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
Sonimus Britson Console coming soon Saturation Plugins
Old 5th April 2014
  #631
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by smoke View Post
...lost my initial post (?)

Anyway, I thought I should purchase Britson, so I'm not ****ting you guys with my views through Satson... I could be completely wrong. However I was thinking of also getting one of their EQs. Would Sweetone be redundant to Satson's filters, or should I just pony up for the SonEQ. I am also considering Hornet SW34 (which I demoed already and I think it is very HQ) in this bunch, as I need a decent easy native, I've been waiting weeks to finally pull a trigger. Can anyone help me? Quickly? I am ready to go.
Not redundant entirely, but plenty is shared. Sweetone has a resonant option on the HP.

I have all Sonimus products. They none of them are fully replaced by another. I find sweetone to be great in composing as I don't get hung up in trying to be to precise.

SonEqPro is quite strong on drums.

The console emus are as described 10x over in this thread.
Old 5th April 2014
  #632
Lives for gear
Thanks David.
If you're still here, when you say SonEQ is strong on drums,. it makes me think it's limited to punch.

I'm leaning in that direction... might you clarify?
Have you tried the SW34?
Old 5th April 2014
  #633
Lives for gear
I own both SonEQ Pro and SW34. They're great plugin : affordable, simple layout/limited set of options for a quick workflow, carefully chosen curves, nice subtle saturation. They're quite versatile and can work on all kind of materials. Each has its own strengths.

But I haven't used them (or any other EQ) since SlickEQ's release. What a fantastic EQ. Give it a try if you haven't already !
Old 5th April 2014
  #634
Lives for gear
Make things MORE complicated eh?

I am going to turn the hook on the Hornet. Just for a different family, since I just brought Brit.

Lets see.
Old 5th April 2014
  #635
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimmy View Post
Of course not! Why the heck would I want to do that? I tested it extensively on 2 mixes I was working on and decided that it's utterly unessential to the refinement of my audio. Even that it instead does something to the contrary effect. Please have a look at the other posts I made in this thread if it means anything, before there's another "you're using it wrong".
I have to agree with Dimmy on this. If you can't hear what a plug-in is doing and make a decision after a couple of hours of serious testing, then you're going to be spending WAY too much time evaluating plug-ins.

Also, if that's how long it takes you to figure out if something sounds good, it's going to take forever to mix a song. People who successfully practice this trade become good at quickly evaluating what they hear. And let's face it, new plug-ins come out every day as ITB audio evolves. If you want to keep up with the latest developments, you really have to be able to evaluate a new plug-in within a couple of hours at the most.
Old 5th April 2014
  #636
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by smoke View Post
Thanks David.
If you're still here, when you say SonEQ is strong on drums,. it makes me think it's limited to punch.

I'm leaning in that direction... might you clarify?
Have you tried the SW34?
Not exclusively for drums by any stretch... But I find using it on drums to be rewarding.

The bottom band is like a pultec, but not stepped. Great at adding "whoomp" to kicks and bass.

The middle bands sound very API 550 series, tons of snap and clarity.

The high band is quite bright, but doesn't get brittle unless pushed- but definetly can get harsh (but so can every other eq when pushed). The thing is: it plays so nicely with the LP that striking that balance of bright to harsh is generally quite easy.

Currently using:
SonEqPro
Sweetone
DMG Equilibrium
Elysia Museq

I'm quite happy with these as each of them has found a place in my "routine" without a ton of crossover.

I haven't tried the Hornet or Bootsy stuff.

But have used a TON of others in the past... But those others are collecting "digital dust" currently.

**I realize this is a lengthy post that isn't about Britson, but I wanted to address Smoke's question. Thread jack over!
Old 6th April 2014
  #637
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Ray View Post
**I realize this is a lengthy post that isn't about Britson, but I wanted to address Smoke's question. Thread jack over!
Thanks! Its all relative.
Old 6th April 2014
  #638
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoke View Post
...lost my initial post (?)

Anyway, I thought I should purchase Britson, so I'm not ****ting you guys with my views through Satson... I could be completely wrong. However I was thinking of also getting one of their EQs. Would Sweetone be redundant to Satson's filters, or should I just pony up for the SonEQ. I am also considering Hornet SW34 (which I demoed already and I think it is very HQ) in this bunch, as I need a decent easy native, I've been waiting weeks to finally pull a trigger. Can anyone help me? Quickly? I am ready to go.
I own Pro Q.. And don't NEED any other EQ. But after I demoed SonEQ Pro, I immediately purchased it. It can be used on absolutely anything. Vocals, drums, acoustics, etc. Anything. This may sound cheesy, but my EQ choices have improved since purchasing (and I'm not the only one who's said this, lots of others too). Theyve gave it a vintage feel, in that it doesn't have a million choices, it's limited in choices, but it doesn't really affect how useful it is, which is amazing. You'd think with limited choices, you'd have limited applications, but it's not exactly like that. It's amazing at shaping stuff. The only time I don't use it is if I need multiple bands of narrow cutting, as SonEQ mainly only gives you one band that can cut very narrow (the low mid, as that's where most resonances and weird frequency build ups occur).

Anyway, enough of that. Give it a whirl! I can't recommend it enough. I actually hope they make more plugins like SonEQ Pro vs console emulations. I'd like to see a compressor built by them with the limited choices like SP.
Old 6th April 2014
  #639
Gear Nut
 

Just got Britson yesterday. Not bad...not bad at all. Between it, VCC, and the UAD Studer 800.....ill have fun deciding what to use on which song. Nice job Sonimus....this is my first outing with you and I'm impressed. Im a heavy spoiled UAD addict so its nice hearing something so inexpensive sound so expensive.
Old 6th April 2014
  #640
Gear Addict
 
johnnynash's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe_04_04 View Post
I'd like to see a compressor built by them with the limited choices like SP.
This +1!
A compressor "Sonimus style" would be really nice. Fast and easy to work with.
Old 6th April 2014
  #641
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zillaclout View Post
Just got Britson yesterday. Not bad...not bad at all. Between it, VCC, and the UAD Studer 800.....ill have fun deciding what to use on which song. Nice job Sonimus....this is my first outing with you and I'm impressed. Im a heavy spoiled UAD addict so its nice hearing something so inexpensive sound so expensive.
Or can use all three...VCC on channels, Britson on the buss, and Studer wherever you need it. Never a need to choose..
Old 6th April 2014
  #642
Gear Nut
 

i hear you audiosphinx. ijs, if i was working on a mixer in the real world, i would just mix from that one board, so i prefer thinking about mixing in those terms. it may seem somewhat limiting, and i have tried various combinations in the past, but its not a given that using multiple emulations within a mix will make the song sound 'better'. Me personally, i own hundreds of plugins, most of the top ones, but i could care less what name is on the plugin….the bottom line is does the track, buss, song sound better. Ive pulled many a plugin off a track after much tweaking only to find that i like the track better without it. Choosing for me is, what do i like better…...
Old 7th April 2014
  #643
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zillaclout View Post
i hear you audiosphinx. ijs, if i was working on a mixer in the real world, i would just mix from that one board, so i prefer thinking about mixing in those terms. it may seem somewhat limiting, and i have tried various combinations in the past, but its not a given that using multiple emulations within a mix will make the song sound 'better'. Me personally, i own hundreds of plugins, most of the top ones, but i could care less what name is on the plugin….the bottom line is does the track, buss, song sound better. Ive pulled many a plugin off a track after much tweaking only to find that i like the track better without it. Choosing for me is, what do i like better…...
I've pulled plugins off too, including VCC at times on some tracks..however, VCC, and VTM emulate two different things...tape, and console, so those two are sometimes essential to recreating the analog vibe. Also, just because I'm working on a Neve, doesn't mean I can't use API 550 EQ's, or tracked through API pre, and then slap an SSL buss compressor on the mix...thus mixing consoles anyway.

I do understand what you are saying however, and if it works to stay with one, that's all good. I like to think that if we had access to mix on various analog boards, we would have back in the day, so now it's easier to say use an API on the drums, and a Trident for guitars and a Neve for vocals...

I am not much for names either, but it's more for a reference of what type I am using and what I prefer on different sources.
Old 7th April 2014
  #644
Gear Nut
 

Understood your point too….and I'm not really disagreeing. Sure i use various eq's, compressors within a mix too just like everybody, I'm just referring to how i think about using a plugin….about 'why' I'm using it. I really don't have the mindset of i use a particular plugin 'automatically' because even tho i know how they sound and what ill get, certain songs sometimes sound better without certain ones. I like to let the song point in what direction to go in. Free or inexpensive or older plugins make my mixes all the time. But who knows, i might also have a song with VCC and the Studer on tracks, and Britson on the mix buss. Matter of fact, I'm sure that will happen eventually….
Old 7th April 2014
  #645
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe_04_04 View Post
I own Pro Q.. And don't NEED any other EQ. But after I demoed SonEQ Pro, I immediately purchased it. It can be used on absolutely anything. Vocals, drums, acoustics, etc. Anything. This may sound cheesy, but my EQ choices have improved since purchasing (and I'm not the only one who's said this, lots of others too). Theyve gave it a vintage feel, in that it doesn't have a million choices, it's limited in choices, but it doesn't really affect how useful it is, which is amazing. You'd think with limited choices, you'd have limited applications, but it's not exactly like that. It's amazing at shaping stuff. The only time I don't use it is if I need multiple bands of narrow cutting, as SonEQ mainly only gives you one band that can cut very narrow (the low mid, as that's where most resonances and weird frequency build ups occur).

Anyway, enough of that. Give it a whirl! I can't recommend it enough. I actually hope they make more plugins like SonEQ Pro vs console emulations. I'd like to see a compressor built by them with the limited choices like SP.
I've started with SW34, it's fast(?), I mean you can hear tone changes quickly, especially at the higher Q. At first it reminded me of working with the UAD 88RS, but the 88RS has weighted knobs, they are very subtle until you get 60% in, then it kinda goes too far, then you adjust the Q to get it back down. 34 starts 'sounding' as soon as you look at the knob! It's not transparent, but it can stick to the sound and really accentuate what's there without changing things too much. I also like it with and without sat, it's not like it falls apart when you turn the sat off. Something about the knobs though? Will take some adjusting to trying to grab onto the right part.

I did not spend too much time with Brit, yet, but I can kinda better understand what folks were talking about. It's not subtle like Satson. And the filters seem stronger, I need to take a look at the specs, but shame the softer curve isn't available. The FAT thing, I'm not sure what to think about it!

As an aside I hadn't really ever used the buss version for Satson. It's much more useful than I thought, and can't wait to spend time to see if Britson buss offers something.

edit: mistaking EQs lets edit quickly! I'll probably pick up SonEQ next time around.
Old 7th April 2014
  #646
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by smoke View Post
It's not subtle like Satson.

Hmmm, I think it is quite subtle compared to the other channel emus out there. For instance many seem to add more stuff in the low end than Britson.

On certain sources (certain frequency content) if you only use it conservatively it can even affect the sound less than Satson (I did an A/B with Sat and Brit on the same channel). But you have the *choice* to drive it hard, that changes the sound a lot, and I love the auto compensation on Britson for this.
Old 9th April 2014
  #647
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Topgear View Post
Hmmm, I think it is quite subtle compared to the other channel emus out there. For instance many seem to add more stuff in the low end than Britson.

On certain sources (certain frequency content) if you only use it conservatively it can even affect the sound less than Satson (I did an A/B with Sat and Brit on the same channel). But you have the *choice* to drive it hard, that changes the sound a lot, and I love the auto compensation on Britson for this.
Very helpful. Thanks! I can see this in certain situations. These things can be tricky. It will take me some time to actually say anything about this, TBH I should admit that I have more to learn about Satson still and it's deficits which I need to know better.
Old 9th April 2014
  #648
Lives for gear
 
Beatworld's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Topgear View Post
On certain sources (certain frequency content) if you only use it conservatively it can even affect the sound less than Satson (I did an A/B with Sat and Brit on the same channel). But you have the *choice* to drive it hard, that changes the sound a lot, and I love the auto compensation on Britson for this.
I bet you know this but ..... Satson has the same auto compensation option
Old 10th April 2014
  #649
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beatworld View Post
I bet you know this but ..... Satson has the same auto compensation option
With auto compensation and filters you can really alter the sound a lot, it's all source dependant. Which again...the people who say "Well it's a console emu, I should just be able to slap it on every channel and without any work it should sound great, otherwise money back!" are really missing the point of these.

Yesterday I watched the Mike Shipley Pensado's Place episode, where he said something like "I love console emus, like the Slate one for instance, but I hate the name 'console emulation'. Because they really aren't. They are all tools to be used in a certain way". And I think that's important...that's how you get the best out of these things. Really know the flavour they add, how and when to use it and ignore the name.
Old 11th April 2014
  #650
Lives for gear
 

Great Point

Very well said.
Old 11th April 2014
  #651
Lives for gear
 

I have found both the Saton and the Britson so valuable to all of my mixes. Like I have stated on many other threads learn and understand the differences between ITB and OTB mixing. I and my partner often give many listeners the impression that we are using Big Consoles and that only started when we learned to understand how to calibrate the mix through proper gain staging. The Satson Sonimus helped largely to open that door. Check out Skip Burrows thread on the Why ITB mixes don't sound like hardware mixes. Long thread but thats more of a lead than I should give but Im in a good mood. You will find many clues. Truthfully I am not knocking anyone here skill but if you can't get the sound of a console from either of the two you are truly not using these products correctly.
Old 11th April 2014
  #652
Gear Guru
Hey Smoke you liking the Hornet eq? I use mine a lot, very soft and musical for lack of a better term. Curious if others have it and the Soneq pro and what their thoughts are. Hornet pairs nicely with Britson. Analogue goodness....
Old 12th April 2014
  #653
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ardis View Post
Hey Smoke you liking the Hornet eq? I use mine a lot, very soft and musical for lack of a better term. Curious if others have it and the Soneq pro and what their thoughts are. Hornet pairs nicely with Britson. Analogue goodness....
Man I am having so much fun with the SW34, I can't keep my pants up. It's so instant, hard to put into words. I am trying to not overuse it at the moment

Britson's "Master Bright" seems to have a very pointy transient peak eh? I took a low level listen and heard it add a little more to my nylon that I (think I?) wanted... for now heh. Just like Satson, a trick is to get it very low so you can hear certain distortions... esp. wrt to our old FAT.
Old 12th April 2014
  #654
Lives for gear
 
Zyzygis's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by smoke View Post
Man I am having so much fun with the SW34, I can't keep my pants up. It's so instant, hard to put into words. I am trying to not overuse it at the moment

Britson's "Master Bright" seems to have a very pointy transient peak eh? I took a low level listen and heard it add a little more to my nylon that I (think I?) wanted... for now heh. Just like Satson, a trick is to get it very low so you can hear certain distortions... esp. wrt to our old FAT.
Yes, the SW35 is pant dropingly good.
I really enjoy using Satson and Britson in the same mix for different instruments or channels. Britson makes it easy to bring things forward in the mix due to its brighter colour, whereas Satson sounds softer or rounder to my ears. The filters are great on both, and the fader/ metering and level options make it much easier to gainstage properly. Add VCC, Soneq pro and Satin to the mix and the colour options not only make me lose my pants, but blow my socks off too!
Old 12th April 2014
  #655
Lives for gear
^Yup, exactly. For me I just exchange NLS instead of the V stuffs, and I am enjoying almost too many options to make quick decisions. A good problem to have.

May I ask? What are you in particular, bringing 'forward' in your mixes and from what kind of sources?

I think Britson (and a lot of stuff) may mean something different depending on your miked audio vs. VSTi workflow. Not to go too far off track but perhaps to bracket the opinions a little tighter.
Old 12th April 2014
  #656
Lives for gear
 
e-are's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by smoke View Post
^Yup, exactly. For me I just exchange NLS instead of the V stuffs, and I am enjoying almost too many options to make quick decisions. A good problem to have.

May I ask? What are you in particular, bringing 'forward' in your mixes and from what kind of sources?

I think Britson (and a lot of stuff) may mean something different depending on your miked audio vs. VSTi workflow. Not to go too far off track but perhaps to bracket the opinions a little tighter.
I put vcc on a track followed by a trim plugin, gain staging, and I heard absolutely no difference with the exception of the neve. Been liking satson tho.
Old 12th April 2014
  #657
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ardis View Post
Hey Smoke you liking the Hornet eq? I use mine a lot, very soft and musical for lack of a better term. Curious if others have it and the Soneq pro and what their thoughts are. Hornet pairs nicely with Britson. Analogue goodness....
I'm a fan of SW34. Demoed Soneq Pro, but didn't feel a need to purchase it. (I also use 6144 and SlickEQ.)

I'm still on the fence about Britson. I rely on Satson a lot right now.
Old 12th April 2014
  #658
Lives for gear
 
Zyzygis's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by smoke View Post
^Yup, exactly. For me I just exchange NLS instead of the V stuffs, and I am enjoying almost too many options to make quick decisions. A good problem to have.

May I ask? What are you in particular, bringing 'forward' in your mixes and from what kind of sources?

I think Britson (and a lot of stuff) may mean something different depending on your miked audio vs. VSTi workflow. Not to go too far off track but perhaps to bracket the opinions a little tighter.
Snares, guitars, acoustic and electric, and solo strings have worked well for me through Britson, also on the drum buss, depending how much high mid detail I want. It's the mids and upper mids that Britson seems to bring out most, so I like to balance that with Satson for pads and instruments that I want further back in the mix. The Fat switch on Britson sounds good on electric guitars to bring out any crunch, never really found the Fat on Satson worked for me, I always prefered it off, but on Britson it often seems to add something desirable, depending on the source.
The Britson buss sounds very good, but I find I have to experiment with the input level to find the sweet spot for a mix. Too much gain and things can get brittle, it seems much more sensitive than Satson in this respect. The crosstalk is great for bringing out that extra bit of depth.
Old 12th April 2014
  #659
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zyzygis View Post
Snares, guitars, acoustic and electric, and solo strings have worked well for me through Britson, also on the drum buss, depending how much high mid detail I want. It's the mids and upper mids that Britson seems to bring out most, so I like to balance that with Satson for pads and instruments that I want further back in the mix. The Fat switch on Britson sounds good on electric guitars to bring out any crunch, never really found the Fat on Satson worked for me, I always prefered it off, but on Britson it often seems to add something desirable, depending on the source.
The Britson buss sounds very good, but I find I have to experiment with the input level to find the sweet spot for a mix. Too much gain and things can get brittle, it seems much more sensitive than Satson in this respect. The crosstalk is great for bringing out that extra bit of depth.
I am hearing some of what you are saying, it depends on your track and how much precedence you want to push out relative to everything else. It's up or down.

I've found that you certainly need (for me, in a lower quality environment that I kinda know) to get it through your available monitor sources to hear how it translates. I do think that Britson is more forward, and furthermore, it seems to be a sonic decision, rather than Satson which is a discrete path that I can choose what to add to.
Old 16th April 2014
  #660
Gear Nut
 
Boris Sonimus's Avatar
 

Hi Folks!!
We have been working in a new version of Britson. "Grouping" will be added in this release.
Next week we will announce in our site the date for the release and some technical details.
As always feedback are considered for future releases, thanks!!

Boris
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