Waves NLS Non-Linear Summer released

[Sequent]

I don't think I'm going to be getting the Waves... or at the very least not for now. But the Satson is inexpensive enough that I might look into it. So thank you for sharing your thoughts and experiences.

Finally tried the demo. It's darn nice for subtle effect. That said, I also just recently tried Satson ($39!) a couple weeks ago. First impressions of both doing some comparisons: I will say Satson does sound different than all three of the Waves models but holds its own - no doubt. IMO, In some respects it is more polite or nuetral, one might go so far to say 'more even keeled' in the upper edges of harmonic distortion compared to the bold waves models which makes it just 'different' and simply another color all told. I've so far found that Satson is quite equal in that it also adds remarkably comparable subtle aural "depth" or "breadth" to each channel.

If you have Satson and are wondering if you are missing out on something "better" with the new, pricey Waves "namebrand" 3console plug-in, you can breathe easy. They both sound good, just a little different. Grass is always greener so I had to demo the Waves, but so so far i've concluded that both make audio sound a just little, tiny bit more 'rich'...basically, you barely notice it when you insert the console plug-in; but if you work with it enabled for awhile during a session then turn the plug-in off later - you miss it - somehow it does add that 'something, that certain I don't know what?".

My thoughts anyways.

[Sequent]

Just going to take a few bits out of the discussion to say that the RTB Book arrived today. Mick, you were so right... this book really IS epic!!!

I am floored.

Probably way too much information for the average reader. Like the book equivalent of the LOTR extended dvds or the book equivalent of the LOTR complete soundtracks. But most definitely worth it, especially if you're into this kind of detail.

Just to reiterate... I went through Curvebender directly (http://www.recordingthebeatles.com) which was about 30% cheaper than the cheapest Marketplace vendor on Amazon). The publisher is located in Kansas City, MO.

Again, a big thank you to Compyfox, who first mentioned it.

On the book again... I've updated my post to say that shipping from the publisher is extra and not included. But it's only about $10-15.

The book that I just purchased does look like it still includes the extras (and a slipcase?). I was really debating about whether to go for it, because it IS a lot for a book. But I decided to do it. It's one of those things... like the Alan Parsons DVD set from Keyfax that seems a good investment in learning more about the tools of the trade.

(And seeing the quote from AP on the site made me think... okay, I'm doing it.)

You are going to flip out when you get it. Epic.

PS - The slipcase looks like an original EMI tape box and is very robust.

[Dean Aka Nekro]

On the last big project I did I wound up using a tiny amount of chorus or phaser set to ever-so-slightly pan back and forth through the stereo field and tucked under the main signal. I'm not sure whether that's exactly along the lines of what you're referring to, but I did find that the slight resulting imperfection was very pleasing and did seem to make the tracks broader as well as more 'alive." Well... at any rate, I did it and it sounded good to me.

And the phase is wobbling in analog hardware, and that's what gives stereo audio tracks a broader [unstable] soundstage. You can't hear that on mono tracks, of course. Anyway, analog is just not perfect in any aspect. Sometimes that's good, sometimes it's not.

Cheers!

Think DuX is reffering to this type of thing or rather a cumulative (for some very highly desirable) set of side effects that naturally happen due to parts/components:

Thats in as good condition as it gets and quality wise flawless but even so it will start to sound different over time, One's DAW/Plug-ins will not (leaving aside what a developer may do to change things if they so wish, Plug-Ins, Not DAW i would hope!). Along with more than likely the PITA that maintaining/calibrating...etc (oh the virtues) of a tape machine and what that brings or adds (headaches and frustrations aside) to the table (again for some very highly desirable). Personally I like to incorperate both and the strengths of each (digital audio workstation/plug-ins and analogue hardware, even digital hardware). They can live and work happily side by side. I would like some more space so I can fit more gear in. One day I will have that space, Just not going to happen anytime soon

Unless I am mistaken/way off base from what you mean't DuX

Compy, When i did my time at a shitty engineering 'school' I got marked down wrong/bad for not using any of the outboard when doing a mix, I could not believe it. So i got bad marks for not going out of the Digi 192 POS converters and into some mediocre/not worth the degradation stage of passing the mix through a Drawmer 1960 and a few other bits 'because that was how it was sussposed to be done' but instead I tracked or "printed" through all the stuff I wanted to use the 'character' of and then mixed down totally ITB with plug-ins where needed...It was at that moment I realized the people 'teaching' were a bunch of morons. Then the next year when a new bunch start the cheeky f**kers used one of tracks/mixdowns as an example of previous students work (even though I had a extra year and abit to go) as there were some other metalhead dudes starting asking about....Metal. I was pissing myself laughing and just did my own thing on the course as all the information that was fed to us was just all totally subjective/endlessly debateable Except the Pro Tools 'exams' - Them books and online exam things say there is only their way or you fail I smoked more weed than I did learn shit from that place to be honest

Best to all as always and one of these: ¯\(°_o)/¯

Dean

[AudioGuy720]

Having used and owned Slate VCC since the free iLok 2 deal I can safely say that it is NOT snake oil like some people in this thread claim.

Using VCC saves me time when mixing. It gets me to a much BETTER sounding mix faster than before it was released. It's not magic but it's a tool that makes my job easier and as we all know time is money. The only times I don't mix with it is when I'm going for a completely clean signal like classical music or talk radio. It was worth every damn penny.

I presume your targeting me with that comment as I was the one mentioning snake oil.

If you read what i said you will see that regarding the 'summing' is snake oil. The saturation etc is what it is and does and it in no way replaces or changes the summing engine of your daw.

Slate claimed early on that it was 'digital summing' that was to blame and that VCC does it different. It doesn't, the claim is snake oil. They use the same 'digital summing' that was claimed by them to be 'wrong'.

I also praised Slate for the abilty to help getting good mixes by the nature of it requiring proper levels to make their plugin sound good, which isn't always easy with the headroom daws offer.

No it doesn't change the summing of the DAW however from what I've read it follows what mastering engineer Bob Katz says about summing amps...only two channels are needed to get the "analog effect". Any more than two channels is a waste of money. On one of the forums Slate said that that summing magic is happening on the mix buss plugin not the channel plugins. Makes sense to me based on what Bob Katz said.

100% agreed on VCC forcing users to properly gain stage. Learning those principles made a huge difference in my mixes and recordings.

[Real Grooves Audio]

Not sure what to make of NLS so far. Because they recommend you're supposed to instantiate each insert fresh from the plug-in menu (as opposed to copying), it can be quite a bitch to get all your inserts going in a full project*.

From playing around (still need to find a good project to properly level and use this with), I haven't heard anything amazing yet, but it seems very subtle at lower levels. The first "Spike" (SSL) emu gets dirty quickly if pushed, making a "grumbly" sort of distortion that I would avoid using. "Mike" sounds a little more mid-low, and the Nevo algo sounded a little sweeter on top. But need to play with it more.

*They said you can insert multiple instances of the plug-in in Cubase at once my holding down alt/option+shift, but that didn't work for me...

A fresh insert is necessary to use a different channel for each instance. You could click+drag an instance to another fx bin but it will use that same channel.

If you insert a new instance in X1 it automatically goes to the next open channel.

I've been working with this plug in Reaper: If I drag and drop the plug from one track to another, it automatically goes to the next open channel. So no need to insert a new instance.

[bduffy]

Not sure what to make of NLS so far. Because they recommend you're supposed to instantiate each insert fresh from the plug-in menu (as opposed to copying), it can be quite a bitch to get all your inserts going in a full project*.

From playing around (still need to find a good project to properly level and use this with), I haven't heard anything amazing yet, but it seems very subtle at lower levels. The first "Spike" (SSL) emu gets dirty quickly if pushed, making a "grumbly" sort of distortion that I would avoid using. "Mike" sounds a little more mid-low, and the Nevo algo sounded a little sweeter on top. But need to play with it more.

*They said you can insert multiple instances of the plug-in in Cubase at once my holding down alt/option+shift, but that didn't work for me...

A fresh insert is necessary to use a different channel for each instance. You could click+drag an instance to another fx bin but it will use that same channel.

If you insert a new instance in X1 it automatically goes to the next open channel.

I've been working with this plug in Reaper: If I drag and drop the plug from one track to another, it automatically goes to the next open channel. So no need to insert a new instance.

Yeah, despite the warnings in the manual, I found I could cmd+drag them to a new channel in Cubase, and it did what it's supposed to. Thank god! It would be unreasonable, I think, to manually insert it every time.

[MickGael]

Yeah, despite the warnings in the manual, I found I could cmd+drag them to a new channel in Cubase, and it did what it's supposed to. Thank god! It would be unreasonable, I think, to manually insert it every time.

That is a great tip! Have to give that a try.

[bduffy]

Yeah, despite the warnings in the manual, I found I could cmd+drag them to a new channel in Cubase, and it did what it's supposed to. Thank god! It would be unreasonable, I think, to manually insert it every time.

That is a great tip! Have to give that a try.

Nice! Should work OK. Sadly, my demo has expired in what seemed like 2 days.

[MickGael]

Yeah, despite the warnings in the manual, I found I could cmd+drag them to a new channel in Cubase, and it did what it's supposed to. Thank god! It would be unreasonable, I think, to manually insert it every time.

That is a great tip! Have to give that a try.

Nice! Should work OK. Sadly, my demo has expired in what seemed like 2 days.

Complete aside: Sorry about the Canucks! I was born in Buffalo, so I root for the Sabres. After that, I root for Canadian teams.

[bduffy]

Yeah, despite the warnings in the manual, I found I could cmd+drag them to a new channel in Cubase, and it did what it's supposed to. Thank god! It would be unreasonable, I think, to manually insert it every time.

That is a great tip! Have to give that a try.

Nice! Should work OK. Sadly, my demo has expired in what seemed like 2 days.

Complete aside: Sorry about the Canucks! I was born in Buffalo, so I root for the Sabres. After that, I root for Canadian teams.

Hey, thanks man! Honestly, I'm not a huge hockey fan, but I wish them the best. Also, I don't want riots again, so I'm a little relieved. But thanks!

[kmonkey]

Tried NLS. Liked it. It seems nice subtle enhancer.

What is kinda bogus to me is that now everyone is saying how these plugins are game changers but like it is forgotten that almost whole decade and even further we enjoyed quite a big amount of music i mean really amazing music (and i am not thinking on trance or techno when i say this) which was created purely on computer.

I can't recall that anyone ever complained on something trivial as mixer summing(or something called "proper gain staging for plugins" for that matter..).

All these slate,waves,satson things seems just like a current marketing cliche. If something is wonderful there then IMHO it's the pure genius behind people which maintain these companies. Genius which detected what is the next big thing which people will easily swallow under "i need that"..

Yes i like them,i was especially impressed with VCC demo, this Waves seems also very nice but to say that these plugs will save my shitty mixes, i think not. And somehow i am always under impression that i can already achieve similar result with different tools even free ones.

This is just my observation. I am not taking piss on any plugin whatsoever (FYI i ordered stripbus which i like - not because of faux console but it have decent tone shaping tools)

in the end i think i learn better mixing and better tricks..

[MickGael]

I can't recall that anyone ever complained on something trivial as mixer summing(or something called "proper gain staging for plugins" for that matter..).

Speaking only for myself, I find digital summing and gain staging brittle, inflexible and an unforgiving pain in the ass. Of course, these so-called summing plugins don't change that, but they do offer some nice colors.

[MFXxx]

Except the Pro Tools 'exams' - Them books and online exam things say there is only their way or you fail I smoked more weed than I did learn shit from that place to be honest

Best to all as always and one of these: ¯\(°_o)/¯

Dean

If everyone did it the same we would have no variety to any productions, granted somethings do have a statutory point which is normally...inhale, hold, exhale, jam

[Compyfox]

When will people stop and realize that both analog and digital summing do the same thing. They simply add tracks together. The only difference with analog is that the hardware also adds specific saturation. Its the saturation that is being emulated, not the "summing". Adding 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 sounds the same in both analog and digital. Analog just has the side effect of harmonic distortion / saturation while doing it.

I can mostly agree on the "summing" part. This is really just 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 and then pressed through a stereo stream. I can not agree on the specific saturation part.

Years ago someone at a highly acclaimed engineering school tried to convince me that "analog summing" is the thing, and he showed me a particular device that was basically a 19" 2U 24channel volume control. The only saturation that happened in there was if the volume knob was turned up too much. In short, this was an active summing device.

Passive summing (like summing cables) do nothing at all. They are either tons of channels in parallel, at most they also offer resistors in the chain. Much like (really) old mixing consoles. To those that have the "Beatles" book, there is a REDD.51 console add on device with 4 faders. This device is actually just a fader bank - 4 variable (coal) resistors. They can only attenuate, nothing more. Their output is then sent to a bus/another channel - done. This is all there is to it.


Though there is one small thing that digital consoles do not(!) do, and this is "the trick" (or the thing) that everyone is after: crosstalk. Usually, this is a very, very negative sideeffect where one channel bleeds into the other in the stereo bus. But actually, this is what a lot of people like, the "impression" that everything sounds "more alive, more stereo" even though it messes with the phase and it is a negative sideeffect of a console that a lot of engineers tried to evade (hence the creation of digital workstations!).

Usually this crosstalk is very low, sometimes even drowned in the (modeled) noise floor, but it's measurable. At 1kHz and I think in VCC's Trident it's about -68dBFS digital peak, lower with more modern consoles (about -80dBFS digital IIRC). If you mix normally (K-14 max) with a headroom of -3dBFS digital on the summing bus, you barely notice it. I guess this is the impression a lot of people have that these plugins are just "snake oil".

This is the whole magic.

Speaking only for myself, I find digital summing and gain staging brittle, inflexible and an unforgiving pain in the ass. Of course, these so-called summing plugins don't change that, but they do offer some nice colors.

Again, these "so-called" summing devices do a bit more.

And regarding gain staging - they aren't as inflexible and unforgiving. At least not in my opinion. Granted, you have a less dynamic range at your disposal (if you're after that), but you actually benefit from several things.

One is to have a higher fader resolution while mixing. Then there is the fact that you don't need to mess with the master fader if you do things right, clipping doesn't occour that often either (especially if you use elder plugins that don't work internal 32bit float - old UAD stuff anyone?!).

I call this definitely a lot of flexibility than constantly messing with levels and checking my meters. I can literally close my eyes while mixing if I use a calibrated system and proper gain staging.

And I didn't even mention simpler hardware integration yet.

Again, a big thank you to Compyfox, who first mentioned it.

A pleasure.

Compy, When i did my time at a shitty engineering 'school' I got marked down wrong/bad for not using any of the outboard when doing a mix, I could not believe it. So i got bad marks for not going out of the Digi 192 POS converters and into some mediocre/not worth the degradation stage of passing the mix through a Drawmer 1960 and a few other bits 'because that was how it was sussposed to be done' but instead I tracked or "printed" through all the stuff I wanted to use the 'character' of and then mixed down totally ITB with plug-ins where needed...It was at that moment I realized the people 'teaching' were a bunch of morons. Then the next year when a new bunch start the cheeky f**kers used one of tracks/mixdowns as an example of previous students work (even though I had a extra year and abit to go) as there were some other metalhead dudes starting asking about....Metal. I was pissing myself laughing and just did my own thing on the course as all the information that was fed to us was just all totally subjective/endlessly debateable

You don't have any idea how much I can relate. I always went a different route, my mixes were "too tamed". Yet I gave my classmates enough bits of info to find their own route and also rebel against their teachers. At least I wasn't forced to go OTB several times. Whatever suited the production best - and this was simplicity while working efficient (read: fast). We did a mistake while printing, the mistake stayed and was part of the song's character.

Even though I was the mischief-maker in class, I never stopped bothering my teachers and/or asking questions while keeping an open mind. That didn't swing well with certain people, but after all these years I can say that I am proud of what I achieved through the last decade. I also went the wrong route more than once, did a ton of mistakes in the process - but I found my own style and set my own rules. This is what defines me.


Oh and... "our" production was also used for several terms for "demo mixing" and presentation purposes after we left school. So we didn't do that much wrong it seems.

Except the Pro Tools 'exams' - Them books and online exam things say there is only their way or you fail I smoked more weed than I did learn shit from that place to be honest

Though with PT, you still need to apply the very same rules. It's just another picky DAW that was once the monopol in terms of recording audio to HDD before Logic and Cubase stepped in.

I can't recall that anyone ever complained on something trivial as mixer summing(or something called "proper gain staging for plugins" for that matter..).

You've never been to GearSlutz or so called "HiFi Audio" boards then.

in the end i think i learn better mixing and better tricks..

This is what's most important.




One question I'd like to ask regarding NLS:
This... individual channel modeling... I wrote earlier that I see this one as flaw if each channel responds differently rather than all channel respond the same (as they should). I'm all for slight(!) changes in sound if I use more than one module of the same hardware. But it's totally different with a console.

In short:
Can I turn this mode/feature off?!

Though I have a feeling what the answer will be. Oh and I still say that they should have included the HELIOS console into the pack. It's still pricey as hell this way in comparision to the competition (Slate sells VCC once more in discounted fasion).

[Dean Aka Nekro]

Except the Pro Tools 'exams' - Them books and online exam things say there is only their way or you fail I smoked more weed than I did learn shit from that place to be honest

Best to all as always and one of these: ¯\(°_o)/¯

Dean

If everyone did it the same we would have no variety to any productions, granted somethings do have a statutory point which is normally...inhale, hold, exhale, jam

Yes indeed/totally agree. The only thing that grated was that there was and even more so now is more than at the very least two or usually three ways to do the exact same thing in most digital audio workstations. However yeah it was the Digi-certified way or fail even if another way was faster/suited one's own workflow...I would love to see how
Av(o)id have the same stuff as rigid these days...NOT

Compy, When i did my time at a shitty engineering 'school' I got marked down wrong/bad for not using any of the outboard when doing a mix, I could not believe it. So i got bad marks for not going out of the Digi 192 POS converters and into some mediocre/not worth the degradation stage of passing the mix through a Drawmer 1960 and a few other bits 'because that was how it was sussposed to be done' but instead I tracked or "printed" through all the stuff I wanted to use the 'character' of and then mixed down totally ITB with plug-ins where needed...It was at that moment I realized the people 'teaching' were a bunch of morons. Then the next year when a new bunch start the cheeky f**kers used one of tracks/mixdowns as an example of previous students work (even though I had a extra year and abit to go) as there were some other metalhead dudes starting asking about....Metal. I was pissing myself laughing and just did my own thing on the course as all the information that was fed to us was just all totally subjective/endlessly debateable

You don't have any idea how much I can relate. I always went a different route, my mixes were "too tamed". Yet I gave my classmates enough bits of info to find their own route and also rebel against their teachers. At least I wasn't forced to go OTB several times. Whatever suited the production best - and this was simplicity while working efficient (read: fast). We did a mistake while printing, the mistake stayed and was part of the song's character.

Even though I was the mischief-maker in class, I never stopped bothering my teachers and/or asking questions while keeping an open mind. That didn't swing well with certain people, but after all these years I can say that I am proud of what I achieved through the last decade. I also went the wrong route more than once, did a ton of mistakes in the process - but I found my own style and set my own rules. This is what defines me.

Oh and... "our" production was also used for several terms for "demo mixing" and presentation purposes after we left school. So we didn't do that much wrong it seems.

Thats why I laughed about it also man, I was more amused than at all angry and somewhat at the time surprised as all the 'but you did it wrong so...' comments/write ups. It is rather pleasent knowing/sharing similar findings despite of place that it was the same basically. It was not just me going against the grain for what must of appeared/very much felt like (or rather I was made to feel like) for the sake of it (it was not at all) and indeed I made alot of mistakes which I learned from, I still do make mistakes and learn from them and I hope that never stops or what would I have to look forwards to? It would be so stale

Except the Pro Tools 'exams' - Them books and online exam things say there is only their way or you fail I smoked more weed than I did learn shit from that place to be honest

Though with PT, you still need to apply the very same rules. It's just another picky DAW that was once the monopol in terms of recording audio to HDD before Logic and Cubase stepped in.

It was Cubase for MIDI and Pro Tools for audio along with ADATs and tape machines at 'school'. I found Cubase really tricky myself whilst PT just seemed to work for me personally (Which may have in the long run been a disadvantage and put myself off a great DAW but you know how personal preference becomes almost bad habit), It was though at the time sorely lacking on the MIDI/Virtual instrument side than Cubase was. Thankfully its caught up and like you say and I agree its just another digital audio workstation. I am not buying into v10 though as I really dislike where Avid are headed after the 'now we are playing fair' nature of v9, Luckily I just picked up a license and disc are in the mail for v9 for a great price off a top bloke or I would of been stuck on 7.4.3 M-Powered and 8.0.5 LE as I missed the boat on buying v9 and my new audio machine is halfway to be complete. I'm sticking on v9 along with the other applications I use and see if they sort things out for v11 pricing wise plus some or all of the rather good TDM only STILL plug-ins get ported to AXX. If i were starting out PT would not be what I would go for but I am too far in to start from scratch on a new DAW, I use Ableton Live for having alot of fun and access to the land of VST/VSTi and when I did get into it Live 4 then properly on Live 5 it was awesome, I really disliked it to begin with as it was so odd looking and made no sense to a guy whom was used to using basically a DAW as a tape machine with all the added great flexabilities of non-destructive editing and other mod cons. My collegue uses SONAR and won't budge on it so I am going to have to get reasonably used to it, Just got to put the time in when my new machine is ready as I am just about getting by on a far from ideal laptop, I am looking forwards to having the raw power to properly work again. I know plenty of Logic users also along with many other DAW and hearing all thier works I am 100% that non of them sound better and for the sake of it I actively did really try to compare. It amazes me how threads about 'best' sounding DAW still come up. S1 is currently the bestest ever is it not? Or according to a recent SOS article Samplitude is even better! Oh and with the new machine comes plenty of new stuff (old to many no doubt) that I need to demo properly, Waves v9 stuff being on the 'list' the 'list' is getting bigger each bloody week

Cheers

Dean