KVR Audio

metrosechual · Post by **metrosechual** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:46 am

Tronam wrote:The Oxford EQ is top notch. Definitely in the upper tier for digital equalizers. One of the few with a nice enough top end for smooth boosts without the harshness.

i think this description is well covered by a number of eqs already out there for a while now.

wsaidah · Post by **wsaidah** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:38 am

the Oxford line is great the inflator sits on my 2 buss cant live with out it! i like it more then ac1 the limiter is one of the best by far the dynamics is good too,the transient modulator let me clear 4 spaces from my rack and make some cash. the eq was the reason i bought the poco! then i sold the poco and bought the hole rtas bundle. there good!!! but if your audio is a turd then no plug-in can help. there more meat & potatoes then bread & butter

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 2:19 pm

I'm interested in the oxford reverb, which seems very flexible...

bmanic · Post by **bmanic** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:31 pm

Tronam wrote:The Oxford EQ is top notch. Definitely in the upper tier for digital equalizers. One of the few with a nice enough top end for smooth boosts without the harshness.

.. and I have to disagree.

IMHO the sony plugins are really nothing spectacular but hey, that's just me. It's kind of like URS plugins for me.. I simply do not understand the hype. Standard filters, standard algorithms (at least they sound nothing special). Maybe it's just me..

- bManic

Ozorg · Post by **Ozorg** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:48 pm

kingstone - you are just one rude little man.

Kingston wrote:
metrosechual wrote:yup, segall is right. Old news.
will you please take your nose off my asscrack, you f**king parasite of KVR! it's embarrassing to have you follow me around with your inflammatory attention seeking in every thread.

snooky · Post by **snooky** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:11 pm

Ozorg wrote:kingstone - you are just one rude little man.

Kingston wrote:
metrosechual wrote:yup, segall is right. Old news.
will you please take your nose off my asscrack, you f**king parasite of KVR! it's embarrassing to have you follow me around with your inflammatory attention seeking in every thread.

Ozorg - metrosechual is a firstgrade troll...

you guys don't f**k around now

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 4:23 pm

Holy shit those Oxford plug-ins are expensive! "Oxford EQ - £200"!

Wow. I think Sony Oxford will be the new Waves around here.

Richard Lichten · Post by **Richard Lichten** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:30 pm

Have some of these critics here of Sony Oxford actually HEARD the plugins ?
I did a lot of testing in A/B situations, and the only native thing coming somewhat close was Sonalksis, except some Scope plugins which were on that level.
High-priced they are, but not without reason, i fear.

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:42 pm

Richard Lichten wrote:Have some of these critics here of Sony Oxford actually HEARD the plugins ?
I did a lot of testing in A/B situations, and the only native thing coming somewhat close was Sonalksis, except some Scope plugins which were on that level.
High-priced they are, but not without reason, i fear.

I've never tried it, but I'm straining to think of a single high-end VST EQ that goes for $400! If it's better than Sonalksis, AirEQ, etc, then by all means, charge $400. It's a bad sign to me that both Kingston and Bmanic don't think they're worth it. But I look forward to trying them!

metrosechual · Post by **metrosechual** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:50 pm

snooky wrote:
Ozorg wrote:kingstone - you are just one rude little man.

Kingston wrote:
metrosechual wrote:yup, segall is right. Old news.
will you please take your nose off my asscrack, you f**king parasite of KVR! it's embarrassing to have you follow me around with your inflammatory attention seeking in every thread.
Ozorg - metrosechual is a firstgrade troll...

you guys don't f**k around now

even so, twasnt deserved -- its just kinstone thinking much too much of his pretty self again.

I definetly dont "follow" him around

I troll how i wish.

twister · Post by **twister** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:06 pm

Don't know about other Oxford plugins, but nothing come close to INFLATOR. I have seen/heard it in action, and couldn't believe my ears by the amount of loudness and warmth it added to my track, after it was mastered already. A lot of dance studios use it as their "secret weapon" to pump more volume out of the track.

metrosechual · Post by **metrosechual** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:11 pm

twister wrote:A lot of dance studios use it as their "secret weapon" to pump more volume out of the track.

do you mean like where little girls go to learn ballet?

Or do you mean like house, tarnce, etc..

eitherway, goood reasons not to use

INFLATOR

martian · Post by **martian** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:17 pm

twister wrote:Don't know about other Oxford plugins, but nothing come close to INFLATOR. I have seen/heard it in action, and couldn't believe my ears by the amount of loudness and warmth it added to my track, after it was mastered already. A lot of dance studios use it as their "secret weapon" to pump more volume out of the track.

try clipping.

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:27 pm

this is somewhat an idiotic discussion...
based on speculation...

it has its price and if it sounds shitty, nobody has to buy...

twister · Post by **twister** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:35 pm

From what I heard, the warmth in Inflator is not achieved by clipping, but rather mixing in a specific amount of noise. Either way, I was convinced with my A/B comparison.

@metrosechual: I meant professional dance music production studios, not the ballet classes where you parents took you when you were a kid

Sony Oxford at NAMM...going native!