Built in = paid plugin you can't use outside of luna

 

It's been said beofre. In fact, you can use third party plugins and VIs.

I've used EasyDrummer within Luna. To me, the MIDI implementation looks a lot like Pro Tools before version 10, but it's there and it does the job. To me it feels like a Pro Tools that can run third-party plugins.

The one gripe for me is the use of iLok (dongle or Cloud). They claim it's because of the use of computer resources to run Luna (prone to be cracked?).

The positive things:

• Integrated pitch shift and gain trim right at the track lane.
• A very effective warp feature that lets you edit audio like Pro Tools
• No-nonsense layout and shortcuts

Am I sold to the concept? Not yet. If I have to keep using iLok real-time protection, I'd rather keep on using Pro Tools,but I'd always dreamed of a plugin that took the best of PT and took it to the next level. In later versions, they might just do that.

 

I agree with those aspects of their organisation. Apollo and UAD is becoming outdated. SHARC processing it laughable. Prices of UAD plugins is laughable. Apollo racks and Satellites are overpriced. But I can't call an entire company garbage when they still make industry standard top tier hardware.

 

You may be right about me overstating it. I respect their contribution to the compressor game. But I also see much less of their hardware in use, and I'd be surprised if those sales weren't pretty low nowadays. Used market is flooded with 1176s and 2As. Clone market is even more flooded. It's a different era than when I started out.There's a lot of options, and most professionals are reaching for a lot less hardware in general. I've seen plenty of studios who haven't powered up their 76s or 2As in a long time.

I'll use their stuff bc I own it, and it's a pita to get rid of it. And I actually do like the ability to hop on a song and track with plugins at any buffer with no latency. That's their second greatest accomplishment to me. Luna has me salted up, though. Playing dumb about the term "built-in", charging ridiculous prices, and putting out something literally no one needed. Just reinforces why I haven't spent money with them in a long time.

 

Who need this "daw" ?

 

Last edited: Apr 13, 2020

Who needs it? I don't think anybody needs it. I don't see anybody adopting it as their main platform. It's like Harrison's Mixbus. How many people use that as their main DAW? However, I can follow the logic of why they want to enlarge their ecosystem to incorporate their products into an all in one solution. Will it survive is the question.

 

No, they didn't lie to customers. What I described above was "sneaky", in that they didn't go out of their way to say "everything you see in this screen will be free" but they didn't, in all the previews, pre-marketing, teasers, NAMM interviews - and I watched a bunch, including their preview event - mention that the platform would have paid extras. The *implication*, from what I saw, was that Luna came with some instruments like a Minimoog emulation, and some limited sample-based instruments etc (remember how FREE Luna is) and it's not an unrealistic takeaway, given that all DAWs include some basic instruments to get you going, that these were part of the free Luna (sure, release some new stuff later on, and make them paid extras if you like).

Now, clearly my takeaway from the pre-marketing was wrong, in that those things are part of the free Luna but need pricey paid unlocking - and they are entitled to do that. But I do think they could have (and from the backlash, possibly *should* have) mentioned, at least somewhere, that some of the stuff we're demoing in the (did we say FREE) Luna would not, in fact, be free.

It's a bit more nuanced than that. Firstly, yes, companies do indeed bundle free software with their hardware, sometimes essential (say, your audio interface control panel) and sometimes bonus (eg a free Ableton Lite license with purchase). But there are always *reasons* for it, of course. Free doesnt' mean valueless, as we know.

In the case of Luna, it may be free, but it's useless to anyone without a UA interface. So really, it's kind of "bundled" software with their hardware (it just took a bit of time to be released). Ok. So they were looking at a number of reasons why Luna should exist:-

- People using DAWs would have to flip over to the Console app to control routing and the print-first low latency plugins thing, which adds an extra layer of complexity to use

- We want to expand our product line to do instruments, but we cannot do them on our UAD platform because of latency, and we will not make native plugins for regular DAWs because of piracy

- We can give an integrated recording solution to people who buy our interfaces so they don't also need to buy/use a DAW if they don't want to (tenuous, as who the hell would buy a UA audio interface + DSP without already owning a DAW, but, ok...)

- If we provide this cool free thing to our users, who are already investing in UA's hardware, and likely, plugins as well - they have money, and are willing to spend it with us - let's give them another platform/vehicle where we can offer paid extensions

Yes, you can use third-party plugins, and yes, you can create music with MIDI on Luna.

 

I also watched the preview and immediately thought summing and the moog would be included as content, so I was disappointed to find out as I followed the development timeline on Facebook that additional content would a paid extra. They were clear about this very early on.
However, as I've already said, I now understand their definition of "built in" because Unison plugins can justifiably be labelled as built in, but you don't get them for free. It is both correct and misleading at the same time. Did they lie about it? Not at all. Should they have stated from the beginning that "in app purchases" would include Neve summing and a Minimoog. Clearly the answer is yes, since people here seem to feel as though the free distribution of LUNA is some kind of scam.
Worth noting is that the splash screen has very clear wording stating that LUNA is a recording system.
I may try it for that purpose but it won't be my working DAW. I won't compose on it although I may try mixing stems with it. I'd be interested to see how it handles 24 tracks of audio with the Studer and the Neve summing on every track.

 

I've seen a few LUNA ads leading up to this and I was also definitely under the impression that everything mentioned in their ads was bundled with the DAW for free (y'know, like every other DAW in existence ... even Pro Tools). You can't use any of that stuff outside of LUNA, right? And you can't use LUNA itself without some sort of UAD hardware, right? So why take advantage of their customer base (I guess they assume that "Hey, if they're rich enough to afford an Apollo, then can plunk down even more on the LUNA bundle!") instead if using it as an incentive for customers to purchase UAD hardware and, inevitably, more plugs? Either that or just sell the whole thing as a DAW bundle. Who wouldn't pay the same $600 they would have to pay for non-HD PT for a DAW with select powered plugs, VIs and accurate tape/summing capabilities? At least charging for the DAW would have been an honest move, instead of this sleazy shit.

Also, as much as I fucking hate Logic, they give you 70 GBs of free shit.

 

Last edited: Apr 13, 2020

I agree with most of the sentiments on here. When I got the promo emails and stuff I just assumed it was coming built in and then they quickly roll out more add ons but to be honest I did zero actual research because I knew I wasn't going to be using it. Plus I know UA they aren't going to give all that away for free just because you've bought one of their interfaces in the past. In the future you already know the "bundles" are coming. Buy this interface get X Luna add ons free... because that's how they do things. I like my interface but the price of their plugins for what they are just aren't meant for someone like me that's simply a low level consumer.

I've only bought a couple UA plugins (the dimension D and Galaxy Tape Echo) and they're good but I would never want to get on board with paid add ons that only work in their native host when I'm happy with the DAW I use. I mean I think it's cool for UA to maybe branch out and do some VA synths (market is already pretty saturated though) and I'd definitely consider buying those if the price was right and they sounded better than alternatives on the market but I'm not going to buy them if I can't use them outside of LUNA. I'm not upset because I wasn't going to use LUNA anyway but it's sad to think moving forward they may only develop new "add ons" for LUNA to try and force convert people over.

 

LUNA transforms Apollo interfaces into the most inspiring and fully‑integrated Mac‑based recording systems on the planet

Quote from their website - I guess it says it all (it sucks)

 

Yes, it says currently Luna (which requires a UA interface) only works on Macs. That will change when/if they release a PC version, but it's very early days yet. Cubase, Logic, Digital Performer, Vision etc etc also didn't have a PC version at version 1.0. No need to hate on them for no reason. UA's products have always been Mac first, that's what they prioritise for market reasons (much of their existing userbase are on the Mac, so it's pretty obvious how to prioritise your dev resources. Plus, PC development was less important because of the spotty track record with FW and Thunderbolt interfacing, meaning you often couldn't run UA stuff reliably on the PC platform for a long time.)

BTW I have zero interest in Luna, and while I have UAD DSP (in various forms since the early 2000's) and have bought and use a fair few UAD plugins over the years), I don't have a UA audio interface and have no intention of switching DAWs anyway. I think Luna looks quite nice in many ways, but it is clunky (much to be expected from a 1.0 release), and like all software, it will surely get improved and refined over time.

How much they continue to invest in it I guess depends on the take up from users. If it's really going to drive Apollo sales (hmm, not sure about that), and has significant advantage for people to switch to from their existing DAWS (again, hmm, not sure) then it will have a future.

If people won't switch, and won't buy Apollo's just because of Luna, then I'm not sure how much point there is in investing in it, or creating bolt-ons for it. And I can't really see people using it as a recording front end, only then to have to move everything into another DAW to work on it. It's a weird product for these reasons. We'll see what the public take up is like, but I wonder if the driver, apart from offering a more seamless DAW integration with their hardware, is to be able to extend their successful and fairly saturated plugin product line into instruments and other areas that they can't really do with their UAD platform - and if these are significantly compelling, whether that will drive people to Luna.

 

I simply don't like Luna. I tried making a song on Luna this past weekend and it took me 10 times longer to do, as opposed to using Logic or Live, etc. Also so many small things that either simply can't be done on Luna in comparison, or take extra workarounds. I feel like it's a product that no one was asking for. That said, I do like the look of the interface, and the idea behind using in directly with the UAD hardware, but you can't even easily add a plugin to the "Luna specific instruments" chain and either I'm crazy or there is no simply "count-in" feature when pressing record? They should have taken a basic look at the top mac DAW's and at least tried to inculde the basic work flow stuff. To sum it up, more trouble than it's worth. blehh...

 

I agree totally. I spent an hour looking for a count-in feature. Then I got on one of the livestreams to ask about it and some asshole fanboy goes on to tell me to use the pre-count (which is not the same thing) then goes on to say "well maybe you should make good practice of adding a few bars of space at the beginning of your song" I was like but that is two totally different things lol. They way I see it as of now it is only useable for actually mixing a song and not recording, even then unless you own a shitload of UAD stuff, it makes no sense whatsoever. You'd be a fool, to go from Studio One, Reaper, Pro Tools, or even FL Studio to Luna as your main DAW. Needles to say, I was hyped for it, then had a epic letdown after using it.

 

Isn't it designed as just a DAW for getting your recordings down? Or is it trying to be a full blown DAW?

 

Seems like recording system is being used as a euphemism for missing features. It's definitely attempting to be a DAW that will compete with Pro Tools. It's just several years off being mentioned in the same breath as a real DAW. And if they stick to a fixed 128 buffer for anything other than UA plugs, it will never make it to Mixcraft status.

 

This might be so called "free" to UAD hardware users, but my time isn't. I can't imagine the developers of this actually having used a normal DAW. How could they miss so many basic features? geeze, you can't even see which UAD plugins that you actually own! It's a hot mess. maybe in a year or two with actual feedback based development, it might have an actual use for Apollo owners.

 

I was excited to join UAD for the first time in my life for LUNA. I purchased Apollo town x. For a reason, I returned it and I purchased Antelope discrete 8. I have about 50 free plugins and high sound quality. Good news.

 

Last edited: Apr 13, 2020

I hope Antelope does the same. Antelope DAW!

 

At this point NO DAW can beat Mixbus 32C v6 for its Analog sound.