Waves SSL E-Channel for just $29!

[ghettosynth]

Err..pardon the ignorance, but what can you do with the SSL E-channel that you can't do with your DAW's inbuilt channel strip? Say Cubase?

Not much, but, Cubase has an awesome channel strip. The advantage of tools like this is that they give you a unified channel strip workflow in your DAW. So if you aren't using Cubase, you can still do all these things, but it's not as convenient.

[incubus]

As much BS as is here, I agree with that. Cubase has a very specific and kick-butt option thatf not every other host has.

Then again, why are people whining and moaning over a 29 buck plug?

[BRBWaffles]

Then again, why are people whining and moaning over a 29 buck plug?

Waves arguably has more clout than they rightfully deserve. So, I imagine most of the cautionary posts center around that assumption. Personally, I think there's quite a bit of validity to that position, so I wouldn't characterize it as "whining and moaning".

[ghettosynth]

As much BS as is here, I agree with that. Cubase has a very specific and kick-butt option thatf not every other host has.

Then again, why are people whining and moaning over a 29 buck plug?

Yeah, not sure, but, $30, or whatever, is $30 and it's perfectly valid to ask if a plugin is worth that and, if so, why. I like the concept more than the SSL "modeling", per se. In fact, I like how it works in Cubase even better for the same reason. I have NI's solid series so I'm not hung up on getting this special blend of SSL emulation.

I dunno, if I were in a different mood, i.e., I hadn't recently purchased a handful of plugins, I'd probably get it. Isn't that how it goes?

[1wob2many]

Then again, why are people whining and moaning over a 29 buck plug?

Some of us have to save up to buy a $29 plug-in.

Anyway, whether a plug-in costs $29 or $299 or nothing, you should ask yourself whether you are actually going to use it or not.

[exmatproton]

Then again, why are people whining and moaning over a 29 buck plug?

Some of us have to save up to buy a $29 plug-in.

Anyway, whether a plug-in costs $29 or $299 or nothing, you should ask yourself whether you are actually going to use it or not.

?

Ofcourse there is a difference between such a plugin at 29 or 299. I wouldn't buy it for 299, but i did for 29. I do use it, but it isn't worth the 'normal' price for my usage. A good sale for me, if you ask me.

[1wob2many]

Then again, why are people whining and moaning over a 29 buck plug?

Some of us have to save up to buy a $29 plug-in.

Anyway, whether a plug-in costs $29 or $299 or nothing, you should ask yourself whether you are actually going to use it or not.

?

Ofcourse there is a difference between such a plugin at 29 or 299. I wouldn't buy it for 299, but i did for 29. I do use it, but it isn't worth the 'normal' price for my usage. A good sale for me, if you ask me.

It is an entirely valid and fundamental question irrespective of the price.

Whether you would buy a particular plug-in at, say, $50 but not $100 is a different question.

I, like many others around here, like to keep an eye open for when developers are offering plug-ins for free for limited periods. There have been a few recently, and there are always plenty around Black Friday and Xmas.

I find myself eagerly signing up, downloading, installing and then either forgetting about or uninstalling, all in quick succession. Now I try and consider whether a plug-in offers me anything that I haven't already got, whether it is better to use than my existing tools, whether I have the necessary skills to use it properly, and whether I actually have any use for what it does in the first place. The fact that the plug-in is free is irrelevant.

[pc2000]

As much BS as is here, I agree with that. Cubase has a very specific and kick-butt option thatf not every other host has.

Then again, why are people whining and moaning over a 29 buck plug?

Yeah, not sure, but, $30, or whatever, is $30 and it's perfectly valid to ask if a plugin is worth that and, if so, why. I like the concept more than the SSL "modeling", per se. In fact, I like how it works in Cubase even better for the same reason. I have NI's solid series so I'm not hung up on getting this special blend of SSL emulation.

I dunno, if I were in a different mood, i.e., I hadn't recently purchased a handful of plugins, I'd probably get it. Isn't that how it goes?

The funny thing is that the title of this thread was to highlight the sale price, not what anyone thought of it. That's why I mentioned earlier that the title should be changed or a new thread be started, based on bashing it. Obviously the option to test it is available to all. There's really no need to have multiple pages questioning the validity or value. This plugin could be free for a limited time and still will get the same responses. I still have yet to read about any technical issues, such as crashes or bugs.

As for why bother with it when there are other offerings that do the same argument.... well, why bother being sexually attracted to different women when all vagina's do the same thing?

[ghettosynth]

As much BS as is here, I agree with that. Cubase has a very specific and kick-butt option thatf not every other host has.

Then again, why are people whining and moaning over a 29 buck plug?

Yeah, not sure, but, $30, or whatever, is $30 and it's perfectly valid to ask if a plugin is worth that and, if so, why. I like the concept more than the SSL "modeling", per se. In fact, I like how it works in Cubase even better for the same reason. I have NI's solid series so I'm not hung up on getting this special blend of SSL emulation.

I dunno, if I were in a different mood, i.e., I hadn't recently purchased a handful of plugins, I'd probably get it. Isn't that how it goes?

The funny thing is that the title of this thread was to highlight the sale price, not what anyone thought of it. That's why I mentioned earlier that the title should be changed or a new thread be started, based on bashing it. Obviously the option to test it is available to all. There's really no need to have multiple pages questioning the validity or value. This plugin could be free for a limited time and still will get the same responses. I still have yet to read about any technical issues, such as crashes or bugs.

Are you seriously trying to say that posting a sale price shouldn't drive discussion? Cmon, it's part and parcel with this kind of plugin. Moreover, this discussion is bringing far more attention to this plugin than it would get on KVR without it, so really, what I don't get is the need to complain about how other people are talking about a plugin that is the subject of the thread?

[1wob2many]

As for why bother with it when there are other offerings that do the same argument.... well, why bother being sexually attracted to different women when all vagina's do the same thing?

There's a completely different kind of plug-in.

Or do you just have a strange relationship with your software?

[Temptin]

Haha I just came back to 8 pages of discussion that arose after my page 1 post. Amazing.

There have been many interesting points from both sides.

1. The code is from 2005 (11 years old).

Pros: It was coded for muuuuuuuuuch slower computers, so its CPU usage on a modern computer is very low and you can easily use it on hundreds of tracks.

Cons: It was coded for much slower computers, so they had to cut corners to get acceptable performance in 2005, so forget about modern features like detailed saturation modeling, oversampling and other juice. The difference is like UAD SSL mk1 vs mk2 (which uses much more DSP CPU but sounds much better thanks to using modern modeling techniques).

2. It is one of Waves' most famous plugins and has been used on countless hit records. So who cares if it doesn't model everything perfectly? Buy it for ITS famous plugin sound, which has been proven by pros who mix for a living, instead of trying to compare it to the hardware.

3. It's just a digital EQ with SSL curves, and can be nulled to inaudible insignificance (~0.00025 dB difference) by regular digital DAW EQs.

4. But it provides a great workflow with EQ, expander, gate, compressor and lowpass and highpass in a single, efficient GUI. With very low CPU usage. So that you can get work done instead of fiddling.

5. And it is just $22 at AudioDeluxe with the DK39S coupon. It's a no-brainer.

6. But it's not worth even $22 since it is so old. People are better off instantiating Slate's VRM SSL EQ plus Slate VCC saturation plus Slate VBC bus compressor, to get a juicy color.

7. People are better off waiting for bx_console's SSL emulations which have been announced and will be out soon, and will have perfect, modern modeling code and perfectly emulate the differences between various channels and their cumulative imperfection effect on the overall mix, which leads to wider and deeper mixes. At a very high CPU cost, of course... But still, a modern CPU can easily run enough bx_console instances to cover 140 channels on a modern Quad Core CPU.

8. But... it's currently just $22 for a $199 plugin, the most popular plugin of the entire Waves SSL bundle, which pros have used for over a decade and which gets a certain result quickly in an all-in-one GUI and provably stable, low-CPU code...

Hehe; no wonder people are arguing. Every positive has an equal negative answer.

Even though I own Slate and bx_console and will probably buy bx_console's upcoming SSL emulations, I am getting a bit more tempted after hearing the positives of this old Waves plugin. After all, it is just $22 with the coupon, and I do get basically unlimited instances since the code is so old and basic - but its sound WORKS for professionals who still use it. So why not... it's just $22... and if I end up with a plugin I can use a lot of instances of and get a good result, it'll be worth it. It's time to do a proper demo!

I'm still leaning towards saving the $22 and using it towards the soon-to-be-released bx_console SSL, to get the real mix depth of a SSL console. Sure it costs a lot more CPU but a modern CPU easily covers the whole project with bx_console.

[ghettosynth]

So why not... it's just $22...

Because it's $22.

[kmonkey]

We already know 94,3% people here, let alone KVR product specialist and aliasing hunters would argue and piss on plugin even if Waves offered it for FREE - just like with every plugin which is offered for free or for low price.

People around here tend to generate conspiracy about everything.

[Temptin]

So why not... it's just $22...

Because it's $22.

Well, I just demoed it and really wanted to like it since it is so cheap. But... it's... horrible. It really has that "vintage, 2001-2005" plugin sound nailed to a tee. To really test its lack of oversampling I used a 44.1kHz project. It sounds like my oldest, stock DAW plugins from the 90s. Shrill digititis. Try giving the highs a huge boost to test the aliasing, and your ears will die from the digital shrillness. I don't care how many infinite instances I can run of this on a modern CPU. It is not a sound I want. Nothing retains any smoothness; it always tends towards harshness. Blessings to those who like this "vintage plugin" sound.

I can already run about 100 instances of Brainworx bx_console, and THAT channel strip is such a joy to use. Punchy, controlled, tight and airy. Everything retains smoothness and beauty. Doing "massive" high boosts with it still retains the clarity of the highs and doesn't pierce your ears. It sounds beautiful and clear no matter what you do with it. And spread across a mix, its analog channel variation modeling really gives a great depth.

Just try demoing plugin-alliance.com's bx_console against Waves SSL E-Channel. I don't care that they are different consoles with different EQ curves. Listen to the SSL's "old plugin EQ" sound. It is aliasing the highs all over the place, and the EQ and compressor are nothing special whatsoever. It feels like I am traveling back in time when using the Waves SSL.

There's a chance this "$29" offer is in preparation for a modern rewritten Waves SSL mk2, with an upgrade path, and that they're hoping to sell people on the $29 "drug deal" now and then slap us with a $99 or so upgrade price later, to try to snag as many people as possible on that upgrade path... And maybe then it'll be a pretty good offer, if the mk2 is great... but still, I don't care about a "possible maybe", since Waves has said nothing about any Mk2.

I'll save the $22 and put it towards the upcoming bx_console SSL, which will probably be $299 MSRP but with an intro price and a bx_console owner crossgrade price which brings it to something like $149, and then I'll be sure to get a beautiful SSL emulation with amazing sound quality and a full console emulation with all channel variations.

http://www.pro-tools-expert.com/home-pa ... g-plug-ins

"The Tolerance Modeling Technology in these plug-ins is designed to give you 72 slightly different channels, just like a real console, including different left and right channels in stereo setups. It is expected that bx_console SSL should be out in July and will be available in all Native formats, as well as AAX DSP and there will be upgrade deals for existing owners of the VXS console."

I don't care if any sensitive Waves fanboys will try to attack me now. I understand that professionals have used the Waves SSL plugin for a decade. But they used it because nothing better was available in 2005, and then they became used to it. Sure, it serves a certain purpose for many people. But its sound is so gross in comparison to modern emulation quality. To sum it up, Waves SSL has a few sweetspots - but you have to try to make it sound good, whereas modern emulations like bx_console are one big, fat, juicy, beautiful sweetspot - where you have to try very hard to ever make it sound bad. I'd rather use a more powerful computer to run more powerful plugins, than fighting with the old-school plugin sound of the Waves SSL just because it's cheap on the CPU.

PS: Wow, Waves Central doesn't let me uninstall just the Waves SSL. I have to uninstall all my Waves plugins and then re-install just the ones I want. Wtf. This will certainly make me think twice about demoing any other Waves plugins in the future.

[kmonkey]

I can't wait for BX Console SSL...that should be really good plugin..