|
|
Post by maldenfilms on Oct 31, 2023 12:11:14 GMT -6
how it looks is how it sounds. There are digital artifacts, deliberate distortion, unwanted distortion, unwanted phasing and even optional deliberate phase shift to emulate a hardware loop back which is ridiculously because the digital processor cannot even emulate the analog one’s curves correctly. Just because the digital distortion and artifacts work on one track, does not mean that they will work on most or on any other. Poor attempt at a mastering tool especially when modern productions are all over the place and many mastering jobs are not popular music productions with overt saturation and fx. This is just distorted eq with more digital artifacts than what psp was putting out 20 years ago. That psp 4 pack had aliased distortion but the filters didn’t cramp. cramping is itself an aliasing artifact where the poles of the filter warp. pre-warped filters to mostly match analog frequency response have existed since 1990s (Oxford and Renaissance eqs) and oversampled eqs to mostly match analog frequency and phase response have existed since the original mdweq in early 2000s There is no reason for this or any of the make believe pack to exist other than to make money from unsuspecting, naive customers or to have more antiquated processing for metric halo’s onboard dsp. The ideal digital state variable filters were worked out and published by Simper and Zavalishin in their free papers too. There are zero reasons for any recent digital eq to use filter structures from older text books too. Yet we still see direct form eqs try to present themselves as mastering eqs with oversampling, pre-warping, and or some sort of linear phase warping to try to match an analog phase response claiming that it results in less ringing than the svf filters oversampled and then downsampled on output yet that still has the drawbacks of direct form filters but with a nicer top end. Dan Dan, I appreciate that you have strong opinions. That's fine. I do not appreciate, however, having myself or other members of this community being called "unsuspecting, naive customer(s)." The fact is that not everyone agrees with you. There are members here who really like their monitors that have plate amps in them. And there are members here who have great ears who do not like Molot GE or Kotelnikov. That's just the way it goes, man. One of the primary things that has made this online community so different from other online communities over the past ten years has been this community's general ability to disagree without name calling or being disagreeable. There has historically been a certain level of goodwill and assuming the best of each other. Not perfectly, of course, but we try. I hope that can continue, but it does require us to think twice or even thrice before hitting the button labeled "Create Post". Amen. I think what makes this community so great has been the (comparative) lack of arrogance, dogmatism, and condensendence that is all over other forums. I think we can all learn from each other and think it's wise to assume that none of us knows everything. Absolutisms just leave a bad taste in my mouth, especially when so many great engineers seem to love some of these tools, like the Sontec plugin. It took me way longer than I'd like to admit to realize that the "if it sounds good, it is good" maxim is what matters. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2023 13:44:30 GMT -6
how it looks is how it sounds. There are digital artifacts, deliberate distortion, unwanted distortion, unwanted phasing and even optional deliberate phase shift to emulate a hardware loop back which is ridiculously because the digital processor cannot even emulate the analog one’s curves correctly. Just because the digital distortion and artifacts work on one track, does not mean that they will work on most or on any other. Poor attempt at a mastering tool especially when modern productions are all over the place and many mastering jobs are not popular music productions with overt saturation and fx. This is just distorted eq with more digital artifacts than what psp was putting out 20 years ago. That psp 4 pack had aliased distortion but the filters didn’t cramp. cramping is itself an aliasing artifact where the poles of the filter warp. pre-warped filters to mostly match analog frequency response have existed since 1990s (Oxford and Renaissance eqs) and oversampled eqs to mostly match analog frequency and phase response have existed since the original mdweq in early 2000s There is no reason for this or any of the make believe pack to exist other than to make money from unsuspecting, naive customers or to have more antiquated processing for metric halo’s onboard dsp. The ideal digital state variable filters were worked out and published by Simper and Zavalishin in their free papers too. There are zero reasons for any recent digital eq to use filter structures from older text books too. Yet we still see direct form eqs try to present themselves as mastering eqs with oversampling, pre-warping, and or some sort of linear phase warping to try to match an analog phase response claiming that it results in less ringing than the svf filters oversampled and then downsampled on output yet that still has the drawbacks of direct form filters but with a nicer top end. Dan Dan, I appreciate that you have strong opinions. That's fine. I do not appreciate, however, having myself or other members of this community being called "unsuspecting, naive customer(s)." The fact is that not everyone agrees with you. There are members here who really like their monitors that have plate amps in them. And there are members here who have great ears who do not like Molot GE or Kotelnikov. That's just the way it goes, man. One of the primary things that has made this online community so different from other online communities over the past ten years has been this community's general ability to disagree without name calling or being disagreeable. There has historically been a certain level of goodwill and assuming the best of each other. Not perfectly, of course, but we try. I hope that can continue, but it does require us to think twice or even thrice before hitting the button labeled "Create Post". This is not an opinion that improved methods of creating digital eqs have been created that operate in the same way (or an entirely identical way) that most analog eqs do but digitally rather than with electrical circuits. Direct form biquads even if pre-warped do not. I am not name calling. I do not mean to insult. The marketing for the Make Believe bundle and many other analog emulations is absurd new speak. It cannot be the same. It is not an ideal digital model of the circuitry. It is not even a model of the circuitry given the talk of poles and de-cramping. It is most likely a standard old school digital eq that attempts to copy the frequency response of the hardware with some slight optional harmonic distortion and unwanted digital artifacts. The limiter in the Make Believe bundle is less advanced than what’s included in most DAWs. The good math is absurd. The math is obvious and many daws like Cubase and Reaper have better math than that plugin if you want to debate mites on the head of a pin or contrive a test that would reveal the quantization of the significand like the reverb tail and electronic instruments that are mostly noise and distortion tests for hearing 24-bit quantization distortion. The Relab ad copy is ridiculous. This one talks about robotics and advanced machine learning. One can get into further how their plugin of the Lexicon 480 or other emulations or purported ports of vintage digital equipment cannot be identical to the originals unless the emulations or ports perform mathematical operations like the vintage dsp chips performed them. That is another topic altogether because that digital imprecision and distortion is part of the sound and the settings of the device had to take that into account versus the digital artifacts and dysfunctionality existing in most digital emulations of entirely analog processors. Many people like older digital compressors and limiters that do not function as advertised if at all or are more digital distortion devices than effective dynamics processors. L1 and L2 have become this for many modern productions. The 1176 and LA2A emulations are effectively this. Complex dynamics processors can be difficult to grasp, especially those with controls that will drastically change how the device functions and requires the user to know how older devices functioned, how they exploited their limitations or drawbacks, or what those did to the envelope being applied to the sound. Something like the emulated bleed from the charging capacitor for the secondary envelope into the main envelope in the glue, Buspressor, and Molot is hard to explain but can be a beneficial modulation. Artifacts like the unemulated thus far vca distorting more when away from unity of their trimming which can be beneficial or detrimental, high noise vcas having and modulating that noise, or the dc control path bleeding into the audio path aren’t in popular digital dynamics plugins I know of. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2023 23:52:53 GMT -6
Wrote that when watching football. These developers and hardware manufacturers hype up all this stuff from textbooks and old service manuals. Metric Halo is doing stuff for different distortion at each tick that doesmt feel like a simple waveshaper. Relab, I have no idea what they are doing in general but it seems rather black box and the bells are peculiar.
Vadim Zavalishin from Native Instruments figured out how to run digital state variable filters like hardware parametric eqs. Andy Simper from Cytomic broke that out into the using Kirchoff's laws to emulate the block diagrams. cpus aren't powerful enough yet to get extremely non-linear and run crazy non-linear state variable filters in real time. We're a long ways off from digital API 550s with shifting frequencies and running out of gain in the treble.
when he blows up the old school direct form biquads is what's happening in old type EQs very far down. I can blow up the Apogee EQs I have here. The biggest difference to me with 64-bit direct form vs newer EQs is how much more drastic many of the smaller cuts feel. Like that Avid EQ III needing double the cut to feel like a better EQ but not as bad.
|
|
kcatthedog
Temp
Super Helpful Dude
Posts: 16,058 
Member is Online
|
Post by kcatthedog on Nov 16, 2023 4:09:16 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by makebelievestudios on Jan 7, 2024 13:55:17 GMT -6
Thanks for all the kind words! We really appreciate it!
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 7, 2024 14:38:33 GMT -6
I think the MH Sontec sounds great. It’s too bad you didn’t put it in Plug-in Doctor first to see how it looks. Could have saved yourself the embarrassment of weighing in (in public no less) on an audio processing tool after merely having listened to how it processes audio. Smh  |
|
