Waves SSL E-Channel for just $29!

[Temptin]

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

Me too. The bx_console Neve VXS is insanely good. I can't wait for bx_console SSL 4k E&G and will probably buy it day 1.

[chk071]

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.

I can't comment on this plugin, but, so far, what i tested from Waves was really quite sobering. Especially considering that their regular prices is so high, i expected more from their plugins. Also many of their plugins seem pretty long in the teeth now.

Oh, and i HATE software centers, which don't even let you choose where to install them, or to install the plugins. I mean, really, HATE. And HATE. And HATE. Especially when there's not much space left on your system SSD anyway.

[Harry_HH]

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. 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 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.

Oh dear...One of the most wanted, by many professionals acknowledged Waves pugin, turned crap overnight, mainly because its too cheap. But good to have all kind of opinions - that's what the Kvr is for. This proves, once again, that we can take ANY possible subject in the universum, and opinions towards to it tend to distribute according to the Gaussian curve.

[Temptin]

Oh dear...One of the most wanted, by many professionals acknowledged Waves pugin, turned crap overnight, ...

Its fame as a plugin is very simple: Those professionals were working in 2005 and had to sell records and make great mixes in the box, and they got a huge boost when Waves SSL came along and was better than any plugins before it. They became very, very used to working with the Waves SSL and all of its quirks, workflows, flaws and tricks.

11 years later, it is crap by plugin sound quality standards, but it still serves a purpose for those who are used to working with that exact plugin. For everyone else, there are now much better quality emulations available in 2017 than in 2005.

Next month, Brainworx bx_console's SSL 4k E & G emulation is expected to be released. I think it will be a day 1 instant purchase, judging by how incredible their bx_console Neve VXS is.

... mainly because its too cheap.

It's not the price we're talking about. It's the outdated sound. It's a plugin from over a decade ago, when computers were weak, and the sound quality / emulation quality had to be reduced to be usable on those old computers (otherwise those old computers would only be able to run a single plugin instance). And it was coded long before modern advances in analog emulation. Before things like circuit component modeling were even feasible on those old CPUs. And before something as basic as oversampling (anti-aliasing) became a standard feature.

If you like the "old plugin" sound of the Waves SSL so much, you should mix with the UAD SSL Mk1, instead of the newer and better sounding UAD SSL Mk2. Let's never advance sound quality and analog emulations, since clearly it was all perfected 11 years ago by Waves, two years before even the iPhone 1 (ONE) came out, and back when Macs still used PowerPC CPUs.

I find it amazing that KVRians can simultaneously cheer every time a new, "amazingly analog" modern plugin comes along with huge advances in analog modeling quality, and simultaneously defend absolutely ancient and outdated emulations. If Waves SSL was a human, it would be close to going to High School now. It's been a long time of huge advances in plugin-land, since its birth 11 years ago.

If you like it... great, congratulations on getting it for just $22. For me, those $22 are better spent towards the price of the new, amazing bx_console SSL in July.

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/new-pro ... strip.html
http://www.pro-tools-expert.com/home-pa ... g-plug-ins

"bx_console E will be out in July, and soon after that we'll release updated bx_console N (the existing plugin), followed by the bx_console G release."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acNYFMx5Cjw

[poshook]

OK, let say that bx console is new (2years old). But in eq and dynamics there is nothing just curves. no advanced modelling someone here talked about. moreover TMT is also nothing special as it does not apply non linearities depends of the level of signal. It just copy / paste 72 static snapshots to sound before the signal reaches the output. And finally one type of noise for whole plugin if you want. It is clean and very simple concept. The main part of the plugin without TMT it is even simpler that Waves E-Channel

[Temptin]

OK, let say that bx console is new (2years old). But in eq and dynamics there is nothing just curves. no advanced modelling someone here talked about. moreover TMT is also nothing special as it does not apply non linearities depends of the level of signal. It just copy / paste 72 static snapshots to sound before the signal reaches the output. And of finally one type of noise for whole plugin if you want. It is clean and very simple concept. The main part of the plugin without TMT it is even simpler that Waves E-Channel

lol. Not even worth replying to that drivel.

See: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/11443898-post242.html

[poshook]

OK, let say that bx console is new (2years old). But in eq and dynamics there is nothing just curves. no advanced modelling someone here talked about. moreover TMT is also nothing special as it does not apply non linearities depends of the level of signal. It just copy / paste 72 static snapshots to sound before the signal reaches the output. And of finally one type of noise for whole plugin if you want. It is clean and very simple concept. The main part of the plugin without TMT it is even simpler that Waves E-Channel

lol. Not even worth replying to that drivel.

See: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/11443898-post242.html

What does "non-linearities in dynamic section" mean? From what I hear, TNT introduces some phase shifts and alternates filter behaviour in EQ section.

[Rockatansky]

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).

Here's some insider insight...

Signal amplification 2005: signal *= gain
Signal amplification 2017: signal *= gain

Saturation/soft clipping 2005: signal = tanhf(signal)
Saturation/soft clipping 2017: signal = tanhf(signal)

and so on.

RBJ's filter/audio EQ cookbook is on musicdsp since 2005 or earlier, at least that's when it got the first comments. It's still a valid and common reference today, the filters in it are no better or worse than what most plugin developers use today. The RBJ filters are in Vinnie Falco's filter library that many use, and the IIRFilters in JUCE work the same way as the RBJ filters. Who uses JUCE, you say? Companies like Valhalla DSP, D16, Sound Radix, Acon, Cableguys... so I guess their products are basically all shite because they use filters from a 2005 document. Interesting point.

Upsampling/oversampling was a thing in the 90s already. I have no information or opinion about this, but you quite evidently have. I want to form my own, so please feel free to link to any reliable source stating that Waves didn't use oversampling in their SSL plugins. Always good to know such things.

[pascal020]

This thread is flooding with fanboi and off-topic crap.

Are you sleeping mods?

[ATN69]

This thread is flooding with fanboi and off-topic crap.

Are you sleeping mods?

Welcome to KVR!
..one big happy family

[DCS]

I just stumbled upon this article: http://www.soundonsound.com/people/insi ... iams-happy

Another one I read recently: http://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/ ... ers-closer
That channel is almost on every Track.

There are so many of pro mixers who still use this plugin. So if 22$ is too much money for this plugin...

[chk071]

Where can you get it for $22, BTW?

[pixel85]

Meantime when you argue about bull***t here I've done mix with almost only Waves E Channel/NLS (it took me about 2 hours only) and I've got good reviews from guys working professionally in the industry for very long time. How much have you done by this time when you argue here?
I read this topic and I'm laughing about silly dudes trying to diss on this (or any other) plugin
I'm curious how many of dudes over here actually produce music professionally (I mean: it's their main source of income). I guess that not many because you have so much time to waste on useless topics like dissing a plugin that you don't like.

Not to mention comments like 'compressor in E is the same like every DAW native'... yeah right Why I have feeling that so many dudes didnt even tried this plugin and their knowledge is coming from looking on GUI picture?

[Harry_HH]

...

... mainly because its too cheap.

It's not the price we're talking about. It's the outdated sound. It's a plugin from over a decade ago, when computers were weak, and the sound quality / emulation quality had to be reduced to be usable on those old computers (otherwise those old computers would only be able to run a single plugin instance). And it was coded long before modern advances in analog emulation. Before things like circuit component modeling were even feasible on those old CPUs. And before something as basic as oversampling (anti-aliasing) became a standard feature.

If you like the "old plugin" sound of the Waves SSL so much, you should mix with the UAD SSL Mk1, instead of the newer and better sounding UAD SSL Mk2. Let's never advance sound quality and analog emulations, since clearly it was all perfected 11 years ago by Waves, two years before even the iPhone 1 (ONE) came out, and back when Macs still used PowerPC CPUs.

I find it amazing that KVRians can simultaneously cheer every time a new, "amazingly analog" modern plugin comes along with huge advances in analog modeling quality, and simultaneously defend absolutely ancient and outdated emulations. If Waves SSL was a human, it would be close to going to High School now. It's been a long time of huge advances in plugin-land, since its birth 11 years ago.

If you like it... great, congratulations on getting it for just $22. For me, those $22 are better spent towards the price of the new, amazing bx_console SSL in July.

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/new-pro ... strip.html
http://www.pro-tools-expert.com/home-pa ... g-plug-ins

"bx_console E will be out in July, and soon after that we'll release updated bx_console N (the existing plugin), followed by the bx_console G release."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acNYFMx5Cjw

On my behalf I find amazing how the same people can on the one hand praise, search and use all kind of analog emulations from the past years, many decades ago, and on the other hand judge 2005 made very precise emulation from the late 70's. The motivation can be: computers were 2005 weak=modelled software are today bad.

If the E-Channel wasn't on sale, you most likely hadn't wrote your critique now.
Affordabe rather good, even very good = popular= bad thing.
Many times more expensive, who knows how good, not that popular = good thing

[Compyfox]

Holy carp! Sleep in for a couple of hours, and this happens.

If the E-Channel wasn't on sale, you most likely hadn't wrote your critique now.
Affordabe rather good, even very good = popular= bad thing.
Many times more expensive, who knows how good, not that popular = good thing

You forgot:
New / previously unknown developer, price doesn't matter, many sock-puppet comments = instant purchase

*cough*

Where can you get it for $22, BTW?

AudioDeluxe among others, with a Waves Voucher (example: see page 2, middle).

This thread is flooding with fanboi and off-topic crap.

Are you sleeping mods?

Do you see the red circle to the top right of a post? That one with the white exclamation mark in it? That's the report function. Feel free to use it if you consider threads "fanboi drivel" and "off-topic crap".

You're right though - this needs to be sorted out immediately.
But the mods can't monitor every thread of course.



EDIT:
Oh hi "Mad Max"!