How good are G-Sonique plugins?

[Brother Charles]

I can only speak of the Pultronic, and that thing is good.


Sad thing, still Windows only, and still undocumented. But I like the idea to have more control over the tube stages on both input and output.

Is it a Pultec EQ emulation (at least it looks alike)? How good is it compared to other (inexpensive) Pultec EQ emulations?

Can not come anywhere near OverTone's PTC-2A, in this reviewer's opinion.

However, I do like the Twisthead VS-206. I often use it on bass guitar tracks. The G-Mix series stuff is quite good; especially the Transient Shaper. It is finicky though and best used judiciously. For the money, XBass 4000 is a definite keeper, if you're looking for huge bass with a few twists of some virtual knobs and fledgling mixing experience.

[TMaudio]

They are pretty nice. Just keep in mind they are SE so in case you have and use a fast bounce/render/export option like in Sonar, it will not play nicely at 88.2 and higher sampling rates.

SE, really? I thought they rather look like Synthmaker GUI's... But that wouldn't hinder me to buy one of them. It's more important what's under the hood (GUI)...

Yes SM, sorry. My focus has been on a particular crashing behavior at higher sample rates using fast bounce or render. The plugins included SM and SE types. The GSonique can be very cool, but they do exhibit this behavior.

[Tricky-Loops]

Tests are still going on...

Hands up for the MS Stereophonic Harmonic Generator...especially in combination with the Twisthead! My keyboard is flying away... (positively meant)

I like Pultronic, too, but so far I don't get too warm with it...at least it's one of the better coloration effects...

XBass 4000 + Unisono/Pitch Shifter effects + Delay work great, too...

The Mid-Side Creative Stereophase Filter can't convince me, I rather prefer the Meldaproduction Wobbler...

[Tricky-Loops]

I'm thinking about buying Twisthead, the Stereophonic Harmonic Generator or XBass 4000...

But what I really miss from G-Sonique are manuals. I cannot stress enough how important manuals are. Of course I can adjust the knobs and simply listen to it. But it would be better to know how the controls of the plugin work to get most out of it...

[Compyfox]

Tip from my side:
Take a closer look with VST Plugin Analyser. This reveals with the marketing really does what it's telling you, or if it's plain downright lying in your face.

VST Plugin Analyser helped me understanding Pultronic better. But there are still thing's I'd like to know.

[Tricky-Loops]

Tip from my side:
Take a closer look with VST Plugin Analyser. This reveals with the marketing really does what it's telling you, or if it's plain downright lying in your face.

VST Plugin Analyser helped me understanding Pultronic better. But there are still thing's I'd like to know.

To compare different emulations?

But how can you analyze with it whether a plugin sounds good and how it sounds combined with other plugins? For example the Stereophonic Harmonic Generator sounded really good together with Twisthead, and XBass 4000 on its own didn't make me amazed but combined with a Pitch Shifter Unisono and a Delay it sounded great...

And then there may be plugins which sound great on drums or guitars and very bad on pads or organs...so it depends on the context, too...

[Davias]

I think you can have XBass 4000 for free if you register on primeplugins.com newsletter. I got Xbass 4000 and Cubic Audio Apollo that way (a nice punchy little synth).

[Compyfox]

Yes, that is right. But if there is no manual available, and I really want to know what's "below the hood", I take it for a test ride in the plugin analyser.


Actually, I pretty much take every plugin for a test ride, because I don't trust developers anymore. Certain things jump at you that way more easily.

For example:
As I tested and compared Waves REDD with the Nomad Factory ALL-TECH, I found out that even though the All-Tech is a slight(!) evolution of the Classic/Pop Module of the REDD - it behaves totally different!

This is not mentioned or shown in the manual.


Same with so called acoustic fingerprints of modules running in default. People claimed that the IKM Fairchild is one of the best emulations on the planet. While I definitely do not doubt that this is a good emulation, a closer look at the analyser reveals something else.

Or (as example with Waves again): most modeled analog gear (based on modules from the 50ies to 70ies)... but even with the analog and noise mode on, it has an unholy noise floor of -160dBFS?!



Here I must give praise to Variety of Sound. Most of his plugin manuals feature frequency and THD plots. I wish more developers would do this. This was pretty much standard back in hardware days.

[Tricky-Loops]

Or (as example with Waves again): most modeled analog gear (based on modules from the 50ies to 70ies)... but even with the analog and noise mode on, it has an unholy noise floor of -160dBFS?!

Does this mean I have to use an input of more than 160 dB to make Wave (emulations) plugins sound really analog?

[chokehold]

Yeah, that noise floor thing is a really immense factor when it comes to "realism". Those decades-old original hardware boxes might do a good job compressing stuff, but I'm convinced that a lot of the "warmth" and "charm" of classic records comes from the analog noise that these boxes introduced and conveyed and amplified.

Mix together 32 such tracks (or so) with only -90dB(fs) analog noise floor on each, compress some of them really good... and you got yourself a real noisefest going on.

In contrast, I can slam a whole lotta "emulations" on every possible track of my 64-track project -- yet there's still no significant hiss or rumble or noise or anything going on.

The Waves stuff usually offers you two sorts of analog noise and the possibility to pad it down or cut it completely, very desirable.


Back to topic: I only ever had that G-Sonique Pultec and their Transient thing, Twisthead or what it was called. Hardly ever used the Transient thing because I couldn't really figure out what it did, and that Pultec emulation was more of a tube distortion unit than really an Equalizer. Did have its use, but not really as a Pultec clone.

[Compyfox]

I appreciate the joke, but what I'm trying to aim at is this:


Analog gear, especially old one, wasn't really clean. The engineers had to work with suitable work levels to have the noise drowned in the recorded signal. That is especially the case with tape machines.

Now take for example an EQ module from the 70ies, powered with a PSU (else it wouldn't work). What we should see on the analyser is not only humming noise (modulating noisefloor) due to applied voltage (50Hz or 60Hz), we should also see some footroom noise in general. And nobody can tell me that noise way below -120dB was possible back in the days (50ies and 60ies), if engineers had to battle mostly -85dBFS to -65dBFS (tapes especially).



The new Slate modules have a noise floor of about -140dBFS to -110dBFS - but... these modules are newer and optimized. Everything that clings towards -200dBFS and stays static, is a pure digital device in my opinion.


In the end, it's also a part "guess work". But... we at least see what the heck is going on. And how strong this "heck" is taking place.

[chokehold]

The great thing about having some serious noise floor in your processors is the moderation it brings. It'll have you "dieting" FX and balancing the noise from track to track, make you really consider whether the bass needs another Compressor and EQ or if the hiss from those on the drums and voice are enough.

The negative point being that digital recordings of analog noise are still only digital recordings, they're nowhere near that natural "soft" noise you hear when you listen to a completely analog box, they've got all sorts of "digitalism" and harshness going on. Unfortunately.

[Tricky-Loops]

Yeah, that noise floor thing is a really immense factor when it comes to "realism". Those decades-old original hardware boxes might do a good job compressing stuff, but I'm convinced that a lot of the "warmth" and "charm" of classic records comes from the analog noise that these boxes introduced and conveyed and amplified.

I thought the so-called "warmth" comes from harmonic distortion (via various ways), not (mainly) because of the noise floor... The noise floor of old records isn't that pleasuring, for example when they play music from the 70ies and 80ies too loud on fairground rides, I nearly get headache...

(For musicians visiting funfairs is like torturing...)

[TMaudio]

I think you can have XBass 4000 for free if you register on primeplugins.com newsletter. I got Xbass 4000 and Cubic Audio Apollo that way (a nice punchy little synth).

Why is the XBass 4K download from that site showing up with VirTool.Vbcrypt trojan?

Anybody else notice?

[Brother Charles]

Back to topic: I only ever had that G-Sonique Pultec and their Transient thing, Twisthead or what it was called. Hardly ever used the Transient thing because I couldn't really figure out what it did, and that Pultec emulation was more of a tube distortion unit than really an Equalizer. Did have its use, but not really as a Pultec clone.

+1000
Totally agree.