LUNA: New DAW from Universal Audio

[ConcertinaChap]

It implies you can run the software without and interface connected even though they say you can’t do that.

Yeah, but copy protecting free software

CC

[djangodeadman]

I understood that the iLok is needed for the extensions, which run natively. Unless and until there's a Windows version, I won't be able to find out through.

[ConcertinaChap]

That would make sense, but only if they don't need Luna to run but can be used in any DAW.

CC

[fredmant]

Thanks Sam for the video. I've watched it twice. I have Apollo 8 and think the world of it. However, there is always room for improvement. I'm just not certain Luna is that improvement. Does Luna signify that there will be no more development for Console which is at version 2 currently?

UA's advantage (and one shared with other companies using Sharc processors in their audio interfaces) has been low latency. The claim, or at least implication, is that Luna presents an environment where your Daw (say ProTools) could be configured at 512 samples for editing and mixing and never need to be switched to 32 samples for tracking. However, that assumes that outside of analog sources, you'll be satisfied with the two or three VI's currently in UA's line up. In the real world, a UA Console/DAW or UA Luna/DAW codependency will need to be maintained for a long time to come if not indefinitely. Add to that the major investment many have made in complete VI solutions like Arturia Collection, Native Instruments Komplete, etc, hybrid tracking is a requirement that needs to be improved, not glossed over with UA-Centric solution.

Call me jaded, but Luna, far from being the talk of the town at NAMM 2020, is just another portal by which UA hopes to expand softening plug-in sales as that market becomes saturated. I would have been much happier to see a Console 3 release with a few improvements that benefit their customer base more than an entirely new product whose utility remains to be seen. I will try Luna of course and hope to see more from SOS and UA in the future on this topic.

[currentsound]

I shot some footage of Luna, asked some questions as well as used it myself in the Universal Audio booth at Namm. Here is the video and summary:
https://currentsound.com/general/universal-audio-luna-daw-first-impressions-review/

[currentsound]

However, that assumes that outside of analog sources, you'll be satisfied with the two or three VI's currently in UA's line up. In the real world, a UA Console/DAW or UA Luna/DAW codependency will need to be maintained for a long time to come if not indefinitely. Add to that the major investment many have made in complete VI solutions like Arturia Collection, Native Instruments Komplete, etc, hybrid tracking is a requirement that needs to be improved, not glossed over with UA-Centric solution.

On launch, Luna will support AU plugins. I would assume that will also include instruments. So I don't know why you would think you will only be able to use UAD's instruments.

Here is the video I shot asking about 3rd party plugins: https://youtu.be/JKSS6UbMXDA

[Kayvon]

If this thing can deal 100% with aligning external MIDI recordings and playback then colour me v interested. I disappeared up my own brainhole working out the flaws in recording MIDI spot on into Ableton so if I could have full confidence that what I'm playing in is being played back I'd have no problem buying into the Apollo platform.

The cynic in me suspects they may not be quite as ruthlessly intent on perfect MIDI timing but one can and does hope.

[The Elf]

It's amazing it's free

*If* you have an Apollo or Arrow, of course - it only works with those.

...which makes it a new 'Pro Tools'.

I thought we'd done away with all that nonsense.

[Bob Bickerton]

Not nonsense if you’re already an Apollo owner!

Wasn't Pro Tools a case of the software driving the hardware purchase? I suspect this is the other way around - you buy into the hardware and now (potentially) you have the option of well integrated software to support your purchase.

Bob

[The Elf]

To me it would make more sense to stick with the DAW you already have that can also run on your mobile rig that (maybe) doesn't have an Apollo interface. And you can take that project to someone else who has your DAW, but a completely different AI.

I just don't see the point of an AI-brand-locked DAW. It feels like we've gone back two decades!

[ConcertinaChap]

I'm open minded about this.

I've already got Apollo Tbolt kit so I can download it and use it at no cost. I will certainly download it and try it. Whether I will keep on using it will depend on whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages when compared with Logic. The odds are against that since v1 doesn't support control surfaces but who knows what may come downstream.

I'm interested while it's free. If it ever costs or requires kit I don't already have then it would have to be bloody amazing to wean me off Logic.

CC

[Bob Bickerton]

Agreed - I'm not sure whether I will or won't use it, but it potentially has benefits that I can't get from Logic in terms of monitor sends etc. It's possible that, if I use it, it'll be for projects in the studio where I'm tracking other musicians and setting up monitor sends etc.

My mobile rig is based around Sound Devices anyway, so would I use Logic or Luna to process that - who knows?

You could consider Luna to be an optional extra to their Console software - as I said before I believe this to be hardware driven not software driven as in the case of ProTools.

What would be unfortunate is if UAD locked you into using Luna on their hardware - but that's not going to happen.

Anyway it's all conjecture and early days. Personally I've always considered changing DAW to be tantamount to changing religion and when you have to use another DAW it's feels as uncomfortable as wearing someone else's underwear (note - this is also conjecture).

Bob

[OneWorld]

Personally I've always considered changing DAW to be tantamount to changing religion and when you have to use another DAW it's feels as uncomfortable as wearing someone else's underwear (note - this is also conjecture).

Bob

And when you're in between you have to go commando!

I am having a go at changing DAWs even though on Cubase10, I am trying the Bandlab Cakewalk. I really like the GUI, especially channel strip, which seems to make so much sense. Whereas with Cubase I have to keep opening and closing the mixer, which is an ugly critter anyway. It looks as if it was designed by the makers of Tonka Toys or Lada cars

But try as I might, as soon as I get back to Cubase I feel as if I have come home, speaking my native tongue instead of feeling like I am wandering around Wallonia being dependent on a phrase book.

Steinberg, please, please, please look at the Cakewalk GUI and I plight my troth to you and will never stray again (Although LUNA looks good!)

[ore_terra]

I dont see myself moving from cubase either for mixing, but currently for recording I have to be switching from console to cubase and backwards to set the channels, as I like to print some comp and EQ (and corrective EQ if needed). for that currently I need to solo the track incubase, send the output back to a virtual input in console, tweak with the plugin there, and move the plugin to the right channel in console... you can imagine how those steps will be simplified with this LUNA

for me, if I can do the above, comping is as easy and quick and multichannel exporting is painless, I'm more than sold to LUNA.

beyond that, that emulated neve summing (price pending, of course ), the tape oxide... if they're an improvement over my current tape shit thing and summing shit thing (J37 and console 5) that would be a plus too.

[Hugh Robjohns]

I just don't see the point of an AI-brand-locked DAW.

It makes sense from UAD's perspective.

Their business is based on plugins, and their's are locked into physical hardware... but general purpose computer tech is now so good that native plugs are easily as good. So their marketing advantage and market share are diminishing.

One way of maintaining and building the customer base is to offer something that no one else can do... like integrate the plugins with the interface to closer replicate vintage hardware and allow other features ... which they've done with Apollo.

And another is to offer a level of plugin integration, signal routing and control with the DAW that others just can't do... which they are now introducing with Luna.

I agree it isn't a very practical option for a professional like you who needs greater flexibility and independence, but for a lot of bedroom warriors it could be quite an attractive option. And once they get new users adopting the DAW most will remain UAD customers for life (assuming it's a decent product that's maintained and developed sensibly).

As a business model, I can see the hoped-for advantages...

[The Elf]

I just don't see the point of an AI-brand-locked DAW.

It makes sense from UAD's perspective.

Of course!

As a business model, I can see the hoped-for advantages...

So can I.

But the world doesn't need yet another DAW - at least not one locked down to a hardware brand - IMHO, of course!

(And yes, I'd say the same if it was RME doing this!)

[muzines]

But the world doesn't need yet another DAW

And UA would seem to agree with you, which is why they are very deliberately not using the term "DAW" in any of their marketing for Luna. ("We get fined $5 for saying 'DAW'", jokes one Luna demonstrator.)

They refer to it call it a "recording system" - almost as if you had a hardware box (a UA audio interface), with integrated DSP (UAD2), and a sophisticated integrated mixer/recorder, with a graphical front end - it also gets across the "system" aspect, which means UA interface + UA DSP + computer + UA software - to stop people thinking they can just use it with their regular audio interface etc.

I think it will find a small market, but whether it catches on in any notable way I'm skeptical - but we shall see, of course...

[The Elf]

But the world doesn't need yet another DAW

And UA would seem to agree with you, which is why they are very deliberately not using the term "DAW" in any of their marketing for Luna. ("We get fined $5 for saying 'DAW'", jokes one Luna demonstrator.)

They refer to it call it a "recording system"...

[zed]

I just installed it as I thought I'd have a look at the Neve summing thing, which seems like the big new thing here, but that is £229 - anyone used it think it's worth that + switching worklflow? I mean that is £30 more than Logic is.

[muzines]

Wait, so it's free to UAD interface owners... apart from all the features that aren't free?

I see the Luna instruments, like the Moog and stuff, are all paid extras too...

I remember when the UAD platform wasn't so nickle 'n' dimey. I love their stuff, but...

Edit: 50% off all UAD plugins at the moment...

Hey - what happened to the Lexicon 224? It seems to be gone from UA's site now, only the 480 is there...

The page just 404's:-
https://www.uaudio.com/uad-plugins/reverbs/lexicon-224.html

[Bob Bickerton]

Spent a couple of hours with LUNA today and can see the potential alright, but was reminded that changing DAWs is like changing religion - not the easiest of processes.

Sure hope the Lexicon 224 hasn’t been removed - it’s one of my favourite reverbs - hopefully a web glitch.

Bob

[muzines]

Just heard back from UA, the missing Lexicon 224 is a site glitch and so should be restored shortly...

[zed]

Wait, so it's free to UAD interface owners... apart from all the features that aren't free?

Hey - what happened to the Lexicon 224? It seems to be gone from UA's site now, only the 480 is there...

The page just 404's:-
https://www.uaudio.com/uad-plugins/reverbs/lexicon-224.html

Yeah - I was excited for a minute - but I can't see moving workflow to a DAW/not-a-daw where the main driver is 'buy our plug-ins' rather than something focused on my results.

Yes - the Lexicon reverbs were my main temptation of recent weeks there - looks like they put it back?

https://www.uaudio.com/uad-plugins/reve ... n-224.html

[muzines]

Yes, after I had let them know, the 224 came back in the shop after a few hours, and the rest of the 224 pages came back an hour or so later...

[ConcertinaChap]

Is the 224 worth the money, then? (Currently £130).

CC