KVR Audio

aetmos · Post by **aetmos** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:17 am

Has anybody used Bionic Delay?

This comment was submitted to my database of free plugins today, and I'm hoping somebody can help confirm or deny it...

DONT USE THIS, ITS PUT SPYWARE ON TO MY COMPUTER, EVERY TIME YOU AUTOMATE A PARAMETER THIS SITE POPS UP http://www.echochamber.ch/ ....TOTAL RUBBISH

...I dunno, the website looks pretty legit. I don't really want to try it now, though, for fear that it's true...

Thanks,
Tom

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:24 am

sounds like a bug. http://www.echochamber.ch/ is the site by the people who made this plugin, and I presume they have a link/button to their site somewhere in the GUI that gets accidentally fired up. It's a clone of the logic audio tape delay, and I've used a few times in the past.

I certainly never saw that bug, but who knows, maybe it happens in some hosts. The plugin is a very old SE creation.

here http://www.echochamber.ch/analogicdelay.htm

and here http://www.interruptor.ch/vst_overview.shtml

jens · Post by **jens** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:30 am

either way I can't recommend using it - it's made with SE and uses an absurd amount of cpu-cycles for what it does...

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:32 am

jens wrote:either way I can't recommend using it - it's made with SE and uses an absurd amount of cpu-cycles for what it does...

eh? 2.5% too much for two saturating delay lines? and what has SE to do with any of that? I've found it works really well for what it does.

jens · Post by **jens** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:45 am

Kingston wrote: eh? 2.5% too much for two saturating delay lines?

with what CPU? But with any decent machine that's far too much, yes.

and what has SE to do with any of that? I've found it works really well for what it does.

as I'm not a programmer I have no idea what SE has to do with that but I never came along a delay plugin which was made with it which wasn't a complete cpu hog...

do you know any?

(*oops* sorry - I forgot that it's forbidden to say something negative about SE round these parts...)

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:52 am

jens wrote:
Kingston wrote: eh? 2.5% too much for two saturating delay lines?
with what CPU? But with any decent machine that's far too much, yes.

and what has SE to do with any of that? I've found it works really well for what it does.
as I'm not a programmer I have no idea what SE has to do with that but I never came along a delay plugin which was made with it which wasn't a complete cpu hog...

do you know any?

(*oops* sorry - I forgot that it's forbidden to say something negative about SE round these parts...)

Let's see now.

Voxengo AF Delay up to your standards?

It has nearly the exact same feature set, two delay lines, but no saturation and uses 3.5% CPU. Not made with SE, quite obviously. I mean, you brought the whole SE thing up as a negative, so I challenged you up on it. You can't just throw the reputation around like that, since it clearly has nothing to do with this particular plugin.

androidlove · Post by **androidlove** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:53 am

i use it way more than any other delay. i haven't automated it though

donkey tugger · Post by **donkey tugger** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 12:56 am

It's f**king rubbish. Then again;

some shoegazer crap

Well I thoght it was one of the best delays ever, even better than me JHS mini-echotex. The wobbly stuff you can do with it is immense. Sinth-edit? Ooops. best ditch it.

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 1:01 am

donkey tugger wrote:Sinth-edit? Ooops. best ditch it.

Indeed.

and jens,

mdsp AnalogDelay, 2.9% CPU, not made with SE, obviously.

I think you're full of opinionated shit.

lex_strooder · Post by **lex_strooder** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 1:03 am

USE THIS, IT PUT ADDICTIONWARE ON TO MY COMPUTER, EVERY TIME YOU AUTOMATE A PARAMETER SOUND LIKE A INTERNET SITE ....TOTAL DUBBISH

jens · Post by **jens** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 1:06 am

Kingston wrote:
Let's see now.

Voxengo AF Delay up to your standards?

nope, not at all - it's a cpu hog par excellence (I have AF but never use the delay due to its ridiculous amount of cpu consumption - I think it has to do with the fact that it uses convolution - but either way: very bad example, mate

)

what about e.g. the lovely MDSP Analog Delay?

http://mdsp.smartelectronix.com/classic/

it uses about 25% of Analogic Delay's cpu-consumption on my machine...

also I think its saturation sounds much better (less grainy) but perhaps that's just me...

jens · Post by **jens** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 1:09 am

Kingston wrote:

I think you're full of opinionated shit.

b.t.w.: I don't care what you think, mate - all I care about is not maxing out my cpu if I can hinder it - and I care a lot about this, mate.

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 1:16 am

opinionated, because you brought up SE purely as a negative ie. "can't recommend it because..."

...with nothing to back it up.

and spewing carp, because your beloved AnalogDelay uses more CPU than the other.

not standing on any turf here, just hating carp.

jens · Post by **jens** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 1:23 am

Kingston wrote:opinionated, because you brought up SE purely as a negative ie. "can't recommend it because..." ...with nothing to back it up.

sure - name me one single delay which uses less than 1% on my XP2600+ which is made with SE - I'm very curious - I don't have anything against SE per se - e.g. I absolutely love Mr. Tramp and Mr. Ray and of course stuff like String Theory...

and spewing carp, because your beloved AnalogDelay uses more CPU than the other.

either you are lying, or there's something wrong with your computer or you are using an outdated version

it uses about 0,9-1,4% on my machine whereas Analogic Delay uses about 3,6-5,0%...

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 1:31 am

jens wrote:either you are lying, or there's something wrong with your computer or you are using an outdated version

it uses about 0,9-1,4% on my machine whereas Analogic Delay uses about 3,6-5,0%...

nothing wrong with this computer(AMD X2), and why would I lie? In fact if I turn the interpolation of AnalogDelay to "analog", it uses 3.6%, where as Bionic/Analog Delay will always use a steady 2.5%

I would say there's something wrong with *your* computer, and that you lie! or maybe you aren't even talking about the same plugins. Who knows. I've seen you pull up weirder stuff around these parts.