The concept of plug-ins is good, but they sap the DAW's CPU power, increase latencies, limit track counts and stretch rendering times.

I foresee generic outboard digital processing boxes that are able to run multi-lingual plug-ins, and have high-speed digital links to the DAW. The DAW's one remaining plug-in has the job of parcelling up the correct tracks and sending them to and from the external boxes.

It would work with all the standard DAWs, and once the plug-ins are loaded up, the user interface remains unchanged. It would be a bit like a Digidesign DSP farm, but made generic, non-proprietary, modular, scalable and affordable. I am aware that there are offerings in this area already, but nothing that fully addresses these key design goals.

Boswell wrote: I foresee generic outboard digital processing boxes that are able to run multi-lingual plug-ins, and have high-speed digital links to the DAW. The DAW's one remaining plug-in has the job of parcelling up the correct tracks and sending them to and from the external boxes.

Isn't this the concept behing SSL's Duende and UA's UAD2 cards? I think the only way to capture the quality of hardware is through convolution but not just a capture of the signal process but a direct emulation of the circuit.

I know this is a stretch and from a self proclaimed hack. UA tries their best to follow this model. I think they do a great job. I still find some plugins have a tendency to create mud or odd artifacts. Plugin delay is a headache. I don't know if that will ever be truly compensated for.

a huge amount of mixing gets done ITB nowadays. for one, an EQ is pretty much an EQ. you're boosting and cutting frequency ranges. convolution reverbs sounds amazing, but they do have their problems with latency and CPU munch. VI's are replacing hardware synthesis in a big way.

however, OTB compression is still a basic studio requirement.

you make the most important point about mics and preamps. which is... what you do ITB starts and ends with what happens OTB. some people say you can't polish a turd, which isn't true, you definitely can (to a point), but it's not easy or recommended. starting with good preamps, mics and MIC POSITIONING, is fundamental to making good things happen ITB.

DefiningFreq wrote: a huge amount of mixing gets done ITB nowadays. for one, an EQ is pretty much an EQ. you're boosting and cutting frequency ranges. .

DefiningFreq, Do you think all ITB eq's are pretty much equal then? My outboard eq is one of those pieces being replaced by the DAW's?

Boswell wrote: The concept of plug-ins is good, but they sap the DAW's CPU power, increase latencies, limit track counts and stretch rendering times.

I foresee generic outboard digital processing boxes that are able to run multi-lingual plug-ins, and have high-speed digital links to the DAW. The DAW's one remaining plug-in has the job of parcelling up the correct tracks and sending them to and from the external boxes.

It would work with all the standard DAWs, and once the plug-ins are loaded up, the user interface remains unchanged. It would be a bit like a Digidesign DSP farm, but made generic, non-proprietary, modular, scalable and affordable. I am aware that there are offerings in this area already, but nothing that fully addresses these key design goals.

Hey Boswell,

Ya, I agree. I'd say this is where digi is going. Could be we're all going to be able to use their front end and as an option, but their, or other third party plug-in farm excels or what ever they are called?

hueseph wrote: [quote=Boswell]I foresee generic outboard digital processing boxes that are able to run multi-lingual plug-ins, and have high-speed digital links to the DAW. The DAW's one remaining plug-in has the job of parcelling up the correct tracks and sending them to and from the external boxes.

Isn't this the concept behing SSL's Duende and UA's UAD2 cards? I think the only way to capture the quality of hardware is through convolution but not just a capture of the signal process but a direct emulation of the circuit.

I know this is a stretch and from a self proclaimed hack. UA tries their best to follow this model. I think they do a great job. I still find some plugins have a tendency to create mud or odd artifacts. Plugin delay is a headache. I don't know if that will ever be truly compensated for.

Hey Hueseph,

I haven't had the opportunity to use UA ( you)?, They are in the front lines. I guess you've answered the question though, They are doing a good job but there is still latency? Is there still artifact clutter and image wash ( that's what I call it)?

hueseph wrote: [quote=Boswell]I foresee generic outboard digital processing boxes that are able to run multi-lingual plug-ins, and have high-speed digital links to the DAW. The DAW's one remaining plug-in has the job of parcelling up the correct tracks and sending them to and from the external boxes.

Isn't this the concept behing SSL's Duende and UA's UAD2 cards? I think the only way to capture the quality of hardware is through convolution but not just a capture of the signal process but a direct emulation of the circuit.
Sure, but my next paragraph covered that point. The main issue is that all these schemes so far are proprietary, and, as far as I am aware, there is no generic external box that can run standard VST or other format plug-ins in a modular and scalable form. An industry-accepted way of doing this would immediately remove many of the principal drawbacks to using software-based processing in the small to medium-sized studio.

Hi,

I paid a lot of money in plugins in the last years, but only to realize that they do their job, but sacrifices depth.. The last couple of months I found this

Http://www.acusticaudio.net

I don't want to talk more on this because of someone thinking that I'm working for that company.. It is only that I'm satisfied with this plugin, and at the time, angry for all the money I spent on crap )plugins are so expensive)..

Cheers

I one of those who definitely thinks it's betting better all the time. Less expensive hardware, less power consumption, less of everything, but more options and more flexibility, to the point of almost TOO Many choices. (Don't believe me? Just take a look at all those home-based studio environments doing just fine already, with mostly nothing more than plug ins. This alone has changed the recording industry as much as downloads have wiped out the commercial CD biz. It's not better or worse, IMHO, it's just DIFFERENT.)

I don't think we need to wait till 2010 for the answer; we've already got it.

The big studios will always have the real thing - very expensive vintage stuff; very very nice if you can get 'em. But it's harder and harder to maintain, and only the bravest and best-financed folks will have this sort of thing in the future. The rest of us will be running emulations. Very good emulations at that, and the bottom line is that it wont sound all that much different in the end. It will become like painting; choose your media; acryllics vs. tempura vs. pastel vs. charcoal, and so on.

I've been ITB for so long now, I've stopped wondering/worrying. (PC-based, Sequoia & Samplitude, Sony Vegas, Final Cut Pro) I primarily produce music and video thats are supposed to sound "real" and natural; primarily acousctic type music of all sorts (Jazz, Classical, Folk, Opera, Choral, etc.) With the right approach, I can make my digital stuff as "Warm" and as vintage-y as any piece of brown oxide, without any of the analog pitfalls and shortcomings. (I've done enough analog recording to know how to do this, as have many others reading this.)

I don't have the time and the luxury, either, of collecting anything more than great mics and pre's. Everything else is a losing investment. (go on, just TRY to resell those Rev 7s, Tascam consoles and Otari half-tracks!) The other hi-end & vintage outboard boxes are wonderful, but I consider them a hobby for others to pursue, not me. My plugs are fantastic, work as advertised, and don't get in the way of my sound. They help me CREATE the sound, but that's all I want anyway. (I don't want heat, hum, extra AC power consumption, and a tech (usually ME) to keep 'em all working.)

Should I ever need a "real" Leslie tone cabinet, stairwell reverb, or tube guitar amp, I might go rent or buy one, but even still....those plugs are getting better all the time. I always ask myself: What is the goal here, and how much time/money do I have to acheive it?

I know I'm not like others; I don't run a facility open to the public, and I don't have to be all things to everyone and have a slew of sexy gear to entice cliens. But that was never my goal anyway. I've had the fender rhodes keyboards, fender guitar amps, drum rooms, etc., and it's just no longer cost effective for what I do now. Fortunately, I can still hear what sounds good vs. crap in plugs OR the real gear.

As for EQ; the lack of time-smear and ringing, inaccurate freqs., and so many other anomalies in the old stuff just makes me wonder why more don't hear the difference with great digital EQ tools. Oh well, that's why HoJo makes 28 flavors, I guess.

Me? Plug away. I've got my favs and am open to more. You probably do too.

Boswell: Right. I misunderstood what you were getting at. There is Muse' [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.muserese…"]Receptor[/]="http://www.muserese…"]Receptor[/] though it seems more geared toward VSTi. It doesn't seem to support any of the major players either. IE: Waves/Cambridge/Ik Multimedia. It does however suppport VST/AU/RTAS and is both Mac an PC compatible. Whether it will run your plugins is a crapshoot it seems. I can't find a proper compatibility list on the site.

audiokid: I have a UAD card and it does sound great but even with the card I can only run a few instances of any of the higher quality plugs like the 1176LN and with this particular card I can't run the Fatso Plugin that I covet so much. lol. Latency is still an issue. I don't know how or if that will ever be resolved.

JoeH wrote: As for EQ; the lack of time-smear and ringing, inaccurate freqs., and so many other anomalies in the old stuff just makes me wonder why more don't hear the difference with great digital EQ tools. Oh well, that's why HoJo makes 28 flavors, I guess.

when in the digital environment the algorithm or program is set and should not make mistakes or work differently next time it's loaded
given the DSP is working and the process is NOT corrupted it should work the same
analog gear will be influenced by many things , age, temp, interfacing, signal levels
they can seem alive at times

this reliability and repeatability is the something a computer and digital does very well

As the programming gets better and better the emulations will get better and closer
and yes there will be TOO many choices as with all software options
the favourites will get to the top via good sound or good marketing
as always be wary of the good marketers ... some will be fine

interesting will be those DSPs that are available as both Hardware and Software ... like Virus
why do they sound different ?
are they the same algorithm or program ?
the D to A converters ?

as time goes on these issues get less and less
I did give up on my Analog Desks due to simplicity of operations and workflow

I LUV the old gear and outboard hardware BUT it is obvious where the future will lay
for now Mic Pres and Amps and perhaps Compression will still be about in track laying and then later at Mastering

BE aware that OLD gear needs to be working correctly for you to have the magic
SO many people just DO NOT know what the magic should sound like and I know there are many 1176 and LA2's out there that are not quite right
and
these may still sound cool and different and still be valid and some will need tender luving care to make right

Guitar Amps ... tubed ... will be interesting to watch into the future
the electric guitar as we know it today would not be how an electrical eng would want to make it today
We have grown up listening to this sound and so want to repeat it

New recording methods will lead to a generation that don't know the OLD sounds and as this happens there will be new sounds and the new DAW ways to make them

A great time to be in this
and the new generation do not know the tricks we had to learn
sub group to save plug power
obvious to us older units as we only had one or two reverbs ..... the newbies are tempted to put one on each track

Understand the past
Look to the future
Never stop learning

life according to Kev
8)

Is it time to sell high end graphs and processors ?

Is it time to sell high end graphs and processors ?

That would be mistake. It is the high end stuff that still has real value as a an audio tool and most of the time can not be matched ITB. If your talking digital, then that can be more of a product by product.

Plugs have matured as expected, but are not the same as hardware. I find that hardware is more forgiving, easy to dial in and less fuss.

I can not imagine ever getting rid of items such as my Massive Passive, Vari-Mu, Lexicon 480L, TC M5000 or three Eventides for any plugs unless those same makers made plugs and made them to be just like the outboard boxes. Even so, the zero CPU load and 100% stable use of digital outboard outweighs plugs everytime.

Sure I paid $4k for my Eventide DSP4500 about 10-years ago with all options. That was only a few bucks over dealer cost and it now sells for less than half that, but I have gotten, and continue to get so much use and joy out of it that box that it was money well spent and is something that I hope works and can use for at least another 10-years. No plug is likely going to have that life span because of how fast things move and become obsolete in the computer world.

I am still working on my first all digital mix project not using any analog outboard and I have to say it is a real fricken chore in workflow and effort compared to using all analog. It is taking me dozen of weeks and I am still not where I think it needs to be to be finished or where it would be if I was using all analog like I have always done before.

I know for me anyway that there is no way that I could live with ITB without using at least a digital mixer of control surface without a min of 16-faders at one time. Without faders there is so much effort and work flow compromises, that it just takes most of the joy out of working or at least out of mixing.

Sure I have a digital learning curve to overcome, but it is no surprise to me why wankers or pro's a like have such a hard time getting decent results.

I am finding that while the DSP plugs of UAD, PowerCore and some other high end native plugs are better than yesteryear, and are quite useable and acceptable, you can't use them the same as analog including the direct analog emulations. They need to be more hand tweaked and used far more lightly to avoid the mush mix.

I am willing to complete and try a few more projects, but I may not be able to hack ITB and need to go back to at least all analog mixing. I imagine it would have been easier all around if I never knew or had any experience in all analog. But I do, so ITB just really sucks in comparison.

Those that start with, and only use digital/ITB will never know what they are missing or how much better it could have been so they muddle along with all the crap that goes with digital and ITB.

I now have so much sympathy for all those that will never know what they are missing.

You poor clueless bastards....

audiokid wrote: Is it time to sell high end graphs and processors ?

I can't recommend that just yet
not if they are the real deal
but then
I hung on to my ADATs for way too long expecting there to be trade in old archive tapes transferred to ProTools etc

I WAS WRONG
so what do I know ?

the gear Gaff mentioned
Massive Passive, Vari-Mu, Lexicon 480L, TC M5000 or three Eventides
sweeeet
very sweet

as he said with good hardware ... digital or analog ... to compare to
heavy CPU loads can make even a good DAW seem like a toy

and digital to digital transfers with a sub standard clock or distribution ... for whatever reason ... are all part of why the knowledge is not out there

" You poor clueless bastards.... "

sometimes I have felt this clock issue even on mixes purely ITB
but I can't prove it

and this is why I ... often ... still suggest analog transfers between digital boxes
Mastering Suites with there HIGH spec analog mixer/switches and there phase/filter tricks still show the way

everyday things get better
even ProTools has a better sound than in the early days of MixPlus
the newer mixers ... the spec is set BUT things do seem to get better

I know Chris is OFF PT these days but that's not the point
ALL the software writers are getting better at it ... but there is bad software and gear out there so beware and use your ears

SO Chris
if you have something truly special and in good condition that you do use often to get your results
then hang on to it and look after it

if you have something that you don't use and perhaps not the LUV for
then think about liquidating it

I'm interested to know if some of the modern Digital will stand the test of time and become LONG term classics ... like a 480L and Eventide thingys

Waves Hardware ... L2 or is it L3
Crane Song ... Head and others
Disstressor ... brain fade ... does this have a DSP ?
TC gear like Gold Chanel and DBmax have some true believers

IF we stay with PCM then there is a chance
but
must learn how to distribute that clock properly

:?
digital is so cost effective
big bang for the buck and hard to ignore that
we do seem to live in an mp3 world now
:cry:

hi

Chris, I moved to HD Accel in 2007. Pro Tools HD 8 is a terrific software, sounds really good, a giant leap from PT 5/Mix Systems.

I have reduced the number of plug-ins to 1/4 of what I used to have at my DAE folder. I gave up on Waves. Stayed only with Mc DSP, PSP, Tc Electronic and the Massive Pack bundle.

I have also invested on pretty nice high end analog gear ( More sebatron Mic Pres, Crane, Pendulum stuff) and superior monitoring ( Dynaudio). Man, what a difference.

PT8HD hepls your workflow a lot, but better a/d, monitoring and clocking were the main steps from that sound I used to achieve.

I may be able to offer an outsider's perspective.
Granted, I've only been doing this a short time, but every aspect of it has consumed me and I've been an active learner.

So here goes:

The background:
I never got the chance to deal w/ any good OTB gear, excepting a few mics and pres.
I am a DAW-child, and use plugs exclusively for verb/comp/etc (excluding my dbx 166, which gets used when tracking bass, or any other-transient happy source that can suddenly cause unwanted peaks).
I DID get the chance to spend some learnin' time in a few very fine local studios, with the 2", the LA2As, Neumanns, Lexicons and such.
My technical skills are rather lacking. I can sauter, strip, and cut wires. I can make rudimentary repairs of my musical equipment, but not so much my audio equipment. That is, I know my way around a toolbox and garage, but not so much electronics. This makes my OTB investment decisions all the more critical.

My take:

I am a slave to my CPU and my clocks. A few reverbs or channel strips, and it's stutter-city. Still working w/ Presonus on getting my FS and 2 Digimax's to jive right - that's another story.
I hate using a mouse to control faders. Control surfaces look more appealing to me daily.
I'd love to have some of the "golden toys" to make use of. Unfortunately, at thousands of dollars a piece, they're a long way off.
I get clients regularly who marvel at the idea of using a studio like mine (project, in a church) that had a console. So that vintage stuff has allure for would-be clients as well as myself.

While emulations and plugs will get better and better (good for me), they'll never be a substitute for the good old grand-daddies (bad for me). The only way that would be possible (as you've mentioned) from my perspective is if CPU load can be greatly reduced (if not eliminated), and the cost ratio remained the same.
Still, there'll always be the factor of "You've actually got a "____"?!"

TC gear like Gold Chanel and DBmax have some true believers

TC DBMAX lover hear. One of my secret weapons. It hass it's weakness like any box, but I have done some amazing stuff with that box.

And the wanker projects that I have rescued, fixed and saved from the trash using it over the last 5-years has easily paid for it and other gear.

AudioGaff wrote: ... the wanker projects that I have rescued, fixed and saved from the trash ...

yep
:D
and a many audio fellows from the video and film wold will agree
a fast way to submit a documentary etc

a good tool when used right is a very sweet thing
can make us look very good

but that is half of our trade or craft ... knowing a good sound and how to get there
and conversely knowing a crap sound and then letting your crap detector do what you know it should ... don't get talked into keeping it .. it is hard to say NO to the producer

AudioGaff wrote:

TC gear like Gold Chanel and DBmax have some true believers

TC DBMAX lover hear. One of my secret weapons. It hass it's weakness like any box, but I have done some amazing stuff with that box.

And the wanker projects that I have rescued, fixed and saved from the trash using it over the last 5-years has easily paid for it and other gear.

AG,

nice tool! 4500.00

The Ultimate Production Limiter and Optimizer!
The DBMax was designed specifically for use in broadcast, although it works great in any application, including post production, CD mastering, and surround production. The DBMax optimizes the signal for any use you choose. You can select any of the presets; choose "wizard" and let DBMAX make all of the decisions for you; or if you prefer, go in and tweak to your heart's content. DBMAX comes with 52 ROM presets, and room for 128 user presets.

You are doing what I'm very interested in doing.
In another thread: {old-link-removed}

which I'm trying to get a handle on how I can avoid plugins as much as possible, use my nice hardware...
I'm trying to get my head around this all. Would you use the DBMax with a summing box?

http://www.tcelectronic.com/default.asp?id=12292

You can find the DBMAx for less than $2K used. It is basically an upgraded TC Finalizer meant for mastering or broadcast.

Being broadcast targeted means that it has the filters that are used in broadcast that help you hear what your music would sound like going thru cable TV, Radio or FM radio. Then when you compress and/or limit, you are doing so for your target audience.

One I see another cheap enough I'll likely buy a second one.

While it is a powerful, flexable and great as an outboard box goes, I still find that it is not enough and I need to combine it in a chain with other gear or plugs. I think it is kind of weak in the Eq section unless you only need to tweak a few dB.

Ya, you could use with a summing box and I have in the past. My normal use for it is to help fix a mix or stem like a drum bus or a vocal bus, but it can be used anywhere and I have used it on sources such as lead vocal or thick, smacky rock guitar or tight, phat exploding drum bus.