KVR Audio

MrTom · Post by **MrTom** » Fri Jun 10, 2005 4:01 pm

JeffSanders wrote:Now that Princeton's having a GB for 2016 Stereo Room, I want it. Tried their non-PACE demo and like it more than any verb I've used except for maybe my UAD Plate...

Many of you probably have the Roomverb... what are your experiences with PACE? Personally I'm scared shitless of it, but it seems there's less invasive levels of PACE. Any good/bad experiences with system stability, post-Princeton Roomverb?

Dude, don't be a puss....

...

JeffSanders · Post by **JeffSanders** » Fri Jun 10, 2005 4:10 pm

vtd · Post by **vtd** » Fri Jun 10, 2005 4:12 pm

There's a lot of misinformation and fear being spread around for illogical reasons.

danielmm · Post by **danielmm** » Sat Jun 11, 2005 3:28 pm

vtd wrote:There's a lot of misinformation and fear being spread around for illogical reasons.

true, but i can't help but think that the PACE implimentation in the product has affected the GB....I mean, 7 buyers so far for a product that is supposed to be one of the best software verbs on the market???

dano

jmh · Post by **jmh** » Sat Jun 11, 2005 3:45 pm

That's why dickheads like me harrass honest people like Jeff about this issue on forums

Regards,

JMH

daverich · Post by **daverich** » Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:43 pm

I never knowingly reward companies that use pace with my money.

Whether this c/r version works or not is irrelevant - it just shouldn't be encouraged.

Kind regards

Dave Rich.

MickGael · Post by **MickGael** » Sat Jun 11, 2005 5:03 pm

Only 7 in the group buy so far...

Funkybot · Post by **Funkybot** » Sat Jun 11, 2005 5:08 pm

Well that's 7 as of yesterday. I'm sure it's at least a bit higher today. I'd really be shocked if this group buy didn't hit the lowest price by the end as this is one damn fine reverb. Jesus, good sales would probably only encourage Princeton Digital to start putting out some of the other algos in VST format.

MickGael · Post by **MickGael** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 12:49 pm

Funkybot wrote:Well that's 7 as of yesterday. I'm sure it's at least a bit higher today. I'd really be shocked if this group buy didn't hit the lowest price by the end as this is one damn fine reverb. Jesus, good sales would probably only encourage Princeton Digital to start putting out some of the other algos in VST format.

Up to 10 (which means they need 40 more in the next 3 weeks)

vtd · Post by **vtd** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 4:06 pm

It's 12 now. I am playing with the demo, it's great. I just may buy it this week.

Breeze · Post by **Breeze** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 9:38 pm

I did a quick comparison of the Princeton, AAR and R66 reverbs today (all demos). I also threw in FreeverbToo out of curiosity. This is just my opinion and I really recommend people do their own comparisons as these judgments are out of context and based on my personal taste. I'm fortunate to have a decent pair of powered speakers (dynaudio BM6) which definitely helps in making this kind of evaluation.

I like reverbs to add be light and add "air" to a mix wihout being overbearing. From this perspective I liked both the Princeton and the R66. The R66 and the AAR have more parameters to tweak, which gives them more flexibility, but for a quick set and almost forget instant sound, I find the Princeton easy to use and quick to satisfy. The R66 seemed a bit "grittier" than the Princeton. The AAR is definitely more synthetic to my taste, and it also consumes around 30% more CPU resources than the other two (who are about even) in Nuendo.

None of these reverbs is perfect, and each is very usuable in many contexts. I'm sold on the Princeton because with little effort, the space it provides seems to sit well in a mix (it's present without being overwhelming) but I find it pricy; if the group sale looks good I'm sure I'll jump in.

BTW PACE is no issue for me: I've been using the PACE protected Waves plugins for 3 years and I never had an issue with them. Ever.

I also found it quite revealing to hear what can be done with FreeverbToo and some pre and post processing (compression, EQ).

I'd be curious to hear what others think.

Breeze

greendoor · Post by **greendoor** » Tue Jun 14, 2005 4:45 am

If people keep buying this PACE/C/R stuff, then developers will keep on using it. Damnit - it's an insult to paying customers, and almost ensures that cracked versions will be made available. Does nobody expect to have to re-build their PC's in a few years time? And do you expect the vendor to still be authenticating this software then? I just don't get it. I would consider buying Princeton reverb if it wasn't for this shit. But fortunately, there are reasonable developers making equal or better products.

Breeze · Post by **Breeze** » Tue Jun 14, 2005 11:56 am

[quote="greendoor"]If people keep buying this PACE/C/R stuff, then developers will keep on using it. Damnit - it's an insult to paying customers, and almost ensures that cracked versions will be made available. Does nobody expect to have to re-build their PC's in a few years time? And do you expect the vendor to still be authenticating this software then? I just don't get it. I would consider buying Princeton reverb if it wasn't for this shit. But fortunately, there are reasonable developers making equal or better products.[/quote]

Interesting points, greendoor. So far it's a fact that nothing protected can't be successfully "unprotected". But the obsolescence issue is true regardless of copy protection. If you have a piece of unprotected software that's unsupported (company closes), it won't survive hardware obsolescence any more than your protected software will.

Remember that you don't own any of the software you use. It's all licenced and that licence can be terminated whether it's copy protected or not. You have every right to disagree with the terms of a licence agreement. That is your right.

Copy protection doesn't stop piracy, but it does slow it down hopefully enough for the software artist to make a decent return on their labors. I think that's really the issue in the end. If we lived in a system where everybody's labors went equitably rewarded then I believe we would be able to forego both copy protection and piracy.

Until then, I'm afraid we'll just have to put up with, as you say, "this shit".

Breeze

hoffy · Post by **hoffy** » Tue Jun 14, 2005 12:47 pm

Breeze wrote: Copy protection doesn't stop piracy, but it does slow it down hopefully enough for the software artist to make a decent return on their labors

PACE protection gets cracked within seconds.

I have no problem with companies using whatever copy protection scheme they want, but if it's going to affect the user, they may as well try one that at least works...

Breeze · Post by **Breeze** » Tue Jun 14, 2005 7:49 pm

Hey Hoffy,

I'm playing your songs on tour this year and I'm not giving you one red cent of my earnings. I hope you don't mind! Thanks for leaving your material completely unprotected.

Princeton...and PACE

PACE