I wont shoot youUncle E wrote:Agreed! I'm only the messenger, it doesn't mean I approve of that behavior.Hink wrote:Having said that I quoted part of your post in bold Eric because I think the argument can be made that this is not always a good thing.
That is the very essence of the real bottom line of firstly the end/answer to such a subject and secondly really all what actually matters, Well said mateHink wrote:in your original post you ask can you make a comparison and here you make note of the fact that marketing is the issue. I'm assuming you've been at this for while. I think the type of marketing that you speak of has been around a very long time. I'll take the example of guitar amps because I am a guitarist (and ftr 54 years old, been playing since I was 12). This is the same marketing that they used in the 70's, 80's, 90' 00's and this decade sounds just like a Marshall (still hear it with amp sims) but at this point in my life that marketing has grown very old and I block it out. It's embellishment, it's fluff, the truth is if I want a Marshall I am buying a Marshall.Axiomstatic wrote:Uncle E before you start accusing me of anything read the thread and the history.
One guy on here says, do not get confused and think all Plugins sound the same.
Until then at no time have I ever mentioned that all plugins sound the same and thought it would be interesting to post Ethans little talk on the subject.
Personally I do not care if plugins sound differently and you are right my experience is very limited with software EQ. But let me assure you given my experience with hardware EQ, I can quickly learn to understand one of your software EQ's in no time.
You may find it interesting that yesterday I decided to down load a Waves version of a supposed to be emulation of my Pultec EQP- 1A.
What would you know, the plugin sounds nothing like the original.
It would be good if the marketing would cease the over hype nonsense claiming these emulations sound the same or better then the real thing. Oh dear me marketing at its greatest lol.
Actually thanks to all in this thread for reminding me that I am not missing out on anything
After all we use what we like in the end.
You ask can you compare software to hardware, remove marketing from the equation and let me ask...do you need to compare hardware and software? Do you believe when you read that it sounds just like whatever it does? Which is more important? Sounding like the marketing department says it does or whether or not you like how it sounds and whether or not it will compliment your existing gear?
There is nothing wrong with your being biased toward hardware, I can relate. But perhaps you might want to approach it from a different angle. There are some good suggestions as to why hybrid is the way to go, even from an old(er) timer like myself. I'm sure you have tried this but please allow me to just emphasize this, try a demo and instead of asking does this sound like? Ask yourself, can this be useful to me?
thanx Dean, good to see you here...4 days until Lauren's big day, I hope I can hold it togetherDean Aka Nekro wrote:That is the very essence of the real bottom line of firstly the end/answer to such a subject and secondly really all what actually matters, Well said mateHink wrote:in your original post you ask can you make a comparison and here you make note of the fact that marketing is the issue. I'm assuming you've been at this for while. I think the type of marketing that you speak of has been around a very long time. I'll take the example of guitar amps because I am a guitarist (and ftr 54 years old, been playing since I was 12). This is the same marketing that they used in the 70's, 80's, 90' 00's and this decade sounds just like a Marshall (still hear it with amp sims) but at this point in my life that marketing has grown very old and I block it out. It's embellishment, it's fluff, the truth is if I want a Marshall I am buying a Marshall.Axiomstatic wrote:Uncle E before you start accusing me of anything read the thread and the history.
One guy on here says, do not get confused and think all Plugins sound the same.
Until then at no time have I ever mentioned that all plugins sound the same and thought it would be interesting to post Ethans little talk on the subject.
Personally I do not care if plugins sound differently and you are right my experience is very limited with software EQ. But let me assure you given my experience with hardware EQ, I can quickly learn to understand one of your software EQ's in no time.
You may find it interesting that yesterday I decided to down load a Waves version of a supposed to be emulation of my Pultec EQP- 1A.
What would you know, the plugin sounds nothing like the original.
It would be good if the marketing would cease the over hype nonsense claiming these emulations sound the same or better then the real thing. Oh dear me marketing at its greatest lol.
Actually thanks to all in this thread for reminding me that I am not missing out on anything
After all we use what we like in the end.
You ask can you compare software to hardware, remove marketing from the equation and let me ask...do you need to compare hardware and software? Do you believe when you read that it sounds just like whatever it does? Which is more important? Sounding like the marketing department says it does or whether or not you like how it sounds and whether or not it will compliment your existing gear?
There is nothing wrong with your being biased toward hardware, I can relate. But perhaps you might want to approach it from a different angle. There are some good suggestions as to why hybrid is the way to go, even from an old(er) timer like myself. I'm sure you have tried this but please allow me to just emphasize this, try a demo and instead of asking does this sound like? Ask yourself, can this be useful to me?
...I know I owe you a message or two TTYS I know you'll hold it together just fine and I look forwards to hearing from you plus the splendid photos of Lauren on her big day John, Stoked for her and she deserves it to be fantastic. Lots of love to you three as alwaysHink wrote:thanx Dean, good to see you here...4 days until Lauren's big day, I hope I can hold it togetherDean Aka Nekro wrote:That is the very essence of the real bottom line of firstly the end/answer to such a subject and secondly really all what actually matters, Well said mateHink wrote:in your original post you ask can you make a comparison and here you make note of the fact that marketing is the issue. I'm assuming you've been at this for while. I think the type of marketing that you speak of has been around a very long time. I'll take the example of guitar amps because I am a guitarist (and ftr 54 years old, been playing since I was 12). This is the same marketing that they used in the 70's, 80's, 90' 00's and this decade sounds just like a Marshall (still hear it with amp sims) but at this point in my life that marketing has grown very old and I block it out. It's embellishment, it's fluff, the truth is if I want a Marshall I am buying a Marshall.
You ask can you compare software to hardware, remove marketing from the equation and let me ask...do you need to compare hardware and software? Do you believe when you read that it sounds just like whatever it does? Which is more important? Sounding like the marketing department says it does or whether or not you like how it sounds and whether or not it will compliment your existing gear?
There is nothing wrong with your being biased toward hardware, I can relate. But perhaps you might want to approach it from a different angle. There are some good suggestions as to why hybrid is the way to go, even from an old(er) timer like myself. I'm sure you have tried this but please allow me to just emphasize this, try a demo and instead of asking does this sound like? Ask yourself, can this be useful to me?
Well put Jan, A lot, Lot more straight and to the point than I can ever seem to manage even when I tryjancivil wrote:Axiomstatic wrote:Actually thanks to all in this thread for reminding me that I am not missing out on anything
Love and best to your way to yourself and your family and loved one's 
Try out their Scheps 73, that might be Waves' most accurate emulation. IK Multimedia's EQ 73 is also very good and, as I said before, their 432 is the creme de la creme of native software EQ's, IMO. The Maag EQ4 is also very good. If you want to hear a great software version of the Pultec, try the UAD Pultec MK2. That's a little tougher to try, though, because it's not native and you'll need a UAD card to do it.Axiomstatic wrote:You may find it interesting that yesterday I decided to down load a Waves version of a supposed to be emulation of my Pultec EQP- 1A.
and having some fun talking about this stuff here. I never put the software plug down, I did ask though how does it compare with folks who use both daily?
Again, Softube's Console 1 not only replicates that but actually improve on a console's workflow in many regards:Axiomstatic wrote:No matter how good a plugin will sound I like the interaction between the unit and me and the effect it has when working this way.
© KVR Audio, Inc. 2000-2024
Submit: News, Plugins, Hosts & Apps | Advertise @ KVR | Developer Account | About KVR / Contact Us | Privacy Statement
