Using Satin on every channel

[sascha]

I can only give general advice: don't overcook, use your ears, and make pauses when judging critical sources. Make A/B comparisons and try manipulating so subtly that you don't notice the effect much when the plugin's engaged but immediately notice 'something missing' once you switch it off. Play with the eq curves (Rec/repro EQs). Especially switching between NAB & IEC has quite an impact on low-end integrity (NAB creates a pre-tape LF boost). And AES & 'flat' have the most HF 'smear', thus the biggest transient-taming effect. This becomes more dominant when you reduce tape speed and compensate for the roll-off by increasing the 'pre-emphasis' amount.
Instead of just putting it on the master or a sub group, try adding the plugin to multiple tracks, with even less drive and more subtle settings. Again, A/B-compare.

[Googly Smythe]

I can only give general advice: don't overcook, use your ears, and make pauses when judging critical sources. Make A/B comparisons and try manipulating so subtly that you don't notice the effect much when the plugin's engaged but immediately notice 'something missing' once you switch it off....
... Instead of just putting it on the master or a sub group, try adding the plugin to multiple tracks...
... Again, A/B-compare.

Good advice for any plugin!

[clangorous]

set each track to -18 peak.

Wow, that would give you VERY different perceived volume levels between tracks... I'd strongly recommend against that.

When levelling, rather go for a consistent RMS level. The odd peak breaking out here and there won't matter, as long as the overall perceived RMS stays fairly consistent.

Thanks Rob for this suggestion. I guess when I even out the level with the clip gain it compensates for this concern? I do recheck the level after adjusting clip gain, especially if the faders are a little whacky (usually its fine).

My goal is to have plenty of headroom and most of the mixers I know don't use RMS. But since I reduce the peaks with clip gain I could try using RMS to see if it helps reduce fader fiddling

[Andrew John]

I can only give general advice

Thank you Sascha, i really appreciate you taking the time out to explain this. I love the sound of Satin, but i do find all the options in the settings quite daunting. I want to get the best sound possible out of the plugin, but my technical knowledge of producing in the box still has some way to go so i am a bit cautious. Thanks again, it is really helpful.

[sascha]

Don't rush, just take your time. Learning how to mix and squeeze the best out of a DAW environment is like learning how to play an instrument (minus muscle memory). Doesn't happen over night

[Andrew John]

Thank you man, that is good, sagely advice! It is most kind of you to share.

[Andrew John]

set each track to -18 peak.

Wow, that would give you VERY different perceived volume levels between tracks... I'd strongly recommend against that.

When levelling, rather go for a consistent RMS level. The odd peak breaking out here and there won't matter, as long as the overall perceived RMS stays fairly consistent.

Could you suggest a practical method to deliver a consistent RMS level Rob when using Satin?

Thanks.

[#rob]

The idea of "RMS" is to provide a fairly consistent representation of a signal with dynamic and jumpy Peak levels. Peak level meters would be all over the place all the time with a dynamic signal, making it hard to calibrate an input sensibly.

So RMS levels actually already ARE the consistent version of Peak levels.

If your RMS levels change too much for your taste, you need to even the Peak levels. The less dynamic range (especially sudden changes) your signal's Peak levels have, the more consistent its RMS level is going to be. In other words, you'd have to compress/limit/clip your signal quite a bit in order to keep its RMS value consistent, make it "flat".

Sometimes that can be desirable, sometimes it's not. Either way, you'd have to control the RMS of your signal before it goes into Satin, since Satin does affect the dynamics but doesn't have an "input compressor" as such that could squash a dynamic signal into a consistent one.

Lastly, please let me mention this very important point: don't obsess about it.

Satin will operate best if the input RMS level is around -18 dBfs, but that doesn't mean it's going to sound like total garbage if you go into it at -15 dBfs RMS or -24 dBfs RMS.

If your input signal is consistently very loud, Satin will have less headroom to use for dynamic and spectral changes. You'd have to use less drive before things start clipping, basically robbing yourself of the full range of flexibility the input drive knob could give you. The same goes for a signal that is mostly very quiet and just has occasional very loud peaks.

And if your input signal is consistently too quiet, you'd probably boost it into Satin with the input drive, which already affects the transient response and dynamics of your signal. And if you have to boost a lot "just to get the volume up", your signal would already be heavily processed from the input drive before you even start playing with the other parameters, which could sound less desirable/more dirty than if you already had the level up before Satin and didn't have to drive its input gain as much.

So the -18 dBfs RMS suggestion is just what it is, a suggestion. If you like what going into Satin with a louder or quieter signal does, then by all means, don't be afraid of breaking anything.

[Andrew John]

Haha! Brilliant advice Rob! Thank you so much! You are right I was slightly obsessing but with the best of intentions, just trying to get the best out of the plugin.

Thanks again for your help!