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? Equalizer Plugins
Old 4th December 2018
  #61
Lives for gear
 
b0se's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by teebaum View Post
ok, in a stemmastering, el-rey has now worked quite nicely.
but it's a mixtool, on the buzz the plugins don't really inspire me compared to hardware (if you switch a/b, it becomes pretty clear).
if i am forced to stay itb, the Acoustica plugins can help.

but I won't buy many more now, especially since every 6 months "everything has finally become soooo much better and now really sounds like hardware" - or something like that.
Yes true, and I've said that myself (akin to HW). Sounds closer to HW would be a more accurate statement. I suppose it's the nature of comparing to previous algos and whatnot.

Slightly OT - how are you finding the Pollock?
Old 4th December 2018
  #62
Lives for gear
 
teebaum's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by b0se View Post
Yes true, and I've said that myself (akin to HW). Sounds closer to HW would be a more accurate statement. I suppose it's the nature of comparing to previous algos and whatnot.

Slightly OT - how are you finding the Pollock?
the pollock can make the difference between "pretty good" and "you got the job" - but it needs a signal that already has a pretty well setted dynamic.

OT off
Old 4th December 2018
  #63
Lives for gear
 
thermos's Avatar
I'll add DMG Essence as another one that doesn't remove depth. Its actually a great Wideband compressor which it isn't advertised as. True Iron is pretty good as well, tough I wish the filtering wasn't so extreme.
Old 4th December 2018
  #64
Gear Guru
 
Brent Hahn's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thermos View Post
True Iron is pretty good as well, tough I wish the filtering wasn't so extreme.
How do you get away with calling a string of code anything other than True Code? Or at least, Pretend Iron?
Old 4th December 2018
  #65
Lives for gear
-Probably the least analog-like approach but spectral compressors when their curve is set dark and low ratio (they can go crazy quick with aggressive settings).

-Waves Cobalt Saphira, really wanted to like this plug-in (a saturator that doesn't suck dynamics too much) but complex and couldn't drive as much as I wanted.
Old 4th December 2018
  #66
Lives for gear
 
bgood's Avatar
I’m a hybrid guy... lots of outboard and lots of computer robot sh1t

I’ve never done any serious a/b sort of testing, but, I’m sure someone in the internet has:

Uad or Nebula expensive compressor vs real dbx or solid cheap outboard box

I love outboard and everything I do (except virtual instruments) is tracked through all manner of real gear... I even run VIs through outboard when I’m not being lazy... running a DI bass through a real la2a or gtr through a dbx 160x (wassup, Brent!) sounds great and takes a lot less time to setup than most plugins.

I also have a ridiculous library of plugins... pricey? Cool, I’ll buy it. Except for Nebula stuff... I just don’t dig the company. It seems to me that they basically ran a giant beta test through Nebula until they had the tech to launch the expensive modeling line of pink, aqua, etc. that and I just don’t hear such an enormous difference in the end results compared against the native and uad stuff that I have... and with regard to compression I don’t feel like the AA Nebula stuff is ready for prime time. Maybe folks that don’t own any actual gear are hearing something with AA Nebula that I don’t... but, if I spent $300 on a plugin I know my brain would absolutely try to convince me that it is amazing! but, hell, if you’re tracking everything through the built in preamps in a prosumer sub $1000 usb interface I suspect that the AA Nebula plugins make a difference, perhaps.

All of that being said, to me there is something liberating about having the program 98% “there” before it even hits the converters.

The added feature of outboard is that it’ll outlast whatever daw you’re using... there’s no ilok...
Old 4th December 2018
  #67
Lives for gear
 

I had a fun experience recently - which I don't quite understand, but it is relevant.

I was fixing up an old Akai consumer reel to reel. The model dates from the sixties, and the amp is all valve. I found a few replacement parts from ebay and it works quite well and I thought at least it might make for a cool looking 'dock' since it had speakers. The tape response is quite bad for the low end.


Anyhow I plugged an ipod into it, and through headphones I was astonished at the amps quality. In fact I was sure I was making a mistake - monitoring the ipod, not the amp output. Somehow through this ancient simple amp, the music seams to sort of 'expand'. The ipod seams narrow and compressed in comparison. It is a night and day thing, it is adding rich sheen to the cheap consumer output - playing MP3's - and making it sound much better.


I have tried all kinds of 'valve' plug ins, but none of them really open up the sound like this. So really despite all these fancy emulations, nothing seams to nail the consumer valve amp from the 60's sound, which if I had as a plug in would give me all the '3D' I could ever want !
Old 2 weeks ago
  #68
Lives for gear
I have a few pieces of hardware I use when I am trying to maintain or create a 3D feel.

TCE-M5000. this box has a mid-side mic decode that has great stereo width control I like the sound of. Very old tech now days.

Pair of Firefly direct box's. I use them in place of JDI when I want more 3D at the cost of punch.

In retrospect, its the input chain & Source that creates the 3D feel.

Two mic's in a room......how many sounds and feels can be had!

But expecting 3D results by using software, only from a softsynth that captured tracks with a 3D feel. The software & Computers have a way's to go before it fully fools a trained ear.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #69
Gear Maniac
 
eternalsound's Avatar
How do you get your hands wet by touching a picture of water?
Old 2 weeks ago
  #70
Gear Guru
Quote:
Originally Posted by eternalsound View Post
How do you get your hands wet by touching a picture of water?
Cute! Well since we're talking about turning a bunch of soundwaves into electrons that turn back into soundwaves, I really don't understand your point..... All of this is about synthesis, and some tools do it better than others, philosophy aside......
Old 1 week ago
  #71
Lives for gear
 
Jerry Tubb's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barncore View Post
I know this question is going to annoy analog purists
Bingo!

:~}>

JT

(posts pic of a vacuum tube)
Old 1 week ago
  #72
Gear Maniac
 

I have one big problem with the whole audio community. It's so much about hands on experience with different gear and not so much about understanding why. At least this is my impression. Wrong?

I mean after all it's called audio engineering. Woudn't it be interesting to talk more about why a certain gear has a special something instead of taking about specific gear and how it compares to a different similar gear? So the question should be what effect does good hardware create and how can we explain it technically? And finally how can you get closer with plugins to that sound ideal.
Old 1 week ago
  #73
Lives for gear
 
SmoothTone's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AreYouHuman View Post
Woudn't it be interesting to talk more about why a certain gear has a special something instead of taking about specific gear and how it compares to a different similar gear? So the question should be what effect does good hardware create and how can we explain it technically? And finally how can you get closer with plugins to that sound ideal.
That would be a nice thread.
Old 1 week ago
  #74
Lives for gear
 
JP__'s Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by AreYouHuman View Post
I have one big problem with the whole audio community. It's so much about hands on experience with different gear and not so much about understanding why. At least this is my impression. Wrong?

I mean after all it's called audio engineering. Woudn't it be interesting to talk more about why a certain gear has a special something instead of taking about specific gear and how it compares to a different similar gear? So the question should be what effect does good hardware create and how can we explain it technically? And finally how can you get closer with plugins to that sound ideal.
But how this should work? I mean we even have managed to agree about a definition about "3D" yet... What do you expect from such a discussion? measurements that shows why some stuff sounds a little bit more "3D" than other without having a proper definition what 3D even means? And no real theoretical clue what really leads to an enhanced feeling of themystical 3D? Looks not very usefull to me...
I had such questions too and have done a lot of testing, discussion, measurements and stuff in the past. But in the end its a one way route. Its about very small, complex interactions thatcould take a lifetime to put in proper numbers. A reason why all digital simulations are always a rough approximation still.
Just take audio transformers as one component, there are literally thousand of designs out there all quite different in sound (and not so much in raw measurements).

The other thing is, you couldnt miss what you havent experienced soundwise by yourself (as I said above: it often simply even lacks the monitoring). Theoretical discussion leads to nothing therefore (at least in this case), we at least needs audio examples (which is another hard one). Better try it out for yourself. Unfortunately its a very costly and time consuming experiment (maybe even another lifetime job).. But theres no way around it if you are really interested.
A lot of ppl are therefore trying tomake shortcuts (tried it myself too often) with mediocre analog stuff (and most stuff outthere is just mediocre, unfortunately because of cost and knowledge). A transition (back) to digital simulations is a very comprehensible step then, which leads to those often read posts like :"man, I sold all my analog stuff and switched to plug in, couldnt be happier".
Its all a question of perspective, and perpective is always a very personal thing...

PS: a cheap and usefull way could be to book a session with a experiences and dedicate audio engineer in a well made environment to get an idea, maybe.
PPS: another usefull experiment is: grap yourself the NAT sampler of Acustic Audias Nebula, took some high quality gear (or maybe just single transformers) and some hg ADDAs, and see what comes through from those real world details and what arent when playing with all those settings. It could took months, but you maybe get more of an idea whats all about.
PPPS: I really could write pages with ideas to this very interesting topic, but in the end of the day I have to pay my bills as we all. One reason why most ppl here arent willing going into details much. So, better dont expect finding real usefull answers in a forum or the www.

Last edited by JP__; 1 week ago at 09:55 AM..
Old 1 week ago
  #75
Lives for gear
 
stinkyfingers's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmoothTone View Post
That would be a nice thread.
Unfortunately, a lot of people here are personally offended by technical data...
a fascinating phenomenon, actually.
Lots of magical thinkers, too, who believe they can perceive things that “just can’t be measured...”
yeh...would be a cool thread, though...
Old 1 week ago
  #76
Lives for gear
 
b0se's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by stinkyfingers View Post
Unfortunately, a lot of people here are personally offended by technical data...
a fascinating phenomenon, actually.
Lots of magical thinkers, too, who believe they can perceive things that “just can’t be measured...”
yeh...would be a cool thread, though...
Agreed. On the flip side though there are those who are influenced by measurements, convinced they can hear things that don't fall into the human hearing range.
Old 1 week ago
  #77
Lives for gear
 
JP__'s Avatar
 

Verified Member
I think the main problem is that ppl tend to sit at home trying finding answers in the www instead of going out and make their own...

Of course measurements are the most objective base for those kind of discussions (if you are really that experienced to perfectly read them, which might look easier to most than it really is), but unfortunately just a raw approximation of what is really going on. So, in realty they are not more than cheap advertising for those who think they know, like "authentic analog sound" for those who think they listen....Not saying we arent able to measure " the truth" from a technical viewpoint, but claiming 99% of a all that typical measurements for audio stuff only shows a extremly small window only (THD at XYdB at 1 kHz for example...). And whats the ideal relationship betwee THD and IMD to emulate that magical 3D then...? Man what should this really tell us regarding a topic like this? Nothing! Ok, the more smart guys out there may measure at 100Hz and 10k too, but still nothing to really gain from that beside a pure QC.
And what about the relationship between measurements and human perception then?

What I said above, the NAT could be one eye opener playing around with all those parameters for those who prefer to try theirselfs instead of talking theory.

Have to pay bills now. So, have fun with the same ongoing discussions about X vs Y... :D

Last edited by JP__; 1 week ago at 10:28 AM..
Old 1 week ago
  #78
Lives for gear
 
the unik's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
You might want to check VOS releases (all old freeware Variety Of Sound ).
Yes some of them are very nice indeed, and even nicer then some plugin developped more recently. Like old vintage pieces of hardware, there are some old vintage pieces of software now, and I love digging them sometimes
Old 1 week ago
  #79
Lives for gear
 
Silvertone's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by AreYouHuman View Post
I have one big problem with the whole audio community. It's so much about hands on experience with different gear and not so much about understanding why. At least this is my impression. Wrong?

I mean after all it's called audio engineering. Woudn't it be interesting to talk more about why a certain gear has a special something instead of taking about specific gear and how it compares to a different similar gear? So the question should be what effect does good hardware create and how can we explain it technically? And finally how can you get closer with plugins to that sound ideal.
I’m sorry for this problem with the audio community as a whole. Forgive us as we are only human. lol

We would like to think that everything is quantifiable, it’s not. We as humans like to assign value and meaning to everything yet it’s all a farce to make us feel better.

There only exists two states, matter and energy... everything we know exists in these two state yet neither can truly be quantified. We as humans assigned values to each, right or wrong.

“Only time exists, without it we don’t exist” - Lucy

Enjoy today everyone, enjoy your time.
Old 1 week ago
  #80
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JP__ View Post
But how this should work? I mean we even have managed to agree about a definition about "3D" yet... What do you expect from such a discussion? measurements that shows why some stuff sounds a little bit more "3D" than other without having a proper definition what 3D even means? And no real theoretical clue what really leads to an enhanced feeling of themystical 3D? Looks not very usefull to me...
I had such questions too and have done a lot of testing, discussion, measurements and stuff in the past. But in the end its a one way route. Its about very small, complex interactions thatcould take a lifetime to put in proper numbers. A reason why all digital simulations are always a rough approximation still.
Just take audio transformers as one component, there are literally thousand of designs out there all quite different in sound (and not so much in raw measurements).

The other thing is, you couldnt miss what you havent experienced soundwise by yourself (as I said above: it often simply even lacks the monitoring). Theoretical discussion leads to nothing therefore (at least in this case), we at least needs audio examples (which is another hard one). Better try it out for yourself. Unfortunately its a very costly and time consuming experiment (maybe even another lifetime job).. But theres no way around it if you are really interested.
A lot of ppl are therefore trying tomake shortcuts (tried it myself too often) with mediocre analog stuff (and most stuff outthere is just mediocre, unfortunately because of cost and knowledge). A transition (back) to digital simulations is a very comprehensible step then, which leads to those often read posts like :"man, I sold all my analog stuff and switched to plug in, couldnt be happier".
Its all a question of perspective, and perpective is always a very personal thing...

PS: a cheap and usefull way could be to book a session with a experiences and dedicate audio engineer in a well made environment to get an idea, maybe.
PPS: another usefull experiment is: grap yourself the NAT sampler of Acustic Audias Nebula, took some high quality gear (or maybe just single transformers) and some hg ADDAs, and see what comes through from those real world details and what arent when playing with all those settings. It could took months, but you maybe get more of an idea whats all about.
PPPS: I really could write pages with ideas to this very interesting topic, but in the end of the day I have to pay my bills as we all. One reason why most ppl here arent willing going into details much. So, better dont expect finding real usefull answers in a forum or the www.

That is exactly one point. Would be interesting to have a understanding what 3d means. Best with samples. But I'm seeing more the education part. I can understand that experienced mastering guys who have to pay the bills don't want to share their tricks or have time to share the knowledge (I really mean this, no sarcasm).

In most engineering disciplines you can buy good books to get the knowledge. In audio engineering it's not the case. And not everyone can afford to buy gear for 15000€ just for the education part.

Therefore I would love to see more serious sources for knowledge in this regard.
Old 1 week ago
  #81
Gear Guru
Look the problem with audio it is abstract and can’t be compared side by side like visual media. Mastering is a very specific skill and highly specialized.
Émulations have to be really accurate to cut it.

TDR seem to get it right, but 3Dness is totally abstract and with any equipment hard to quantify....
Old 1 week ago
  #82
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ardis View Post
Look the problem with audio it is abstract and can’t be compared side by side like visual media. Mastering is a very specific skill and highly specialized.
Émulations have to be really accurate to cut it.

TDR seem to get it right, but 3Dness is totally abstract and with any equipment hard to quantify....
You can talk also about a movie. Has also a time component. It's a craft and also art. Like audio. I think a lot of people just want to retain a bit of myth to audio after all. It's not that we understand everything so far, but why not trying?
Old 1 week ago
  #83
Gear Guru
Quote:
Originally Posted by AreYouHuman View Post
You can talk also about a movie. Has also a time component. It's a craft and also art. Like audio. I think a lot of people just want to retain a bit of myth to audio after all. It's not that we understand everything so far, but why not trying?
Not at all. You can compare visual media side by side and see the difference in image quality. You can’t do that with sound. Seeing is a much more concrete sense than hearing.

I can quantify a color and texture easily with video. Sound is some buzz words that may or not make sense. A picture is worth a thousand words....
Old 1 week ago
  #84
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ardis View Post
A picture is worth a thousand words....
Maybe so .... but Sound speaks Volumes.


... sorry ... couldn't resist.


Anyone have a definition of 'euphonic' ? [oft associated with Tube gear].
Old 1 week ago
  #85
Gear Head
 
Benoit D's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ardis View Post
Not at all. You can compare visual media side by side and see the difference in image quality. You can’t do that with sound. Seeing is a much more concrete sense than hearing.

I can quantify a color and texture easily with video. Sound is some buzz words that may or not make sense. A picture is worth a thousand words....
Assuming everybody have the same eyes and look the same... which is not the case at all.

I’m observing for years the relationships between sense and perception (that why I called my studio Perception Mastering) and there is nothing comparable from one person to another.

If you want an entertaining insight on this subject, look at the book called «*Sleights Of Mind*». It’s priceless !
Old 1 week ago
  #86
Lives for gear
 
teebaum's Avatar
check this!

StageOne - Leapwing Audio
Old 1 week ago
  #87
Lives for gear
 
b0se's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by teebaum View Post
I've been testing this also, very nice indeed, it can add subtle depth to an entire mix very easily.
Old 1 week ago
  #88
Lives for gear
 
teebaum's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by b0se View Post
I've been testing this also, very nice indeed, it can add subtle depth to an entire mix very easily.
That's how it is!
Has nothing to do with "hardware 3D voodoo", but is in another way damn good
Old 1 week ago
  #89
Gear Addict
 
B Elgin's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by teebaum View Post
That's how it is!
Has nothing to do with "hardware 3D voodoo", but is in another way damn good
Yes didn't mention it in this thread since it's a different type of 3D mojo - better than K stereo for me for depth enhancement, and the width processing is unique. Pairs very well with MS EQ for broadening, small doses from each.

Originally it had a wider range for the depth reflection process but it was scaled down...pity since it's amazing to push during mixing, and can be automated.

I've been experimenting with various Airwindows dithers for depth too. Had high hopes for his DMT one but it wasn't quite what I expected.
Old 1 week ago
  #90
Trying to mix here: yesterday, i could achieve very nice sounds by using
the El Rey and Taupe (A0 in parallel) (plus Essence) from a non-full-range-material
with a bit excessive HM and HF.
turned 2.0D to 2.7D nicely. ;- )
the remaining 0.3D would be achieved by HW, hopefully.

The Question : Hardware vs "The Real Thing" would be imaginable soon (?) ;- )
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