The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Which plugin does the best job of creating that magic 3D depth that hardware imparts? Dynamics Plugins
Old 2 weeks ago
  #331
DAH
Lives for gear
 
DAH's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by fadein View Post
I certainly agree with you on that. Although, as I have pointed earlier, I'm after something much more basic, than music-making per se, namely - sound recording with depth. I'm not talking about "final artistic results" here at all. It doesn't even have to be music, just a stereo soundscape with a clear, immediate depth perception in it. Does it make any sense?
I doubt the console will be deeper than just going from a preamp to ADC/tape.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #332
Gear Maniac
 
fadein's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by scraggs View Post
If you put good microphones in front of good musicians in a good room, record them and play that back without doing anything to it, that recording will have immediate depth perception to it.
Maybe so, if you don't change anything after that ITB.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #333
Gear Maniac
 
fadein's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAH View Post
I doubt the console will be deeper than just going from a preamp to ADC/tape.
Agreed, but who wants tape today?
I do have friends, who still use tape machines for their sessions tracking. Although, a console is always there, of course.
Actually, the "depth question" first arose in a discussion with them. Only then I've started to realize, where the "ITB problem" lies.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #334
Gear Maniac
 
fadein's Avatar
I think this video perfectly illustrates "the depth". What one gets ITB is a panoramic view of "small cows".

Old 2 weeks ago
  #335
Gear Guru
Look this is kinda like: "if my sister had a pair she'd be my brother" arguments.... I don't record in ideal environments and do the best I can. I mix ITB and have found plug ins can help greatly. Obviously if I had a great singer in a great space it'd be wonderful with top line equipment. I send my stuff out to good people who surprisingly use chosen plug ins, as well as great analogue. That's kinda the point of all this...... I get people who don't like digital anything, GS is full of threads that argue digital/analogue endlessly.

Someone will invariably bring up a good room or a competent engineer as a solution...... Not really the point of the thread....
Some would also argue that an engineers job is to find tools to create the illusion of space ITB, if that's what's being asked......
Old 2 weeks ago
  #336
Gear Maniac
 
fadein's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardis View Post
Look this is kinda like: "if my sister had a pair she'd be my brother" arguments.... I don't record in ideal environments and do the best I can. I mix ITB and have found plug ins can help greatly. Obviously if I had a great singer in a great space it'd be wonderful with top line equipment. I send my stuff out to good people who surprisingly use chosen plug ins, as well as great analogue. That's kinda the point of all this...... I get people who don't like digital anything, GS is full of threads that argue digital/analogue endlessly.

Someone will invariably bring up a good room or a competent engineer as a solution...... Not really the point of the thread....
Some would also argue that an engineers job is to find tools to create the illusion of space ITB, if that's what's being asked......
You're talking about things outside my focus. My inquiry has nothing to do with people's talents and abilities, which I do not doubt at all. Nor it is about analog vs digital discussion. If you think, there's no depth problem ITB or it's insignificant for you, it's totally fine by me! Some of my buddies mix mono, so what.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #337
Lives for gear
There's no depth problem ITB.

Also! On topic! In real life I don't have depth perception. Y'all should see me try to hit a baseball.
Old 1 week ago
  #338
Gear Maniac
 
fadein's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by scraggs View Post
There's no depth problem ITB.

Also! On topic! In real life I don't have depth perception. Y'all should see me try to hit a baseball.
It's not a new thing, come on!
It has been going on since the the 80s.
There is a problem with mixing ITB.
It's just not everybody recognize it as the "depth" problem.
That's why the majority (all of them?) of commercial engineers still work in hybrid settings.
That's why this endless "channel-strip" plugins, "vintage emulations" plugins, psycho-acoustic plugins, interfaces with "tubes", budget mixing consoles marketing and stuff.
No other explanation can I see in order to explain this phenomenon.
I'm somehow glad for your lack of depth perception in real life, your baseball bat will probably miss my balls.
Old 1 week ago
  #339
DAH
Lives for gear
 
DAH's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by fadein View Post
It's not a new thing, come on!
It has been going on since the the 90s.
There is a problem with mixing ITB.
It's just not everybody recognize it as the "depth" problem.
That's why the majority (all of them?) of commercial engineers still work in hybrid settings.
That's why this endless "channel-strip" plugins, "vintage emulations" plugins, interfaces with "tubes", budget mixing consoles marketing and stuff.
No other explanation I can see for this phenomenon.
I'm somehow glad for your lack of depth perception in real life, your baseball bat will probably miss my balls.
if there were an immanent problem with depth in digital, then judging the presence/lack of depth in the signals for the purpose of the gear/medium comparison by a/b listening of digital files would be impossible. Yet it is not the case with modern adcs and dacs and high enough sample/bitrates.
To me, the perception of the sound field depth in the signal is almost an on/off 1-bit state - it either is present, or it is not. I mean, the quantitative judgement is difficult, when you have it, but immediately apparent, when you don't.
Old 1 week ago
  #340
Gear Maniac
 
fadein's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAH View Post
if there were an immanent problem with depth in digital, then judging the presence/lack of depth in the signals for the purpose of the gear/medium comparison by a/b listening of digital files would be impossible. Yet it is not the case with modern adcs and dacs and high enough sample/bitrates.
To me, the perception of the sound field depth in the signal is almost an on/off 1-bit state - it either is present, or it is not. I mean, the quantitative judgement is difficult, when you have it, but immediately apparent, when you don't.
Digital recording is fine when it's coupled with a "high-end console". I'm still tesing how "high-end" it should be.

It is possible to test it, although, it's pointless at the same time.
Make recordings:
1. Live band through a "typical" interface.
2. Same band through a "high-end" interface
3. Through a "typical" interface + a "high-end" console.
4. Through a "high-end" interface + a "high-end" console.
5. Mix ITB previous takes in each instance.
6. Mix through a "high-end" console previous takes in each instance.
7. Use faders and pan only while mixing ITB and OTB.
8. Listen.

Who cares to do it? No one. It's pointless.
The poor are not going to buy high-end consoles.
The rich (and the aspired to be) are not going to stop lying.
Old 1 week ago
  #341
Lives for gear
 
robert82's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by fadein View Post
Digital recording is fine when it's coupled with a "high-end console".

Who cares to do it? No one. It's pointless.
The poor are not going to buy high-end consoles.
The rich (and the aspired to be) are not going to stop lying.
So, in my opinion, a good way to respond in a discussion like this is to say "in my opinion".

You keep stating that only a "high-end console" can give "depth". Fine. Just add "in my opinion".

And now you accuse people of "lying", when they simply don't agree with your opinion.

If you keep insisting, as fact, that only an analog console gives "depth", then it is entirely on you to support that claim with evidence.
Old 1 week ago
  #342
Gear Maniac
 
fadein's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by robert82 View Post
So, in my opinion, a good way to respond in a discussion like this is to say "in my opinion".

You keep stating that only a "high-end console" can give "depth". Fine. Just add "in my opinion".

And now you accuse people of "lying", when they simply don't agree with your opinion.

If you keep insisting, as fact, that only an analog console gives "depth", then it is entirely on you to support that claim with evidence.
Everything I say is "in my opinion" by default. That's what people do on public forums - share their personal opinions. In my opinion, people do lie, because they make money on this problem. I've said it not once here and I stay by it. I've already given my perspective on how such "evidence" will be met. Why on Earth grifters admit their grift?

BTW, how did you do your "noidse" composition? Was it purely ITB? If so, would you mind to share your plugin chain and other details? Privately? I think, it's quite good "depth-wise". At least on my 7506 headphones. I'll check again on my 1031A speakers tomorrow. It's late in Stockholm now. Thanks! Good night.
Old 1 week ago
  #343
DAH
Lives for gear
 
DAH's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by fadein View Post
Disagree. It is not a problem of the medium. Digital recording is fine when t's coupled with a "high-end console". I'm still tesing how "high-end" it should be.

It is possible to test it, although, it's pointless at the same time.
Make recordings:
1. Live band through a "typical" interface.
2. Same band through a "high-end" interface
3. Through a "typical" interface + a "high-end" console.
4. Through a "high-end" interface + a "high-end" console.
5. Mix ITB previous takes in each instance.
6. Mix through a "high-end" console previous takes in each instance.

Use faders and pan only ITB and OTB.

There's a test.
Who cares to do it? Nobody.
Because, anyway, people are going to stand their ground and laugh.
Doesn't matter how many diplomas you hang on your wall, nor your years of actual experience.
But if you made a lot of money doing whatever - they are going to bow to you and accept any BS you spread .
That's the way people are. Prove is, like, everywhere.
What are you disagreeing with? That adding a hi-end console is recreating the depth lost at straight cable transfer from the preamp to the ADC?

The second part about testing needs some procedural and conceptual alignment.
1) conceptual. These many steps are only required if one believes in creating the depth. Then by adding those magical units one can defeat the previous depth killing.
2) conceptual. Mixing many sources including mono dry ones using panning basically is rearranging the captured stereo-track based field. Say, an xy-pair with spot mikes, DI inputs and vocals added.
Sorry, made a pause to chat with an emigrating colleague, now lost the flow.
The thing is, if you do not believe in adding depth via chain, it is enough to capture mic/ preamp or stylys+phono preamp - console ( with and without) - ADC.
Old 1 week ago
  #344
Gear Maniac
 
fadein's Avatar
Wildhill Music | Free Listening on SoundCloud
I've checked on my speakers now. Amazing depth. Very clear and distinct placement of sound sources. Modern at the same time, which is nice on its own right. Thanks for sharing!
Old 1 week ago
  #345
Gear Maniac
 
fadein's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAH View Post
What are you disagreeing with? That adding a hi-end console is recreating the depth lost at straight cable transfer from the preamp to the ADC?

The second part about testing needs some procedural and conceptual alignment.
1) conceptual. These many steps are only required if one believes in creating the depth. Then by adding those magical units one can defeat the previous depth killing.
2) conceptual. Mixing many sources including mono dry ones using panning basically is rearranging the captured stereo-track based field. Say, an xy-pair with spot mikes, DI inputs and vocals added.
Sorry, made a pause to chat with an emigrating colleague, now lost the flow.
The thing is, if you do not believe in adding depth via chain, it is enough to capture mic/ preamp or stylys+phono preamp - console ( with and without) - ADC.
1. It's just a test. To be sure. Not a concept.
2. Yes exactly. As I hear it, those rearrangements do work with a console.
I sure need the pan and level changes. As for "stylys+phono preamp - console", it does work with digital just fine to my ears. I've digitized hundreds of records and tapes - the depth is present. I don't hear it in "remastered" versions at all.
Old 1 week ago
  #346
DAH
Lives for gear
 
DAH's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by fadein View Post
1. It's just a test. To be sure. Not a concept.
2. Yes exactly. As I hear it, those rearrangements do work with a console.
I sure need the pan and level changes. As for "stylys+phono preamp - console", it does work with digital just fine to my ears. I've digitized hundreds of records and tapes - the depth is present. I don't hear it in "remastered" versions at all.
I meant the conceptual aspect of the test. The number of entities should be kept to minimum. If you agree that center pan and 1.0 gain in digital preserve the depth, then that is yet an agreement point.
So you say that a non-center panning and non-unity gain in digital kill the depth? As for the paning, are you aware of the pan law, like an ssl is -4.5, DAWs usually have a selectable pan law. That is why I would propose only having true stereo (for the off center mix elements) and mono signals (for the center ones) at different gain levels (faders, yess) being summed in the console vs ITB if you wish.
I personally only see the limitations in preserving the depth as the following factors: the analog front-end to capture/pass the signal, the ADC and DAC, and the inappropriate sample/bitrates ( the last probably is not mandatory, but my humble experience shows that every DAC preserves the depth better at 96 kHz, than at 44 or 48. Hilo, Prism, Microsonics Pacifics, Lavry, Mytek, Forsell I have not touched).
I think we might discuss this topic in some messenger instead of typing long sheets of text.
I have not listened to the co-GSian track you linked to yet, but the very fact that mp3 on SoundCloud at 44 or 48 bears the depth qualities for you is screaming ITB has the depth.
PS the colleague went to Norway where our head office is located.
Old 1 week ago
  #347
Gear Addict
 

Today i kept listen to music at 44 kHz and then Switch at 88 kHz with my Prism Lyra. indeed sound difference is huge, More depth, details, separation between instruments and the overall sounds smoother like i could listen longer..
Working at 88 or 96 require a very powerful computer but is definetely improving depth
Old 1 week ago
  #348
DAH
Lives for gear
 
DAH's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirito View Post
Today i kept listen to music at 44 kHz and then Switch at 88 kHz with my Prism Lyra. indeed sound difference is huge, More depth, details, separation between instruments and the overall sounds smoother like i could listen longer..
Working at 88 or 96 require a very powerful computer but is definetely improving depth
Thank you for reporting your experience on a higher-end DAC, which supports the claim that 44 kHz are not enough to appreciate the digital, or, in other words, the CD format are not what the digital is to be judged by. It just confirms my experience with lesser DACs.
I have done some listening tests that compared music samplerate and DAC samplerate combinations:
1) 96/24 @ 96 dac
2) 44/16 resampled @ 96 dac
3) 44/16 @ 44 dac
4) 96/24 resampled to 44/16, resampled to 96/[email protected] 96 dac.
96/24 just won. I wanted to perform an A/B test but it turned out impossible to do in the one computer/one operator situation.
Old 1 week ago
  #349
Gear Addict
 

Tbh i was not so impressed by the Lyra at the beginning compared to my previous . At 44 there are differences but not so huge. When i switch to 88 kHz i understood why its high end dac and why this price
Old 1 week ago
  #350
Gear Maniac
 
fadein's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAH View Post
I think we might discuss this topic in some messenger instead of typing long sheets of text.
Sounds great. Pick one. I use mostly Skipe for talking and texts
Old 1 week ago
  #351
Gear Maniac
 
fadein's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAH View Post
I have not listened to the co-GSian track you linked to yet, but the very fact that mp3 on SoundCloud at 44 or 48 bears the depth qualities for you is screaming ITB has the depth.
Well, the author didn't yet provide any info on how was the track done. If it's all ITB, it's great news indeed.
Old 1 week ago
  #352
Gear Maniac
 
fadein's Avatar
First album recorded on digital medium in 1979, long before high-end ADCs and it still has the depth, because it was tracked and mixed analog.

Old 1 week ago
  #353
Gear Maniac
 
fadein's Avatar
Plenty of similar discussions are found here since the very beginnings of this site.
Just search for "analog vs digital" or "OTB vs ITB", or "DAW vs console", and you'll find loads of stuff for and against.
Then, it's just a personal preference that matters.
I'm about to start a religious movement "Analog Depth Witnesses" or "analdepwits", 'cause someone has already baptized my views as "beliefs", so why not. We'll probably fight against the "Analog Expert Witnesses", or "analexwits", but it will not take longer then the 30 years' war took.
I see many contributors, the scheme has been well-laid for at least 2000 years.
"Only experiencing depth in stereo can save you" ©
Old 1 week ago
  #354
Gear Guru
Great so the best depth plug in is a console....... and we're back to analogue vs digital....... How original.......
Old 1 week ago
  #355
Lives for gear
 
thermos's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by fadein View Post
First album recorded on digital medium in 1979, long before high-end ADCs and it still has the depth, because it was tracked and mixed analog.

Actually it's mostly because there is barely ANY compression on this thing. I mean none. If you listen to it on youtube they add limiting, but if you listen to it on Tidal (lossless) it literally never peaks at 0! That is because they probably wanted to show off the dynamic range and SNR of digital most likely. That goes for individual instruments. Just check out the dynamic range of the hi hat.

I hear loads and loads of converter artifacts. If you want that depth, simply don't add compression or limiting. You could probably get an even deeper mix ITB than this if you recorded with great conversion and front end, AND most importantly you were as good as those players (the hardest part). Fun listen though. Digital could be so awesome.
Old 1 week ago
  #356
Gear Maniac
 
fadein's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardis View Post
Great so the best depth plug in is a console....... and we're back to analogue vs digital....... How original.......
Nope, we hit some "hybrid middle ground", whatever it means. That's all. Disappointing, I agree. I hate cables and PSUs.
I'm a DAW enthusiast from the very start. I actually made a living by "digitizing" analog studios for a decade. "Yeah, we won! ITB! ITB!" some shouted as early as 2004, maybe even earlier. Where's the bloody thing?
It doesn't work! Yet again undermined by the rich.
Old 1 week ago
  #357
Gear Maniac
 
fadein's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by thermos View Post
Actually it's mostly because there is barely ANY compression on this thing. I mean none. If you listen to it on youtube they add limiting, but if you listen to it on Tidal (lossless) it literally never peaks at 0! That is because they probably wanted to show off the dynamic range and SNR of digital most likely. That goes for individual instruments. Just check out the dynamic range of the hi hat.

I hear loads and loads of converter artifacts. If you want that depth, simply don't add compression or limiting. You could probably get an even deeper mix ITB than this if you recorded with great conversion and front end, AND most importantly you were as good as those players (the hardest part). Fun listen though. Digital could be so awesome.
Totally agree. Digital is awesome, but not perfect (too perfect???). Especially not front-back depth-wise. DAW mixers just suck. All of them. It's not the real thing, which has always defined the sound. Levels, pans, inserts, aux sends - are not real in DAWs. And to achieve the depth - they just have to be. As I imagine it (a promise is a promise).
Old 1 week ago
  #358
Lives for gear
 
thermos's Avatar
Ok back to something useful. The new DMG Multiplicity is bonkers good. It can do crazy dynamic reductions and maintain all of the depth. Worth a look.
Old 1 week ago
  #359
Gear Maniac
 
fadein's Avatar
Igor Levin, the man behind Antelope Audio, said something like "it's simply not possible to run a full emulation just on a CPU". Not an exact quote, I do apologize.
So, how is it possible to run a "full-scale mixing console" emulation on CPU on DAW? A ridiculous thought! Guys just underestimated the importance of the console in the first place. ProTools with "Audio Heat", Studio One with "Console Shaper", Mixbus, all those virtual "channel-strips" - those are all "Analog Depth Witnesses", they just deny the facts. These guys, instead of solving the problem, create a different kind of aesthetics - the "ITB one", because it is easier and cheaper. "Catch them young" kinda hitlerjugend BS. How many of my students had the "wow" first trying a console vs DAW mixing? Most of them.
Old 1 week ago
  #360
Gear Maniac
 
fadein's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by thermos View Post
Ok back to something useful. The new DMG Multiplicity is bonkers good. It can do crazy dynamic reductions and maintain all of the depth. Worth a look.
I'll try it tomorrow and report back. BTW, what "useful" have you suddenly seen in this thread?
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
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Toketronic / Q+A with David Moufang
1
The Press Desk / Product Alerts older than 2 months
286
Ben Mc / Newbie audio engineering + production question zone
14
supercool482 / Electronic Music Instruments and Electronic Music Production
7
Mark1353 / Electronic Music Instruments and Electronic Music Production
70

Forum Jump
Forum Jump