Coming up from Kjaerhus Audio

[PeterL]

Not important but something else I would love to see on all the plugs is the ability to manually enter numerical values into those black boxes.

Excellent thinking.

Seconded.

Cheers!

I also suggest this feature.

[headquest]

Yep, +1

[_dada_]

Any chance for a switchable look ahead ?

As Kingston indicated, there is no need for such thing on this gate as it is quite fast; it would be like putting propellers on a jet plane.

Well ...
problems arise, when you have to fight crosstalk,
or want to extract a snare from a stereo drum recording.
In general :
when the threshold has to be set unusely high.

In these cases, even the fastes gate will miss the initial attack.
Only way out is look ahead.

AND
for the "hardware and realtime" paradigm ...
.. just make it switchable.


bye, Jan

[Torben]

Entering parameters should be possible in a near future.

dada, I understand what you mean but the tests we done shows good results with no lookahead. Kingston also used the gate on drums where the sound from other drums was bleeding through and it works fine. I can not say you would not be able to show a special case where the look-ahead would be handy but we never ran into a need for that; you must try it once it is released to decide for your self. Having an option to turn look-ahead / latency on and off is not good. The host needs to know latency when a plugin is created (and some hosts only scans for these things when the plugin is new), so it is asking for problems if we implement something like that.

Torben

[smart]

I love this new GUI. It's looks so much more quality than the others!

I like the new logo MUCH better too. Kjaerhus is getting the professional look to match his professional plugs!

[_dada_]

Thanks Torben, got the point.
( In SX it's quite easy, as you only need to switch the plugin off/on ).

Will give GAG a try, for sure.

BTW.:
Are there still any plans for a mono version of GCO-1 ?

bye, Jan

[daverich]

I agree with the gui comments.

Kjaerhus plugs are looking much better these days - I actually didn't buy the golden channel because of the gui - the eq seemed very clumsy to use compared to say - Trackplug.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[headquest]

I agree with the gui comments.

Kjaerhus plugs are looking much better these days - I actually didn't buy the golden channel because of the gui - the eq seemed very clumsy to use compared to say - Trackplug.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

Although I haven't (yet) bought either, I second your point Dave - having demoed both I found Trackplug MUCH easier to use, quite probably because I have only learnt about music production within a software environment (Kjaerhus Golden range seems more overtly to emulate hardware).

One thing I did really like about GAC-1 though was that the EQ breakpoints could be dragged with the mouse, unlike in GEQ-7 (which I have bought, along with GCO-1 and GMO-1, all of which I love). It would be nice to be able to do that in GEQ-7 as well. My alternative is the Sonitus EQ that I got with Sonar - again slightly easier to manage than GEQ-7 because you can mouse-drag the breakpoints in the EQ curve... but I MUCH prefer the sound of GEQ-7, so use it as my go-to EQ plug.

So yes, GREAT work Torben, but just a few interface things could make them even more easy to use. I think I may have spotted yhou say a while back that you might consider doing draggable breakpoints for GEQ-7 in a future update - is that on the cards still?

[Compyfox]

RASK! Can't wait to get my claws on the Classic Gate. The only missing plugin in that set.

[spinedoc]

I agree with the gui comments.

Kjaerhus plugs are looking much better these days - I actually didn't buy the golden channel because of the gui - the eq seemed very clumsy to use compared to say - Trackplug.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

Dave,
Don't you think there is a big difference in sound quality in the eq between these products? To me it is night and day. I do like the layout of trackplug better though.

[daverich]

hmm

I found the kjaerhus to have a *sound*, whereas trackplug is more transparent.

Not surprising as kjaerhus is analog modelled and that's what he's trying to achieve.

I thought the sound was ok, not unpleasant and adds a nice sparkle for some things - but not really what I would want out of a channel strip type plug.

A good analog-esque EQ with much simpler controls (think TL audio EQ1) would be a very welcome addition to the kjaerhus line-up.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[Torben]

Are there still any plans for a mono version of GCO-1 ?

bye, Jan

Not really. If you use it with stereolink on monotracks it will use about the same amount of CPU as a mono version so there is not much point in making a seperate mono version now.

Torben

[Arsov]

Compyfox wrote:

RASK! Can't wait to get my claws on the Classic Gate. The only missing plugin in that set. Wink

err... also missing some visual (para)graphic version of Classic EQ.

btw.. Torben, your Classic series rules the free world.

Cheers

Alex

[tombuur]

I am seriously tempted by this plug. The only thing I could want more was a gate/expander working on selected frequencies. That way it could be used to remove low frequency noise while still keeping weak breath sounds on vocals - as an example.

I also happen to like the old GUI better. Gold has a vintage look to it, so knobs should be vintage looking too. With the new knobs silver or aluminum would look better. Why is MPL-1 not a golden series plug BTW. It is the only Kjaerhus plug I own, and would have liked it to be golden. Anyway performance is the main thing, look at Voxengo's ridiculous GUI, still we will buy the plugs if they do the job.

[Shifrin]

I'm very interested in this, the audio demo's were impressive! I'm looking to grab the GUP-1 before August 1st too

FWIW I the new GUI design, Rune did a great job!

Shif.