'Why I don't buy "Analog" EQ Plugins'

[T Boog]

I saw this a while back and thought it was very interesting. And considering it's such a beautiful day, I just thought I'd try to get an argument going between u guys 😁

 

 

[T Boog]

And comps...

 

Just curious if anyone here has any thoughts on these vids. Cheers 🍻

Edited Thursday at 09:37 PM by T Boog

[Bapu]

He's a very intriguing guy.

[Bapu]

I bought his paid for compressor.  Have not taken it out for a spin.

[craigb]

1 hour ago, Bapu said:

I bought his paid for compressor.  Have not taken it out for a spin.

Shouldn't you leave it inside and compress with it instead of taking it out for a spin Ed? 🤔

 

😜

[OutrageProductions]

Opinions are like A##holes, everyone has one, thinks they're entitled to proclaim it to the masses, and most of them stink thanks to YT.

As an over-educated and practicing Electrical Engineer for over 40 years, I'll state these facts, which obviously only apply to the accurately emulated analog modeling algorithms, most of which one has to pay real money for:

Beyond the EQ curve or compression ratio are factors that are captured from the analog circuitry that are meant to emulate things like Intermodulation distortion, Total Harmonic distortion, slew rate, hysteresis, and transformer ringing, among other stuff that gives a distinct difference (to well trained ears) between, for example, a Dbx 160x and a genuine Teletronix LA2. They actually sound different if done correctly as a plug-in, as they do in the hardware version.

Does the "average" wannabe musician/recordist/content creator know the difference? No. Therefore, it matters to a very slim minority of modern engineers.

[T Boog]

1 hour ago, OutrageProductions said:

As an over-educated and practicing Electrical Engineer for over 40 years, I'll state these facts, which obviously only apply to the accurately emulated analog modeling algorithms, most of which one has to pay real money for:

Beyond the EQ curve or compression ratio are factors that are captured from the analog circuitry

  Cheers to u my friend and thanks for the feedback. It's good to hear some different, experienced opinions.

After all, even I know there's lots of snake oil out there that comes wrapped in cool looking packages. I've also seen a lot of strongly opinionated people get humbled quickly in blind test. Even pros can get fooled by their eyes &/or preconceived notions. 

Btw, ironically, I was actually coming back here to post his most recent video on this subject. He says he designed an even better testing plugin. And he addresses some of the  things that u, & others have mentioned. (I figured I should be fair to the guy and let him have his final say)

I'd be curious to hear ur opinion as to the effectiveness of his new & improved testing method 👍

Edited yesterday at 02:20 AM by T Boog

[mettelus]

5 hours ago, OutrageProductions said:

hysteresis

+1 to this entire post, in the analog realm there is no way to "prompt jump" (step function) from point A to point B without some transition/smoothing effect, but in the digital realm you very much can. While individual components are often well modeled, their interaction may be lacking. This also leads into the traditional analog medium (magnetic tape), which adds more variables, with hysteresis being one of them. It is the interaction of all those variables that yields the analog result, so the more "piece parts" there are, the harder (or more complex) the modeling will be.

Adding more variables onto the pile would be an amp sim accurately modeling a tube amp, especially with complex circuits... my Carvin XV 212 is one of the more complex ones, and LINE6 put a lot of effort into modeling it in their "Legendary Drive." Even though that has the highest CPU usage in HELIX/Native (not sure if that is still the case), it is not fully modeled nor 100% accurate, but as mentioned above, to the average user that will not be an issue/concern. If they never used the hardware, they will be none the wiser.

5 hours ago, OutrageProductions said:

Opinions are like A##holes, everyone has one, thinks they're entitled to proclaim it to the masses, and most of them stink thanks to YT.

This did give me a good chuckle though, thanks for that! When I slip up and let my sarcasm loose, I catch myself saying, "Congratulations, you Googled something... now you're an expert." from time to time.

[Byron Dickens]

19 hours ago, OutrageProductions said:

Does the "average" wannabe musician/recordist/content creator know the difference? No. Therefore, it matters to a very slim minority of modern engineers.

More importantly, does your audience know? Or care?

[OutrageProductions]

40 minutes ago, Byron Dickens said:

More importantly, does your audience know? Or care?

As someone who has been mixing music for albums and film for almost 50 years, if it passes muster for myself and a very few respected colleagues, it will definitely work for the vast majority of the target audience. 

[craigb]

How do you get AI to use your analog devices?

Asking for a friend...

 

😜

[Chaps]

13 minutes ago, craigb said:

How do you get AI to use your analog devices?

Asking for a friend...

 

😜

Robots.

[Amberwolf]

3 hours ago, craigb said:

How do you get AI to use your analog devices?

 

wait for the remote control implants

[T Boog]

 Thanks for the feedback guys.  And fwiw, I do understand the subtleties of tone. I've been tone chasing with my guitars & amps since the mid 80's. I understand how component variations can affect tone & response. However, there's a lot of snake oil with that too. 

 For instance, the tube industry makes a ton of money based on all the tube brand hype. When it's a fact that the transformer and speakers are WAY more important to tone. But of course the tube industry has no incentive to set that record straight. Just the opposite, they help perpetuate the hype because it generates more money for them.

As far as plugins, esp eqs & compressors, I personally believe there's a lot of hype & BS with it. Plus, these companies aren't stupid. They know that most of their customer base is addicted to shiny new software (like drug fiends looking for their next fix 😵‍💫 ).  

I believe a lot of home musicians keep convincing themselves that the latest hyped up plugin will inspire them more and will equate to better music making.

 I'm actually very familiar with this way of thinking from teaching guitar for decades. I'd say that about half of my students were this type. They kept thinking that the next amp, next pedal or next guitar would magically make them sound better and would inspire them to want to practice more. But almost without fail, those were the same guys who rarely became good musicians. And no matter how much I tried to help them shift their priorities, it was almost always a waste of my breath. It was clear to me that their drug was mainly in aquiring more cool equipment and just holding onto the dream of one day getting better.

 My best students were the guys who's main focus was growing at their craft. And to this day, they can play a cheap guitar thru a cheap amp and make it sound good.

Btw, Don't get me wrong, I like nice plugins too. But when I find something that works for me, I have no desire at all to keep looking for the next best thing. And you will never, ever, ever catch me spending $300 on a f*cking EQ plugin (even if you tell me it came straight from a unicorn's ***** 🤣). In fact you won't even catch me buying one at all. I'm very happy with the few free eqs I have.

But hey, to each his own. If someone gets their kicks from buying expensive plugins, more power to them. That's def not me though.  Besides, I'm confident that if Quincy Jones had made Thriller using all stock Cakewalk plugins, it would still be a great sounding album.

Having good ears and knowing how to really use the equipment/software that you already have is SO much more valuable than having expensive plugins. But I know you guys already know that. Cheers 🍻

 

 

 

 

[OutrageProductions]

1 hour ago, T Boog said:

Having good ears and knowing how to really use the equipment/software that you already have is SO much more valuable than having expensive plugins.  

Especially those that pile 15 plugins on each instrument channel in search of the elusive Valhalla. 

I can do an entire score with less than 6 effect plugins in entirety. 

Edited 5 hours ago by OutrageProductions

[T Boog]

13 minutes ago, OutrageProductions said:

Especially those that pile 15 plugins on each instrument channel in search of the elusive Valhalla. 

I can do an entire score with less than 6 effect plugins in entirety. 

That's a good point too. You're reminding me of a Bob Clearmountain interview I saw.  He said he spends a lot of time removing plugins from overprocessed songs people send him. And he said when he sends it back, they're blown away by how good it sounds. Then he said they'll ask him what he did to make it sound so good 😄. And he tells them that most of what he did was just remove all the EQs & crap they had stacked on it 🤣

[Shane_B.]

Everyone speaks of these "professional" audio engineers who would be the only ones that could hear a difference between digital and analog eq's, comps, etc. I haven't heard anything commercial that I would call a good mix in many many years, so in my opinion, their opinion doesn't hold much weight.

I hate to use these amature buzz words and sound like the diy recording guy I am, but its true .... the one thing I've noticed over the years is, it's easier to get that creamy distortion using analog gear, and you won't get that with home gear like you hear on old recordings. When I do get close to it, it just makes everything mix and master better. Having a crystal clean recording isn't really what is desirable. At least for me.

Some of the recordings of big artists from the 50s and 60s are incredible. And they all have a very noticeable distortion, especially on the vocals. You'll never get that with digital gear or vst's that emulate analog. It's not possible due to the unpredictable nature of analog gear.

That's my 2 cents after many decades of chasing a sound I finally realized I'll never achieve and all this vst stuff is donkey dust ...

[T Boog]

13 minutes ago, Shane_B. said:

it's easier to get that creamy distortion using analog gear, and you won't get that with home gear like you hear on old recordings

I hear you. I must say that some things are getting better though. Like some of the neural amp modeling. I love the convenience of plugging straight into the box. But the tone and especially the response always suffered compared to a good tube amp. But they're def making strides now with that. The harmonic complexity and even the playing response is getting more & more realistic. But yeah, good analog gear definitely has it's mojo 👍