Brian Walton

All good ideas/process but still requires that beast of an installer (and the repeat of that installer every time they update). I've got most of them but just seems like a massive disc space waste as I honestly only use a few of them.

I like the IKM one, but for a lot of people that don't own the whole suite (I own most of it), the fact it requires you to download an insanely large install just to run what you do have might be enough to make someone take the UAD freebie and deal with ilok.

Honestly if they add the ability to simply record a few tracks of audio and host say a Drum VST that I wouldn't have scaler actually playing any of the notes - it looks like it could replace basic daw use. But recording audio is a pretty big part of that package. Even if it can't this is a great addition/update but adding that would make this much more.

I use the turbo reverb the most. I have difficulty getting the turbo delay to act and sound like a guitar pedal delay or the binson echrec. It seems like the UI isn't well thought out for those of us coming from guitar pedal land.

I also don't use this one for similar reasons but hope that one day it gets features added and a facelift and redesign on the modules. So it could be a $9 gamble for some. That said, Toneboosters EQ pro seems like the better option to put money towards for actual usage.

woops, correct typo on my part.

Given they are adding in arrangement tracks, I'm expecting more sounds so that you can demo ideas within the plugin/standalone without having to get into routing to other vsts until you want to mix/add to the piece. The footprint at ~1GB currently is quite small compared to other VSTi in 2024 especially one that offers more value than you continue to give it credit for.

Respectfully no you can't replicate what Scaler does with some scripts in Reaper. You can potentially replicate some ideas of what Scaler 2 can do. But if you are not getting the same full blown Scaler functionality out of some Reaper scripts. If that is all the functionality you want out if it, great, but this post comes across as misleading as the what Scaler actually can do.

It is certainly a program worth supporting. That said, at launch upgrade pricing from V1 to V2 was $15. We might not see the same this time but they did treat customers well last time, so there is some hope it will be quite a bit less than $50.

Agreed, surprised they haven't incorporated some of the "after market" designs out there or hired a legitimate designer to put together a light, medium and dark theme that are well thought out. That said, at least this is better than some of those that have been "in the box" for years. I've seen worse.

You listed WAVES as a company that you are "spoiled by" in the way they treat customers?....I'm out.

Movie Studio is not in the Same family as Vegas Magix has multiple Video editors Movie Studio - budget friendly but with a modern interface Video Pro X - same type of interface as Movie Studio (but more professional grade feature set) VEGAS Pro - has different editions but is a different video editing package that was created a long time ago and then bought by Magix and they continue to update it.

I haven't sued Movie Studio but have been under the impression it is the stripped down less feature version of Video Pro X (which I prefer to Vegas), which probably means it is good enough for most users that want to put a video together.

Adding a scalable UI is worth the risk for me, without that it doesn't get used.

The market for VSTs are either musicians or producers/engineers. AI created music seems like a different audience. There are a lot of creatives out there that simply like to create things themself and to have control over creating it. While the same people will enjoy messing around with AI or even as inspiration/starting point - there are enough people that want to make something that there is a market for it. The real drop in VST prices is driven by the fact most people already have more than they need to create and manipulate sounds. Thus the value one sees in a new EQ or Compressor that doesn't really do anything different. The majority of the market also isn't fundamentally making a profit on their creation.

Toneboosters pro EQ offers some special stuff with some band types that are lacking in Fab Filter, and Sonible had already started that sort of journey years ago with the proximity EQ and others. I've always thought all of them lacked the all in one instance adjustment view that this might be adding. I got claro mostly for that type of view.

It can run in the MSF-Player which is free, not sure why it would need to be totally standalone VST. You don't need the paid SE or Full MSF for it. I think that was the point that it can be purchased as a pack OR you get it with a much larger product.

Not included in MAX all the signature collections are a separate purchase. Don't have total studio but 99% sure it would not be included there either.

$6K per guitar I don't think so.

While this set doesn't appeal to me 25 tone models is 35+ hours of work/time easily if you are tweaking and testing plus advanced capture process. Plus the studio time cost and gear used to profile it add up and start making the cost seem more reasonable. I'm sure the artist also needed to be paid or get a percentage of sales. It also isn't exactly a preset in the traditional sense. You cannot replicate the tone and the feel of these by tweaking the knobs of things that it comes with. It is adding tones that don't exist with the stock unit. This one is too expensive for the value I see in it, but when they get around to profiling some legitimate holy Grails like the dumble pack the cost isn't as crazy.

Confirmed you don't need the visual feedback and there is also an alternate view if you don't want to see where your adjustment curves are (and yes you can tweak the settings in the 2nd view by click and drag

I'll have to check on it, but I'm pretty sure you can turn the different visualizations off and that certainly isn't a driver for using an EQ like this for me. While I have tons of "hardware" based EQ including the EQ81, etc - they are terribly inefficient from a work flow perspective. It doesn't have anything to do with these things having surgical options. Grab a frequency and adjust the Q with the same motion (by holding down a modifier or scroll wheel on your mouse) vs. having to adjust different knobs controlling those on the hardware looking ones. Coloration aspects I can understand but frankly, most real world EQs that are high end don't tend to have a ton of coloration on them despite what plugin makers push. I expect the PRO eq will eventually get a saturation module given EQ4 had some of that from what I remember. If I had a hardware controller that is mapped to a hardware EQ plugin it would be different as you can grab both knobs at once (or use just one as needed) for quick adjustments. I also don't like "surgical eq" I want broad strokes and still find a TB Pro eq better at that.

Be sure to look at the ToneBoosters Pro one, it is different than the "v4" and just came out a couple months ago that most people know about.

Good combo of UI, Features, Workflow, Sound quality and CPU consumption (and reasonable authorization system). Most consider this to be the standard by which all other EQs of its type are measured by. That said, to my point above - I personally think at half the sale price of this the ToneBoosters PRO is every bit a worthy rival and ticks those boxes as well.

My post wasn't about which is best. The point being that even at an upgrade price - there are alternatives that one might consider looking at. The ToneBoosters pro being one of them that many don't know about (never posted here because those products don't go on sale). Kirchhoff has an annoying UI, IMO but sounds great. At the revised price, the TB4 Pro is 1/2 the price of this basically.