MixControl Pro (Group Buy Started)

[Fritze]

Sorry for switching to German:

Der Limiter arbeitet nicht als letztes Modul, sonst würde er quasi als Brickwall arbeiten. Es ist eben primär ein Channel Strip Plugin und der Limiter kann sich um starke Overs kümmern - muss er aber nicht.

Praktisches Beispiel warum ein Threshold (kann man in dem Fall auch Ceiling nennen) und der Output Gain Regler trotzdem noch Sinn machen:

Schlagzeug z.B., peakt sehr stark trotz oder gerade weil EQ und/oder Compression. Um den Output Bus nicht zu überladen, würde der Limiter den Overload einfach abschneiden.

Jetzt ist es aber so, wenn es einen festen "Ceiling WErt" gibt, kann es sein, dass das Plugin "intern" überfahren werden muss um die Peaks zu beschneiden (Input Gain - Signal wird in die Komprimierung/das Limiting getrieben). Mittels dem Output Gain würdest zu zwar das Signal anpassen, es wäre aber immer noch Intern verzerrt.

Der Ceiling/Threshold wirkt da etwas entgegen.



So zumindest meine Überlegung zu dem Konzept. Bis dato brauchte ich den Limiter nicht.



[/german]

Äh, nee. Sorry. Wenn da was intern verzerren würde, wäre was falsch. Macht es auch nicht: Ausprobieren! Da kannste 100dB gain reindrücken, den Input und den Output voll aufreissen und nix zerrt da in dem plugin.
Also leider kein Argument für den threshold Regler.



OT:(Slatering: Geil, später mehr, Danke! )

[Compyfox]

Ich sagte ja, Beispiel.

Auch wenn es interne 32bit/64bit floating point ist, und somit kein Übersteuern möglich wäre, sollte trotzdem ein gewisses Gain Staging bzw. Signalanalyse/Begrenzungen eingehalten werden.

2c...

[Fritze]

Ich sagte ja, Beispiel.

Auch wenn es interne 32bit/64bit floating point ist, und somit kein Übersteuern möglich wäre, sollte trotzdem ein gewisses Gain Staging bzw. Signalanalyse/Begrenzungen eingehalten werden.

2c...

Ach komm. Es ist nicht schlimm, wenn man nicht recht hat, das dann auch zuzugeben. Brichste Dir nix ab. Im Gegenteil.

[Compyfox]

Just sayin', chacka. Nothing about being right or wrong in this case (different viewpoints, no?). It's an example and I could brag on about to "not internally clip" a plugin chain, which would turn this completely into OT.

Then again, as long as I use MCP (nice abbreviation btw), I haven't used the limiter. Neither the stereo widening tools btw.



And while I'm at it, I'd like to adress a FR:
Could you (maybe) reduce the plugin count? Meaning: no "mono" and "stereo" plugins seperately?

I don't know if it's possible at this point, but a lot of plugins can adapt to mono/stereo signal. Having just two plugins only (large and medium sized GUI) would add to the workflow.


And I still need to figure out a good Generic Remote layout for my BCR2000 to control this thing.

[Fritze]

Just sayin', chacka. Nothing about being right or wrong in this case (different viewpoints, no?). It's an example and I could brag on about to "not internally clip" a plugin chain, which would turn this completely into OT.

Sorry Sir, but you're wrong and you know it. When there's no clipping possible you're not "internally clipping a plugin chain".
If you have plugins that are level dependent then it makes lotsa sense to be careful with your gain staging. But here this is not the case. Just as I wrote in my earlier post in german I literally turned up the gain with a simple, clean gain plugin by 100dB in front of MCP and nothing clipped inside of that plugin while having no module turned on. So the output gain stage of that plugin is obviously totally clean, as it should be!?

The output knob sets the overall output of the MCP. Surprise! So why is there a threshold knob in the limiter, which in fact IS the last possible stage in that plugin that can change the sound? All that I see that it changes is that you can drive the limiter harder by up to 24 dB and have to afterwards turn up the gain with the output knob to get the lost level back. The whole thing would be easier if you would have 24dB more gain available on the input (gain) knob.

And now prove me wrong or give me a real life application of the threshold knob.

[Compyfox]

If we take a look at that angle - yes, you are right and I am wrong (there people, I admitted it!). If every plugin in the chain, or the "modules" in a plugin run by the same floating point mathematics, and there is nothing that "adds" to the signal (saturation/emulated circuity) - then yes, users can boost the sh't out of it and still get back a clean (read nulled) signal after proper gain compensation.


Still... I kind of follow your point right there. It would actually make more sense to just drive the signal into compression/limiting with a fixed threshold (let's say -0,5dB) and then adjust the output gain (final stage) according to needs.

Then again, I agree that it would be useless on the long run if the Limiter is the second to last stage of the plugin. I'd rather add this one as "savety" module post output gain. But even then I wouldn't use it if I have my gain staging in check. Unless I want to "abuse" this module (especially if it has an additional sound-shaping mode) to get a certain sound out of it.


Reallife application... hm... I pretty much only use the output ceiling/input gain "option" (Pro-L, TLs Maximizer, Waves L1) - pretty much maximizers only. Last time I used a "input gain / threshold / output gain" combo was with MPL-1 Pro from Kjaerhus. And this was certainly NOT intuitive (read confusing) on the long run IMO. I'd rather use a compressor with inf:1 Ratio, then mess with the threshold and output gain. At least here I can sometimes even change the knee courve.

Again, 2 cents.

[geroyannis]

And while I'm at it, I'd like to adress a FR:
Could you (maybe) reduce the plugin count? Meaning: no "mono" and "stereo" plugins seperately?

I don't know if it's possible at this point, but a lot of plugins can adapt to mono/stereo signal. Having just two plugins only (large and medium sized GUI) would add to the workflow.

The vst3 version is like that. I only hope I could move it to my preferred subcategory because now it sits in the "Other" subcategory in Cubase.

[DNR Collaborative]

And while I'm at it, I'd like to adress a FR:
Could you (maybe) reduce the plugin count? Meaning: no "mono" and "stereo" plugins seperately?

I don't know if it's possible at this point, but a lot of plugins can adapt to mono/stereo signal. Having just two plugins only (large and medium sized GUI) would add to the workflow.

The vst3 version is like that. I only hope I could move it to my preferred subcategory because now it sits in the "Other" subcategory in Cubase.

Now, I recall seeing your last mention of this and have passed along the info but haven't heard back yet. This is something the host application determines upon the installation of the software, yes? So, this should be something that we can control in the coding of MCP? This was how I understood your initial report of it anyways, so please do let me know if I have misunderstood.


Steven

[geroyannis]

And while I'm at it, I'd like to adress a FR:
Could you (maybe) reduce the plugin count? Meaning: no "mono" and "stereo" plugins seperately?

I don't know if it's possible at this point, but a lot of plugins can adapt to mono/stereo signal. Having just two plugins only (large and medium sized GUI) would add to the workflow.

The vst3 version is like that. I only hope I could move it to my preferred subcategory because now it sits in the "Other" subcategory in Cubase.

Now, I recall seeing your last mention of this and have passed along the info but haven't heard back yet. This is something the host application determines upon the installation of the software, yes? So, this should be something that we can control in the coding of MCP? This was how I understood your initial report of it anyways, so please do let me know if I have misunderstood.


Steven

It seems that the coder can control this because I have a bundle of vst3 plugins from another developer and every plugin goes to the appropriate category.

The thing is I would prefer to choose on my own where to put each plugin, as is the case with earlier vst2 plugins but unfortunately, this can't be done with vst3 plugins.

I would put MixControl under the "Dynamics" section because that's where I'm used to put my channel strips but I'm sure others would prefer a different location. That's why user intervention would be nice. Alas...

[softska]

The output knob sets the overall output of the MCP. Surprise! So why is there a threshold knob in the limiter, which in fact IS the last possible stage in that plugin that can change the sound? All that I see that it changes is that you can drive the limiter harder by up to 24 dB and have to afterwards turn up the gain with the output knob to get the lost level back. The whole thing would be easier if you would have 24dB more gain available on the input (gain) knob.

And now prove me wrong or give me a real life application of the threshold knob.

Personally I do like the threshold knob. Sometimes I use limiter for truncating transients in percussion hits. It always annoys me a little when I must drive the signal up and down to compensate.

That said I'll happily sacrifice a knob for a GR meter on the limiter

[DNR Collaborative]

It seems that the coder can control this because I have a bundle of vst3 plugins from another developer and every plugin goes to the appropriate category.

The thing is I would prefer to choose on my own where to put each plugin, as is the case with earlier vst2 plugins but unfortunately, this can't be done with vst3 plugins.

I would put MixControl under the "Dynamics" section because that's where I'm used to put my channel strips but I'm sure others would prefer a different location. That's why user intervention would be nice. Alas...

We are just finishing up with the RTAS version, which should be available publicly (barring any issues) tomorrow morning. Once we have that out of the way, we will start working for the next version, and I will mention this once again and see if there is something we can alter to get it categorized properly

That said I'll happily sacrifice a knob for a GR meter on the limiter

Already on the feature request list, no sacrificing necessary!


Ps. It appears that we've made this discussion to 1000 individual responses


Steven

[Fritze]

Personally I do like the threshold knob. Sometimes I use limiter for truncating transients in percussion hits. It always annoys me a little when I must drive the signal up and down to compensate.

That said I'll happily sacrifice a knob for a GR meter on the limiter

Ah, thanx for that. Makes sense to me.

And +1 again for the meter.

[DNR Collaborative]

And +1 again for the meter.

Consider it noted

Also, the RTAS version should be along shortly. It will be available to all current MixControl Pro license holders free of charge.

And for those wondering what we'll do with the new AAX format - it will be available long before it's necessary.


Steven

[DNR Collaborative]

MixControl Pro R5 is released, which includes the long-awaited (phew!) RTAS version. New users should make sure to go through the manual, as some things have changed. We are now migrating to a licensing process that does not require initializing the software inside your host - there is a standalone version which does the authorization, and it is explained in the manual.

There is also a new (very simple) introduction video that we've put together. We're going to be preparing to get the tutorial section organized and online as well, which we will hopefully have ready in the next few weeks.




Steven

[DrApostropheX]

False alarm!

The video looks great!