Login / Register
 
THIS is why plugins are the way forward.
New Reply
Subscribe
|-|
#61
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #61
|-|
Lives for gear
 
|-|'s Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2010
Location: Detroit
Posts: 555

|-| is offline
*YAWN*

You like hardware?
Use hardware

You like software?
Use software

You like both?
Use both
Quote
1
#62
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #62
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 11,737

narcoman is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by |-| View Post
*YAWN*

You like hardware?
Use hardware

You like software?
Use software

You like both?
Use both
7 months and bored already!
#63
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #63
Lives for gear
 
NEWTON IN ORBIT's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 2,347

NEWTON IN ORBIT is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enlightened Hand View Post
And on top of that. A lot of these analog die hard folk's mixes ain't sounding all that great anyway......so, there's that too.

Plug-in or not, if you can't mix you can't mix.

Plug-in or not, if you CAN mix then you can mix.
jeebus....


I guess making friends isn't a high priority?
That's nice.


Best wishes.

john

btw...where do you display your grammies...on your mantle?
#64
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #64
Lives for gear
 
Nowak's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 1,543

Nowak is offline
You say Po tay ta, I say Po tar ta, let's call the whole thing off.
#65
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #65
Harmless Wacko
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Location: A prison cell with soffit mounts
Posts: 1,737

Slipperman is offline
Use whatcha got.

Have fun. Make music. Get paid for it(if possible).

For me that means NFW am I using plug-in's where I have hardware in many cases.

Most cases really.

But that's me, and my situation.

Yerz may be a different world.

Many thanx to Narcoman for his explanation(s) on his take of the subject at hand.

He actually addresses the HOW and WHY of where many of us think the software stuff still has a distance to travel in terms of SONICS in a lucid form.

Something I simply don't have the will(or probably skill - HOHOHO) to do here.

Best regards,

SM.
__________________
“No plan survives contact with the enemy”
:Erwin Rommel
therealbigd
Thread Starter
#66
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #66
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Location: London
Posts: 2,714

Thread Starter
therealbigd is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by reezy2 View Post
we have to remember as engineers ITS ABOUT THE SOUND. plug ins might be able to go around the world in 80 days but the listener cant hear that.

the listener cant hear the convenience, versatility, or price of a plug-in.
so it is biased to compare a hardware behringers vs. uad/waves/softube plug-ins based soley on price. lol the listener can't hear how much money we saved on going Waves.

at the end of the day no plug-in can can beat a fine piece hardware. at $300, yes. but remember it is not about the money, ITS ABOUT THE SOUND. were engineers, not accountants
and true, unfortunately, theres no way around a good piece than to lay down some dollars.. but its about the sound remember

and considering you do your job well as an engineer, the listener CAN hear the difference. even its its subconscience because they dont know better lol.. but its there and it matters.
It may be about the sound to you, but it's not about the sound to everyone.

RTFQ - it says 'Way Forward'. The way forward of the music recording industry has been defined by the record buying industry for a long time.

The audience may not be able to hear the cost, nor the portability of it. But they can just not buy the record when it costs $50 because when they wanted to move the engineer and his 48ch Helios desk to work with the band in the UK, they couldn't just spend $500 on his plane ticket and have it move in his bag. No they had to call in RockIt Cargo to move the thing.



That's why I said WAY FORWARD. This whole thing is a business, and business is about more than just nice things. That is why car seats aren't all made out of leather. Yes it's nicer, and yes, the buyer would rather have them. But the buyer, often, would rather save some money and have some slightly less comfortable seats. So if the label decide that their record sales will not change by using cheaper, all-ITB studios, they will do so, as believe me, record labels prefer money to the 'OTB sound' which is all a load of GS hype anyway.

Please for the last time I want to clarify this thread is not about what's better. I don't give a flying f!!k about what sounds better. I have my preferences, others have theirs, it's all happy days. This is simply about, the evolution of plugins, the price they can now put on them, and how this will affect the next 10 years of how studios are chosen and hired. The A vs D argument is older than the sun and is properly boring.
#67
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #67
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,359

Bassmankr is offline
Therealbigd, the reason you use "Monitors from PMC, Wilson Benesch + NS10Ms (plus some interesting monitors!), Amps from Bryston and Cyrus." instead of a set of powered Mackie nearfields is presumably a difference in sound quality. That quality difference is meaningful to you and your customers so that's why you have picked those tools over the just as usable, much cheaper Mackie setup. Hardware users hear the same difference over plugs and it's meaningful enough to them to them to pay the price. To muddy the waters even more, digital and analog have a different sound to them so the "apples and oranges" posters are right and additionally the weight given to either price or sound quality varies with each buyer. Doing price comparisons you have to look at total cost of ownership over X number of years. Software is not only the initial cost but upgrade costs and ALL your time costs for each install / update and dealing with bugs which can easily cost more than the plug itself. Given OS changes and software orphaning it's can be hard to get 10 years out of a software product, something else to factor in. So when running the numbers look at all the costs for both platforms over a long term INCLUDING your time costs. In regards to how studios are choosen and hired over the next 10 years. My prediction is that picking the person due to results, relationships, location, and budget/terms is going to continue to be the far more important factors over the specific tools available. What the future holds is at best just a guess, in the present sharing our own experiences with the tools we are using (the good and the bad of the specific tool) to help others here may be a more fruitful endevor.
#68
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #68
Lives for gear
 
Konketsu's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Location: Vancouver BC

Konketsu is offline
I can fix my hardware with a soldering iron and a multimeter when it craps the bed.

I can't do that with NI Reaktor, as much as I love it.

I have some hardware that is older than I am and still works great.

Is there anyone out there who is still running Opcode Studio Vision or TurboSynth? Anyone remember how awesome those were?
therealbigd
Thread Starter
#69
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #69
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Location: London
Posts: 2,714

Thread Starter
therealbigd is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bassmankr View Post
Therealbigd, the reason you use "Monitors from PMC, Wilson Benesch + NS10Ms (plus some interesting monitors!), Amps from Bryston and Cyrus." instead of a set of powered Mackie nearfields is presumably a difference in sound quality. That quality difference is meaningful to you and your customers so that's why you have picked those tools over the just as usable, much cheaper Mackie setup. Hardware users hear the same difference over plugs and it's meaningful enough to them to them to pay the price. To muddy the waters even more, digital and analog have a different sound to them so the "apples and oranges" posters are right and additionally the weight given to either price or sound quality varies with each buyer. Doing price comparisons you have to look at total cost of ownership over X number of years. Software is not only the initial cost but upgrade costs and ALL your time costs for each install / update and dealing with bugs which can easily cost more than the plug itself. Given OS changes and software orphaning it's can be hard to get 10 years out of a software product, something else to factor in. So when running the numbers look at all the costs for both platforms over a long term INCLUDING your time costs. In regards to how studios are choosen and hired over the next 10 years. My prediction is that picking the person due to results, relationships, location, and budget/terms is going to continue to be the far more important factors over the specific tools available. What the future holds is at best just a guess, in the present sharing our own experiences with the tools we are using (the good and the bad of the specific tool) to help others here may be a more fruitful endevor.
I don't contend any of this. I like nice sounding speakers so I buy them. You buy nice sounding hardware because you like it. Whatever. That's fine, never contented it.

Point is only that if you can buy unlimited instances of outboard like the PYE, Helios etc (assumably others - SSL, API, Neve, Fairchild, Pultec, etc will follow suite in time), for $150 a go, when just one instance of any of those would cost you at least 10x that; it is reasonably obvious that high quality studios will be able to form, and run, at a fraction of the cost of others, due to their equipment overheads being so low.

The question "Does analogue hardware sound better than it's digital plugin equivalent? (A: Yes, or no)" is UTTERLY, UTTERLY irrelevant. It is no more relevant than "does SSL sound better than Neve?"

The relevant question is "does plugin software get mixes to a standard where they can be commercially released and make profitable sales?" and the answer is absolutely, yes. If the mix is good enough, the label, who are essentially your (as a studio) employer, couldn't give a flying turd how you got there, and whether it was in the box, out the box, round the box or up the boxes arse. It sounds good, they can release it, job done.

This is the reality when working with material at corporate level, rather than for fun.

Take an alternative. Taxi to the airport. You could use a standard family saloon, or a top-brand sports car. They can both reach the speed limit, they're both safe, both air conditioned, both hold all your luggage. But one has lovely leather reclining seats, a big powerful engine, sport suspension, race tyres, the works.

Now, your wealthy VIP, who wants to arrive in style, might choose the sports car. But the corporations sending employees to the airport, who, at the end of the day, are in the game to make money, don't care if the engine has enough beef to double the speed limit. The drivers' not allowed to. So, if the standard saloon is going to be sufficient to get their man to the airport, they'll use it.

This is what I'm pointing to. It doesn't matter how much YOU prefer your hardware. You do not pay your own wages. The sound ONLY matters to those paying your wages. So, if you can achieve a sound which they are content with, at half the price, they will begin to filter over to your yard in time, as they realise the cost savings available. And it will become more viable to businesses, in time, to use the companies creating an equally good sound (that is DIFFERENT, but not BETTER or WORSE) ITB, at half the price.

I say again THIS IS NOT A SOUND COMPARISON

please please please leave your sound comparisons at home. this is about where business is going, at $150 for 2 quality plugins and prices only going in one direction, I find it hard to believe that hardware is going to remain the king in a declining industry, based on the fact that when A/B'd with the source material it's sound is arguably better.
therealbigd
Thread Starter
#70
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #70
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Location: London
Posts: 2,714

Thread Starter
therealbigd is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Konketsu View Post
I can fix my hardware with a soldering iron and a multimeter when it craps the bed.

I can't do that with NI Reaktor, as much as I love it.
Same with our HW API2500 and our Waves one.

But the Waves still gets used more often. Because we can use 20 of them in the same mix, save the settings and recall them later. The HW one doesn't do that.

All ups and downs.
therealbigd
Thread Starter
#71
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #71
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Location: London
Posts: 2,714

Thread Starter
therealbigd is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post

It isn't about being able to tell that something was done on an 88R or in Reaper... it's about the ends justifying the means - or more accurately - the means to get to an end.
I think this is something people forget. A/B a source between Reaper and an 88R, yes there's a difference. But what's a difference? Who cares? As long as the Reaper one sounds good, it is good.

"If it sounds good, it is good"

Joe Meek said that before DAWs were invented. It's still true. Doesn't matter how it gets there, if it gets there, you win. Like football... there's no points for how the goal is scored! As an Arsenal supporter I know this too well. We often score 2 great goals in a match, problem is, other team score 3 rubbish ones, and still win the match.

Great mixes can be achieved with or without hardware. Difference is, without can be done cheaper and quicker (and quicker means cheaper) due to the benefits plugins bring. And in a declining industry with no money, I see these factors driving plugins much further than the sonic differences found in analogue hardware.
csj
#72
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #72
csj
Gear Head
 
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 36

csj is offline
lol you guys are forgetting one main point that plays a big roll in this...hardware just looks alot better then software...lol... its just point n saying that you have a Helios EQ
__________________
New to gearslutz.......
but not new to music production....
#73
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #73
Lives for gear
 
Beyersound's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Location: Vegas, Norcal
Posts: 3,728

Beyersound is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
3. the top mixers in the world are all over 40 (it tales 20 years to get to that level)...
That is the absolute truth, no doubt about it. Now there is at least one non-debatable statement in this thread!
__________________
Congratulations 2010, and now 2012 World Champion SF Giants!!!

"There is no crying in baseball, there are no rules in recording!!!"
www.myspace.com/beyeraudio

Michael Beyer
#74
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #74
Lives for gear
 
Enlightened Hand's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 1,836

Enlightened Hand is offline
Top mixing engineers are top mixing engineers because the records that they work on happen to become hits. They get chosen to work on those projects because they've been around long enough to develop enough connections to be on the short list of some record company's picks for mix engineer. It ain't always about the quality of their work. It's about who they know and where they happen to be working.

Hits and projects associated with big dollar and/or big name productions win awards.

The assumption is: "Well that guy has a grammy so he must be doing something right." But since when is a grammy a great indicator of skill? Thousands of cutting edge, excellent mixes go unnoticed, not because the people that mixed them suck, but because the songs aren't hits or big name projects. Besides that making hits isn't the job of the mix engineer.

I think this industry is full of pretentiousness and sucking up to people to "get over". But really if we're honest (honesty being in short supply in the music business) most of the big name guys aren't responsible for their name recognition due to their contribution to the project. You work and you take on work until the work you take on gets noticed. If it never does, you never get noticed. Not because you can't mix. But because you don't get attached to hit projects.

Has nothing to do with gear. Has nothing to do with plug-ins. Has nothing to do with the console in your control room or your monitors or your golden ears. If my dog mixed a record that sold 10 million copies then there would be all kinds of clones trying to emulate the mix tactics and all kinds of magazine interviews and Waves would come out with Fido's collection of plug-ins and everybody would say; "That dog can really mix." It's all a bunch of hype that has nothing to do with reality. Reality being that skillful mixing and hit making are not directly correlated, while name recognition and association with hits are. The other point being that skillful mixing and the use of analog signal processing or exclusively digital or whatever are also not directly correlated, while a great sounding mix and a skillful engineer are, regardless of the tools used.
__________________
Liz - recordist, mixing dragon lady
thoughts

https://soundcloud.com/audio-wisdom/sets/demo-reel
#75
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #75
Lives for gear
 
Beyersound's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Location: Vegas, Norcal
Posts: 3,728

Beyersound is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enlightened Hand View Post
Top mixing engineers are top mixing engineers because the records that they work on happen to become hits. They get chosen to work on those projects because they've been around long enough to develop enough connections to be on the short list of some record company's picks for mix engineer. It ain't always about the quality of their work. It's about who they know and where they happen to be working.
It ain't always about the quality, but it is with the mixers I speak of, and identify with. I do however, agree that some of the others are extremely well connected and lucky.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enlightened Hand View Post
Hits and projects associated with big dollar and/or big name productions win awards.

The assumption is: "Well that guy has a grammy so he must be doing something right." But since when is a grammy a great indicator of skill? Thousands of cutting edge, excellent mixes go unnoticed, not because the people that mixed them suck, but because the songs aren't hits or big name projects. Besides that making hits isn't the job of the mix engineer.
Awards mean diddly squat, I have done audio for far too many awards shows, watching many undeserving people win them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enlightened Hand View Post
I think this industry is full of pretentiousness and sucking up to people to "get over". But really if we're honest (honesty being in short supply in the music business) most of the big name guys aren't responsible for their name recognition due to their contribution to the project. You work and you take on work until the work you take on gets noticed. If it never does, you never get noticed. Not because you can't mix. But because you don't get attached to hit projects.
I for the most part agree, but many times if you are truly talented and stay the course, you will finally get noticed. 30+ years in this business has shown me that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enlightened Hand View Post
Has nothing to do with gear. Has nothing to do with plug-ins. Has nothing to do with the console in your control room or your monitors or your golden ears. If my dog mixed a record that sold 10 million copies then there would be all kinds of clones trying to emulate the mix tactics and all kinds of magazine interviews and Waves would come out with Fido's collection of plug-ins and everybody would say; "That dog can really mix." It's all a bunch of hype that has nothing to do with reality. Reality being that skillful mixing and hit making are not directly correlated, while name recognition and association with hits are. The other point being that skillful mixing and the use of analog signal processing or exclusively digital or whatever are also not directly correlated, while a great sounding mix and a skillful engineer are, regardless of the tools used.
I think you have pretty much nailed it here, nice post! There are actually quite a few big name mixers doing things more ITB, especially for some of those clients who lack the big budgets. It really is about the skills/talent, not so much the gear. It is interesting that I have heard many great mixes on records that were not "hits", but most of mixers that did them went on later to become "big guys".
#76
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #76
Lives for gear
 
tubehead's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: Encinitas, CA
Posts: 840

tubehead is offline
OH MY GOD... I just read this thread and will not get that time back on my life, thanks. I quit, I'm going to jump out a window.
#77
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #77
Gear Head
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 47

cyork is offline
Analog as front end.

I find it kind of baffling that when the whole analog/digital debate happens how the signal chain pre-converter doesn't come up. All of these comparison tests are of course in a mixing application so it's easy to see why the debates tend to move that way...

You can put whatever flavour of plugin you want on a signal it is not going to sound like it was tracked with that hardware. If I put down a track with a Neve pre I cannot make it sound like it was tracked with an API or a Martech by using a plugin...and especially not if it was tracked with some other budget pre. You simply cannot make a track recorded with Mackie pre sound like it was tracked like the aforementioned. The detail and timbre of the sound is significantly different. And if you're EQing pre converter you very quickly see that it's totally different than after A/D.

So to propose that high quality Analog is not part of the way forward seems a bit absurb to me. It will always be part of the recording process as long as instruments are moving air anyways...

Chad
#78
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #78
Lives for gear
 
TobyToby's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 533

TobyToby is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by tubehead View Post
OH MY GOD... I just read this thread and will not get that time back on my life, thanks. I quit, I'm going to jump out a window.
I've just read the whole thread because I have to wait until the paint is dry for the second layer and of course because I like Narc. I think I don't like any Plug In I know lol . . well I liked Ohm Boys half an Enneadekaëteris ago and I will surely like Valhalla because it's individual
__________________
I am no slut. It's just hard to say no

Never believe what an artist says, only what they do - David Hockney

Ars longa, vita brevis
#79
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #79
Gear addict
 
Fenris's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 365

Fenris is offline
You don't actually get 80 instances of a plug-in for $400 or whatever you paid. It's sharing DSP with all your other plug-ins, and you can't use the same plug-in on every track or the crap factor starts to build up. You're getting more like 1 or 2 instances.

Then there's rapid obsolescence and the need to re-purchase all your plug-ins and replace all your hardware every 5 years or so. Computer hardware isn't designed to be repaired. And the endemic bugginess that afflicts ALL computer systems is a much bigger PITA than maintaining analog equipment.

Then there's the fact that even low-priced analog gear sounds better than any plug-in IN THE CONTEXT OF A FULL MIX. So much better that if I run out of hardware compressors or EQ's, I would rather do without than resort to a plug-in.

If you're moderately handy with electronics, you can build yourself a dozen channels of optical compression, inductor EQ, etc. for LESS than the cost of the equivalent plug-ins and DSP cards, if you're not trying to make a 100% authentic vintage replica.

So the answer is no, plug-ins are not the way forward. They're the way to mire yourself in a never-ending cycle of frustration and wasted money.

All the digital gear I ever bought is now junk and I regret every dollar I spent on it.
#80
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #80
Lives for gear
 
Analogue Mastering's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2,334

Analogue Mastering is online now
it's just another algorithm and GUI, nothing more, nothing less, even posting lifelike banners of real gear and smiling engineers won't change that.

Sometimes i just think people buy with their eyes, not ears.....
#81
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #81
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,283

-tc- is offline


...
#82
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #82
Telling it like it is
 
ionian's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2010
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 3,962

ionian is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenris View Post
All the digital gear I ever bought is now junk and I regret every dollar I spent on it.
Lol...I feel this similar pang every time I wander through my old backup folders of my old installs and see the install files for things such as Arboretum Hyperprism plugs and my opcode plugs like Fusion Filter and Vocode...

Good stuff, mind you but terribly outdated in terms of sound. Since the companies are no longer alive they're just abandoned and are stuck with their dated sound and funky artifacts which were acceptable 10 years ago but not today. :(

I also had Antares mic modeler back in the day when it was first released...maybe 99 or 2000 was it? Wow - another waste! hahaha...I really thought back then I could turn my old Shure beta to a Neumann...

Oh yeah...and the old DSP-FX! wow, that takes me back! That was my favorite reverb in the plug-in world back in '98 or 99! It sounded so good... I got the latest update of Sonar (X1) and the DSP-FX plugs are included free! If only I had waited 10 years!

Plugs have their place in terms of convenience. I would rather buy one or two hardware compressors and one good hardware EQ and limit myself to just that for my own stuff, but for example, I music direct this show every year and they also hire me afterward to mix the live show that's recorded on 24 tracks for the DVD sales. There's no way I'm running 24 tracks of 2+ hours of live audio two or three compressors at a time through hardware! I have no problem at all using plugs for that and rendering it all down. For that the convenience and speed that the plugs can render audio at, it is awesome.

Regards,
Frank
__________________
My equipment: A Commodore 64, 2 1541 Disk Drives, Dr T's Music Studio and a Casiotone CT-460.

www.frankperri.com

Never listen to opinions regarding gear. For every 50 nobodies on Gearslutz that say a piece of gear doesn't sound good enough to cut it, I know at least one somebody who is cutting it in NYC with that piece of gear.

Remember kids, Gearslutz is for entertainment purposes only.
#83
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #83
Lives for gear
 
Nowak's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 1,543

Nowak is offline
OK, seems we have a few oldies here when it comes to plug ins....... me being one of them....

QUIZ - does anybody remember PROTRON 3D plug in?, from 1995 when I jumped on the wagon.

S
#84
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #84
Lives for gear
 
Nowak's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 1,543

Nowak is offline
(I'm now 1/2 off the wagon and mixing on a board again and outboard)
#85
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #85
Gear Guru
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 15,859

joeq is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by ionian View Post
Lol...I feel this similar pang every time I wander through my old backup folders of my old installs and see the install files for things such as Arboretum Hyperprism plugs and my opcode plugs like Fusion Filter and Vocode...
I get the same feeling when I look at my rack of old compressors and EQs and stuff.

Oh no, wait. I don't.
__________________
.

“What you ask about is music. What you like is sound. Now music and sound are akin, but they are not the same.”
— Confucius
#86
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #86
Gear addict
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 388

PdotDdot is offline
Fenris, great point about the software always cycling into oblivion while you continue to reacquire your stuff by paying into the abyss. I'm certain there will never be a market for vintage software.

I do believe, and perhaps "fear" is a better word, that eventually hardware will turn into antiques and only software will exist. It may not happen in the next 20 years but with technology progressing exponentially, one day the hardware won't make sense to the culture of the times. Just my thoughts of course.
#87
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #87
Gear addict
 
Caramel's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2009
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 402

Caramel is offline
yesterday I plugged a real TR808 drum machine into an ISA One then a DBX 160.Although the ISA and DBX is not considered high end , it sounded SO much better than any digital combo I`ve tried in the last 15 years.

I`ve mostly worked in digital dormain in the last 20 years, starting with a Yamaha dmp7 mixing desk.Then O1V etc. But as good as the waves API 2500 is, It does not come close to the character/sound of the hardware. It is alot of financial investment to slightly improve your mix and most cannot justify the expense as fewer people care. But that`s what separates the men from the boys.
#88
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #88
Lives for gear
 
Beyersound's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Location: Vegas, Norcal
Posts: 3,728

Beyersound is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenris View Post
You don't actually get 80 instances of a plug-in for $400 or whatever you paid. It's sharing DSP with all your other plug-ins, and you can't use the same plug-in on every track or the crap factor starts to build up. You're getting more like 1 or 2 instances.

Then there's rapid obsolescence and the need to re-purchase all your plug-ins and replace all your hardware every 5 years or so. Computer hardware isn't designed to be repaired. And the endemic bugginess that afflicts ALL computer systems is a much bigger PITA than maintaining analog equipment.

Then there's the fact that even low-priced analog gear sounds better than any plug-in IN THE CONTEXT OF A FULL MIX. So much better that if I run out of hardware compressors or EQ's, I would rather do without than resort to a plug-in.
Wow, you must have been using some crappy plugins! I will take a good plugin over a cheap piece of hardware almost every time, and I love hardware.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenris View Post
So the answer is no, plug-ins are not the way forward. They're the way to mire yourself in a never-ending cycle of frustration and wasted money.

All the digital gear I ever bought is now junk and I regret every dollar I spent on it.
Some real sour grapes here. Whether or not they are the way forward, I certainly wouldn't agree with the "frustration and wasted money" part. Maybe you've just been dealing with the wrong developers, I have dealt with some very good newer ones these last couple of years, it is refreshing to me. The blanket statement about digital gear is a strange one, some of the best hardware pieces these days are digital! Sorry you feel the way you do.
#89
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #89
Lives for gear
 
lagavulin16's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Location: unincorporated marin county
Posts: 1,824

lagavulin16 is offline
Think of how the best sounding plugins sounded 15 years ago, and how many instances you could run at any given time. Now think of 10 years ago, 5 years ago, and today.

The improvement has been dramatic, and I do expect a time, probably in the next 20 years, where none of the golden ears on this forum will be able to tell the difference between the best plugins and the best vintage gear 90% of the time.
__________________
#90
7th June 2011
Old 7th June 2011
  #90
Lives for gear
 
dualflip's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,535

Send a message via MSN to dualflip Send a message via Skype™ to dualflip
dualflip is offline
cheap plug-ins.... wheres the yawn smiley? ohh wait here it is, wake me up when the analog counterparts sell for that price...
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Jules / So much gear, so little time!
62

Forum Jump

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.