The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Synths for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Best plug-ins for "in your face sound"? Dynamics Plugins
Old 19th May 2018
  #31
Lives for gear
 
Acid Mitch's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by soundmodel View Post
Still wouldn't bet that these had to do with Windowlicker, but perhaps some other processor/plugs had? Like who knows if there was some "psychoacoustic" boom in late 90s, which is why Axx and Vox came out then as
I don’t remember any phycoacoustic boom in the late 90’s.
Waves Vox is a dynamics proccessor with limited controls. The things it does (compression, gating, limiting, expansion) had been available for years in various hardware racks and mixers.
Old 19th May 2018
  #32
Lives for gear
 
soundmodel's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acid Mitch View Post
I don’t remember any phycoacoustic boom in the late 90’s.
Waves Vox is a dynamics proccessor with limited controls. The things it does (compression, gating, limiting, expansion) had been available for years in various hardware racks and mixers.
I'm not sure if there are details available for Vox or Axx, but I've heard them broadly referred to as "psychoacoustic compressors", because the "insane amount" of in your faceness that they're able to do without sounding pumping or distorted. So essentially, that they do some frequency-dependent and delay-related stuff in the background (e.g. delaying just few mses different frequency areas relative to each other in order to retain clarity). Perhaps they also have some sort of "auto attack" and "auto release" behaviors. Auto ratio as well. They could, related to the delay-thing, not do delays per se, but apply minimum-phase equalization while the threshold is brought down. Equalizers change phase relationships and could be used to "enhance" the in your face -effect. It's difficult to hear though, what exactly these processors are doing, because the effect is so natural.
Old 19th May 2018
  #33
Lives for gear
 
mikeyman's Avatar
 

my CLA 1176 has a IN YOUR FACE preset on it
Old 19th May 2018
  #34
Lives for gear
 
Praxisaxis's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by soundmodel View Post
I don't know when the Renaissance plugs came out but I found a reference about saying that the channel came in 2003 and Vox and Axx existed before that already. Still wouldn't bet that these had to do with Windowlicker, but perhaps some other processor/plugs had?
VSTs - the first DAW plugins - only began in 1996, and only reached their present-day formation in 1999. At that time, obviously there were very few of them and they were limited; plugins really only kicked off a few years after 2000. Nobody knows how Aphex produced these tunes but it's fair to say that he wouldn't have been using any of the flashy, off-the-shelf digital signal processing tools that are available to us today. Yes, there is compression, distortion, and so on. But these are more likely to have originated in hardware in 1999, and no doubt a lot of it is in the mix. If you think you hear bit reduction, it could well be because he's using digital gear with lower bitrates. Who knows. Fact remains, whatever it is which sounds good about this song (and most of his other work) would have already sounded good in his studio, pre mastering. I feel pretty confident in stating that Aphex Twin doesn't rely on "magic bullets" (ie secret digital processes that a secret clan of producers use to make their music sound wonderful after the fact).
Old 19th May 2018
  #35
Lives for gear
 
bgood's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Polich View Post
There is no such thing as an "in-your-face" plugin.

Seriously.

Let me repeat that...there is no such thing.

Please learn to mix with what you have.
Dave... have you ever heard of Steven Slate? I think all of his catalog is specifically marketed as “in your face”.

(Love you Steve xoxo)
Old 19th May 2018
  #36
Lives for gear
 
bgood's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxisaxis View Post
VSTs - the first DAW plugins - only began in 1996, and only reached their present-day formation in 1999. At that time, obviously there were very few of them and they were limited; plugins really only kicked off a few years after 2000. Nobody knows how Aphex produced these tunes but it's fair to say that he wouldn't have been using any of the flashy, off-the-shelf digital signal processing tools that are available to us today. Yes, there is compression, distortion, and so on. But these are more likely to have originated in hardware in 1999, and no doubt a lot of it is in the mix. If you think you hear bit reduction, it could well be because he's using digital gear with lower bitrates. Who knows. Fact remains, whatever it is which sounds good about this song (and most of his other work) would have already sounded good in his studio, pre mastering. I feel pretty confident in stating that Aphex Twin doesn't rely on "magic bullets" (ie secret digital processes that a secret clan of producers use to make their music sound wonderful after the fact).
I haven’t a clue as to what gear/daw aphex used, but, even Cool Edit Pro 96 a fairly extensive (for the time) set of stock sound design “plugins”... and there were a good amount of direct x plugins at the time, too. I think I even had wavelab, acid (which also allowed direct x plugins)...sound forge... point being is that by 1996/1999 there were plenty of plugins and daw functionality...


Again, whether that stuff was part of the aphex workflow I do not know
Old 19th May 2018
  #37
Lives for gear
 
soundmodel's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by bgood View Post
I haven’t a clue as to what gear/daw aphex used, but, even Cool Edit Pro 96 a fairly extensive (for the time) set of stock sound design “plugins”... and there were a good amount of direct x plugins at the time, too. I think I even had wavelab, acid (which also allowed direct x plugins)...sound forge... point being is that by 1996/1999 there were plenty of plugins and daw functionality...


Again, whether that stuff was part of the aphex workflow I do not know
They had Convoler back then, so probably a lot of other similarly advanced stuff.

AURORA Plug-ins

Some people have false perceptions about the development of sound production. They equate 80s-90s to some sort of "MIDI sound period", even though AFX and others were producing tracks back then that rival nowadays EDM.

---

Found a Finnish text that goes through the plugs in Cool Edit 96.

They had plenty back then. Some of that stuff would be considered by some "advanced" even today, like "arbitrary shape" distortion.

www.aanipaa.tamk.fi/manuals/CoolEdit96.pdf
Old 19th May 2018
  #38
Lives for gear
 

Absent of direct evidence to the contrary, I'm certain he didn't achieve that sound in 1999 with plugins, and probably not in 2003 either. Ive had hands on almost everything available back then. Further, I'd wager the points above by the other members are spot on even if the music examples like Elvis don't convey it.

90% it's not about plugins, even today, I'd wager.

And I like plugins.

Frankly, I think "in your face" is far, far too ambiguous and subjective, even with one example. I'd need to hear several more examples from the OP, myself, before having much else to say.
Old 19th May 2018
  #39
Lives for gear
 
Praxisaxis's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bgood View Post
I haven’t a clue as to what gear/daw aphex used, but, even Cool Edit Pro 96 a fairly extensive (for the time) set of stock sound design “plugins”... and there were a good amount of direct x plugins at the time, too. I think I even had wavelab, acid (which also allowed direct x plugins)...sound forge... point being is that by 1996/1999 there were plenty of plugins and daw functionality...


Again, whether that stuff was part of the aphex workflow I do not know
I used Cool Edit in 1999. It had processes. There were plenty of digital signal processing tools. But they were not the same. The key difference being real-time running. Cool Edit, for example, applied processes but could not run them in real-time playback.

There were no plugins (as we know them now, ie VSTs) commonly available before 1999 ish.
Old 19th May 2018
  #40
Lives for gear
 
Praxisaxis's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by soundmodel View Post

Found a Finnish text that goes through the plugs in Cool Edit 96.

They had plenty back then. Some of that stuff would be considered by some "advanced" even today, like "arbitrary shape" distortion.

www.aanipaa.tamk.fi/manuals/CoolEdit96.pdf
I don't need to read about it, I was using it. I still have a copy of it .

I know what it did and did not do. In 1999 it was certainly not running VSTs.

It had some stock signal processing which did not run in real time. For 1999, it was of a decent standard, but nothing compared to today's functionality. If you're going to tell me that Aphex Twin's sound depends on some stock effect from a pre-1999 version of Cool Edit, I'll happily eat my hat .
Old 19th May 2018
  #41
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxisaxis View Post
I agree, I think you're right.

Even so, the tune the OP referenced was made in 1999. Aphex Twin would not have been using Sausage Fattener, Decapitator, or any other of the present day signal processing that we tend to think of as magic bullets.
I can remember some dance music started to get this loud sound from the late 90's onward.

Maybe not a plugin in those days, but when was T-Racks released originally?
I just read that SOS did an article on it in 2000. Seems to fit the pattern.
Old 19th May 2018
  #42
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxisaxis View Post
There were no plugins (as we know them now, ie VSTs) commonly available before 1999 ish.
Yes there were:

"Steinberg released the VST interface specification and SDK in 1996. They released it at the same time as Steinberg Cubase 3.02, which included the first VST format plugins: Espacial (a reverb), Choirus (a chorus effect), Stereo Echo, and Auto-Panner.[1]"
( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Studio_Technology )

Old 19th May 2018
  #43
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxisaxis View Post
I don't need to read about it, I was using it. I still have a copy of it .

I know what it did and did not do. In 1999
I'm pretty sure by '99 there were multiple softwares that supported plugins, including the directx stuff.
Old 19th May 2018
  #44
Lives for gear
 
Acid Mitch's Avatar
 

Old 19th May 2018
  #45
Lives for gear
 
Praxisaxis's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by monomer View Post
Yes there were:

"Steinberg released the VST interface specification and SDK in 1996. They released it at the same time as Steinberg Cubase 3.02, which included the first VST format plugins: Espacial (a reverb), Choirus (a chorus effect), Stereo Echo, and Auto-Panner.[1]"
( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Studio_Technology )

Right, so if you used Cubase, there were a handful of VSTs from no earlier than 1996.

And yes, as I've said, software was capable of signal processing in the late 90s, and some of it was real time. But mostly, it was processes applied to audio, ala what Cool Edit Pro was capable of.

But it wasn't until after 1999 (give or take) that plugins, ie VST (and eventually other formats) software added to a DAW capable of real-time digital processing, really took hold strongly.

But putting aside accuracy of dates, the point is this: I have no doubt - and have already stated here - that Aphex Twin used computers for this tune and others: by 1999 most people were. But that is not tantamount to a claim that he relied on some commonly available, off-the-shelf digital process for turning his tunes from average-sounding to gold, so much as that this music would already have been sounding good pre-master. And this wouldn't just be true of Windowlicker but a wealth of Aphex Twin music, and also of his contemporaries.

But I'm just talking in likelihoods. I'd be interested to see if anyone here can prove me wrong.
Old 19th May 2018
  #46
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxisaxis View Post
Right, so if you used Cubase, there were a handful of VSTs from no earlier than 1996.

And yes, as I've said, software was capable of signal processing in the late 90s, and some of it was real time. But mostly, it was processes applied to audio, ala what Cool Edit Pro was capable of.

But it wasn't until after 1999 (give or take) that plugins, ie VST (and eventually other formats) software added to a DAW capable of real-time digital processing, really took hold strongly.

But putting aside accuracy of dates, the point is this: I have no doubt - and have already stated here - that Aphex Twin used computers for this tune and others: by 1999 most people were. But that is not tantamount to a claim that he relied on some commonly available, off-the-shelf digital process for turning his tunes from average-sounding to gold, so much as that this music would already have been sounding good pre-master. And this wouldn't just be true of Windowlicker but a wealth of Aphex Twin music, and also of his contemporaries.

But I'm just talking in likelihoods. I'd be interested to see if anyone here can prove me wrong.
Aah, you mean real-time processing.
Yeah i agree. I guess it had a lot to do with available processing power at the time. Real time was just not that accessible before then.

And of course Aphex Twin is a good producer. Duh.
What i am wondering about tho is wether he (or others) used these tools deliberately and not as an afterthought.
I've heared stories of producers generally putting things through t-racks and re-recording them, then putting it in samplers and whatnot. T-racks was hot in the days if i remember correctly.
Old 19th May 2018
  #47
Lives for gear
 
bgood's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxisaxis View Post
I used Cool Edit in 1999. It had processes. There were plenty of digital signal processing tools. But they were not the same. The key difference being real-time running. Cool Edit, for example, applied processes but could not run them in real-time playback.

There were no plugins (as we know them now, ie VSTs) commonly available before 1999 ish.
“Plugins as we know them now” wasn’t the original point made...

Whether real-time effect or offline rendering, we’ve been able to mangle in the computer since before 1999. At the beginning, Audio was similar to film work... you’d get a quick preview to audition the effect, then you’d hit the Render button... it was painfully slow even on a fast computer of the day, but, it was magical at the tome

I don’t know why you’re invested in only considering VST or 1999 as the origin year of plugins; but, plenty of us were using computers, daws and ITB fx prior to 1999. I’d already replaced all of the outboard FX in our radio and tv prod facilities with DAWs running CoolEdit Pro by 1997...

Wasn’t the same easy workflow as we have today, but, there were plenty of guys on the music side dickering around with Audio mangling using that old, slow tech before VST.
Old 19th May 2018
  #48
Lives for gear
 
Praxisaxis's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bgood View Post
I don’t know why you’re invested in only considering VST or 1999 as the origin year of plugins;
Because, quite simply, the OP is after a specific plugin (i.e. a VST or one of the more recent, similar software interfaces or if not that specifically, then presumably a real-time process of the sort we're accustomed to in the contemporary world) to fix a mix, or in his words, make the whole mix "in your face."

Quote:
Originally Posted by bgood View Post
“Plugins as we know them now” wasn’t the original point made...
Yes it was. The OP is looking for a contemporary, presently-available plugin (or something comparable).

The OP used Windowlicker by Aphex Twin as a reference.

I have been attempting to point out that Aphex Twin probably did not make use of anything so-described on his tune produced in 1999, because these things, so described, had only just come into existence and Aphex Twin by then was an established producer, presumably with his own well-worn workflow.

So, what I'm claiming here is likely to be the truth and not controversial, LOL .

I'm not claiming that you couldn't faff around with digital signal processing on a PC, or that Aphex Twin didn't use computers, or anything like that.
Old 19th May 2018
  #49
Gear Head
 
Delta Music BE's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxisaxis View Post
VSTs - the first DAW plugins - only began in 1996, and only reached their present-day formation in 1999
Actually, this info is not correct, there were already DAW plug-ins before 1996.

Digidesign introduced Pro Tools TDM in 1994, enabling real-time effects to run as plug-ins inside Pro Tools. TDM (Time-Division Multiplexing) is a system that allows complex routing of multiple digital audio signals between DSP cards and enabled Pro Tools to run multiple real-time DSP-based TDM plug-ins simultaneously for the first time.

As far as I know TDM plug-ins were the first DAW plug-ins because in those days only DSP based systems were powerful enough to do the real-time calculations.

As a matter of fact, I already started using TDM plug-ins myself in 1995 with Pro Tools III, so that's how I know 1996 could not be correct.

More info about the history of Pro Tools can be found here.

BTW, the answer the OP: there are many ways to achieve a "in your face" sound, it mainly depends on mixing skills and not on using one specific plug-in.
Old 20th May 2018
  #50
Lives for gear
 
TS-12's Avatar
Subtle Phase distortions for me achieves best “in your face” sound
Old 20th May 2018
  #51
Gear Nut
 

Aural Exciter, duh. :p
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump