Waves SSL E-Channel for just $29!
- KVRAF
- 2110 posts since 5 Oct, 2015 from Swedish / Living in Hong Kong
Win 10 -64bit, CPU i7-7700K, 32Gb, Focusrite 2i2, FL-studio 20, Studio One 4, Reason 10
-
- KVRist
- 137 posts since 22 May, 2017
I make no distinction, depending on the person.billcarroll wrote:Yeah, them ... along with people producing top tier music and getting paid well for it.BRBWaffles wrote:People with disposable income and deficient critical thinking skills, maybe.martinjuenke wrote:Who the hell still uses Waves products? OMG!
- KVRAF
- 2938 posts since 9 Dec, 2011 from falling
Trololo indeedBRBWaffles wrote:I make no distinction, depending on the person.billcarroll wrote:Yeah, them ... along with people producing top tier music and getting paid well for it.BRBWaffles wrote:People with disposable income and deficient critical thinking skills, maybe.martinjuenke wrote:Who the hell still uses Waves products? OMG!
Bitwig Certified Trainer
-
- KVRAF
- 2586 posts since 15 Jun, 2006
I just got the E channel from Audiodeluxe.com. They sent the license imediately.
I demoed it earlier today.I was able to get good results very quick with it.
And it is very light on Cpu. My amp sims were clipping the input meters of the E channel
So, I turned down the amp sim masters. What levels are you sending into the E channel.
I know some anologue emulations sound best when you send -18 to -16 into them. The waves vcomp
For example.
I demoed it earlier today.I was able to get good results very quick with it.
And it is very light on Cpu. My amp sims were clipping the input meters of the E channel
So, I turned down the amp sim masters. What levels are you sending into the E channel.
I know some anologue emulations sound best when you send -18 to -16 into them. The waves vcomp
For example.
-
- KVRian
- 505 posts since 2 May, 2014
The simple alternative to designing Waves Central the way it is, is to designing it differently.Burillo wrote:OK, what are the alternatives, assuming the silly "solutions" like "have less plugins" are out the window?1wob2many wrote:And designing Waves Central the way it is, is not the only solution to them having a large back catalogue of plug-ins
- KVRAF
- 4433 posts since 15 Nov, 2006 from Hell
such as?1wob2many wrote:The simple alternative to designing Waves Central the way it is, is to designing it differently.Burillo wrote:OK, what are the alternatives, assuming the silly "solutions" like "have less plugins" are out the window?1wob2many wrote:And designing Waves Central the way it is, is not the only solution to them having a large back catalogue of plug-ins
I don't know what to write here that won't be censored, as I can only speak in profanity.
-
- KVRAF
- 2677 posts since 20 Jun, 2012
I'd say things that need to be improved:Burillo wrote:such as?1wob2many wrote:The simple alternative to designing Waves Central the way it is, is to designing it differently.Burillo wrote:OK, what are the alternatives, assuming the silly "solutions" like "have less plugins" are out the window?1wob2many wrote:And designing Waves Central the way it is, is not the only solution to them having a large back catalogue of plug-ins
Allow setting of custom install and VST path.
Allow uninstall of single plugins.
Integrate Central update download into Central itself.
Cut down on installation size.
Otherwise nothing wrong with it.
No signature here!
- KVRAF
- 4433 posts since 15 Nov, 2006 from Hell
exactly. it solves the problem it is meant to solve - you don't download the entire plugin library just to install one plugin any more.robotmonkey wrote:I'd say things that need to be improved:
Allow setting of custom install and VST path.
Allow uninstall of single plugins.
Integrate Central update download into Central itself.
Cut down on installation size.
Otherwise nothing wrong with it.
(i'd add two more - allow demo requests through the installer, and remember the goddamn password already!)
I don't know what to write here that won't be censored, as I can only speak in profanity.
-
- KVRian
- 505 posts since 2 May, 2014
I can't argue with that, because those were pretty much my complaints in the first place. But the "otherwise" is a pretty big "otherwise".robotmonkey wrote:
I'd say things that need to be improved:
Allow setting of custom install and VST path.
Allow uninstall of single plugins.
Integrate Central update download into Central itself.
Cut down on installation size.
Otherwise nothing wrong with it.
My problem isn't with developers having their own plug-in management software, but Waves implementation of it.
- KVRAF
- 4433 posts since 15 Nov, 2006 from Hell
so, you obviously don't know how to use "rhethorical questions" then. your original post that i took issue with clearly implied (to those who know what rhethorical questions are for, that is) that Waves Central wasn't solving the problem of having to download the entire Waves plugin library in order to install one plugin. now we learn that what you actually mean is, it has a few bits of missing functionality, but otherwise it actually does the job and you're happy with it existing. soooo... yeah.1wob2many wrote:I can't argue with that, because those were pretty much my complaints in the first place.
I don't know what to write here that won't be censored, as I can only speak in profanity.
-
simon.a.billington simon.a.billington https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=341278
- KVRAF
- 2375 posts since 12 Nov, 2014
Dodged a bullet with this sale. Waisted all my money over at Plugin Alliance so I had no money to spend on Waves!!
Crisis averted!! Haha!!
Somehow I think my solution needs a little working on.
Crisis averted!! Haha!!
Somehow I think my solution needs a little working on.
-
- KVRAF
- 2677 posts since 20 Jun, 2012
The sale will go on for several days more so you still have some time.simon.a.billington wrote:Dodged a bullet with this sale. Waisted all my money over at Plugin Alliance so I had no money to spend on Waves!!
Crisis averted!! Haha!!
Somehow I think my solution needs a little working on.
No signature here!
-
- KVRian
- 505 posts since 2 May, 2014
So, you obviously haven't read my original post (which just to make it clear to you was meant in a tongue-on-cheek way) : http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 1#p6813211Burillo wrote:so, you obviously don't know how to use "rhethorical questions" then. your original post that i took issue with clearly implied (to those who know what rhethorical questions are for, that is) that Waves Central wasn't solving the problem of having to download the entire Waves plugin library in order to install one plugin. now we learn that what you actually mean is, it has a few bits of missing functionality, but otherwise it actually does the job and you're happy with it existing. soooo... yeah.1wob2many wrote:I can't argue with that, because those were pretty much my complaints in the first place.
Please try harder.
I am perfectly happy that a used the term "rhetorical question" in a sense that most people would understand. I asked my rhetorical question in order to make a point that just because Waves have a long legacy, it's no excuse for the functional shortcomings of Waves Central. I wasn't seeking an answer. That is a rhetorical question.
Moreover, it should be read in the context of the whole post.
What you call "a few bits of missing functionality", I consider major bits of missing functionality which make Waves Central a pain in the arse to use. That is the point I was making.
The fact that you chose to answer a rhetorical question, out of context, and then use that as a basis for deciding what my issue with Waves Central is, is beyond my control. I have not changed what I "actually" mean.
Sooo.....yeah....
....this is fun, isn't it?