tonyzub999
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 107
- Joined: 2016/05/01 16:55:23
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/10 16:15:19
(permalink)
So my SPLAT was active through May 2017. So does that mean it would be already included in my software plugs?
|
thedukewestern
Max Output Level: -83 dBFS
- Total Posts : 387
- Joined: 2008/04/14 12:06:59
- Location: NY
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/10 16:33:44
(permalink)
Opening story: I did a really big mix job at a saranac beer festival recently, and I was asked what console I wanted. I said that I've used the midas m32 multiple times a week since it came out 3 years ago. Well - they didnt have that, but they did have the behringer x32 which uses that identical software. Even though they had a yamaha that was sonically superior, the best choice for me was the behringer, because I knew it so much better than the yamaha, and I could stretch it much further much faster. Me knowing an inferior console better sounded infinitely better than me fumbling around in an great mix architecture I do not know. Nuts and bolts:In the studio: I still use the pro channel q very very often, and I use the delay alot when I need something thats very clean. I use the blue tubes chorus a lot as well. I use grit in the style dial, and the reverb (forgot the name while typing), and the compressors alot as well. Ive done many mixes using only the cake stuff. However mastering - I havn't used the cake stuff, i've been an izotope customer for a long time and am very used to to the ozone platform. I typically use some kind of compressor, or a tape plugin, then go into ozone. I still use alloy 2 alot, not because its better, but because I know it very very well. Child:For me - as a guitarist, I never wanted to learn Eric Johnsons songs, as much as I wanted to learn where he was coming from. I searched out lessons on his style, what he studied to view music the way that he does, got his instructional videos to hear how he talks about what influences him. I view mixing, and choices one would make in the same manner. What if I could own a piece of gear that a complete genius who has spent their entire life with a soldering iron, built. What if I could buy a software emulation, made by guys who have done software emulations for decades, have ... well... built, based on that. I want to know what they know, hear how they heard. When I was growing up, I got my first guitar, and had it for years before I got another one. Even today it would feel like a welcome old friend, even though it is inferior to ones that I currently have. The child with a credit card:For me - the fun part about some of the more "modeled" waves stuff, is in exploring how they actually do sound different, and go in different directions. I don't own any slate stuff so I can't comment about that, but the idea of having rented access to everything a munufacturer makes is not appealing to me, not because of the rental aspect, but because of the overload. I feel I am better off with 3 things I know very very well. I like when something goes on sale, say at waves, and Ill youtube a few demos, and throw my 50 bucks down. For me - I've bought the ssl 4000 series, the api series, the scheps 73, the h reverb, and a few others from waves over the past 2 years. But my promise to myself is that I only buy another series when Ive done a few mixes restricting myself to what I just bought. Wow... that was good coffee... sorry everyone....
Be the first one who thinks that you can Sonar Platinum, Windows 7 64 bit - clean install January 2016, Focusrite Pro 40, Outboard Pres, Native Instruments Komplete, Izotope, PSP, Melodyne, Vegetarian
|
tonyzub999
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 107
- Joined: 2016/05/01 16:55:23
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/10 16:52:56
(permalink)
Thanks for sharing. I really appreciate the input. What do you think about the H-Verb by Waves? Also, that Midas touring board at church is analog and the sweetest thing you have ever heard. It didn't take too long to get used to it. Amazing sound.
|
Brian Walton
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
- Total Posts : 584
- Joined: 2014/10/24 22:20:18
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/10 17:18:47
(permalink)
tonyzub999
Thanks for sharing. I really appreciate the input. What do you think about the H-Verb by Waves? Also, that Midas touring board at church is analog and the sweetest thing you have ever heard. It didn't take too long to get used to it. Amazing sound.
Check out the Yamaha Rivage PM10 for a legit church touring board. They are a big step up from the Midas Pro X series. Yamaha's CL5 is more on par with the Midas Pro stuff.
|
thedukewestern
Max Output Level: -83 dBFS
- Total Posts : 387
- Joined: 2008/04/14 12:06:59
- Location: NY
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/10 17:28:19
(permalink)
Yeah - at the church where I mix the console went down one sunday, my friend nearby had an old midas venice 24 I grabbed to get through the service, it sounded amazing. So I talked them into getting the m32 to replace what they had. Its a great line. The club where I mix uses the pro series, and an avid venue sc48 in monitorworld.
I think the hverb is really really useful. It sounds great, and all of the things you might use another plug in for, it already has on board. Different delays for pre and post, compression, and really great presets.
Be the first one who thinks that you can Sonar Platinum, Windows 7 64 bit - clean install January 2016, Focusrite Pro 40, Outboard Pres, Native Instruments Komplete, Izotope, PSP, Melodyne, Vegetarian
|
subtlearts
Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2200
- Joined: 2006/01/10 05:59:21
- Location: Berlin
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/10 20:55:03
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby John 2017/10/10 22:28:29
Gosh, I'm glad I'm not the only one given to somewhat long-winded semi-tangential philosophical ramblings!
I feel like the analog modelling paradigm is driven to a significal extent by marketing; it's really hard to convince people they need 27 more EQ's and compressors when they already have several perfectly good ones, *unless* you can convince them that what they really need are faithful models of great historic gear that most of us have never heard or used - but which will, like magic pixie fairy dust, sprinkle awesome analog vibes all over our tracks. It doesn't just sound good, it sounds *authentic*, and by extension your tracks will have credibility that simply can't be achieved without the Special Magic Sound of the very same legendary processor used by, well, you get the idea.
I am probably about as susceptible to this as anyone, and as a result I have some great stuff that in actual fact I only use occasionally... if I want to quickly dial in a bit of simple compression or EQ, I'm quite likely to use the ones already right there in the Pro Channel, unless I know I'm going for something specific, say a heavier saturated compressor like NI's Supercharger GT, or the sheer retro character of Waves' TG12345... But for bread and butter purposes, the PC is right there, and sounds pretty darn good, and I highly doubt anyone who hears the track is going to say oh, I'm not into this, he's clearly using stock plugins. They will like the music, or they will not; if I make it sound as good as I can with whatever tools get me there, hopefully the former is a bit more likely.
That's not to say there aren't some really excellent products that have emerged from the modelling approach. We have, in fact, an embarrassment of riches, and they're getting better all the time. I think it's a bit silly to pretend that UAD and Waves are the only companies with the resources to do serious component-level modelling; certainly I've seen about 30 companies making the claim, including IK, PSP, Softube, Overloud, UBK/Kush... it's not like these units are *that* hard to get access to. And then there are a number of developers that don't go down the road of modelling specific gear but rather make great-sounding, useful and well-thought out plugins that may or may not aim to capture the essence of analog/tube/tape/whatever - like McDSP, FabFilter, iZotope, Soundtoys, Flux, U-he, Blue Cat, Voxengo, Klanghelm, the almost unbelievably prolific Melda, Valhalla, Klanghelm, Toneboosters...
I also think it's a bit silly to pretend that using plugins that very exactly model specific gear from the past is the only way to raise your game production-wise. It's one way, or rather could be part of one way; however as per one of my previous posts, having and using those products is not going to magically make you a better mixer, all the marketing in the world notwithstanding. But it's also completely possible to raise your game in terms of skills, and achieve completely professional results, using only the tools in Sonar. If Andrew Scheps or Chris Lord-Alge or Butch Vig or (insert your favorite pro engineer here) were trapped in a studio with an artist worth recording and only Sonar Platinum, do you think they would not be able to make a great-sounding track? Not pretty-good-but-would-have-been-better-if-only-they-had-better-plugins, but flat-out great. I'm pretty sure they could do it. Real engineering knowledge and skill has little to do with knowing what gear sounds great (though that certainly helps), and everything to do with highly trained ears and the ability to use the basic tools of our trade to make things sound better.
I'm not pretending to be an engineer on anything like that level, I'm fundamentally a musician who got into synths and recording back in the analog days and have nursed it along as an interesting and rewarding hobby that more or less pays for itself and keeps me out of trouble. I do like it when things sound great, rich and warm and detailed and tonally balanced... but I also know that many classic, important and influential recordings were made with limited gear, limited skills, limited budgets, but lots of attitude... and it's hard to find that in a plugin.
|
BenMMusTech
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2606
- Joined: 2011/05/23 16:59:57
- Location: Warragul, Victoria-Australia
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/10 22:52:09
(permalink)
subtlearts
Gosh, I'm glad I'm not the only one given to somewhat long-winded semi-tangential philosophical ramblings!
I feel like the analog modelling paradigm is driven to a significal extent by marketing; it's really hard to convince people they need 27 more EQ's and compressors when they already have several perfectly good ones, *unless* you can convince them that what they really need are faithful models of great historic gear that most of us have never heard or used - but which will, like magic pixie fairy dust, sprinkle awesome analog vibes all over our tracks. It doesn't just sound good, it sounds *authentic*, and by extension your tracks will have credibility that simply can't be achieved without the Special Magic Sound of the very same legendary processor used by, well, you get the idea.
I am probably about as susceptible to this as anyone, and as a result I have some great stuff that in actual fact I only use occasionally... if I want to quickly dial in a bit of simple compression or EQ, I'm quite likely to use the ones already right there in the Pro Channel, unless I know I'm going for something specific, say a heavier saturated compressor like NI's Supercharger GT, or the sheer retro character of Waves' TG12345... But for bread and butter purposes, the PC is right there, and sounds pretty darn good, and I highly doubt anyone who hears the track is going to say oh, I'm not into this, he's clearly using stock plugins. They will like the music, or they will not; if I make it sound as good as I can with whatever tools get me there, hopefully the former is a bit more likely.
That's not to say there aren't some really excellent products that have emerged from the modelling approach. We have, in fact, an embarrassment of riches, and they're getting better all the time. I think it's a bit silly to pretend that UAD and Waves are the only companies with the resources to do serious component-level modelling; certainly I've seen about 30 companies making the claim, including IK, PSP, Softube, Overloud, UBK/Kush... it's not like these units are *that* hard to get access to. And then there are a number of developers that don't go down the road of modelling specific gear but rather make great-sounding, useful and well-thought out plugins that may or may not aim to capture the essence of analog/tube/tape/whatever - like McDSP, FabFilter, iZotope, Soundtoys, Flux, U-he, Blue Cat, Voxengo, Klanghelm, the almost unbelievably prolific Melda, Valhalla, Klanghelm, Toneboosters...
I also think it's a bit silly to pretend that using plugins that very exactly model specific gear from the past is the only way to raise your game production-wise. It's one way, or rather could be part of one way; however as per one of my previous posts, having and using those products is not going to magically make you a better mixer, all the marketing in the world notwithstanding. But it's also completely possible to raise your game in terms of skills, and achieve completely professional results, using only the tools in Sonar. If Andrew Scheps or Chris Lord-Alge or Butch Vig or (insert your favorite pro engineer here) were trapped in a studio with an artist worth recording and only Sonar Platinum, do you think they would not be able to make a great-sounding track? Not pretty-good-but-would-have-been-better-if-only-they-had-better-plugins, but flat-out great. I'm pretty sure they could do it. Real engineering knowledge and skill has little to do with knowing what gear sounds great (though that certainly helps), and everything to do with highly trained ears and the ability to use the basic tools of our trade to make things sound better.
I'm not pretending to be an engineer on anything like that level, I'm fundamentally a musician who got into synths and recording back in the analog days and have nursed it along as an interesting and rewarding hobby that more or less pays for itself and keeps me out of trouble. I do like it when things sound great, rich and warm and detailed and tonally balanced... but I also know that many classic, important and influential recordings were made with limited gear, limited skills, limited budgets, but lots of attitude... and it's hard to find that in a plugin.
What I actually said, and I believe you understand this is, you've got to know what aesthetic you're aiming for. I'm bringing my fine art (ugh I know lol) knowledge into the discussion to help create a language, and from there people can make better choices about their software purchases and indeed their mixing decisions. You don't need 500 EQ plugs...absolutely. And Sonar's offering, as I've said throughout this discussion is the bomb. But the Sonar offerings will only get you so far, and the mixer will need to understand that Sonar is offering you a digital aesthetic...even though they supply console emulation and tube/tape emulation (ugh again I know lol). So a digital aesthetic is cold and blue...if this is the sound you want, then own it. On the other hand, the analogue emulation aesthetic is the solution to the digital medium and to get around the coldness of digital. But you have to follow a formula, or this is what my experiments suggest to me...I know it's confusing...am I an artist or a scientist? lol. Actually I'm probably the last of the modernist Furturists', because of my belief in technology and how I try and work technology out. Or as I've labelled it techno-romantic...I know I'm confused too lol. Finally you're absolutely right, no singular plugin will change the sound of your mix...it's using emulated real world plugs in sequence with 64bitfp, oversampling and binaural diffusion (yea I made the term up...it's more along the lines of time based ambisonic effects lol to be more accurate but binaural diffusion sounds way cooler), that changes the sound of your mix. Ben
|
subtlearts
Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2200
- Joined: 2006/01/10 05:59:21
- Location: Berlin
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/11 06:57:58
(permalink)
Hey Ben... I didn't mean to put words in your mouth and sorry if I misinterpreted you... in fact, looking at what I wrote now I think parts of it do come across like I'm jumping on things you said in an argumentative way, and in fact that wasn't my intention - it was more a case of, things you said made me think and I wanted to express what I was thinking, but again, apologies if it came across more aggressively than intended. However, I think there are some points where we might have to agree to disagree. Or rather, I think we have fundamentally different approaches. I think in many ways you're absolutely correct that having a specific aesthetic and understanding what goes into making that aesthetic are probably going to be helpful in many aspects of production, including but not limited to selecting and using add-on analog emulation processors - if you're going for a specific aesthetic. However, what if - as in my case - the aesthetic you're going for is "whatever sounds good to me and makes me feel good"? I know there are many people working in music and production who are going to be much more formulaic in their approach than I am, and many of them are likely far more successful with that approach than I will ever likely be. But I'm simply not interested in following any existing formulas to make the strange music I like to make, except for whatever habits organically emerge through the process of doing so. I am not trying to emulate anyone or anything, though I think it's perfectly valid to do so; I'm simply not interested in that. So my 'formula', which informs everything I do and everything I produce, is simply to be playful - I start putting things together and when they start to make me feel good and/or spark my creative interest, I figure I'm on the right track. I'm pretty committed to this intuitive, playful approach, since it's always served me well, and in fact it often informs my mixing choices as well - I'll throw something on a track simply because I haven't used it for a while and I wonder what it will sound like on what I'm doing; sometimes it sounds terrible, so I remove it and try something different, but sometimes it wakes up a track with a completely different sound than I might have been going for, taking the whole process in a new and unexpected direction. And *that* is what makes me happy and keeps me curious and creative. I think you're entirely correct that a formula and a more deliberate process will always serve you best if you are going for an expected result, but I am literally doing the opposite, I am looking for unexpected results, since a) they make me happy, and b) they are the lifeblood of my playful creative process. Of course, I also have my standby plugins and my habits which, again, have largely emerged organically, and those are the ones I will tend to put on towards the end of a mix (and I'm also one of those people that doesn't particularly separate composition, production, mixing and mastering - it's all a bit of a jumble for me, which I'm sure breaks all sorts of rules, but then I like breaking rules, it's always worked well for me and I have no intention of stopping anytime soon!) to bring in the overall warmth and spice and tonal balance that I do want the final product to have. For me, currently, that is very often Neutron and Ozone, with sometimes a few hints of Waves and even IK stuff. Anyway, I am in no way interested in an argument about this stuff, but I do think that one of the things that makes this forum valuable is the healthy exchange of ideas from very different perspectives, so while I hope we haven't inexcusably hijacked the thread, it's been interesting, at least to me! 
post edited by subtlearts - 2017/10/11 09:51:40
|
mettelus
Max Output Level: -22 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5321
- Joined: 2005/08/05 03:19:25
- Location: Maryland, USA
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/11 07:30:56
(permalink)
bitflipper
I, too, must confess to having a lot of plugins. Not a bapu-sized collection, but a lot.
Unfortunately, you have to acquire a lot of them before you realize how few of them you actually needed.
This post might have been too short to be noted, but is sage advice. If you cannot properly use a compressor, getting a "better" one doesn't solve the root issue. Until you understand the capabilities of what SONAR can do, you cannot assess its gaps (to your specific workflow needs). Rather than seek "solutions" to an unidentified problem, it is more effective to use what SONAR has until you actually hit one. SONAR is very capable.
ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC), i7-8700k, 16GB RAM, GTX-1070Ti, Win 10 Pro, Saffire PRO 24 DSP, A-300 PRO, plus numerous gadgets and gizmos that make or manipulate sound in some way.
|
bladetragic
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 503
- Joined: 2009/09/12 04:49:24
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/11 08:38:28
(permalink)
Also, there are very inexpensive offerings available from smaller companies that are sometimes just as good or better than what the more "mainstream" companies like Slate and Waves are offering. You may want to have a look at those as well.
Companies like Klanghelm, Tokyo Dawn Labs, Valhalla, SKNote, Sonimus, Boz Digital, etc (I'm sure others can add to the list)....offer great products for far less, or are always running great sales. Plus you don't have to lock yourself into a subscription or deal w/ the WUP plan that many people seem to despise. For instance, Greg Kurstin said he used Valhalla Vintage Verb, which only costs $50, for Adele's "Hello". Dave Pensado also did a video using Klanghelm's MJUC compressor ($29), and Tokyo Dawn's Slick EQ (free, or $35 for the expanded version). All great plugins that I find myself reaching for often.
|
subtlearts
Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2200
- Joined: 2006/01/10 05:59:21
- Location: Berlin
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/11 10:01:36
(permalink)
mettelus
bitflipper
I, too, must confess to having a lot of plugins. Not a bapu-sized collection, but a lot.
Unfortunately, you have to acquire a lot of them before you realize how few of them you actually needed.
This post might have been too short to be noted, but is sage advice....
Agreed. Especially if you have a chaotic/organic learning approach, as I do. I think in many ways a systematic approach - start with e.g. the Sonitus plugs, and really buckle down and study and learn what everything does, since they have lots of control and flexibility - would be a more efficient path, and cheaper, but it's not what I've done. Being the way I am, and learning things the way I do - by diving in and mucking about until things start to make sense - I've done it the opposite way, by getting my hands on a bunch of things and eventually the skills come together by a kind of organic/osmotic process... if that makes any sense... and yeah, then I realize I could do much the same thing with about 1/10 the plugins I have. But, you know, some of them are really nice... bladetragic
Also, there are very inexpensive offerings available from smaller companies that are sometimes just as good or better than what the more "mainstream" companies like Slate and Waves are offering. You may want to have a look at those as well...
Agreed also. In fact, there are tons and tons of free things out there and some are actually really good, though it can take some time to separate the wheat from the chaff... Here's a really great resource with a comprehensive but curated list, helpfully divided into categories and with some editorial annotations: https://bedroomproducersblog.com/free-vst-plugins/
|
lfm
Max Output Level: -53 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2216
- Joined: 2005/01/24 05:35:33
- Location: Sweden
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/11 10:27:26
(permalink)
bladetragic
Also, there are very inexpensive offerings available from smaller companies that are sometimes just as good or better than what the more "mainstream" companies like Slate and Waves are offering. You may want to have a look at those as well.
And smaller companies also go bankrupt - and there you are and no way to authorize what you once bought. Kjaerhus Audio is one I come to think of. But buying from smaller vendors always look for what kind of authorization there is. If general serial you are probably ok - so not having challenge/response type where tied to computer is good advice.
Plus you don't have to lock yourself into a subscription or deal w/ the WUP plan that many people seem to despise. You are not in any way locked by Waves Update Plan(WUP). You have gotten all updates with fixes etc without active WUP. All v9.x updates are free. My first Waves bundle Gold was extended with Vitamin plugin while in WUP - so that was for free - and that needed WUP to get that license as well. But not requirement to use the rest of Gold bundle. You are not denied support because you are not in WUP - they helped in every way since I left WUP late 2014. And if having large investment in Waves - max amount is $300 to activate it again(and same amount you get as vouchers to buy discounts on plugins). So having $1500 investment like me, $300 to get version updates if needed is coffee money. And it's not until v10.x of Waves that you actually must activate WUP getting updates. And every plugin you buy is automatically on one year WUP. It's somewhat outdated view on Waves you told about. Cakewalk subscriptions are in fact more locking you in than WUP do - no bug fixes or updates once stop paying for Sonar rolling updates.
Cubase Pro 9 with SA2015 as backup - W7 i7 2.8GHz 16G GeForce GT 730 - RME HDSP 9632 + AI4S
|
subtlearts
Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2200
- Joined: 2006/01/10 05:59:21
- Location: Berlin
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/11 11:13:02
(permalink)
Indeed, the WUP has always seemed to me - though I confess I've never looked into it especially deeply - rather generous. If anything, it's like those grace-period things that many companies do when they release a major upgrade, so that if you bought the previous version within, say a month or two of the release of the new one, you get the new one for free. With Waves you get a full year of WUP with every new plugin you purchase - even if on ridiculous sale - and so you have that guarantee built in. Even if they update to W10 364 days after you bought plugin or bundle X, you will get that plugin or bundle upgraded to W10 for free, and all point upgrades thereafter. Unless I'm wrong about this?
Anyway, complaining about not getting *all* our Waves plugins upgraded for free always and everywhere, seems a bit rich. given that very few companies offer lifetime updates - well, some of us are Sonar lifers, and Melda does it (can you tell I'm a bit of a Melda fan?), and maybe a couple of others, and Reaper gives the next full version plus all point updates which seems reasonable, but most companies need to offset the R&D costs of a major update with an update fee, and nobody freaks out. So why does Waves get flack for their policy which is actually more generous, as I see it (and again, I may be wrong here), than most?
|
tonyzub999
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 107
- Joined: 2016/05/01 16:55:23
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/11 14:24:43
(permalink)
I appreciate the conversation. It's good to have a free-flowing forum with different thoughts and ideas and people not getting upset. Seems like in Society anymore the attitude is "if you don't agree with me then you're an idiot".
Music and music production is a creative process. By definition that means that there's going to be different approaches by different engineers. Probably all approach things differently. At least thats the way it seems when I listen to podcast from established engineers.
Using the analogy of great chefs, they dont all act in a monolithic way, but they're all excellent in their own genre.
So what are your favorite plugs and why? That may help other people narrow down their choices and save time without wasting a lot of time on extensive research.
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/11 20:57:12
(permalink)
Steve_Karl
Unclear to me ... nothing showing for the yr. 2015 in My Account > Products.
A link would be awesome. TY!
I believe it's installed with updates. Check under C:\Cakewalk Content and see if there's a folder called Anderton Synthetic Impulse Responses. Use ReMatrix Solo's Import function to bring the ones you want to use into ReMatrix. Read the Dorchester eZine for details on how to do this, it's not intuitive.
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/12 02:21:44
(permalink)
tonyzub999
So what are your favorite plugs and why? That may help other people narrow down their choices and save time without wasting a lot of time on extensive research.
I sort of deliberately don't have favourite plug-ins. Partly because I do a lot of live mixing, and at the low-to-mid level I work at, you get to the venue, and you've got what you've got, gear wise. So I don't want to be good at using a particular EQ or compressor; I want to be good at using EQ and compression in a general sense. I prefer to think more about techniques and methods. For example, parallel compression is a technique, and you can do it with whatever compressor you have to hand. Sticking with that example, you will find, over time, that certain compressors are great for certain applications. I really like the PC76 that comes with Sonar for kick snare and toms parallel. But I will sometimes have an overheads parallel bus, and I've come to like the Waves Jack Joseph Puig Fairchild clone for that. But if I didn't have that, I'd just try the compressors I had and find something that did the job well enough, I'm sure. If I had to, I'd use another instance of the PC76, and I'd be fine. So the Fairchild clone is nice (very nice), but not essential. And neither of those plug ins do anything at all useful without the sensible application of solid methods. I don't really think there are *any* magic plug ins. No good tool is ever "like taking a blanket off the speakers" or a "night and day difference, as soon as I switched it on". I wouldn't trust any processor that was. EQ is EQ, generally speaking, compression is a slightly more moveable feast, but there are still only a limited number of ways a compressor can work, and so on. "Character" plugins that replicate old hardware are cool and everything, but you can totally set a Fairchild compressor or an original Pultec to sound like a donkey's backside if you don't know what you're doing with it. It won't do the work for you, and nor will any emulation of those. Understanding how to set *any* compressor is what will make your compression work. And it's hard these days to find yourself stuck with an actually *bad* compressor plugin. So hey. If you're still looking for great compression, and haven't found it yet, don't buy stuff, just fire up what you got bundled in your DAW and practice. All that said, there are some unique things that I would miss if I couldn't have them any more. I really love the Kush Audio Clariphonic EQ, which is unlike any other EQ; not better, not worse, but completely unique, requiring a completely different approach to any other EQ I've come across. I also would miss Zynaptiq Unveil, which is an incredibly clever plugin that can tighten up the ambience of recordings made in less than ideal rooms. It's sort of pitched as a reverb removal tool, but that's not really what it does well. It's better for taming the colouration of dodgy rooms. Absolutely solid gold on overheads and room mics. I'm also really starting to get into SurferEQ by Sound Radix, which is a frequency tracking EQ, meaning you can have your EQ curve move up and down with the note. Fantastically useful on monophonic sources like bass and vocals. And I absolutely couldn't live without the freebie ReaGate plugin from Reaper's effects bundle, which is for my money, the best general purpose gate out there, with really nice look-ahead control, so it need never cut off the attack of any sound. None of those four things are emulations of classic gear; in the case of the last three, quite the opposite. They're things that couldn't even exist in a tape & analogue desk context. I do like and use good Pultec and Fairchild emulations (Waves) and good SSL emulations (the Sonar stuff), but honestly, I will happily do a mix without any of that stuff.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
tonyzub999
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 107
- Joined: 2016/05/01 16:55:23
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/12 03:05:38
(permalink)
Thanks. One interesting thing that kind of supports what you are saying is that the large church venue that I ran FOH on for many years had a great analog Midas pro board, Aviom in ears, excellent mics, drums, Kurzweil keys, etc, but our outboard gear was very mid level quality. We had a couple of mid priced Yamaha EFX boxes, a couple DBX 1066 compressors, a low end Lexicon, cheap de-esser and that's it. Of course the room was huge so there was a lot of natural room sounds.
post edited by tonyzub999 - 2017/10/12 16:06:19
|
BenMMusTech
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2606
- Joined: 2011/05/23 16:59:57
- Location: Warragul, Victoria-Australia
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/12 06:41:17
(permalink)
subtlearts
Hey Ben... I didn't mean to put words in your mouth and sorry if I misinterpreted you... in fact, looking at what I wrote now I think parts of it do come across like I'm jumping on things you said in an argumentative way, and in fact that wasn't my intention - it was more a case of, things you said made me think and I wanted to express what I was thinking, but again, apologies if it came across more aggressively than intended.
However, I think there are some points where we might have to agree to disagree. Or rather, I think we have fundamentally different approaches. I think in many ways you're absolutely correct that having a specific aesthetic and understanding what goes into making that aesthetic are probably going to be helpful in many aspects of production, including but not limited to selecting and using add-on analog emulation processors - if you're going for a specific aesthetic. However, what if - as in my case - the aesthetic you're going for is "whatever sounds good to me and makes me feel good"?
I know there are many people working in music and production who are going to be much more formulaic in their approach than I am, and many of them are likely far more successful with that approach than I will ever likely be. But I'm simply not interested in following any existing formulas to make the strange music I like to make, except for whatever habits organically emerge through the process of doing so. I am not trying to emulate anyone or anything, though I think it's perfectly valid to do so; I'm simply not interested in that. So my 'formula', which informs everything I do and everything I produce, is simply to be playful - I start putting things together and when they start to make me feel good and/or spark my creative interest, I figure I'm on the right track.
I'm pretty committed to this intuitive, playful approach, since it's always served me well, and in fact it often informs my mixing choices as well - I'll throw something on a track simply because I haven't used it for a while and I wonder what it will sound like on what I'm doing; sometimes it sounds terrible, so I remove it and try something different, but sometimes it wakes up a track with a completely different sound than I might have been going for, taking the whole process in a new and unexpected direction. And *that* is what makes me happy and keeps me curious and creative. I think you're entirely correct that a formula and a more deliberate process will always serve you best if you are going for an expected result, but I am literally doing the opposite, I am looking for unexpected results, since a) they make me happy, and b) they are the lifeblood of my playful creative process.
Of course, I also have my standby plugins and my habits which, again, have largely emerged organically, and those are the ones I will tend to put on towards the end of a mix (and I'm also one of those people that doesn't particularly separate composition, production, mixing and mastering - it's all a bit of a jumble for me, which I'm sure breaks all sorts of rules, but then I like breaking rules, it's always worked well for me and I have no intention of stopping anytime soon!) to bring in the overall warmth and spice and tonal balance that I do want the final product to have. For me, currently, that is very often Neutron and Ozone, with sometimes a few hints of Waves and even IK stuff.
Anyway, I am in no way interested in an argument about this stuff, but I do think that one of the things that makes this forum valuable is the healthy exchange of ideas from very different perspectives, so while I hope we haven't inexcusably hijacked the thread, it's been interesting, at least to me!
Hi Tobias, no I didn't think you were angeling for a debate :). I was just disagreeing with you about certain, and it is certain, plugs not adding anything to the mix, and indeed the emulation game as nothing more than a cynical marketing exercise. Let me explain, a couple of months ago, I was stripping mixes of old compositions...this is how I work, I know my past compositions were fine, but my production and mix technqiue was letting me down. Last year, when I discovered or created binaural diffusion :), I started a re-mix project...a bit like Page and Zepellin lol, where I went back over twenty years of work, about 50 tracks and remixed them with all the new knowledge and of course my new binaural techique. Now, I thought great...I'd finally fixed the tracks and I could put them to bed. Then, I was working on a virtual classical piece, and for the life of me I couldn't fix the mix. There was too much low-mid, harsh brittle tops ect. Then out of desperation and after some reading...I switched Sonar's 64bitFP mix engine, and made sure the oversampling switch was on, I also had just brought Wave's NLS console emulation, it was at this point I had a sonik revelation. I could hear what I was adding, and indeed I could hear the differences between each plugin and what they added to the mix. This is why, I stepped in when you said the plugs didn't add anything to the mix, because I could finally hear what they were doing to the mix. And because I knew what the mixes had sounded like without console emulation and tasty effects, then what they had sounded like with Cake's console emulation, and finally Wave's...it was at this point I went ah ha :). Your other comment about mixing and intuition is something I whole heartedly agree with too...what you're actually describing is the automatic, an idea forever linked with Jackson Pollack...I also use the chance technique too...John Cage who is the godfather along with Luigi Russolo of the sampeling and found sounds movemnt :)...it's my sonic arts background. For me mixing is like painting, and even sculpting...I like to think we work in the ethereal realm with the ethereal material of sound lol...look I'm not half as pretensious as 'real' fine artists - ugh I just want to scream sometimes :). But for me, now that I can hear what I'm adding with my emulation plugs, I choose an appropriate flavour and then use my different EQs and compressors to fit that flavour. So, the Wave's NLS console emulation comes in three flavours and can be described like this...the SSL flavour is clear and transparent, the TG12345 flavour is warm and think...the Neve is in between, and from here I choose the next layers...so if I was to use the TG12345...I would stick with the Redd console emulation, the TG12345 emulation and sometimes drift into the Pye stuff...I know the flavours compliment each other. To make sure I don't get into a rut, and to demonstrate the idea of the chance technique...if I feel like I've used a certain type of flavour too often, I purposely choose another aesthetic - its the change up of the technique and allowing the possibilities of the technique to present themselves which creates the chance technique. By knowing the formula, you can forget the formula almost. Finally, I don't believe we've strayed off topic...the question was about 'should I buy these plugs', what we've done through polite discorse is explore the question more fully and on a deeper level...now I'm talking like a Wankademic...yes I can take the piss out of myself...I don't do serious lol. Ben
|
tonyzub999
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 107
- Joined: 2016/05/01 16:55:23
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/12 16:22:22
(permalink)
Ben, out of curiosity, do you favor the Waves over the Cake console emulations, or are they different enough that you use both at different times or together?
|
BenMMusTech
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2606
- Joined: 2011/05/23 16:59:57
- Location: Warragul, Victoria-Australia
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/13 01:13:22
(permalink)
tonyzub999
Ben, out of curiosity, do you favor the Waves over the Cake console emulations, or are they different enough that you use both at different times or together?
Hi Tony, I now favor Waves over Cakes. Only because, it is easier to set the gain of the mixes through the VU meter, and because I know the flavors they offer...meaning I can then use the rest of my plugin collection to match the chosen flavor of the console emulation. You don't use both...here is a huge mistake that I made, and is a problem with Cake's instruction manual. You have to either use the console emulation plugs - Waves, Cake - either as a preamp or before any and all plugs or after any or plugs, creating a summing amp situation. This is one of the reasons I've been pratteling on about the analouge emulation aesthetic, you literally have to re-create the analogue signal flow...because I was mixing and matching...sometimes having the emulation plug at the start of the signal chain, and somtimes at the end within a mix, I think it created some unpleasent distortion...but I'm not one hundred percent sure, because a) I wasn't using the plugs correctly, and b) again, once I turned on the 64bitFP engine, I could hear the posibilities of the effects. I've got to go back and do some experiments, but by not using the 64bitFP engine...this could be the reason why Cake's emulator didn't sound as good to my ears. I'm not sure, so don't quote me on that. From what I now understand, if you think about what these plugs do...it makes sense that they would work only if you use 64bitFP, because as you fold down the audio into 24bit...you lose the harmonics. Don't get this confused though, in regards to bouncing files down to a composite master...I'm talking about DAW processing. However, though...I do recomend boucing out both 64bitFP master files for uploading to Soundcloud and the like, and yes Soundcloud does accept 64bitFP 96khz files. The reason being, the more you compress something or fold it down, the more you lose what you've put in because it disapers into the noise floor. And, I don't do 16 bit files anymore either...for me when I listen to my music on my phone, I make 24bit master files. Finally, I just want to make sure this clear, this is not about Sonar or Cake versus Waves, becuase it is a silly debate. Wave's are a plugin company, and need a fully functioning DAW. Even if Wave's were to bring out a DAW, it would be silly to abandon Sonar, because Sonar have over 20 years of experience building a Windows only DAW. Methinks, Gibson should be contacting Microsoft if the rumors are correct and Windows is looking at getting into the DAW game. Microsoft, if the rumours are true want to create a Windows music creation option along the lines of Logic and Garage Band. To me, if Microsoft want to create a Windows only DAW...they should ask or form an alliance with the one comapny that are experts on this. I hope this has helped. Ben
|
tonyzub999
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 107
- Joined: 2016/05/01 16:55:23
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/13 03:39:22
(permalink)
Thanks for the feedback Ben.
|
bladetragic
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 503
- Joined: 2009/09/12 04:49:24
- Status: offline
Re: Slate Digital, Waves or Nothing
2017/10/13 20:21:36
(permalink)
lfm
bladetragic
Also, there are very inexpensive offerings available from smaller companies that are sometimes just as good or better than what the more "mainstream" companies like Slate and Waves are offering. You may want to have a look at those as well.
And smaller companies also go bankrupt - and there you are and no way to authorize what you once bought.
Kjaerhus Audio is one I come to think of.
But buying from smaller vendors always look for what kind of authorization there is. If general serial you are probably ok - so not having challenge/response type where tied to computer is good advice.
Plus you don't have to lock yourself into a subscription or deal w/ the WUP plan that many people seem to despise.
You are not in any way locked by Waves Update Plan(WUP). You have gotten all updates with fixes etc without active WUP. All v9.x updates are free. My first Waves bundle Gold was extended with Vitamin plugin while in WUP - so that was for free - and that needed WUP to get that license as well. But not requirement to use the rest of Gold bundle.
You are not denied support because you are not in WUP - they helped in every way since I left WUP late 2014. And if having large investment in Waves - max amount is $300 to activate it again(and same amount you get as vouchers to buy discounts on plugins). So having $1500 investment like me, $300 to get version updates if needed is coffee money. And it's not until v10.x of Waves that you actually must activate WUP getting updates. And every plugin you buy is automatically on one year WUP.
It's somewhat outdated view on Waves you told about. Cakewalk subscriptions are in fact more locking you in than WUP do - no bug fixes or updates once stop paying for Sonar rolling updates.
I never said your are locked in to Waves. That was referring to the Slate subscription. That is why I said "OR" deal with WUP which many seem to despise. And many do complain about it. I was simply offering an alternative that he may not have known about or explored.
|