#1003521 - 08/15/00 02:49 PM
Virtual vs Physical Studios
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
What are your feelings on the trend towards all virtual, computer based studios?
Many software manufacturers are claiming their applications and plugins will replace hardware.
Most of the seasoned editing apps are great, but most plugins... well... yuk! I just can't part with my outboard gear, and I am still buying it rather than selling.
Too much mousing around, gotta turn some nobs and push some faders!!!
miroslav
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1003522 - 08/16/00 01:22 PM
Re: Virtual vs Physical Studios
|
ssimpson@audio-one.com
Member
Registered: 08/16/00
Posts: 27
Loc: Nashville,TN,UNITED STATES
|
Offline
|
|
That's a very valid view. I agree that having some measure of knobs to turn and faders to push is very helpful in the studio. But, in the modern digital studio systems (ie. protools), the tactile surfaces are available and quite useful. Granted, there may never be a true replacement for most of our beloved analog gear. There are provisions in the software/hardware that allow for use of these pieces. For instance, it's extremely easy to interface an analog piece into a protools mix situation simply by utilizing the insert via i/o. This means that with a ProControl (or hui or motormix), you can effectively have the same interaction with your music that you would have on any other desk. The main and most important difference (in my humble opinion) is that you can instantly recall and automate every parameter in your mix (except of course for the analog pieces, they still have to be technoted). So, I don't believe that the need for tactile interaction should stop someone from working in the digital (virtual) realm. We're in an age where even the jet airplanes overhead have systems that "simulate" a tactile control system for the pilot when really it's just him giving commands to a computer to do what he wants. They call it fly-by-wire, we call it ProTools. Perhaps we should be calling the whole technolog "mix-by-wire". Long story short, we should just do things in a manner that will make us comfortable and productive. If mixing on a digital system doesn't do it for you right now, then just wait a few days...it will!!
------------------
_________________________
--Shawn Simpson
Engineering/Sales
Audio One Nashville
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1003523 - 08/16/00 11:46 PM
Re: Virtual vs Physical Studios
|
Pro Jules
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 03/11/00
Posts: 2729
Loc: A yank living in London, UK si...
|
|
Offline
|
|
Try ProControl or the cheaper Motor Mix...
I can move 16 faders at once with my setup, you can do up to 32 on a Motor Mix or ProControl set up. I's a blast.
jules
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1003524 - 08/17/00 12:30 PM
Re: Virtual vs Physical Studios
|
David Frangioni
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 08/09/00
Posts: 2642
Loc: Hollywood,FL,UNITED STATES
|
|
Offline
|
|
In my experience, the all-in-one computer-based studio is rarely ever the only solution to a complete studio. Even a DAW-based studio usually needs at least some mic pre's, outboard compressors, DAT machine, etc. Although the project studio technology environment is getting more consolidated every day, most of the die-hard DAW studio owners that I know, find that a working balance of equipment selection is 10-20% outboard gear, while the rest of their “tools” are software-based. My own studio is closer to being 35-45% outboard and the rest in software. Oddly enough, I mostly use the software-based effects when mixing and mastering.
The debate on the sound of plug-in’s is a long-standing, heated topic. Charles Dye (mixing engineer on Ricky Martin’s Livin’ La Vida Loca) loves the sound of plug-in’s. Other top engineers are not so impressed by the sound of plug-in’s. It’s actually a good point of discussion.
What do all of you think about the “sound of plug-in’s?”
Which ones do you like and why?
Which ones don’t you like and why?
Tell us what you think.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1003525 - 08/17/00 03:24 PM
Re: Virtual vs Physical Studios
|
alphajerk
MP Hall of Fame Member
Registered: 03/06/00
Posts: 7950
Loc: asheville nc usa
|
|
Offline
|
|
i like mutant effect plugins because there really is no right or wrong, just what is.
reverbs i dont like as much as outboard.
delays are delays, doesnt really matter.
EQ, i dont think so yet, of course i try to stay away from these at all if i can help it [many times i cant].
compressors, is it really that difficult of math to attenuate gain??? i dont see why it should be so complicated. i tend to use these outboard analog on the way in. i pretty much know what is going to need it [use it similar to tape slamming].
thats about all of them.
_________________________
alphajerk FATcompilation "if god is truly just, i tremble for the fate of my country" -thomas jefferson
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1003526 - 08/17/00 07:25 PM
Re: Virtual vs Physical Studios
|
tcb@canada.com
Senior Member
Registered: 05/31/00
Posts: 56
Loc: ,,CANADA
|
|
Offline
|
|
As for plug-ins.. I think the major portion are not just there yet... but some are on the money. I've tried allot of plug-ins via Soundforge or Cakewalk 9... some I wouldn't live without. For example, 90% of the emulated reverbs out there are really bad except one, Soundforge acoustic mirror. Mind you it takes allot of cpu power to generate a real time pre-view but it's not really much as a reverb than a hall emulator plus the flexiblilaty of the controls make and an awesome sounding transiant reverb.
As for compression.. a great product would have to be "T-Racks". It's an awesome tool to get a warm compressed finished audio file.
Also, not allot of tools out there can boost the signal up as it does to match those hi-output releases.
I could go on about tools like Antares Auto-tune and such indispensable items.. but it a question of experimentation and find what best suited for your taste. But I assume that plug-ins will come into their own a few years down the road.
Stephan.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
