UAD Octo - working at 88.32 with Cubase 7.0.6?

Hoping someone can clarify if the UAD octo is working perfectly with Cubase 7 64bit at 88.2khz.

Any bugs I should be forewarned about? Is it stable etc.?



UAD 2 OCTO. Why shouldn’t it work? :unamused:
Of course it works!

The whole update has focusing a lot on fixing problems and performance issues with UAD 2 cards.
The majority reports that they see a vast improvements with UAD 2 and Cubase 7.0.6 x64.

Best Regards

Thanks for your input Freddie.

Why shouldn’t it work?? Well because it says so on the Universal Audio website ( ! Here is a direct quote from UA:

_"Q: Does UAD version 7 work with Steinberg Cubase 7 and Nuendo 6?

A: We are working directly with Steinberg to resolve a Cubase 7 and Nuendo 6 issue with UAD Powered Plug-Ins and we currently do not recommend using these hosts with any version of UAD software. UAD Powered Plug–Ins version 7 is fully qualified with Cubase 6.5 and Nuendo 5.5.

The issue: Sample rate and/or buffer size errors can occur when using UAD plug-ins and Cubase 7/Nuendo 6 is set to anything other than a sample rate of 44.1 kHz and an I/O buffer setting of 1024. After the error occurs, the UAD plug-in does not process audio and “disabled” does not appear in the UAD Toolbar, so there is no way to determine if the plug-in is functioning (other than listening to it).

Note: If Cubase 7/Nuendo 6 are constrained to use only the 44.1 kHz sample rate AND the 1024 I/O buffer size, UAD Powered Plug-Ins may work, but again these hosts are unqualified and are not supported."…_

Freddie, you seem pretty sure it works. Have you actually tested it at 88.2 khz and at all buffer settings other than 1024?

I look forward to hearing back.


Sorry Al!

I don’t own a UAD- Oct cards so I don’t know? But I would guess it will not work worse then before.
Referring to many both here and at Gearslutz its seem to work pretty okay.

That statement you found on UAD website. Isn’t that all about before the 7.0.6 update?

Best Regards

Greatest respect Freddie, I’m looking for users who can confirm the answer. Guessing if it will work isn’t going to help me in a decision about shelling out cash. Would prefer to hear from users on this forum who can say it works well at those sample rates.


Hi qbaser

I’m using 2 quads and 1 octo. I work exclusively at 96 with no problems in 7.06. I know that’s not 88.32 but I can’t imagine why you would have a worse experience since 96 is slightly more resource intensive. But who knows… Maybe there’s an 88 bug I don’t know about.

I did have a very infrequent sample rate mismatch problem in 7.05. All I had to do was remove and reinsert the plugin. This only happened a few times so it didn’t bother me much.

The good news is that I haven’t seen this or any other uad issue in 7.06.

Btw: I usually mix and record with a 1024 buffer. The motu card can monitor at near 0 latency. I record midi at 256. When that’s not good enough, I hit the constrain plugin compensation button. (I think that’s what it’s called)

Good luck with your system.

That’s really useful Blerg thanks for that.

I guess it must be fine then as according to UA the problems existed at anything other than 44.1.

If be keen to know your experience with live tracking using the octo? Are you able to track say five tracks with 1176 and a pultec on each channel with no Noticable headphone delay (particularly on the vocal headphones)? Or does the octo add sample latency to make it not great for live tracking?

At 88.2khz I’m around 2-3 ms and can track with waves with no Noticable delay just wonder what the UA octo experience is like in that situation?


Sorry, we were typing over each other. From my edited post:

I usually mix and record with a 1024 buffer. The motu card can monitor at near 0 latency. I record midi at 256. When that’s not good enough, I hit the constrain plugin compensation button. (I think that’s what it’s called)

The most I track at once is 16 channels on my drum set. However, I never use plugins on the way in. At 32 bit depth, I just haven’t seen the need and I want to have complete flexibility during the mix. This is just the way I like to work so unfortunately I can’t answer your last question.

I know others do use plugs on the way in. Maybe they will respond.

Hi ye I don’t ‘print’ the plugins so have total mix options as you do. I simply ‘monitor’ with waves plugins and it works well as I can remove them when I mix.

Just curious to knowing UA can replicate that kind of performance. I suspect not.