"Lindell Audio 50" API channel strip by Plugin Alliance

[Unaspected]

One of my friends already made the purchase and is overjoyed. So I guess it is worth the asking price. Not to me though. I'd rather drop that kind of cash on hardware - microphones and such.

I can hear what TMT is doing but it's not like "wow that pair sounds so much better than the last pair of channels". So I've yet to see much advantage to TMT at least in the bx_console N and Lindell 80.

I like both plugins but TMT seems more gimmick than practical feature at this point.

the point isn't to wow you on individual channels, the point is the cumulative effect. whether it's achieved is debatable, but judging something like TMT on the merits of a single channel when it's meant to be stacked across the mix is silly.

This.

I use the PA SSL E console on all channels / tracks with deactivated noise, but with enabled TMT accept on kick and bass, which I want to have dead center. On every other channel / element of the mix I appreciate the little offset/imbalance in stereo field which is introduced by the TMT technology.

You can still exploit TMT on your low end signals - which is what gives you a choice of 72 subtly different channels. Just make sure you engage "digital" processing rather than "analog" - then both sides will be equal.

On the whole, I'm processing mono signals so I mostly engage "analog" on my group busses and FX returns.

[Teksonik]

I can hear what TMT is doing but it's not like "wow that pair sounds so much better than the last pair of channels". So I've yet to see much advantage to TMT at least in the bx_console N and Lindell 80.

I like both plugins but TMT seems more gimmick than practical feature at this point.

the point isn't to wow you on individual channels, the point is the cumulative effect. whether it's achieved is debatable, but judging something like TMT on the merits of a single channel when it's meant to be stacked across the mix is silly.

No, what's silly is expecting something that gives no real advantage on individual channels to have a positive "cumulative effect" when "stacked across the mix".

If the different channels don't really sound any better than each other then they're not going to sound any better when "stacked". Do the channels sound different? Yes. Is one set appreciably better than another ? Not in my experience.

Again to me TMT is more gimmick than useful feature in the console plugins I've purchased.

Their bx_oberhausen plugin also touts TMT. Are you saying that it will have no positive effect until you stack instances of the synth ?

That's a pretty weak argument to defend a placebo.

[Unaspected]

Again to me TMT is more gimmick than useful feature in the console plugins I've purchased.

Quite possibly. One of the arguments against is that people can hear any perceivable difference at all - where a well calibrated desk should maybe not be so variable in tone per channel.

The concept isn't to give different flavours, more to achieve some depth in subtle variation of sound. Whether it works as promoted or not is another matter. Though I have read of people choosing certain numbers for different instruments, it's not something I have taken time to do - If the variation is as subtle as it should be then I wouldn't expect to hear much of any difference to warrant such an exercise.

[Burillo]

No, what's silly is expecting something that gives no real advantage on individual channels to have a positive "cumulative effect" when "stacked across the mix".

ummmm, that's just wrong. i don't eve know where to start.

If the different channels don't really sound any better than each other then they're not going to sound any better when "stacked". Do the channels sound different? Yes. Is one set appreciably better than another ? Not in my experience.

you're confusing "different" with "better". i never said that TMT would make things better - i said the effect would (and is meant to be) stacked. whether what you get is "better" is debatable, but that's not the same as saying "it doesn't do anything".

Again to me TMT is more gimmick than useful feature in the console plugins I've purchased.

that's what's called an opinion. i happen to think so too, but that doesn't preclude me from recognizing what it's for and what it does.

Their bx_oberhausen plugin also touts TMT. Are you saying that it will have no positive effect until you stack instances of the synth ?

you're again conflating "difference" with "positive effect". TMT is meant to make it so that, should you use multiple instances of Oberhausen, you don't get identical sound even if you use the same preset. if you use the same TMT channel - they'll sound identical. whether it's something you want is up to you, but that's an entirely different matter.

That's a pretty weak argument to defend a placebo.

you yourself said that it makes a difference. therefore, it is not placebo. again, whether it's something you like is a different question, but it's by definition not a placebo.

[Teksonik]

ummmm, that's just wrong. i don't eve know where to start.

It's so right there is no place you can start.

you're confusing "different" with "better". i never said that TMT would make things better - i said the effect would (and is meant to be) stacked. whether what you get is "better" is debatable, but that's not the same as saying "it doesn't do anything".

It is you who are confused my friend. I said:

Do the channels sound different? Yes. Is one set appreciably better than another ? Not in my experience.

I did not say "it doesn't do anything". I said it hasn't done anything better yet. I've seen no advantage yet and apparently you agree with me so we're arguing about what again?

Let's say I put bx_console N on a snare track. I dial in a nice sound, well EQ'd and with pleasing dynamics.

I then hit the TMT arrow. One of three things should happen.

1. It will make my snare sound better.
2. It will make my snare sound worse.
3. It will make no appreciable difference in the sound of my snare.

I am saying that 1. has not happened yet. If you think stacking 2 and/or 3 in multiple instances will bring any benefit then there is nothing more I can say.

Again to me TMT is more gimmick than useful feature in the console plugins I've purchased.

that's what's called an opinion.

I thought the words "to me" made that crystal clear but apparently not.

i happen to think so too, but that doesn't preclude me from recognizing what it's for and what it does.

I recognize what it's supposed to do but again I've found no advantage to the TMT feature yet so to me it does nothing positive up to this point. Stacking nothing positive with any number of nothing positives won't change the result despite claims to the contrary.

you yourself said that it makes a difference. therefore, it is not placebo. again, whether it's something you like is a different question, but it's by definition not a placebo.

It is literally the definition of a Placebo:
a harmless pill, medicine, or procedure prescribed more for the psychological benefit to the patient than for any physiological effect.

Replace Pill with TMT and physiological effect with sonic advantage and well you get the point.

Like I've said before I like both the consoles I purchased so far. I just find the TMT more gimmick than useful feature so far. Yes that's my opinion but it's also a fact. I find it to be a gimmick, you'll just have to deal with it.....

[Teksonik]

Again to me TMT is more gimmick than useful feature in the console plugins I've purchased.

Quite possibly. One of the arguments against is that people can hear any perceivable difference at all - where a well calibrated desk should maybe not be so variable in tone per channel.

The concept isn't to give different flavours, more to achieve some depth in subtle variation of sound. Whether it works as promoted or not is another matter. Though I have read of people choosing certain numbers for different instruments, it's not something I have taken time to do - If the variation is as subtle as it should be then I wouldn't expect to hear much of any difference to warrant such an exercise.

Agreed. The thought that using multiple instances brings any advantage on different tracks with different source material is misguided I think.

It's all just playing into the current "Analog is God" mentality and it works. Slap the word Analog on any plugin and suddenly there is "magic".

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

It's not a placebo though and clearly audible on individual stereo channels. Is it a gimmick? Yeah, a bit, but it's not hoodoo. Will it make your mixes sound better? They'll sound a tiny bit different. Could be better, could be worse, probably not going to make or break anything.

When it comes to Oberhausen, TMT works entirely differently and is SUPER audible if you're using an LFO because you go from one global LFO with TMT off, to 8 free-running LFO's that are not sync'd with TMT on. So let's not conflate the TMT usage between consoles and synths.

[plexuss]

I've played around TMT once they started implmenting it. I have very sensitive hearing in terms of amplitude and what appears to be the usual age related LPF. I also work the stereo image in my work and so I do focus on soundstage, depth of image, etc. TMT can impart a bit of effect in the stereo image and depth of field like other plugins that simulate low level harmonic distortion. For me it's not so great that I would purposely grab a specific TMT plugin - rather I flip it on if I feel the track could benefit from stereo image mojo. Or, I'll use specific other tools for this. I think of TMT as a nice to have but not essential and for me it's a point of purchase decision.

[chroma]

TMT to me sounds like ‘analog drift’.... nearly impossible to notice (in small amounts) for a single vco, but add a second set ‘the same’ and the small differences become very audible. Could you do that yourself by programming small offsets yourself? Sure, but that’s a workflow difference.

And especially in the digital age, some people like have exact control over how the analog ‘drifts’ (small detune amounts etc) and others prefer the workflow of pushing a button and having some good-sounding defaults already applied. I used to be the first hardcore but as I get older and lazier (and have less free time) I’ve come to appreciate those shortcuts

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

TMT to me sounds like ‘analog drift’.... nearly impossible to notice (in small amounts) for a single vco, but add a second set ‘the same’ and the small differences become very audible. Could you do that yourself by programming small offsets yourself? Sure, but that’s a workflow difference.

And especially in the digital age, some people like have exact control over how the analog ‘drifts’ (small detune amounts etc) and others prefer the workflow of pushing a button and having some good-sounding defaults already applied. I used to be the first hardcore but as I get older and lazier (and have less free time) I’ve come to appreciate those shortcuts

The way TMT is used in the consoles is not quite that. It's very easy to notice.

Here's channels 1 and 2 of the Lindell 80 console at default settings:



There's nothing subtle about that. There's an almost 2db difference in the low end between the right and left channels. Meanwhile the high end is pretty close. Other channels look different. Some are closer together, some are further apart. Some are more off in the mids, or highs, etc.

[jens]

I thought this was random?

[cprompt]

I thought this was random?

The values are calculated randomly, yes. But those values are baked in to the plugins so selecting the same channel will give you the same "random" settings each time.

[Unaspected]

TMT to me sounds like ‘analog drift’.... nearly impossible to notice (in small amounts) for a single vco, but add a second set ‘the same’ and the small differences become very audible. Could you do that yourself by programming small offsets yourself? Sure, but that’s a workflow difference.

And especially in the digital age, some people like have exact control over how the analog ‘drifts’ (small detune amounts etc) and others prefer the workflow of pushing a button and having some good-sounding defaults already applied. I used to be the first hardcore but as I get older and lazier (and have less free time) I’ve come to appreciate those shortcuts

The way TMT is used in the consoles is not quite that. It's very easy to notice.

Here's channels 1 and 2 of the Lindell 80 console at default settings:



There's nothing subtle about that. There's an almost 2db difference in the low end between the right and left channels. Meanwhile the high end is pretty close. Other channels look different. Some are closer together, some are further apart. Some are more off in the mids, or highs, etc.

Yeah, I would definitely consider that unacceptable. So maybe it is better to treat these strips as Teksonik suggests - with TMT providing 72 completely different consoles. Or one broken desk.

[acousticglue]

Yes I like the channels alot. They all have slightly differences to them. TMT don't know or maybe even use. I use the lugs on side of my head and flip settings when I feel to try them. That is how I learn.

[jens]

I thought this was random?

The values are calculated randomly, yes. But those values are baked in to the plugins so selecting the same channel will give you the same "random" settings each time.

*lol*


That makes the patent even more pathetic then...