Quote:
Originally Posted by
Simon1176f
I tried both Soothe and Gullfoss side by side and I can say Soothe is far more transparent and generally better (to me) sounding than Gullfoss. They both do the same thing really, the thing I missed with Gullfoss is the ability to determine the predestined curve. The creators impose a curve or sonic footprint that you're locked into. It took me one minute A/B ing between the two with a vocal (the ultimate test) to land on Soothe. It basically sounded better, and any settings in Gullfoss just sounded hollower or tinnier in comparison, particularly in the high mid register. I think maybe it's because the bandwdith of the soothe filters are slimmer.. Don't quote me, my guess is based on GUI feedback. The only thing swinging me towards GFoss is the ability to work on things under 250Hz but it's not really where these plugins shine, 4k region is where it's at. Soothe for the win for me and ultimately a purchase. Mix on!
So far I have understood, Soothe has the purpose to correct issues with imperfect recordings, like resonances from the mic and room.
Thus in certain cases it will sure have the reqired impact.
Gullfoss uses a concept of "perfect sound" based on real people, anatomy of the hearing system, and what should sound good to a majority.
This means you are bound inevitably to the listening culture of the era.
The anatomy part is absolutely great, but it would be an empty canvas-functionality here, without the music as a given. And you cannot really predict music as such, but only in a certain cultural context that will change.
To me, it seems good for EDM and current pop and the Latino dance genres. But as an old rock'n'roll guy I dislike its "cold" impact on beefy rock music and also on classical instruments. There is a different purpose in the whole perception of what music should do to a human. Head banging in a club, or "elevator" background music, these things..