Slate VCC alternatives 2024?

[Burillo]

I wonder if any developer has managed to emulate crosstalk ? It seems to me that crosstalk would add some of the missing mojo we associate with summing.

Studio One Mix FX emulates crosstalk. It can do this because it is integrated into the mix engine itself.

Burillo is absolutely wrong, as least as far as Studio One Mix FX are concerned, as this video clearly demonstrates. The non-linear summing, as well as crosstalk, is profiled in the video below:

okay, sure, crosstalk is one feature none of the others have (SKNote's console had crosstalk as well, but IMO it was weird because it sent all channel into all other channels, although from video it's difficult to ascertain if Studio One MixFX does this too, as opposed to cross-talking neighbouring channels), but there's still no "non-linear summing" or "replacing the mix engine" involved (which was my initial point that I'm not "absolutely wrong" about).

most other plugins will have crosstalk but what they mean by crosstalk is stereo bus crosstalk, not inter-channel crosstalk. so, they'll bleed left into right when using "bus" plugin.

[jamcat]

okay, sure, crosstalk is one feature none of the others have (SKNote's console had crosstalk as well, but IMO it was weird because it sent all channel into all other channels, although from video it's difficult to ascertain if Studio One MixFX does this too, as opposed to cross-talking neighbouring channels)

For the free Console Shaper, the crosstalk is not proximity-aware. But for the CTC-1 and Retro Mix Legends (Brit Console, Alpine Desk, Porta-Cassette), it is. So I’d recommend using one of those. Personally, I use the Brit Console in Vintage mode, which models the SSL 4000. CTC-1 models a Neve 80 series, EMI REDD desk, and some PreSonus homebrew “hi-fi” console. The free Console Shaper is like a light version of that one.

but there's still no "non-linear summing" or "replacing the mix engine" involved (which was my initial point that I'm not "absolutely wrong" about).

Mix FX does this. You can hear the non-linear effects which affects the balance of the mix and each individual track differently as Joe turns up the Drive. If it was merely mixbuss saturation, the entire mix would react as one.

[4damind]

Perhaps another approach would be to use a channel strip emulation instead of console emulation? There is more choice and the plugins often replace other plugins.

I use VCC more out of habit and then only on groups (mostly the Trident emulation). But I couldn't tell for sure if there is a significant difference. That's why I wouldn't really want to use any of these emulations at the moment. Lindell 80 or other channel strips have probably a bigger effect.

[Burillo]

but there's still no "non-linear summing" or "replacing the mix engine" involved (which was my initial point that I'm not "absolutely wrong" about).

Mix FX does this. You can hear the non-linear effects which affects the balance of the mix and each individual track differently as Joe turns up the Drive. If it was merely mixbuss saturation, the entire mix would react as one.

I did not say it is "merely mixbuss saturation", I said it isn't replacing summing/mixing engine. what you describe is achieved by driving each individual channel (which is what e.g. Satson also does when you engage group drive knob). there's no "magical summing" going on there, summing is still digital, with added saturation from 1) individual channel drive, and 2) bus drive.

[Trancit]

Don´t beat me, but how does "non linear summing" sound vs. "digital summing"??

[HoRNet]

Hi sorry I don't want promote our products but simply partecipate since I have quite some knowledge of how analog signal summing and digital summing work.

If you take analog summing at its basics you can do it passively, using only resistors.

Say you have 10 audio signal, you take 10 resistors of the same value and connect one end to the output of your signal source, the other end to any other end of all the other resistors, creating one common sum point. that point is the output of your sum. Now if the resistor have the same values all the signals has the same weight, if you change any of the values the weight of the signal changes (making it louder or quieter) this is what a fader does in an analog console.

Passive summing is perfectly clean and linear given the fact that also the cheapest resistor offer the same electrical resistance at every frequency (the only added artefact is a little hiss). The problem with passive summing is that for large count of channels you get a very low output level so an amplifier to get the signal back to a workable level is needed, and this is the point where non linear processing is added (read harmonics) simply because any amplifier we make in real world cannot have a linear transfer function between input and output but after certain point (that changes with technology used and design choices) the output signal tends to asymptotically reach the supply voltage of the amplifier (hence the "soft clip" behaviour)

Now the trick in the analog world is to use high voltage supply for the amplifiers, audio signal rarely exceed a few volts, if you use 24 volts as your supply it's nearly impossible to reach it with your audio signal, this gives you a high headroom before distortion and a cleaner signal but a high energy consumption in return (this is the technique used in mixing consoles)

Crosstalk is an entirely different subject and it's not determined by the technology of the console, but by its design. When an alternate current flows through a conductor (our audio signal is alternate current) it creates a small electromagnetic field (the priceable used by the transformer BTW) so if you put the wires of two different channels too close each other the electromagnetic field created by one can influence the other and viceversa. In hi end mixing console crosstalk is practically null.

Now how you can simulate all this in digital? To simulate the mixing non linearities you don't have to mangle with the DAW mixing engine since it behaves like an analog passive summing but without the losses. So it's simply enough to simulate the channel amplifiers and the bus amplifiers (in Neve's consoles for example they are actually the same amplifiers, the 1081 module). A nonlinear processor in every channel and a non linear processor in every bus and you have your console simulated.

Crosstalk it's another matter since you need to take into consideration channel proximity for which you need to have access to the summing bus (or at least some common exchange are between channel amplifiers emulations to feed part of the signal form one into another) but as far as I know if you are simulating something like an SSL 4000 crass talk is almost non existent, the frequency response and transient response of the bus amplifiers has far more effect on the sound than crosstalk.

I hope to have contributed something to the discussion.

Saverio
HoRNet Plugins

[Synthman2000]

Someone is wrong on the internet.Reading this for someone wanting to learn will know less than when they started.

So much wrong, it's not actually funny.

[Trancit]

Hi sorry I don't want promote our products but simply partecipate since I have quite some knowledge of how analog signal summing and digital summing work.

...

Hi Saverio and thx for taking the time writing all this stuff!

I am not entirely sure having understood everything properly though...

Am I right to take out of your post that the often mentioned non-linear summing is at the very end nothing else than saturation because of the non-linear behaviour of the amplifiers??

[Uncle E]

It's anything that colors the signal. Saturation, phase, capacitance, resonance, feedback, etc.

[HoRNet]

Hi sorry I don't want promote our products but simply partecipate since I have quite some knowledge of how analog signal summing and digital summing work.

...

Hi Saverio and thx for taking the time writing all this stuff!

I am not entirely sure having understood everything properly though...

Am I right to take out of your post that the often mentioned non-linear summing is at the very end nothing else than saturation because of the non-linear behaviour of the amplifiers??

Exactly if you remove the amplifier out of the equation in the analog world you get a perfectly linear summing (although with a drop in signal level which is proportional to the number of channels summed, so an amplifier is required to keep the levels steady) btw on the market you can find passive summing units that you can pair with our own pre at the output to have different flavours of saturation (and this is exactly like adding a non linear plugin as first inter in the master bus of your DAW)

Saverio

[Trancit]

Hi sorry I don't want promote our products but simply partecipate since I have quite some knowledge of how analog signal summing and digital summing work.

...

Hi Saverio and thx for taking the time writing all this stuff!

I am not entirely sure having understood everything properly though...

Am I right to take out of your post that the often mentioned non-linear summing is at the very end nothing else than saturation because of the non-linear behaviour of the amplifiers??

Exactly if you remove the amplifier out of the equation in the analog world you get a perfectly linear summing (although with a drop in signal level which is proportional to the number of channels summed, so an amplifier is required to keep the levels steady) btw on the market you can find passive summing units that you can pair with our own pre at the output to have different flavours of saturation (and this is exactly like adding a non linear plugin as first inter in the master bus of your DAW)

Saverio

Thx for confirming...

Tbh, I never understood this "analog mixing" hype here and everywhere...
My own tests gave me the result that it´s 99% saturation what I got from "speciallized" plugins and not much else...
But I was always unsure because of the huge talk around this topic where I always asked myself how can there be so much talk about a bit of saturation and if I miss something...
I analyzed the CTC-1 (the homemade one...) from Presonus a bit deeper and found that it does a huge bumb around 30-50Hz in the lowend apart from the saturation and crosstalk but if you are not so into crosstalk that´s really it...
I mean nothing easier than adding an EQ bumb at around 40Hz and add a saturator to a channel and eventually the bus... how can there be so much noise around such simple tasks with companies asking for quite some money to replicate this "behaviour"...

Lot´s of marketing nonsense and credulous people who are looking for "magic" shit-to-gold converters it seems...

[Burillo]

the point is in workflow. of course no plugin is anything you can't replicate given enough time and effort, but with MixFX specifically it's more about you not having to think about it and just benefitting from it by default, rather than it being something unique and inimitable.

[Uncle E]

Lot´s of marketing nonsense and credulous people who are looking for "magic" shit-to-gold converters it seems...

You’re benefiting from coming in at the tail end of this. There are now many ways to get a big studio sound ITB but that wasn’t the case when the summing mixer craze was happening, and we probably wouldn’t have all these great tools now if people hadn’t gotten so crazy about it 10 years ago.

[Trancit]

Lot´s of marketing nonsense and credulous people who are looking for "magic" shit-to-gold converters it seems...

You’re benefiting from coming in at the tail end of this. There are now many ways to get a big studio sound ITB but that wasn’t the case when the summing mixer craze was happening, and we probably wouldn’t have all these great tools now if people hadn’t gotten so crazy about it 10 years ago.

You don´t get the point...
I accept the workflow/speed argument from Burillo but apart from the MixFX I absolutely don´t mind "all of these great tools" if they at the end do nothing else than what everybody has in his arsenal already anyway...

Presonus MixFX is a different story as it cannot be integrated better and easier to use with a complete featureset of what a real console may does different...

I can even understand people liking complete channel strips because of the modelled EQ curves/ comps/preamps and having everything in one (often nice) GUI...
But all of these "Waves Non-linear summing" type of plugins or the topic plugin VCC, that´s beyond my logic if a simple saturator and perhaps a bit of EQ does already 99% of the job ...
...anyway, who likes it... well ...different people, different taste...

[Uncle E]

You’re not simulating MixFX, NLS, or VCC with a single EQ and saturator. You can do it on a single channel but not on a complete mix. Hornet’s point was about hardware summing mixers, not these plugins or complete consoles.

We can have a detailed discussion about how to emulate a big studio sound ITB but you have to be open-minded about it. Some things will seem like no big deal but they actually are a big deal once they’re all put together.