Bruno de Souza Lino

Another concern I'm seeing is...your current system requirements for both are quite high even in comparison to heavy hitters like Ableton Live, Bitwig and FL Studio. Let's hope they're not actually 8-core and 16 GB of RAM minimum.

There's no this yet, which means it could actually be subscription.

I guess no AI algo can protect a company from their own incompetence, not even one from Sonible. If you remove the AI "learning" from it (which it can only do for a few seconds, unlike iZotope's), you're sitting at very basic plugins with nothing special about them.

Let's hope this is not another way of saying "we're sort of seeing how well a subscription plan is received so we can move accordingly and see how long we'll have to delay it before it happens." My predictions so far: Sonar - Regular run of the mill Cakewalk that's known with maybe a few extra things from SPlat thrown in. Maybe free. Probably priced for the extra features. Next - Subscription based with all the stuff from SPlat. Or priced with the good old marketing strategy of diverting your attention away from that so you think you're actually saving money with the subscription.

He did not say because you know what happens when companies start offering subscription models. Next will most likely be subscription based and include all the SONAR Platinum content people kept saying for many years "would be glad to give them money for."

This doesn't surprise me at all. We're potentially looking at this backfiring in such a way that Gibson will have to buy Cakewalk back from BandLab and we'll have to wait a few years before another company buys it and makes it free again, then the cycle repeats. I won't be surprised at all if Next is a subscription service with all the SONAR Platinum plugins people kept asking Bandlab for many years.

Start reporting their emails to your provider.

The huge issue with comparing analog gear which is composed of a ton of components, like the Distressor, and the software is that you can't claim a "reference" sound for the hardware. You're not gonna find two units of said hardware which sound the exactly same. So, the claim of a plugin not sounding like "the real thing" becomes a really weak argument IMO.

The video is not about DAW performance. You'd know it if you actually watched the video instead of massaging your own ego with all that badge flashing.

I'd love to live in your world because 87 USD is not something I call "stupid cheap."

Don't come out later complaining it broke because all the electrons fell out... Looking at it, if your rack was more compact, you could slide the hole thing right-side up there. It seems to be only slightly larger than your bog standard 19" rack.

Not exactly the same thing but...Analog Obsession has this: Which happens to be an emulation of this:

My point is it would make sense to have an indicator for that in the track lane because you have every other control from the channel strip replicated in the track lane. I don't necessarily think you should be able to open the ProChannel from the track lane, but it would be nice to know if it is on for that track or not without having to open the inspector.

I'm starting to think about the same idea but for Harrison plugins.

This only makes their claims on the page blurb worse. This is a plugin, none of their flowery language about how you'd use the EQ on an actual 32C console applies here. Plus you'd expect a bunch of plugin and DAW developers to not claim it was an arduous task to create response curves for a digital EQ because...There's a metric ton of channel strip EQs out there with varying levels of complexity and I'm yet to see any of them claiming it was an arduous task to come up with the curves. The whole distortion, harmonics and saturation present in analog gear is what gives them their characteristic sound in the first place. Carefully calibrated EQ curves are not the reason why there's more SSL emulations than particles in the universe. Why would it be different for a Harrison console? The later part of it is just a bunch of attempt at diverting you from the subject. Also, their "complex" emulation cramps near Nyquist and, you can be 100% sure no analog console does that. But this is not about Harrison and their "complex" emulation shenanigans. Just grab Harqules and a compressor of your choice and you're already way ahead of Harrison when it comes to emulating their own hardware, because one guy just recreating the behavior of their EQ going off from a schematic is beating them to the punch.

Any documentation updates?

Uh...Apart from the app, this is exactly what Plugin Alliance and Plugin Boutique do. This is the usual behavior of companies which are run by people so scared with rampant piracy which does not exist, they spend more time working on endless anti-piracy schemes instead of improving their software. Heck, Image-Line even encourages their users to snitch and rat out other people using pirate versions of their software. Download managers are just a variant of that. Without it, they can't keep track of how many users their software should have based on the profit or page hits they received.

I think the word you're looking for here is "false advertising." Because I've just taken a screenshot for this post and this is still in their site: But that's okay, as if I wanted a 32C EQ emulation, Analog Obsession makes the nice Harqules, which is free and unlike Harrison's offer, has every resistor, capacitor and transistor as part of the model.

You can see all the controls on both places in the picture though. This is a fact, not an opinion. The only control which is not replicated from the channel strip at the track said strip is part of is the ProChannel.

Both tools are an increbible ally in our constant quest of not letting people get scammed by Harrison.

Synthetic benchmarks are not reflective of real life usage scenarios. While it is fun to look at Gamers Nexus and other guys and fetishize over charts and testing, in practice, you're not gonna even notice those performance differences. This video illustrates my point well:

Essentially, you have ProChannel indicators everywhere but the track view, which is what the request is. That's a bit strange if you consider every single control from the Channel strip is replicated in the track "strip" as shown here:

It's also important to mention this plugin is not a free or cheaper alternative to DDMF's Plugin Doctor, which has many more ways to analyze audio, linear and distortion analysis, phase and so on.

They just released an update which hopefully fixed the VST Audio Engine issues in the first version, which would cause Dorico to fail to initialize its audio engine and never launch. As per using it, they're getting there. There are some quirks and the software sticks very close to the strict limitations of MIDI and in some cases feels more like you're not writing a score. It's hard to gauge how using the program is as it's different from Sibelius, Finale, Notion and MuseScore in many ways. But, it's important to note you're not gonna get a DAW experience from it. It is a scoring program.

The only thing which differentiates those two in boost clock is 1 MHz assuming you have a binned SKU which boosts up to the reported frequency. Performance wise, they're equivalent. Intel usually performs best in gaming while AMD performs best at productivity stuff and data decompression at least in 7zip, where it is 27% faster than the 13900K.