Do good plugins sound as good as even low end hardware?

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by dullfangs

i'm trying to produce my album on my laptop. i've got the waves ssl plugs, but wonder if i'm being realistic in thinking i can mix a proper good sounding record with these tools. Thinking about getting the Stillwell Rocket if i need something faster. Is waves ssl channel compressor with fast attack fast enough for most material? I'm talking like really clean electric or accoustic guitar where i need to grab the initial transients. can plugins do this or is this where hardware has the edge?

Your monitoring is likely to be far more of a holdup than your plugins.

[Blast9]

^ +1

.... and your listening environment

[beanface]

Originally Posted by dullfangs

Do high end plugins sound as good as even low end hardware like dbx 160's, art vla etc?

For example, Waves ssl. Many debate if it sounds like a real SSL. But does it sound as good as hardware in general, if not SSL?

Or the Stillwell Rocket. It's supposed to be a very fast 1176 style compressor. Could it pass for hardware?

They're not exactly the same, but either can sound great or shit. Some hardware is total bollocks, some software is total bollocks. Hostly right...some plugs sound FANTASTIC. Refined audiometrics PlparEQ (both an LP & PW eq) sound INCREDIBLE, as does the Algorithmix Blue & Red + split comp. Not to mention some of the Flux, Waves & PSP stuff.

I've mixed a couple of records which have done pretty well with only plugs and no one seemed to complain. Don't get me wrong I love hardware & tape, but can attain goodresults either way.


BTW - Bob Katz & Bob Ohlson rate quite a few plugs, PSP Oldtimer, Mastercomp & Waves API being among them. Actually, I beleive Bob O mixes mainly with the Waves API stuff.


EDIT: +1 for the monitoring acoustics being more of an issue....

[lllubi]

Originally Posted by dullfangs

Do high end plugins sound as good as even low end hardware like dbx 160's, art vla etc?

For example, Waves ssl. Many debate if it sounds like a real SSL. But does it sound as good as hardware in general, if not SSL?

Or the Stillwell Rocket. It's supposed to be a very fast 1176 style compressor. Could it pass for hardware?

im recording bass still with the DBX 160X when no other comp is around
8-9 db compression sometimes
no plug does this without artifacts today

[beanface]

Originally Posted by lllubi

im recording bass still with the DBX 160X when no other comp is around
8-9 db compression sometimes
no plug does this without artifacts today

I can think of quite a few soft comps WAY more transparent and musical than the 160. I'm a firm lover of hardware, mostly a few well chosen bits of high end & hand made gear mainly for mastering & some for tracking through, but theres still plenty of plugs that I use - though I wouldn't touch the 160 nowadays.

What loudspeakers are you using to make your generalisations on and with what dac + cabling + room treatment?


Best
Toby

[dullfangs]

guys, you are absolutely right monitoring is probably where i need to invest next. right now im just using headphones and a decent set of 2.0 computer speakers. i'm actually able to mix fairly well, in terms of getting levels and balance. but the accuracy just isnt there with the crap speakers, the upper mids are weak, the bass is hyped and muddy, the presence is harsh, the list goes on. i just work with a decent set of canalphones most of the time. but yeah, i suppose a decent set of nearfields are next on the list.

anybody have recommendations in the $500 ballpark?

[Surbitone]

Originally Posted by dullfangs

Right. Does anybody think that any major releases (non-electronica) actually use any plugins?

I'm talking about in like the indie, alternative, pop, and rock world. I mean, even low end studios have good hardware. Why would any commercial artist in their right mind resort to using plugins on a final version of anything?

I mean, does anybody think pros actually use Waves SSL or UAD Neve, when they can easily get access to the real thing?

Loads of pro stuff has been mixed with, or at least, in part with plugins. I mean LOADS of stuff in lots of genres. Not blowing a horn here, but I know I could mix a 'record' using only plugins - now, I might not enjoy doing it all that much - but I could (and have) do it.

[Surbitone]

Originally Posted by dullfangs

anybody have recommendations in the $500 ballpark?

Q Acoustics 2010's + a Cambrige audio amp?

EDIT: Didn't realise this thread was from 09'

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by dullfangs

Do high end plugins sound as good as even low end hardware like dbx 160's, art vla etc?

For example, Waves ssl. Many debate if it sounds like a real SSL. But does it sound as good as hardware in general, if not SSL?

Or the Stillwell Rocket. It's supposed to be a very fast 1176 style compressor. Could it pass for hardware?

I can't weigh in on Waves as I don't like their way of doing business and would never buy in -- but I have a number of plugs that were either free or came with the 'pro' upgrades to my DAW and, no question, some of them are much better than some of my hardware and in a couple cases, almost all of them are superior to some of my hardware.

(You do not want to ask me about the two 5 band para EQs I bought for ~$300 a piece in the early/mid 90s from a not-yet-bargain-priced Behringer. Let's just say: yuck. I actually stopped going to my old pro shop -- even though I really liked the owner, a great guy -- pretty much after they pushed those and a Behringer Composer that was actually not nearly as awful -- but which broke down about 15 minutes out of warranty. Of course, the 'inexpensive' options were far fewer then but, nonetheless, I felt burned. I daresay I don't have any EQ plugs -- free or otherwise -- that sound anywhere as awful as those Behringer 5 band paras. They were a disappointment from the first day.)

[thiagoabreu]

everybody is going ITB... except some golden ears here on GS that change their mind on every blindtest 3 or 4 times...
people can claim whatever they want, but you gotta realize that just a few are real talented... the rest are clueless and will write "warm" and "punchy" whenever they can

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by thiagoabreu

everybody is going ITB... except some golden ears here on GS that change their mind on every blindtest 3 or 4 times...
people can claim whatever they want, but you gotta realize that just a few are real talented... the rest are clueless and will write "warm" and "punchy" whenever they can

Everybody is a mighty big word. Even with the noted exception. And then, actually, I suspect there are some golden ears here on GS who actually don't leap to conclusions quickly and, so, are less likely to commit to preferences/identifications in the gray area... and so less likely to get 'caught' in a misidentification.

[@¶,*ƒƒƒ&™]

Originally Posted by dullfangs

Do high end plugins sound as good as even low end hardware like dbx 160's, art vla etc?

For example, Waves ssl. Many debate if it sounds like a real SSL. But does it sound as good as hardware in general, if not SSL?

Or the Stillwell Rocket. It's supposed to be a very fast 1176 style compressor. Could it pass for hardware?

This exact question was asked in the Musician/Engineer Survey 2009 and 567 respondents answered:

Musician/Engineer Survey 2009 Results Photo Gallery - Photo 102 of 174 by Musician Engineer - MySpace Photos

[thiagoabreu]

Originally Posted by theblue1

Everybody is a mighty big word. Even with the noted exception. And then, actually, I suspect there are some golden ears here on GS who actually don't leap to conclusions quickly and, so, are less likely to commit to preferences/identifications in the gray area... and so less likely to get 'caught' in a misidentification.

yeah, maybe i generalized too much... but the point is, if you give a great engineer just plugins to work with, he`ll make a great job without complaining. I just cant take people who trash good stuff for no good reason. There are quite a few snob posts here in GS that are just unbelievable...

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by thiagoabreu

yeah, maybe i generalized too much... but the point is, if you give a great engineer just plugins to work with, he`ll make a great job without complaining. I just cant take people who trash good stuff for no good reason. There are quite a few snob posts here in GS that are just unbelievable...

Yeah... I hear ya. Snobs are... well... snobs. Sometimes their snobbery is based on real differences. Sometimes not. But I think it's fair to say that sometimes what looks like unfounded snobbery can, when more carefully inspected, possibly from a different angle, look somewhat more reasonable.


FWIW, converter design legend, Dan Lavry (some of whose product definitely is in the upper price range of snobville ) has suggested fairly convincingly that digital signal processing is very good at linear jobs -- level changes, summing, EQ, time based FX processing, etc -- but perhaps less so at nonlinear processes like compression.

Yet one of my favorite plugs is a compressor that I think compares well enough with the (admittedly low/mid) hardware compressors I've owned. (The one place where I still rely on a hardware compressor is in my vocal chain, where I have an ART Tube Levelar typically patched in, dialing in some of its particular [and, for sure, highly nonlinear] brand of opto-compression.)

[Ethan Winer]

Originally Posted by theblue1

Dan Lavry ... has suggested fairly convincingly that digital signal processing is very good at linear jobs -- level changes, summing, EQ, time based FX processing, etc -- but perhaps less so at nonlinear processes like compression.

Just to clarify, compression does nothing more than change the volume, which of course is a linear process. Now, some compressors may add other types of "flavor" in the form of artifacts. But compression itself is trivial to do digitally with high quality.

--Ethan

[Horking My Lunch]

I'd say a good amount are better than cheaper hardware. Softube.