THIS is why plugins are the way forward.
#151
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #151
Lives for gear
 
steveschizoid's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexDaCat View Post
Er not as simple. There is an inherent reluctance to change in us all.
For the emotion, you may collect equipment (and pay the MOST ridiculous prices for it will not be about sound,......blah...blah....blah
Hey Alex, what kind of work are you doing, and with what sort of gear?
#152
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #152
Lives for gear
 
tha]-[acksaw's Avatar
 

There are all kinds of great thoughts flying around here. Regardless of all the harsh debate, I'm thankful for everyone taking the time to weigh in. While some people find these topics redundant and pointless, I find mass value. Because, while just about everything audio is "to each their own" (subjective), we should all be learning and growing regardless of skill level and ability. And how can we grow if not from eachother.

It seems to me, that the real point of this thread comes down to moving "forward". As in, the future. Analog is ever changing. Flavors come and go. They come back after long rest. And of course there are a great deal of "if it ain't broke (sounds amazing), don't fix it". Vintage gear will ALWAYS be lusted over cause it just sounds GREAT!

But digital is ever evolving in a way that analog is not. Analog isn't conquering new ground in the same way digital is. While in some aspects, digital is still catching up, it's also breaking new other wise impossible ground. And when it does catch up where it lacks, it won't stop there. Digital is gaining new ability as each year passes. Some of these gains come in the form of a more accurate representation of a particular analog counterpart. Other gains manifest as sonic benefits never before possible in the analog world. And what the future will bring is very very fruitful based on what we have seen so far.

Not trying to sway anyone. And defiantly not saying that analog isn't improving. Digital just has a greater total potential for innovation as we move into the future. It has more room to grow. While digital may never totally emulate the sound of analog, it will continue to break ground for a long time to come. It will rival analog, do things analog could never do, and do things beyond what we can all imagine.

I always hear people talking about the extra "inches" gained by using analog... for better or worse. Some feel the inches are important, while others feel they are minor for the added cost, time or whatever. But I can't help but wonder, with the vast possibility of digital, will it one day be moving "miles" instead of "inches"? Only the future will show.
#153
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #153
Lives for gear
 
ionian's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by tha]-[acksaw View Post
Not trying to sway anyone. And defiantly not saying that analog isn't improving. Digital just has a greater total potential for innovation as we move into the future. It has more room to grow.
I agree to a certain point but with the democratization of the 500 series format, almost every EE out there is or can create some kind of product as well for a lower cost so I think there's been a real surge in analog as of late from boutique guitar pedals to all kinds of handmade stuff for the 500 series.

The little labs VOG is an interesting piece. The XQP optical disrupter sounds different then just a typical opto compressor. I just bought a Clariphonic and it's awesome how Gregory Scott was able to take something as simple as an EQ and find a way to approach it that's different along with the ability to solo the EQ'd bands alone for further processing. I think Elysia, as a company from their Alpha compressor on down finds amazing, new ways to bring technology forward with features no one's thought of along with clean and punchy sound. The new Stereo Toolbox with M/S compression and width control in a double lunchbox slot. I think more or less, SPL as a company pushes the boundaries of hardware with quirky, interesting items. And I'm sure I'm missing some other stuff.

On the contrary, I might say there's been as much innovation in hardware and analog as there's been in plugs over the past few years.

Regards,
Frank
#154
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #154
Lives for gear
 
Analogue Mastering's Avatar
 

You can't download hardware
#155
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #155
Lives for gear
 
Beyersound's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tha]-[acksaw View Post
There are all kinds of great thoughts flying around here. Regardless of all the harsh debate, I'm thankful for everyone taking the time to weigh in. While some people find these topics redundant and pointless, I find mass value. Because, while just about everything audio is "to each their own" (subjective), we should all be learning and growing regardless of skill level and ability. And how can we grow if not from eachother.

It seems to me, that the real point of this thread comes down to moving "forward". As in, the future. Analog is ever changing. Flavors come and go. They come back after long rest. And of course there are a great deal of "if it ain't broke (sounds amazing), don't fix it". Vintage gear will ALWAYS be lusted over cause it just sounds GREAT!

But digital is ever evolving in a way that analog is not. Analog it's conquering new ground in the same way digital is. While in some aspects, digital is still catching up, it's also breaking new other wise impossible ground. And when it does catch up where it lacks, it won't stop there. Digital is gaining new ability as each year passes. Some of these gains come in the form of a more accurate representation of a particular analog counterpart. Other gains manifest as sonic benefits never before possible in the analog world. And what the future will bring is very very fruitful based on what we have seen so far.

Not trying to sway anyone. And defiantly not saying that analog isn't improving. Digital just has a greater total potential for innovation as we move into the future. It has more room to grow. While digital may never totally emulate the sound of analog, it will continue to break ground for a long time to come. It will rival analog, do things analog could never do, and do things beyond what we can all imagine.

I always hear people talking about the extra "inches" gained by using analog... for better or worse. Some feel the inches are important, while others feel they are minor for the added cost, time or whatever. But I can't help but wonder, with the vast possibility of digital, will it one day be moving "miles" instead of "inches"? Only the future will show.
Nice thoughts, sanity is a good thing. Should have expected as much from a Norcal resident! There are a lot of good points being made here, a few not so good, but the discussion is important nonetheless.
#156
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #156
Lives for gear
 
ionian's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCDBM View Post
You can't download hardware
No, but there is a certain happiness in waiting by the front door like a dog looking for it's owner while I'm waiting for the Fed-Ex truck to drive down the block!

Regards,
Frank
#157
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #157
Gear interested
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by u b k View Post
Plugins could disappear tomorrow, and I'd have to make some significant adjustments, but I'd get on with it.

If hardware disappeared tomorrow, I'd find another craft.

This can't be rationalized or argued, it has nothing to do with what's best or what's the way of future; for me this is emotional, it's all about sound and why I love it, why it makes me feel the things I do.

These boxes, they do things to sound that stir my soul. That's not some fringe benefit, that's the reason why I do this in the first place.


Gregory Scott - ubk

+1,000,000

Also, all these plug-ins are trying to emulate the effects of great hardware that have achieved the above-mentioned soul stirring. So if Plugs are "The Way Forward" then there will eventually be no new hardware boxes and consequently nothing for a plug-in to emulate. Then what?

I use hardware and plugs and I like the way things currently are, because realistically I can't afford all the hardware I want so I use plugs as a substitute for what I lack, but I'm not suffering any delusions, they are substitutes copies or imitations of what I really want.

I'd really like Aretha Franklin to sing on my track. Unfortunately, I can't afford her, I probably couldn't even afford to feed her for the time she spent in my studio(Ok, sorry, that was uncalled for). But I know a girl who has a great voice and does a pretty good Aretha imitation and I can get her for cheap. So she's "The Way Forward"....for now.
#158
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #158
Lives for gear
 
ionian's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by little erich View Post
I can't afford her, I probably couldn't even afford to feed her for the time she spent in my studio(Ok, sorry, that was uncalled for).
So why did you leave it in? tutt

Frank
#159
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #159
Gear addict
 
Fenris's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tha]-[acksaw View Post

But digital is ever evolving in a way that analog is not.[...] Some feel the inches are important, while others feel they are minor for the added cost, time or whatever. But I can't help but wonder, with the vast possibility of digital, will it one day be moving "miles" instead of "inches"? Only the future will show.
I don't know about that. I remember a 15-year-old equalizer plug-in called Q-Metric that was my first really good EQ plug. The latest EQ plugs are only incrementally better. I use a set of converters made 10 years ago, and the latest converters are only incrementally better (leaving aside improvements in the ANALOG circuitry such as transformers and discrete class A circuits).

Digital technology has not undergone any real, fundamental, revolutionary improvement in 10 years. It's just minor variations on the same old thing.

Most of the amazing stuff that DAW's can do is related to fixing bad performances either pitch-wise or timing wise. Or fixing poorly recorded tracks. Not what I want to spend my time doing.

"Added cost"? Analog is NOT more expensive than digital, if you go about it properly. I mean buying a proper console, instead of overpriced "summing boxes" to "warm up" your DAW.

Analog isn't evolving?!? I've been building my own gear out of random junk that KDVS has accumulated over the past 20 years. So far I've come up with a new kind of rotating speaker, a tape-based chorus effect with coarse and fine speed controls, and a new kind of passive equalizer circuit. And my electronics knowledge is minimal at best. What new sounds are the plug-in designers coming up with, besides mediocre emulations of vintage gear?

I watched the TRON sequel recently, and boy, did I miss Wendy Carlos' analog synth soundtrack from the original movie. The Daft Punk soundtrack, done with software synths from what I understand, was sterile and digital-sounding.

Even the sound of movies has become harsh, cluttered, and fatiguing thanks to DAW technology. Removing all limitations on your "creativity" is NOT always a good thing.
#160
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #160
Lives for gear
 
Beyersound's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenris View Post
I don't know about that. I remember a 15-year-old equalizer plug-in called Q-Metric that was my first really good EQ plug. The latest EQ plugs are only incrementally better. I use a set of converters made 10 years ago, and the latest converters are only incrementally better (leaving aside improvements in the ANALOG circuitry such as transformers and discrete class A circuits).
You don't try new stuff much, do you.................


Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenris View Post
"Added cost"? Analog is NOT more expensive than digital, if you go about it properly. I mean buying a proper console, instead of overpriced "summing boxes" to "warm up" your DAW.
A "proper" analog console starts at about $15,000usd used.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenris View Post
Regarding track count, even the sound of movies has become harsh, cluttered, and fatiguing thanks to DAW technology. Removing all limitations on your "creativity" is NOT always a good thing.
DAW or analog, a bad mix is a bad mix. This one is all about the driver, not the car!
#161
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #161
Gear addict
 
Fenris's Avatar
 

I auditioned every single new plug-in that came out until about a year ago, when I suddenly lost interest.

You can buy a proper console for a few grand if you know what you're doing.

And if you want to talk cars, my 1972 Ford pickup is considerably better-engineered from a longevity standpoint than the brand-new Chevy Blazer I bought in 2000 that had to be junked after 8 years and cost me 15 times as much!!!
#162
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #162
Lives for gear
 
Beyersound's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenris View Post
.

You can buy a proper console for a few grand if you know what you're doing.
That is information I'm sure everyone here would love to know, please enlighten us all. How do you get a proper Amek, Api, Calrec, Trident, etc, with automation for just a few thousand dollars pray tell? Don't forget, unless you have a big tape machine (a whole other cost structure), you will need converters for each channel..........
#163
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #163
Gear addict
 

All I know is my API2500 unit sounds infinitely better than my plug in version.

I have never heard anything come close to an original Urei 1176 either.

Maybe top=of-their-game pro's can do amazing mixes in the box, because they have teh knowledge and experience to manipulate them as they want, but there is no way, rule of thumb, that plug ins sound as good as outboard.
#164
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #164
Gear addict
 
Fenris's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexDaCat View Post
Er not as simple. There is an inherent reluctance to change in us all.
For the emotion, you may collect equipment (and pay the MOST ridiculous prices for it will not be about sound, it will be about money making from supply & demand collecting as in antiques).
You don't know much about the vintage market. The price for a vintage piece such as a Fairchild, U47, Marshall Plexi, etc. tends to rise until it's about equal to the cost of re-creating it. A proper re-creation isn't easy to do, because the quality of electronic components has sharply declined in recent decades, and the hundreds of specialized varieties available in the past have disappeared (including pots and capacitors).

Only a few items such as 1930's radio transmitters and very early condenser mics are priced based on their historical value.

Quote:
You would probably be very surprised in blind tests (that is, with a blindfold on, so you cannot SEE what you are hearing), that you would not be able to tell the difference. Unless you were tuned to hearing certain distortions (which may be described as the character of the equipment, rather than the source).
These blind tests do not reflect real-world use. A comparison of a vintage processor and a plug-in emulation, in isolation, is worthless. It's in the context of a full mix that the difference becomes glaringly obvious.
#165
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #165
Lives for gear
 
jinksdingo's Avatar
Yeah, they are good reasons. Undoubtedly Plugins will improve. Who doesn't use plugins?

I think there will always be the analogue recording chain. And I believe it is the main way forward for manufacturers.

I like to get my analogue sounding sounds on the way in.

There are so many options in digital and it is truly a revolution in mixing. Limitless creative potential.

The other way forward for manufacturers is the growing Mixdown summing chain.

There is a difference between the home Project Studio and the Pro Studio Facility; the gap has narrowed.
#166
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #166
Gear addict
 
Fenris's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beyersound View Post
That is information I'm sure everyone here would love to know, please enlighten us all. How do you get a proper Amek, Api, Calrec, Trident, etc, with automation for just a few thousand dollars pray tell? Don't forget, unless you have a big tape machine (a whole other cost structure), you will need converters for each channel..........
You don't need console automation. You can get a basic DAW for a few hundred bucks, buy some older converters (which as I mentioned earlier are about as good as newer ones), and let the DAW handle mutes and volume automation. You can record stems into the DAW alongside your mix so that you can make small volume changes without having to do a full recall.

When you mix on an analog console with analog outboard and analog effects, it's a lot easier to get the mix right the first time. You don't NEED endless recalls to get it to sound right.

There are a half-dozen older consoles in the under-$5000 range that are a good deal if you do your homework. The console provides mic pres, EQ's, summing, and monitoring all in one package. Even a $20,000 console with automation is a better investment than spending the same amount on a DAW and then trying to fix its inherent shortcomings by purchasing outboard preamps, EQ's, summing boxes, control surfaces, etc.
#167
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #167
Gear addict
 
Fenris's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jinksdingo View Post
There is a difference between the home Project Studio and the Pro Studio Facility; the gap has narrowed.
No, it hasn't. BY FAR the biggest factors in getting a good sound are the rooms, the instruments, and the microphones.

Good-sounding musical instruments and microphones are LESS accessible than they were in previous decades. 30 or 40 years ago, even budget-priced equipment -- Danelectro guitars, Sears Silvertone amps, cheap analog synths, electric pianos, Shure Unidyne microphones -- was a lot better sounding than the modern equivalent.

I've engineered hundreds of live-on-the-air performances at KDVS, and the bands with vintage gear always sound miles better than the bands who bought all their gear at Guitar Center. And it's not expensive vintage gear, it's stuff they scrounged up at yard sales and pawn shops.

Back in the 1960's, a lot of regional rock bands made records in small demo studios or with a guy who set up his equipment in a church or a meeting hall. KDVS plays a lot of these lesser-known bands, and the sound quality is usually excellent. The cost of studio time has NEVER been an obstacle for a well-rehearsed band.

While we're on the subject, KDVS has the best sound of any FM station in the area, because we still use a vintage analog Optimod. And we're only about 5 dB quieter than the over-compressed over-modulated commercial stations.
___________
Fenris Wulf
KDVS Studio Tech
#168
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #168
Gear addict
 
Capstan Cappy's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexDaCat View Post
Tech is where the money is going..lol...It takes a while to develop software, therefore for the next 10 years, the future is most CERTAINLY DIGITAL...lol After that, well, I shall be happy to take your report...

Why is everyone so hell bent on EMULATION? The concept of advancement is to IMPROVE on current designs/techniques...I understand some of the OLD timers wanting to cash in on plugs whilst they can. However the coloration of sound is not what everybody regards as the norm...In classical recording toys are the last thing one is thinking about. Think THE WHOLE of the industry, not the one part.

Cutting tape with a razor, was not that much fun, digital editing has improved editing immensely. This facilitates an efficient workflow, allowing more time to be spent on creativity.

In reality, it cuts costs. Less overheads and costs equals a greater profit margin. When your business is flourishing, it will enable you to become more competitive, without, hopefully cutting the quality of the service.
you know ,countless people have been shouting just that for the last 2 decades and yet here we are still debating the same content, same objections or preferences about both technologies, we live in the NOW, not the FUTURE , nobody cuts tape anymore thats something from the PAST , but enough people still use it to record on or even mix from, the workflow is different for eveybody, if you can work well with a DAW you may have a nice workflow but for people who like to stare into nothing and rely on their ears only stretching their hand without looking to channel 12 to add 2db/14khz this has great valeu to the process of painting (that goes for ME)...we didn't need 100 tracks to create timeless music in the past , with a few exceptions already named here, the majority didn't , why would we be lost without it, cause thats how some make it sound around here. it's got nothing to do with being creative , it's wanting to have a 1000 possibilitie to choose from while you can have only one, wich in most cases is always one of the first 3 takes of anything..
therealbigd
Thread Starter
#169
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #169
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by tha]-[acksaw View Post
There are all kinds of great thoughts flying around here. Regardless of all the harsh debate, I'm thankful for everyone taking the time to weigh in. While some people find these topics redundant and pointless, I find mass value. Because, while just about everything audio is "to each their own" (subjective), we should all be learning and growing regardless of skill level and ability. And how can we grow if not from eachother.

It seems to me, that the real point of this thread comes down to moving "forward". As in, the future. Analog is ever changing. Flavors come and go. They come back after long rest. And of course there are a great deal of "if it ain't broke (sounds amazing), don't fix it". Vintage gear will ALWAYS be lusted over cause it just sounds GREAT!
Thank you.

Nowhere did I state, in the OP, that plugins were better, sounded better, would replace hardware, or anything like that. That is something ONLY introduced by the people who bring it up on every A vs D thread and it's incredibly boring.

The thread was only that, when you can start to good almost-as-good-as vintage EQs and compressors for $150 the pair, plugins are going to become the standard for studios. Because they are low cost, low maintenance, low power consumption... and so far more cost efficient than their hardware equivalents which boast only a questionable improvement in audio.

I have no doubt there are applications for both, I'm not saying 'bin your hardware it's useless' - that's another thing that's been invented in this thread. Nothing wrong with liking it, it's just, in an industry of severe financial decline, which doesn't seem to be getting any better, it is doubtful that those paying for the service, will continue to pay for it at the high expense of analogue service, when an almost identical digital service can be obtained at a far lower cost.

There are a lot of people who would like their equipment to still be handmade. And I expect, a lot of electronics, would be of a higher standard than they are, if hand-made. But when production lines got to a standard that was high enough, that became the standard. Some people continued to build hand-made equipment, but they lost their businesses, by failure to adapt, because yes, their product was 5% better through being handmade, but they had to charge much more than 5% price increase, due to not being able to churn about 100 units an hour, which the production line could do.

That is ALL I am saying about plugs and hardware. There is no talk of good or bad. No talk of hardware not being good. Only, talk of hardware being VERY expensive compared to plugins, which is a luxury that a cash-strapped industry will soon no longer wish to fund. All you who have gone barking up the tree of which is better have completely missed the point, that or you just enjoy going over the same ground again and again.
#170
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #170
Lives for gear
 
Beyersound's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenris View Post
You don't need console automation. You can get a basic DAW for a few hundred bucks, buy some older converters (which as I mentioned earlier are about as good as newer ones), and let the DAW handle mutes and volume automation. You can record stems into the DAW alongside your mix so that you can make small volume changes without having to do a full recall.

When you mix on an analog console with analog outboard and analog effects, it's a lot easier to get the mix right the first time. You don't NEED endless recalls to get it to sound right.

There are a half-dozen older consoles in the under-$5000 range that are a good deal if you do your homework. The console provides mic pres, EQ's, summing, and monitoring all in one package. Even a $20,000 console with automation is a better investment than spending the same amount on a DAW and then trying to fix its inherent shortcomings by purchasing outboard preamps, EQ's, summing boxes, control surfaces, etc.
Wow, that's really great advice, I'm just trying to get a handle on it here. So basically you are saying DAWs, summing boxes, and digital suck, consoles and analog gear are great (love to see what you can do on a budget with your "analog only" effects), but now you are saying not to use a console and analog gear only, but use them with a DAW. Makes perfect sense to me.
#171
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #171
Gear addict
 
Fenris's Avatar
 

I'm saying that the studio should be centered around analog gear, the DAW should complement the analog gear instead of trying to replace it, and you should never spend more than a few hundred dollars on a DAW.

Building an analog studio isn't for beginners. When I was 25 or even 30, I wouldn't have had the knowledge or experience to do it. I had to waste a lot of time and money first. Unfortunately, there's a lack of mentoring in the audio engineering field, not to mention a lack of jobs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beyersound View Post
love to see what you can do on a budget with your "analog only" effects
We have an echo chamber, tape echo, tape chorus and flange, and a rotating speaker, all built from old junk. It beats the piss out of anything you can get in a plug-in.
#172
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #172
Gear addict
 
Fenris's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by therealbigd View Post
Some people continued to build hand-made equipment, but they lost their businesses, by failure to adapt
You don't know what you're talking about, and you should learn something before you open your mouth.

Microphones, tape machines, compressors, equalizers, et cetera all have their origins in broadcasting. They were developed with large R&D budgets for state-run broadcasters in Europe, and for de facto monopolies like RCA in the U.S. The equipment was built to a very high standard of sound quality and reliability.

Many of these manufacturers (AKG, Neumann, Marshall Amplification, Neve, Urei, etc.) were bought out by larger companies, which used the prestige of their name to sell cheap mass-produced equpment at inflated prices. This equipment was aimed at hobbyists, not at professional recording engineers. The old, high-quality equipment continued to rise in price, until a number of small boutique manufacturers stepped in to fill the need, either with vintage reissues or original designs. They operate on very small profit margins and they do it mainly for the love of music.

The rise of DAW's, instead of replacing analog gear, has led to the renewed popularity of all kinds of tube-based and transformer-based gear. This will continue to be the case.

Boutique analog gear is nice if you can afford it, but even moderately priced analog gear sounds much, much better than a plug-in. It has more texture and a wider range of useful settings. Plug-ins are not "almost as good" and they are not "cost-efficient."

A DAW might seem cost-efficient at first, but you're failing to take all the factors into account, such as the fact that you can work roughly three times as fast in an analog studio, and the equipment will retain its value for decades instead of being junked in 10 years.
#173
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #173
Gear nut
 

Lets see now, I've upgraded my Waves WUP like 5 times, had to upgrade OS on Mac until G4 couldn't handle it anymore so time for a new Mac pro and then seems like everyother time I buy a new plug it's time for new OS on that. My Neve's, Api's, Manleys, etc, just show up everysession and gets it done. And analog is evolving still as new chip sets are helping in some cases to bring manufacturing cost down. Transformers and capacitors and transistors OH MY, plugs not so much!
#174
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #174
What's funny to me is that people continue to make these statements about how plug-ins are "so much worse" and that "the differences are clear". But there are all kinds of mixes done with plug-ins that sound great and are done by big name professionals. Also, I have yet to see it done that a person can take a well made mix and pick out the plug-in usage. Nobody can do it.

You can hold up the worst case scenario easily and point out things about how the overuse or improper use or sloppy use of plug-ins sounds terrible and nothing like analog gear. But really it's all the same crap arguments that are given around here whenever one challenges the conventional "wisdom".

Conventional "wisdom":
-Plug-ins suck and obviously and always sound inferior to hardware
-All things with integrated circuits in the signal path suck and sound terrible
-All things Behringer are not worth the money and sound terrible
-All speakers that don't cost thousands and come from the most well known "high end" manufacturers are terrible, except NS10s which are okay because big names use them
-All equipment made in China is terrible
-All expensive, transformer based preamps make your stuff sound better
-All microphones that cost less than several hundred and up are terrible
-Any converter technology that doesn't cost at least hundreds per channel sounds terrible and will ruin your recordings
-All engineers with big studios and big names know what they're talking about
-If you don't have this or that brand of this or that then you can't ever compete....

...and on and on and on. It's downright silly. NONE of that stuff is absolutely true. It's all relative and situational and subjective and it's ALL very hard to qualify and quantify. YET,..

There are thousands of people out there that use whatever they've got, defy the "wisdom" of the old guard and get excellent results. I get work every week that is pretty darn good from home recordists. Yeah it could be better but it doesn't suck and it sounds fine when it's handled well, even when done completely in-the-box, even when recorded on their Presonus or Behringer whatever.

The point is results.

CAN YOU GET GREAT MIXES FROM WORKING COMPLETELY IN-THE-BOX???

YES, OF COURSE YOU CAN.

Whether you like working or need to work in the box is a matter for the individual to decide.

Whether or not it sounds exactly like the hardware it represents is almost irrelevant because if you get in there and work the knobs and use your ears you can get something out that sounds killer, and nobody knows or gives a sh*t what you did to get it there.

I can't help but think the resistance to allowing people to champion affordable solutions like plug-ins and lower costing, modern gear is not about quality, but about paradigm paralysis. That's why a lot of guys that can mix well in the analog domain, suck at using plug-ins, and then blame the plug-ins. They haven't learned to adjust their paradigm to fit the very real possibilities that exist.
#175
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #175
Gear addict
 
Fenris's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enlightened Hand View Post
-All things with integrated circuits in the signal path suck and sound terrible

-All microphones that cost less than several hundred and up are terrible
Some cheap IC-based equipment is very good for the price. I appreciate the wide range of price points that are available in outboard gear.

Quote:
CAN YOU GET GREAT MIXES FROM WORKING COMPLETELY IN-THE-BOX???
Yes, I've done great ITB mixes in the past. But it's a pain in the ass and it takes about three times as long.
#176
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #176
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
There was a ITB and OTB mastering battle(check my post)....ITB won.and the ITB gang weren't even mastering engineers,the time to save money is now but hey its your choice.

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz.com App
#177
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #177
Gear addict
 
Fenris's Avatar
 

Really? The 30-year-old analog Orban on our transmitter sounds so good that I'm considering buying another one for mastering. It uses an ingenious method of pre-emphasized distortion-cancelled clipping that's actually less objectionable than any look-ahead digital limiter I've heard.

Meanwhile, our $2000 digital profanity delay stopped working, couldn't be repaired due to cheap surface-mount construction, and had to be replaced. Our $3000 digital sports remote became obsolete and also had to be replaced.
#178
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenris
Yes, I've done great ITB mixes in the past. But it's a pain in the ass and it takes about three times as long.
So is that supposed to mean that it's perfectly reasonable to assume that it will take EVERYBODY who ever does it 3 times as long? If not then why mention it as part of your argument?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenris
Really? The 30-year-old analog Orban on our transmitter sounds so good that I'm considering buying another one for mastering. It uses an ingenious method of pre-emphasized distortion-cancelled clipping that's actually less objectionable than any look-ahead digital limiter I've heard.
So is that supposed to mean that everybody should regard your opinion on this particular piece of gear as mattering when considering purchasing a digital limiter? Also, you haven't heard every digital limiter in action, so your opinion is of limited value even if we accept it as true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenris
Meanwhile, our $2000 digital profanity delay stopped working, couldn't be repaired due to cheap surface-mount construction, and had to be replaced. Our $3000 digital sports remote became obsolete and also had to be replaced.
So is that supposed to mean that EVERY digital piece of gear is poorly made and can't be repaired if it ever fails? Also, are we to assume that no analog piece ever fails and/or becomes obsolete? Of course not.

These are all examples of you applying your opinion to an argument as though is should be regarded as relevant. It still has nothing to do with the bottom line; Results.

Great sounding work can/is/will be done on digital equipment, using plug-ins and occasionally on lower costing, budget gear and it will be advantageous to those that need to use it. If you don't that's fine. If you don't like it. That too is fine. But just because you don't like it or have a use for it doesn't mean there is something wrong with using it or that it's necessarily inferior.
#179
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #179
Gear interested
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ionian View Post
So why did you leave it in? tutt

Frank
Because I felt like it. Plus, I get the distinct feeling that Aretha doesn't spend a lot of her down time on this site so there's not much risk in offending her. I hope it didn't detract from my main point and I'm sorry if you are a "big person" and I offended you. If I offended you, please accept my sincere apology.
#180
8th June 2011
Old 8th June 2011
  #180
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenris View Post
I watched the TRON sequel recently, and boy, did I miss Wendy Carlos' analog synth soundtrack from the original movie. The Daft Punk soundtrack, done with software synths from what I understand, was sterile and digital-sounding.
Talk about putting yer foot in yer mouth!

Analog systems synth's along with a few rented monsters. Strings recorded at Air on an 88R (). Mixed by Alan Meyerson - a man who's mixes can be accused of anything but sterile! Ya might wanna check your research with someone who was at the UK sessions.

Me.

Secondly Wendy was a huge fan of digital synths as well as analogue. The original Tron film has very many custom created digital synths. And filters. And reverbs.

But I wasn't at that one..... :(
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
 
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.