Skip to main content

What do you guys think about Waves Renaissance eq instead of hardware eq. while tracking?

There are great units out there like the Vintech or Chandler types that are pre-amp and eq section, but are significantly more expensive than their pre-amp only versions.

How would you feel about using just a high quality hardware pre-amp such as Chandler TG-2 and mixing in the box with Reinassance eq and compression?

Charles Dye mixes his records with Waves plugins, no hardware processing and still achieves a nice pro sound.

What do you think?

Comments

AudioGaff Mon, 07/12/2004 - 22:46

Depends on which outboard units you are referring to as if they are betther or not. No software can not yet compete with the likes of units from Vintech, Daking, Chandler, Manley and at least a dozen more makes/models I can think of when it comes to having a great sounding, full unique tone. Mabe someday, but not today...

jonyoung Tue, 07/13/2004 - 04:49

Like all things audio, it depends on your budget! I'm tracking into a stand alone 24 track HD deck through an analog board and mixing in Sonar using the Renaissance plugs. Sonically it's much better than the rack gear I have right now, which admittedly, is not top shelf, but not bottom shelf either. My next chunk of change will be for some high end pres for tracking. I don't like to add EQ while recording for fear of phase issues while mixing.

anonymous Wed, 07/21/2004 - 12:24

"even a mackie 1202 mixer while less flexilble but sounds better''
thoise EQ's are complete garbage, crap, noisy sound destroyers, after reading another post where you said "the 9098 eq is gritty and only sounds good for bass or destroying drums!!!" I think you work for Mackie and are doing comparisons on clock radio speakers, sorry about the harshness but you must be kiding.

sheet Wed, 07/21/2004 - 17:56

tripnek wrote: The EQ in my A&H console is far better than my Waves Plugs. And the A&H is far from as good as some of the rack units (GML, API, ect..) and the Neve consoles.

I don't know what Waves plugs you have, or what console that you have. I have everything Waves makes under 4.5, and there is no EQ that compares to an EQ on a console in form or function. My Waves plugs will smoke any AH console I am sure, but then again we are talking about mastering applications vs. basic channel applications, and a difference in users.

It is not the plug, but how one uses it. If you are mic'ing correctly, and you have quality instruments, performers and acoustics, EQ whouldn't come into play really.

I don't know of too many people who track with EQ myself. Maybe there are some other here who do. But you cannot compare EQ'ing before and after the AD process anymore than you can compare compressing/limiting. It has a differenct effect. One is reversable, one is not.

iznogood Thu, 07/22/2004 - 16:09

missilanious

you're completely entitled to your opinion..... as i am entitled to mine!

yes i think the ren eq sounds absolutely crap.... and i should know.... i've had it for years.

and yes i do think the 1202 vlz sounds ok for what it is!! and for lifting a bit in the high or lo end it sounds way better than the ren....

and yes i do think the 9098 sound is gritty (i have the old one).... that's why i like it for drums... destroying is a positive thing sometimes...

i also love the manley massive passive (we have 2) and it's gritty as hell! compared to avalon/fairman/gml and some other things

and no... i don't work for mackie and i compare on hi-end speakers

btw ... here's a link to the studio i work in so you can see for yourself what kind of equipment i'm used to...

http://www.studioc4.dk

what speakers are you on??

mine are speakers handbuilt on danish (of course) drivers... the same as krell uses in their hi-end series

i like people with a temper.... but for the sake of allah and this post...

relax