Plug designers who aren't audio engineers.

[bmanic]

Just want to clarify my point (if it's possible with this hangover!! Aaarrrgghhhhh! ).

SpaceBoy, what I really wanted to say is, don't underestimate the listener. Suprisingly many "john doe's" have good ears and can hear the difference of quality of audio reproduction. I noticed this first with my parents and my girlfriend and later have noticed it with friends who have no knowledge nor interest in the whole process. They may not be able to accurately describe why a certain thing sounds better.

A common description of a good (read: suitable) compressor compared to a mediocre compressor (when applied to drums+bass) from a non-audiophile persepective is: "..wow! It grooves much better now! There's more swing in it.."

Last but not least, money has NOTHING to do with quality in plugin development but much more so in the hardware scene. Heck, Voxengo are still my personal favourites when it comes to plugins in general as each and every plugin is of very high sound quality and still the price is fair. Not to mention ddrummer's plugins! Very good sound quality at a very fair price!

Cheers and may your hangovers not suck as much as mine does!
bManic

[championrabbit]

just my 2 cents while recovering from the heavy partying!
- bManic

Great post.

One thing that never fails to amuse me is when people trot-out the old 'well, your uneduted ears probably can't tell a Neve from a Behringer' thing.

Newsflash.

If a regular punter can't tell a Neve from a Behringer in terms of one being more pleasing to his ears (accepting the cumulative point) then engineers are wasting their time with Neves.

Are they wasting their time?

[Space Boy]

Just want to clarify my point (if it's possible with this hangover!! Aaarrrgghhhhh! ).

SpaceBoy, what I really wanted to say is, don't underestimate the listener. Suprisingly many "john doe's" have good ears and can hear the difference of quality of audio reproduction.

I never do and I didn't make such a statement as you are explaining it. If you read carefully what I wrote (without hangover) you may see that I was simply describing human behavior i.e. when the majority say something is good, the tendency is to go with the majority even when our ears tell us differently. That in itself implies that "John" can tell the difference - but we are influenced in our decisions by other factors i.e. like a nice looking GUI or a good magazine article.

One thing that never fails to amuse me is when people trot-out the old 'well, your uneduted ears probably can't tell a Neve from a Behringer' thing.

champ-rab: No-one actual did that, at least not in this thread. But I still don't know if your original post was based on what you read or your own experience. Any chance of further clarity on this?

[bitcrusher]

If a regular punter can't tell a Neve from a Behringer in terms of one being more pleasing to his ears (accepting the cumulative point) then engineers are wasting their time with Neves.

Are they wasting their time?

as I fall for more troll-bait...

As a recording engineer, it is your responsibility to provide a client with the best possible recordings. If a Neve has a lower S/N ratio and THD, then who cares if it is 1000% the price of a behringer (note, there is other properties that make NEVE desirable, but I'm not going there)

Quality in software is a different unit of measure now, isn't it? Its a bit more subjective. Some people want "analog EQ" distortion/coloration and phase smear- the very things that many analog EQ designers were trying to avoid in their circuits.

You can't please everyone with software, but there is so much to choose from.

What was your point again?

[Funkybot]

I think we're getting a little too far away from I read as being the original point of this thread: good well trained ears should be a must for plug-in development, the same way it is for hardware development. Like I said earlier, most hardware designers are/were engineers and know what a good sound is and have an idea of how to achieve that sound. While certainly some plug-in developers don't have this background and seem to be using math and available algo's to achieve something, not necessarily their ears. At least that's the way I'd read it.

[bmanic]

Just want to clarify my point (if it's possible with this hangover!! Aaarrrgghhhhh! ).

SpaceBoy, what I really wanted to say is, don't underestimate the listener. Suprisingly many "john doe's" have good ears and can hear the difference of quality of audio reproduction.

I never do and I didn't make such a statement as you are explaining it. If you read carefully what I wrote (without hangover) you may see that I was simply describing human behavior i.e. when the majority say something is good, the tendency is to go with the majority even when our ears tell us differently. That in itself implies that "John" can tell the difference - but we are influenced in our decisions by other factors i.e. like a nice looking GUI or a good magazine article.

Aah, yes I see. Indeed I missed your point a bit and I agree. Lots of stuff are sold with pretty pictures but it don't work on me! Bring on the Uggly GUI (tm)!

Hangover much better after a relaxing cup of tea with jmh and kingston! Cheers guys!
- bManic

[waveriderarts]

I have a lot of respect for Voxengo, Kjaerhusaudio and ArtsAcoustic.

One of these designers inspired this thread.

One of these designers made a coment that betrayed a lack of understanding of one of their own plugs.

My bet is on Voxengo....

[waveriderarts]

I would suggest that somebody (again for example) modelling a Fender Twin without first checking to see if the speakers had been switched for some nasty HH ones and if the valves were cheap Chinese rather than Groove Tube (or whatever) would be a fool.

If you tell me that you've modelled a Fender Twin and I ask "Cool! Does it have Jensens or Celestions?" to which you reply "No idea!" then I would find it hard to take you seriously.

Agree 100%


You are on it, some devs lack electronic/electric music culture, I would say, I do not think they have to be real ingeneers.

[Aleksey Vaneev]

Example, please... Otherwise it's just a wishful thinking (BAD wishful thinking).

[Space Boy]

I think we're getting a little too far away from I read as being the original point of this thread: good well trained ears should be a must for plug-in development, the same way it is for hardware development. Like I said earlier, most hardware designers are/were engineers and know what a good sound is and have an idea of how to achieve that sound. While certainly some plug-in developers don't have this background and seem to be using math and available algo's to achieve something, not necessarily their ears. At least that's the way I'd read it.

I think you overlooked something. The easy availability of software tools means that many more people are able to create plug-ins than you could ever expect to be possible when everyone had to make a hardware design. This means that the rules of audio signal processing just changed - big time! We are not constrained by the need to carve speaker enclosures out of solid oak or hand blow our own valves. As a result of this new reality, many more people can contribute, many new ideas have and will arise and many more virtual audio processing tools are at your disposal. Out of all these tools, a great many more, than you ever were used to, are incredibly good. Many more are average to mediocre and yet more are simply not that impressive. You have the luxury that you can try all or none of them without spending a dime or stepping outside your front door.

Quite simply, you have more choice than ever before. You just need to decide what YOU like - not what the expert hardware/audio engineer would give a thumbs up to.

[Funkybot]

Granted, while the rules have changed, and we have so much more available to us than anyone could have imagined a few years ago, let's not pretend either that it's all good. And while I do have all those options, and the ability to choose for myself, it's not to say I wouldn't like it a lot more if the people creating these tools still had a firm understand of what sounds good and why it does. And to go back to the original post, I'm not talking about the more esoteric plug-ins that are more about doing something new, but plug-ins like stock EQs, Compressors, Guitar Amp Sims, etc. But I'm not limiting my comments to modelling of actual gear either. I don't care if the EQ sounds like a Pultec or a Neve or a Manley, etc, but it should sound good, and a developer should have an understanding of what made the classic units sound good in the first place, and should then think about what they can add to the equation and how they can achieve their results.

[renø]

Last but not least, money has NOTHING to do with quality in plugin development but [...]

money = time = better work
money = better tools = better work
money = motivation = better work
money = i can eat = better work

[Funkybot]

But can we add talent, knowledge, and good ears to that equation as well?

[Aleksey Vaneev]

Funkybot, may I add a somehow questionable point here?

What is GOOD sound? If you have not noticed this, I should say that measures of GOOD sound evolved greatly over the years. What was great in the past is NOT great nowadays, or is perceived differently.

I should add that COMMERCE makes our views conservative. It is usually really hard to promote new sounds and approaches and still gain enough profits. And so advertiser, developer, media and other resources promote the same standards over and over again WHILE world around us changes. And we BELIEVE something sounds better than the other. Usually without having any distinctive criterion. This last 'criterion' point actually reveals why people argue on the forums so much about sonic qualities of one thing or another. It's all usually pretty pointless - much like the idea of this thread. A good example of [unconsious] public attitude manipulation: old AE's win while new AE's lose. This looks like an unconscious movement because literally saying, you are cutting a branch (affordable software) you are sitting on with it.

Making music is the only thing which really matters.

[Funkybot]

Aleskey I don't think anyone can pin down what makes a good sound, and a lot of it is subjective. But I think most peeople would agree that certain things just sound better than others, regardless of how we're able to describe it or how it does it. For instance, I've got a solid state Crate guitar amplifier (GFX212) that everyone I've ever played with agrees sounds crappy (even my band's guitar tone deaf lead singer/guitar player). There's literally no way to get a pleasing sounding distortion out of it, that me or anyone in my band would like. Unfortunately it is my back-up amp, and plays second best to my Fender Twin which everyone can agree sounds much better. Why? I dunno, it just sounds better. But why don't I just ditch the Crate, if it's so bad you ask? Because it (for some reason)sounds better than my Fender Twin with my Farfisa organ (this is probably because the cleans stay clean no matter what the volume, and it seems to have a wider frequency response than my Twin). It's perhaps ironic that my Rhodes sounds much better through the Twin than the Crate. So I'm not saying nothing has a purpose or task it can't excel at, and that even applies to bad gear. But as a guitar amp, everyone seems to agree that the Twin is leaps and bounds ahead of the Crate, hell even the singers girlfriend who knows nothing about gear, asked why I didn't sound so good during the rehearsals when the Twin was in the shop.

And you're right making music is the only thing that matters, but since having purchased the Twin, I'm playing more guitar than I used to as it inspires me. There's something about a good piece of gear that will inspire you. I don't think that asking for developers to have a better understanding of this is too much to ask.

And I by no means want to knock you, I posted what I thought about your guitar amp sim in that thread to be helpful, and you have several plug-ins that through the demos I should be picking when I get a chance because they sound good to me, even the one's that don't necessarily sound "vintage" (whatever that means).

My point here, is that while everything is subjective as far as what sounds good, there's quite a few things that have a general consensus as sounding good, and others that do not (even they do serve a purpose, or work very well in specific circumstances).