Can this New CUBASE 13 Plugin Stand Against UAD's Pultec EQ?
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 06. 2024
- ➡️ FREE WORKSHOP "How to Build the PERFECT MIX TEMPLATE"
mixdown.online/free
➡️ Get FULL CONTROL over CUBASE with
THE ULTIMATE GUIDE TO CUBASE
mixdown.online/cubase
➡️ Craft Professional, Radio-Ready Mixes
Using Only the Tools Available to You in CUBASE
with The Ultimate CUBASE MIXING Masterclass mixdown.online/mix
Can this New CUBASE 13 Plugin Stand Against UAD's Pultec EQ?
The Pultec EQ is one of the most well-known hardware EQs out there. But it’s not in everyone’s budget to own one of these hardware units!
Thankfully, dozens of plugin companies have made versions of the Pultec.
UAD has been recognized as one of the top designers of hardware emulation plugins, and their Pultec is no exception.
But now, Cubase has released their own version that comes stock with Cubase 13, the EQ-P1A.
How does it compare to the UAD? In today’s video, we’ll take a look!
Leave me a comment below and let me know what you think of the comparison!
RELATED VIDEO :
The Magic of the PULTEC EQ: How to use it : • The Magic of the Pulte...
DOWNLOAD the Bertom EQ Curve Analyzer 2 Plugin: www.bertomaudio.com/eq-curve-...
Instagram: / mixdownonline
Facebook: / mixdownonline
TIK TOK / mixdownonline
Website: mixdown.online
Timestamps
0:00 Intro
0:35 Looking at both plugins
0:55 Reviewing and comparing parameters
3:10 Analyzing EQ curves
7:29 Looking at presets
8:10 Listening on a track
9:00 Final thoughts on the 2 Pultec emulations
Compare CUBASE Versions: new.steinberg.net/cubase/comp...
Some of the gear and plugins I use in the studio:
CUBASE 12 sweetwater.sjv.io/XxQVe5
STEINBERG LICENCE KEY sweetwater.sjv.io/6bBJNN
DAW CONTROLLER Presonus Faderport 16: sweetwater.sjv.io/5bXnGn
STREAM DECK amzn.to/3OFVHaO
MONOGRAM CC monogramcc.com/shop/
SPEAKER CONTROLLER sweetwater.sjv.io/gbvG75
MICROPHONE sweetwater.sjv.io/b3WVKB
STUDIO MONITORS:
KALI Audio IN-8 sweetwater.sjv.io/XxQVBM
HEADPHONES:
Audeze MM-500 www.audeze.com/products/mm-500
Austrian Audio Hi-X65 sweetwater.sjv.io/vno7MN
Beyer Dynamics DT770 sweetwater.sjv.io/LPzQ6O
STUDIO MONITOR CONTROLLER sweetwater.sjv.io/gbvG75
VIDEO FILMING GEAR
Video gear shared in this video
CAMERA geni.us/My8h
CAMERA PRIME LENS geni.us/Pu7i
CAMERA MIC geni.us/zBCdmg
LAVALIER MIC geni.us/DdQTq
CAMERA LIGHT geni.us/2fruo
VIDEO LED LIGHTS geni.us/259YYN
LIGHT STANDS geni.us/ARrDmz3
SOFT BOXED geni.us/L2XAmoq
RGB FLOOR LIGHTS geni.us/KwL7 - Hudba
Nice comparision! the good thing now about Cubase 13 is for any newcomers, they can rely on stock plugins for at least 90% of the time
Very true!
I think a total noob on CB13PRO might be a bit overwhelmed 😉
The frequency characteristics of both are similar, but compared to UAD, Cubace's Pultec has more noticeable stereo blurring, and this appears as a difference in clarity.
Many people prefer the personality that UAD has.
Thank you Chris for this comparison. It was very interesting. 👍
I had the feeling, that the UAD version might have a little bit of saturation going on, leading to a slightly more polished sound and that the Steinberg version might be cleaner on that side, leading to a slightly duller sound. 🤔 Still very cool to have it for free now in Cubase 13 as the EQ curve looks and sounds really similar. 🥳
I'm hearing a bit more warmth and clarity in the UAD version but Steiny's version is solid for a stock plugin. Thanks for the comparison and tip on the EQ Analyzer!
same
My pleasure!
Excellent video Chris! 👍The UAD Version has a bit more color to my ears, a bit warmer so to speak in the lows. But it depends on the tracks you mix. For more acoustic based songs the Steinberg version might be perfect. Or you have to tweak the knobs a bit harder to get more bottom.
Great comparison! I don't know about the UAD one, but I've found the Cubase one to be kind of CPU intense. Great addition to the upgrade anyway.
Comparison videos of analogue emulations always focus on getting things to sound the same. And these come close enough to the real deal Pultec sound. The proof however is when you want to get that sound on your mix. Anybody with working ears and active braincells can use either of these emulations to get rich tone, warm low end and sparkling high end. So to have a Pultec emulation of this quality as a stock plugin in Cubase 13 is simply awesome. Then also take note that Cubase 13 also has the MEQ5 emulation that rules the midrange. Which, combined with the EQ-P1A makes for a terrific combo.
You got that right :-)
I have learned something, merci Chris.
Always good watching your videos, learned a lot again :)
Thank you! I'm glad you enjoyed!
I can't believe that I had totally missed this Pultec in Cubase 13 Pro! 🧡
You did a great job curve matching that last one. Like you, I could hear a tiny difference, but it is so small that I would have to study it with lots of material to be able to articulate it.
Cubase version sounds a bit flatter, propably needs more boosting on the lows and high to get the same effect. Dont own any uad effects, but considering upgrading to Cubase 13, so thanks for the comparison 👍
best video i´ve seen on the digital pultec plugin. Thanks a lot.
Awesome! I'm glad you liked it!
With ATH-M30x headphones and Realtek HD Audio soundcard (which is a decent card IMHO) on a laptop, I cannot hear much of a difference. Like you said, every emulation has a slightly different flavor. It's nice to have another one in the toolbox. I'll BTW, I love the tee shirt. The EQ analyzer is nice because it can be run inside the DAW unlike Plugin Doctor.
Nice vid once again man… I am giving Steinberg one more chance since 12 hasn’t been stable for me at all despite massive amounts of CPU that my Mac has…. Been using since C5 pro on weaker macs with less crashing… if problems persist I’m moving to another DAW, which is a bummer.
I vote for the Cubase one because your head bopped more enthusiastically (it worked! ;) )
Seeing the EQ curves I thought Cubase have nailed it, but even on my desktop monitors I watched this video and happens to be a pair of affordable BOSE the difference is huge ! Mind you I own the UAD version so maybe I'm biased. Imho I think it was a potential wrong move to decrease the output on the UAD to bring it to zero. You should have sampled the 2 versions so you have baked in the effect and then do the appropriate gain staging on peak and/or RMS for a fair comparison. I mention this because I myself did exactly that bake in with the UAD version then I gain staged through VU meters with all parameters to zero and the UAD affected the sonics of the sample in a pleasant way even when just passing through it. That indicates that there are more parameters UAD emulated than trying to much the EQ curve of a real device.
Hi Chris, thanks for this demo. It was helpful. To my ear, the UAD version sounded a little richer. But I agree, your settings got them as close as I can imagine. Now for the elephant in the room. Why doesn't the Cubase version have values around the dials? Sometimes we get too slick for our own good. I miss the numbers - - especially since the scale is so different on their version (i.e. 10 o'clock on the UAD version is not the same value as 10 o'clock on the Cubase version). Any thoughts?
You will the values when you dial it in, but honestly, I usually go by ear, and not look too much at the values when I mix...anyways, I try ;-)
i follow you from Egypt, and I recently subscribed to your channel and I learned a lot from you. You are so wonderful 🤩🥰
Amazing! My father was actually born in Cairo, so my ancestors are from your part of the world :-)
Wow, a very good coincidence. I was happy to know about this matter. My greetings to you and I wish you more success always. ❤🔥❤🔥😊@@mixdownonline
Thanks Chris for the nice comparison!
Of course! Glad you enjoyed the video!
They both sound good. For my taste I love the sound of the NoiseAsh Pultec. The color is so good.
Noiseash is great!! Oversampling 💥💥
Love the shirt! Watching from Pittsburgh - Home of Heinz ketchup!
Oh Yeah! So So this video is now dedicated to YOU! Lol!
You have balls Chris to make a video like this! There are so many UAD fanboys out there that just a simple comparison will unleash a world of butthurt haha! I loved it! Would be great to see antilope audio vs UAD also!
LOL,.I own the UAD version (came in a bundle), and II will say you're probably right. I realy like this video, and appreciate Chris's comparassin. I'm mixing a project so no time to upgrade, but it is compelling.
Great little comparison. My question is - does the steinberg version have any circuit modelling. To my ears
It sounds clean. Will have to experiment with some harmonic curves. I wish the steinberg plugins could be accessed in plugin doctor for analysis!
I have no clue. It would be cool to be able to use PD with DAW plugins
I like the red ON light on UAD, and I prefer the UAD color and knobs. But it's good to have an analog EQ in Cubase (even if like most of us, I already had many of them).
It's good for sure!
It's not analog and neither is the UAD. It's called "make believe"..
Chris watching from Ghana 🇬🇭
Oh yeah! that's so cool!
Great Intro Musik!!!!!!
Pretty close. I felt like the UAD was a bit fuller/ warmer. I have the UAD but I'm also definitely looking forward to Cubase 13, although I still slightly use Cubase 11 more than 12.
Un Cubano viéndote desde China.Saludos!
Oh yeah! ¡Gracias por ver!
I follow you from Israel, great content, keep it up!
Music will bring peace 💙 💙
That's so cool! YES to Music Bringing Peace! Thanks for watching, brother!
Love Israel
@Chris Selim. Salut Chris, Jean de Rimouski. Peut etre que tu n a pas vu ma question dans un autre Video, etant donné que je suis, et tu es un utilisateur de Faderport 16, est ce que tu a vu de nouvelles mise a jour avec la version Cubase13 pour les fonctionnalité du F16 ?. Merci
Спасибо за отличный обзор 👍👍👍
You rock dude!
No, YOU ROCK Chris :-) Thanks, man!
thank you for this comparison. well I am surprised at such a difference. I listened with the OLLO s4x with uad the sound is wider and deeper with silky highs. I don't have that feeling at all with Cubase. I even have the impression that it degrades the stereo image. maybe yt compression?merci Chris beau très beau teeshirt .
You're welcome, bro! When it's very close, YT compression might not help. It does affect the sound slightly. Glad you like my T-Shirt Lol!
@@mixdownonline le gras c’est la vie :) encore merci pour ton travail .
Bonjour, Chris savez vous svp s il possible d utiliser les plugins de cubase dans un autre DAW ou un vst host (ddmf metaplugin) pour tenter de beneficier de l oversampling par exemple?
À ma connaissance, non, les plugins de Cubase sont à même le systeme. Pour ddmf metaplugin, j'ai jamais essayé, mais si c'est comme Plugin Doctor, ça sera pas possible pour l'instant, mais encore, j'ai pas essayé
I think the update is worth it just for the orchestra, I've had a lot of fun with it already and it sounds awesome.
And between Iconic Opus and Iconics Sketch What is the difference?
Iconica Opus as far as I know wasn't included with Cubase 12 which is what I have upgraded from. Isn't Iconica Opus around £850 to buy?
Close, a cigar. The UAD is nicer with those settings, a tweak may fix. I saw a lumpyness in the upper frequencies on the Steinberg that wasn't on the UAD but didn't hear it, I heard the lower mid warmness difference.
The main issue I have with Steinberg plugins is that they're not resizable and it seems like Steinberg creates these plugins for screen resolutions that were common 15 years ago. It's just too damn small on my 1440p screen, so I don't even wanna know what it would look like on 4K.
The UAD was “warmer” due to a very muddy midrange. It’s strange. The Cubase one is les “pleasing” but far more natural and open. Nice Job!
but I guess with plugins u can add that warmness that its missing I guess yeah?
Sometimes one can't put a direct explanation why one plug in "sounds better" -- I suppose it must be something very personal in how one hears. These 2 plugins sound almost like mirror images but something about the Pultec one simply "sounds better." If anything ... it's something about an "overall sparkle" in the sound that the slightly "cleaner" Steinberg version lacks, but my comment is on a very high level here. We're talking about two EXCELLENT products!
You're totally right... I'm with you!
hi chris sir can i use cubase 13 pro on more than one of my pc
I like the Steinberg's version a bit more, I hear more definition in the drums. The UAD is a bit muffled.
You know what I think? There's a lot of version 12 owners that are going to be upgrading
I hear more crack on the UAD, particularly in the snare, almost like saturation. The Cubase emulation sounds clearer in top range, but less “thick” there due to the lack of perceived saturation as compared to the UAD. Sounds different (slightly), but not lesser.
UAD warmer and cristal clear. Hands down.
Hi Cris I follow u from Imphal, Manipur, India i learned a lot from u in Cubase. You are great.🎉
Awesome! That's so cool! Thank you, and thanks for watching!
I need that shirt!
Lol! I bought it in Banff, Alberta (Canada)
@@mixdownonline it's a classic 🙂
Great video, ever better shirt
UAD was little bit smooth gentle on 8kHZ, not much different. Thank you. Bıut also thanks to introduce the Bertom.
My pleasure!
Strangely enough (copyright issues?), it's EQP-1A on UAD and EQ-P1A in Cubase.
Interesting! You might be right
cubase 13 dont show me the uad dsp plugins! 😮 i tried to fix it by re installing apollo twin x but dont work 😮
*In all fairness - Whenever you purchase The Pro Version of Cubase, it should at the least include a full version of GA-5 or Halion (let buyer choose).* Personally, imho GA-5 should be included.
It's not fair to have Pro when all of its main Vsti's are limited editions. 🗑️ Steinberg would do much better in sales by going this route - more sales. They could even bring back the Dongle to protect itself from The Pirates. The Dongle never bothered me.
*This would be a true upgrade.* We don't need any more plugin emulations. Everyone has tons & tons of plugs. We need/want GA-5 or Halion included.
*Wake up Steinberg!!*
Please do not bring back a dongle. OMG.
But I agree the pro-version isn’t all that “pro” in some features compared to the competitors. The different versions of every product is confusing. And Wavelab is another $500? Studio One does this for free and it’s integrated into the DAW so you can switch from song to album for mastering and it keeps the master mix down updated as you work on the song.
Anyway, I often work on a MacBook and a dongle is a deal breaker for me, lol
Weird effect on guitars in the mix. Stereo image just collapses into center with Cubase plugin. Sounds like a different mix, with guitars centered, actually...
The punch on the kick drum goes away on Cubase but that can be adjusted to taste.
For a qubase user it's a bit disappointing that you didn't used the comparison EQ... THAN you could. Exact see what the difference in the curve was.. Anyway: nice video Mr Ketchup. 👍
What's the comparison EQ you're refering to?
Huh? C'mon.. You are one of my gurus ejjj... Open any track, output etc and route both the tracks with the pultechs to this track. Open the editor and and on top of the EQ section you can open both the pultechs and than you can Exactly compare both curves... All in Cubase... 🤙🏻
@@youtuupYou are talking about the Spectrum Analyzer comparison feature. That's not used to compare EQ curves.
Please, make sure to study and understand the tools before criticizing.
@youtuup Yes, of course I know this feature, but didn't realize you were referring to this one that is a Spectrum Analyzer. The Spectrum Analyzer will not give me the actual EQ Curve of the Plugin, but will show me a frequency reading according the signal I send in it plus the processing, so the signal will be part of the reading which is why it won't give the same reading as EQ Curve Analyzer 2 does, it's something completely different, not what I was looking for. I can go with Mr Ketchup though :-)
@@Tama300 idiot. Don't start making assumptions you can't prove.
hi Chris.
i wonder if the codes are all the same and its just the GUI that differs and a few "mods" seems to me when one company Brings out a mod of a classic Unit the other company's will also all do it the following months.
eg. studio one looked a lot like cubase talk was (without getting myself legal trouble) it was the cubase or "A" cubase code , or the Great charly Steinberg wrote the first codes for pro tools..cant say one way or the other if its true but it makes sense.. this is why i rate ALL OF STEINBERGS STOCK PLUGINS HIGHLY..look at that Portico stuff.. omg... and who is resposible for the whole "VST" yep our Steinberg guys. 🙂
i will often mix with stock plugins because they are quicker to find and do what it says on the tin..
i like many others have fallen into the "GAS" and brought plugins because some youtuber says they are the best thing etc my work flow is now.: stock plugins first then if i cant get what i need then i will swap out with others.. faster mixing faster results and tbh no one ever asks which brand of 1176 did i use blah blah
you Did aFew videos on this subject it was one of those that made me rethink ..do i regret spending all that money ? someimes yeah but mostly no i dont
Thanks once Again Chris...you are one of the Best out there keep on doing what you do .
chees
T
with a little tweaking you will get exactly the same sound. Regardless of what values are on the knobs. It´even better to use ears and not values.
That's right, already in this part of the video, the settings are not quite the same between the 2 plugins, and by dialing it a bit more, I could get closer I think.
no, you can't because the dip is much lower on the UAD. 160 Hz to 220 hz is not a subtle difference
@@hanspanzermost EQs can be nearly the same. "Lower dip" an UAD is not all of it - who says that EQs always have to have the same values or "dips". All that matters is the end result...
@@Byron101_ sure but if the lowest dip of emulation A is 60 Hz higher than that of B you can objectively not have the same result, at least in that edge case. Math bro! :)
@@hanspanzer
you just don't get it ;) who cares whether hardware is cloned 1:1 or not! Only the result counts. Usually several EQs are on mixed tracks. But enough chatting, time wasted. Have a nice day.
“A friend of mine” 😂
😂😂 I guess that was you! 😂😂
Depends on how well
the producer hears.
UAD sounds much better, closer, realer, maybe because of the the Oversampling they do internally?
the UAD has that "grip" that they somehow get on all of their plugins, the Steinberg sounds a bit boring in comparison (not bad though).
As a mixing engineer for almost 15 years I can say that the difference between the two is like night and day the UAD sounds warm and analog and Cubase sounds leaner and digital
Thanks for your take on this :-)
The UAD has more wear on it Mais Cubase reste champion
Reggaeton waaaoo
Yeah!
UAD is best
It's not really close from my view. The UAD version does a significantly better job when I compare both here. The Steinberg one is still well useable, although maybe with a bit of aliasing when you push it.
I hear a color difference, it's much darker isn't it😅
LOL!
Logic version is better than UAD's.
A successful video as always. But unfortunately, I think Cubase 13 is an early update this time just to collect money from us. I have been using Cubase since Atari and now I am using Cubase 12. The new orchestra is lower level than the orchestras of other companies. Sine player and Native instrument are also given for free and Sine has a more realistic sound... Vocal Vocoder, Pultech EQ and many new plugins you can find on the internet, original and free. I also bought similar One Nobe plugins from many companies for free. The update should be innovative and be able to give what others cannot give. Thank you again...
That's fair, we all have different needs. Thanks for your comment, and for watching :-)
Biggest thing so far I’m noticing is cubase is way more snappy and stable. That’s a god send
You’re probably right that the update isn’t innovative. In fact some of it seems to just be tidying up a bit, something you might not expect to pay for. But I’ll still give them $99 to support the product and its continued development.
I think you are just upset because you didnt wait for version 13 and instead got the buggy and unstable v12. Ask anyone who's gone from 12 to 13,,, its the one to get. Vers 12 is unstable,, v13 fixes all that and is solid stable. Plus the native plugins now are pretty much destroying the competition out there and making it unnecessary to buy any third party plugs now,, native plug is always more stable too. Also, good quality sounds are never free,, not unless you are pirating,,, you arent pirating are you?
@@SnowAngelfish Neveeeer Hello, THANKS FOR THE COMMENT. I REQUEST YOU TO PLEASE READ WHAT I WRITE FROM THE BEGINNING. I WRITTEN EVERYTHING WITH THEIR NAMES. I THINK USING PIRATED SOFTWARE IS THEFT. BUT I GOT MANY EXPENSIVE AND HIGH QUALITY PLUGINS FOR FREE OR FOR VERY LOW MONEY. IF YOU FOLLOW, YOU CAN GET IT TOO. FOR EXAMPLE, I BOUGHT A DRUM AND A CONTRABASS FROM UJAM AND VERY EXPENSIVE AND BEAUTIFUL EQ AND COMPRESSOR PLUGINS FROM PULSAR COMPANY FOR FREE. NO KRACK. WISH YOU SUCCESS..
Could definitely hear the difference, UAD sounded better. But the Cubase version is really nice.
I can't hear any difference and I think it is because of CZcams.
Yes, CZcams compression might alter the sound a bit
I guess you didn't test for aliasing - the Black Valve is awful - no excuses in 2023 Steinberg.
you smoking crack if you think anything sounds better then UAD, maybe sooth2, maybe some plugin alliance or slate or Kush.., very few more all sound as good but in their own ways.