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
DMGAudio Multiplicity Dynamics Plugins
Old 5 days ago
  #241
Lives for gear
 
filterfreak's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sensorychaos View Post
I’m doomed.
Owning neutron2, Ozone8, Newfangle Elevate, mcdsp serie, uad precision serie, acustica...
So why do I want this? I’ll be a GASman all my life ?
As long as there is innovation and progress in soundquality, we ´ll be purchasing new stuff
Old 5 days ago
  #242
Gear Head
 
mynet's Avatar
 

I found that it would be great to have a fourth mode/option in the sidechain source.

EXT+BAND (Combined)

That way we can have the EXTERNAL signal but still have it filtered by the BAND(s).

I find Multiplicity very useful!

Thank you
Old 5 days ago
  #243
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mossie23 View Post
Anybody using this in a mixing context? From all the comments I gather people do, and I would love to do that as well, but the latency seems to be quite high (>1024 samples), depending on the amount of processing. I know this is intended as a mastering processor, but is it possible to get lower latency?
If you lower the lookahead - does that help?
Old 5 days ago
  #244
Gear Maniac
 
mossie23's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbraner View Post
If you lower the lookahead - does that help?
Nope. Every pre- or post-band seems to add 1024 samples of latency. And that's with lookahead at 0. A crossover band seems to add even more. With just 2-3 bands, I'm already looking at >1000 milliseconds of total latency. Pro-MB on the other hand, can work without any latency.
Old 5 days ago
  #245
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mossie23 View Post
Nope. Every pre- or post-band seems to add 1024 samples of latency. And that's with lookahead at 0. A crossover band seems to add even more. With just 2-3 bands, I'm already looking at >1000 milliseconds of total latency. Pro-MB on the other hand, can work without any latency.

I would also love a low latency mode. For now I have been using it during mixing more as a repair tool and rendering the track. Too much latency and CPU for simple tasks so I stick to Pro-MB and use Multiplicity when I need top get technical.
Old 5 days ago
  #246
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mossie23 View Post
Pro-MB on the other hand, can work without any latency.
Multiplicity is linear phase. Try setting Pro-MB to linear phase mode and look at the latency.
Old 5 days ago
  #247
Lives for gear
 
nyandres's Avatar
Is the 220ish pricing the discounted pricing?
Old 5 days ago
  #248
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bmanic View Post
Multiplicity is linear phase. Try setting Pro-MB to linear phase mode and look at the latency.
You are correct. However, he said pro-mb CAN work without latency. I don't think his claim about latency was based on filter types so much as it was ability. For the time being I think that multiplicity is objectively better than Pro-MB but I don't think it renders Pro-MB useless. I personally am absolutely loving having the option to use either one depending on the task. To be clear, I'm not saying you were discrediting Pro-MB by any means. Just pointing out that Pro-MB having zero latency as well as linear phase is a strength rather than a weakness.
Old 5 days ago
  #249
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyandres View Post
Is the 220ish pricing the discounted pricing?

The discount appears to still be available. Better hurry though because it ends today.
Old 5 days ago
  #250
Gear Maniac
 
mossie23's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bmanic View Post
Multiplicity is linear phase. Try setting Pro-MB to linear phase mode and look at the latency.
It seems you didn't quite understand what I was trying to say. Notheorem729 does a good job of explaining it in post #250 though.

Based on all the comments, I thought this would be great as a mixing tool. And I'm really curious whether people are using it that way. As for myself, almost 2500 samples latency for just 2 bands makes it unusable in a mix. So I would love a low latency (although probably lower quality) option for mixing. Or would Essence be the tool for that?
Old 5 days ago
  #251
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mossie23 View Post
It seems you didn't quite understand what I was trying to say. Notheorem729 does a good job of explaining it in post #250 though.

Based on all the comments, I thought this would be great as a mixing tool. And I'm really curious whether people are using it that way. As for myself, almost 2500 samples latency for just 2 bands makes it unusable in a mix. So I would love a low latency (although probably lower quality) option for mixing. Or would Essence be the tool for that?
I recommend essence in general but not as a replacement for multiplicity. I don't know the latency amounts off hand but it can be used with zero latency and is an incredible tool. It definitely can't do anywhere near what Multiplicity can but it can do some of it. I personally am happy to have both. I bought multiplicity for both mixing and mastering. In mixing it is more of an emergency tool where I haven't been using it a lot but when very detailed and complex work is needed it saves the day. I think it also makes a lot more sense to buy if you are working on other people's recordings where you don't have as much control over what you get. I don't view it as a replacement for your typical dynamic processors. I view it as something you may not need every day but when you do it is irreplaceable.
Old 5 days ago
  #252
Gear Addict
 

I'm a little confused why people need a low latency version for mixing. Mixing is exactly when you use the high latency versions of plugins for the utmost quality, because the DAW ADC can work without upsetting the 'talent'. I regularly have around 20000 samples of plugin delay when mixing, and the DAW makes all of that invisible. Higher latency generally means a lower CPU hit, more time for the computer to do what it is asked.
Old 5 days ago
  #253
Lives for gear
 
Benj's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkandKurious View Post
I'm a little confused why people need a low latency version for mixing. Mixing is exactly when you use the high latency versions of plugins for the utmost quality, because the DAW ADC can work without upsetting the 'talent'. I regularly have around 20000 samples of plugin delay when mixing, and the DAW makes all of that invisible. Higher latency generally means a lower CPU hit, more time for the computer to do what it is asked.
Maybe they're mixing in Pro Tools and it breaks the limits of it's delay compensation? Or maybe they don't like a delay between making changes and hearing them? I'm not bothered so much by the second, but always run into the first. That being said, I asked for more latency in hopes of being more CPU efficient, because this with many bands oversampled is pretty heavy!
Old 5 days ago
  #254
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benj View Post
Maybe they're mixing in Pro Tools and it breaks the limits of it's delay compensation? Or maybe they don't like a delay between making changes and hearing them? I'm not bothered so much by the second, but always run into the first. That being said, I asked for more latency in hopes of being more CPU efficient, because this with many bands oversampled is pretty heavy!
I'm in ProTools, Multiplicity is nothing like some of the Izotope plugins which exceed the maximum available delay (32000 I think)

The plugin itself seems quite visually reactive, until you add massive amounts of processing after it, but that is true of all plugin chains.
Old 5 days ago
  #255
Lives for gear
 
Benj's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkandKurious View Post
I'm in ProTools, Multiplicity is nothing like some of the Izotope plugins which exceed the maximum available delay (32000 I think)

The plugin itself seems quite visually reactive, until you add massive amounts of processing after it, but that is true of all plugin chains.
I don't mean that the plugin itself breaks delay compensation... that if you're working on a complex session with complex bus routing, then a plugin like this (or anything similar) can be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

Last edited by Benj; 5 days ago at 02:59 AM..
Old 5 days ago
  #256
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkandKurious View Post
I'm a little confused why people need a low latency version for mixing. Mixing is exactly when you use the high latency versions of plugins for the utmost quality, because the DAW ADC can work without upsetting the 'talent'. I regularly have around 20000 samples of plugin delay when mixing, and the DAW makes all of that invisible. Higher latency generally means a lower CPU hit, more time for the computer to do what it is asked.

You must have had time to kill after hitting your space bar and waiting for playback to start.
Old 5 days ago
  #257
Gear Nut
 

Maybe some people have forgotten this but latency is a negative consequence brought on by attempts to exceed what audio processing is currently capable of. Under no circumstances is it preferable unless it allows you to achieve something greater than what could be achieved without it and even then you have to be sure it makes sense in the context of what you're doing. Anyone that argues for latency as if it is a desirable feature clearly isn't worth arguing with.
Old 5 days ago
  #258
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Notheorem729 View Post
You must have had time to kill after hitting your space bar and waiting for playback to start.
20000 samples is less that half a second, I am not losing sleep waiting for that. If you're waiting longer, you need a better hard drive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Notheorem729 View Post
Maybe some people have forgotten this but latency is a negative consequence brought on by attempts to exceed what audio processing is currently capable of. Under no circumstances is it preferable unless it allows you to achieve something greater than what could be achieved without it and even then you have to be sure it makes sense in the context of what you're doing. Anyone that argues for latency as if it is a desirable feature clearly isn't worth arguing with.
Negative consequence? No, it's just a consequence. High CPU through low latency is a worse consequence in my context when mixing. Delay is a minor inconvenience dealt with by the ADC, while my CPU limit is a ceiling I can't overcome, except through increasing latency. Some manufacturer's even have high latency modes for that reason.

In nonlinear audio, in a mix context, latency is just a variable that is easily overcome by delay compensation. Zero or low latency is only of significant value when recording through plugins.

I'm pretty sure Dave is always trying to stretch the boundaries of what the CPU can do. His installers are particularly free of the bloat that other manufacturer's seem to waste space with, so I can sense he tries to have a minimal footprint wherever possible, but his plugins do require either high CPU or latency due to their function.

To be clear, I am not arguing for latency, just questioning why people need a higher CPU version with lower latency for nonlinear mixing. It's simply the usual tradeoff. I prefer more instances when mixing than less, so latency is a compromise I accept. If Dave can streamline the plugin, great. If he already has streamlined it (to whatever tradeoff he is currently able to without sacrificing quality) great. But I still fail to see why anyone needs a lower latency version for mixing.

Saying someone isn't worth arguing with, well, okay. At least we are both admiring the plugin's function, and making music sound better with it
Old 5 days ago
  #259
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkandKurious View Post
20000 samples is less that half a second, I am not losing sleep waiting for that. If you're waiting longer, you need a better hard drive.



Negative consequence? No, it's just a consequence. High CPU through low latency is a worse consequence in my context when mixing. Delay is a minor inconvenience dealt with by the ADC, while my CPU limit is a ceiling I can't overcome, except through increasing latency. Some manufacturer's even have high latency modes for that reason.

In nonlinear audio, in a mix context, latency is just a variable that is easily overcome by delay compensation. Zero or low latency is only of significant value when recording through plugins.

I'm pretty sure Dave is always trying to stretch the boundaries of what the CPU can do. His installers are particularly free of the bloat that other manufacturer's seem to waste space with, so I can sense he tries to have a minimal footprint wherever possible, but his plugins do require either high CPU or latency due to their function.

To be clear, I am not arguing for latency, just questioning why people need a higher CPU version with lower latency for nonlinear mixing. It's simply the usual tradeoff. I prefer more instances when mixing than less, so latency is a compromise I accept. If Dave can streamline the plugin, great. If he already has streamlined it (to whatever tradeoff he is currently able to without sacrificing quality) great. But I still fail to see why anyone needs a lower latency version for mixing.

Saying someone isn't worth arguing with, well, okay. At least we are both admiring the plugin's function, and making music sound better with it

You went out of your way to argue a feature request that would in no way inhibit your work. So regardless of how you choose to classify latency you are implying that anyone that doesn't share your preference is wrong. The vast majority of people avoid high latency regardless of delay compensation. And regardless of your willingness to accept it latency is a negative consequence. If latency wasn't a negative consequence there would be no delay compensation to begin with. Whether its minor or major is irrelevant to the negative classification. The same way you that you believe that low latency is no big deal others feel that CPU is no big deal. Regardless of the technical aspects of low latency processing you felt the need to argue a feature request with no reason other than your personal preference. And to be clear... assuming that low latency automatically equals high CPU is also false. Perhaps it's reasonable to assume this to be the case but the majority of modern plugins use a maximum latency solution so that changing settings have no impact on latency. Which means that under many circumstances changing the latency has no effect on cpu since the majority of the latency you see is a safety net. Regardless of this I think that you are arguing against zero latency more so than lower latency. I personally will use this plugin with or without latency but I can't think of any reason someone wouldn't want a lower latency mode in the menu. Is it really that bad to have that option for people that may need/want it that it's worth discussing at all? In my opinion it increases the usefulness of Multiplicity even if only some people use it. For some people this could be a must have based on limitations of their system. My argument is not saying your preference is wrong it is only saying that you assuming your preference to be the only logical one is inaccurate.
Old 5 days ago
  #260
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Notheorem729 View Post
You went out of your way to argue a feature request that would in no way inhibit your work. So regardless of how you choose to classify latency you are implying that anyone that doesn't share your preference is wrong. The vast majority of people avoid high latency regardless of delay compensation. And regardless of your willingness to accept it latency is a negative consequence. If latency wasn't a negative consequence there would be no delay compensation to begin with. Whether its minor or major is irrelevant to the negative classification. The same way you that you believe that low latency is no big deal others feel that CPU is no big deal. Regardless of the technical aspects of low latency processing you felt the need to argue a feature request with no reason other than your personal preference. And to be clear... assuming that low latency automatically equals high CPU is also false. Perhaps it's reasonable to assume this to be the case but the majority of modern plugins use a maximum latency solution so that changing settings have no impact on latency. Which means that under many circumstances changing the latency has no effect on cpu since the majority of the latency you see is a safety net. Regardless of this I think that you are arguing against zero latency more so than lower latency. I personally will use this plugin with or without latency but I can't think of any reason someone wouldn't want a lower latency mode in the menu. Is it really that bad to have that option for people that may need/want it that it's worth discussing at all? In my opinion it increases the usefulness of Multiplicity even if only some people use it. For some people this could be a must have based on limitations of their system. My argument is not saying your preference is wrong it is only saying that you assuming your preference to be the only logical one is inaccurate.
No I didn't go out of my way to argue agains a feature, I was asking for the logic of why latency is the devil in a mix scenario. I don't know of any modern DAW that can load a 64 bit plugin that doesn't have oodles of delay compensation sufficient for this purpose. CPU is a big deal because it's limited by your current hardware, while latency can be adjusted. For the same number of instructions, either you spread the instructions over time to lower the CPU hit, or you consume CPU in one go and cripple the machine. If there is an extra processing buffer, that still doesn't change this logic. The reason DAWs have buffers higher than 64 is precisely to increase latency so the CPU can breathe while mixing. These are just variables, not features.

If you reread what I've written, I am not arguing against further optimisation as that is always welcome, and I am not arguing against lower latency, I am questioning why it's an issue. As neither of us is seeing the middle ground, well, we're a distraction now, and I apologise if I've offended with my words.
Old 5 days ago
  #261
Gear Maniac
 
mossie23's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkandKurious View Post
No I didn't go out of my way to argue agains a feature, I was asking for the logic of why latency is the devil in a mix scenario. I don't know of any modern DAW that can load a 64 bit plugin that doesn't have oodles of delay compensation sufficient for this purpose.
I think I understand where you are coming from, so let me explain why I would like a low/no latency version. If you are a 'traditional' mixer where you get recorded tracks that you have to mix together, than indeed latency is handled by delay compensation. I wouldn't say perfectly, because this means there is a lag between what you hear and see/do. This is usually not that much, but with a plugin like Multiplicity it can be substantial.

I make electronic music on the other hand, where I often create the music and do a big part of the mix at the same time. I like to treat my DAW as an analog mixer, riding faders in real time and creating feedback loops with return channels (eg: feed a sound into return A, send that to return B and send return B into return A again). I also have hardware synths and effects connected that I like to manipulate in real time.

You can probably imagine that none of this works well with plugins introducing a lot of latency. And plugin delay compensation even breaks down when you use feedback loops in the returns. I don't know if this is true, but I seem to remember that the more a DAW has to compensate for plugin delays, the more CPU it uses. Sure, the plugin uses less CPU, but the system doesn't.

The big advantage of no (or very low) latency for me is that I can use the wealth of tricks that was developed over many decades in the analog domain. So that's why I work at higher sample rates and avoid plugins that introduce a lot of latency (so no linear phase for me, even though it would be nice sometimes). When people raved about how Multiplicity tamed the resonances in their synths (something that I have to deal with often), I thought it was a good tool to have. Due to the latency unfortunately it isn't. That's why I specifically mentioned Pro-MB, because that can work without latency (and with crazy latency).
Old 5 days ago
  #262
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkandKurious View Post
No I didn't go out of my way to argue agains a feature, I was asking for the logic of why latency is the devil in a mix scenario.
In many modern production approaches, the lines between composition, recording, production and mixing are blurred. They are not always separate processes that come one after another.

Quote:
I don't know of any modern DAW that can load a 64 bit plugin that doesn't have oodles of delay compensation sufficient for this purpose.
Pro Tools for one. Unless you are on HDX, Pro Tools does not do side-chain delay compensation. (And even on HDX, it probably only works with AAX-DSP plugins, not native plugins but I'm not entirely sure).

Alistair
Old 5 days ago
  #263
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mossie23 View Post
I think I understand where you are coming from, so let me explain why I would like a low/no latency version.
Thanks for the detailed explanation, that made a lot of sense. I've used feedback loops in mixes as you've described to get interesting oscillation patterns, and every change made to that track required checking that automation hadn't lost sync, so that makes sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
In many modern production approaches, the lines between composition, recording, production and mixing are blurred. They are not always separate processes that come one after another.



Pro Tools for one. Unless you are on HDX, Pro Tools does not do side-chain delay compensation. (And even on HDX, it probably only works with AAX-DSP plugins, not native plugins but I'm not entirely sure).

Alistair
Another good explanation. OT regarding ProTools and sidechains, have you tried setting up dummy outputs? if you route the sidechain bus to a dummy aux that feeds to the monitor path (and muted so you don't hear it), it forces the sidechain to be compensated because the compensation is only calculated for the monitor path, at least that's how I understand it. A cumbersome work around though.
Old 4 days ago
  #264
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkandKurious View Post
No I didn't go out of my way to argue agains a feature, I was asking for the logic of why latency is the devil in a mix scenario. I don't know of any modern DAW that can load a 64 bit plugin that doesn't have oodles of delay compensation sufficient for this purpose. CPU is a big deal because it's limited by your current hardware, while latency can be adjusted. For the same number of instructions, either you spread the instructions over time to lower the CPU hit, or you consume CPU in one go and cripple the machine. If there is an extra processing buffer, that still doesn't change this logic. The reason DAWs have buffers higher than 64 is precisely to increase latency so the CPU can breathe while mixing. These are just variables, not features.

If you reread what I've written, I am not arguing against further optimisation as that is always welcome, and I am not arguing against lower latency, I am questioning why it's an issue. As neither of us is seeing the middle ground, well, we're a distraction now, and I apologise if I've offended with my words.

Well if you are genuinely curious then I am wrong for saying you went out your way. I don't feel that was the case because you gave supporting evidence for why low latency is useless which is argumentative more so than curious. However, I'm sorry if I mistook your curiosity. As I said before though I personally feel that people far too often on the internet go out of their way to argue feature requests. In my mind people should be able to request features that don't affect the workflow of others without being told by stranger what they do and don't need. So perhaps my response was derived from this feeling as well as your approach. The very fundamental argument against your perspective is simple... latency doesn't matter so long as you don't do anything in real time. There are countless situations where real time workflows are what people prefer. Especially people who work in hybrid ways. The reality of the modern world is that there are people that still make music without a computer. Then on the opposite end of the spectrum there are people who work 100% in a DAW. Then there's everything in between. I have absolutely no problem with Multiplicity having no low latency mode. However, I would still love to have the option and I also understand why it would be important for others. And your statements about delay compensation are all based in a perfect system scenario. They all require that there are no discrepancies between the involved parties. Which as many people will testify is not an assumption that should be made. If you go to almost any plugin or DAW change log you will see constant updates to delay compensation and latency reporting because it is a constantly changing situation where it's rare that all parties work together flawlessly. Most of the time there are no issues if you work purely in the box. However, the more high latency plugins you use the more faith you are investing in numerous companies with different strategies to keep your work from being inhibited. Once again... I'm sorry for any miscommunication and arguing is never my intention but I just feel that arguing against the usefulness of a feature that has no impact on anyone that chooses not to use it is illogical and purely argumentative. Anyway, glad you got some other perspectives and here's to DMG for this amazing tool regardless of what happens. I'm already loving the most recent updates. Especially the extended range. Multiplicity is an incredible repair tool and the intended range makes it a first and last line of defense for any drum gating jobs.
Old 4 days ago
  #265
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Notheorem729 View Post
... Anyway, glad you got some other perspectives and here's to DMG for this amazing tool regardless of what happens. I'm already loving the most recent updates. Especially the extended range. Multiplicity is an incredible repair tool and the intended range makes it a first and last line of defense for any drum gating jobs.
This is the truth, my favourite usage for Multiplicity is to remove high hat spill from a snare mic (most of my clients' music is jazz, with odd bits of rock or electronic periodically), literally destroying the HH transients while leaving the ghost notes untouched. Multiplicity saves me hours of edits.
Old 4 days ago
  #266
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkandKurious View Post
This is the truth, my favourite usage for Multiplicity is to remove high hat spill from a snare mic (most of my clients' music is jazz, with odd bits of rock or electronic periodically), literally destroying the HH transients while leaving the ghost notes untouched. Multiplicity saves me hours of edits.
Yeah for a long time manual editing has been too effective to use regular gates for live recordings unless they were recorded extremely well but this changes everything. I was preparing to buy expurgate but now I can put it off a little longer.
Old 4 days ago
  #267
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkandKurious View Post
This is the truth, my favourite usage for Multiplicity is to remove high hat spill from a snare mic (most of my clients' music is jazz, with odd bits of rock or electronic periodically), literally destroying the HH transients while leaving the ghost notes untouched. Multiplicity saves me hours of edits.
Would love to know the details of how you do this. Please enlighten us (or me at least)
Old 4 days ago
  #268
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by STSQ View Post
Would love to know the details of how you do this. Please enlighten us (or me at least)
I split the snare mic into 'attack' and 'sustain' with a gate (I use Boz's Big Beautiful Door, because it is a simple way to do it): I duplicate the channel, and have the same settings on the gate but solo the above threshold potion on one channel and the below on the second. I then use multiplicity to compress the 'sustain' portion: with the sidechain set to wideband, HPF around 15k - looking for where the HH is most audible. I use a crossover band to compress over maybe 2k, looking at where the body of the HH clang might happen. Fastest attack, quick fast release with the secondary release set to make sure any sustain of the HH is smoothed out. Knee usually around 70%, so the ration can be maybe 2.6:1 - 4:1 and it acts like a soft knee limiter.

Because it's only compressing the 'sustain'/'below threshold' portion, the high frequencies of the ghost notes are quieter than the HH spill, so only the HH triggers compression, and the attack portion is left untouched. You can be quite brutal with the HH being compressed, as the HH present in the overheads and HH mic will hide any compression artefacts, and with fast attack and release, the quieter ghost notes will be relatively untouched. The clarity of those is often helps by a bottom snare mic anyway.

You could do this with multiple instances of Multiplicity and clever routing (Use multiplicity to gate with the advanced settings, create a sum and difference to get the separate 'below threshold'/'sustain' portion, then use another instance to compress).

Using the HH mic to sidechain externally is okay, but I find it easier to trigger from the spill that is present only in the 'sustain' portion, so I am only processing the problem spill between significant hits. As the 'sustain' portion doesn't have the 'attack' there is no compression on the sustain when the actual snare hits happen, so the two portions recombine relatively seamlessly. It's important to separate the above threshold portion from the below, otherwise you'll change the dynamics of the snare hits as well as the spill.

I hope that explains what I do!
Old 3 days ago
  #269
Lives for gear
 
nyandres's Avatar
Hey guys, will Multiplicity be better than compassion for this...

So I have some dynamic EQs, but they dont have the controls I typically get with a compression, to control the speed, and curve of attack and release...

So in Compassion I love to use the sideChain EQ feature in it, to react to say just the low end of a side chain track, and then compress a track.. Is there a way to say, do that, but have it compress a specific EQ band, which could be a different frequency range entirely. Right now in compassion, the compression still occurs on the overall signal.

Is that possible in compassion, or alternatively, would multiplicity be able to pull that off??? Without needing to make extra tracks to pull this off (want to simplify things)
Old 3 days ago
  #270
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyandres View Post
Hey guys, will Multiplicity be better than compassion for this...

So I have some dynamic EQs, but they dont have the controls I typically get with a compression, to control the speed, and curve of attack and release...

So in Compassion I love to use the sideChain EQ feature in it, to react to say just the low end of a side chain track, and then compress a track.. Is there a way to say, do that, but have it compress a specific EQ band, which could be a different frequency range entirely. Right now in compassion, the compression still occurs on the overall signal.

Is that possible in compassion, or alternatively, would multiplicity be able to pull that off??? Without needing to make extra tracks to pull this off (want to simplify things)
I haven't used Compassion, but what you want to do is exactly what Multiplicity was designed to do. You can set the sidechain to any frequency of the full spectrum/wideband signal and compress any band of audio with it, causing the HF to be pumped by the lows, whatever you want.and you can have many bands reacting, expanding or compressing simultaneously
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
justis / Product Alerts older than 2 months
994
DaveGamble / Product Alerts older than 2 months
492
DaveGamble / Product Alerts older than 2 months
488
DaveGamble / Product Alerts older than 2 months
42
DaveGamble / Product Alerts older than 2 months
39

Forum Jump
Forum Jump