Slate Digital Virtual Tape Machine: Released

[Tp3]

Oh one more thing worth mentioning to everybody:

Tape machines, due to their complex dynamic behavior, take TIME to learn. Don't expect to form an opinion about a machine until you have a fair number of hours of testing and using the thing. This is not a "slap it on a track and form an opinion within the first hour" kind of plugin. It takes quite a bit of patience and experimentation to find your own sweet spot and how to tackle the machine.

That kind of defeat the purpose of a plugs, doesn't it ?

I mean, with HW we EXPECT a learning curve. but with plugs.... there's "no time to learn" (let alone compare with the real thing - 99% will never get the chance to hear a real tape, like it is INTENDED to be heard).

You don't seem to understand what I was trying to say.. I'll try to be more specific:

Yea, I understood you PERFECTLY.

You're just rephrasing what I was saying : it takes time to understand the nature of tape EMUs (I will not take into account the the nature of REAL tape and one's ability to compare between the two) ; time is something that one doesn't have, in the consumer realm (plugs are commodity, like it or not... with a VERY short life span).

Hence the problem I was talking about.

[jam92189]

I dont work on DJ stuff but when you think about it when would you be able to set up a tape machine for a show like that

I have a new custom built ADK computer to replace my old ass dual core I agree with how much better computers have gotten but also I never really had to much of cpu problems I have all my computers built for audio. I hope that better computers can also be coupled with something like better ways to help a plugin be more efficient. that being said sometimes latency is a bitch maybe a option to have a non latency mode would be nice for something like a live thing

[AudioGuy720]

...time is something that one doesn't have, in the consumer realm (plugs are commodity, like it or not... with a VERY short life span).

Hence the problem I was talking about.

I am still using plug-ins that were made nine years ago. Namely the Waves Renaissance collection. RVox gets used on almost every vocal track in my mixes. Waves IR1 is also a great reverb plug-in.

I wouldn't call nine years a short life span. I think in the next decade, as long as VST is still supported, I will be using Slate's TRIGGER, VCC and VTM plug-ins. Good software never get old, just like classic microphones and hardware. Hell, I'm still using Windows XP at the studio and that was released in 2001!

[spinlud]

Hi all!

I've just purchased the new Slate Tape plugin. I really like what feel it gives to the sound!

I don't know if this is a problem, but i've noticed that each istance of VTP decrease my digital headroom. Let's say i put 1 istance on my drum bus without pushing it: with the plugin off my meters on ableton report peak around -6db, with plugin on around -4db. Is this normal?

[Kaboom75]

Tape adds a bit of compression and distortion so I think that is normal for it to be a bit louder. The Harder you hit it the more you will get of that.

Use the FG9 tape to get less distortion and less colouration.

[4damind]

Could be different effects, compression (it's a typical behaviour of a tape) but also loudness because of distortion (this is the typical Inflator effect).
But I'm not sure if the distortion/additional harmonics are a important part (maybe for 15ips more than for 30ips) to achieve a bit more loudness.
Fabrice could help here better.

[Edit]
I ask Fabrice. There is such a tape loudness maximizer effect.

[electro]

Oh one more thing worth mentioning to everybody:

Tape machines, due to their complex dynamic behavior, take TIME to learn. Don't expect to form an opinion about a machine until you have a fair number of hours of testing and using the thing. This is not a "slap it on a track and form an opinion within the first hour" kind of plugin. It takes quite a bit of patience and experimentation to find your own sweet spot and how to tackle the machine.

That kind of defeat the purpose of a plugs, doesn't it ?

I mean, with HW we EXPECT a learning curve. but with plugs.... there's "no time to learn" (let alone compare with the real thing - 99% will never get the chance to hear a real tape, like it is INTENDED to be heard).

You don't seem to understand what I was trying to say.. I'll try to be more specific:

Because TAPE is complex (this includes ALL proper digital emulations of tape as well) it will take time to learn how to use it. It is NOT just a simple effect that you slap on everything. Same goes for some other complex effects.. especially if they have any kind of analogue modeling which automatically means you have to keep gain staging in mind and learn how it affects the sound.

This is not like choruses, flangers and filters (again unless they are analogue modeled because then again there is the gain-staging present) where you can pretty much instantly get a general feel for the plugin and will know pretty quickly if you like it or not.

Cheers!
bManic

You record real instruments and vocals to a tape machine that then gets sent on to the desk. Aside from proper gain staging what's this big learning curve?

A properly emulated tape plug is supposed to do the same thing to the audio that a real tape machine does under the same conditions.

[bmanic]

The learning part comes from the gain staging! How come this part is so hard to understand?

Analogue equipment SOUNDS different depending on how hard you hit it. It also sounds and behaves different depending on the dynamic content AND the frequency content.

Sure, we are talking about relatively subtle things but they all add up. So lets say you mix a song on an analogue mixing desk and the song has 48 tracks. Now the difference in sound when you hit all 48 tracks relatively hard into the desk compared to hitting it way below optimal levels will be very easily heard.

THIS is the thing that takes time, learning what works and what doesn't. Simply hitting things at nominal levels means you are not exploring the possibilities. Same goes for all complex analogue modeled plugins. For instance, the Softube plugins do sound quite different when pushed or not pushed (try hitting their trident EQ with signals that have an RMS of about -30dBFS and compare it to hitting the thing at +6dBFS or more).

I guess there is a whole generation now growing up without any experience with analogue gear so they have missed this whole part of mixing. Gain staging is not just about setting proper levels to reduce noise, it has always been used for creative control as well. Hitting tape hard is a typical example of this. Also pre-equalizing (some call it pre-emphasis) was also very common. You hit the tape hard and bright and then compensate at the mixing desk to bring back the signal to it's original frequency content. This makes the tape react in a totally different way than if you would just have hit the tape normally.

These analogue beasts are like guitars and violins.. or any other form of acoustic instrument where it will sound different depending on how you "hit" it. A violin sounds different depending on how much pressure the player puts on the bow.. or at what angle the bow is relative to the strings.. or position. Subtleties like this take time to learn and can not be immediately appreciated or exploited.

Same thing with any analogue hardware or complex analogue modeled plugins.

Another example is various analogue filters. A synthesizer's filter WILL SOUND different depending on how hard the oscillators hit the filter. This can be easily verified in U-He Diva and many other VSTi plugins that have complex filters.

So in short, once more: Learning HOW a unit will sound, depending on frequency content, dynamic content (short transients versus long sustained portions) and overall input level will take some time and experimentation.

This is what I've been trying to say here. I can not express this any more clearly so if somebody is still confused then I do apologize. Perhaps somebody else can explain it more clearly?

Cheers!
bManic

[SLiC]

The learning part comes from the gain staging! How come this part is so hard to understand?

Analogue equipment SOUNDS different depending on how hard you hit it. It also sounds and behaves different depending on the dynamic content AND the frequency content.

Sure, we are talking about relatively subtle things but they all add up. So lets say you mix a song on an analogue mixing desk and the song has 48 tracks. Now the difference in sound when you hit all 48 tracks relatively hard into the desk compared to hitting it way below optimal levels will be very easily heard.

THIS is the thing that takes time, learning what works and what doesn't. Simply hitting things at nominal levels means you are not exploring the possibilities. Same goes for all complex analogue modeled plugins. For instance, the Softube plugins do sound quite different when pushed or not pushed (try hitting their trident EQ with signals that have an RMS of about -30dBFS and compare it to hitting the thing at +6dBFS or more).

I guess there is a whole generation now growing up without any experience with analogue gear so they have missed this whole part of mixing. Gain staging is not just about setting proper levels to reduce noise, it has always been used for creative control as well. Hitting tape hard is a typical example of this. Also pre-equalizing (some call it pre-emphasis) was also very common. You hit the tape hard and bright and then compensate at the mixing desk to bring back the signal to it's original frequency content. This makes the tape react in a totally different way than if you would just have hit the tape normally.

These analogue beasts are like guitars and violins.. or any other form of acoustic instrument where it will sound different depending on how you "hit" it. A violin sounds different depending on how much pressure the player puts on the bow.. or at what angle the bow is relative to the strings.. or position. Subtleties like this take time to learn and can not be immediately appreciated or exploited.

Same thing with any analogue hardware or complex analogue modeled plugins.

Another example is various analogue filters. A synthesizer's filter WILL SOUND different depending on how hard the oscillators hit the filter. This can be easily verified in U-He Diva and many other VSTi plugins that have complex filters.

So in short, once more: Learning HOW a unit will sound, depending on frequency content, dynamic content (short transients versus long sustained portions) and overall input level will take some time and experimentation.

This is what I've been trying to say here. I can not express this any more clearly so if somebody is still confused then I do apologize. Perhaps somebody else can explain it more clearly?

Cheers!
bManic

learn?....experiment?.....this is the instant gratification age!

''press big red button to make anything sound better''

[macmurphy]

Perhaps somebody else can explain it more clearly?

it doesn't get much clearer than that!

[@midnight]

How does this one sound to the UAD/Waves/Sknote etc...?

[dusted william]

crazy as it may sound, I really liked how UAD studer into the Slate VTM sounded.

super warm...

dw

[eytanmich123]

crazy as it may sound, I really liked how UAD studer into the Slate VTM sounded.

super warm...

Yes, being rich DOES make one feel warm and cosy...

[heffus]

crazy as it may sound, I really liked how UAD studer into the Slate VTM sounded.

super warm...

Yes, being rich DOES make one feel warm and cosy...

[penguinfromdeep]

How does this one sound to the UAD/Waves/Sknote etc...?

This is quite difficult, they are different beasts as is obvious. I don't own UAD but I own the Waves Kramer, Sknote Roundtone and TB Reelbus. Now I have only limited experience with real tape machines but I think VTM sounds the most 'realistic' from the bunch. I don't like Kramer that much anymore, it sounds somehow too rough for me, especially in the highs. Sknote Roundtone is a cool saturation effect and sounds very nice but VTM sounds more authentic 'tapey' to me, Roundtone got only recently Wow / Flutter and noise emulation for example. Now Reelbus sounds very good too and quite tape-like, though I slightly prefer VTM when I tried them side-by-side. Personally I'm going to use VTM and Reelbus in the future for my tape needs with Roundtone thrown in sometimes on special tracks for a good measure (or as a tape delay, it's great for that!)