Any way I can mimic a 90's effects rack?

[Alyctro]

I really love the Tim P Focus, which is a Focusrite Trackmaster for a great compressor from that era.

The Focusrite Trakmaster was introduced in 2001, so pretty much impossible to find in a 90's effects rack.

But yeah, it's a very good Nebula lib, highly recommended like everything else from Tim P really.

Pretty sure I saw OP mention 90s-early 00s in this thread. Sure, not technically 90s, but still one of the few examples of a lower end compressor that might have been used in a rack setup in the early 2000s. AND, more to the point, it sounds great. You can keep it out of your purist 90s software rack, but I’ll keep it in mine

You nailed it, it's supposed to be bad on purpose. I could pick one of the free plugins on the market right now, but i didn't mean that bad. What i truly meant by 90's was old tech that would crunch up your sound in a pleasant way. Now, as far as i'm aware any effects were applied after the sample was recorded (into a sampler). When i say i want to degrade a sample, i don't mean literarily destroy it with a poopy plugin. I mean giving it a weakness and pressence. Going pure 8bit introduces too many resonant artefacts. So the least i can go is 12 bit. But, whilst comparing the output of VST's. I found out it's not quite there. I tried all possible rack configurations. And i also tried advanced ADPCM compression methods. That one got me closer to the sound but i'm not quite there yet because i'm not a programmer and i don't know how to operate codecs outside a simple software program. I'm not sure if sounds are supposed to be ran through the rack individually and then as a whole, or just as a song. Dunno if that would count as stacking. If a sample is run through a 12 bit sampler with a 22050hz samplerate, there's nothing else there to affect it other than the gain/clipping stage.

[Ken_Oath]

Did you end up finding a solution?

[thecontrolcentre]

For old school sampler emulation, I like the RX950 Classic AD/DA Converter by Inphonik.
https://www.inphonik.com/products/rx950 ... converter/



... they recently released a 12bit Sampler too, but it's not a rack.

[Alyctro]

https://www.airwindows.com/mackity/

I've seen this man's plugins before, they're great. Thank you for bringing my attention to him once again. This is something i longed for. But someone should make some gui's for him already. I always thought the plugins are malfunctioning when they appeared without an interface.

[Alyctro]

Did you end up finding a solution?

Kind of, i've read through people's responses and also studied a bit outside that. And i came to a conclusion that there's no plugin that can do everything. I try to emulate the signal chain with separate modules and then i just compress the resulting recording as it would be back then.

[VariKusBrainZ]

I always felt Permut8 gives a nice hardware sounding crunch to things

[soundmodel]

There are already very good answers in this thread. But I will give my advice, because I've gone through seeking the exact same, the 90s EDM sound, but without having to have a ton of 90s hardware, because I already have plug-ins.

But the truth is that the plug-ins don't sound like the gear. They just don't.

I've nailed the sound that I was after down to these pieces of hardware:

-a Boss multi-effects box, I have the SE-70 (an SE-50 would do too).
-an Alesis reverb, I have the Quadraverb.
-some inexpensive dynamics processor, I have the Behringer MDX2600. For e.g. Daft Punk you'd want the Alesis 3630. For some others it might be a DBX 160, preferably not a reissue one. BBE MaxCom (or some other sonic maximizer of that age) is pretty interesting for piercing 90s drum breaks.
-some sort of hardware mixer. E.g. an old Mackie could do. I have a four-channel SubZero, which is not even that age, but I knew what to look for, and it does the trick quite well. These mixers give the bite and compression in cymbals that is e.g. in 90s drum & bass / jungle, when you run them pretty hot in and maybe use the on-board EQ a bit.
-if you have more $$$, then get an Eventide H3000 or H8000.
-random guitar and bass stomp boxes can be useful.
-if you can find a tape recorder like some Marantz or Tascam, then that'll give you the tape sound of that age.

With this gear I think any plug-in can be made to sound like it was from the 90s, when you just pass the signal through something of this list. So you don't necessarily need some 90s phaser of whatever. Just use a plug-in phaser and after that pass through the mixer adding some EQ maybe.

It was speculated, whether the Quadraverb e.g. has a sound of its own. It does add some noise if you just pass signal through it.

Mixing:

A significant portion of the mixes is about the EQ section of an outboard mixer. These EQs only have limited bands and aren't always even parametric, so what they do is tune the instruments based on the EQs, rather than over-EQ tracks.

If you still want only plug-ins even when they don't sound the same, then buy Propellerheads Reason. It was originally the 90s rack up to version 6 or so.

EDIT:

If you want closer to the hardware's sound while staying fully in software, then the best compromise is to get:

-airwindows plug-ins
-Acustica Nebula 3/4
-Possibly, Nomad Factory Magma

If I had a ton of money, I'd probably buy an Acustica plug-in for each piece of outboard gear I'd need, but airwindows and just the Nebula are cost-effective alternatives. Arturia plug-ins are an okay middle-ground, but they sound far less analogue.

These are mainly just in order to give the warming and noise characteristics of that age. Magma has plenty of effects that sound quite similar to what e.g. the Boss SE-70 gives.

[Synthman2000]

Home studio or pro studio could have quite a bearing on the quality of what was available.

Not too complex, many useful suggestions given, no need to repeat. Makes sense to use some kind of desk emulation - the worst one you can find - unless they were using an SSL of course and also add some hiss. A few home studio boxes back then were pretty noisy. Digitech Studio Quad for example.

Maybe there is good Yamaha SPX series emulations ?

https://www.uaudio.com/uad-plugins/dela ... ifter.html

Most of this will relate to your sound sources to positioning it in that era. Effects would be icing on the cake.

A lot of effects would already be on synth patches etc.

Quite recently about 5 months ago.. there was a plug in emulating an Alesis MIDIverb or something similar. Found it for you:

https://www.kvraudio.com/product/uberve ... rgio-frias

https://sergiofrias25.gumroad.com/l/UBERVERB

Ok so a bit older but could easily have been in any 90's studio.

[Uncle E]

I've nailed the sound that I was after down to these pieces of hardware:

-a Boss multi-effects box, I have the SE-70 (an SE-50 would do too).
-an Alesis reverb, I have the Quadraverb.
-some inexpensive dynamics processor, I have the Behringer MDX2600. For e.g. Daft Punk you'd want the Alesis 3630. For some others it might be a DBX 160, preferably not a reissue one. BBE MaxCom (or some other sonic maximizer of that age) is pretty interesting for piercing 90s drum breaks.
-some sort of hardware mixer. E.g. an old Mackie could do. I have a four-channel SubZero, which is not even that age, but I knew what to look for, and it does the trick quite well. These mixers give the bite and compression in cymbals that is e.g. in 90s drum & bass / jungle, when you run them pretty hot in and maybe use the on-board EQ a bit.
-if you have more $$$, then get an Eventide H3000 or H8000.
-random guitar and bass stomp boxes can be useful.
-if you can find a tape recorder like some Marantz or Tascam, then that'll give you the tape sound of that age.

You must have original Mackie CR-1604 console for 90's sound! Accept no substitutes!

[Synthman2000]

There are already very good answers in this thread. But I will give my advice, because I've gone through seeking the exact same, the 90s EDM sound, but without having to have a ton of 90s hardware, because I already have plug-ins.

But the truth is that the plug-ins don't sound like the gear. They just don't.

I've nailed the sound that I was after down to these pieces of hardware:

-a Boss multi-effects box, I have the SE-70 (an SE-50 would do too).
-an Alesis reverb, I have the Quadraverb.
-some inexpensive dynamics processor, I have the Behringer MDX2600. For e.g. Daft Punk you'd want the Alesis 3630. For some others it might be a DBX 160, preferably not a reissue one. BBE MaxCom (or some other sonic maximizer of that age) is pretty interesting for piercing 90s drum breaks.
-some sort of hardware mixer. E.g. an old Mackie could do. I have a four-channel SubZero, which is not even that age, but I knew what to look for, and it does the trick quite well. These mixers give the bite and compression in cymbals that is e.g. in 90s drum & bass / jungle, when you run them pretty hot in and maybe use the on-board EQ a bit.
-if you have more $$$, then get an Eventide H3000 or H8000.
-random guitar and bass stomp boxes can be useful.
-if you can find a tape recorder like some Marantz or Tascam, then that'll give you the tape sound of that age.

With this gear I think any plug-in can be made to sound like it was from the 90s, when you just pass the signal through something of this list. So you don't necessarily need some 90s phaser of whatever. Just use a plug-in phaser and after that pass through the mixer adding some EQ maybe.

It was speculated, whether the Quadraverb e.g. has a sound of its own. It does add some noise if you just pass signal through it.

Mixing:

A significant portion of the mixes is about the EQ section of an outboard mixer. These EQs only have limited bands and aren't always even parametric, so what they do is tune the instruments based on the EQs, rather than over-EQ tracks.

If you still want only plug-ins even when they don't sound the same, then buy Propellerheads Reason. It was originally the 90s rack up to version 6 or so.

I think OP did not want hardware. You did not want a load of hardware, then bought a load of hardware.

One thing though dbx, consistently the worst compression imaginable. I really tried but no, so heavy handed and uncompromisingly terrible. Probably would have been the low end line 166 or whatever crummy option that had back then. Very quiet gear from dbx even the low end stuff but almost unusable. Unless you like that.... I have no idea what I am doing but its compressing so it must be good ... type of sound.

" so what they do is tune the instruments based on the EQs, rather than over-EQ tracks"

Was that in the same parallel universe as the "Cider ceremonies".

[Uncle E]

Ironic that this thread crept back up right as Baby Audio's BA-1 v1.5 is released, with its 80's modeled effects section made into a separate plugin:

BA-1 isn’t just an analog modeled synthesizer. It also offers a meticulously modeled FX section, based on budget 1980s rack effects. Users have been asking for a standalone edition of BA-1’s effects chain since the early days and here it is! Use the FX Strip to run any audio through BA-1’s virtual circuits and add 80s-flavored drive, filtering, delay, reverb, chorus – and even BA-1’s speaker simulator.

[soundmodel]

I think OP did not want hardware. You did not want a load of hardware, then bought a load of hardware.

As it says, the plug-ins don't sound the same, they just don't. This is a small setup, it's only in order to bridge the gap between plug-ins and 90s hardware. With a small mixer like the SubZero and not the extra stuff like Eventides you can manage this setup into 4U I think. Not have all 90s hardware. So it's in essence about an "90s hardware with 70% software and 30% hardware" -setup. Better than 100% plug-ins, better than 100% hardware.

" so what they do is tune the instruments based on the EQs, rather than over-EQ tracks"

Was that in the same parallel universe as the "Cider ceremonies".

It means that your prior work always works within the constraints of "having only two (or so) non-parametric shelving filters in the final channel".

So the final mix tuning can essentially be just about getting everything right using those bands and nothing more. It leads to e.g. making tracks more polished earlier on and tuning them to frequencies that are suitable based on where the shelving bands are. So the mixer dictates your "important frequencies" a bit.

Over-EQ:ing is a phenomenon in DAW world, where having unlimited EQ means that you'd use more EQ than what's really necessary. And then you disregard the controls in the instruments themselves like decay times and damp controls, the tuning of your instruments, the ADSR controls, the built-in filters, ... Compare this to e.g. if you had what some consider a "real player", e.g. a violinist. Then that you'd be fine with having a lousy performance, and then think you can fix the performance using a lot of EQ. It doesn't make sense, but electronic musicians may fail to understand themselves as "real players", e.g. because they use samples and samplers.

With the mixer's limitations you will be guided to use your instruments to their full power, because you can't try to fix your mistakes later on. Like you can't try to fix lousy sequencing of MIDI by putting some EQ on the entire track to manage frequencies you didn't really want.

[DrGonzo]

But the truth is that the plug-ins don't sound like the gear. They just don't.

Trying to replicate the 90s rack effect sound with plugins is nearly impossible. With some exceptions here and there. I found the Soundtoys DevilLoc to capture the same unruly insanity you would get from a cheap 90s compressor.

I would say that at this point, if you really want to capture the sound of the 90s go buy yourself a Quadraverb and be done with it. Eventide H3000 sounds fantastic but is sounding too damn high-end. SE50/70 is also a great choice. But on my list a Quadra is my no. 1. Nothing sounds more 90s than Alesis.

[soundmodel]

And if you don't do something else, then you might still get just the Quadraverb (it's just 1U) just in order to know what we are talking about. Use it and you'll understand why you want some hardware eventually. Because no plug-in will match it.

It's instant magic (you don't need to even EQ after it, if your input is well-balanced) for e.g. the 606/808 drums that you hear on many 90s EDM records. It glues the hihats and it rounds the bd and snare.

[Synthman2000]

I think OP did not want hardware. You did not want a load of hardware, then bought a load of hardware.

As it says, the plug-ins don't sound the same, they just don't. This is a small setup, it's only in order to bridge the gap between plug-ins and 90s hardware. With a small mixer like the SubZero and not the extra stuff like Eventides you can manage this setup into 4U I think. Not have all 90s hardware. So it's in essence about an "90s hardware with 70% software and 30% hardware" -setup. Better than 100% plug-ins, better than 100% hardware.

" so what they do is tune the instruments based on the EQs, rather than over-EQ tracks"

Was that in the same parallel universe as the "Cider ceremonies".

It means that your prior work always works within the constraints of "having only two (or so) non-parametric shelving filters in the final channel".

So the final mix tuning can essentially be just about getting everything right using those bands and nothing more. It leads to e.g. making tracks more polished earlier on and tuning them to frequencies that are suitable based on where the shelving bands are. So the mixer dictates your "important frequencies" a bit.

Over-EQ:ing is a phenomenon in DAW world, where having unlimited EQ means that you'd use more EQ than what's really necessary. And then you disregard the controls in the instruments themselves like decay times and damp controls, the tuning of your instruments, the ADSR controls, the built-in filters, ... Compare this to e.g. if you had what some consider a "real player", e.g. a violinist. Then that you'd be fine with having a lousy performance, and then think you can fix the performance using a lot of EQ. It doesn't make sense, but electronic musicians may fail to understand themselves as "real players", e.g. because they use samples and samplers.

With the mixer's limitations you will be guided to use your instruments to their full power, because you can't try to fix your mistakes later on. Like you can't try to fix lousy sequencing of MIDI by putting some EQ on the entire track to manage frequencies you didn't really want.

I think this is convoluted BS. People were not thinking about what they were writing based on available EQ.

If you was using a high end desk you had very good EQ. And if you had a 24/8/2 variant which many did at home you had at least 2 shelfs and 2 bands of semi parametric approx spanning 400 - 10kHz and bass - 3kHz and I think the 8 bus had bandwidth/Q for 1 band.

This very strongly suggests you are writing nonsense. The EQ was perfectly usable for routine tasks.