poll results and some confusion

votes

Last week I had asked about some feedback through the polls here. The results on the polls about samplerates and SSE1 support where unsurprisingly straight forward and so I skip those here.

More confusing to me was the result to the other poll in which I’ve asked: “If NastyCS would be extended to be a complete pre-amp/channelstrip emu, which features would be a must-have?”.

A cumulated 31% of all votes went to saturation/distortion type of things (Tape  (12%), Tube (10%), Pre-Amp (9%)) and afterwards there is showing up a 8% demand for transient shaping – why do you expect such things in a channelstrip that much? I would have had expected to see sophisticated compression options to be on top of the list but this just appears in 7% of the total votes.

Comments

  1. I guess we all go for quick operation on our ideal channel strip. Personally i use a lot more the 2-knobs-sounding-great plugin than anohter great plugin with tons of options (LA2A or 3A over marquis, i.e).

    For sure more options give more possibilities, but i like to have several simples plugins that do “that” perfectly than rather a single one which need to be tweaked to death after you get the sound.

    Of course i am a composer so this opinion might be completely different to another one who is working as a mixing engineer, remixer, etc.

  2. kingocounty says:

    I guess for me, what I want in a channel strip is something I will use on every channel. Your eq’s and saturation plugs make everything sound more “analogue” (I hate saying that, but it’s the best description) so I’d like to have that on every channel just for basic sound shaping. As for sophisticated compressors and such, I may use a couple in a mix but I don’t feel the need for something like that in a channel strip; I’d rather have separate plugs that I can pull up when I need them. I could see having a basic compressor in the channel strip, but then I think I might be too tempted to use it and I have to be mindful of not over-compressing everything as it is😉

    Just my two cents! (which is actually more than you charge for all these world-class plugins)

  3. susiwong says:

    Ed has some good points here, I mostly agree.
    But you asked about a channel strip which is useful in its own right imho, complete snare sound in one preset (user made for a specific snare of course), everything in a single GUI, for newbies it’s easier to learn a single channel than the quirks of lots of individual FX, the chance of getting closer to a coherent “console sound” …
    Bottom line: I do use both simple individual plugs as well as strips, based on sound mostly.
    I think looking at two widely acclaimed channel strips, the SSL and the 88RS, shows a few similarities for good reason – full EQ, a decent allrounder comp, a full featured really useable gate/expander, tuneable filters, the option to change the sequence of the sections and put the filters as SC – that’s the set of features that’ll get you “there” in most situations.
    So if you’re going for a channel strip this feature set is a given more or less, creativity should go into the quality of the individual sections instead, maybe carefully adding a few details others don’t have, preamp emu, I often find me wishing for attack controls instead of switches, Neve’s Hysteresis is cool etc.
    Anything else is candy on top imho, there’s a fine line between full featured and Battlestar Galactica.
    And with so many controls a clear, ergonomic, one glance GUI is a must.
    Ymmv,
    susiwong

  4. susiwong says:

    Oh, and re the poll, give me 7 options and I’ll use them up fast, ask about my 2 or 3 favourite (still missing) channel strip features and I’ll think harder, that’s the way the croissant crumbles.
    Like in demographics, the question predetermines the results somewhat.
    Ymmv,
    susiwong

    • I agree to a certain extend but I don’t believe we would have a totally different result if I would have asked for just giving 3 votes (given some thousends of votes already here). Do you?

      • susiwong says:

        Far from being an expert on these issues.

        A few things you might want to take into account however:
        — the current obsession with all things analog, tape, transformers, saturation, distortion – how much of that is based on actual listening experience, let alone hands-on experience in mixing using these phenomena ?
        — basic psychology #1: you want xy ? – gimme, gimme !
        — basic psychology #2: easy vs. sophisticated – “will I be able to handle sophisticated ? Not sure, I’ll take easy.” (unspoken, of course)

        Nothing of that is meant to devalue any of the tech options in question, nor to devalue any votes. I’m pretty sure some of the above mechanisms influence the poll results, the question is to what degree.
        A night out with a sociology student might shed more light on the underlying mechanisms …

        In the end, go with your own gut feeling, it has served you (and us😉 ) well in the past, and factor in some tendencies from the poll as long as long as they fit in with your own vision.

        Ymmv,
        susiwong

        • kingocounty says:

          I think part of the response may have been that there are very few decent saturation/analogue emulation plugins in PC VST land whereas there are many compressors etc., from which to choose. Not to argue, and just speaking personally, but the mild distortions that analogue gear impart on a signal make elements of a mix sit together much better, plus the natural saturation/compression of things like tape and transformers can be more subtle and pleasant than specific ITB compression. Bootsie’s plugs do a great job of approximating those sounds and I think people are hungry for more. Again, just one middle-aged man’s opinion.

  5. I’m against 99% of tape and tube emulations just because the never sound as pleasing as the real thing. But I do like the vintage pre amp drive circuits emulated in your stuff, wave’s API, SSL stuff, and such.

    Still there is no great smooth soft knee compression out there for free and I would love to see your take on an LA-2A style compressor. I’m working on a compression module right now. I’ll let you know if I make any headway.

    Also I would like to see the NastyVSD with the same vintage sound as the BootEQ and with a SSL style bus compression. I don’t want you to emulate the SSL or the LA-2A. Just make something that would be used for similar functions.

    But I think that the NastyCS with a pre amp drive would be all it needs. I’d like to see any tape or tube emulation you decide to do in a separate plug.

    Also I can’t get the BootEQmkII to work as a mono plug-in when wrapped with FXpansion vst to rtas adapter in ProTools 8.

  6. So, if there would be one dynamic section added in which you are able to select between different processing types (lets say e.g. compression A, B, limiting, tape, …) would that be ok?

  7. Hi everybody,

    My Dream channel strip should be like this:

    1. A minimal phase EQ with high Q, high and low cut and 3 fully parametric bands, followed by…

    2. … a musical EQ with broad Q bands, shelfs and certain frequencies like in Neve Design, followed by…

    3. … a compressor that can be switched in feedback, feed forward and opto mode, and with a limiter knob

    4. The option to switch between EQ->Comp and Comp->EQ

    5. Bootsys Analog knob

    Thats all ! Don`t care about transient shaping and Saturation ! These are special features, not used often enough to take place in a regular channel strip. You know, if you make a survey in the internet, you have to count with a lot answers from people having their knowledge from magazines instead of their own working experience.

  8. If you could archive something along the lines of the new Dynamic Spectrum Mapper – DSM

    ( http://www.proaudiodsp.com/products/dsm/ )

    Along with some of your beautiful saturation magic in there Boosty, that for me would be the ultimate plugin of all time.

  9. that does not answer my question …

  10. I’d still rather you only add the analog drive circuit. I have great limiters already (W1 Limiter) and I think an all-in-one is too much.

    I’d just rather have the compressor/limiter on a separate plug with a soft knee (La-2a style), hard knee (1176 style), and limiter (soft/hard) mode with fully modeled gain stage. The ultimate compressor!

    Channel strips usually do one or two things well and I never find myself liking all the built in features at the same time.

    I would love to see a saturation plug-in with your analog drive circuit. Kinda like the URS Saturation plug. You could have different modes for tape, tube, and vintage iron. That leaves more flexibility.

  11. Major Edition says:

    Ask 100 people about what they wanna see in a new car model and you will get a bunch of different answers.

    Some of the answers will make you wonder if they know anything about cars, their designs, technicalities and any car experience apart from just driving it.

    You have no idea.

    • quote, i think u should take your own decisions and simply do your things. nobody outthere reach this audio quality 4 free, so i think if u make some plugins exactly like some users wants u shold get paid 4 it

      • Major Edition says:

        Sure Ilkombo. Bootsy is already doing a hell of a great job. I was making suggestions, contributing what I know to help.

        May be someday, I will make time and write my own plug-ins just like Bootsy. I studied Applied Computer Science, Software Engineering in University so I’m sure I can.

        Software and Programming languages are not easy. They are time consuming and I’m glad Bootsy and a lot others are able to make the time besides their regular jobs to do it and share them with all of us for free.

        May be I’m too lazy. I don’t know. LOL. Just kidding. I’ll see what I can do later.

        If you don’t mind me asking, who are you quoting, by the way?

        Cheers.

  12. Why don’t you do two versions of the channel strip, one that would be a dedicated vocal channel and another with more “all around” capabilities. Imo the only thing you are missing for a great vocal channel is an excellent compressor that emulates something like an UA 1176ln or a dbx160. The MkII is an excellent eq/tube section, and really needs a compression/limiter friend. You are the only one that can pull off an incredible comp plug in and the world needs it.

  13. Major Edition says:

    Bootsy, to bring all the confusion to an end, why don’t you turn Nasty CS into something like the Neve 8801 Channel Strip? I have read nothing but good reviews and good things about it. Check the links below:

    http://www.ams-neve.com/Products/Outboard/8801/8801.aspx

    EQ Magazine’s review

    http://www.eqmag.com/article/ams-neve-8801/feb-08/33451

    If I remember very well, Susiwong was saying something similar but he/she was going more towards the Neve 88RS and the SSL channel strip.

    I think it will be a great channel strip to have. What do you guys think?

    • Major Edition,
      the 88RS sure is a mighty fine channel strip (very similar to your 8801), and so is the SSL.
      However I was not suggesting a clone or something remotely along these lines, not at all.
      I used those well known examples to draw conclusions about a sensible feature set, both companies sure know their stuff, and the features both channels share might be worth a consideration, not more.
      Bootsie can do better than cloning for sure.
      Cheers,
      susiwong

      Damn, off to check the 8801, I could do with a decent mic channel or two as frontend, no doubt (except for my banker, unfortunately)

  14. Major Edition says:

    For the guys here who speak italian, you will appreciate this video more. If you don’t speak italian like me, don’t worry so much about what he is saying, although I think I can make up some of the things he is saying in the video. Sorry but this is the only video I could find on this beautiful channel strip.

    If you speak italian and you think he mentioned something important and worth knowing in the video, can you let us all know. They provide you a link to download test files and compare the unprocessed and processed files which the channel strip was used on. Link below:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsNqDpADbxc

    On their site, scroll to the equipment you want to hear the test file for and click on the Audio HQ link.

    Bootsy, I love Nasty LF and HF. They are wonderful. The Audient Black Series rack remind me of them. Have you tried these and did you model after them? Probably just a coincidence. Most equipments look kinda similar.

    http://www.audient.com/audient/product/black-series-overview

    Brent Averill’s racks look just like Neve’s and some studio’s use them to replace their Neve racks. Well, Brent Averill states that they are modelled after the Neve racks and sound like them. The two are not affiliated. No big deal.

    http://www.brentaverill.com

  15. This is pointless, really. There won’t be a clone or such a like developed by me.

    • Major Edition says:

      Bootsy, I was not suggesting a clone because I know you are capable and will do something better. I found it interesting and just wanted to share.

  16. Bootsy, EVERYTHING is a clone of something or another.
    The only things that aren’t clones are the home made units that started appearing in the 1950’s.

    There is a big difference if you play Rock’n’Roll style music or if you just do plain Elvis covers, thats my point. And the real great artists today go beyond genre and style or combine them fluent and seemless (imho).
    Having a VCA in the circuit (which in digital is just a single multiply) isn’t really the thing …

    • And while there may certainly be value to a good emulation nobody has done before (like UA do), what would be the appeal of yet another 1176 or Fairchild ?
      I didn’t give in to the temptation of that current IK deal for exactly that reason.
      My hope for your and Patrick’s future work would be exactly continuing what you do now, taking some inspiration from the classic designs (nobody can completely ignore them, most are popular for a reason), adding some original ideas and thus creating something entirely new.
      For me at least this concept works perfectly.
      I’m not thinking “I need a UA plug here” or “Let’s add something by Bootsie”, instead I’m thinking in terms of the character my track needs, sometimes a Pultec is exactly “it”, sometimes an SSL, and (quite often I may add) the unique filter combinations of BootEQ II or NastyCS will do the trick.
      Same for the other plugins, all have a strong character to them, giving me additional colours to work with.
      Kinda like a Matchless DC30, although it borrows a lot of that Vox heritage, nobody in his right mind would call it an AC30 clone, it is loved for its own unmistakeable vibe instead.
      Ymmcv,
      susiwong

  17. The #1 reason for me to use a channelstrip (the only one I use is the Waves SSL E channel) is because it saves a lot of time when I can dial in a preset I made earlier for example the lead vocal or the snare sound, and mosts of the time you only have to do a little tweaking to make it fit in the song. The reason why it works this fast, is because it has the 3 most important ingredients:

    EQ, gate/expander, compression

    I would LOVE to see a channelstrip made by you with these 3 ingredients. Density mkII replaced the Waves SSL bus compressor in all my tracks, I’m sure your channelstrip will be able to do the same with my Waves SSL channelstrips.

    Thanks for everything!

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: