Sheesh man, some people really do take the complete piss.... spend their lives trying to find fault in whatever they can instead of MAKING SOMETHING USEFUL and using their time in a more constructive way. Even implying you need some audio training to realise you've been ripped off...? Ripped off? How can someone be ripped of when THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE BUYING! Your video is bollox mate. It proves what is already written on the side of the tin!!! Whaaaaaa!!!! WOW! I am completely astounding you had to do a test to figure out what VOG was! :-/ Go figure man. Honestly, go knock one out, release the stress and maybe make some damn music be it shit or not, who cares, it's yours, your choice the way it is arranged and that's what matters. I genuinely am not hating on you... just taking the piss completely out of you for putting this video up! It's kinda stupid. But fair play for figuring out what we already knew. FYI - I also use the stock EQ's in Cubase 8.5 Pro
your beef is with little labs, not UAD. it is no secret that the hardware voice of god is also "just" a resonant high-pass filter, and that version is almost $500 - do they owe us an apology, too? all UAD did was spend the time and development to emulate the hardware to bring it to the UAD platform - they aren't misleading anyone, and also aren't forcing anyone to purchase it. of course there are multiple ways to accomplish the same task - that's the beauty of engineering today. you're just trolling for page views by implying that UAD has committed some wrongdoing by selling this plugin, and your attitude and mannerisms are utterly obnoxious to boot.
In this era of computing, the DSP is certainly not a huge necessity. I noticed with myself that I felt "married" to the "dongle". If I'm gonna pay $1000+ for a dongle, I had better use it. It encouraged a UAD vs Waves type of mentality where I naturally gravitated towards UAD on all plugins for reasons that now elude me.
As a fellow audio enthusiast thank you for making this video and calling a spade a spade! Companies that put out garbage products need to be exposed and you did just that. Credibility +100 to you sir!
I think the UAD prices are insane. The plugin prices alone are way too much. Do you realize a SHARC chip costs 20 bucks a piece? www.analog.com/en/products/processors-dsp/sharc.html Probably the cost per Quad PCB for them is as much as 200 bucks (I believe less) yet they sell it at 1000 dollars with a lame bunch of plugins then you have to invest another 1000 for another small bunch ....nice business, huh? Yes, paying for research and development, blabla....probably those costs were paid over many times already. That's the reason each time I approach the idea of an UAD card I end forgetting about it.
Sacco Svd There are probably very people who can build a UAD card in their garage. (Some!...but not many.) The SHARC chips are a feature of the UAD and not necessarily a benefit. You could argue that the peace of mind from all the celebrity endorsements is MAYBE a benefit, I guess. For me, the bigger questions is whether UAD provides something superior that other plugin companies do not. Generally speaking, my answer has been "not really". The UAD Maximizer is probably the only plugin from UAD I truly miss. There are just too many great plugins out there these days.
recordingreview Sure, I make that comparison too....and honestly for me it sounds like a lot of marketing hype. BTW: Aren't the SHARC chips the DSP processors themselves? The Duo and the Quad share the same PCB, just the Duo has two SHARC slots empty.
Sacco Svd If I had to guess (and I'm a terrible guesser), I'd say the SHARC chips are doing the heavy DSP lifting. The UAD guys have the marketing thing figured out even if we are neutral about their tools. The exclusivity of the thing automatically makes it appealing. I don't mind people that have gotten great use out of their stuff, but I only miss one of their plugins and not by much. To each his own.
You are targeting the wrong people, nowhere in your review or any of your susequent comments do you reference how accurately the plugin emulates the Little Labs hardware, which is the UA Part of this. If you are mad at anyone, be mad at Little Labs.
I certainly appreciate the work you've done here. I also understand why you'd be upset. I am a happy Apollo user. But the VOG is *not* on my list of must have plugins. On UAD's side, music and pink noise are different. The levels of material going into the plugin can vary widely. The unique soft clipping that some devices impart can be extremely subtle. Having said all that, thanks for the heads up. I certainly won't be buying that one. But some of their other plugins are quite good.
Your next video should be "they fooled us with compression" Then have a video of you using a compressor and getting the same results but using automation or a gain knob. Then say "omg, compressors may not be fraud, but they've lost my trust" But I'm pretty sure you've used a compressor on your vocals judging by how your vocals sound.
UAD has lost it's true essence (RIP Bill), literally, and this type of shit proves it. We can't keep falling for their marketing tactics, and keep purchasing over priced plug-ins, especially when most are clearly just aesthetically pleasing to the eyes. Are these plug-ins better than hardware, NO WAY, not even close, but you have to hear the difference for yourself, and at least try the hardware. I agree with the vid 100%, if they do this to us now, what else is down the road...
Does UAD have shills that dislike your video, lol? I think it is hilarious when people reverse engineer a product and call it out for its grossly inflated value. Well done sir. Have my like. I do not just give them out to anyone.
The Voice of God hardware seems like kind of a gimmick too. I'm sure there are plenty of resonant high pass analog filters out there, and many that predated this unit.
Oh man I hear you, I know exactly what you are saying. However you should know this happen in most industries, take Graphic Adapters for instance: Gamer version of cards are sometimes an exact replica of professional cards used in expensive studios. The difference most of the time is the firmware or like 10 year or so ago you move one resistor from the board and you get a card 20 times better with unlocked cores and other features. No need to mention who they are there are only two top GPU makers and they have been recycling and shuffling features for decades all on our penny. Thanks for exposing one more, maybe enough of us do this, this nonsense stops one day.
Yeah, I certainly can't critique all of UAD plugins. Their Maximizer is absolutely brilliant. It's just a shame that not all UAD plugins are special. That's okay. I'm glad I learned my lesson when I did.
recordingreview The amazing thing is the LM is still a few yeas old and sounds like expensive tube gear. I do not know why some plugs are superior and some just are an expensive EQ curve, like the legacy 1073. I feel as well that the marketing is a bit to aggressive…
That is like going to a 5 star restaurant ordering an expressive cheeseburger and getting served burger king or MC D . A plug in company responded to this plug in by making the same thing for free call Bark of dog. Bark like voice and dog is god spelled backwards. Came here to see if the voice of god plug in really pissed people off that much even though i'm really late lol. www.bozdigitallabs.com/product/bark-of-dog/ get your bark of dog for free here lol.
blood lord Another way to look at it, is UAD VOG, Bark Of Dog, and any resonant filter you can get your hands on are all 5-star, expressive cheeseburgers. The only thing "wrong" with the UAD VOG is the marketing that made you feel like you were getting more than a 1-band resonant EQ.
recordingreview Was that actually littlelabs who responded down in the comments. Didn't sound very professional to me for a company to insult so directly.
blood lord Yes, LIttle Labs officially said, "maybe you have too much time on your hands in your moms basement". That's certainly an odd way to conduct business. I'm used to that sort of thing from individuals, but it's certainly rare for businesses to act in such a way.
+recordingreview actually quite funny.... maybe HE (the guy who did the review) does have too much time on his hands, who gives a shit... you've got a choice whether to spend money on a quick solution or not. It works, does what it says it does. So what? Where's the problem? The price? Then don't buy it!
I used to fiddle with the settings and try to figure out how things worked and get lost in the minutia, I had a big complicated studio, Yamaha digital console, etc - AND then I got UAD Apollos, and now I make music instead of fiddling with settings ;) I don't know why you paid $100 bucks for VOG, I think it cost me like $30 in a bundle, with coupons they sent, man I used all those deals, got tons of plugs at fraction of list. The real point of UA stuff is how easy it makes producing, my headaches and BP are much better now. Anybody want to buy a nice Yamaha mixer? It save space, and maintenance, and you couldn't dust it if you tried.
Why do people take this so serious? its clearly his opinion . Just breathe slow and produce some art . VOG or not ...ijs. Thanks for the objective opinion bro . I'll probably still purchase it ( unless someone starts seeding lol )
I see we are going to keep this going. I'm not going to explain myself again. I found the marketing elusively pulling us in to a tool all of us have at least 3 of. The end. What money back offer?
When UAD DSP engineers realized that what they were modeling in hardware land was all over the place in digital land, they should have moved on to a different project. I never expected I'd get phase cancellation from UAD and stock Cubase plugins. That's the only gripe.
That's clearly a typo in the manual at least on my system. On my system a green "flat" setting bypasses the EQ. There's no way I'd get that resonant boost in SPAN if the plugin were in bypass mode. I've tried dozens of settings in VOG and can't find one that I can't match with minimal effort with the stock Cubase EQ. It's clearly the same off-the-shelf EQ that everyone uses. I urge you to fire up SPAN on your system. I bet you can match it with your stock EQ in 12 seconds.
You have to keep the bastards in line! But maybe it's good in a "natural selection" kind of way. It weeds out the more simple minded ones and keeps them from being able to buy gear they can really get in trouble with.
I am just a regular dude with a hobby studio at the moment. To all the people that think uad plugins are a waste I will say that I know and have seen professional seasoned studio owners use only uad and not even outboard gear. That was the moment when I knew it wasn't just hype. If the industry pros are using these then by golly I would like to use these as well. I've been happy with mine. Put it this way sure you can get great work done with just about any plugin. I mean if people can get supreme mixes out of the clunky gear from yester year then you can get great mixes out of the state of the art technology today. My philosophy is if you can't get a good mix without any plugins then plugins are not going to make it great in fact they will make it worse. Now if you can get a good mix then they will enable you to go that extra mile to achieve a great mix.
My philosophy is if you can't get a good mix without any plugins then plugins are not going to make it great in fact they will make it worse. THAT! Congrats, you are on a right spot (Y)
That's one perspective. Of course, we can pick out tube gear in blind tests. There's that 200Hz-ish thing happening. I'm pretty sure I couldn't do the same with this. We'd also need to establish that we are hearing harmonics in VOG. I saw none in SPAN. It could be a time issue. Just one sample of difference will result in similar results with no audible difference. I'm not sure.
Hmmm, maybe you should have read the manual of the plugin before you flamed it.
Here's a copy right from the manual of the UAD VOG.
The EQ circuitry is bypassed when Flat is enabled (red
LED); the circuit is active when Flat is disabled (green LED)
Hey look! Your flat button is set to RED.....derp.
Whops!!!
So what is blatantly obvious to me, is you have no idea what you are talking about.
Rekt.
Try your test again but this time take your VOG plugin out of bypass mode.
Its on track one, track 2 has the eq
What happens in a nulling test?
how long did it take you to match the stock EQ freq and Q to the VOG to get it to phase cancel perfectly?
Although there is certainly truth in what you are saying, if it is that simple for you to enhance bass frequencies the same way the plugin does ( especially for dialogue) why do you sound like Gilbert Godfrey on helium?
After testing your process I realized your point is one dimensional. As soon as I change frequencies in the VOG the resonance parameters shift. That means you emulated one fraction of the available effects ability. That is like claiming you can play like Charlie Parker because you can play middle C.
@NotRecordingReview - so what do you think of the what the manual says about "flat" Flat
The EQ circuitry is bypassed when Flat is enabled (red LED); the circuit is active when
Flat is disabled (green LED). When Flat is on, the dry signal path of the hardware is still
being modeled and DSP is used. For true bypass, use the Power switch. - Maybe another test with flat green lit?
yeah you have modeled the static eq curve of the transformer but that is only part one.... the main usage of the plugin you have "BY-PASSED" so you are not using it correctly as you have it in bypass - which still models the static eq curve... maybe read the manual next time first lol!
If you took the time you could eq to match the effect of 100's of plug-ins. Where are the rest of your videos showing them?
So did you get your money back after buying it?
They are clearly using the demo
it was in bypass mode the entire time.... he was only getting the static xformer eq curve which is still active even in bypass mode. - needs to read manual on this before 86ing it lol
I don't own vog... saw this video while searching out the software. A q response to constant pink noise is only representative of a small portion of any audio device. That's like saying two different microphones are the same because they share the same q. The fact that your so pissed about it... now that's comedy
This, I guess, is where you and I may disagree. We've got frequency response, distortion, and time. That's what defines what a device sounds like. If two different microphones measure identically in all those categories, those two mics will sound identical (at least in blind tests). Getting the frequency responses identical in the time domain is difficult in microphones. It's not difficult at all with EQ.
It's basically an issue of science vs the magic of audio for me. In my view, UAD pushed the magic end (claiming the VOG can retune a tom) way too far in order to sell stuff most of us already have. Not everyone feels that's unethical. I can live with that, but I'm personally done with UAD even if I do miss their Maximizer sometimes.
Yeah, I get laughed at all the time when I'm pissed. I wish I could do it on queue. I'd have a future in standup.
+recordingreview man you wouldn't have a future in standup, even if that was a joke - it's actually quite embarrassing, how you were talking etc, proper silly... dude, relax, VOG works and does what it says it does and I paid £50 odd quid for it... and yea, I use it on almost everything that requires a nice bump. Who cares if you can re-create the same with stock EQ? I don't. And to be honest, the comments are more funnier, and interesting than that video! I watched it and I wouldn't be surprised if you are a regular gearslutz (forum) member.... those guys just remind of this video.
Really man, it's sad. And I'm sure you're probably a very pleasant guy in reality. Just that video, how you spoke and the slamming of UAD is a little OVER THE TOP, seriously, it's like you have a vendetta out on them lol. Fk it man, who cares? Really.... we all know what we were buying when we bought it right? Didn't you? You do have a 14 day demo period too! I mean, could you have not figured all this out BEFORE paying for it? And why did you buy it.... ah man... I can't really go on but the more I think about it the more I realise I am having more fun reading the funny replies to your ridiculous test.
Tests are pretty hard to do right, in all honesty, those who said using noise is not the right way to test are right. But why did you buy it? Why did you buy something you knew what you were buying and could easily do it with EQ? That is the silly part.
Be a gentleman mate, fuck it and who cares, UAD make quality software and that's fact. Top notch software and top notch customer service.
Hi Brandon - We've posted a full response to your video at your original posting on Recording Review. What the UAD VOG customer is buying for $149 is a near-perfect replica of the hardware, designed to quickly bump and shape your low end.
In some DAWs adjusting the stock EQ to match the VOG would require setting up two separate filters, a cut and a peak, tweaking their frequency and slope as you go - these two filters adjust simultaneously in VOG with the turn of a single frequency knob.
It only seemed to knock 30-something dB off when you nulled, am I missing something? It can't be exactly the same if it doesn't null completely.
me too
What was the filter slope set at 12db or 24db
The VOG does vary resonance as you shift through frequencies. That's not a typical feature on your standard ol' high pass resonant filter. Some with a bias towards the hardware unit or UAD will automatically consider that an advantage. It's certainly a subjective facet. I found it a disadvantage, but it's not why I was upset. Whether you believe this variable Q saves 10 seconds or costs 10 seconds isn't a significant enough deviation in my mind. I felt misled by the marketing.
The #s in the video were there to phase cancel with the VoG. They weren't chosen to sound particularly good. You simply want to use "High Pass 2" and then crank up the Q (usually the width of the boost or cut). That'll crank up the resonance.
UAD's marketing was radically too aggressive. Saying the UAD VOG can "retune a tom" implies that it's doing something radically different from what it actually does. I have no issue with the hardware version because few consoles have resonance controls on high pass filters. UAD tells us they make very special plugins. In this case, I already have 6 other EQs (most of 'em free) that do this resonance thing just fine. I would like to know what benefits I get in the UAD VOG that I don't get in the stock Cubase high pass filter.
Shayaan Ali Exactly! I haven't figured out the benefit of VOG either. I didn't get them to 100% phase cancel, but I did get over 30dB of phase cancellation. Calling UAD VOG and the stock Cubase EQ "nearly identical" is fair, I think.
recordingreview when i said littlelabs VOG, i meant the hardware version (as opposed to the UAD VOG). so i ask again - and i'm re-framing your own question here - what benefit do you get in the $400 hardware VOG that you don't get in the stock cubase high pass filter?
There #1 benefit of hardware is it's there. In other words, the thing works without a computer. Anyone mixing on an analog console with no plugins must utilize analog tools. That's why I don't have an issue with the hardware VOG. It serves a purpose to a totally different demographic where a person doesn't have access to the stock Cubase EQ. As for the benefits of analog mixing, that's up for debate. I don't like recalling analog mixes so that's why I mix ITB and I'm happy. My issues are not with my tools, at least. I'm of the opinion there is no reason why I would ever need the hardware VOG as I highly doubt I could pick it out over the stock Cubase EQ in blind tests.
Brandon Drury UA doesn't have an obligation to ensure there are no cheaper alternatives to the products they release, and only release products which are one of a kind. they are merely providing another option - one that a LOT of people are happy to have - and are not forcing you or anyone else to buy their plugins. saying the UAD VOG can retune a tom doesn't imply anything that it doesn't or can't do - you have only yourself to blame for feeling misled. they are hardly keeping the design of the plugin or the hardware that inspired it a secret, and anyone who does two minutes of research and utilizes the 14 day demo before purchasing would understand what it actually does.
shayeasy I agree, it's my fault for trusting that UAD and assuming they were always making tools that were helpful enough to warrant their high price tag.
On the other hand, if I buy a $12 hamburger and realize all I was getting was a repackaged McDonald's burger, I'd be upset. The difference here is it's easy to detect when a $12 burger tastes like a Big Mac. The audio world is decidedly more subtle and trust seems to a bigger factor than sonic results.
Everyone is free to do their thing, but for me UAD is no longer trustworthy. They have packaged a "generic" plugin with a hardware-style GUI, made sensational claims, utilized celebrity endorsements, and ultimately sold a tool that sounds no better than free stuff. I have no reason to assume that VOG is the only example.
The implications that a UAD 1176 is superior to a $50 Stillwell Rocket, for example, are completely shot down for me now that trust is gone. Only after this transition does a person start blind tests and realize that the Stillwell Rocket is BIG TIME...maybe even "better" than the UAD 1176.
Ultimately, I'm not on a crusade here. If a person is happy buying a Lexus even after they realize it's stuffed with Hyundai parts, I'm glad for them. However, I believe quite a few people would find this information useful when making purchases in the future.
Interesting. I've heard others not thrilled with the Shadow Hills compressor as well. Those specific things I find my hardware La3a to be great at just don't seem to be included in the UAD La3a.
I wanted get Little Labs Voice of god but I cannot afford an Apollo or satellite. Wish they had a Native version😢 Nothing besides Waves Rbass can compete with the UAD VOG unfortunately........☹ (Also tried Boz Digital Labs Bark of Dog)
I realize that you are skilled enough to recreate the effect with your stock EQ, but UA's goal was to emulate a piece of hardware.
That hardware may sound like your stock EQ, but in the end, the plug does what it says.
Much like RVox. It’s a simple compressor for vocals. I can get the same results from other compressors, but sometimes, it helps to pick something that works fast.
Anyone with common sense knows this, clearly the guy in the video doesn’t have any
I don't understand how this test got the results you got...
As a post pointed out, when the "flat" button is set to Red, the effect is bypassed. This I've verified by using the same settings you have in the video and phase canceling the original untouched signal. So that part is a fair criticism of the video, that the effect was bypassed.
Assuming then that the effect was bypassed, what I don't understand is how when you invert a signal with Cubase's EQ on it, you're not then getting everything phase canceled EXCEPT the low frequencies being affected by Cubase's EQ.
I'm sitting here with Cubase open, with the exact same settings on both VOG and Cubase stock EQ as the video, and I'm getting very different results, whether the "flat" knob is set to Red or Green - I can still very easily hear low frequency content regardless. Probably because with the settings he has on the VOG, the boost in resonance is happening at sub-40hz frequencies that my cans won't even produce.
Either way, I accept that this test is very flawed by the fact that the VOG was bypassed. But can someone explain to me how the EQ on the duplicate channel is NOT being clearly heard in the video?
Added harmonics aren’t gonna show up. Doesn’t mean they aren’t there now.
THIS VIDEO IS INCREDIBLE....OPENED UP A WHOLE NEW AWARENESS.....WOW....THANKS BRO
On other thing. I did set this EQ by hand based on what I saw from SPAN. I bet if I zoomed in SPAN, I could get radically closer.
Wow, UAD are indeed crafty! I just did a null test and got an almost perfect null.
curve is a little bit different than the digital eq but that's what the hardware does a simple resonant filter
hmmm Download the manual VOFG. The circuit emulation and Unison technology for real time tracking from UAD does not compare to Cubase. Have an informed opinion before trashing a whole platform !
I got a $50 "coupon" from UAD and I was considering buying the VOG... luckily I did a little research and some testing on my own on some of my home studio tracks... I agree with Brandon... hold on to your money and dig into the tools you already have before throwing your cash at a sexy gimmick. Trust your ears. What is is. What isn't isn't.
Well, I wouldn't call a resonant high pass filter a "gimmick". It's a tool that should be looked at. My gripe is with UAD's marketing of the thing as if it is remotely unique and the kind of the thing that requires their DSP processor. For me, this one killed the notion of "magic" in UAD plugins....or anyone other plugins for that matter.
Oh my gosh I can't stop laughing at this! He's so angry about it hahah
What is so stupid about this video, that people don't seem to get is, is you can take any eq and create the same curve with a generic daw eq, such as a cubase and they will phase cancel. Try it with the pultec, or the ssl plug in. You will see. Also the functionality in how the vog works with both the boost and cut occurring at the same time with one knob is a unique and functional carving advantage. Behind the plug in, the math involved in the VOG is much different than the Cubase. If you cannot tell the difference, and you can get the results you want with the Cubase, use Cubase. But to say you can mimic the amplitude vs. frequency curve of the VOG or an SSL eq or a Pultec or a Neve is not proving anything, except maybe you have too much time on your hands in your moms basement..
Saying that a resonant filter is "unique" in plugin land is a flat out misleading. Resonant filters are everywhere in digital land. (They are harder to come by in analog land.) You can insult me all you want, but it reflects more on your character than it does mine.
This video showed that they are close enough to the point where it doesn't matter. and frankly it holds true for a lots of other expensive plugins. You can say this guy is an idiot all day long but he showed what price you pay for blind faith. there maybe some crazy nasa class technology underneath but it doesn't matter since frequency response is the same (which also mean saturation character and resulting harmonic content also match). due to the huge amount of blind faith, people forget that in the end these brands don't give 2 cents worth damn about the people. 150 bucks is quite some money, especially for budding mixers. we should also suggest newcomers to think logically and spend wisely.
+Little Labs Pro Audio "maybe you have too much time on your hands in your moms basement.."
Hi there, I have a question. Are ALL people who criticize your company or products basement-dwelling children, or is it just SOME people who criticize your company or products? Followup question, it's clear your company is in dire need of a PR team. I'll gladly draw a salary to simply not insult people, and by doing so I'll have already elevated your company's image.
I could dig a shallow grave for your dumb ass with a plastic fork, but id rather use a shovel..... God you missed the whole point. Personally I dont take advice from morons who wear their sunglasses in the studio. This video could be really helpful for someone who cant afford VOG, or UAD Plug-ins, instead, you're putting people down to make yourself feel better. I hope thats working out for you, p.s. get a haircut you fucking hippie.
Whoah there.
Can you give us the C7 fxp preset for your EQ setting?
So it doesn't completely phase cancel? That must be the coloration. I have it btw and it sounds diffferent than a lo cut filter with hi resonance. Bitch all you want, I like it.
I can understand you are disappointed, but maybe you could put up a music example instead of the two-minute explosion of grief. If it sounds the same I want to hear it. Thanx.
P.S.UA call VOG a BASS RESONANCE plugin. Did you know "RESONANCE" is a common parameter of FILTERS?
he did the null test, what music you want more, what you think when hitting 200hz suddenly a genie will apear? the man just tried to do a service(to you and all) showing not all hype is true ok? i got a good nose for marketing like this, fuck WAVES and UAD and NI never bought/use anything from them, there are so many indie developers outthere making much much better work.
Cool to know you can replicate the effect with EQ, however, you did not prove they did not model analog distortion, the two signals did not cancel, there was still -50 or so left from a signal of -25 or so.. Just saying....
Thanks for the response. I have responded on my blog. Can we expect any other UAD tools to phase cancel with stock Cubase plugins with very minimal effort?
Thanks for proving The truth of uad
I've left UAD after spending TONS of money on cards/interfaces/plugs and use Slate exclusively. 300.00 annual for everything they have and will make is a great deal and they just smoke UAD offerings. ALSO strangely enough my system stopped choking when I did so with a loaded rack on every track and buss.
+Mike Gervasi the thing about slate that is a turnoff is that the fanboys act like slate plugs are a religion. And ilok that's an issue too. slate is the perfect example of how effective persuasive marketing can be.
+zeebazu I never go with the hype. It may lead me to try a company's plugs but I don't stick with ones that don't do it for me. iLok is also not a big deal to me. Protools needs one as do a LOT of plugs. The thing that sold me on Slate wasn't Slate, it was the results I got from using the plugs. I still use the UAD tape sims as they sound better than Slate's to me. 2 months since my original post and i still feel the same way.
VOG was and is available as hardware. The point on this plugin is well taken. There are many plugins that are simplified versions of compression and EQs. I may not purchase this one. If there is a specialized tool for a purpose that makes it easier to accomplish a task it can be justified.
And then you'll never dial in that curve with stock eq.
here is the thing. You can do all you need and want to do with stock plugins. you don't need a grand worth of plugins to be "professional" Ghram from Recording Revolution has said that a ton of times. its like that telephone plugin that is 400 bucks. honestly. just give me a stock eq and put an high pass and a low pass until you reach that mid high sound of a phone call. with any tape machine plugin, you can get the same sound with an stock eq. just add a bit of warmth and highs. mostly a high and a low shelf and there is your virtual tape machine.
Yup, I agree. The big plugin companies are selling based on the idea that they are offering the ONLY way to get to Point B. VOG showed that UAD isn't doing anything "magical". If there ain't no magic, why do I need a DSP card? I don't. I sold mine.
True but for example the Logic stock EQ can sound too much phase shifted. There is nothing wrong to sell an EQ curve special if they label it as this. I love the Waves SSLs. Take the first Version of the UAD 1073, they claimed they nailed it. I own a nice clone by Vintage Design… they nailed nothing…. they just sold me a pure plain EQ curve. In other words a nice expensive JPG. I learned in the last two years that you can get better plug ins by in-depended programmers… one of my favorites is the Tonebosters ReelTape….
Dave Pensado put VOG among one of his 5 Plug ins "That he uses all the time",is he been insincere?
The concept of a resonant high pass filter is a GREAT concept. (Same thing with the resonant low pass filter). Pensado choose the $100+ UAD version because he's probably paid to in some way. Why he didn't use the free one in his DAW is the perplexing part. Of course, I hear that Pro Tools doesn't have a resonant high pass filter stock, which is another issue, I guess.
It would be nice if Pensado was more responsible with his advice to broke people. He should have said, "He broke people, just use your stock one. People with money...also just use your stock one." SMILEY
recordingreview You clearly don't know wtf you are talking about at all on any level. And your conjecture is laughable.
If you want to believe that the UAD VOG is special, that's your business. If you want to disagree with me, I'm 100% cool with that and willing to discuss any issue you may have. However, if you are going to say I don't know what I'm talking about,, you could at least find a particular point you don't agree with.
He gets paid to say that.No professional mixing or mastering engineer is using software plug-ins.
I suspect plenty of big boys are using plugins these days. Pensado may love VOG, but that also means he loves the stock Cubase EQ, too. That's all. The resonant filters in both are 99.999999% the same.
What vocal chain are you using for this vid???? Very Crisp!
Thanks for the reply. I think it would be worth doing again spending a bit more time to see if you could get it significantly lower. From other experiments with different types of product I can still hear differences at this kind of cancellation level, so I'm not entirely convinced.....Yet!
Just do an A/B with some bass, let's see if it's the same then. I don't mean try and cancel it out, I mean how it enhances bass.
Try to model the 1073 with your Cubase EQ hehe.
I don't have the UAD card anymore. However, I'd be SHOCKED if you could pick out the 1073 in blind tests. The ONLY thing the 1073 is doing to do is have fixed Q on the boosts/cuts and a very minimal amount of distortion. I saw the measurements on the Waves 550b recently and the distortion levels were -85dB below the dry signal. This explains why it's so incredibly difficult to hear this character in blind tests. The 1073 plugins may have more overt distortions....at least I hope so!
I could... been using them for decades!
+recordingreview what happens when you put the 1073 in a Unison slot... ?
Well there’s also the fact that they are extremely slow at upgrading the CPUs on their devices. They have the who knows how old DSP-2 chip. Oh wow. How about AMD Rizen or intel i9?
i think now that there are so many free plugins available, its just everyone's responsibility to try and compare and use such techniques to actually find out if the price we are paying for such named plugins is justified. The ONLY way I see UAD can be pretty useful is if one would use it to save some CPU resources. Maybe pull the reverbs from the UAD card. I switched from Cubase to Reaper two years back and I am extremely happy with the stock plugins. Thanks Brandon.
All of these plugins are a ripoff as far as I’m concerned. This industry is driven by stupid people buying them. What about the music and musicians? You can have all the plugins in the world but if the music is shit the result will be…shit.
a much better and more convincing comparison would be to use the VOG, cubase EQ, and maybe even your bark of dog on something musical (bassline, voice, drums). people use and love the VOG because of the weight and richness it adds WITHOUT sounding artificial or forced - if you can achieve the same effect on a track or piece of music using those free tools, then you might have a leg to stand on.
I think using music would be more fun, but I don't have the UAD card anymore. I'm not sure exactly what "forced" or "artificial" is or how to measure it (either subjectively or objectively). I can't imagine if two processes phase cancel with a sine wav or noise that they'd react all that differently with music, but we won't know unless someone else conducts the test because my days with UAD are definitely over.
I'm on Cubase 6 still, but I'd imagine it'll work. The only problem is my demo for Voice Of God ran out and I'm not sure if I can export those settings. My test was straight forward. I just ran rendered noise (to be identical) through two tracks. One used VOG, the other used the Cubase EQ. I hard panned them so I could use SPAN to "draw" the line for each. It's a pretty quick process, actually.
Wellll, you know, nice sounding tube equipment adds total harmonic distortion of like 1% or less, that's subtle stuff but it does make a difference..
also, it's a bass resonance tool that uses an advertised 1.4% of DSP, not really much to it in the first place. Compared to a Fatso, or Variable Mu that use up about 40% DSP of a chip, i would say they probably don't BS on modeling at the component level. Although Ableton can use 90% CPU with a 440hz sine wave so thats not saying much. The VOG just doesn't have much to it, hardware or software. I bet Mike Soldano owns a dual rectifier, albeit probably not the one he threw through the window in 1992.
Don't worry. I plan on getting quite a bit more phase cancellation. Boz Digital Labs has their Bark Of Dog plugin in beta testing mode and it offers quite a bit more resolution in the Q settings that the stock Cubase EQ. It's using the same off-the-shelf algorithm. I'll pull out an oscilloscope to make sure they are phase aligned as well. I suspect there may be a time component of a sample or two causing mischief.
oh it... it seems like it was off buddy.
i never knew a plugin video could be so cringey
So... the VOG hardware is only a high-pass filter?
I know very little about the hardware, but it's safe to say that all the VOG stuff is a resonant high pass filter. The steeper the slope of the filter, the greater the bump just above the cutoff frequency.
$149, not $100! Even worse, haha.
+Alex Niedt actually it's £59
It happens to be on sale for $79 here right now, which is still a ripoff when Bark Of Dog exists.
+Alex Niedt Well, I think the idea is that Bark Of Dog is a ripoff, too, (even at $0) when resonant filters are just about everywhere. SMILIE The point of the video was not that VOG is easy to clone, but that VOG is just a clone of a billion other EQs already out there.
Of course.
Someone is butt hurt. Condemning all of UAD plugs because they made a plug in that sounds like hardware that a lot of people love because of the sound and the WORKFLOW. Nobody wants to mess around with a digital eq typing in numbers and trying to get the slopes to line up perfectly. Time is money and if people want a resonant filter that only has two knobs and takes 2 seconds to dial in, then there is a legitimate demand for this product., which makes UAD smart for being the first ones to deliver it. You sir, have failed.
I didn't condemn all UAD plugins. Their Maximizer is the best brickwall limiter I've ever heard.
For anyone that prefers the two knob workflow on their resonant high pass filter, the VOG is certainly an option. However, stating it "sounds like hardware" is pure marketing regurgitation at least until we A/B it with the real thing. That, however, is irrelevant when the UAD VOG phase cancels so well with the stock Cubase EQ. My bet is both the UAD VOG, hardware VOG, and stock Cubase EQ all sound remarkably similar in blind tests. I guess I could buy a hardware VOG and test it. That would be fun.
I'm "butt hurt" that UAD said using VOG was like "retuning a tom" when all they were selling was a resonant high pass filter that phase cancels with the stock Cubase EQ.
recordingreview watch UAD's VOG tips and tricks video. jonathan little from littlelabs demonstrates how to retune a kick drum. it's not just a marketing gimmick, it actually is capable of retuning with the frequency knob.
recordingreview And that's the problem. Mr. Little can call it "retuning" a kick drum all he wants, but all he did is EQ it. The pitch of the kick does not change when you high pass and boost elsewhere. Maybe I'm him too literally and he was just having a little fun with the English language. However, I think they implied the VOG did a bunch of "fancy" stuff that it simply can not do. If a person sees no foul in that, then call me an idiot. However, I'm positive that anyone with experience with resonant high pass filters is going to be VERY leery of selling out $100+ for yet another one.
recordingreview the audible/apparent pitch of the kick DOES change when you "EQ" it with the VOG. it's not just a "high pass and boost elsewhere" - it's changing the frequency of the resonant peak, and the way that resonant peak interacts with the original signal, that makes the VOG uniquely effective at this task. argue semantics all you want, but it does do what littlelabs and UAD claim it does, even if that doesn't meet your criteria.
shayeasy Out of curiosity, have you tried to match your VOG results with another resonant high pass filter? Even just looking at the frequency response of manipulating a track using VOG, it's clear to see that only two things are happening. 1) You'll see high pass filtering. 2) You'll see a bump due to resonance. We can call the benefits of these two things anything we'd like, but I'm failing to see how VOG is anywhere close to "unique". That is my qualm. Can you explain to me what facet of the VOG is NOT a high pass resonant filter?
Being very skeptical about UAD, I held out, I'm talking way back UAD-1! I didn't exactly believe the hype..... as one poster in the comments sections pointed out, "professional engineers using UAD..." (or along those lines) - these guys make a living out of using this stuff.... why would they use UAD is a question I asked myself.
So.... after a lot of consideration and of course WHEN I COULD AFFORD IT... I said "f it" and went UAD and haven't turned back. I don't care if they are exact models, or the price tag is high - it actually does drop CONSIDERABLY during their little discount seasons, I don't care if VOG can be replicated by an EQ, it's a simple tool, it's something I use and I actually use a lot and it actually does what it is supposed to do... whether or not I can get the same result from using a stock/native EQ.... I couldn't give a shit. It's running off my DSP so free's up RAM/CPU on my DAW for use of other native plugins (which by goddamn I actually use too)....
My point... who cares? It's your money! By the way, currently you can purchase the VOG for less than £59. I really don't think that's a rip off. Honestly? You get one takeaway, some petrol for your car, make a phone call and your 59 quid is gone.
Sheesh man, some people really do take the complete piss.... spend their lives trying to find fault in whatever they can instead of MAKING SOMETHING USEFUL and using their time in a more constructive way. Even implying you need some audio training to realise you've been ripped off...? Ripped off? How can someone be ripped of when THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE BUYING!
Your video is bollox mate. It proves what is already written on the side of the tin!!! Whaaaaaa!!!! WOW! I am completely astounding you had to do a test to figure out what VOG was! :-/
Go figure man. Honestly, go knock one out, release the stress and maybe make some damn music be it shit or not, who cares, it's yours, your choice the way it is arranged and that's what matters.
I genuinely am not hating on you... just taking the piss completely out of you for putting this video up! It's kinda stupid. But fair play for figuring out what we already knew.
FYI - I also use the stock EQ's in Cubase 8.5 Pro
your beef is with little labs, not UAD. it is no secret that the hardware voice of god is also "just" a resonant high-pass filter, and that version is almost $500 - do they owe us an apology, too? all UAD did was spend the time and development to emulate the hardware to bring it to the UAD platform - they aren't misleading anyone, and also aren't forcing anyone to purchase it. of course there are multiple ways to accomplish the same task - that's the beauty of engineering today. you're just trolling for page views by implying that UAD has committed some wrongdoing by selling this plugin, and your attitude and mannerisms are utterly obnoxious to boot.
That's why I'm bypassing buying that UAD CRAP, and getting hardware. Nothing beats hardware. Period!!!!
In this era of computing, the DSP is certainly not a huge necessity. I noticed with myself that I felt "married" to the "dongle". If I'm gonna pay $1000+ for a dongle, I had better use it. It encouraged a UAD vs Waves type of mentality where I naturally gravitated towards UAD on all plugins for reasons that now elude me.
Maybe you should get the 500 series HW and perform the same test, seeing it is based on HW
As a fellow audio enthusiast thank you for making this video and calling a spade a spade! Companies that put out garbage products need to be exposed and you did just that.
Credibility +100 to you sir!
broo hahahahaha the hardware does the same thing little labs are the most culprit they just emulated the hardware
I think the UAD prices are insane. The plugin prices alone are way too much.
Do you realize a SHARC chip costs 20 bucks a piece?
www.analog.com/en/products/processors-dsp/sharc.html
Probably the cost per Quad PCB for them is as much as 200 bucks (I believe less) yet they sell it at 1000 dollars with a lame bunch of plugins then you have to invest another 1000 for another small bunch ....nice business, huh?
Yes, paying for research and development, blabla....probably those costs were paid over many times already.
That's the reason each time I approach the idea of an UAD card I end forgetting about it.
Sacco Svd There are probably very people who can build a UAD card in their garage. (Some!...but not many.) The SHARC chips are a feature of the UAD and not necessarily a benefit. You could argue that the peace of mind from all the celebrity endorsements is MAYBE a benefit, I guess. For me, the bigger questions is whether UAD provides something superior that other plugin companies do not. Generally speaking, my answer has been "not really". The UAD Maximizer is probably the only plugin from UAD I truly miss. There are just too many great plugins out there these days.
recordingreview Sure, I make that comparison too....and honestly for me it sounds like a lot of marketing hype.
BTW: Aren't the SHARC chips the DSP processors themselves?
The Duo and the Quad share the same PCB, just the Duo has two SHARC slots empty.
Sacco Svd If I had to guess (and I'm a terrible guesser), I'd say the SHARC chips are doing the heavy DSP lifting. The UAD guys have the marketing thing figured out even if we are neutral about their tools. The exclusivity of the thing automatically makes it appealing. I don't mind people that have gotten great use out of their stuff, but I only miss one of their plugins and not by much. To each his own.
You just saved me 800€ mate. Sending back the Satellite right next Monday!
Ordering the Little Labs LL2A TOMORROW!!!!!
You are targeting the wrong people, nowhere in your review or any of your susequent comments do you reference how accurately the plugin emulates the Little Labs hardware, which is the UA Part of this. If you are mad at anyone, be mad at Little Labs.
Well anyway, no proof that the plug in is just EQ, but good point, you can probably achieve the same effect using just EQ..
I certainly appreciate the work you've done here. I also understand why you'd be upset. I am a happy Apollo user. But the VOG is *not* on my list of must have plugins. On UAD's side, music and pink noise are different. The levels of material going into the plugin can vary widely. The unique soft clipping that some devices impart can be extremely subtle. Having said all that, thanks for the heads up. I certainly won't be buying that one. But some of their other plugins are quite good.
Bullocks! Pink noise is harmonic and perfect for this test.
hahaha the plugin is off
Your next video should be "they fooled us with compression"
Then have a video of you using a compressor and getting the same results but using automation or a gain knob.
Then say "omg, compressors may not be fraud, but they've lost my trust"
But I'm pretty sure you've used a compressor on your vocals judging by how your vocals sound.
Couldn't agree with you more about UAD
UAD has lost it's true essence (RIP Bill), literally, and this type of shit proves it. We can't keep falling for their marketing tactics, and keep purchasing over priced plug-ins, especially when most are clearly just aesthetically pleasing to the eyes. Are these plug-ins better than hardware, NO WAY, not even close, but you have to hear the difference for yourself, and at least try the hardware. I agree with the vid 100%, if they do this to us now, what else is down the road...
Why tf do you plugins at all then? Because they all do the same shit
Does UAD have shills that dislike your video, lol? I think it is hilarious when people reverse engineer a product and call it out for its grossly inflated value. Well done sir. Have my like. I do not just give them out to anyone.
you're right. in addition to that, I think reaper is much more stable
The Voice of God hardware seems like kind of a gimmick too. I'm sure there are plenty of resonant high pass analog filters out there, and many that predated this unit.
uve obviously not used it very much it just simply gets the job done in seconds and sounds amazing
Oh man I hear you, I know exactly what you are saying. However you should know this happen in most industries, take Graphic Adapters for instance: Gamer version of cards are sometimes an exact replica of professional cards used in expensive studios. The difference most of the time is the firmware or like 10 year or so ago you move one resistor from the board and you get a card 20 times better with unlocked cores and other features. No need to mention who they are there are only two top GPU makers and they have been recycling and shuffling features for decades all on our penny. Thanks for exposing one more, maybe enough of us do this, this nonsense stops one day.
what gpus, any examples?
Pink noise, vocals, and drums all null when I flip the polarity on one of the tracks when comparing the stock Cubase EQ to VOG.
Thing is, people say its just $149 - its not.. You need the UAD hardware to run each instance of the plugin and that isn't exactly cheap.
Some excellent points!!! Thanks for sharing!! Really appreciate it!
To be fair UAD did a great Job on the 1176 MkII Versions….. but that you can get this one to cancel out …. LOL
Yeah, I certainly can't critique all of UAD plugins. Their Maximizer is absolutely brilliant. It's just a shame that not all UAD plugins are special. That's okay. I'm glad I learned my lesson when I did.
recordingreview The amazing thing is the LM is still a few yeas old and sounds like expensive tube gear. I do not know why some plugs are superior and some just are an expensive EQ curve, like the legacy 1073. I feel as well that the marketing is a bit to aggressive…
are you joking?! try that with different settings... 100hz straight flat won´t do any miracles! that´s the worst comparison i´ve ever seen...
SPAN clearly shows a boost with the VOG. Should I be expecting something different?
They suck way overpriced
That is like going to a 5 star restaurant ordering an expressive cheeseburger and getting served burger king or MC D . A plug in company responded to this plug in by making the same thing for free call Bark of dog. Bark like voice and dog is god spelled backwards. Came here to see if the voice of god plug in really pissed people off that much even though i'm really late lol. www.bozdigitallabs.com/product/bark-of-dog/ get your bark of dog for free here lol.
blood lord Another way to look at it, is UAD VOG, Bark Of Dog, and any resonant filter you can get your hands on are all 5-star, expressive cheeseburgers. The only thing "wrong" with the UAD VOG is the marketing that made you feel like you were getting more than a 1-band resonant EQ.
recordingreview Was that actually littlelabs who responded down in the comments. Didn't sound very professional to me for a company to insult so directly.
blood lord Yes, LIttle Labs officially said, "maybe you have too much time on your hands in your moms basement". That's certainly an odd way to conduct business. I'm used to that sort of thing from individuals, but it's certainly rare for businesses to act in such a way.
recordingreview I can imagine their customer support from unhappy customers to be horrible.
+recordingreview actually quite funny.... maybe HE (the guy who did the review) does have too much time on his hands, who gives a shit... you've got a choice whether to spend money on a quick solution or not. It works, does what it says it does. So what? Where's the problem? The price? Then don't buy it!
I used to fiddle with the settings and try to figure out how things worked and get lost in the minutia, I had a big complicated studio, Yamaha digital console, etc - AND then I got UAD Apollos, and now I make music instead of fiddling with settings ;) I don't know why you paid $100 bucks for VOG, I think it cost me like $30 in a bundle, with coupons they sent, man I used all those deals, got tons of plugs at fraction of list. The real point of UA stuff is how easy it makes producing, my headaches and BP are much better now. Anybody want to buy a nice Yamaha mixer? It save space, and maintenance, and you couldn't dust it if you tried.
Why do people take this so serious? its clearly his opinion . Just breathe slow and produce some art . VOG or not ...ijs. Thanks for the objective opinion bro . I'll probably still purchase it ( unless someone starts seeding lol )
I see we are going to keep this going. I'm not going to explain myself again. I found the marketing elusively pulling us in to a tool all of us have at least 3 of. The end. What money back offer?
LOL Loudly! Comedy Central reading these comments hahahaha
7? What are you on steroids or something?
Yeah well, there's a big difference between white noise and the human voice. The VOG is a tool. A tool that is supposed to do no thing very well.
When UAD DSP engineers realized that what they were modeling in hardware land was all over the place in digital land, they should have moved on to a different project. I never expected I'd get phase cancellation from UAD and stock Cubase plugins. That's the only gripe.
dude, thanks, I was just gonna buy it literally right now.
That's clearly a typo in the manual at least on my system. On my system a green "flat" setting bypasses the EQ. There's no way I'd get that resonant boost in SPAN if the plugin were in bypass mode.
I've tried dozens of settings in VOG and can't find one that I can't match with minimal effort with the stock Cubase EQ. It's clearly the same off-the-shelf EQ that everyone uses.
I urge you to fire up SPAN on your system. I bet you can match it with your stock EQ in 12 seconds.
It's fucking snake oil.
end of the day..the VOG saves your space for CPU ;-P
You have to keep the bastards in line! But maybe it's good in a "natural selection" kind of way. It weeds out the more simple minded ones and keeps them from being able to buy gear they can really get in trouble with.
I am just a regular dude with a hobby studio at the moment. To all the people that think uad plugins are a waste I will say that I know and have seen professional seasoned studio owners use only uad and not even outboard gear. That was the moment when I knew it wasn't just hype. If the industry pros are using these then by golly I would like to use these as well. I've been happy with mine. Put it this way sure you can get great work done with just about any plugin. I mean if people can get supreme mixes out of the clunky gear from yester year then you can get great mixes out of the state of the art technology today. My philosophy is if you can't get a good mix without any plugins then plugins are not going to make it great in fact they will make it worse. Now if you can get a good mix then they will enable you to go that extra mile to achieve a great mix.
My philosophy is if you can't get a good mix without any plugins then plugins are not going to make it great in fact they will make it worse. THAT! Congrats, you are on a right spot (Y)
Yeah should work, I think you can save a channel preset or let us know the numbers on the eq. Saves me $100 :D
I was asked to repeat the test with a drum loop and a voiceover. It still phase cancels in all tests.
That's one perspective. Of course, we can pick out tube gear in blind tests. There's that 200Hz-ish thing happening. I'm pretty sure I couldn't do the same with this. We'd also need to establish that we are hearing harmonics in VOG. I saw none in SPAN. It could be a time issue. Just one sample of difference will result in similar results with no audible difference. I'm not sure.
I have no qualm with the Little Labs hardware. If I mixed OTB I'd want four of them. I cover this in my article I linked to above.