NEW MINDSET: Best sound possible EFFICIENTLY

[GRUMP]

Complexity

What is branded as UAD may as well be bx, Sonnox or whatever.?

My materials always again react differently on different FX - as do I myself. Just tested around Saturation Plugs and ended up liking the Cubase stuff most for my purposes. Softube Harmonics yesterday - try the Transf(ormer) mode. Pretty awesome. Never got "that" (lowend) with Acusticas I had nearly forgotten about them. Shame on me :/

But Acustica is permanently on, lately lots of N4. Cupwise CupTone. Timp ColorBoost. Very "efficient".

Convolution [...] can bring you lots of power. Reflections. Tonal Balance. Whatever. Patience and analytic experimentation required.

Analog Obsession FetDrive + FetSnap are the way I make things going, too.

But honestly ... quality is fluid. No day is like the other as are the waveforms of the synths. I just generated sawtooth wavetables of all my synths and you wouldn´t believe how different they are. Taking an other one may be a solution, too. I´d recommend to try the MSoundfactory Generators if you haven´t done that yet. You can always work with harmonics (and much more) if you feel so and the overall quality of the OSC/generators is out of touch.

I have changed my mind, too. I like my well selected plugins but you really have to get familar with them. That is a time consuming passion. And at the end of the day knowledge - even if it is just generated from experiences you have collected - is quiet sure most effective and efficient when it´s about reaching your targets.

"Overall sound" is my passion btw.

[Cancel Culture Club]

Complexity

What is branded as UAD may as well be bx, Sonnox or whatever.?

My materials always again react differently on different FX - as do I myself. Just tested around Saturation Plugs and ended up liking the Cubase stuff most for my purposes. Softube Harmonics yesterday - try the Transf(ormer) mode. Pretty awesome. Never got "that" (lowend) with Acusticas I had nearly forgotten about them. Shame on me :/

But Acustica is permanently on, lately lots of N4. Cupwise CupTone. Timp ColorBoost. Very "efficient".

Convolution [...] can bring you lots of power. Reflections. Tonal Balance. Whatever. Patience and analytic experimentation required.

Analog Obsession FetDrive + FetSnap are the way I make things going, too.

But honestly ... quality is fluid. No day is like the other as are the waveforms of the synths. I just generated sawtooth wavetables of all my synths and you wouldn´t believe how different they are. Taking an other one may be a solution, too. I´d recommend to try the MSoundfactory Generators if you haven´t done that yet. You can always work with harmonics (and much more) if you feel so and the overall quality of the OSC/generators is out of touch.

I have changed my mind, too. I like my well selected plugins but you really have to get familar with them. That is a time consuming passion. And at the end of the day knowledge - even if it is just generated from experiences you have collected - is quiet sure most effective and efficient when it´s about reaching your targets.

"Overall sound" is my passion btw.

Unfortuately, most of your research will be for not, because it will most likely be lost in translation due to those tiny little things called ear buds and it's bigger brother the iphone.

Suggestion, start with great source material and work backwards...

[Passing Bye]

If you make crappy music, it doesn't mater what you use to polish it, it will stay crap, just polished one.

[10bd01]

Hi. I've been into electronic music production for 20 years and I've tryed all the best plugins possible, searching for the best sound quality, best compressors, the best analog emulations, the best limiters, etc. I got at a time that I stopped making music just because of this never ending search. And after 20 years I got at some conclusions:

The best is a subjective question, but the best sound is the one that works best for the song.

Everything else is just a tool to get you there, it doesn't matter the brand of hammer, it's the finished house that people subjectively decide upon.

Even though the best is a subjective question, the make of hammer does matter - the quality of the hammer can affect the result or the amount of time it would take to get to the same result.

The "tools don't matter" platitude is b.s. IMO - if tools and brands didn't matter we wouldn't have professional mixing engineers with racks filled with tens of thousands of dollars of them. Everyone would be mixing with stock plugins and would be saving thousands because it wouldn't matter. Also, they would be using stock plugins from 2002 because why improve those stock plugins or upgrade if the tool doesn't matter?

They buy these tools precisely because they do matter. It may matter in a different way to each individual, but it does matter. The OP is compelled to post precisely because the make of the tool matters to them and is having a negative impact on their workflow.

[Eauson]

So...how about Airwindows?

Airwindows and Acustica is a very good combination.

Airwindows and Analog obsessions are really good, for me anyway
Airwindows effects are interesting because they can do things which they possibly weren’t designed for
An example is MV, top slider under 26000, next to full and output/wet dry to taste can result in a thicker sound
Just above 26000 +up can create some crazy effects in terms of glitch

This is just my opinion & tbh my opinion is best taken with a bit of Danish Blue

[Cancel Culture Club]

Hi. I've been into electronic music production for 20 years and I've tryed all the best plugins possible, searching for the best sound quality, best compressors, the best analog emulations, the best limiters, etc. I got at a time that I stopped making music just because of this never ending search. And after 20 years I got at some conclusions:

The best is a subjective question, but the best sound is the one that works best for the song.

Everything else is just a tool to get you there, it doesn't matter the brand of hammer, it's the finished house that people subjectively decide upon.

Even though the best is a subjective question, the make of hammer does matter - the quality of the hammer can affect the result or the amount of time it would take to get to the same result.

The "tools don't matter" platitude is b.s. IMO - if tools and brands didn't matter we wouldn't have professional mixing engineers with racks filled with tens of thousands of dollars of them. Everyone would be mixing with stock plugins and would be saving thousands because it wouldn't matter. Also, they would be using stock plugins from 2002 because why improve those stock plugins or upgrade if the tool doesn't matter?

They buy these tools precisely because they do matter. It may matter in a different way to each individual, but it does matter. The OP is compelled to post precisely because the make of the tool matters to them and is having a negative impact on their workflow.[/i][/i]

Then keep searching for your golden hammer that will magically make your music delicious...

Tools can help you, give assistance, make things convenient and even inspire you. But, there are no required brands and no specific rules on how they are used that will guarantee great results. It will always be who is wielding the hammer and their experience and taste.

Just for your information, technology has come a long way and pretty much all high quality plugins do about the same thing. They're all pretty darn good, even your stock plugins. Maybe spend less time comparing tools and try comparing musical achievements instead?

[evilantal]

Hi. I've been into electronic music production for 20 years and I've tryed all the best plugins possible, searching for the best sound quality, best compressors, the best analog emulations, the best limiters, etc. I got at a time that I stopped making music just because of this never ending search. And after 20 years I got at some conclusions:

The best is a subjective question, but the best sound is the one that works best for the song.

Everything else is just a tool to get you there, it doesn't matter the brand of hammer, it's the finished house that people subjectively decide upon.

Even though the best is a subjective question, the make of hammer does matter - the quality of the hammer can affect the result or the amount of time it would take to get to the same result.

The "tools don't matter" platitude is b.s. IMO - if tools and brands didn't matter we wouldn't have professional mixing engineers with racks filled with tens of thousands of dollars of them. Everyone would be mixing with stock plugins and would be saving thousands because it wouldn't matter. Also, they would be using stock plugins from 2002 because why improve those stock plugins or upgrade if the tool doesn't matter?

They buy these tools precisely because they do matter. It may matter in a different way to each individual, but it does matter. The OP is compelled to post precisely because the make of the tool matters to them and is having a negative impact on their workflow.[/i][/i]

Then keep searching for your golden hammer that will magically make your music delicious...

Tools can help you, give assistance, make things convenient and even inspire you. But, there are no required brands and no specific rules on how they are used that will guarantee great results. It will always be who is wielding the hammer and their experience and taste.

Just for your information, technology has come a long way and pretty much all high quality plugins do about the same thing. They're all pretty darn good, even your stock plugins. Maybe spend less time comparing tools and try comparing musical achievements instead?

I think your missing the point a bit....

The supposition is not that better tools can make anyone produce better music/mix.

Rather that a really talented person can make better sounding music with stock tools than a less talented person, but that that same talented person could make even better sounding music with better tools than with stock tools.

So, great tools enhance the quality (or speed) of output given talent.

[Cancel Culture Club]

I think your missing the point a bit....

The supposition is not that better tools can make anyone produce better music/mix.

Rather that a really talented person can make better sounding music with stock tools than a less talented person, but that that same talented person could make even better sounding music with better tools than with stock tools.

So, great tools enhance the quality (or speed) of output given talent.

Please continue on your epic adventure for the golden hammer, and do report back to us when you find it, so we all can benefit from it, and make better music because of it. We're all starving for such a tool to reach a level that we could never reach otherwise. But, maybe someday!

Alas adventure, we await your return!

Hint: The quality of content over shadows the quality of fidelity almost every time.

[10bd01]

Then keep searching for your golden hammer that will magically make your music delicious...

Tools can help you, give assistance, make things convenient and even inspire you. But, there are no required brands and no specific rules on how they are used that will guarantee great results. It will always be who is wielding the hammer and their experience and taste.

Just for your information, technology has come a long way and pretty much all high quality plugins do about the same thing. They're all pretty darn good, even your stock plugins. Maybe spend less time comparing tools and try comparing musical achievements instead?

I said tools matter, I never suggested searching for a golden hammer that will make anyone's music delicious. Nice job on the straw man, though, it's now clearly been destroyed.

Thanks for telling me it's the one wielding the hammer that ultimately makes the difference. I totally thought that hammers hammered things themselves, but you've enlightened me.

Also, thanks for educating me from your apparent position of higher knowledge then mine that "technology has come a long way". I had no idea! I guess maybe I should look into a replacement for my rotary phone.

Maybe I'll do whatever I determine is best for me to do rather than what you apparently think it's best for me to do. After watching you defeat a straw man and then embarrass yourself by acting like an enlightened sage welcoming me to the new millennium I'm not really interested in what you're advice is for me. That, and you don't know me so are completely unqualified to advise me on jack, despite your pretensions at doing so.

Tools matter, period. You said they don't matter. You're wrong. You're right that the person using the tool will ultimately determine if it's put to good use, but then who are you arguing with? I feel the same way.

By all means, build your house and use a rock as a hammer. A rock, too, can be a hammer and hammer things in. And yes, a master builder could build an amazing house hammering with a rock. But find a master builder and you'll invariably find him with a hammer made by a master hammer-smith. Why? Because tools matter and that hammer - that was crafted with mastery - will work better than the rock. These are facts, sorry if they don't jive with comes off to me as your overly romantic vision of the craftsman.

Tools matter. You're platitudes about them not mattering don't change that. Nor does arguing with ghosts.

[10bd01]

I think your missing the point a bit....

The supposition is not that better tools can make anyone produce better music/mix.

Rather that a really talented person can make better sounding music with stock tools than a less talented person, but that that same talented person could make even better sounding music with better tools than with stock tools.

So, great tools enhance the quality (or speed) of output given talent.

Well said, you get it exactly.

[GRUMP]

Unfortuately, most of your research will be for not, because it will most likely be lost in translation due to those tiny little things called ear buds and it's bigger brother the iphone.

Suggestion, start with great source material and work backwards...

"Lost in translation" hits the point here. I don´t get it :/

And I think that we all will understand "work backwards" differently. Probably. What exactly do you mean?

If you refer to what I´d call "reengineering" - learning from others is included in "research". But this method is limited to available sources - and those are not always an open book like a VA synt (samples materials, wavetables, ...). And despite of some major reservations like a too narrow focus for effective learning this method underestimates the importance of experience with the available options. It seems in so far as if we´d have a completely different understanding of a promising learning process.?

[ScrLk]

Could bad tools slow down learning?

[Cancel Culture Club]

Could bad tools slow down learning?

Not as much as the person wielding it, but I'm sure they'd be smart enough to find one that works.

[10bd01]

Could bad tools slow down learning?

Yes. I've seen threads on GS displaying analyses of plugins that are not boosting and cutting where they say they are. It's difficult to learn correctly when you're given false information.

But sure, "tools don't matter" - pure brilliance! /sarcasm

[Cancel Culture Club]

Could bad tools slow down learning?

Yes. I've seen threads on GS displaying analyses of plugins that are not boosting and cutting where they say they are. It's difficult to learn correctly when you're given false information.

But sure, "tools don't matter" - pure brilliance! /sarcasm

If you used your ears you wouldn't need to rely on your eyes to tell you what you hear. But, you can always use a scope since you're so technically detailed about it.

I'm pretty sure it's not bad plugins that is holding back all the bad musicians, but that's just a guess...