KVR Audio

bmanic · Post by **bmanic** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 12:39 am

I don't think it does 192khz but lemme check..

EDIT: no, this beta build will not run at 192khz, not that I see any reason to run it that high.

Cheers!
bManic

brianbrian · Post by **brianbrian** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 12:43 am

Hydratone is definately the best plugin EQ right now. Just wait until you hear Angeltone (the mastering EQ). That thing is just ridiculous. I can't believe they are selling Hydratone for $149, I would pay so much more than that.

electro · Post by **electro** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 12:44 am

It would be so foolish to release a plug in '05 that didn't do 192Khz from the start.

bmanic · Post by **bmanic** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 12:46 am

electro wrote:It would be so foolish to release a plug in '05 that didn't do 192Khz from the start.

Umm.. do you actually know anybody who uses 192khz? Well, I admit that I do sometimes upsample to 192khz but only to oversample some plugins. I can't imagine hydratone sounding any better than it already does.. but who knows, maybe it would

.

brianbrian · Post by **brianbrian** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 12:49 am

Hydratone sounds so good at 96Khz, you will probably forget all about 192Khz.

munchkin · Post by **munchkin** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 12:50 am

What about 384khz?

brianbrian · Post by **brianbrian** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 12:52 am

munchkin wrote:What about 384khz?

Yea, not bad, but if you are a true audiophile you gotta try 1.15Ghz.

munchkin · Post by **munchkin** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 12:57 am

brianbrian wrote:
munchkin wrote:What about 384khz?
Yea, not bad, but if you are a true audiophile you gotta try 1.15Ghz.

brianbrian · Post by **brianbrian** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 12:57 am

By the way, this plugin has hardly any latency compared to standard convolution devices. I believe it has only 32 samples of latency.

akisd28 · Post by **akisd28** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:28 am

Most of you I remember from the UAD forum. Since I missed the BETA sign-up, how do you think it compares to the Pultec Pro and PEQ? I started my PEQ demo yesterday and I like it, though I don't think it should be hyped that much! Nice nevertheless.

BTW, tomorrow I'm receiving my iLok, it's time to test the URS...

RAYA · Post by **RAYA** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:29 am

The original clip sound good as is,and the prossesed sound a bit fatter and more present.

Better would be to do it with a non so good sounding clip just to appreciate the diffs a bit more.

electro · Post by **electro** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:26 am

"Hydratone sounds so good at 96Khz, you will probably forget all about 192Khz"

What if you work with VSTInstruments and want to export at 192Khz and master at 192Khz? Not every sample rate issue is about recording audio.

kilroy · Post by **kilroy** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 6:04 am

akisd28 wrote:Most of you I remember from the UAD forum. Since I missed the BETA sign-up, how do you think it compares to the Pultec Pro and PEQ?

If you had already purchased those EQs...it would be very hard for me to imagine someone not wanting to have this TritoneDigital offering as well...

...like we are talking within seconds of doing a bit of creative shaping with it.

Another very, very lovely EQ for native systems...it sounds bleeding marvelous. Well done Tritone.

brianbrian · Post by **brianbrian** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 7:27 am

akisd28 wrote:Most of you I remember from the UAD forum. Since I missed the BETA sign-up, how do you think it compares to the Pultec Pro and PEQ? I started my PEQ demo yesterday and I like it, though I don't think it should be hyped that much! Nice nevertheless.

BTW, tomorrow I'm receiving my iLok, it's time to test the URS...

I think the sound quality is slightly better than the UAD stuff. Pultec Pro is great and has a unique color to it that Hydratone can't match, but Hydratone is more versatile and smoother sounding. The P-EQ is great, but I think Hydratone is slightly smoother, and is definately more versatile as a mixing EQ (more bands, +/- 12dB instead of

. Hydratone is cheaper than the PEQ while sounding better to my ears.

Hopefully the demo is released soon so you can try it yourself. If I were to buy only one EQ, I'd get Hydratone, especially since more overall color and band color options are on the way. Unfortunately it is a bit too CPU heavy to use on every single track, but you can load at least 8-10 for critical tracks (depending on CPU: mine is AMD 1800XP).

bmanic · Post by **bmanic** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 7:29 am

electro wrote:"Hydratone sounds so good at 96Khz, you will probably forget all about 192Khz"

What if you work with VSTInstruments and want to export at 192Khz and master at 192Khz? Not every sample rate issue is about recording audio.

Good point but what VSTi do you see benefitting from 192khz samplerate? I know many do when rendering at 96khz but I've never tried 192khz myself so I'm just curious. I'll forward this request to the beta list and see what answer I get.

Cheers!
bManic

TritoneDigital.. hydratone, Voxengo and Kjaerhus, Fear it!