John


Its one thing to question the wisdom of placing an FX in a particular spot but its quite another to question two of the most helpful and competent members of the CW team. 

Further from my viewing they knew exactly what they were doing.

+1 exactly right 100 percent. Seth and Brandon are on top of their game. They know what their doing!! 

Maybe a dumb question, but what can I say. If I have a Limiter in the FX bin and everything else in the prochannel. Is the limiter last in the chain? Thanks

Great job on the tune Craig.  Thanks for sharing!

You can also insert an FX bin anywhere in the prochannel you like.

 
I find this to be a great addition to X2 - it makes the track/bus signal flow so much easier to visualize.

Thanks again Craig for taking the time to share your observations. There is some mystery for me around the "tolerance" button. Until I understand it a little better, I'm leaving it off.

Does Roey have a view on this??

Here's a good way to get a handle on what the CE does.

I created three sine wave test tones - 100Hz, 700Hz, and 7kHz and loaded them into individual tracks in Sonar, then placed the CE channel version in the master. The tracks were set up for exclusive solo so I could A/B/C among them, and did my variations within the CE insedrted in the Master bus. The CE Trim was set to 1 o'clock, and the Drive up full to make the changes obvious.

The Trim button seems like a "more" or "less" control. If we accept that the CE adds non-linearities characteristic of analog electronics and transformers, then the Trim control simply choose how much you want to accentuate those non-linearities. The Drive control determines the nature of the non-linearities.

It's VERY easy to hear what happens to the waveform when you're listening to sine waves. The S is the most subtle and rounded, the N does the most coloring, and the A lies in between. I applied the CE to three 100Hz sine waves and loaded the waves into WaveLab to see the waveforms. The "look" of the waveforms correlated to what I was hearing: S was the most sine-like but the trailing wave of the positive peak is very slightly more of a line than a curve. A flattened the peaks more, but remained fairly rounded while N didn't flatten the peaks as much, but altered the waveform shape more radically.

With the low frequencies isolated, it sounded to me like these differences are intended to emulate the midrange "ring" you hear with transformers in the signal path.

I'll be covering this in depth in an upcoming Sonar Technique column in Sound on Sound.

Anderton


Here's a good way to get a handle on what the CE does.

I created three sine wave test tones - 100Hz, 700Hz, and 7kHz and loaded them into individual tracks in Sonar, then placed the CE channel version in the master. The tracks were set up for exclusive solo so I could A/B/C among them, and did my variations within the CE insedrted in the Master bus. The CE Trim was set to 1 o'clock, and the Drive up full to make the changes obvious.

The Trim button seems like a "more" or "less" control. If we accept that the CE adds non-linearities characteristic of analog electronics and transformers, then the Trim control simply choose how much you want to accentuate those non-linearities. The Drive control determines the nature of the non-linearities.

It's VERY easy to hear what happens to the waveform when you're listening to sine waves. The S is the most subtle and rounded, the N does the most coloring, and the A lies in between. I applied the CE to three 100Hz sine waves and loaded the waves into WaveLab to see the waveforms. The "look" of the waveforms correlated to what I was hearing: S was the most sine-like but the trailing wave of the positive peak is very slightly more of a line than a curve. A flattened the peaks more, but remained fairly rounded while N didn't flatten the peaks as much, but altered the waveform shape more radically.

With the low frequencies isolated, it sounded to me like these differences are intended to emulate the midrange "ring" you hear with transformers in the signal path.

I'll be covering this in depth in an upcoming Sonar Technique column in Sound on Sound.

The above is the problem I have with science and why it will never make sense to me. Not picking on you Craig...I think the world of you as a teacher and an engineer...but I have to question why on earth you'd judge any of this by using a sine wave? We don't make music with sine waves...so why would it hold any credibility at all? If we create a guitar track or a bass guitar track and we can barely hear the effects of these CE's, isn't that enough proof that they really aren't anything to brag about other than maybe they got the saturated drive part down?
 
It's like the guy that ran analyzers on these when they first came out. What good does that do any of us if what the analyzer reports isn't actually heard on a track? I've been talking about these in a few other threads and have pretty much exhausted my testing with these things. I can simulate them with eq as far as the slight top end coloration they add. The saturation....it's one of the best "good drive" sounds I've heard...I just wish you didn't have to jack so much gain to hear what these things do. And, all I hear no matter what I try is a bit of top end with drive that I don't necessarily want. So to me, these things are pretty much a waste as far as CE's go. I refer to them now as "simulated pre-amps" without the warmth in color.
 
Again man, honest I'm not meaning to sound like I'm picking on you. I respect you too much for that. I just simply don't understand some of the scientific methods people come up with to test this stuff where in reality, my tracks I create will not sound like a sine wave or any type of test tone signal. If people can hear a big difference while using a sine wave, what good does that really do anyone? I have to use too much of this drive/trim to hear these plugs. I don't need drive in my sounds and every console *I* have ever worked on in my career, none of them were used to over-drive a signal. When we did drive something...it sounded horrible. I just can't buy into these things....that goes for the Waves NLS too. Just more hype that really doesn't make a difference to where someone should use these things all over the place in my opinion. Good saturators though, I'll give them that.
 
What are your thoughts hearing my comments in that regard?
 
-Danny

Danny Danzi

Anderton


Here's a good way to get a handle on what the CE does.

I created three sine wave test tones - 100Hz, 700Hz, and 7kHz and loaded them into individual tracks in Sonar, then placed the CE channel version in the master. The tracks were set up for exclusive solo so I could A/B/C among them, and did my variations within the CE insedrted in the Master bus. The CE Trim was set to 1 o'clock, and the Drive up full to make the changes obvious.

The Trim button seems like a "more" or "less" control. If we accept that the CE adds non-linearities characteristic of analog electronics and transformers, then the Trim control simply choose how much you want to accentuate those non-linearities. The Drive control determines the nature of the non-linearities.

It's VERY easy to hear what happens to the waveform when you're listening to sine waves. The S is the most subtle and rounded, the N does the most coloring, and the A lies in between. I applied the CE to three 100Hz sine waves and loaded the waves into WaveLab to see the waveforms. The "look" of the waveforms correlated to what I was hearing: S was the most sine-like but the trailing wave of the positive peak is very slightly more of a line than a curve. A flattened the peaks more, but remained fairly rounded while N didn't flatten the peaks as much, but altered the waveform shape more radically.

With the low frequencies isolated, it sounded to me like these differences are intended to emulate the midrange "ring" you hear with transformers in the signal path.

I'll be covering this in depth in an upcoming Sonar Technique column in Sound on Sound.

The above is the problem I have with science and why it will never make sense to me. Not picking on you Craig...I think the world of you as a teacher and an engineer...but I have to question why on earth you'd judge any of this by using a sine wave? We don't make music with sine waves...so why would it hold any credibility at all? If we create a guitar track or a bass guitar track and we can barely hear the effects of these CE's, isn't that enough proof that they really aren't anything to brag about other than maybe they got the saturated drive part down?
 
It's like the guy that ran analyzers on these when they first came out. What good does that do any of us if what the analyzer reports isn't actually heard on a track? I've been talking about these in a few other threads and have pretty much exhausted my testing with these things. I can simulate them with eq as far as the slight top end coloration they add. The saturation....it's one of the best "good drive" sounds I've heard...I just wish you didn't have to jack so much gain to hear what these things do. And, all I hear no matter what I try is a bit of top end with drive that I don't necessarily want. So to me, these things are pretty much a waste as far as CE's go. I refer to them now as "simulated pre-amps" without the warmth in color.
 
Again man, honest I'm not meaning to sound like I'm picking on you. I respect you too much for that. I just simply don't understand some of the scientific methods people come up with to test this stuff where in reality, my tracks I create will not sound like a sine wave or any type of test tone signal. If people can hear a big difference while using a sine wave, what good does that really do anyone? I have to use too much of this drive/trim to hear these plugs. I don't need drive in my sounds and every console *I* have ever worked on in my career, none of them were used to over-drive a signal. When we did drive something...it sounded horrible. I just can't buy into these things....that goes for the Waves NLS too. Just more hype that really doesn't make a difference to where someone should use these things all over the place in my opinion. Good saturators though, I'll give them that.
 
What are your thoughts hearing my comments in that regard?
 
-Danny

+ 1 on everything danny especially this part "It's like the guy that ran analyzers on these when they first came out. What good does that do any of us if what the analyzer reports isn't actually heard on a track?"


and " I can simulate them with eq as far as the slight top end coloration they add." 

and "all I hear no matter what I try is a bit of top end with drive that I don't necessarily want."


I really have not used the CE function very much. I am still trying to figure out a personal need for it. although I must say they do look cool in the prochannel strip.

It's definitely something you'll need to try for yourself, Marcus. But for the life of me...I just can't see a need for this other than for special effects purposes from time to time or for a little drive on a modern bass guitar tone or something. They sure do look cool. The Waves versions are even cooler and you have control over all of them in one instance. But again...is a console supposed to give us drive in order to hear a top end coloration?
 
This is my problem with these things and the hype that surrounds them. I don't feel that any of us should ever have to use an analyzer or a test tone to see the results of plugs like these. I just can't understand where that would be helpful. You either hear a drastic difference that works for you or you don't, ya know?  

Agreed Danny! I tried the Console Emulators on a few projects. I really did not like the results and I cranked up the drive a little. I am trying to keep an open mind. I think that maybe there is something I am missing here. I have had the same experience with Reel to Reel and I also got no top end. instead I got a slight warmth and compression. Maybe that is what the developers are shooting for.


I hear the difference in my projects when I increase the drive, but i don't hear it in the youtube video. In the past I have uploaded Youtube videos and some of the original sound was lost in youtube's conversion process. I really have not heard anything from the CE that would make me buy additional plug-ins

stevec


Not that I've done any real work with the CEs, but it's been stated before that adding a CE to *a* track isn't the intended design and probably won't do much.  Instead, you have to add it all tracks and busses while the project is coming together so that you "mix into it"; i.e.g, make your mix decisions based on the presence of the CEs from the start.  Then when you're far enough along, quick-group all of the tracks and disable/enable to hear the effect.
 
It seems that at least a few folks that did this liked the end result.   I'm definitely curious to try it myself, but unfortunately I don't have any projects in a state where it would have any effect.
 

That's exactly what I did Steve. But mixing into them doesn't really do anything. For me, a console emulator should alter the sound just by being on. I shouldn't have to raise a gain stage to hear the difference it makes and it shouldn't add top end and drive to my sounds. It's like....what are you really mixing into? When we record an instrument through a console, the circuitry of that console is going to alter or color the sound based on what console you use, right?
 
If we recorded an instrument using a Behringer Eurodesk and then used an SSL....the signals would sound different just because of the coloration differences between those consoles. I highly doubt that we'd run the gains up high enough on either of them to get drive....you know what that would sound like. :)
 
These CE's don't behave like that. Whether you mix into them on all tracks and busses or not....turning them off and on does nothing to the sound unless you hit the gain/trim knobs. My point is...to me they are not emulating consoles at all...they are giving you more of a pre-amp drive with top end sparkle. Most of the time when we drive a pre-amp, we get a little saturations and warmth. We don't gain top end and sizzle drive. That's all I hear from these whether I mix into them or just create a track and add one on.
 
What I notice is...an entire mix will be a little brighter in certain instances or certain instruments will have a slightly driven sound. So, if I notice this brightness and it happens to be a bit too bright, I take a little top end off of the instruments that I find are a little sparkly. In turn, upon disabling the CE's....it leaves me with the same sounds I recorded because I just took away one of the two things they do...so I'm left with driven instruments that may not necessarily need this addtional drive, understand?
 
I'm not one that is won over by gain boosts and treble boosts. That's all they do to my ears when I compare them with tracks that are un-affected by them. To each their own though....if something works and a person is happy with the outcome, they are right where they need to be. :)
 
-Danny 

stevec


Nah, I hear ya.  I guess CEs in general just aren't for everyone, or everyone would already be using them!  
 
I still am curious to try them on a "real" project at some point just for my own clarification.  Or saturation + presence, as it were.  
 

You'll definitely like the saturation and presence IF you feel your mix needs that stuff. Like I say, of all the plugs I've ever used that do the saturation thing Steve, these are definitely the best hands down. If you mix a little warm...the additional top end they give you is sort of like "gloss" on the PC eq in my opinion. The drive thing...well, you know how that goes...that's pretty much genre specific. :) I like 'em as plug effects more than CE's...but that's just me. :) You'll see what I mean when you mess with them even if you happen to not totally agree with me after you've experienced them yourself. :) It's all subjective anyway at the end of the day.
 
-Danny

Danny Danzi

The above is the problem I have with science and why it will never make sense to me. Not picking on you Craig...I think the world of you as a teacher and an engineer...but I have to question why on earth you'd judge any of this by using a sine wave? We don't make music with sine waves...so why would it hold any credibility at all? If we create a guitar track or a bass guitar track and we can barely hear the effects of these CE's, isn't that enough proof that they really aren't anything to brag about other than maybe they got the saturated drive part down? What are your thoughts hearing my comments in that regard?
 
-Danny

The point was not using sine waves to judge the efficacy of the plug-ins, but as I said, as a way to "get a handle" on what they do. I'd already judged the plug-ins and found them useful for enhancing tracks, but I wanted to know why. The more you understand what something does and how it works, the better you can apply it.
 
For example, the character of the 100Hz sine wave sounded VERY much like what you would hear running a sine wave through a transformer, whereas at the top end, it was more obvious that the non-linearities were manifesting themselves as high-frequency components. Neither of those are inherently "good" or "bad," they just "are." So someone who had not tried the CEs due to negative commments might read what I said and decide to try it on bass with a fair amount of Drive to bring up that "transformer sound," but also know to pull back the highs a bit if they don't want the non-linear sparkle.
 
I also compared how a sine wave was affected by the various CEs by looking at the waveforms in WaveLab. The first thing I noticed right away was that these affect the positive-going wave only - asymmetrical distortion. That's quite different from traditional saturation, and because I know how asymmetrical distortion sounds compared to symmetrical distortion due to all the design work I've done with distortion devices, this makes it easier to know which processor to choose when I want a specific sound.
 
So the bottom line is I could play with the CEs for hours, listen carefully to how they affect program material and individual instruments, and eventually, figure out what they do so I could have some guidelines on how to apply them. Or, I could run a few tests and get the "what they do" part over with as fast as possible so I could experiment with applying them. Now, knowing what they do doesn't dictate how I'll use them, but they provide suggestions that save time. As just one example, on a song where I applied the N-type CEs to all the tracks, the percussion didn't sound quite right. I instantly knew to try the S-type CE to give a more rounded sound, and tried it bypassed and enabled. I ended up keeping the S-type, but if my only choice had been between N-type enabled or bypassed, I would have bypassed it.
 

I am fully aware of the distortions that an analog console introduces. I was referring more to the fact that people are saying they have to drive the CE effect hard and almost get it into saturation before it becomes effective. The sort of consoles I was referring to were things like Neve and SSL etc where one is usually well below any such saturation levels in channels and buses etc..

Who says analog signal paths are perfect and that is what we should be striving for. I say we have been working and listening to an inferior environment for years and now we think that is our reference and when something better comes we now have a whole generation of people who don't know what to do with it.

OK the transformer does introduce all sorts of things into the sound (and you will not have any arguments from me on that!) but I say why not avoid them all together and just work in an all digital domain. Then you don't have to worry about any such non linearities at all ever. I can easily argue that a total non transformerless sound is better than a transformer sound.

Digital is much closer to the piece of wire with gain. Something that many Hi Fi enthusiasts have been striving for years. I have got the finest turntable and RIAA equaliser that you can get and the finest analog recordings and yes I know how good analog can sound at its peak. But a fantastic modern Jazz recording (DDD) without any such interference from analog simulation devices absolutely creams it though. No comparison. It sounds better to my ears.

I have come from a completely analog background and now I am working in an all digital one and to be honest I prefer the sound. It is more transparent, open, transient and noiseless! The more time I spend working in digital the more I like it. And yes you can produce very warm sounding and analog sounding recordings if you want to. (totally agree with Danny on that one) I have done it time and time again except you do not need any console emulators to do it. There are many other ways.

But I do like the way that we can now take an all digital mix and pass just part of it through some sort of analog processing as opposed to doing an all analog mix on an analog console where you are actually stuck with the sound of that console on every track. That may not get you the best result but now because we can put some parts of our mix through analog processes to my mind that is better just in itself. But it also can be said it is silly to apply CE on every track and every buss as well because then you are not hearing the clarity that digital brings anywhere.  

The place where we really need to emulate analog things in all their glory is getting VST synth instruments to sound as good as their earlier analog counterparts and thank god we are doing it and doing it well. I just love them now.    

Jeff Evans
<<I am fully aware of the distortions that an analog console introduces. I was referring more to the fact that people are saying they have to drive the CE effect hard and almost get it into saturation before it becomes effective.>>

I don't agree with them. I drive the CEs at around 2 o'clock max when I want an aggressive sound with rock, less with other material. Anything more sounds excessive to me.

<<The sort of consoles I was referring to were things like Neve and SSL etc where one is usually well below any such saturation levels in channels and buses etc.>>

Regardless of what level you chose, there was unavoidable residual distortion and I believe the aim of plug-ins like the CE is to emulate that.

<<Who says analog signal paths are perfect and that is what we should be striving for.>>

Well, obviously not me. But I do recognize that analog has a particular character that some people like, like slamming tape with drums. If that's what they strive to replicate with digital recordings, then that's what they should do.

<<OK the transformer does introduce all sorts of things into the sound (and you will not have any arguments from me on that!) but I say why not avoid them all together and just work in an all digital domain.>>

But that's the point of plug-ins like the CE. I would rather not record harpsichord through a transformer, and now I don't have to. However, when choosing a DI for bass, I'll usually use one with a transformer over one without simply because the transformer adds a pleasing quality to the bass. If I can do that predictably in the digital domain, so much the better.

<<I can easily argue that a total non transformerless sound is better than a transformer sound. >>

More accurate, yes. But that doesn't always mean it's subjectively better. I don't think anyone has heard an “accurate” electric guitar sound in the past 75 years

<<Digital is much closer to the piece of wire with gain...etc. etc.>>

This is not an analog vs. digital question; anyone using Sonar instead of a multitrack analog recorder has already made their preference clear. But you don't want to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Just because tape hiss sucks doesn't mean transformers can't add some great mojo to a bass part, or that subtle distortion products can't enhance a piece of music. The beauty of digital IS its neutrality; you can do anything from nails-on-chalkboard lo-fi industrial to classical guitar recordings so warm you can heat a small room.

<<I have done [analog-sounding recordings] time and time again except you do not need any console emulators to do it. There are many other ways.>>

If there are many ways to do something, I tend to choose the best-sounding, most effective, simplest option. If a CE, when applied appropriately, gives an extra 5% sonic improvement to a track—or even a 1% improvement—I see no reason to reject using it for conceptual or philosophical reasons, or spend time trying to figure out a way to produce the same result in a more complex or time-consuming manner.

When I first tried the CE, I thought it was superfluous at best and "the emperor has no clothes" at worst. But that was before I learned how to use it. Whenever I determine to my satisfaction that something can contribute to a better listener experience, it becomes part of my toolbox, and used (or abused!) when appropriate.