KVR Audio

Pipelineaudio · Post by **Pipelineaudio** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 10:47 am

koolkeys wrote:
If the plugs didnt work, that gear would be LIT UP instead and in use.
This and other statements show to the contrary.

Not at all

Like I said, ReaComp may be all you need. And it may be great. But it isn't a replacement for all the gear.

I didnt make that claim

Just as that picture that I mentioned in my last post. You used to post that all the time to show people that Reaper is capable of replacing everything in that studio.

Not everything

Whether you meant it or not, you sure do make it seem

"seem" is cool, but evidence and facts are more important in this case. For instance:

like ReaComp and Reaper are the be-all and end-all in audio production, when they are not.

Evidence?

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 10:56 am

(I think you're joking about the "evidence" part, hence the smiley. At least I hope you are, as it's obviously unproveable either way)

You IMPLIED exactly what I said. Just because you didn't use the words "ReaComp can replace everything in my studio and yours!", doesn't mean that you didn't imply it. I mean, if the outboard gear wasn't lit up because of the plugs, then what else is somebody supposed to think? Did the plugs beat up the gear? Did they take all their electricity? Seems to be no other explanation of why they wouldn't be lit up, and you would point it out.

On the old picture, why else would you say "notice compressor xyz sitting there doing nothing" or "notice the console isn't being used, and Reaper is instead?". Those kind of statements only can logically point to one conclusion: that these products can be replaced by the software. When you and I both know, that they can't do so in every way. Functionality-wise, yes. Sound-wise, doubtful.

As for facts, I don't see any facts for anything ANYONE in this thread has said, including you. So asking for facts is pointless. It's such a subjective subject anyways.

But whatever.

Brent

Pipelineaudio · Post by **Pipelineaudio** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 11:14 am

koolkeys wrote:(I think you're joking about the "evidence" part, hence the smiley. At least I hope you are, as it's obviously unproveable either way)

of course

THIS year

This start, we have SO MANY great new ways to go

So many improvements above the past

So many necessary innovations

REAPER cannot be all when there is so much good to chose from

You IMPLIED exactly what I said.

No I didnt

Just because you didn't use the words "ReaComp can replace everything in my studio and yours!", doesn't mean that you didn't imply it.

No I didnt, I wouldnt dare to begin to say ReaComp could replace ANY EQ for instance, or an engineer, or speakers, or even a limiter, yes you read that right

I mean, if the outboard gear wasn't lit up because of the plugs, then what else is somebody supposed to think? Did the plugs beat up the gear? Did they take all their electricity? Seems to be no other explanation of why they wouldn't be lit up, and you would point it out.

My mixes are better off, staying in the box with ReaComp, than going thru a DA/AD hit to the Vari-Mu. Furthermore, the control I have over ReaComp's detector makes it far more useful for me.

HOWEVER, some guys REALLY REALLY want to use that box. There is no replacing it for them, no matter what. Even guys who wouldnt know the difference if I painted Vari-Mu on a toaster, would scream if they didnt see a piece of hardware called " Vari-Mu "

So it stays in my rack

When you and I both know, that they can't do so in every way. Functionality-wise, yes. Sound-wise, doubtful.

I would argue the opposite. Functionality wise the DAW world has some SERIOUS hurdles, hence REAPER's emphasis on routing to try and solve some.

I've mixed records on, modded, and completely restored most every family of console out there. I will take in the box summing ANY day. WYSIWYG has ALWAYS been my goal, even in the console days. The more transparent the better. The more accurate the better. I like to have character type things around, but I like to know that my path can be garbage in, garbage out.

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 11:29 am

Pipeline, please don't take this like I'm saying that Reaper and ReaComp aren't capable of doing entire productions. I'm only saying that they aren't a full replacement for everyone from using hardware or other plugins or whatever. I, too, prefer staying in the box. And I do. I personally don't own any outboard gear. I may sometime, but haven't seen the need to. Plus, I still have access to great studios when I need them, including my own workplace. But that's besides the point.

I see there is a bit of silliness in your post as well. Of course you knew I was just making a statement, and not actually accusing you of saying that ReaComp could replace all EQ, monitors, etc.

Regardless, I'm not trying to start a flame war, and I don't think you are either. This isn't the first time we've went back and forth, and probably not the last(probably the most civil so far though). I know you enjoy Reaper, and in your own personal work, it is about everything you need. That's fantastic! But sometimes you have come across very arrogant. And no, no evidence will be posted. Take it with a grain of salt. Just my opinion.

You're obviously not an idiot, and I would openly admit that in many areas, you know more then I do. I've actually learned from your posts before(although I still don't know who to believe in this topic). So with all due respect, we disagree on these past few posts and it will have to stay with that. It's freakin late(early) here in the Central Timezone, and I have to get some sleep for work.

(on a more personal note, if you are looking for an opportunity to share any knowledge in audio production in a more formal way, let me know)

Brent

Highvoltage · Post by **Highvoltage** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 12:45 pm

ah i get shivers from people quoting and commenting each and every sentence. lol

Marduchk · Post by **Marduchk** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:33 pm

basically all this is is pipelineuaiod and koolkeys saying "yes i did, no i didnt, yes i did, no youdiddnt"

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:38 pm

Basically, this thread should die. Die, die, die.

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:06 pm

Marduchk wrote:basically all this is is pipelineuaiod and koolkeys saying "yes i did, no i didnt, yes i did, no youdiddnt"

no it isn't.

Besides, I wasn't the one arguing with Pipeline over things. I just chimed in at the end.

So there.

Brent

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:06 pm

bduffy wrote:Basically, this thread should die. Die, die, die.

I agree. Oh wait, I just bumped it. Sorry. Too much popcorn.

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:10 pm

Indeed! Whoops! I bumped too.

alex zonder · Post by **alex zonder** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:20 pm

I guess many people will profit from using Reacomp... which is where the thing was coded for in the first place... so let's bump!

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:27 pm

alex, I don't know you well enough to do that. you sick man.

I do like ReaComp, for what it's worth. Although ReaFir is my favorite plug from Cockos. So I guess a bump isn't a bad thing here.

Brent

Frippertronix · Post by **Frippertronix** » Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:18 am

Pipelineaudio wrote:
Frippertronix wrote:
Pipelineaudio wrote:
Frippertronix wrote: It just can't be as easy as pegging a short list of variables to "reproduce" the sound of a piece of analog gear in the digital realm, particularly a great and highly coveted piece like a classic compressor.
Thats not the claim I made
Are you sure? Not making accusations but I recall a statement made by someone in your tutorial video that seemed to be along those lines. I'll have to go back and listen again. My apologies in advance if I'm blowing that out of proportion.

BTW, are you guys in Hawaii?
I stated that I believe what many, especially those around here refer to as "character" could certainly be emulated, convincingly enough...CERTAINLY convincingly enough for an ABX test of most people concerned, by knowing how the detector in question worked, what sort of knee it had, and its parameter ranges.

To me, most of the "business end" of what a compressor does comes from how the compressor itself hears the signal. Of course different topologies are going to make different sounds, but now, in PC land, we have the ability for consistency, predictability and reliability, which again, to me, opens the door to thinking about things more the way they are on paper , ideally, and what happens when harsh reality sets in.

We're not in Hawai'i, but keep teetering on the edge of going back

Yes, I think we may have uncovered the sticking point here and it's the word "character", which is a pretty vague term, really, and one that can be very "hype-friendly", but some might consider it misleading in some cases. The reason is that someone can define the scope of the character of something more narrowly than someone else.

For instance, someone might do a spectral analysis of a Stradavarius violin as well as get very accurate numbers on the attack/decay of the soundboard and incoroprate those into a VST violin model, then they might venture to say in their promo material that they have captured the "character" of a Stradavarius (which by their definition would be true), and this would undoubtedly raise many eyebrows and get many people excited, but then probably most of them would be complaining about how the VST didn't really sound exactly like a Stradavarius.

When one can state that carbon comp resistors sound different from metal film resistors and some think that influences the "character" of a peice of sound processing hardware, and in the case of the tube comps you have tube generated harmonics coloring the sound, etc., etc., it's easy for arguments (like the one in this thread) to erupt as to whether someone has captured the character of something or just accurately modelled certain aspects of it while the effect as a whole still remains elusive.

All that said, though, I haven't tried your hardware model fxp's but I will soon, and I just wanted to say I appreciate that you've put a very nice and useful free suite of porcessors out there (love the EQ as well) which I think is great whether or not I think the comp succesfully nails the sound of a vintage piece, or whatever.

kylen · Post by **kylen** » Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:40 am

As long as it will replace a vari-mu (gotta remember to scratch that off the future purchases list!) I recon I better try it out! Thanks for the tip.

ED: Whew I just read this entire thread. Some hothead engineers think they own Audio or something, what a trip! Instead of doing something productive like an AB shootout we're trying to predict & debate character based on transfer curves and resistor tolerance. Instead of a little give and take we're getting a dark vibe here at KVR, not the potential sharing and building of ideas - Good job men

Where's Citizen Chunk when we need him ?

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Sun Feb 25, 2007 4:43 am

kylen wrote:As long as it will replace a [manley] vari-mu

only pipelineaudio made that ridiculous claim.

It would be just plain irresponsible to take such advice at face value.

reacomp is really just another plain vanilla plugin compressor. It does nothing mjcompressor, or citizenchunk vanilla compressor won't - or any other reasonably flexible dynamics processor for that matter. As much as I ponder about it I can't bring myself to understand how it has pipelineaudio so hyped up.

[typo]