Ssl fx vs rack fx

This forum is for discussing Reason. Questions, answers, ideas, and opinions... all apply.
User avatar
Mystile
Posts: 33
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

29 Jan 2016

Just a random curiosity I had... Are you using the ssl mixer or the rack fx more? I'm talking for things that can be done with the mixer like compression.. Eq.. Filtering and such?

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

User avatar
Vince-Noir-99
Posts: 449
Joined: 02 Dec 2015
Location: Russia

29 Jan 2016

In the beginning I didn't spend much time in the mixer, but I admit I'm trying to use its effects more and more. I particularly like the colouration you can get by driving a bit the input. Although I love the realistic look, sometimes I wish it were a bit more compact and optionally like in Cubase or Logic, where the currently selected track's mixer channel appears on the left hand side. This way I think it would be easier for me.
Last edited by Vince-Noir-99 on 29 Jan 2016, edited 1 time in total.

txh003
Posts: 93
Joined: 14 Jun 2015
Location: USA

29 Jan 2016

With the exception of HP and LP filters, I mostly use rack effects in Reason. However, the SSL chain is more than serviceable, in my opinion.
Last edited by txh003 on 29 Jan 2016, edited 1 time in total.
:reason: :record: :recycle: :rebirth: :reload: :re: :refill:

User avatar
normen
Posts: 3431
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

29 Jan 2016

Vince-Noir-99 wrote:In the beginning I didn't spend much time in the mixer, but I admit I'm trying to use its effects more and more. I particularly like the colouration you can get by driving a bit the input. Although I love the realistic look, sometimes I wish it were a bit more compact and optionally like in Cubase or Logic, where the currently selected track's mixer channel appear on the left hand side. This way I think it would be easier for me.
? There is no coloration from driving the input..

User avatar
Vince-Noir-99
Posts: 449
Joined: 02 Dec 2015
Location: Russia

29 Jan 2016

Normen, I know what you mean! I should have used a different word.
Ok, let's be more clear: the input gain does not saturate on its own.
It does, however, push more the EQ and comp, making them more apparent.
Now, having said that, our gain trim doesn't look so cool anymore :(

User avatar
normen
Posts: 3431
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

29 Jan 2016

Vince-Noir-99 wrote:Normen, I know what you mean! I should have used a different word.
Ok, let's be more clear: the input gain does not saturate on its own.
It does, however, push more the EQ and comp, making them more apparent.
Now, having said that, our gain trim doesn't look so cool anymore :(
The EQ doesn't colorize either, no matter what the input level is (apart from actual the EQing you dial in obviously). And the only thing you do to the compressor is effectively the same as lowering the threshold. The SSL in Reason doesn't emulate an analog desk or any of its nonlinearities. What it does is emulate a "perfect" SSL without any analog limitations. So the compressor and EQ work as the SSL designers intended them to in terms of gain reduction, attack, release, EQ width etc. - without the inherent limits of the actual analog circuitry.

User avatar
Chizmata
Posts: 918
Joined: 21 Dec 2015
Contact:

29 Jan 2016

i try to do all "mixing" things in the SSl "mixer", lol. all sounddesign happens outside of it. but i like to have some common send fx that go to every track as glue. the mixer is pretty good especially if you use all those tiny buttons and knobs you dont notice at first, like switching the HP/LP to control frequency sensitive compression

Vyckeil
Posts: 119
Joined: 25 Jun 2015
Location: Canada

29 Jan 2016

Like txh003 said, I don't really use the SSL except for HP/LP and prefer to use rack devices. That is, when I'm composing. I reserve the SSL features when the song is done and it's at the stage of mixing. I often have automations for composing purposes that affect EQs, Comp and Gates, and the SSL is left alone for the final stage. It removes tedium of having to redo automations, and quite frankly the SSL sounds much better when used lightly to balance the song. In other words, it's a not a sound design tool per-se, but excels at mixing.

User avatar
Osmose
Posts: 37
Joined: 27 Feb 2015
Location: Veendam, The Netherlands
Contact:

29 Jan 2016

I usually do more then 90% of mixing in the rack. Only get to the ssl for the last final tweaks.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn HUAWEI P7-L10 met Tapatalk
Soundcloud/Osmose-music - Facebook/ OsmoseSounds -

osmose-music.com - osmose-music.bandcamp.com

"When you quit the mind, your not quite the mind"- Arcturus Ra -

User avatar
Vince-Noir-99
Posts: 449
Joined: 02 Dec 2015
Location: Russia

30 Jan 2016

normen wrote:
Vince-Noir-99 wrote:Normen, I know what you mean! I should have used a different word.
Ok, let's be more clear: the input gain does not saturate on its own.
It does, however, push more the EQ and comp, making them more apparent.
Now, having said that, our gain trim doesn't look so cool anymore :(
The EQ doesn't colorize either, no matter what the input level is (apart from actual the EQing you dial in obviously). And the only thing you do to the compressor is effectively the same as lowering the threshold. The SSL in Reason doesn't emulate an analog desk or any of its nonlinearities. What it does is emulate a "perfect" SSL without any analog limitations. So the compressor and EQ work as the SSL designers intended them to in terms of gain reduction, attack, release, EQ width etc. - without the inherent limits of the actual analog circuitry.
Yeah, I got you, 'colouration' usually implies nonlinearity, which as I said already, should have been replaced with a better word.

User avatar
clone
Posts: 266
Joined: 18 Jan 2015

31 Jan 2016

I mostly use rack. I noticed on certain interments, it's really hard to tell if It's even doing anything? Not sure if it's because I'm on headphones? Drums is what's more noticeable on the SSL. But Am trying to use it more.

KEVMOVE02
Posts: 267
Joined: 26 Jan 2015

31 Jan 2016

This is the very issue that I think leads to performance issues on many computers. It is impractical to buy a hardware mixing desk, then purchase discrete fx units for each audio channel, when the same effect chain can be achieve by using the mixing desk send and returns properly. The same approach applied to a virtual mixing desk can result in a seemingly underpowered system producing incredibly complex sonic creations.

User avatar
Ahornberg
Posts: 1904
Joined: 15 Jan 2016
Location: Vienna, Austria
Contact:

01 Feb 2016

normen wrote:
Vince-Noir-99 wrote:Normen, I know what you mean! I should have used a different word.
Ok, let's be more clear: the input gain does not saturate on its own.
It does, however, push more the EQ and comp, making them more apparent.
Now, having said that, our gain trim doesn't look so cool anymore :(
The EQ doesn't colorize either, no matter what the input level is (apart from actual the EQing you dial in obviously). And the only thing you do to the compressor is effectively the same as lowering the threshold. The SSL in Reason doesn't emulate an analog desk or any of its nonlinearities. What it does is emulate a "perfect" SSL without any analog limitations. So the compressor and EQ work as the SSL designers intended them to in terms of gain reduction, attack, release, EQ width etc. - without the inherent limits of the actual analog circuitry.
So you can like it or dislike it the way it is. Most DAWs come with stock EQ, compressor and so on that sound thesame way clean. In the analog days engineers tried to create the cleanest sounding devices. Now in the digital world we have them and we don't like them. I promise you, in 10 years or so when mp3 will be an ancient technology, there will be special plugins to re-create the mp3-sound :geek:

madmacman
Posts: 786
Joined: 18 Jan 2015

01 Feb 2016

Ahornberg wrote:I promise you, in 10 years or so when mp3 will be an ancient technology, there will be special plugins to re-create the mp3-sound :geek:
Already there: You'll find the preset in Propellerheads' "Audiomatic":

https://shop.propellerheads.se/product/audiomatic/

:P

User avatar
Ahornberg
Posts: 1904
Joined: 15 Jan 2016
Location: Vienna, Austria
Contact:

01 Feb 2016

madmacman wrote:
Ahornberg wrote:I promise you, in 10 years or so when mp3 will be an ancient technology, there will be special plugins to re-create the mp3-sound :geek:
Already there: You'll find the preset in Propellerheads' "Audiomatic":

https://shop.propellerheads.se/product/audiomatic/

:P
crazy ... hahaha :thumbs_up:

User avatar
normen
Posts: 3431
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

01 Feb 2016

Ahornberg wrote:So you can like it or dislike it the way it is. Most DAWs come with stock EQ, compressor and so on that sound thesame way clean. In the analog days engineers tried to create the cleanest sounding devices. Now in the digital world we have them and we don't like them. I promise you, in 10 years or so when mp3 will be an ancient technology, there will be special plugins to re-create the mp3-sound :geek:
I didn't say I don't like them? I actually agree and rather like to record through clean modern preamps and work with clean digital processing for the bulk of the work. Theres more than enough ways to get "grit", "warmth" or whatever ITB later. To take a photography analogy: I rather have a megapixel super clean photo and put a Polaroid filter on it later than use an actual Polaroid and be left with the output of that :)

User avatar
Ahornberg
Posts: 1904
Joined: 15 Jan 2016
Location: Vienna, Austria
Contact:

01 Feb 2016

normen wrote:
Ahornberg wrote:So you can like it or dislike it the way it is. Most DAWs come with stock EQ, compressor and so on that sound thesame way clean. In the analog days engineers tried to create the cleanest sounding devices. Now in the digital world we have them and we don't like them. I promise you, in 10 years or so when mp3 will be an ancient technology, there will be special plugins to re-create the mp3-sound :geek:
I didn't say I don't like them? I actually agree and rather like to record through clean modern preamps and work with clean digital processing for the bulk of the work. Theres more than enough ways to get "grit", "warmth" or whatever ITB later. To take a photography analogy: I rather have a megapixel super clean photo and put a Polaroid filter on it later than use an actual Polaroid and be left with the output of that :)
fully agree with you

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

01 Feb 2016

normen wrote:
Ahornberg wrote:So you can like it or dislike it the way it is. Most DAWs come with stock EQ, compressor and so on that sound thesame way clean. In the analog days engineers tried to create the cleanest sounding devices. Now in the digital world we have them and we don't like them. I promise you, in 10 years or so when mp3 will be an ancient technology, there will be special plugins to re-create the mp3-sound :geek:
I didn't say I don't like them? I actually agree and rather like to record through clean modern preamps and work with clean digital processing for the bulk of the work. Theres more than enough ways to get "grit", "warmth" or whatever ITB later. To take a photography analogy: I rather have a megapixel super clean photo and put a Polaroid filter on it later than use an actual Polaroid and be left with the output of that :)
I've gone back and forth over the years. Today I would say that if you have the budget and the experience, and you WANT a Polaroid look, there is nothing like a real Polaroid - there's something that happens when it is the ONLY option. It's like recording through an effect, like a guitar pedal - different things happen in those cases that go well beyond the "sound" of the effect, one being things go faster in the sense that you don't second guess yourself and start auditioning various options.

That being said, if you do NOT record 24/7 and do NOT have a big budget, I fully agree that recording clean and adding the effect later is likely the very best way to go for general production. This is even more true if you are not the "client" and are working with others who also do not produce music 24/7 (and need to hear options and not get painted into a corner).

I get to work both ways - when in Nashville working on major projects in nice studio with full time producers, it's great to put up that "oddball" mic recorded through a CB radio or whatever - these guys do this every day and are comfortable/confident with this process.

To split the issue, when at my "project" studio in Utah I have a selection of Focusrite, API, Vintech, and boutique 500 series preamps, so it's a little of both.

But at home I use a clean preamp and get all of the "sound" via FX.

As to the original question, I started on SSLs so I have certain things I like to use the SSL compressor on (drums, percussive sounds in particular), and find the EQ is a great "general purpose" EQ for many things. I tend to use insert compressors more often than insert EQs FWIW.
:)
Selig Audio, LLC

Stranger.
Posts: 329
Joined: 25 Sep 2015

01 Feb 2016

ΣΣΣ
Last edited by Stranger. on 06 Jun 2016, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
pjeudy
Posts: 1559
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

02 Feb 2016

normen wrote:
Vince-Noir-99 wrote:Normen, I know what you mean! I should have used a different word.
Ok, let's be more clear: the input gain does not saturate on its own.
It does, however, push more the EQ and comp, making them more apparent.
Now, having said that, our gain trim doesn't look so cool anymore :(
The EQ doesn't colorize either, no matter what the input level is (apart from actual the EQing you dial in obviously). And the only thing you do to the compressor is effectively the same as lowering the threshold. The SSL in Reason doesn't emulate an analog desk or any of its nonlinearities. What it does is emulate a "perfect" SSL without any analog limitations. So the compressor and EQ work as the SSL designers intended them to in terms of gain reduction, attack, release, EQ width etc. - without the inherent limits of the actual analog circuitry.
Or straight from the horse's mouth :
Jim@SSL
Solid State Logic
Just so I've said it - the mixer in Reason is not an SSL. It has nothing to do with SSL, is not tested, approved, or licensed by SSL. Nobody from SSL has listened to it and said "yes, that sounds right" or been involved with the development of it.

If anything it is the equivalent of a covers band SSL.

Reason is a very powerful tools and IMHO a very good writing sketchpad. But it's not an SSL mixer.
To Solid Stare Logic it's not an SSL because they haven't tested it and given it there stamp of approval!
My opinion is that Propellerhead REASON needs a complete rewrite!
P.S: people should stop saying "No it won't happen" when referring to a complete rewrite of REASON. I have 3 letters for ya....VST
Mon Dec 11, 2017 1:53 pm

User avatar
Ahornberg
Posts: 1904
Joined: 15 Jan 2016
Location: Vienna, Austria
Contact:

02 Feb 2016

It's not an SSL but it gives you the workflow of an SSL console. And that's what I like about it.
SSL builds consoles since decades and the layout of the channel-strip is vastly improved. Every knob and button makes sense.
That's what I do personally miss in other DAWs And it is one reason why I'm more and more on Reason again (I left Reason 3 and came back last summer on Reason 8).

User avatar
Vince-Noir-99
Posts: 449
Joined: 02 Dec 2015
Location: Russia

02 Feb 2016

pjeudy wrote:
normen wrote:
Vince-Noir-99 wrote:Normen, I know what you mean! I should have used a different word.
Ok, let's be more clear: the input gain does not saturate on its own.
It does, however, push more the EQ and comp, making them more apparent.
Now, having said that, our gain trim doesn't look so cool anymore :(
The EQ doesn't colorize either, no matter what the input level is (apart from actual the EQing you dial in obviously). And the only thing you do to the compressor is effectively the same as lowering the threshold. The SSL in Reason doesn't emulate an analog desk or any of its nonlinearities. What it does is emulate a "perfect" SSL without any analog limitations. So the compressor and EQ work as the SSL designers intended them to in terms of gain reduction, attack, release, EQ width etc. - without the inherent limits of the actual analog circuitry.
Or straight from the horse's mouth :
Jim@SSL
Solid State Logic
Just so I've said it - the mixer in Reason is not an SSL. It has nothing to do with SSL, is not tested, approved, or licensed by SSL. Nobody from SSL has listened to it and said "yes, that sounds right" or been involved with the development of it.

If anything it is the equivalent of a covers band SSL.

Reason is a very powerful tools and IMHO a very good writing sketchpad. But it's not an SSL mixer.
To Solid Stare Logic it's not an SSL because they haven't tested it and given it there stamp of approval!

Interesting. I didn't know about it. Here's the footnote on the PH page about mixing with Reason:
* All product names used are trademarks of their respective owners, and in no way constitute an association or affiliation with Propellerhead Software or companies interviewed. Any products or trademarks mentioned are solely used to identify the products whose sound was studied during development and/or for comparison purposes only.
Regardless, I am still happy with how it sounds, works and looks! Be it 100% faithful to the SSL9000k or not, linear or non-linear in the way it processes signals. :thumbs_up:

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

02 Feb 2016

pjeudy wrote:
normen wrote:
Vince-Noir-99 wrote:Normen, I know what you mean! I should have used a different word.
Ok, let's be more clear: the input gain does not saturate on its own.
It does, however, push more the EQ and comp, making them more apparent.
Now, having said that, our gain trim doesn't look so cool anymore :(
The EQ doesn't colorize either, no matter what the input level is (apart from actual the EQing you dial in obviously). And the only thing you do to the compressor is effectively the same as lowering the threshold. The SSL in Reason doesn't emulate an analog desk or any of its nonlinearities. What it does is emulate a "perfect" SSL without any analog limitations. So the compressor and EQ work as the SSL designers intended them to in terms of gain reduction, attack, release, EQ width etc. - without the inherent limits of the actual analog circuitry.
Or straight from the horse's mouth :
Jim@SSL
Solid State Logic
Just so I've said it - the mixer in Reason is not an SSL. It has nothing to do with SSL, is not tested, approved, or licensed by SSL. Nobody from SSL has listened to it and said "yes, that sounds right" or been involved with the development of it.

If anything it is the equivalent of a covers band SSL.

Reason is a very powerful tools and IMHO a very good writing sketchpad. But it's not an SSL mixer.
To Solid Stare Logic it's not an SSL because they haven't tested it and given it there stamp of approval!
These two subjects are totally unrelated - one clarifies that the only sections modeled are the EQs and Compressors, something the Props have long said (in other words, no "coloration" of any sort).

The other subject clarifies that SSL had nothing to do with the development of this model, something I believe they said because there ARE products they WERE involved in. That being said, and as someone who has worked on SSL mixers from 1984 on, I'm as happy with the Reason SSL model as I am with any other model including the Waves plugins (which WERE licensed by SSL).

Another observation: To call it an SSL "cover band" (which comes off as a dismissal to my ears) one would assume they TESTED IT - but they said they never tested it. "Marketing" once again says what it feels it needs to say to protect their investment…
;)
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
pjeudy
Posts: 1559
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

02 Feb 2016

@Selig yea...may not answer the statement that I quoted specifically, but I was surprised by normen post because I didn't think about it before, it prompted me to do a Google search and saw this interesting statement from SSL.

While I'm on the subject. ..what makes an SSL emulation or model?
REASON looks like an SSL. Does a real SSL desk color the sound even without engaging the EQ or compressor ? If yes....isn't that an important part of calling an SSL emulation/modeled an SSL? Isn't that what the WAVES SSL plugins aim to do, to give you the look/feel and color (if a the real DESK has it?)
My opinion is that Propellerhead REASON needs a complete rewrite!
P.S: people should stop saying "No it won't happen" when referring to a complete rewrite of REASON. I have 3 letters for ya....VST
Mon Dec 11, 2017 1:53 pm

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

02 Feb 2016

pjeudy wrote:@Selig yea...may not answer the statement that I quoted specifically, but I was surprised by normen post because I didn't think about it before, it prompted me to do a Google search and saw this interesting statement from SSL.

While I'm on the subject. ..what makes an SSL emulation or model?
REASON looks like an SSL. Does a real SSL desk color the sound even without engaging the EQ or compressor ? If yes....isn't that an important part of calling an SSL emulation/modeled an SSL? Isn't that what the WAVES SSL plugins aim to do, to give you the look/feel and color (if a the real DESK has it?)
Reason only claims to model the EQ and dynamics - don't know if they use the word "emulate" or not. I'd rather they stick to a clean "model" rather than try and miss the mark trying to add the more subtle saturation/EQ curves.

And yes, as far as I know the Waves plugins include a default EQ curve even when the EQ is bypassed, supposed to emulate the real SSL. They also include an "analog" button which emulate the circuitry and VCA's "color". These types of things are quite subtle and wouldn't be obvious except for when ALL audio goes through the process (if then).

For me, I'm either wanting a clean signal or a much 'dirtier' signal - the subtle stuff doesn't do it for me. Remember the original SSL was striving to be as clean as possible, fwiw, so it's color is quite minimal when compared to older consoles such as Neve or API.

As I've mentioned in the past, features like Pro Tool's HEAT work well for me for adding color at the channel level, but it's a much stronger effect than the "color" a VCA would add (such as with the SSL).
:)
Selig Audio, LLC

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests