Brainworx bx_console: Any users here?
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 513 posts since 6 Mar, 2012
I've been considering getting bx_console for a while, but still haven't demoed it. Since it's on sale this weekend, I was wondering if any KVRers are using it and what they think of it, especially in comparison to other console emulations. Is it worth its (now reduced) price?
-
- KVRAF
- 3817 posts since 8 Mar, 2006
I urge anyone to DEMO it! You can't judge it from the audio demos or YT videos..
If it kinda gets "phasey" ... just disable the HPF and LPF as they are on by default.
You won't believe the quality of the EQ! + the compressor can get very smooth too.
It's the best sounding EQ I currently have in my toolbox and one of the very best I've tried so far.
Also, the CPU usage is very low! Not sure how they did it while keeping the best of sound quality and no latency...
I've keep playing with it for the last few days and it'll undoubtedly be my go-to, general eq and compressor.
I was lucky to win a mixing contest featuring all the bx plugins and I was very curriuos to try the bx_console...
If I wouldn't have won and still DEMOed the plugin... I probably consider paying up to $150 for it (and I live in a country with poor economy
)
There isn't any harmonic dist/saturation modeled and there's a good reason why... long story short: The console they modeled was designed to be ultra-clean sounding (not like the usual expectations of Neve consoles) and if you tried to push it, it wouldn't sound great at all, so they ultimately decided not to model it... as a side-effect, it's very CPU efficient. .. + with all the great saturation plugins today, you can easily pair it with something if needed.
look how pretty it looks
If it kinda gets "phasey" ... just disable the HPF and LPF as they are on by default.
You won't believe the quality of the EQ! + the compressor can get very smooth too.
It's the best sounding EQ I currently have in my toolbox and one of the very best I've tried so far.
Also, the CPU usage is very low! Not sure how they did it while keeping the best of sound quality and no latency...
I've keep playing with it for the last few days and it'll undoubtedly be my go-to, general eq and compressor.
I was lucky to win a mixing contest featuring all the bx plugins and I was very curriuos to try the bx_console...
If I wouldn't have won and still DEMOed the plugin... I probably consider paying up to $150 for it (and I live in a country with poor economy
)There isn't any harmonic dist/saturation modeled and there's a good reason why... long story short: The console they modeled was designed to be ultra-clean sounding (not like the usual expectations of Neve consoles) and if you tried to push it, it wouldn't sound great at all, so they ultimately decided not to model it... as a side-effect, it's very CPU efficient. .. + with all the great saturation plugins today, you can easily pair it with something if needed.
look how pretty it looks
-
- KVRian
- 663 posts since 22 Sep, 2007 from Caracas, Venezuela
It's totally worth it. I've done lots of mixes with it alone (nebula console/preamp pre-processing or Kush preamps and then bx_console all over the mix). There aren't many cases where it won't work on something.
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 513 posts since 6 Mar, 2012
I've finally downloaded and installed the demo. So far, I've mainly tested the EQ, and I agree with 3ee's statement: It's one of the best sounding, if not the best sounding EQ I've ever used within a DAW. For what I expect from an EQ, it's a lot smoother/silkier/more effective than even Slate's Custom Series EQ.
Does anyone know what this small pen on the Hi-EQ shelf button (which turns up every now and then when you switch channels, see 3ee's picture) is supposed to indicate?
Does anyone know what this small pen on the Hi-EQ shelf button (which turns up every now and then when you switch channels, see 3ee's picture) is supposed to indicate?
-
- KVRAF
- 3817 posts since 8 Mar, 2006
It's purely aesthetic... a toothpick or whatever...Skorpius wrote:Does anyone know what this small pen on the Hi-EQ shelf button (which turns up every now and then when you switch channels, see 3ee's picture) is supposed to indicate?
From what I've read, it seems that some of those buttons wouldn't stay engaged with the real version so they decided to "model" that also
-
- KVRian
- 663 posts since 22 Sep, 2007 from Caracas, Venezuela
You can do neat things with the EQ section. You can put that section in the compression sidechain to tame a certain frequency range with the compressor (de-esser for vocals, remove cymbals harshness, control nasal vocals, etc). Example for de-essing: enable "IN SC", change the high band from shelf to peak, enable HiQ, put it around 10kHz, boost it all the way up, engage the compressor, set it to limit, move the second release to maximum (60) and the main release to minimum, switch the attack to the fastest setting and then tweak the threshold.Skorpius wrote:I've finally downloaded and installed the demo. So far, I've mainly tested the EQ, and I agree with 3ee's statement: It's one of the best sounding, if not the best sounding EQ I've ever used within a DAW. For what I expect from an EQ, it's a lot smoother/silkier/more effective than even Slate's Custom Series EQ.
Does anyone know what this small pen on the Hi-EQ shelf button (which turns up every now and then when you switch channels, see 3ee's picture) is supposed to indicate?
The compressor is really smooth and thick. It has "hold" functionality when set to "Auto". Both attack and release timings are program-dependant but since the attack only has two fixed values (1mS and 100uS) the circuitry always affects the very first portion of transients faster and the rest with a roughly 7mS time constant. With the second release you can keep the compression steadier or let things go faster. Just set the main release properly and then fine-tune how steady or radical the compression is with that second release.
The gate is so simple and effective that it wouldn't even make sense to give you details about it. Just tweak the threshold and that's it. You'd rarely need to change other controls.
Remember that TMT is engaged when the plugin is in analog mode. This is important for filters because you can experience a bit of phase de-correlation, especially on the low end so keep an eye on it.
-
- KVRian
- 650 posts since 26 Sep, 2014 from Kingshill Valley
Just a heads up for those who are interested in buying it: if you add the bx_tuner to your cart as well at PA you get an automatic bundle discount which leads to a significant price drop.
bx_console: price with 19% VAT = 213,01 EUR. bx_console + bx_tuner with 19% VAT = 157 EUR
bx_console: price with 19% VAT = 213,01 EUR. bx_console + bx_tuner with 19% VAT = 157 EUR
-
Robert Randolph Robert Randolph https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=7328 - KVRAF
- 2225 posts since 25 May, 2003 from Saint Petersburg, Florida
HUGE tip there.Sim.Sky wrote:Just a heads up for those who are interested in buying it: if you add the bx_tuner to your cart as well at PA you get an automatic bundle discount which leads to a significant price drop.
bx_console: price with 19% VAT = 213,01 EUR. bx_console + bx_tuner with 19% VAT = 157 EUR
The discount goes up if you buy more too.
You could get bx_console, sandman, bx_limiter, bx_tuner and bx_boom for $159usd.
What a deal. Toss on g8 for another $8, pex-500 for another $8... ($172 total now)
Throw in bx_meter and that's -$1 for a total of $171.
Quite the bundle system.
-
Robert Randolph Robert Randolph https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=7328
- KVRAF
- 2225 posts since 25 May, 2003 from Saint Petersburg, Florida
Basically $18 off the sale price of bx_console and 7 plugins for free. Sandman and G8 are quite cool too.
-
- KVRian
- 1050 posts since 1 Jan, 2013
+ $38 VAT in EuropeRobert Randolph wrote:
Basically $18 off the sale price of bx_console and 7 plugins for free. Sandman and G8 are quite cool too.
Optimal number of audio plugins is one more than you currently have.
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 513 posts since 6 Mar, 2012
I’m still hesitating whether or not I should jump on the offer: I thoroughly tested bx_console, especially in comparison with Slate VCC (that is, VCC + Custom Series EQ within VMR). I tested piano, vocals a drum bus and a complete instrumental part.
For me, it all comes down to a decision between VCC and bx_console, since I only want to use either of them to make my DAW workflow simple and consistent.
For the test, I chose one VCC console + some “moderate” EQ settings in the Custom EQ, and set the same EQ settings – but no compressor or gate – in bx_console. So basically, both VCC and bx_console had identical settings.
My personal results are as follows:
With regard to the individual instruments and the drum bus, it was nearly impossible to make out a difference between VCC and bx_console. If there were any differences, they were definitely minor and would not be audible for anyone with untrained ears.
With the complete instrumental part, things were a little different: VCC seems to emphasize the low mids, and the lows sound a tiny bit muddier, less precise than with bx_console. Also, I used different channels for all bx_console instances, which resulted in an overall sound that is somewhat more airy or silky.
Overall, there are pros and cons for both VCC and bx_console, which make the decision a little tough for me. For example:
VCC has the possibility to group various channels and switch them all on/off.
VCC offers a choice of various consoles.
Bx_console is the more realistic emulation, since it has a comp/gate section and an EQ section, which is what you actually find on high class mixing desks. Also, you can add noise as desired.
VCC allows you to save and load presets from within VMR. With bx_console, you have to use the preset mechanism of your DAW.
One thing that bothers me about bx_console is that buttons start to move already when you click on them once, even without moving the mouse wheel. This is not the case with VCC. Also, the values of the buttons in bx_console are only displayed when you move them.
Another thing I’m not too fond of in bx_console is the fact that clipping starts at rather low levels already, unlike VCC. This means, for example, that you can set a drum kit louder in VCC than in bx_console before any clipping occurs.
Bx_console allows you to switch between 72 channels. While the differences between the channels will not be audible with individual instruments, they seem to make a difference in a complete song, if all individual tracks are set to different channels.
Well, like I said, this is no easy decision. At least I have some more hours to jump on the offer.
For me, it all comes down to a decision between VCC and bx_console, since I only want to use either of them to make my DAW workflow simple and consistent.
For the test, I chose one VCC console + some “moderate” EQ settings in the Custom EQ, and set the same EQ settings – but no compressor or gate – in bx_console. So basically, both VCC and bx_console had identical settings.
My personal results are as follows:
With regard to the individual instruments and the drum bus, it was nearly impossible to make out a difference between VCC and bx_console. If there were any differences, they were definitely minor and would not be audible for anyone with untrained ears.
With the complete instrumental part, things were a little different: VCC seems to emphasize the low mids, and the lows sound a tiny bit muddier, less precise than with bx_console. Also, I used different channels for all bx_console instances, which resulted in an overall sound that is somewhat more airy or silky.
Overall, there are pros and cons for both VCC and bx_console, which make the decision a little tough for me. For example:
VCC has the possibility to group various channels and switch them all on/off.
VCC offers a choice of various consoles.
Bx_console is the more realistic emulation, since it has a comp/gate section and an EQ section, which is what you actually find on high class mixing desks. Also, you can add noise as desired.
VCC allows you to save and load presets from within VMR. With bx_console, you have to use the preset mechanism of your DAW.
One thing that bothers me about bx_console is that buttons start to move already when you click on them once, even without moving the mouse wheel. This is not the case with VCC. Also, the values of the buttons in bx_console are only displayed when you move them.
Another thing I’m not too fond of in bx_console is the fact that clipping starts at rather low levels already, unlike VCC. This means, for example, that you can set a drum kit louder in VCC than in bx_console before any clipping occurs.
Bx_console allows you to switch between 72 channels. While the differences between the channels will not be audible with individual instruments, they seem to make a difference in a complete song, if all individual tracks are set to different channels.
Well, like I said, this is no easy decision. At least I have some more hours to jump on the offer.
-
- KVRist
- 436 posts since 20 Aug, 2010
I can quite clearly hear the difference in the channels on single instruments working at 88.2. That's why I bought it. Try the side solo option and flick through the channels using different instruments.
