WAVES MPX MASTER TAPE PLUGIN snake oil???

[DaveSB]

What do you guys think of Waves MPX Master Tape Plugin?

Read my previous thread on analog emulations
http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=253758

thanks in advance
David

[ronwasserman]

Luckily plugins like this don't have the temperature issues. So "Snake Oil" no. IMHO.

[Bill Denton]

In the words of Jeremy Roberts on the thread you linked to...

1. Troll

I used to live in Chicago, and I've seen my share of mob muscle. But not one of them ever tried to force me to buy a Waves product.

Anybody interested in the MPX can download a demo for free at the Waves website. They can then make their own decision whether to buy it or not.

The purpose of this forum is to help Pro Tools users. And you are not helping anyone...

[DaveSB]

Excuse me Im no troll -I just bought a Waves MPX from Paul at dutchmuzik
The post from Planet Mu website about analog emulations was fair and who ever that was they had some valid points
Im interested to see what other people really think of the MPX
The white paper looked good --but somehow I have have doubts that it sounds exactly the same as the real thing more or less
I had the SSL Duende channel strip and bus compressor (Native) and sold those after disappointment thinking it would be the same as SSL desk , however I love and have kept the SSL X-Comp which did not really emulate an existing piece of hardware but was something new

cheers David

[nst7]

Why does it matter what anyone else thinks about it? Even if no one else likes it, if it sounds good to you then it's worth the money.

Even if it doesn't sound like the unit it's emulating, if it sounds good, then who cares?

It doesn't cost you a penny to download the demo and see if you like it.

FWIW, generally people have been raving about it.

[DaveSB]

yeah but this is best place to ask as the forum members here , really know what works and would have probably used multitrack tape machines

[Bill Denton]

But following on to what nst7 said, what do you care if it sounds like a Studer or like a Fisher Price toy microphone?

Again, if you like the way it sounds, buy it. If you don't like the sound, don't buy it.

Trust me, the people who might buy enough of your recordings to allow you to make a living really don't give a damn how it was recorded...

[midnightrambler]

I don't want unreliability / unpredictability built into my software, thanks all the same. That for me was the worst thing about analogue. I want the same thing to happen every time.

Heaven knows we have enough instability to put up with as it is. Every time a piece of software gets updated it feels like we're all running the gauntlet.

[crizdee]

Originally Posted by DaveSB

Excuse me Im no troll -I just bought a Waves MPX from Paul at dutchmuzik
The post from Planet Mu website about analog emulations was fair and who ever that was they had some valid points
Im interested to see what other people really think of the MPX
The white paper looked good --but somehow I have have doubts that it sounds exactly the same as the real thing more or less
I had the SSL Duende channel strip and bus compressor (Native) and sold those after disappointment thinking it would be the same as SSL desk , however I love and have kept the SSL X-Comp which did not really emulate an existing piece of hardware but was something new

cheers David

Hi,

I'm really getting to like the MPX and i've started using it a lot more on mastering than i thought i would!!

But then i also love the SSL Channelstrip! Whether its exactly like an analogue 400 series console i don't care but it is exactly like the C series digital consoles which it was taken from and the XL9000 analogue console which it was modelled on.

No, 48 plugins will never sound exactly like 48 bespoke channels of circuitry, but we're getting close!!


Chris

[Bob Olhsson]

While it's certainly true that analog gear is always a moving target, I think the plug-in sounds almost exactly like the machine that we used for the model and is closer than a different Ampex 351 would probably be. This is provided you don't overdrive the input.

The biggest challenge to begin with was finding a machine and the proper way to align it that sounded as good as possible on a wide variety of material at various levels. Once we had established we had the right machine, the best sounding tape for that machine and the proper alignment based on the two most common methods, a model was created based on its electronic components and what that particular machine sounded like on a wide range of material using Benchmark Media and CraneSong converters.

John Haeny aligned and recorded with these machines every day at United/Western, RCA Victor, Sunset Sound and Elektra Records for a decade and even had one at home. His stellar work served as a benchmark for many of us during the 1960s. Eric Schilling was taught to align 351s by an engineer who had learned from the head of engineering at Ampex who had overseen the machine's design. I don't think there is anybody more qualified to judge the subjective performance of a 351 than John or anybody more qualified to align it to reach the very highest level of performance than Eric.

There's a ton of oversimplified misinformation about analog recording floating around the internet. This is especially true about the relationship between headroom and saturation. I think we came closer to getting that right than anything I've heard thus far.