Thread: Is Waves Kramer Tape plug-in worth the money for what you get?

Anything is worth the money if you deem it necessary. Different equipment will provide different results. Too many condenser thingies (microphones) for digital recording can really sound quite harsh. That's where we use dynamic microphones and ribbon microphones. We might also utilize preamps that are transformer coupled in and out? Don't forget, there is a sucker born every minute. So when you get the cleanest and brightest recording in digital it can sound like crap. And then you need to scrounge around to take the edge off. So use more dynamic microphones instead of condenser microphones and you will have already solved most of your problems.

They are still trying to come up with software algorithms to mimic the nonlinear transfer characteristics of analog tape. Some folks utilize tube style saturation plug-ins. Others think they need analog tape style saturation. Some people want the cleanest, brightest, most neutral sounding equipment only to find out it's not what they really wanted. For $99, you could probably buy a for real analog tape recorder! And then you can have the real deal instead of a genuine imitation. That's kind of like a VW beetle tricked up to look like a Rolls-Royce. All that saturation software stuff is designed to mush up your recordings. There are plenty of other ways to accomplish that. Folks with $20,000 Pro Tools systems might want to spend three times as much for something because they think if they spend that much money, it has to be good. Problem is, nothing else was good that they did before they got the mushy plug in. Learning how to record and mix better negates the need for any kind of mushy plug in. So spend what you want if it's worth it to you. If you want some second harmonic distortion, take your audio file, high Pass filter it at 500 Hz and then double the pitch without doubling the speed. Mix a little of that back in to your other master file and you will have produced second harmonic distortion. See? Wasn't that simple?

I'm a simple engineer
Mx. Remy Ann David

Both work great. They are pretty different. you may want to start with less expensive alternative and if after few years you're still not getting what you want get the other one

Take a look at the Slate Digital VTM.

I have it and it sounds great, though I've never worked with real tape.
But there are some good reviews that claim that it's very close to the real thing.

I'm a big fan of Variety of Sound's Ferric TDS. It's not a tape saturation plugin. It does incorporate some very nice harmonic distortion that sounds very tape like. It's not harsh distortion either. It's very subtle even on extreme settings. You hardly know it's there until you turn it off. The best thing though is that it's free. Unfortunately, it's VST only. No RTAS version.

I've been using the old IK Multimedia, T-Racks which actually has a nice little " distortion " adjustment. What it actually does is make the waveform go with what appears to be greater forward modulation i.e., even order distortion components when you find greater globules of your waveforms above the center baseline then below it. Kind of reeks from the days of AM radio specifications allowing for 125% forward modulation but being constrained to 100% negative modulation. And before that was enacted some stations were actually going nearly 200% forward modulation. Put that in your limiter and it. Of course this comes from class C amplifiers, LOL. And that sounds like it already has been d? Don't want to be plugging those into any speakers. I mean ya could? But you also might need to be clicking your heels together and say... I want to go home... I want to go home?

I think I'm an 18 wheeler? I have two trucks, a van and a motorcycle and that equals 18 wheels. No?
Mx. Remy Ann David

I have the Slate VTM and the VCC plugins and cant imagine working without them. Im an analog guy with a digital budget. Love vinyl and R2R and have taken digital mixes and ran them across consumer R2R and rescently bought an Otari R2R in search of a cheap way to get that smoother saturated sound. Once I installed Slates VTM I quit experimenting with tape. Read the reviews on all the tape sims. Slates is coming out on top.

While the OTARI's were decent machines, the best flavored saturation came from the Ampex 351's, Scully 280 Bridgeport germanium's, 3M's, MCI and Studer's. And not just with the hot tapes but even with the old 3M Scotch 111 running at 185 nano webers per meter on a Scully 280 Bridgeport, with the linearizer, on at 15 IPS. I think it's funny that you don't see any Scully saturation emulators? I mean that was the ticket back in the day. Nothing like that 288-16 not even a Studer. Go figure? Who made the best record cutting lathes before we got those German ones? Scully. Who had more head room than an Ampex or a Studer? Scully. And who sounded bigger and fatter? Scully. (The Bridgeport germanium ones). Dictaphone versions not so shabby either. The sound of silicon and not germanium. And I think this doesn't exist because no one creating these emulators is old enough to remember? Just like everybody thinks the Universal Audio UAD 2, can actually sound like a plate reverb. It doesn't. Believe me it doesn't. A VW is not a Porsche even though a Porsche is a VW. Or so to speak. Bottom line, if it feels good, do it.

Where's my batteries?? OMG where's my batteries?! No fun tonight.
Mx. Remy Ann David

my analog recorders sell ro like 50, or 250. it's the real thing better or worse. and wasn't mci reguraded as the 'best sounding', just absurdley high maintentence? it was by phil but who cares. he opted for the closest sounding thing that didn't need constant care. ampex i think. again who cares. but he did say something that rattled the cobwebs of my brain about, at a certain time the tape machines used to start to take care of themselves via rudimentary cpu's. so you could actually have an electronically controlled tape deck, that ya didn't need tiny screw drivers for constantly. hence 50k per 24ch. i think they actually started working towards electronic alignment type stuff. could be mistaken. could challenge a big money company to make a new tape machine, could not even like the sound of tape for all things. i use dirty cheapo machines that work as such when i need to. so i get to not be picky about any of the finer details and enjoy. as long as modern tape has minimal dropouts, good deal. i love 90's music, and that was such a wish-wash in production tech, but they did ok. by the time they perfected tape, they had to compete w/ digital tape, and so an evolution just makes sense.

People who want to use tape as an effect, as opposed to the only available medium, should just use it. pluggins rule. but the choice of current modeling, is on 'high end' or recordist specific tools. it's still just digital distortion, great or not. i could care less about purity, unless purity means a good sounding bands' performace. digital is not a cuss word. people were trying very hard to have 'clean tape sounds'. i dunno. i guess it can all be related to high level electtical stuff, but i'll just use some tape and re-convert. algoriythims are numeric relationships based on a much more condensed physical space, than an old reel to reel. i think the digital version will perform more consitently, but consistency is not what i really expect when i fire up a deck, close, but never the same. even if the equipment was the same, the band won't be. i haven't cooked food w/ a micro chip yet, although it'd help me get more sleep. if you want tape sound use tape, ya want a nice digital version, use good converters. Get the best darn emulation you can, on the most relavent computer and that'll be fine, but it'll be more about inherit eq and modulation than anything else. just get the most pleasant digi and reap the rewards. or use your choice of analog w/the most usable dig conversion.

i'm not gonna go make a charcol mic tonight, soo. just get what you want