Shelled out for the Waves Bundle, went back to stock plugins.

[GeneRoberts]

I don't get it. After being on this forum for a while, I realized I needed a bunch of plugins, and, instead of paying each time, I just went ahead and got the Waves Platinum Bundle (plus a few other plugins by Waves). I had a mix done with stock plugins and thought the new plugins would help perfect it. After spending a couple of days educating myself about these plugins (watching tutorials, reviews, etc.) I started to replace all the stock plugins I had applied. I tweaked everything meticulously and kept exporting mixdowns along the way.

Now, I am sitting here and doing AB tests between these mixes, before and after the Waves plugins, and I find the mix produced with the stock plugins is a lot more natural and superior in every way. I now have to revert everything back to stock, I'm afraid.

For example, I tried the Waves H-Verb, Abbey Road Plates, TrueVerb, and none of these gave me the natural, forward vocal reverb sounds I got with the stock D-verb (using their room or plate settings). I also found the stock Pro Tools eq to be more serviceable for precision work than the ones coming with Waves. Similarly, the L2 limiter was no improvement over the stock Maxim, and it was simply a waste of time going from one plugin to the next.

Anybody had a similar experience?

[JFreak]

I think it's just a matter of what one is used to be using; an eq is an eq no matter what the skin.

OTOH, IMO you're wrong about L2/Maxim comparison. There is a notable difference in favor of L2 so be happy you have it ;)

Picking the right reverb is a matter of opinion and while I dislike the D-verb it's not bad at all. And the price is right ;)

[Carl Lie]

Most plugins have a trial period. Best to do that before shelling out any money.

C.

[soybalm]

yes, Maxim is far more distorted than L2 for a whole mix. However, I used Maxim on drums and got good results.

[lesbrunn]

I don't get it. After being on this forum for a while, I realized that I needed a bunch of plugins, and instead of paying each time, I just went ahead and got the Waves bundle. I had a mix done with stock plugins and thought the new plugins would help perfect it. After spending a couple of days educating myself about these plugins (watching tutorials, reviews, etc.) I started to replace all the stock plugins I had applied. I tweaked everything meticulously and kept exporting mixdowns along the way.

Now, I am sitting here and doing AB tests between these mixes, before and after the Waves plugins, and I find the mix produced with the stock plugins is a lot more natural and superior in every way. I now have to revert everything back to stock, I'm afraid.

For example, I tried the Waves H-Verb, Abbey Road Plates, TrueVerb, and none of these gave me the natural, forward vocal reverb sounds I got with the stock D-verb (using their room or plate settings). I also found the stock Pro Tools eq to be more serviceable for precision work than the ones coming with Waves. Similarly, the L2 limiter was no improvement over the stock Maxim, and it was simply a waste of time going from one plugin to the next.

Anybody had a similar experience?

Hi Gene,

Correct me if I'm wrong, and this is just a feeling I have, but could it possibly be that in your eagerness to get 'pro' results with your new plugins, you've maybe been a little over-zealous? I know I've been there before.

Depending on the material, sometimes less is more when processing audio. Many experienced engineers would probably do some subtractive EQ first, before boosting if necessary. It's easy to process a track to death especially with EQ and compression, so constant comparison along the way is important. Our ears are good at forgetting what went on before, and they quickly adjust to what's happening now.

I've used Waves for over a decade, and I find many of their plugins quite good. Maybe instead of throwing your Waves plugins away, you could tackle the issue from the perspective that you want to improve on what you had done previously with the stock plugins (they're also quite usable, BTW). With that in mind, I'd probably duplicate the tracks I'm working on and do a constant A&B between stock and Waves. Mind you, your AB should be carried out while processing, not after the fact.

As was said before, it's all a matter of choice and how comfortable you are with your tools. That said, it's still possible to become more and more comfortable with new tools to the point where you may actually prefer some of them to your previous ones. I press all of them (stock and 3rd party) into use depending on what needs to be done and which tool I think is most suitable.

With me for instance, the 7 band stock EQ gets a lot of use, but the Fabfilter Pro Q is more suitable for precision surgery. The waves EQ's also get some love. Many digital EQ's can sound harsh in the higher frequencies, but there are a couple that have a silky smooth high end, so those come into play when that is called for.

[Gemylon]

ProTools stock Plugs are top notch.
If you got good results using them, there is no need to replace them.

I use Waves from time to time, but not as much as I used to.
So many great developers out there ...:-)

[musicman691]

I don't get it. After being on this forum for a while, I realized that I needed a bunch of plugins, and instead of paying each time, I just went ahead and got the Waves bundle. I had a mix done with stock plugins and thought the new plugins would help perfect it. After spending a couple of days educating myself about these plugins (watching tutorials, reviews, etc.) I started to replace all the stock plugins I had applied. I tweaked everything meticulously and kept exporting mixdowns along the way.

Now, I am sitting here and doing AB tests between these mixes, before and after the Waves plugins, and I find the mix produced with the stock plugins is a lot more natural and superior in every way. I now have to revert everything back to stock, I'm afraid.

For example, I tried the Waves H-Verb, Abbey Road Plates, TrueVerb, and none of these gave me the natural, forward vocal reverb sounds I got with the stock D-verb (using their room or plate settings). I also found the stock Pro Tools eq to be more serviceable for precision work than the ones coming with Waves. Similarly, the L2 limiter was no improvement over the stock Maxim, and it was simply a waste of time going from one plugin to the next.

Anybody had a similar experience?
What Waves bundle did you get? I never buy bundles but get the plugins I want. That way I'm not stuck with dogs. I also make liberal use of demo periods for plugins. For instance right now I'm working with H-Reverb (killer sale at Audio Deluxe for ~$41). It's a great reverb for what it does; deep and it takes some time to get used to what everything it does. And that's the rub - you need to spend time & patience with new plugins and don't expect miracles from any presets they come with. There's no such thing as a 'forward vocal reverb' as reverb for the most part puts things in a space.

I have a few 'verbs and each has their own use; there's no one that's suitable for everything. Abbey Road Plates gets heavy use on drums and piano. True Reverb I got as a freebie and seldom gets used. Eventide UltraReverb gets good use and is the one I tend to use sparingly on vocals. Reverberate 2 is a deeply programmable ir reverb and the Fusion ir's have a depth to them you have to experience - they do take some time tweaking to get things so they're not TOO heavy.

Precision eq work with Waves plugins are an oxymoron. Now I don't have every one of their eq's but those I do have don't fit that bill. For precision eq work I use HOFA IQ-EQ; not cheap but worth the bucks when you see what it can do. Back to Waves eq's - I like the ones in the TG12345 strip and REDD console for that 'British' sound.

The moral of my story: Waves has some good stuff - you just need to know what to look for and make use of demo periods.

[JFreak]

Some good stuff, yes.. a couple of my favourites:
- C6
- L3LL Multi
- Dorrough Meters
- SSL Channel
- API2500
- SuperTap

[huzzam]

Please don't take this the wrong way, but I have to point out: the thing that you didn't upgrade when you bought the Waves plugins is your own skill (as well as your monitoring environment). Now I don't know anything about how skilled you are, nor about your monitoring system. But: you carefully crafted your first mix to the best of your ability, with the (quite capable) stock tools at hand. Then you tried to do the same with Waves (perhaps overusing the new tools in your excitement) and were disappointed that they didn't provide more "magic." But you're the same engineer, and looking for the same result, only "better"...

In my experience, "better" tools don't necessarily make better mixes than decent tools; they make getting good mixes easier. For example, you can get super fat crunchy analog-style delays with stock PT plugs — just throw some saturation, modulation, & eq after the delay plug in & dial them in, perhaps routing the channel back into itself for the feedback. But if you have (eg, my favorite delay) EchoBoy, you just open it and pick which style you want, or poke around if you're not sure what you want.

That said, I don't argue that there's no point in getting other plugins; in particular reverbs impart such a distinct, present color, and are worth investigating. & a great limiter, a surgical subtractive eq, and a multiband compressor are also very worthy additions to the stock offerings.

A great painter can mix any color from red, yellow, blue, white, and black. But you might still prefer to buy a certain green that you like...

Anyway on your next mix, maybe try working with mostly what you already know well, and pick one or two of your Waves plugs to experiment with. For example, try using the SSL Channel as your only eq/comp on all your tracking channels, and getting really used to that. Keep everything else the same. Or pick one of your new reverbs as the main verb, and have the L2 or SSL Comp on your master bus, at a gentle setting, from the start of your mix. This way you can learn your new tools specifically, and appreciate their colors for what they each offer.

Or else try to get every single new plugin somewhere in your session :)

~peter in athens

[GeneRoberts]

What Waves bundle did you get?

Got the Platinum Bundle + a few separate reverb and some other plugins. And I agree with you. Their eq plugins were so bad I don't see myself ever using them. I'll see if I can find something I like later.

By "forward vocal reverb" I meant having good reverb effect without losing the vocals into the background. For example, this song ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4BfyFCzWCs ) is my reference track, and you'll notice how forward and present the vocal sounds while apparently being heavily processed with reverb (and possibly delay effects). I am trying to achieve the same results with my female vocal track. Whichever reverb plugin I bought (and I probably won't buy more) got me farther and farther away from my goal. Then I got back to the good old D-verb and it got me closest to this effect.

[GeneRoberts]

Some good stuff, yes.. a couple of my favourites:
- C6
- L3LL Multi
- Dorrough Meters
- SSL Channel
- API2500
- SuperTap

Thanks. I'm going to look into these and see if I can learn to use them well.

[GeneRoberts]

Please don't take this the wrong way, but I have to point out: the thing that you didn't upgrade when you bought the Waves plugins is your own skill (as well as your monitoring environment). Now I don't know anything about how skilled you are, nor about your monitoring system. But: you carefully crafted your first mix to the best of your ability, with the (quite capable) stock tools at hand. Then you tried to do the same with Waves (perhaps overusing the new tools in your excitement) and were disappointed that they didn't provide more "magic." But you're the same engineer, and looking for the same result, only "better"...

In my experience, "better" tools don't necessarily make better mixes than decent tools; they make getting good mixes easier. For example, you can get super fat crunchy analog-style delays with stock PT plugs — just throw some saturation, modulation, & eq after the delay plug in & dial them in, perhaps routing the channel back into itself for the feedback. But if you have (eg, my favorite delay) EchoBoy, you just open it and pick which style you want, or poke around if you're not sure what you want.

That said, I don't argue that there's no point in getting other plugins; in particular reverbs impart such a distinct, present color, and are worth investigating. & a great limiter, a surgical subtractive eq, and a multiband compressor are also very worthy additions to the stock offerings.

A great painter can mix any color from red, yellow, blue, white, and black. But you might still prefer to buy a certain green that you like...

Anyway on your next mix, maybe try working with mostly what you already know well, and pick one or two of your Waves plugs to experiment with. For example, try using the SSL Channel as your only eq/comp on all your tracking channels, and getting really used to that. Keep everything else the same. Or pick one of your new reverbs as the main verb, and have the L2 or SSL Comp on your master bus, at a gentle setting, from the start of your mix. This way you can learn your new tools specifically, and appreciate their colors for what they each offer.

Or else try to get every single new plugin somewhere in your session :)

~peter in athens

Thank you for the intelligent thoughts and the good advice. I agree with you. I have many years of experience in music making but digital production is relatively new to me. So it's entirely possible I haven't yet learned how to use the tools.

[GeneRoberts]

Hi Gene,

Correct me if I'm wrong, and this is just a feeling I have, but could it possibly be that in your eagerness to get 'pro' results with your new plugins, you've maybe been a little over-zealous? I know I've been there before.

Depending on the material, sometimes less is more when processing audio. Many experienced engineers would probably do some subtractive EQ first, before boosting if necessary. It's easy to process a track to death especially with EQ and compression, so constant comparison along the way is important. Our ears are good at forgetting what went on before, and they quickly adjust to what's happening now.

I've used Waves for over a decade, and I find many of their plugins quite good. Maybe instead of throwing your Waves plugins away, you could tackle the issue from the perspective that you want to improve on what you had done previously with the stock plugins (they're also quite usable, BTW). With that in mind, I'd probably duplicate the tracks I'm working on and do a constant A&B between stock and Waves. Mind you, your AB should be carried out while processing, not after the fact.

As was said before, it's all a matter of choice and how comfortable you are with your tools. That said, it's still possible to become more and more comfortable with new tools to the point where you may actually prefer some of them to your previous ones. I press all of them (stock and 3rd party) into use depending on what needs to be done and which tool I think is most suitable.

With me for instance, the 7 band stock EQ gets a lot of use, but the Fabfilter Pro Q is more suitable for precision surgery. The waves EQ's also get some love. Many digital EQ's can sound harsh in the higher frequencies, but there are a couple that have a silky smooth high end, so those come into play when that is called for.

Thanks for your comments. I might have been a little overzealous... But if we take eq, for instance, the PT stock 7-band eq seems superior to the ones in Waves, with the exception that it won't let me see frequency wave activity while tweaking. (Same thing with the delay plugin. I just couldn't dial in anything that sounded good and went to the PT stock delay, which is a very good plugin, apparently, with lots of useful features.)

And yes, the presence boost on most eq's has been harsh. Which one is it that gives the silky smooth high end?

[JFreak]

Sonnox EQ with the GML option

[GeneRoberts]

Sonnox EQ with the GML option

Three bills... This time I might have to demo first. :)

[K Roche]

Three bills... This time I might have to demo first. :)

I have the Platinum bundle also and Honestly I don't use that much of it .
For me Waves is a real mixed bag . Now I agree with the gent that stated the Maxim is distorted , for me it is unlistenable where the Wave L2 is quite good.
Although because I am on a Mac I use the Massey L2007 limiter.

For EQ I think it is pretty hard to beat the PT bundled EQ III especially for precise subtractive work. And also Use the bundled Channelstrip for my vocals

As for waves if have used with some success I like the H-delay for guitars and the Waves doubler on occasion . I also used the Ren. reverb before I got a Bricasti M7 which ended almost all of my plug reverb use.
However you can now get a Bricasti sanctioned plug in called Seventh Heaven from Liquid Sonics

https://www.liquidsonics.com/software/seventh-heaven/

They have two versions If money is tight the standard version does indeed have arguably the most used Bricasti presets and would work fine

I have heard a solo acoustic guitar with this plug in and it was superb. IF I did Not have the Hardware M7 I would not hesitate to get this plug in.
The Bricasti presets are as good as it gets IMO
For my vocals I use the Sunset Chamber with 60 ms predelay.

Here is an example of that Sunset Chamber preset /with 60ms (ignore the fact that is probably recorded a bit to hot and I have not taken the time to re-record it ) and it is 128 bit MP3.

Don't know why the Sound Cloud player will not play in the DUC forum
but the link below it willhttps://soundcloud.com/kevwind/thequestion



The vocal you linked has great air and presence, Personally I don't think it is all that heavily processed and I'm not sure about delay. Now you may already know all this BUT.
For vocal I always place the verb on an Aux track@ 100% wet in (parallel) and send to it.
I would guess that whatever verb might be used that A. it is in parallel and B. it is likely pre delayed by some where between 40 ms and 80 ms Which IMO tends to let more air and presence through.
If you haven't already done it try the predelay and you could also try the Abby Road Vocal trick .
https://youtu.be/4lNckK8N3to

[GeneRoberts]

The vocal you linked has great air and presence, Personally I don't think it is all that heavily processed and I'm not sure about delay...


Wow! That Abbey Road trick is amazing! Thank you so much! Can't believe I might continue mixing not know that cool trick. Some reverb plugins allow you to roll off the highs and stuff, it's nothing like being able to fine tune the reverb like this.

As far as delay, I think some of it must have been used on her vocal to bring her close, to the front of the mix and give some warmth and body to the vocal.

Reverb alone, no matter what plugin is used, doesn't seem to get me there completely. I am going to experiment with the pre-delay settings you suggested and see what I can get.

P.S. Great singing on that track there! The recording itself is fine too. Not sure if recording it too hot was the reason why the guitar is so stridently forward. The mic could have been too close to the sound-hole, plus the strings are pretty bright. A softer pick might help. But it's all fine as it is, overall. The vocals (both tone and singing) are just great!

I wonder if you'd use any delay, if you were mixing to achieve a similar effect, though. Somehow I feel like it needs to be used, even if ever so gently.

[musicman691]

Got the Platinum Bundle + a few separate reverb and some other plugins. And I agree with you. Their eq plugins were so bad I don't see myself ever using them. I'll see if I can find something I like later.

By "forward vocal reverb" I meant having good reverb effect without losing the vocals into the background. For example, this song ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4BfyFCzWCs ) is my reference track, and you'll notice how forward and present the vocal sounds while apparently being heavily processed with reverb (and possibly delay effects). I am trying to achieve the same results with my female vocal track. Whichever reverb plugin I bought (and I probably won't buy more) got me farther and farther away from my goal. Then I got back to the good old D-verb and it got me closest to this effect.
I never said the Waves eqs are bad but just that they're not exactly surgical in their usefullness; more broad strokes than anything else. Then again you really need to look at what each eq can do - some have a 'sound' that's unique to that eq. Which is why an API style eq sounds different than a Pultec than an SSL eq.

Your first mistake is getting the Platinum bundle. Sure you get a bunch of plugins but you also, as you've found out, gotten plugs that you'll never use or don't work for you. Like I said, before your next purchase spend some time with demos of plugins - that approach has saved me a ton of money. There's been times where I've demoed a plug that's supposed to be the greatest thing since sliced bread and it ends up being month old moldy instead.:eek:

As to the reverb on the linked to video I'd take a guess and say some kind of plate reverb. They also didn't roll-off much in the reverb as it stays fairly bright. Try Abbey Road Plates with one of the solid state drivers (i.e. don't use the tube model). If you don't have a plate reverb try an old-school tank spring reverb.

[musicman691]

Wow! That Abbey Road trick is amazing! Thank you so much! Can't believe I might continue mixing not know that cool trick. Some reverb plugins allow you to roll off the highs and stuff, it's nothing like being able to fine tune the reverb like this.

As far as delay, I think some of it must have been used on her vocal to bring her close, to the front of the mix and give some warmth and body to the vocal.

Reverb alone, no matter what plugin is used, doesn't seem to get me there completely. I am going to experiment with the pre-delay settings you suggested and see what I can get.

P.S. Great singing on that track there! The recording itself is fine too. Not sure if recording it too hot was the reason why the guitar is so stridently forward. The mic could have been too close to the sound-hole, plus the strings are pretty bright. A softer pick might help. But it's all fine as it is, overall. The vocals (both tone and singing) are just great!

I wonder if you'd use any delay, if you were mixing to achieve a similar effect, though. Somehow I feel like it needs to be used, even if ever so gently.Delay won't bring a vocal forward. In another response to you here I mentioned trying Abbey Road Plates. Do you have H-Reverb? That may do what you want; make use of the input and output echoes as well as the built-in eq.

[sdelsolray]

I don't get it. After being on this forum for a while, I realized that I needed a bunch of plugins, and instead of paying each time, I just went ahead and got the Waves bundle. I had a mix done with stock plugins and thought the new plugins would help perfect it. After spending a couple of days educating myself about these plugins (watching tutorials, reviews, etc.) I started to replace all the stock plugins I had applied. I tweaked everything meticulously and kept exporting mixdowns along the way.

Now, I am sitting here and doing AB tests between these mixes, before and after the Waves plugins, and I find the mix produced with the stock plugins is a lot more natural and superior in every way. I now have to revert everything back to stock, I'm afraid.

For example, I tried the Waves H-Verb, Abbey Road Plates, TrueVerb, and none of these gave me the natural, forward vocal reverb sounds I got with the stock D-verb (using their room or plate settings). I also found the stock Pro Tools eq to be more serviceable for precision work than the ones coming with Waves. Similarly, the L2 limiter was no improvement over the stock Maxim, and it was simply a waste of time going from one plugin to the next.

Anybody had a similar experience?

How much previous experience have you had with the "stock plugins" compared to the few days you have spent with various Waves plugins?

[JFreak]

For EQ I think it is pretty hard to beat the PT bundled EQ III especially for precise subtractive work.

Sonnox EQ mode2 :)

[JFreak]

I never said the Waves eqs are bad but just that they're not exactly surgical in their usefullness; more broad strokes than anything else

Q10 is rather good at surgical tasks

[Top Jimmy]

Delay won't bring a vocal forward.


Not trying to be argumentative, but used for Haas or early reflections, delay does in fact have the effect of pushing a vocal forward. Makes it easier to perceive and understand without making it louder.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[JFreak]

Not trying to be argumentative, but used for Haas or early reflections, delay does in fact have the effect of pushing a vocal forward. Makes it easier to perceive and understand without making it louder.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

True. But everything is relative to the volume you're listening to...

[Top Jimmy]

True. But everything is relative to the volume you're listening to...



Volume alone doesn't confer "forwardness" when accounting for dimensionality in a stereo mix.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[GeneRoberts]

Delay won't bring a vocal forward. In another response to you here I mentioned trying Abbey Road Plates. Do you have H-Reverb? That may do what you want; make use of the input and output echoes as well as the built-in eq.

I played with the Abbey Road Plates plugin for hours. Tried every possible dial. Sounds OK, but it's not appropriate for this mix. I didn't feel good about the sound coming out of H-Verb either. In the end, what did it for me was a combination of the D-Verb and the TrueVerb (at least something out of Waves got used) and cutting out the Delay completely. The TrueVerb basically creates some kind of room setting and the D-Verb gives the full-on reverb I needed.

Taking the advice above, I slightly rolled off the lows in the reverb and dialed the pre-delay to 40. This got me the closest to my reference. Nice learning experience.

[GeneRoberts]

How much previous experience have you had with the "stock plugins" compared to the few days you have spent with various Waves plugins?

Not a whole lot. I'm new to PT (Used Samplitude before.) and only have used PT for 5-6 songs. But the stock plugins have served very well. I used meticulously dialed eq tricks to bring a badly recorded, boxy-sounding classical guitar track to near perfection. The Waves eq plugins wouldn't let me do something like that.

[K Roche]

Wow! That Abbey Road trick is amazing! Thank you so much! Can't believe I might continue mixing not know that cool trick. Some reverb plugins allow you to roll off the highs and stuff, it's nothing like being able to fine tune the reverb like this.

As far as delay, I think some of it must have been used on her vocal to bring her close, to the front of the mix and give some warmth and body to the vocal.

Reverb alone, no matter what plugin is used, doesn't seem to get me there completely. I am going to experiment with the pre-delay settings you suggested and see what I can get.

P.S. Great singing on that track there! The recording itself is fine too. Not sure if recording it too hot was the reason why the guitar is so stridently forward. The mic could have been too close to the sound-hole, plus the strings are pretty bright. A softer pick might help. But it's all fine as it is, overall. The vocals (both tone and singing) are just great!

I wonder if you'd use any delay, if you were mixing to achieve a similar effect, though. Somehow I feel like it needs to be used, even if ever so gently.
No reverb alone will not get you there, but I would guess compression is going to bring the vocal forward as opposed to delay. Some prefer delay rather than reverb because they feel it gives a feeling of space but is less diffuse than reverb so possibly clearer. Personally I prefer predelay on verb and some compression

[lesbrunn]

Thanks for your comments. I might have been a little overzealous... But if we take eq, for instance, the PT stock 7-band eq seems superior to the ones in Waves, with the exception that it won't let me see frequency wave activity while tweaking. (Same thing with the delay plugin. I just couldn't dial in anything that sounded good and went to the PT stock delay, which is a very good plugin, apparently, with lots of useful features.)

And yes, the presence boost on most eq's has been harsh. Which one is it that gives the silky smooth high end?

+1 for the Sonnox. Also Gliss EQ from Voxengo. There's also the Baxter EQ, which is freeware, but I don't think there's an AAX version. The DMG EQ's are also good.

[moshuajusic]

I think you'll find more satisfaction in using your new plugins from the get-go in your next mix. (Then try replacing them with stock plugins and see what happens.)

[Southsidemusic]

I think you'll find more satisfaction in using your new plugins from the get-go in your next mix. (Then try replacing them with stock plugins and see what happens.)

+1

And I have to disagree that the stock plugins are better sounding then expensive colorful EQ/Comp/FX plugins, bo way ever is that true. You can of course get a good session with stock plugins but I can PROMISE if we mix the same song, one with stock and one with UA/Sonnox/Slate and Soundtoys et al the song will sound very different, there is a reason some plugins are $500 a piece and stock comes free with Daw's.

[Tim Ripley]

I think you'll find more satisfaction in using your new plugins from the get-go in your next mix. (Then try replacing them with stock plugins and see what happens.)


YES, YES, YES! I totally agree with this. You make many mix decisions based on how a plugin is behaving. You can't just take a mix that you've perfected with other plugins and start swapping them out. You'll never be happy. Use them from the start and make your decisions based on what they are doing. Use them over several projects. Use them on different sources. It takes time to get to know one tool let alone an entire bundle of them.

[musicman691]

+1

And I have to disagree that the stock plugins are better sounding then expensive colorful EQ/Comp/FX plugins, bo way ever is that true. You can of course get a good session with stock plugins but I can PROMISE if we mix the same song, one with stock and one with UA/Sonnox/Slate and Soundtoys et al the song will sound very different, there is a reason some plugins are $500 a piece and stock comes free with Daw's.
Agreed. Sound different and better. There will be a certain sweetness & smoothness that can't be done with stock plugins. Stock plugins model nothing in particular; take a UAD SSL channel strip plugin which models specific hardware and actually learn how it works and you'll have a real step up from anything stock.

In all the time I've been doing digital recording there's only been one stock plugin worth it's salt and then some and that's the LA2A emulation that comes with Digital Performer. They even modeled what happens when there's no signal on the photocell versus when there is for the first couple of audio passes through it. The cell warms up just like a tube.

[JFreak]

different is different and that is a whole "different" thing than better or worse... A/B can judge "different" but whatever judges "better" is a matter of personal opinion

[RiF]

The Platinum bundle does not offer much above what comes stock with PT. But there are some plugins that could deserve some attention:
- To me, all digital EQ plugins sound pretty much the same, but the Waves PuigTec EQP1A can do some nice high end boosting.
- The H-Delay with it's analog modes and the lo-fi button is my go-to delay for getting great sounding delays more quickly than using ModDelay.
- The Doubler can do some subtle stereo widening, if needed. I like it on synths (less subtle) or vocals (more subtle). Default settings with the doubled parts' gain down.
- The C4 has no equivalent in the stock PT arsenal. Can act as a dynamic EQ to even out spiky frequencies. Great tool.
- RenVox is simple, but has a certain sound that I often like. And it can level a vocal track very quickly.
- RenDeesser works fine and I prefer it over the stock PT one.
- Waves Tune LT works great (very little tuning artifacts) and simple. Besides simple tuning, I even use it to change the actual notes of a vocal line to something different.
- Then there are some plugins like S1, MaxxBass/RenBass and Vitamin that can do a good job, if needed and have no equivalent in PT.

Other than that, I would not see myself using the rest of the pack.

All those do not really make my mixes sound better, but I get good results more quickly.

[K Roche]

Sonnox EQ mode2 :)
To clarify are you talking the OXford EQv3 ? I have yet to use any Oxford, are you saying you think the sound is superior to the digi EQ III ?

[Bob Olhsson]

Wow! That Abbey Road trick is amazing!...It's amazing to me too however only the fact that it's being credited to Abbey Road when it has been SOP in the U.S. since the '50s and possibly even the film industry in the 1930s!

[K Roche]

It's amazing to me too however only the fact that it's being credited to Abbey Road when it has been SOP in the U.S. since the '50s and possibly even the film industry in the 1930s!

True the guy in the vid even mentions it is only because AbbyRoad does apparently use it regularly, and I would further suspect it is used because it is catchier than something like "The old standard high-pass low-pass filter, trick for EQing vocal reverb " :D

[Bob Olhsson]

Vocal reverb? That's plug-in speak! We only ever had a total of two to three chambers and plates!

[GeneRoberts]

The Platinum bundle does not offer much above what comes stock with PT. But there are some plugins that could deserve some attention(....)

Thanks for that detailed comment. I'll be sure to pay more attention to these. If I can get H-Verb to work well for me then it might be worth it, after all.

[K Roche]

Vocal reverb? That's plug-in speak! We only ever had a total of two to three chambers and plates!Is it ? Could you not send the vocal to the plate bring it back in and Eq it specifically ?

[GeneRoberts]

It's amazing to me too however only the fact that it's being credited to Abbey Road when it has been SOP in the U.S. since the '50s and possibly even the film industry in the 1930s!

I also dislike the non-stop references to Beatles-related studios and gear, as if it automatically meant quality. The name given to some old London residence converted into a recording studio is supposed to inspire confidence in us somehow, simply because the Beatles recorded there.

[YYR123]

To clarify are you talking the OXford EQv3 ? I have yet to use any Oxford, are you saying you think the sound is superior to the digi EQ III ?

The Sonnox has 3 different EQ curves, he is referring to EQ curve 2.

I love both my Oxford and Eiosis Air EQ. so clean and natural.

I haven't used the EQiii in years...but I did start there.

[YYR123]

But there are some plugins that could deserve some attention:
-PuigTec EQP1A
-H-Delay
-Doubler
- RenVox
- Waves Tune
- RenBass .

almost every session.....by the time it's over....almost every session.

I like feeding the send of doubler to the vocal delay...and automating in during chorus's and different places.

[Marsdy]

I also dislike the non-stop references to Beatles-related studios and gear, as if it automatically meant quality. The name given to some old London residence converted into a recording studio is supposed to inspire confidence in us somehow, simply because the Beatles recorded there.

It's been the primary orchestral recording studio in the UK since 1931. The first ever recording was Elgar's Land of Hope And Glory conducted by the man himself. The list of major Hollywood scores recoded there and at Air Lyndhurst is pretty long too! Dark Side of The Moon - Abbey Road

I get your point though! I don't buy the marketing BS either.

[lesbrunn]

To clarify are you talking the OXford EQv3 ? I have yet to use any Oxford, are you saying you think the sound is superior to the digi EQ III ?


The Oxford is definitely superior, in a class of its own. :D Forget the 'dated' look, it's among the cream of digital eq's. The EQIII gets the job done, but it's nothing special. I use it for simple stuff that doesn't require accurate tonal sculpting. I think it's a little strident from 2k upwards and needs too much attention to not make it sound harsh. On the other hand, it's the smooth sound of the Sonnox that sets it apart.

[musicman691]

I also dislike the non-stop references to Beatles-related studios and gear, as if it automatically meant quality. The name given to some old London residence converted into a recording studio is supposed to inspire confidence in us somehow, simply because the Beatles recorded there.

It's been the primary orchestral recording studio in the UK since 1931. The first ever recording was Elgar's Land of Hope And Glory conducted by the man himself. The list of major Hollywood scores recoded there and at Air Lyndhurst is pretty long too! Dark Side of The Moon - Abbey Road

I get your point though! I don't buy the marketing BS either.
It's not so much quality but the sound of the studio and the equipment there. There are places that are legendary for their sound and Abbey Road is one of those. I'm not saying that everything with a big name on it is golden (consider the Eddie Kramer cheapy plugs from Waves)

[Bob Olhsson]

Is it ? Could you not send the vocal to the plate bring it back in and Eq it specifically ?Not quickly enough with the taxi meter running! Most studios only had a handful of outboard eq./filter units and most consoles gave you the choice of one of four echo send busses.

[Bob Olhsson]

It's been the primary orchestral recording studio in the UK since 1931. The first ever recording was Elgar's Land of Hope And Glory conducted by the man himself. The list of major Hollywood scores recoded there and at Air Lyndhurst is pretty long too! Dark Side of The Moon - Abbey Road...It was never really a hotbed of audio innovation, just a very traditional, conservative label-owned studio having an incredible staff. Studio 1 has only been equipped to score films since the '70s and little classical recording was done there after gear became portable enough to record in a proper hall.

At this point it is one of a handful of traditional studios remaining thanks largely to being the best studio for recording strings in London.

[GeneRoberts]

It's been the primary orchestral recording studio in the UK since 1931. The first ever recording was Elgar's Land of Hope And Glory conducted by the man himself. The list of major Hollywood scores recoded there and at Air Lyndhurst is pretty long too! Dark Side of The Moon - Abbey Road

I get your point though! I don't buy the marketing BS either.

I know that. Read up on it a while back. (Huge Elgar Fan, by the way.)

But the fact that major Hollywood scores should be recorded there also makes my point. I lived in LA for 20 years and I know how many truly remarkable world-class recording studios they have over there.

A few years ago, the music notation company Finale unveiled their new virtual sounds for the software, and that's all we kept hearing: that they recorded the samples at the legendary Abbey Road Studios. They shared pictures of the studios, inside and out for months... Gets on your nerves after a while.

[Marsdy]

I know that. Read up on it a while back. (Huge Elgar Fan, by the way.)

But the fact that major Hollywood scores should be recorded there also makes my point. I lived in LA for 20 years and I know how many truly remarkable world-class recording studios they have over there.

A few years ago, the music notation company Finale unveiled their new virtual sounds for the software, and that's all we kept hearing: that they recorded the samples at the legendary Abbey Road Studios. They shared pictures of the studios, inside and out for months... Gets on your nerves after a while.

Indeed. OTOH, maybe the extra revenue generated from selling the brand helps keep it going

I wouldn't be surprised if Abbey Rd. gets more business doing scores for computer games than record companies.

And as Bob just said, nothing really innovative has come out of the studio hardware-wise.

[K Roche]

Not quickly enough with the taxi meter running! Most studios only had a handful of outboard eq./filter units and most consoles gave you the choice of one of four echo send busses.

Having not worked in recording way back when, I am unclear as to exactly what you are saying in terms of EQ'ing and filtering
So are you saying that eq'ing the reverb for the entire mix rolled off at 600 and 10K was a SOP ?

[Bob Olhsson]

Yes, that was often the case depending on the filters available.

[K Roche]

Yes, that was often the case depending on the filters available.

Interesting I never knew, thanks. I may give this go for when I use a room reverb for multiple instruments.

[JFreak]

To clarify are you talking the OXford EQv3 ? I have yet to use any Oxford, are you saying you think the sound is superior to the digi EQ III ?

talking about mode2 of the sonnox eq. it has four modes you know, or five if you have the gml option. mode2 is superior surgical tool, IMO

[K Roche]

talking about mode2 of the sonnox eq. it has four modes you know, or five if you have the gml option. mode2 is superior surgical tool, IMO
Ah ok thanks I suppose now I'll have to look into it , don't know if thats a thanks or a damn more money :D

[YYR123]

I have the Sonnox Oxford EQ DSP version for sale if your interested

FYI

[JFreak]

I have the Sonnox Oxford EQ DSP version for sale if your interested

FYI

FWIW, the DSP version can be upgraded with the GML option, native version can not. So if you are looking for that (GML) you need to first have the DSP version. BUT, with the current AAX offering, you CAN run the GML code with native systems, only that you need the DSP license for it. In the TDM era, GML was DSP-only

[YYR123]

All true - you have to have the DSP version to get the GML which is the George Massenburg curves.

Once you have the DSP version you can run it all natively, as I do now....sans HDX card.

[K Roche]

I have the Sonnox Oxford EQ DSP version for sale if your interested

FYI
Thanks but I am on HD Native

[noah330]

It's amazing to me too however only the fact that it's being credited to Abbey Road when it has been SOP in the U.S. since the '50s and possibly even the film industry in the 1930s!

Yeah, I thought the same thing. I clicked on the link expecting read about something I had never heard of. That's how I learned to do it back when I was young.

[TOM@METRO]

Thanks but I am on HD Native

You can still run the GML option in Native if you get the DSP version.

[YYR123]

Thanks but I am on HD Native



Yep Tom is correct.

And mine is the AAX DSP Version- and I run it all Natively

HDN specifically

[Carl Lie]

Whats the lowdown on the GML option? I owned the hardware unit. How close is it?

C

[Bob Olhsson]

It's George's design that was an option on the Sony Oxford console. He has said that he likes it and his own MDW version better than his hardware. It's been my favorite transparent eq because of the flexibility of the additional formats. It's especially nice on piano and acoustic instruments.

[Carl Lie]

It's George's design that was an option on the Sony Oxford console. He has said that he likes it and his own MDW version better than his hardware. It's been my favorite transparent eq because of the flexibility of the additional formats. It's especially nice on piano and acoustic instruments.

Thanks Bob. I think I'll add it to my Oxford curves. The hardware was crazy transparent. One of the few EQ's that sounds like a natural extension of the material itself.

Appreciate it.

Carl