KVR Audio

Aloysius · Post by **Aloysius** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 6:31 pm

^ Best post so far by a country mile.

chk071 · Post by **chk071** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 6:35 pm

ethermusic1981 wrote:
TheoM wrote:I doubt steinberg would use a quote that a huge composer like Hans never said.. they'd be in a world of legal trouble. So i do believe it.

That said it kind os shows how ridiculous steinberg themselves are to use that as a selling point.

What about the DAW's that use 64 bit float then unlike 32 like cubase? they don't go around saying they sound better lol.
Oh I'm sure he said it. But simply for the $$$. Him saying it doesn't mean that it's his true opinion.

Apart from the fact that he surely doesn't need the pocket money he would get for such a statement, i don't think any artist really gets something for endorsement. It's rather a give and take. Steinberg gets publicity, Hans gets publicity, profit for everyone.

Heartfeltdawn · Post by **Heartfeltdawn** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 6:51 pm

TheoM wrote: it really is hogwash, btw. he's wrong about that and someone with such experience loses a lot of credibility in my book making statements like that. Just in my opinion of course. I am sure there are others who believe him.

You really should email him personally to let him know how little credibility he has in your eyes.

musical android · Post by **musical android** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 6:54 pm

Gonga wrote:Hans is quoted somewhere as saying that the main trick to his giant low-end percussion sounds is to use low velocities. He uses low velocities without a lot of high transient and that way he is using the pure sound itself moreso rather than processing it too much. He says people make the mistake of "beating the drums" too loudly in an effort to produce giant sounds, where the result is thinner, higher-frequency stuff.

That is very interesting!
Would never have thought about it unless you brought it up. Thanks.
Will put that to the test as soon as possible.

MogwaiBoy · Post by **MogwaiBoy** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 9:12 pm

Well it makes sense from a studio engineering point of view. Even bright ride cymbals can have huge low end resonance drones in the decay when you tap them with mallets (instead of sticks) and put your ear/mic close to it.

djscorb · Post by **djscorb** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 9:52 pm

I remember Steve Duda on Pensado's place voicing a preference for using low velocities on pianos as he found them a bit harsh in the upper registers otherwise.

Totally agree with Theo about the laughability of Cubase being somehow superior in audio quality to anything else.

I don't believe there's a difference between any of the major players these days.

And if there were differences, didn't the original guy behind Cubase's engine go on to write Studio One? With that being 64 bit, then surely Mr Zimmer should consider demoing it if those really were his words!

You get out what you put in? Err yes, you would hope so. Not really saying much, a comment like that.

djscorb · Post by **djscorb** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 10:00 pm

MogwaiBoy wrote:Well it makes sense from a studio engineering point of view. Even bright ride cymbals can have huge low end resonance drones in the decay when you tap them with mallets (instead of sticks) and put your ear/mic close to it.

No audience hears cymbals close up so you wouldn't mic them that way. Low velocity cymbals? Doesn't make sense to limit things like this imo. Intimate brushwork in jazz etc. sure, but not appropriate for a lot of scenarios.

Like most "rules" in audio, there are plenty more exceptions so it's pretty limiting to think in these terms.

Having said that, I like perverting things in this way. Playing loud instruments softly and then turning them up. Removing top end from higher pitched sounds, high passing crunchier bass sounds, this stuff has a lot of creative mileage!

Cheers

Scorb

elxsound · Post by **elxsound** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 10:17 pm

Gonga wrote:Hans is quoted somewhere as saying that the main trick to his giant low-end percussion sounds is to use low velocities. He uses low velocities without a lot of high transient and that way he is using the pure sound itself moreso rather than processing it too much. He says people make the mistake of "beating the drums" too loudly in an effort to produce giant sounds, where the result is thinner, higher-frequency stuff.

Yup. This was posted in either Reddit or VI forums. Can't remember which one it was.

Hit soft, and increase the volume.

phaded · Post by **phaded** » Sun Dec 13, 2015 12:52 pm

sprnva wrote:My money is on OneKnob Pumper.

Obsolete236871 · Post by **Obsolete236871** » Sun Dec 13, 2015 1:07 pm

I personally like how Cubase "sounds". But there is also a major problem with Cubase: when working in higher sample rates during composition and mixing (88kHz, 96 kHz etcetera) and then doing the conversion to 44kHz, Cubase's sample rate conversion is not totally accurate.

See the plots here: http://src.infinitewave.ca/

I find the statements about using low velocities quite interesting! Do they refer to actual acoustic instruments or to virtual instruments?

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Sun Dec 13, 2015 1:10 pm

So are you guys saying Hans Zimmer has a big bootie?

Apostate · Post by **Apostate** » Sun Dec 13, 2015 1:39 pm

aMUSEd wrote:So are you guys saying Hans Zimmer has a big bootie?

My anaconda don't want none unless...

fluffy_little_something · Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:18 pm

It has been decades since I last saw a movie in a cinema, but I remember that cinema speaker systems have always been geared at low frequency rumble because of action movies. I remember that from a time long before there was any Zebra or Cubase.

I sometimes make my basses "intenser" with the help of the phaser built into my synth.

Klinke1 · Post by **Klinke1** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 2:48 pm

Try Lowender. (reFuse Softw.)
Produces Low(er) Freqs (in opposite to RenBass).
Incredible low(-end) freqs.
https://www.refusesoftware.com/lowender

Also test Waves "LoAir". (cheaper atm)
(I don't have that one)

Ingonator · Post by **Ingonator** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 8:43 am

Of course the low end also depends on which synths are used and for synths like a Minimoog Model D or the monark plugin you will rarely need to improve the low end. Sometimes those could produce so much low end taht you actualöy have to remove some of that low end while recording. I had a comparable experiences when doing audio demos of some Waldorf Pulse 2 patches, especially those that use the built-in analog Drive. The Korg DW-8000 that i bought recently seems to be quite good in terms of low end too.
U-He Diva seems to be another option with a good low end "by default" (same could be true for Zebra HZ aka "Dark Zebra" but i never used that myself so far...).
Speaking about purely digital synths i also found that the low end in my Yamaha Motif ES 7 could be really good even without using external FXs.

I am sure Hans Zimmer has multiple "tricks" for big low end (which includes the sound sources he uses...) In comparison I am by far not as professional as Hans and actually i am a novice if we talk about mixing but as i alraedy mentioned my favourite for improving the low end currently is Waves OneKnob Phatter (just has an "amount" knob):
http://www.waves.com/plugins/oneknob-ph ... atter-demo

OneKnob series:
http://www.waves.com/bundles/oneknob-se ... xx-oneknob

With Waves "MaxxBass" seems to be comparable but offers controls for tweaking:
http://www.waves.com/plugins/maxxbass?g ... GwodKigDsw
http://www.waves.com/plugins/renaissance-bass

In cases where this does not work properly i use an EQ instead (e.g. Waves Renaissance EQ or PSP NobleQ).

Hans Zimmer's Incredible Low End