Do You Use Channel Strip Plugins?

Discuss VST stuff here!

Do You Use Channel Strip Plugins?

No
36
56%
Yes
28
44%
 
Total votes: 64
User avatar
Ahornberg
Posts: 1739
Joined: 15 Jan 2016
Location: Vienna, Austria

Post 08 Jul 2019

Boombastix wrote:
08 Jul 2019
esselfortium wrote:
08 Jul 2019
The Masking feature is just a visual aid. What you choose to do with it is up to you.

I own and use Neutron and am speaking from personal experience with its feature set. I'm telling you what it actually does. Please stop assuming that I don't know what I'm talking about.
Just to let you know: ALL my comments above were directed to iZotope and their plugins. NONE of my above comments were directed to you. Not sure how you could read it that way. And I mainly stayed focused on the unmasking feature (using the Relay add-on plugin).
And referring to this guy:

Look at the video and the comments below the video - masking feature using the Relay. The masking feature is just a visual aid? No.
He shows it is cutting out a frequency band on the channel with the Relay plugin. I see what I see, and it does not do it dynamically like the Tracker plugin. So when I call it "trash", it is obviously a comment about the plugin feature, has nothing to do what you said.
Again my "LMAO" was clearly directed to iZotopes feature implementation, so please stop assuming I was directing my comments to you and/or what you say, when my comments are meant for iZotopes functionality.
As this guy in the video said, cutting out frequencies (of the guitar) changes the sound. If this frequencies and/or cutting depth would change dynamically, it would alter the sound dynamically and I don't think that would be expected by users of this plugin.

reggie1979
Posts: 657
Joined: 11 Apr 2019

Post 08 Jul 2019

Oh noes, not white sea :cry:

User avatar
hurricane
Posts: 790
Joined: 14 Oct 2017

Post 08 Jul 2019

Nothing wrong with Reason's mixer, but I use a third party SSL channel strip and console emulation because I want an 'as close as possible to a real SSL' experience. I want the analog circuit emulation - the saturation, the noise and distortion, the clipping. Reason's "SSL" does not model that.

Jim from Solid State Logic, said this on Gearslutz:

"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."
https://soundcloud.com/hurricane-music
Mac mini (Late 2012) | macOS Mojave | Logic Pro X | Pro Tools | Reason | DX7 | DX7s | TX7 | CZ-1 | Steinberg UR22mkII | Emagic AMT 8 | Mackie SR24x4 | StudioLogic SL 990 PRO

User avatar
guitfnky
Posts: 1027
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

Post 08 Jul 2019

Boombastix wrote:
08 Jul 2019
esselfortium wrote:
08 Jul 2019
The Masking feature is just a visual aid. What you choose to do with it is up to you.

I own and use Neutron and am speaking from personal experience with its feature set. I'm telling you what it actually does. Please stop assuming that I don't know what I'm talking about.
Just to let you know: ALL my comments above were directed to iZotope and their plugins. NONE of my above comments were directed to you. Not sure how you could read it that way. And I mainly stayed focused on the unmasking feature (using the Relay add-on plugin).
And referring to this guy:

Look at the video and the comments below the video - masking feature using the Relay. The masking feature is just a visual aid? No.
He shows it is cutting out a frequency band on the channel with the Relay plugin. I see what I see, and it does not do it dynamically like the Tracker plugin. So when I call it "trash", it is obviously a comment about the plugin feature, has nothing to do what you said.
Again my "LMAO" was clearly directed to iZotopes feature implementation, so please stop assuming I was directing my comments to you and/or what you say, when my comments are meant for iZotopes functionality.
umm...you’re not even talking about the same feature that we’re talking about. they’re not even the same plugin.

we’re talking about Neutron. this clip is referring to Nectar.

User avatar
guitfnky
Posts: 1027
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

Post 08 Jul 2019

hurricane wrote:
08 Jul 2019
Nothing wrong with Reason's mixer, but I use a third party SSL channel strip and console emulation because I want an 'as close as possible to a real SSL' experience. I want the analog circuit emulation - the saturation, the noise and distortion, the clipping. Reason's "SSL" does not model that.

Jim from Solid State Logic, said this on Gearslutz:

"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."
just because it’s not licensed or officially “sanctioned” by SSL doesn’t mean it’s not a faithful representation.

that said, I have no idea how faithful a representation it actually is. it gets high marks from people who know better than I (Selig comes to mind), and I’d trust their ears over those who admittedly haven’t even heard it.

User avatar
NekujaK
Posts: 573
Joined: 09 Oct 2016
Location: USA

Post 08 Jul 2019

guitfnky wrote:
08 Jul 2019
hurricane wrote:
08 Jul 2019
Nothing wrong with Reason's mixer, but I use a third party SSL channel strip and console emulation because I want an 'as close as possible to a real SSL' experience. I want the analog circuit emulation - the saturation, the noise and distortion, the clipping. Reason's "SSL" does not model that.

Jim from Solid State Logic, said this on Gearslutz:

"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."
just because it’s not licensed or officially “sanctioned” by SSL doesn’t mean it’s not a faithful representation.

that said, I have no idea how faithful a representation it actually is. it gets high marks from people who know better than I (Selig comes to mind), and I’d trust their ears over those who admittedly haven’t even heard it.
Reason's SSL mixer emulates the SSL EQ curves and compression behavior, which is fine. But it doesn't try to impart any of the character or analog sound of an actual SSL console. So in that regard, it's not a full and complete emulation of anything SSL. That's not to say, it's a bad mixer - quite the contrary - but if you're looking for something that comes closer to a console sound, then one of the dedicated channel strips or analog summing plugins are required.
wreaking havoc with :reason: since 2.5

User avatar
guitfnky
Posts: 1027
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

Post 08 Jul 2019

NekujaK wrote:
08 Jul 2019
guitfnky wrote:
08 Jul 2019


just because it’s not licensed or officially “sanctioned” by SSL doesn’t mean it’s not a faithful representation.

that said, I have no idea how faithful a representation it actually is. it gets high marks from people who know better than I (Selig comes to mind), and I’d trust their ears over those who admittedly haven’t even heard it.
Reason's SSL mixer emulates the SSL EQ curves and compression behavior, which is fine. But it doesn't try to impart any of the character or analog sound of an actual SSL console. So in that regard, it's not a full and complete emulation of anything SSL. That's not to say, it's a bad mixer - quite the contrary - but if you're looking for something that comes closer to a console sound, then one of the dedicated channel strips or analog summing plugins are required.
ah, interesting. I thought I’d heard somewhere that it does emulate those other analog characteristics, but I’m not sure where. does it say what you’re saying somewhere in Props’ manual or documentation? it would be cool to be able to see it in black and white directly from them, if it’s available.

User avatar
NekujaK
Posts: 573
Joined: 09 Oct 2016
Location: USA

Post 08 Jul 2019

guitfnky wrote:
08 Jul 2019
NekujaK wrote:
08 Jul 2019


Reason's SSL mixer emulates the SSL EQ curves and compression behavior, which is fine. But it doesn't try to impart any of the character or analog sound of an actual SSL console. So in that regard, it's not a full and complete emulation of anything SSL. That's not to say, it's a bad mixer - quite the contrary - but if you're looking for something that comes closer to a console sound, then one of the dedicated channel strips or analog summing plugins are required.
ah, interesting. I thought I’d heard somewhere that it does emulate those other analog characteristics, but I’m not sure where. does it say what you’re saying somewhere in Props’ manual or documentation? it would be cool to be able to see it in black and white directly from them, if it’s available.
I asked about this a while back in this thread:
viewtopic.php?t=7503126
and the most definitive answer came from Selig.

The Reason manual makes no mention whatsoever about SSL, but on this page
https://www.propellerheads.com/en/reason/mixing
the Props claim they have "faithfully" emulated the SSL 9000 console. But they make no mention of saturation, harmonics, or analog coloring - only that they faithfully emulated the routing paths and mixing features.
wreaking havoc with :reason: since 2.5

User avatar
guitfnky
Posts: 1027
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

Post 08 Jul 2019

NekujaK wrote:
08 Jul 2019
guitfnky wrote:
08 Jul 2019


ah, interesting. I thought I’d heard somewhere that it does emulate those other analog characteristics, but I’m not sure where. does it say what you’re saying somewhere in Props’ manual or documentation? it would be cool to be able to see it in black and white directly from them, if it’s available.
I asked about this a while back in this thread:
viewtopic.php?t=7503126
and the most definitive answer came from Selig.

The Reason manual makes no mention whatsoever about SSL, but on this page
https://www.propellerheads.com/en/reason/mixing
the Props claim they have "faithfully" emulated the SSL 9000 console. But they make no mention of saturation, harmonics, or analog coloring - only that they faithfully emulated the routing paths and mixing features.
ah, excellent—thank you!

User avatar
Marco Raaphorst
Posts: 2453
Joined: 22 Jan 2015

Post 08 Jul 2019

hurricane wrote:
08 Jul 2019
Nothing wrong with Reason's mixer, but I use a third party SSL channel strip and console emulation because I want an 'as close as possible to a real SSL' experience. I want the analog circuit emulation - the saturation, the noise and distortion, the clipping. Reason's "SSL" does not model that.

Jim from Solid State Logic, said this on Gearslutz:

"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."
The Props claim it's "Faithfully modeled after the famous SSL 9000k* analog mixing desk." SSL was not involved but that did not stop them from recreating the EQ curves, gate/expander, compressor and master buss compressor of course.

Can someon do a comparison? Would be interesting, maybe the clean SSL in Reason is even better than a real 9000k.

User avatar
Boombastix
Posts: 680
Joined: 18 May 2018
Location: Bay Area, CA

Post 08 Jul 2019

guitfnky wrote:
08 Jul 2019

umm...you’re not even talking about the same feature that we’re talking about. they’re not even the same plugin.

we’re talking about Neutron. this clip is referring to Nectar.
Well, we actually talked about both Neutron and Nectar.

Anyhow, this is my understanding: Neutron has a "Masking Metering" (thats what iZoptope calls it). Nectar has a "Unmask" feature using the additional "Relay" plugin (Relay is added to a target channel). No doubt they managed to confuse the nomenclature here.
If you apply Masking/Unmasking on the Relay it will carve out frequencies, i.e. taking the vocal frequency spectra from Nectar and carve out those frequencies on the track where you have the Relay plugin. But it does not do it dynamically, so you will basically loose your mid range for that instrument on the whole track. I tried to point that out and many people are complaining about the lack of dynamic application using the Nectar/Relay combo.

Neutrons "Masking Metering" is a graphical display (similar to the free Voxengo SPAN), but it has some more features such as the addition of bars at the top showing the "intensity" or amount of frequency clashing. Then you manually adjust to taste with the EQ incl the additional dynamic level/side chain EQ feature.

Nectars EQ on the other hand also has dynamic level (but no side chain) and the additional dynamic frequency. Though my observation of the dynamic frequency is that is has minimal to no slew rate and every time the pitch tracking glitches (octave jumps) the EQ jumps away as well. Hence, the reason why I have adjustable slew rate in my own EQ w pitch tracking combinator. Nepute, that I use for pitch tracking in the combinator, is quite good at avoiding octave jumps but it still may happen.

I don't mind being corrected if I have misunderstood something, but I do prefer we refrain from name calling.
10% off at Waves with link: https://www.waves.com/r/6gh2b0
Disclaimer - I get 10% as well.

reggie1979
Posts: 657
Joined: 11 Apr 2019

Post 08 Jul 2019

This is what I don't like about youtube. These monitized idiots who clickbait you with "snake oil?" and then read the website, give you a bunch of irrational opinions that really shouldn't have any bearing on a perspective decision.

And the web eats it up like it's some kinda truth. The earth isn't flat people, and white sea should definitely NOT be your source for making an argument.

User avatar
guitfnky
Posts: 1027
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

Post 08 Jul 2019

reggie1979 wrote:
08 Jul 2019
This is what I don't like about youtube. These monitized idiots who clickbait you with "snake oil?" and then read the website, give you a bunch of irrational opinions that really shouldn't have any bearing on a perspective decision.

And the web eats it up like it's some kinda truth. The earth isn't flat people, and white sea should definitely NOT be your source for making an argument.
yeah, and this particular guy is a prime offender. I’ve seen a few of his vids and always walk away thinking he knows just enough for people to take him seriously, even when his information is wrong.

User avatar
guitfnky
Posts: 1027
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

Post 08 Jul 2019

Boombastix wrote:
08 Jul 2019
guitfnky wrote:
08 Jul 2019

umm...you’re not even talking about the same feature that we’re talking about. they’re not even the same plugin.

we’re talking about Neutron. this clip is referring to Nectar.
Well, we actually talked about both Neutron and Nectar.

Anyhow, this is my understanding: Neutron has a "Masking Metering" (thats what iZoptope calls it). Nectar has a "Unmask" feature using the additional "Relay" plugin (Relay is added to a target channel). No doubt they managed to confuse the nomenclature here.
If you apply Masking/Unmasking on the Relay it will carve out frequencies, i.e. taking the vocal frequency spectra from Nectar and carve out those frequencies on the track where you have the Relay plugin. But it does not do it dynamically, so you will basically loose your mid range for that instrument on the whole track. I tried to point that out and many people are complaining about the lack of dynamic application using the Nectar/Relay combo.

Neutrons "Masking Metering" is a graphical display (similar to the free Voxengo SPAN), but it has some more features such as the addition of bars at the top showing the "intensity" or amount of frequency clashing. Then you manually adjust to taste with the EQ incl the additional dynamic level/side chain EQ feature.

Nectars EQ on the other hand also has dynamic level (but no side chain) and the additional dynamic frequency. Though my observation of the dynamic frequency is that is has minimal to no slew rate and every time the pitch tracking glitches (octave jumps) the EQ jumps away as well. Hence, the reason why I have adjustable slew rate in my own EQ w pitch tracking combinator. Nepute, that I use for pitch tracking in the combinator, is quite good at avoiding octave jumps but it still may happen.

I don't mind being corrected if I have misunderstood something, but I do prefer we refrain from name calling.
not sure when I called you names?

as for Nectar, that’s exactly how any basic EQ works. if you dial in a setting, it stays that way unless you make it do something else. not sure how that makes Nectar a laughable waste of time, or whatever—it just doesn’t have a feature you want.

User avatar
Djstarski
Posts: 271
Joined: 20 Jan 2015

Post 09 Jul 2019

NekujaK wrote:
08 Jul 2019
guitfnky wrote:
08 Jul 2019


just because it’s not licensed or officially “sanctioned” by SSL doesn’t mean it’s not a faithful representation.

that said, I have no idea how faithful a representation it actually is. it gets high marks from people who know better than I (Selig comes to mind), and I’d trust their ears over those who admittedly haven’t even heard it.
Reason's SSL mixer emulates the SSL EQ curves and compression behavior, which is fine. But it doesn't try to impart any of the character or analog sound of an actual SSL console. So in that regard, it's not a full and complete emulation of anything SSL. That's not to say, it's a bad mixer - quite the contrary - but if you're looking for something that comes closer to a console sound, then one of the dedicated channel strips or analog summing plugins are required.
Just in case you did not know . the 9000k was designed to be a clean console , in simple terms without character . For character , the SSL 4000 console would be your go to .


User avatar
Marco Raaphorst
Posts: 2453
Joined: 22 Jan 2015

Post 09 Jul 2019

Djstarski wrote:
09 Jul 2019
NekujaK wrote:
08 Jul 2019


Reason's SSL mixer emulates the SSL EQ curves and compression behavior, which is fine. But it doesn't try to impart any of the character or analog sound of an actual SSL console. So in that regard, it's not a full and complete emulation of anything SSL. That's not to say, it's a bad mixer - quite the contrary - but if you're looking for something that comes closer to a console sound, then one of the dedicated channel strips or analog summing plugins are required.
Just in case you did not know . the 9000k was designed to be a clean console , in simple terms without character . For character , the SSL 4000 console would be your go to .

Thanks. But since it's analog it cannot be 100% clean. Reason's SSL is 100% clean though. A blank canvas, a logical design decision imo.

User avatar
antic604
Posts: 2114
Joined: 23 Oct 2017
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Post 09 Jul 2019

AFAIK Reason's mixer is a FUNCTIONAL recreation of the SSL, so it has similar layout, routing, knobs and buttons have the same (or similar) range, filter & transfer curves have the same shape, etc. But it doesn't model the electric circuitry and per-channel variance, non-linearities, noise, saturation, channel cross-talk.

In short - it works like SSL, but doesn't sound exactly like it :)
Bitwig 2 // Reason 10 // Cubase Pro 10 @ Lenovo Y730 15'' i7-8750h
my music - https://soundcloud.com/antic604
other stuff - "Psytrance in Bitwig Studio" tutorial

User avatar
Djstarski
Posts: 271
Joined: 20 Jan 2015

Post 09 Jul 2019

Marco Raaphorst wrote:
09 Jul 2019
Djstarski wrote:
09 Jul 2019


Just in case you did not know . the 9000k was designed to be a clean console , in simple terms without character . For character , the SSL 4000 console would be your go to .

Thanks. But since it's analog it cannot be 100% clean. Reason's SSL is 100% clean though. A blank canvas, a logical design decision imo.


Watch the video they will explain . i`m no expert .
Last edited by Djstarski on 09 Jul 2019, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Marco Raaphorst
Posts: 2453
Joined: 22 Jan 2015

Post 09 Jul 2019

antic604 wrote:
09 Jul 2019
AFAIK Reason's mixer is a FUNCTIONAL recreation of the SSL, so it has similar layout, routing, knobs and buttons have the same (or similar) range, filter & transfer curves have the same shape, etc. But it doesn't model the electric circuitry and per-channel variance, non-linearities, noise, saturation, channel cross-talk.

In short - it works like SSL, but doesn't sound exactly like it :)
exactly. I love non-linearities but as an option.

Reason's SSL is the best DAW mixer imo.

User avatar
hurricane
Posts: 790
Joined: 14 Oct 2017

Post 09 Jul 2019

Reason's mixer has no options. It's not the best. If it DID have those options, then you'd have an argument.
https://soundcloud.com/hurricane-music
Mac mini (Late 2012) | macOS Mojave | Logic Pro X | Pro Tools | Reason | DX7 | DX7s | TX7 | CZ-1 | Steinberg UR22mkII | Emagic AMT 8 | Mackie SR24x4 | StudioLogic SL 990 PRO

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7827
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 09 Jul 2019

hurricane wrote:
08 Jul 2019
…Jim from Solid State Logic, said this on Gearslutz:

"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."
TL/DR: Reason models the super-clean J series SSL console, not the more colorful (and popular) E or G series, and thus is a fairly accurate emulation of the console (and a very accurate emulation of the EQ/Filter/Dynamics). I found it next to impossible to get ANY color from the 9k (the 2nd J series) in particular.

The "long" version:
I totally agree (hard to dispute it was not tested and approved by SSL, that's a fact). But I would also point out it's important what Jim is NOT saying: that Reason's SSL EQ or Dynamics in any way misses the mark. The J series is VERY clean compared to the E and G, which have a sound that we spent a lot of time working around. It was, and is, considered first and foremost a "mixing" console. When tracking on an SSL E/G most engineers patched around the console where possible, and ran things "cold" where not possible (to avoid the "extra crispy" artifacts of overdriving the modules).

In contrast, the J series was as close to a "clean" digital console of most analog consoles of that era, using no capacitors in the audio path (they called it "Superanalogue"), and IMO Reason gives a very close SSL J Series "experience".

So to be clear, I still agree with everything you said. I would just clarify to be more specific and say that if you want the SSL E or G series experience, you should use an emulation of those specific models - you won't get it from using a J series emulation and thus you won't fully get it from Reason's big mixer.

As for channel strips, when using Reason you end up doing exactly what most folks did you used real SSLs - substituting channel strips and modules with "color" for those instruments that require it. It was, after all, the automation/total recall workflow that was the BIG initial draw to SSL - there was simply nothing else that was that well integrated with the rest of the studio, almost like working with a DAW today! The "sound" (of the E especially) was heavily criticized by many the "golden ears" engineers of the day, as was the cost and reliability (there was a LOT to break on that console). It was only after the G series EQ/channel was introduced (based on feedback from the E series) in the late 1980s that it was more widely embraced by the studio world, and this took almost 10 years to reach the "critical mass" that is assumed was preset from the introduction. Even then, folks would often use "E Series" EQ modules due to their different response curve characteristics (the rest of the G series console sounded better than the E due to different VCAs and mic

Obviously, having the choice to change the console from J to E/Q, plus a few additional options (Neve, Trident, and API being obvious choices) would be fantastic! But to get the most from those models, you would have to understand how they work and how to deal with their individual "quirks", so for many Reason users the subtleties may be lost…
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
NekujaK
Posts: 573
Joined: 09 Oct 2016
Location: USA

Post 09 Jul 2019

selig wrote:
09 Jul 2019
When tracking on an SSL E/G most engineers patched around the console where possible, and ran things "cold" where not possible (to avoid the "extra crispy" artifacts of overdriving the modules). ..

...The "sound" (of the E especially) was heavily criticized by many the "golden ears" engineers of the day...
Heh, yesterda'y "garbage" is today's treasure :) Everyone lusts after the sound of tape, tubes, and character nowadays, but back in my youth, I would've given my right arm, so to speak, for ultra clean recordings.

20 years from now, people will covet the sound of bad MP3 compression :D
wreaking havoc with :reason: since 2.5

strangers
Posts: 470
Joined: 06 Mar 2017
Location: NJ

Post 09 Jul 2019

Voted yes. I have a few channel strip plugins. The one I use the most is Softube's Console 1. I actually really like Reason's SSL strip. Console 1 takes the cake for me because of the boost to workflow. Massively cuts down on clicking, dragging, clicking, more clicking, etc. and lets me get right into things with faster results. I'm not forced to use every component of any channel strip. I can still mix and match whatever I want especially since Console 1 is so light on CPU. Another perk is quick switching between tracks. The rack can be cumbersome to scroll through when you've got a lot of tracks. With Console 1, all I do is drop it on whichever tracks I want, all tracks are recognized/labeled within the plugin window and can easily be called upon by one click of the corresponding track on the board.

Their channel strips are on the pricey side but they're very efficient tools.

reggie1979
Posts: 657
Joined: 11 Apr 2019

Post 09 Jul 2019

NekujaK wrote:
09 Jul 2019
selig wrote:
09 Jul 2019
When tracking on an SSL E/G most engineers patched around the console where possible, and ran things "cold" where not possible (to avoid the "extra crispy" artifacts of overdriving the modules). ..

...The "sound" (of the E especially) was heavily criticized by many the "golden ears" engineers of the day...
Heh, yesterda'y "garbage" is today's treasure :) Everyone lusts after the sound of tape, tubes, and character nowadays, but back in my youth, I would've given my right arm, so to speak, for ultra clean recordings.

20 years from now, people will covet the sound of bad MP3 compression :D
Here here. Not that those emu's are bad or anything, but it's weird how people recall the "quality" of cassettes :lol: Man, I couldn't WAIT to stop using them.

User avatar
Boombastix
Posts: 680
Joined: 18 May 2018
Location: Bay Area, CA

Post 09 Jul 2019

NekujaK wrote:
09 Jul 2019
Heh, yesterda'y "garbage" is today's treasure :) Everyone lusts after the sound of tape, tubes, and character nowadays, but back in my youth, I would've given my right arm, so to speak, for ultra clean recordings.
20 years from now, people will covet the sound of bad MP3 compression :D
Lol, yes! I kinda cringe and laugh at the same time when tape plugins have a "hiss" feature. Don't they know how hard it was to get rid of hiss when you have 24 tape channels open through a console???
And tape drive!!?? Try to drive a tape machine just right, too much, oops, just rerecord that channel from start to finish. I sooo love working in the box not having to deal with it anymore.
BUT, mp3 at 16k is the new sauce, some of the BEST lo-fi sounds you can get (I'm not kidding) :ugeek:
10% off at Waves with link: https://www.waves.com/r/6gh2b0
Disclaimer - I get 10% as well.

  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 1 guest