Slate FG-X 2.0

[simonjewel]

Originally Posted by mesaone

I probably have mentioned this before, but I'm conflicted on slate. VTM is great, except for how they gutted VCC by removing group naming and assignment editing. An upgrade is announced years before release (boo) but it's going to be free (yay)

I'm conflicted also .... I don't love VCC in VMR , I hardly ever use VMR any more, VTM has been well and truly replaced by UAD for a long time now ... Free update? Yes, and so it should be! Will it feature again on any mix? Well the jury's out on that one ... Depends how good it is, there's plenty of great alternatives out there. One note of caution, if it's VMR based ... It's totally out of contention

[mesaone]

Originally Posted by simonjewel

One note of caution, if it's VMR based ... It's totally out of contention

Oh, I sure hope not. The other VMR modules aren't what I would reach for on the master bus, and FG-X is not what I would reach for on individual tracks or groups. It's just not a "rackable" processor in my opinion.

[simonjewel]

Originally Posted by mesaone

Oh, I sure hope not. The other VMR modules aren't what I would reach for on the master bus, and FG-X is not what I would reach for on individual tracks or groups. It's just not a "rackable" processor in my opinion.

Agreed! But there's this nasty suspicion lurking that VMR is the be all and end all of slate now

[mesaone]

Free or no, I have no problem ignoring FGX2 and using Pro Limiter or Xenon in its place. The A-J inserts on a PT track are already a rack, and having a matryoshka doll of effects does nothing for my workflow. At least with the EQ, trim, and dynamics in VMR it kinda makes sense. Please, Steven, give me the option of inserting it alone.

[simonjewel]

Originally Posted by mesaone

Free or no, I have no problem ignoring FGX2 and using Pro Limiter or Xenon in its place. The A-J inserts on a PT track are already a rack, and having a matryoshka doll of effects does nothing for my workflow. At least give me the option of inserting it alone.

Exactly!!

[knothardly]

i kinda agree with simon... slate is pushing everything in VMR now so i ain't holding my breath so it wouldn't surprise me. i think stevie boy wants people to have to depend on his rack system and also to help promote his subscription.

but i am with mesa... i use Xenon instead of FG-X now but i am quite interested if ALL this wait and lies have been worth it so... we will see what we will see.

one word of note.. stevie boy did not say which summer he was aiming for lol (sorry to point out the obvious)

[Mikey MTC]

There's nothing wrong with just using the rack with one module in it.
You could put a FGX-2 over your master as the only device in the rack if you want. The rack on its own won't punish your CPU. The only downside is that it might slightly complicates your automation (depending on how you work).

[YYR123]

Problem is most of his clients don't want it.....

And unfortunately maybe this is the new norm, a company not listening or giving its customers what they want

[simonjewel]

Originally Posted by YYR123

Problem is most of his clients don't want it.....

And unfortunately maybe this is the new norm, a company not listening or giving its customers what they want

I agree and it certainly would relegate it to the unused folder if it has to be contained in VMR

[Pingafuego]

Which plugins are you using instead of VMR eqs and compressors?