the real answer is;
its a good as you can make it sound. that's all. it may be modeled after a certain type of compressor or eq or whatever. these things are all intangible. quality of sound ? who's to say?

<pist I smoked a little tonight shhhh>

Just a short reply about my own question on external insert, got it working and up in like 5 minutes once I remembered Lynx's archaic software nomenclature...seems to work quite well which was a bug in the 8 release that they mostly ironed out...

This is a HUGE feature for people like me who gravitate to the outboard stuff...good to see it works.

Thanks for all the feedback on this!

It sounds like the prochannel is fairly good all-around, especially for the price.

I haven't found the ssl stuff to be a cpu hog myself, but my machine is pretty good. Still, what appeals to me actually is having it all laid out on the same screen as seen in the pictures rather than in separate plug-in windows on top of the console in earlier sonar versions. This is actually a pain. If it sounds almost as good or can be made to sound equally as good, then that's pretty cool imo.

I have no experience with the uad plugins, so I can't really comment on those.

One thing I didn't like about the ssl eq's was that you couldn't give them a q higher than 3.5, which made me go elsewhere for ultra fine precision. Sometimes a Q of 7 or 12 is all that is needed, so I'd often use multiple EQ's on a track ;)

acoustigod


Hi everyone,

How good is the pro channel? Can it replace something like the SSL plugin series by waves, or would you still be better off using that?

Any info on how the pro-channel stacks up to other plugins would be great.

Thanks!

Its great! High end TOP quality!
 
 
------------------>   http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.aspx?m=2161412

I find the Prochannel EQ very close to Waves SSL4000 G-channel and Vintage series (Neve). I was demoing both the Waves SSL4000 and Vintage series with the intend of buying one of them - and I'm glad I can now save quite a bit of money because of the Prochannel. I did an A/B comparison between the G-channel and the Prochannel with the same EQ settings - very close indeed. As for the tube saturation, I use it for acoustic instruments (from strings to sax). I still prefer my SPL TwinTube on guitars. 

Pro Channel is a very useful tool.  After using it for a while now, it's kind of like a swiss army knife that's good for a lot of small tasks. 

The Gloss EQ is definitely an upgrade from the Sonitus EQ (IMO) as far as the sound is concerned.   But I do think the interface needs a bit more refining.  Using it can be a bit "clunky" sometimes.  The Sonitus interface, as well as most other quality EQ plugs, is much more user friendly and quicker to get from A to B.  They really should look into creating a larger scale, more detail oriented interface that you can bring up when needed similar to the way we could w/ the inline Sonitus EQ.  If they do this then I really can't see myself reaching for other eq's too often.  But as of now when I need to get more detailed and do it quickly, I often find myself reaching for something like Pro-Q or Equality simply due to quicker and easier workflow.  Which is ironic, considering that "better workflow" has been touted as the main driving force behind X1.  Go figure.

The comps have their place.  I'm still trying to get used to them and feel them out to see where they shine the most, but I've found them useful for certain tasks.  It's been hit and miss with me thus far.  But I guess that's with any plug, or hardware for that matter, as the source material usually determines which one will work best.  After some comparisons, I still find myself preferring other options like The Glue or Bombardier for buss compression for drums or on the master though.

The tube saturation is strictly on a case-by-case basis for me.  Every once in a while I'll find that it adds something that I like.  But not something I use very often.

Also, as of right now, PC is a bit buggy w/ some strange behavior.  When you change eq modes a lot of the time the graph won't reflect the change.  The comp/eq/sat power buttons appearing to be off when they're actually on.   Stuff like that.  Hopefully they sort this out w/ the next patch though.

If I compare to anything it would be Nomad factory plugins, WaveArts or URS plugins.


Waves & AVID? ... that plugins aren't good. Its just hype. 

Just a brief comment -

I agree with the commenter above that the difference between Hardware and Software Plug-ins is narrowing in most applications.

The one thing Software and Digital Emulation still had not come close enough yet to be convincing is TUBE emulations.

Simple example -- guitar players out there will tell you this also ----  though they are useable and can create interesting sounds, none of the guitar amp emulators out there feel, respond or sound like an authentic tube amp on 10 being miked in a room.

Amplitube, POD, Vandal, etc...etc..etc..

There is still something not right about them.

It is kind of like comparing a 35mm print to a Polaroid.

The digital emulations seem to capture the basic image, but lack the complexity and depth of tones, etc..

Kind of like the way most Analog Tape plug-ins are good at emulating the bass head bumps, EQ roll offs below 40 and above 16K, the broad mild tape saturation "warming" between 300-400 HZ, etc..

But they usually lack the Wow and Flutter factor which makes tape sound more "alive". 
The W&F causes random subtle shifting in the music that help blend tracks better and gives it more depth.
Digital is almost too perfect, direct, and sterile in that regard.

But honestly, all of this is technical nitpicking.

Heck, the average non-musician listener can't tell a drum machine from a live drummer and we who do recording argue over which is better ------BFD-Vs-Supreme.

Even most of us could probably not listen to a finished album and comment ------ Oh yes, I can hear he used the UAD 1176 plug-in on that song and not the actual hardware unit.

On the other hand, you can often listen to a commercial or song and recognize the POD or Amplitube sound for guitars.

So for my 2 cents worth , to summarize ---

I think the difference in signal processing software and hardware as narrowed in most cases (like those above said too)

But in some areas, there is still a weakness in the digital imitation of some instruments to play and create the musical tones that comprise your song.

Makes sense if you think about it .....

It is one thing to use a signal processor to tweak a recorded sound.

It is something altogether to artificially create and imitate that recorded sound.

We may not be able to hear the difference between a UAD Plug In -OR- actual 1176 slightly processing a guitar tone.

But we can hear if that guitar tone itself was not authentic.

It takes a whole lot more computer "smarts" to perform the latter magic.

The recorded sound IS THE SOUND.
The tweaking with EQ, compressor, may only be 5% of the sound.

 

akes sense if you think about it ..... It is one thing to use a signal processor to tweak a recorded sound. It is something altogether to artificially create and imitate that recorded sound. We may not be able to hear the difference between a UAD Plug In -OR- actual 1176 slightly processing a guitar tone. But we can hear if that guitar tone itself was not authentic.

out of pure fun. shall we test this theory out?

how about we start a thread testing "digital or audio". and whether people and differentiate between the two.
] 

i agree w/Psychobillybob and mike about this, I use a bunch of analog processors, avalon, focusrite and old telefunken pres, adn been using waves (rennaisance, master, gold, etc) for ages, and just tryed this prochannel for the first time on a flute take, wonderfully recorded with hi end mics and pres in a great studio, with no compression, no eq, nothing at all.

Just spent 5 minutes tweaking/discovring prochanell and the results amazed me. I can see a huge potential here after spending some weeks on ti. In my opinion it can replace most hardware compressors.

I agree, tube distortion and tape simulation is still an analog thing, but as far as compression / limiting goes (fast attack, look ahead), and EQ also:  I've been using plugins mostly, and prochanel seems to be a great tool , and for the money ? , my favourite channel strip hands down..