Best channel strip plugin that's NOT emulation of SSL, Neve, API, Amek, etc.

[BONES]

I just realised this does not contribute anything here...

Then perhaps you quoted the wrong part of my post, you dumbasss?

[ghettosynth]

Hi,
Did anyone mentioned OSL Side Effects ? It's a very nice eq + comp + panning + saturation which is sold for a fair price...
https://oblivionsoundlab.com/product/osl-side-effects/

I missed that one. My god there are so many small vendors out there trying to make a living selling plugins.

[ralfrobert]

Side effects looks really nice. I just thought of another one that is modular and helps me a lot, as it (a) saves time and (b) sounds great: PSP InfiniStrip (Wind at the moment).

Here is a video:



If you do some research, you will find criticism on missing oversampling and similar things. These have been merely academic problems the time i used the plugin. Anonther thing is the interface which is non-scalable at the moment, so it depends on your setup / requirements if it is comfortable to use.

Highly recommended from my side, though.

EDIT: I think the OP asked about a super-easy solution with fixed processors. InfiniStrip can be used this way. I have defined a handful of "custom channel strips" which I apply -- e.g. to bass, male / female voice, guitars etc. To be honest, these are not far from the presets delivered with the strip.

[martinjuenke]

I just realised this does not contribute anything here...

Then perhaps you quoted the wrong part of my post, you dumbasss?

Super cool and professional communication behaviour.
Ever thought about a second career as human resources coach?

[BONES]

Pal, I'm just following the standard you set. If you don't see that, it simply proves my point.

[jens]

Says you, pal. It seems to do all the requisite shit to me.

To you, and that is the problem. I mentioned Dunning Kruger before and you denied it, yet you keep adding evidence.

This leads to nothing for you, seriously. The whole topic of this thread is not for you and you don't get it and the more you post the more people start making fun of you and the more upset you get.

By now you are beyond the point where any further post from you could improve this situation you got yourself in somehow.

[excuse me please]

Never mixed with strips. Weird enough I suddenly get the urge to throw DD on my channels

[jancivil]

---
is Neutron 3 a channel strip
sounds fantastic

[jens]

You could argue it is, as it has all the ingredients for it, or you could argue it isn't, as it is far from being a single-page affair. The latter viewpoint would however also rule out a few of the others mentioned here. (Even the Flux Evo Channel I praised here isn't actually truly single-page)

[jasonekratz]

This is a good example of what I mean - I don't parallel/layers sounds, I find one sound that does the job. If it needs any nicerizing then, again, it's probably not the right sound and I'll find something better for the job.

It's not a phase!!! It's a continuum. You don't stop your sound design to start mixing, you do both from one end of the process to the other. I don't even think of mastering as a separate process any more because if you render out a mix to master, it restricts what you can do far too much. e.g. If something you do while mastering to lift your mix makes the hi-hats too prominent, for example, you'll tend not to do it so I prefer to do most of my mastering while I am still mixing. For me, from the time I first put an idea down into my host, I am mixing and that doesn't stop until the song is finished and ready for release.

I keep reading this stuff and wonder why you keep arguing (not to mention why people keep counter-arguing). If you found something that works for you then keep doing it. But the whole idea of a channel strip, which is what this thread is about (the best one that isnt an emulation), has nothing to do with your personal mixing preferences or workflow. The fact that you want to keep tweaking all over the place while working on a song is just a workflow and frankly doesn't sound any better to me than getting stuff down first then tweaking via a channel strip. Either way you're still tweaking the sound and you're not saving any time or anything else doing it your way. And honestly its laughable that people have been doing it the "regular" way for decades and decades and you're here arguing that it's wrong and your way is better.

[plexuss]

This is not a channel strip.

Says you, pal. It seems to do all the requisite shit to me.

It is not a channel strip.

[vurt]

I keep reading this stuff and wonder why you keep arguing (not to mention why people keep counter-arguing).

you must be new here...

[jancivil]

"You don't stop your sound design to start mixing, you do both from one end of the process to the other.[...]

I keep reading this stuff and wonder why you keep arguing (not to mention why people keep counter-arguing)

that's one way to look at it, but it to me this bit is more about a discussion.
I agree with that approach, if soneone else doesn't think like that that's fine. Some people are kind of testy when they present, sometimes it's way over-the-top.

EG: "The fact that you want to keep tweaking all over the place while working on a song is just a workflow and frankly doesn't sound any better to me than getting stuff down first then tweaking via a channel strip." Both may be seen as a bit argumentative, but there's no great reason to see either as more than 'well here's what I think'.

That said: "honestly its laughable that people have been doing it the "regular" way for decades and decades and you're here arguing that it's wrong and your way is better." "laughable"? but fine, I'm not tone police, just sayin', didja wonder about why you were counter-arguing.
I didn't know using a channel strip was 'the regular way', and couldn't conceivably care any less about that.

My personal internal take on the topic is 'that isn't very important to me' but if I had to express that every time I would bore myself and be majorly wasting time, let alone everybody else that does have interest.
I recently trotted out something, Neutron 3 Essentials, which does three or four things in one plugin, and it worked a treat. Typically I don't use a 'gooderizer', and do nothing on the master bus but maybe overload protection, but approach everything very discretely. BUT the exciter in this has aspects my usual tool doesn't, and I like what it imparts in the EQ so, I can do something I wasn't predisposed particularly to look for, in one plugin.

[ralfrobert]

One ego against the other, nothing really new here, so I am out. I hope this egothread will wither away soon.

[_leras]

This is a good example of what I mean - I don't parallel/layers sounds, I find one sound that does the job. If it needs any nicerizing then, again, it's probably not the right sound and I'll find something better for the job.

That process takes me six months, minimum, it is absolutely not something I could even contemplate doing "in one go". And during that time I am likely to replace several parts, change patches in other parts and keep adding and removing things as necessary. There is never a point in the process when I think "I am done with that, I will now start doing this".

How can you polish a sound when you don't have your mix right? It simply wouldn't work. You get your mix right, then you tweak a part to give it that polish you want, then you readjust your mix if you need to. It's a back and forth process, you can't rule a line under one thing and the start another without seriously compromising your result.

How many effects, in total, do you reckon you use in an average piece? I just had a look at the live version of UNDERGROUND, from our last album, which is about the most complicated song we do. There are 8 parts and I've used a total of four effects on the whole song - two on the drums and two in the master channel. That's it, including EQ and all the rest of it.

That's just a perceptual thing. Louder is better but we all learn that everything can't be loud and I think that if you took the time to reassess the way you work, you might find, as I have, that you can get the result you are after without having to endlessly pile on the effects. It becomes counter-productive a lot more easily than you probably realise.

Give me a sound, any sound, and I think I can make it better. At least I have the belief. Usually I think I can add something - but as we all know, sometimes you can strip back to the original sound and prefer it.

I guess everyone has a process that is different. I also can spend multiple sessions starting a track, adding ideas, arranging, rearranging, adding parts. And I guess the further through this the more I'll have started to polish sounds...
BUT.
At some stage, I'll say ok the arrangement is fine. Then I will prep ready for mixing, and try to make time for a mixing only session. Results of a mix will vary from day to day - so I think I just need to commit and go for it!

I do understand what you are saying about processing tracks and ensuring they fit into a mix, adn that is can be a back and forth process. However, I do think the back and forth/polish a sound is still before mixing, mainly as you are going to have an idea of how you want the part to be - and of course you can easily cut any frequencies you don't want when mixing. (arrangement is anyway quite the key thing here).

How many fx do I use in a mix. Probably a lot. Many of them pretty subtle if not part of 'the sound'. Do they all add something? Hopefully - even if just s tiny amount.
I def. use more than 4 on just my main bus and main parallel 'beef' channel that I mix in to taste. I sometimes have more than 5 delays or reverbs sends and they will all have eq before and maybe eq and compression after.
(this is a topic that could have it's own thread, there are many approaches)

Totally agree you, can't just keep piling things on. You need to mix with headroom, makes space for different things, have dynamics between parts and even between notes. BUT I do believe you can make things sound richer, more impactful, sit in a better space. Do you need to make everything perfect no. Probably I even can't. but I do enjoy trying!

Ok, Bones, now you owe me a beer for all this mixing advice!!