Sonimus Burnley 73 VS Waves Scheps-73 VS IK multimedia EQ 73

[jamcat]

NoiseAsh Need 73 is free right now with the coupon code: BEAT73 EXPIRED

https://noiseash.com/need-73-console-eq/

[cbricius]

I have used, hardware, waves, UAD and Sonimus emulations. They all sound great but I would say Sonimus and UAD are the closest ones.
I used to add NLS in all of my sessions but I always found them too subtle. I much prefer Sonimus' consoles emulations or Brainborx TMT consoles. It's true that you get 3 consoles in one plugin with NLS but as I said I think they are too subtle.

[Burillo]

Eh? My impression has always been that NLS are way too obvious and sound like distortion.

[yzcoruhT]

Anyone tried this one and compared to Burnley 73?

https://www.kvraudio.com/product/eq173- ... rock-sound

[martinjuenke]

I used to add NLS in all of my sessions but I always found them too subtle.

My impression has always been that NLS are way too obvious and sound like distortion.

The problem of forum info in a nutshell.

[simon.a.billington]

I used to add NLS in all of my sessions but I always found them too subtle.

My impression has always been that NLS are way too obvious and sound like distortion.

The problem of forum info in a nutshell.

Well you can crunch them up and drive them into distortion, even if subtly. They were really designed to introduce the subtle nuance between each mixer channel, because unlike software, they are not identical. At least, that's as I understand it.

It's the subtle differences that can breathe a little more depth into a mix. It doesn't have to be an either or situation. You can actually use NLS in conjunction with your favourite channel strip just so you can take advantage of those slight differences that your channel strip otherwise wouldn't have.

I, of course, have a bit of a different take on most plugins because I mix at higher sample rates and have less issue with the potential for aliasing.

[martinjuenke]

I, of course, have a bit of a different take on most plugins because I mix at higher sample rates and have less issue with the potential for aliasing.

Then there two of us:
I always mix at 24 Bit / 96 KHz and am quite pleased with the quality.

[simon.a.billington]

I, of course, have a bit of a different take on most plugins because I mix at higher sample rates and have less issue with the potential for aliasing.

Then there two of us:
I always mix at 24 Bit / 96 KHz and am quite pleased with the quality.

Absolutely. It can be more resource expensive, but computers are getting a lot more capable now. And if you're running low on CPU you can always freeze tracks.

It certainly beats upsampling only to downsample only to upsample then downsample yet again. If you do that with multiple plugins across all your tracks you're much better off running at a higher sample rate. Less overhead, less latency.

What I like about 96k is it's effectively a x2 across your whole production which helps for the most part with things like eq cramping and low level aliasing. It even produces slightly better quality results when messing with pitch and time. From there you can elect to use oversampling only on a few select plugins where it really matters.

That's when I really liked about the Waves Magma plugins because the actually added that oversampling option into their plugins. Many other devs have done this for a long time, but it's good to see Waves implement this. I would just like to see it added to their other plugins like NLS. Not sure why the didn't add it to the Scheps Omni when they had the chance though.

[The Noodlist]

If you use Nebula or Acqua plugin,you will think that all of them suck.

Burnley is the worst.

Acustica also offer a free N-style preamp. Sign up required.
https://firethegold.acustica-audio.com/