My version of Samplitude Pro X came with EQ 116 as the stock EQ, along with the FFT.

I love them both. Best digital EQ I've ever used, hands down.

:)

DonnyThompson, post: 420279, member: 46114 wrote: My version of Samplitude Pro X came with EQ 116 as the stock EQ, along with the FFT.

I love them both. Best digital EQ I've ever used, hands down.

:)

We all have those EQ's but they aren't part of the strip, they are a plug-in. They are switching the basic EQ strip to this EQ. Its awesome .

Ahhh. I get what you're saying now. They are replacing the stock 4 band with the 116. Yes, that would be wonderful indeed.

(y)

This is the smartest change to date imho. The filters on that EQ are excellent too. Between this EQ and Amunition, its all there for me. No need for those Pultecs that cost me $7000 grand. No need for the Fet EQ's that cost me $4500. No need for the BAX that cost me $2000. No need for the Nail that has the so called silky top end, SSL G, API 2500, and other FET and hybrid comps... bye bye. Boxed and sold to those doing the round trip lol.

audiokid, post: 420289, member: 1 wrote: (y)

This is the smartest change to date imho. The filters on that EQ are excellent too. Between this EQ and Amunition, its all there for me. No need for those Pultecs that cost me $7000 grand. No need for the Fet EQ's that cost me $4500. No need for the BAX that cost me $2000. No need for the Nail that has the so called silky top end, SSL G, API 2500, and other FET and hybrid comps... bye bye. Boxed and sold to those doing the round trip lol.

So what's going on w your setup? Are you moving ITB?

kmetal, post: 420328, member: 37533 wrote: So what's going on w your setup? Are you moving ITB?

For mixing and mastering, 95% yes. Sequoia 13 is complete, I use that for both DAW's.

Tracking with analog gear is awesome. I kept two UA LA2A's and two 1176's. They are essential and cannot be duplicated itb.

Madi, Orion32 and Prism Atlas are my adda/ interfaces.

Still love the Neos, Dangerous Master and ST and an Eventide processor. I'm debating removing a few more pieces that are basically unnecessary.

The biggest shocker were the Bricastis'. I discovered my mixes sound bigger and better imaging when I mixdown to DAW two and use Sequoia verb there instead. I miss them but sold them as I have a feeling a new version is on its way. I got almost exactly what I paid for them so it was a no brainer parting with them.
As I removed more hardware, everything tightened up, not what I expected.

audiokid, post: 420331, member: 1 wrote: I discovered my mixes sound bigger and better imaging when I mixdown to DAW two and use [[url=http://[/URL]="http://pro.magix.co…"]Sequoia[/]="http://pro.magix.co…"]Sequoia[/] verb there instead.

Really? Man, I thought Bricasti was the benchmark for reverb. I've used them a few times in the past, (The Model 7) and I was absolutely floored by their rich sound. Hard to imagine that a software-based processor would sound better, or even as good.

That being said, I have zero experience with the Sequoia Reverb. (Probably because I don't have Sequoia) ;)

I'm not doubting you... LOL... you would certainly be the one to know, since you owned and used them... I'm just surprised to hear you say this and curious as to what you've discovered.

I do have Samp's VariVerb, I use it all the time; in particular, I love the plates, and it's become my go-to reverb - I just downloaded more impulses for it from Samplitude yesterday... but while I do really like VariVerb, I certainly wouldn't compare it to a Bricasti.

So, how would you compare the stock Samplitude VariVerb up against Sequoia's reverb?

audiokid, post: 420331, member: 1 wrote: For mixing and mastering, 95% yes. Sequoia 13 is complete, I use that for both DAW's.

Tracking with analog gear is awesome. I kept two UA LA2A's and two 1176's. They are essential and cannot be duplicated itb.

yeah that makes sense, that's kinda what I was getting at. It's crazy you've been working for hours in this room w racks of gear and you haven't touched it for days or weeks, but there's really no way make up for some things. It's like I plugged a bass I'm familiar w into a an api 512 and 550 lunobody thru some apogee stuff, something about 10x the price of the usual sansamp eureka motu system. And it was kinda like that it? Even extreme settings weren't really as noticable as the pluggin versions I've used, not that that's realavant, but even people like oh man that's heavy character, it was it just was like, as noticable as you'd think. But, I'd played it back and it was like boom, once I dialed it in. Ten times better, no but, better than that bass ever sounded, and I've cuedked the recording a few places. I dunno it's a lot of money, but it just seems like there is no other way. Like it's like the bass sounds after I'd usually mix it, so I either can enhance that, or just leave it alone.

I think people forget to acknowledge the collective buildup of things and like over emphasize one facet, equipment wise. my area of interest is the capture medium right now. Getting the sounds is amps and a mic and smoke riffs, but like transferring that into the recording and the quality of the listening chain are The more I octant but uneciting area that's probably where your probably get the most our of good gear. Boring lol.
Like more often then not when i notice a good recording it has hit tape, but what a pita, and I don't always want a heavy handed sound. So it just shows me how important the capture medium is, so what I wish for is dimesnion , and that seems too be a combo of fullness and clarity. its how the stages interact with each other. Like a digital recording mixed down to tap sounds diff than vise versa. Im not on a tale vs dig thing that's old stuff, it's more just expertly when what components becoming very important. I guess the sound I could describe would be like 90s style tape, where it's all clean and not super tapes, it's just full. It seems hard to attain depth, and even harder to keep it. im wondering if for the current state of the art that digital is on a less is more basis, and analog,ur seems practical on the way in, and/or in a summing or mix bus. And that's about it, I guess that's abiut as good as it gets. Like I think clean gets associated w thin, and it doesn't have to be, I just think there is a skewed sense of what clarity is out there. Some things are a lot more money and a lot better,I thinks gear is that last 10% better is 10x more. And in some probably a lot of cases not gonna make a large difference to Johnny and the sore throats records. But besid the obvious of a good band or whatever to actually record, it seems like there is no other way than the real thing, for that little extra. I could be wrong. But I also think its just as important where it goes as well.
Then when add it all up its you manipulating the stuff so it still gonna kinda sound like what you always do, lol, a lot of this is GAS, but, I know I'm feeling a rumble. The most boring but us fuel things I can think of is a steroe pair of converters. I can just patch anything into them. And while. A while 16 ch would be nice, if uf injure once basic tracking is done, it's most 1 or 2 ch at a time for me.

My new attitude w digital stuff is if I'm gonna have im gonna get the best, and sell as soon as the next best comes out.there is a crossover pov t where the new stuff comes out and the newly old stuff hasnt completely become worthless. Obviously it depends on the scale of the investment and a lot of other things. keeping up is expensive, so I think It makes sense to minimize what needs to be stat of the art and what can just keep doing its job forever.

DonnyThompson, post: 420333, member: 46114 wrote: Really? Man, I thought [="http://www.bricasti.com/"]Bricasti[/]="http://www.bricasti…"]Bricasti[/] was the Benchmark for reverb.

They are without question. I wouldn't have sold them if I didn't need the money. I plan on buying one back for classical stuff. I'm hoping a new version comes out.

DonnyThompson, post: 420333, member: 46114 wrote: So, how would you compare the stock Samplitude VariVerb up against [[url=http://="http://pro.magix.co…"]Sequoia[/]="http://pro.magix.co…"]Sequoia[/]'s reverb?

Sam and Sequoia share the same plugs. Variverb sounds like most good plug-in verbs.

kmetal, post: 420336, member: 37533 wrote: im wondering if for the current state of the [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.artproau…"]ART[/]="http://www.artproau…"]ART[/] that digital is on a less is more basis, and analog,ur seems practical on the way in,

My thoughts, once itb, stay itb. But, two daws are better than one. Is it Sequoia, an uncoupled 2-bus capture, all in my head or what ?

kmetal, post: 420336, member: 37533 wrote: I think people forget to acknowledge the collective buildup of things

indeed. .

kmetal, post: 420336, member: 37533 wrote: The most boring but us fuel things I can think of is a stereo pair of converters. I can just patch anything into them. And while. A while 16 ch would be nice, if uf injure once basic tracking is done, it's most 1 or 2 ch at a time for me.

Everything positive happened after I got my second stereo converter.

Do you know when that might happen(the switch to EQ116 as stock)? Will it be an patch to Sequoia 13 or will it be 14?

Richard July, post: 422335, member: 48681 wrote: Do you know when that might happen(the switch to EQ116 as stock)? Will it be an patch to Sequoia 13 or will it be 14?

This is a patch for Sequoia 13 and what now comes in Pro X2. In a few days a patch will be released and I will be a happier guy.

I've been slow on the draw putting things back together, but I offcially am at"no new projects till further notice" status. From fixing two year old flood damage in my basement, to finish carpentry at the studios, to finally having my home daw setup. I'm just deciding on a cpu, and if it's a Mac making sure I can dual boot everything smoothly. Magix Samplitude is gonna be my main daw at home and possibly studio. The biggest challenge is incorporating making sure the studios 32 bit systems play nice w my new 64 bit system. And making sure I make intelligent if un-glamorous purchases, that will help me seamlessly moved back and forth between the various digital and analog gear floating around.

It's great to see a software company innovative, and relentlessly improving for the sake of a better end product, which regardless of what some large conglomerates may think, translates into longer long term profits, growth stability, and overall value.

With touchscreen editing at the forefront object based editing is a no brainer. With doubly atmos, and all current video games being object based mix wise, it's only a matter of time until the new post millennium idea of pro audio is formed. It does not seem in anyway to be moving away from object based editing and layers in any form of the digital arts.

kmetal, post: 422374, member: 37533 wrote: The biggest challenge is incorperating making sure the studios 32 bit systems play nice w my new 64 bit system.

Is there a reason - besides cost - that the studio's rig isn't 64 bit?

There are some old projects that we are still working on that are 32 bit. But basically it's just cost and timing. Most of the budget went to upgrades to infrastructure and necessary equipment. So to buy three new daw systems soley for the purpose of higher bit rate, doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I think the plan is to ride out the final days of the existing systems, so by the time we upgrade we know just what we need, and the bugs of all the new wiring in the whole places (mogamin, canare) and all the little buzzes and such are out and the system is working well. But the CPUs are showing age, and the time is coming pretty soon I think.

But that's why I'm making sure my new personal system is up to date, even while being modest. I'm moving towards a mobile dsp thing for plugins, which I don't use a lot of, a Mac mini, an an iPad surface, so far in my thoughts, for upgrade. A high end stereo set of adda, and a high end monitoring controller. Stuff that's easy to move back and forth.

Lol realistically rho, I'd probably end up leaving the monitor controller at one of the studios. I'm streamlining my whole life , lol, and a couple monster cables from the interface ( yet to be determined) should do just fin.

Really I need nothing more than my iPad, for home. It's just so if I go home and want to make a minor adjustment I heard in my car, I don't have to wait, or go back and fire everything up again:). But I'll start a thread about it, maybe if I get off my butt and sand the seams today, I'll start w some pics of the new home digs, which are nothing much out of the ordinary other than some 5.1 lines in the walls.

kmetal, post: 422377, member: 37533 wrote: I'm moving towards a mobile dsp thing for plugins,

Do any of your processor plugs require iLok or dongle ?

I own a basic waves pack, which does, it's also 32bit. I got an excellent deal on it, but there was a limited time span to trade up to the 64bit one for free. I only paid 100 bucks for the pack, which has some useful toys so even if it's another 100 it's a deal. But honestly, I only use a few of the many many plug-insfrom this company regularly. My thought w something like a UAD satalite, even w a basic pluggin set, was to have my. Ones move reguardless of what's on the host cpu. Even the three daw setups at the studio aren't identical, as much as we try, and you know how sensitive these things are. One little thing that isn't exact, and the pluggin isn't recognized, or there's some technical annoyance.

My goal is keeping the daw to just carry audio, and create, the pluggin DSp to power processing, the the cpu to just manage. Too too many times I've gone to sessions w the whole session file and audio ready, and a pluggin was missing, or a different version of the daw is was needed. Or it gets confused w I-o settings. I think a small portable system can handle the type of work I normally do, and I can manly rely on the studio for the room and monitoring, and outboard gear.

I think its here! Downloading it now.

https://www.magix.com/ap/mandants/servicecenter/index.php?m=samplitude&lang=uk&module=downloads&tid=1771

Oh Ya! :D

New version is awesome. More stable. I just tried a 88.2/24 60 channel mix, with 12 instances of Melodyne, VSTis and plenty of automation and it went right through to the end with out a pause 100% ITB, one DAW. That is saying something for this beast.
This update for Sequoia Rocks..

Attached files

Excellent news. How did you find out about it? I have been checking the Sequoia/ support group, but did not notice any posts about it. Looking forward to firing it up.

Can you check whether the VCAs will nest now? I have another nine hours of work before I can get home to download and check...

the VCA's are there, I've not used then though. I don't really understand it yet. The DAW sure works good. I'm really happy. I received those toolbar notices that is was available. Or, just hit the About Sequoia and check for the update.

No worries, I check it when I get home and post back. Thanks for the heads up.

No, the fix for nesting VCAs has not been added. Really lame, for such professional software, and as I understand it, a fairly easy fix to code...

Personally, I'm holding off on the upgrade for the time being. I never was once to immediately jump right into new version/upgrades, anyway.

I'd rather give them the time to work out the bugs, as opposed to having to continually download bug fixes and patch-arounds.

And, I'm smack-center in the middle of a huge recording/mixing project right now, and my version of Sam Pro X64 is working just fine.

I don't need, nor an I afford, any kind of down time right now, or to have to deal with things not working properly.
I'll upgrade at some point - I'd really like to have the new Elastic Audio algorithms, and having the 116 as the stock channel EQ is very attractive as well - but not until I'm sure that all the other issues have been fixed. ;)

FWIW
-d

Strange they add VCA but its not active. Maybe we are beta testing the gui hehe. On the positive, the upgrade seems to have made a difference in smoothness and stability. I just love the software.

Chris, post: 424951, member: 1 wrote: Strange they add VCA but its not active. Maybe we are beta testing the gui hehe. On the positive, the upgrade seems to have made a difference in smoothness and stability. I just love the software.

When you say "they add VCA" are you referring to Samplitude, for which VCAs is a newly added feature?

For Sequoia, as you know, the VCAs have been a long running feature, but it seems that they can only be assigned one level deep - that is - assigning a VCA group(A) as the master of an audio channel(X). When a VCA group(A) is assigned to another VCA group channel(B), as its dependent , the master VCA group(B) controls the volume and mute of the dependent VCA group(A) but this does not affect the audio channel(X) that is assigned as dependent to VCA group(A). Very strange...

Here's my take on it...

VCA has been around a long time, as a feature on console automation, starting on professional desks like SSL's, Neves, MCI's, etc., and eventually, even the cheapest recording consoles ended up incorporating it into their automation as well... Tascam, Yamaha, etc.

It's really not that big of a big deal - or at least not as big of a deal as all the major DAW manufacturers are claiming it is and selling it as.

I think it's become one of those trendy "buzz terms" that people throw around these days - like it's something new and groundbreaking. I also think that the major DAW platforms are all including it in newer versions simply because one of them did it first, and the others just went along with it just to keep up, so that if someone was looking for a DAW platform, some music store salesperson could say "Oh - well, you don't want that one because it doesn't have VCA", when it's very likely that the salesperson doesn't even know what VCA is, or even means.

Voltage Controlled Amplifiers aren't anything huge, new, or innovative. To those who know how VCA automation works and what it does, it's a useful feature, but it's nothing special. You don't have to have it to mix. You can certainly mix without it, especially in this current age of object based control, volume envelope editing and track grouping.

Truthfully, IMO, DAW manufacturers should have been including this feature all along, for those who knew what it was and were accustomed to working with it. I'd say that they are all late to the party on this feature.

Here's a great article from SOS, that explains the benefits of VCA based automation in DAW's very well... they explain it better than I ever could:

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep08/articles/vcagroups.htm

Yes, I agree. It is a very simple piece of technology, and it is amazing to me that it hasn't, as you say, been included long since. I like it for its simplicity and usability and want it implemented in my DAW because I learned to mix using it on SSLs, and so its a familiar workflow.