exit wrote on Fri, 30 April 2004 01:30 |
I work in [Protools] every day. I have had a set way of doing things for a while now, but my EQ'ing has never pleased me like it would on the SSL. (Don't start the A vs. D thing pleez) I'm talking about vocals specifically. Keep in mind I do a lot of rap. When doing my ruff mixes I usually buss out each person to their own stereo Aux track. I always use the Waves DeEsser, Renaissance Comp, and Renaissance EQ 4. Sometimes the DeEsser is 1st, but lately I've been putting it last. As long as I've been working in Alsi I still haven't come to really LIKE the EQing I'm doing. I find myself looking at the graphic of the EQ when I shouldn't be. I'm paying more attention to what frequency or how much I'm tweaking then to how it sounds. I guess sometimes you gotta turn the monitor off so you can just listen! But anyways, my other big issue is DeEssing. Either it's too sibilant and I'm not working the deesser hard enough or it's working too hard and the ss's are smearing. I don't know if it has to do with everything going thru a stereo bus, but i don't like my Deessing. I'm usually deessing between 4237 and 4547. Any bones you wanna throw would be great. I'm all for experimenting but we work on so many songs in a day that I never have time to play and try new things. |
exit wrote on Fri, 30 April 2004 09:54 |
....... The place I'm at daily has a rig that has been used and abused by countless incompetent engineers before me so we're missing a lot of plug-ins anyway! (Like long delay?!?! How do you lose that?) |
Jan Folkson wrote on Fri, 30 April 2004 15:01 |
The way that I de ess in PT is to grab the offending 's' with a bit of pre and post and use the gain plug and drop it by 6 or so db crossfade close to the 's' and you're ready for the next one. It's not fast, it's not elegant but it's very effective. |
kevin cubbins wrote on Sat, 01 May 2004 02:14 |
Neat idea, George. Lemme ask you this, did you need to crossfade the head and tail of each region as to avoid pops during playback? |
exit wrote on Fri, 30 April 2004 07:30 |
I work in Alsihad every day. |
Ruairi O'Flaherty wrote on Sat, 01 May 2004 15:59 | ||
First off - do we have to use that ridiculous nickname here, I understood that bs is to be restricted to MARSH. I always use the Waves DeEsser, Renaissance Comp, and Renaissance EQ 4. [...] cheers, Ruairi |
George Massenburg wrote on Sun, 02 May 2004 04:37 |
p.s. Are you going to be in Berlin? |
exit wrote on Sun, 02 May 2004 17:05 |
We're installing a new rig soon so I'll look out for the EQ's yall mentioned here. |
Quote: |
As far as using the term [editor has removed an arbitrary name for ProTools], don't you think you're being a little too anal? There was no malicious intent, just habit really. Maybe I am working in Nuendo everyday, maybe Logic. Maybe Protools. Who cares? If there's gonna be a R/E/P vs. Marsh thing going on PSW I won't ever return. I enjoy both sides, and I enjoy the place as a whole being laid back. Loosen up a little people. |
Ruairi O'Flaherty wrote on Sun, 02 May 2004 14:05 |
BTW what direction are you going with the new rig? Ruairi |
exit wrote on Sun, 02 May 2004 21:48 |
Well, I'm getting an "A" room going for my main client. We're installing an SSL 6056 which we got for the low-low. Unfortunately I have been a bit handcuffed by budget so I'm not able to get the rig I want, but it will be a good working one. A new G5, PT HD Accel 2, 4 96 i/o's, Sync. After all the talk about Oxford and MDW up here I will be be trying to add that to my list of Plug-ins. I'm wondering if we've got some one-sided opinions about the MDW stuff???? Just kidding. |
Quote: |
But back to the original topic-My point about EQing in the box was this: on the console you just twist knobs and listen. On DAW's, you watch your mouse movements and look at the EQ curve, rather than listen. At least this is my little roadblock. I always go right at certain frequencies, I've got a mental stump here I'm trying to hop over. That's what I meant about turning the screen off! exit |
exit wrote on Sun, 02 May 2004 13:48 |
But back to the original topic-My point about EQing in the box was this: on the console you just twist knobs and listen. On DAW's, you watch your mouse movements and look at the EQ curve, rather than listen. At least this is my little roadblock. I always go right at certain frequencies, I've got a mental stump here I'm trying to hop over. That's what I meant about turning the screen off! |
exit wrote on Mon, 03 May 2004 03:48 |
Guys-I was joking about Garageband. I haven't used it yet. I am waiting on the G5 laptop tho! My G4 Titanium just busted a screen hinge. It's on it's last leg. |
Ruairi O'Flaherty wrote on Sun, 02 May 2004 14:05 |
Apologies if I came off a little heavy sounding and I definitely do not want to start a PSW vs R/E/P vibe. I personally will not visit MARSH because of Mixerman's moderation there and I'd love to see the two boards remain very distinct in style and content. I know that you did not mean anything by using the term Alsihad but unfortunately many others do and have used that and other tactics to cause flames, arguments and rants all over some of my favourite forums. cheers, Ruairi |
sdevino wrote on Sun, 02 May 2004 07:14 |
Alsihad is short for "All's I Had" whichis followed by Pro Tools. |
Quote: |
Mixerman and his crew in the MARSH do not allow posters to mention "Pro Tools" by name. |
Quote: |
Others in the MARSH do not seem to mind. I also think it is time to give up this pointless practice outside of MM's forum (he is entitled to moderate his forum anyway he see's fit IMO). Steve |
exit wrote on Sun, 02 May 2004 16:48 | ||
But back to the original topic-My point about EQing in the box was this: on the console you just twist knobs and listen. On DAW's, you watch your mouse movements and look at the EQ curve, rather than listen. At least this is my little roadblock. I always go right at certain frequencies, I've got a mental stump here I'm trying to hop over. That's what I meant about turning the screen off! exit |
exit wrote on Sun, 02 May 2004 21:48 |
That all sounds cool, I'm on PT6.2.3/Dual G5/Accel and a 192i/o. I have never heard the 96i/o, some say they are poor compared to the 192. Of course some people wouldn't touch the 192 so I guess whatever works for you. |
David Schober wrote on Sun, 02 May 2004 09:36 |
First off - do we have to use that ridiculous nickname here, I understood that bs is to be restricted to MARSH. I agree completely! It's not professional. It's pejorative and displays an agenda. When criticism is needed, (name a DAW that doesn't) refraning from slang that invites a flaming threads can help rather than hurt the dialog....Something I hope this forum avoids! |
David Schober wrote on Sun, 09 May 2004 12:22 |
Call my system or whoever's system whatever you want. But lets get to the issues what really makes the difference in our work. |
Mixerman wrote on Mon, 10 May 2004 01:48 | ||
So let me see if I've got this straight. You don't think that a specific manufacturer building and selling a system designed to be both closed and obsolete in a predetermined amount of time makes a difference in our work? That's an interesting perspective you've got there. Mixerman |
David Schober wrote on Mon, 10 May 2004 05:28 | ||||
Okay.....I'm probably taking bait I shouldn't. So here's some more that fit that bill IMHO. All of the Sony digital tape line. The Mitsubishi line as well. In a sense they're really worse as the platform was abandoned by the manufacturer. You know GM's unhappiness with his rather large investment of his console that can never be upgraded. While they weren't created to be "obsolete in a predetermined amount of time" their fate is worse than an upgrage path....because there is none. Hasn't this been discussed ad nasuem? PT, DP, Logic, etc all by the nature of what they are will be obsolete in a few years every time something new comes out, for ex, the release of OSX. But this stuff is only obsolete if you wanna have the newest thing. If you want to always have the newest, you'll have to pony up. But, I have plenty of friends making lots of money on an old version of PT they bought a couple of years ago. In fact, one produced one of the biggest songs of the last couple of years, "I Can Only Imagine" on that "obsolete" system! So much for that affecting his work. I've got other things to do rather than go down this path...like the tracking session I'm heading off to do. And the quality of work I do today, the sounds I get, the creativity I bring to the table make a heck of a lot more difference than what platform I'm on. Maybe you see it differently, but for me that's the bigger picture that keeps me working. |
Quote: |
I can't wait to hear some of your Garageband tracks |
Giovanni Speranza wrote on Mon, 31 May 2004 18:28 |
My opinion is that you could use the best EQ in Pro Tools, but the mixing bus would steal the magic. Digidesign is releasing a new 48 bit engine, i wonder if there is a change. There is only one way to be happy with your DAW EQ: using the best EQ, in the best summing DAW. (i.e. i'm happy with Channel EQ, in Logic) |
Giovanni Speranza wrote on Tue, 01 June 2004 08:43 |
Channel EQ is real 32 bit floating point, Logic bus is straight 32 bit float, so George i don't know how to compare 32 bit floating point with 48 fixed, may i ask you to explain it? |
Leonard Ng wrote on Tue, 01 June 2004 13:09 |
I would recommend that mixers in the box give the Sonalksis EQ a try. It is incredibly smooth. There is a 30 day full trial. I ended up "having to" buy it, along with their Compressor. Cheers Leonard Ng |
Greg Dixon wrote on Tue, 01 June 2004 22:48 |
I got absolutely ripped to shreds, on another forum, for saying that I'd done an experiment, where I loaded some un mastered tracks I'd done, into PT along side ones that had been mastered in Australia's top mastering suites, by some of our best engineers, to see how close I could get with just plug-ins. I used your EQ, Waves and McDSP compressors and a little bit of Aphex exciter. Everybody that's heared them, agrees that the plug in versions sound just as good and in some cases better. |
Quote: |
And what they're promoting about "Analogue characteristics" is complete and utter bullshit. And you're welcome to forward this to them should they wish to debate this. I hate this. This kind of shitty marketting has ruined audio. |
Quote: |
You know Leonard, it's really hard for me to stand by and see Sonalksis promoted over something I know is better. My read on this is that they're promoting a new filter topology - "state space" - that has nothing in and of itself to do with the sound of an EQ (it's strength is in balancing processing across nodes, as far as I can tell). And what they're promoting about "Analogue characteristics" is complete and utter bullshit. And you're welcome to forward this to them should they wish to debate this. I hate this. This kind of shitty marketting has ruined audio. George |
Level wrote on Wed, 02 June 2004 00:08 |
Personally, I dig using an analog EQ FOR its ability to phase shift whan needed. |
Level wrote on Wed, 02 June 2004 02:08 |
[...] Digital is not analog. Cannot be, never will be. Each with their specific warts. Personally, I dig using an analog EQ FOR its ability to phase shift whan needed. |
George Massenburg wrote on Tue, 01 June 2004 19:29 | ||
Hi Giovanni, There are plenty of explanations out there (and it runs into some amount of detail, if you aren't already familiar with exponential arithmetic), and as much as I hate to do so, I'm going to ask that you be patient while I look for a reference. But suffice it to say 32 float (with 24bit mantissa) is in my mind roughly comparable to 48bit fixed across an average audio dynamic range. George |
Quote: |
You know Leonard, it's really hard for me to stand by and see Sonalksis promoted over something I know is better. My read on this is that they're promoting a new filter topology - "state space" - that has nothing in and of itself to do with the sound of an EQ (it's strength is in balancing processing across nodes, as far as I can tell). And what they're promoting about "Analogue characteristics" is complete and utter bullshit. And you're welcome to forward this to them should they wish to debate this. I hate this. This kind of shitty marketting has ruined audio. |