Eventide SP2016 vs Slate FG-2016
-
- KVRian
- 1082 posts since 24 Apr, 2008 from USA
How close is FG-2016 algorithm in Slate VerbSuite Classics to Eventide SP2016 ?
Is it worth getting Slate VerbSuite mostly for FG-2016 ( and also have other reverbs ) or better just get Eventide SP2016 plugin ?
Is it worth getting Slate VerbSuite mostly for FG-2016 ( and also have other reverbs ) or better just get Eventide SP2016 plugin ?
Main Computer Specs: MacBook M1 Max, 32GB, 4TB, Cubase 13.
-
- KVRist
- 341 posts since 30 Nov, 2008
avoid slute digital
- KVRAF
- 25042 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
I have no experience with (and no interest in) this Slate thing, however you should keep in mind that:
a) the Slate one is a convolution reverb, not algorithmic, so there is no way it coudl faithfully emulate the Eventide reverb, at best it can mimic certain presets of it
a) the original hardware algorithms were designed/developed by Tony Agnello, who is still at the helm of Eventide (together with Richard Factor) and who is outspoken in regards to wanting their emulation-plugins to be highly accurate (which is why they re-did a few of their older emulations, including this one).
c) all Slate plugins require a dongle, Eventide does not
So if you really have a keen interest in the Eventide reverb, I do not see why you would even just look at that Slate thing...
a) the Slate one is a convolution reverb, not algorithmic, so there is no way it coudl faithfully emulate the Eventide reverb, at best it can mimic certain presets of it
a) the original hardware algorithms were designed/developed by Tony Agnello, who is still at the helm of Eventide (together with Richard Factor) and who is outspoken in regards to wanting their emulation-plugins to be highly accurate (which is why they re-did a few of their older emulations, including this one).
c) all Slate plugins require a dongle, Eventide does not
So if you really have a keen interest in the Eventide reverb, I do not see why you would even just look at that Slate thing...
- KVRAF
- 2069 posts since 8 Feb, 2013 from Switzerland
Slate Digital VerbSuite Classics makes use of the Fusion-IR technology by LiquidSonics which is capable to capture modulation. But VerbSuite has a limited, like Jens mentioned, parameter set. You get more or less the hardware revs' presets as they are. If there's a good algorithmic hw emu in software available then it's the one I prefer.
-
Winstontaneous Winstontaneous https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=98336
- KVRAF
- 2598 posts since 15 Feb, 2006 from Another Green World
The SP2016 algorithms don’t use modulation, so I imagine they would be considerably easier to model with convolution. The Eventide plugin is one of my favorite reverbs for drums & percussion.
Does the Slate version model the Position parameter accurately? To me that is the most important control, it affects not just front to back depth but (subtly) the width of stereo soundfield (to my ears).
Does the Slate version model the Position parameter accurately? To me that is the most important control, it affects not just front to back depth but (subtly) the width of stereo soundfield (to my ears).
-
- KVRAF
- 2270 posts since 30 Aug, 2004 from Lancaster, UK
Agreeing on the position parameter. I like the SP2016 on vocals, mainly because of this feature.Winstontaneous wrote: Thu Feb 17, 2022 4:54 am The SP2016 algorithms don’t use modulation, so I imagine they would be considerably easier to model with convolution. The Eventide plugin is one of my favorite reverbs for drums & percussion.
Does the Slate version model the Position parameter accurately? To me that is the most important control, it affects not just front to back depth but (subtly) the width of stereo soundfield (to my ears).
Thu Oct 01, 2020 1:15 pm Passing Bye wrote:
"look at SparkySpark's post 4 posts up, let that sink in for a moment"
Go MuLab!
"look at SparkySpark's post 4 posts up, let that sink in for a moment"
Go MuLab!
