Plugins vs mid priced ffx

[popmann]

I recently tried to replace my pcm91 and KSP8. I couldn't. Technically, the PCM native was 95% or "close enough" to replace the 91, but at $1500...and not being true stereo, I would only need one (or occasionally two) instances per mix, so it financially didn't make sense.

Aether was the only true stereo plug that came close...but, wasn't "close enough" for me. However, this all seems to change when I mix at 96k...so, maybe as I get more projects at higher rates that will shift.

Technically, it was a little more complicated...in the way that I use reverb. If you look at reverb like "here's a reverb for guitar...here's a reverb for the sax", then the plugs generally faired better. But, since I tend to pan into the reverb across a lot of tracks to establish a sense of space, none quite worked as well.

[FLYINGJAY]

Yes they have!

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz App

[sage691]

Nope !

[FLYINGJAY]

Originally Posted by sage691

Nope !

My man sage!

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz App

[szmola]

I give some HW reverb to some tracks beacuse I like characteristic atmosphere of that HW. For extreme example - Boss DM2 delay gives me darkish and tough sound and that is just so much recognized when listening the song in the end.

It's not that it's deviating attention to it's self, it just adds some hard, nailed sound that gives the song a feel of record.

[PapaSon]

Originally Posted by popmann

Aether was the only true stereo plug that came close

Did you try their new one? B2. Many say it beats Aether by a mile.

[fastlanestoner]

I think that reverb is the one effect that doesn't really sound that bad ITB. But there is NO substitute for a good hardware verb

[PapaSon]

Originally Posted by fastlanestoner

I think that reverb is the one effect that doesn't really sound that bad ITB. But there is NO substitute for a good hardware verb

Some reverbs in the box sound great!
My guess is you are hearing more ITB reverbs with music releases today than hardware.

[alexevans917]

I have very limited experience with out of the box reverbs, but I think AltiVerb sounds really excellent for the price.

[dandeurloo]

I think reverbs are one of the things that ITB is the farthest from nailing. I have all the expensive ITB verbs and they all fail to fit in a mix like my OTB fx. Honestly even the cheaper OTB fx sound better to me in most cases. But the Bricasti is a clear winner. I wish I would have just gotten it earlier and saved some money on verb plugs I don't use anymore.

It has me wondering if delays are the same. I think I need to break out my d-two again and see how I like it.

[PapaSon]

Originally Posted by dandeurloo

I think reverbs are one of the things that ITB is the farthest from nailing. I have all the expensive ITB verbs and they all fail to fit in a mix like my OTB fx. Honestly even the cheaper OTB fx sound better to me in most cases. But the Bricasti is a clear winner. I wish I would have just gotten it earlier and saved some money on verb plugs I don't use anymore.

It has me wondering if delays are the same. I think I need to break out my d-two again and see how I like it.

not saying you are wrong, but for my own edification, I'd sure love to hear some sound examples with popular presets from the expensive ITB verbs you are naming, vs the OTB stuff you say smokes them.

[szmola]

just don't make this thread to be hardware versus software reverb.

every thing has his own pluses and minuses.
and nothing is better or worser. it's just different.

i have to say that for hardware fx means a lot whole signal chain. okay, it's valid for everything but for example my Art ProVerb, which costs around 50 bucks, sounds freaking crazy when it passes ULN-2 converters. that converters "shows" all non-linearity and grain of that shitty Art reverb (it's also probably question of his old converter) and it's so weird and unique that it takes sound to some special dimension.

combining low end and hi end is so much fun.

[DUBTEMPLE]

Originally Posted by szmola

just don't make this thread to be hardware versus software reverb.every thing has his own pluses and minuses.
and nothing is better or worser. it's just different.

I am not even sure it HAS to be diffrent,

Even more so considered that "hardware-reverbs" is also software-driven to the bone, for ages ,.. unless of-course compared with ancient plate/springs

Software in reverb-plugs was just made in "light-versions" in the beginning, due to the lack of computer-power, maybe some myth apeared due to that

Today same algoritms can be run, if wanted, in most modern computers.

It should makes more snese to compare algoritms versus algoritms, and not hardware versus software

[szmola]

Originally Posted by DUBTEMPLE

I am not even sure it HAS to be diffrent,

Even more so considered that "hardware-reverbs" is also software-driven to the bone, for ages ,.. unless of-course compared with ancient plate/springs

Software in reverb-plugs was just made in "light-versions" in the beginning, due to the lack of computer-power, maybe some myth apeared due to that

Today same algoritms can be run, if wanted, in most modern computers.

It should makes more snese to compare algoritms versus algoritms, and not hardware versus software

okay, but is everything about algoritms? why my Boss delay pedal sounds like nothing else from my plugin list?

impendance is changing or something else, i don't even bother with it, i just know that i like it and nothing can replace it.

[dandeurloo]

Originally Posted by PapaSon

not saying you are wrong, but for my own edification, I'd sure love to hear some sound examples with popular presets from the expensive ITB verbs you are naming, vs the OTB stuff you say smokes them.

I own the Lexicon plugin, and the UAD plate and UAD 250 and a number of other verb plugs. They barely get used anymore. If I use them its mostly the lexicons because they do a different thing then the M7. The UAD's are basically getting it handed to them regularly by the OTB stuff. On their own they sound wonderful. But I always spent a ton of time messing with them trying to get them to sit in the mix and yet be heard and felt. Then I tried my friends M7 and yardstick. It was effortless. They are loud and clear and the time it takes to fit in the mix is however long it takes me to decided which vibe I want on the track. I ended up buying an M7 I was so impressed. Very happy to have it.

Again on there own they are all great but for me it was how they mixed in the track, which really sold me. I am saving a ton of time now and I feel I truly get better results.

In production I will sometimes use a UAD to get a generic vibe happening if I have the M7 in use already but most of the time it gets replaced when mixing ( I print it a lot).

I should say I also purchased the UAD stuff in the first place because the verbs. I do think having the extra DSP to handle just FX helps. But even my ancient SPX 90 often wins over the newer plugs. I do like the UAD copper. That has been very nice.

OK, just my 2 cents.

[DUBTEMPLE]

Originally Posted by szmola

okay, but is everything about algoritms? why my Boss delay pedal sounds like nothing else from my plugin list?

impendance is changing or something else, i don't even bother with it, i just know that i like it and nothing can replace it.

I am fully on line with you in the sense not to bother, but use whatever works

Hardware is "inserted" diffrent in a setup than a plug, and somtimes used in
diffrent ways, that might be SOME of the reason for diffrences, I don´t know
you specific BOSS pedal, it might be analog, (budget brigade), anyway, if it is
digital, like most, it uses a "algoritm", exactly like plugs,.. that was my point.

Just wanted to point out most hardware is just another kinda "software-host"

Socalled "hardware samplers" also was based on software, to the extend that
they even had OS, and OS-updates, the E-MU line was actually rewritten into
"Emulator X" computer-software, rooted directly from the software-algoritms
from the hardware samplers,..

What I believe is that any hardware that is actually driven by software, like
most modern synths and eff, can relatively easy be translated into a plugin
as long as the developers are skilled and able to translate to new platforms

[szmola]

Originally Posted by DUBTEMPLE

I am fully on line with you in the sense not to bother, but use whatever works

Hardware is "inserted" diffrent in a setup than a plug, and somtimes used in
diffrent ways, that might be SOME of the reason for diffrences, I don´t know
you specific BOSS pedal, it might be analog, (budget brigade), anyway, if it is
digital, like most, it uses a "algoritm", exactly like plugs,.. that was my point.

Just wanted to point out most hardware is just another kinda "software-host"

Socalled "hardware samplers" also was based on software, to the extend that
they even had OS, and OS-updates, the E-MU line was actually rewritten into
"Emulator X" computer-software, rooted directly from the software-algoritms
from the hardware samplers,..

What I believe is that any hardware that is actually driven by software, like
most modern synths and eff, can relatively easy be translated into a plugin
as long as the developers are skilled and able to translate to new platforms

i must tell you that i heard a couple of times about this but i am not convinced 'cause i am hearing something in hardware that is not linear like plugins. my Boss delay is DM2, it's analog but i also heard and played with some digital delay pedals. i don't know but i have a feeling that they all have some "drive" in their sound and in the end i recognize that delay when i get him between other plugin delays. in lack of more accurate adjectives it has something that is unpredictable and alive.
also it better cuts the mix and i feel like it has some production on it self.

sorry if i got into that hardware vs software thing, i just want to show a picture what i hear beacause i am not tehnical guy and i don't know what wires & chips means to sound.

at the end, if that's right what you are saying i still hear my hardware differently.
maybe it's about some harmonics that are generated in all that signal chain when going to hardware.

[Bassmankr]

They sound different just as each of the hardware boxes have their own sound. Given some of the boxes don't cost much now used (many did when new), grabbing one at or below it's market value for an audition with your rig is no big deal. If you don't like it then flip it and chances are the most it would cost you out of pocket for the try out would be shipping costs (you might spend that much in gas to go to a store to audition gear). Getting your hands dirty to answer these type of questions for yourself is really what's best.

[szmola]

Originally Posted by Bassmankr

They sound different just as each of the hardware boxes have their own sound. Given some of the boxes don't cost much now used (many did when new), grabbing one at or below it's market value for an audition with your rig is no big deal. If you don't like it then flip it and chances are the most it would cost you out of pocket for the try out would be shipping costs (you might spend that much in gas to go to a store to audition gear). Getting your hands dirty to answer these type of questions for yourself is really what's best.

[PapaSon]

Can anyone suggest a few good yet reasonably priced used peices to get started with for testing?

[Bassmankr]

Lexicon PCM70 - $450 - classic Lex modulated verb sound

Sony R7 - $300 - clean lush

Ibanez SDR 1000+ (rebadged Sony MU-201) - $140 - dark

Some of my favorites above. Plenty of threads here on them for your research. Wait for the right deal to come to you, use the typical precautions when buying used.

[chk23]

Originally Posted by dandeurloo

I think reverbs are one of the things that ITB is the farthest from nailing. I have all the expensive ITB verbs and they all fail to fit in a mix like my OTB fx. Honestly even the cheaper OTB fx sound better to me in most cases. But the Bricasti is a clear winner. I wish I would have just gotten it earlier and saved some money on verb plugs I don't use anymore.

It has me wondering if delays are the same. I think I need to break out my d-two again and see how I like it.

Maybe you're just better adapted to the controls of your HW-Reverb - or your plugin reverbs don't offer the same parameters to control. But like I said before, it's not the principle of ITB verbs that makes the difference, ist the software - so if you're right, the plugin programmers are to blame...

[chk23]

Originally Posted by szmola

okay, but is everything about algoritms? why my Boss delay pedal sounds like nothing else from my plugin list?

Yes if it is digital and sounds special, it uses an algorithm (or drives one with some special parameter values) that no plugin uses...

[dandeurloo]

Originally Posted by chk23

Maybe you're just better adapted to the controls of your HW-Reverb - or your plugin reverbs don't offer the same parameters to control. But like I said before, it's not the principle of ITB verbs that makes the difference, ist the software - so if you're right, the plugin programmers are to blame...

Well it could also be that they lack the convertors (for better or worse) and also I know the Bricasti has a lot more DSP power then the UAD quad card that I have. So maybe that has something to do with it as well? But the other thing is none of the ITB stuff does the density as well. I think its a little bit of everything because surely some of the modern computers (I have a I7) and Plugs have more power then say my SPX 90 which still sounds great on some stuff.

The only way to know if its the actual programming would be to get someone like Casey and the guys form Bricasti to do a software version of the M7 (which I don't think they should do). That would be the only way to do an Apples to Apples of that unit. I think the Lexicon plugs do a great job of the Lexicon stuff. I think they are off a little as well but that would probably be more to do with the lack of old school analog stages and convertors in them. Which had to add a sound and I think part of the density of those units.

Who knows? Get someone smarter in here to answer this stuff!

[chk23]

Originally Posted by dandeurloo

Well it could also be that they lack the convertors (for better or worse) and also I know the Bricasti has a lot more DSP power then the UAD quad card that I have. So maybe that has something to do with it as well? But the other thing is none of the ITB stuff does the density as well. I think its a little bit of everything because surely some of the modern computers (I have a I7) and Plugs have more power then say my SPX 90 which still sounds great on some stuff.

I don't know the specs of the DSP used on UAD cards - but a single core of a modern i7 is much more powerful than any DSP on the market.

Originally Posted by dandeurloo

The only way to know if its the actual programming would be to get someone like Casey and the guys form Bricasti to do a software version of the M7 (which I don't think they should do). That would be the only way to do an Apples to Apples of that unit. I think the Lexicon plugs do a great job of the Lexicon stuff. I think they are off a little as well but that would probably be more to do with the lack of old school analog stages and convertors in them. Which had to add a sound and I think part of the density of those units.

agreed - there are some differences, the converters and the fact, that a signal routed outboard to external fx and back in again for mixing is converted six times between analog and digital before it reaches your ear, and that surley does something audible to the signal.

[Casey]

Originally Posted by chk23

but a single core of a modern i7 is much more powerful than any DSP on the market.

The Bricasti M7 uses 12 600mhz dsp cores and 3GB/sec of main memory bandwidth for one reverb.



-Casey

[chk23]

Originally Posted by Casey

The Bricasti M7 uses 12 600mhz dsp cores and 3GB/sec of main memory bandwidth for one reverb.



-Casey

My SandyBridge-E i7 has 12 HT-Cores running at 4Ghz and a main memory bandwidth of 37 GB/s. It performs about 100 GFLOPs, while the TigerSharc (I don't know the exact model used for the Bricasti so I can only guess here) performs 3 GFLOPs per dualcore-unit so although you can't just add the single performances up it would be a theoretical maximum of 18 GFLOPs for the Bricasti overall performance. I must admid though, that a DAW plugin on a track isn't able to use more than one core for processing...