Voxengo Marquis Compressor VST 1.3 released

[bmanic]

In some situations it's better to be silent than say what's good and what's bad in your opinion - some may think you are nuts.

Why aren't you staying silent then?...because now I'm thinking you are nuts for expressing your opinion. No need to get so defensive. My opinion won't kill your sales and there would be plenty of people who will come to express opinions that are opposite of mine. Chill out, take a nice cup of Russian tea and go to bed.

There's a slight difference here. You come in and say something without having anything to show whereas Aleksey has a lot on show. He can kind of 'afford' to have an opinion but what about you? I want those audio examples.

Cheers!
bManic

[Eytan Mich]

My opinion won't kill your sales and there would be plenty of people who will come to express opinions that are opposite of mine. Chill out, take a nice cup of Russian tea and go to bed.

No it won't kill his sales.

But I hope the following text will help you deal with the word "stupid" a little better (as Aleksey said, it wasnt meant towards YOU but but towards the general consensus)

No need to get so defensive

He wasn't. ask any P-R-O engineer what's the "Best" processor for XYZ and they will stare at you blankly (probably thinking it is a "stupid" question). the nicer ones will tell you exactly what Aleksey have told you : audio, by definition, is not a "finite" thing. there is no such thing as "best" processor or, as a matter of a fact, for ANYTHING. there IS a "What's the most APPROPRIATE tool for a given task". all PRO engineers today (and I know a few) are faced with that question. but thay will not be inclined towards this or that based on a "what's the best" paradigm. they WILL weigh the pro's and the con's, and then (and ONLY then) they will consider. some might prefer hardware because it is best for THEM (because they are used to it/beceuse they can produce from it the best result as THEY know/beaceuse they have access - both financialy and physically - to expensive hardware machines and so on...). some will prefer software (because it is cheaper, it is immediately accessible, there are updateds to the version of that tool and so on...). some (actually, most "old skool" pro's) will prefer a combination of the two (hardware/software).

Will YOU say that an SSL compressor is better then your RNC ? if the answer is yes, then I'll ask : why ? you see, PRO is NOT a word that defines a TOOL. it is marly a definition of one's profession and his ability to produce a VALID result for the market he "sells" his work on. as of today, we THINK that anything that's considered "pro" is "very good". not so. i've heard far too many things that were produced on "Pro" equipment, that sounded like SHIT.

A tool cant be considered as PRO. you, as person, on the other hand - CAN. lets say that we have all access to an SSL 9000k desk (which is, by all means, considered as a "pro" desk). can YOU justify the word "pro" attached to that desk ? I know that I cant, and the answer probably applies to you as well (and by that I mean : have the ability to produce valid results in a reasonable amount of time).

If your RNC produces better result then the marquis, it is NOT because the RNC is "better" (the oppisite can't be said, either). it is marely becase YOU make it (the RNC) sound good as YOU know it. that's all.

[Aleksey Vaneev]

Eytan Mich, you've explained my post adequately. Of course, I was not defensive. I've just got tired of 'this rocks, that sucks' comments. Because, that tells me nothing since I'm not making money on audio production, and as a developer this tells me nothing about how can I improve my products (if they are present in the equation of the comparer).

[Eytan Mich]

Eytan Mich, you've explained my post adequately
Of course, I was not defensive. I've just got tired of 'this rocks, that sucks' comments

Arent we all ?... (btw, part of being a "Pro" is not getting caught in the illusion of "this rox, this sux"...)

Because, that tells me nothing since I'm not making money on audio production, and as a developer this tells me nothing about how can I improve my products (if they are present in the equation of the comparer).

Well, luckily, u have some of the best hired help at your disposal (NOT ME - if anyone was thinking... )

[Eric Sundance]

Well, when I said "MUCH BETTER" I expressed my opinion. I didn't claim to be the "beholder of the truth" . I've tried many plug-ins (not just voxengo) and for the most part it left me with a feeling that my files (music) were inflated by emptiness where is hardware added more of a real body. As I said all of this is very subjective and I don't claim to be the only one with "the truth in my hands". After auditioning some plug in demos I decided to try RNC (which is dirt cheap) and I ended up buying four of them. The point is - it gave me instant results and hence my over enthusiastic response. I also have EL8X and I use it only from time to time. You see I'm not saying it sucks but I do get better results with some cheaper tools . My favorite combination is RNC paired with The Summit Audio DCL-200. I'm not a hardware snob and I have nothing to sell here…so as Steve Wonder sings "So What The Fuss "...

[defjamm]

defjamm, comparison is not a problem and would be pretty useful for me given its not subjective (engineer may try to get a better sound from the EQ of love and leave the other EQ unexplored). Also, HarmoniEQ is *very* strange EQ if you ask me (in Normal, Soft and Phasy modes), so it may not be fully comparable to normal equalizers. And I have a desire to review its algorithms somewhere in the future.

that's why i would suggest to use the same settings on both(or trying to match them as good as possible). with harmonie-eq this would be pretty easy. we could also use curve-eq, but for me it would be harder to match curve-eq to the settings on the sontec, because of the 'drawing-design'.

plp-eq, poshifopit(free) and algorithmix-red would be also interesting, there are demos for both.

@bmanic: i tried the clip-mode in elephant(with oversampling) on a 'rap'-drumloop versus clipping in the daw and clip-mode in ozone 3. i did't like the clip-mode in elephant, it seemed less 'punchy', the snare was smaller(maybe because it has less distortion?). i will try it more.

[Eytan Mich]

Well, when I said "MUCH BETTER" I expressed my opinion.
I didn't claim to be the "beholder of the truth" . I've tried many plug-ins (not just voxengo) and for the most part it left me with a feeling that my files (music) were inflated by emptiness where is hardware added more of a real body.

Well, nobody's accusing you with anything. but, the 2 sentence "I didn't claim to be the 'beholder of the truth' " and at the same time "....is much better then any plug in" just dont fit

One of the industry's "tragedies" is (IMO) the "too much of everything". you "tried many plug-ins" (as all of us) but as a result you never really "dig" (dunno if its the right word..) the plug. you judge by the first time hear it. and because it's the first time, it is TOTALY subjective. positive or nagative. and you move on - to the next plug. its hard to really judge a plug that way (IMO, at least). the feeling that "my files (music) were inflated by emptiness where is hardware added more of a real body" is part rael and part psychological/subjective (cant say in what ratio though).

Are you happy with your current set up ? if you are, then Im happy for you !

What matter is the music, in the end. technologies are just the MEANS.
BUT, if you DO bother to judge some tool, at least make sure you have mastered it. or else, your opinion wont worth a shekel (FOR YOURSELF, not for others)....

in the end... all I have to say is :

GO AND MAKE SOME MUSIC !

(or, as a friend told me once, when I was talking a little too much - in his opinion - about technologies : "make some boom boom or stfu !" )

[martian]

@bmanic: i tried the clip-mode in elephant(with oversampling) on a 'rap'-drumloop versus clipping in the daw and clip-mode in ozone 3. i did't like the clip-mode in elephant, it seemed less 'punchy', the snare was smaller(maybe because it has less distortion?). i will try it more.

yes its less punchy and less distortion ('nice' clipping), i dont find it preserves punch much better than limitng. ive asked aleksey to consider a 'soft' parameter.

meanwhile try something like this (the soft parameter makes it more tunable than daw clipping): http://homepages.tesco.net/~graham.yead ... /gclip.htm

no oversampling though.

[Kingston]

Also, HarmoniEQ is *very* strange EQ if you ask me (in Normal, Soft and Phasy modes), so it may not be fully comparable to normal equalizers. And I have a desire to review its algorithms somewhere in the future.

Hi, sorry to deviate this thread further, but I very much agree. It's one of those EQs that are highly dependable on source material, and the dynamic processing sounds "odd" at times. I remember when you designed it you wanted it to be a "no fuss" type of plugin, but now algorithmically it's somewhat limited. Good thing you have further plans to extend it.

[martian]

Also, HarmoniEQ is *very* strange EQ if you ask me (in Normal, Soft and Phasy modes), so it may not be fully comparable to normal equalizers. And I have a desire to review its algorithms somewhere in the future.

Hi, sorry to deviate this thread further, but I very much agree. It's one of those EQs that are highly dependable on source material, and the dynamic processing sounds "odd" at times. I remember when you designed it you wanted it to be a "no fuss" type of plugin, but now algorithmically it's somewhat limited. Good thing you have further plans to extend it.

same here, most unique sounding eq ive tried, doesnt really compare to anything.

[defjamm]

@bmanic: i tried the clip-mode in elephant(with oversampling) on a 'rap'-drumloop versus clipping in the daw and clip-mode in ozone 3. i did't like the clip-mode in elephant, it seemed less 'punchy', the snare was smaller(maybe because it has less distortion?). i will try it more.

yes its less punchy and less distortion ('nice' clipping), i dont find it preserves punch much better than limitng. ive asked aleksey to consider a 'soft' parameter.

meanwhile try something like this (the soft parameter makes it more tunable than daw clipping): http://homepages.tesco.net/~graham.yead ... /gclip.htm

no oversampling though.

my new fav. for that clipped sound is ozone 3 from izotope. the clipped mode(it's actually called intelligent-mode with different modes to choose from) sounds punchy and you don't have to bounce and load a file again to lower the output, you can do it in the limiter-section + it has one if not the best dithering and prevents intersample-peaks.

[mustgroove]

Aleksey - I'm not sure what you did to the T3 mode in 1.2.2/1.2.3, but I really REALLY like it... is there any chance you could officially include it as an option? Like T3.1 or something like that?

[Aleksey Vaneev]

mustgroove, I'm not planning to feature that beta mode since it was mostly equal to T3 mode it seems.