Black Rooster Audio releases the VPRE-73

[pekbro]

Ok, thanks for your info. That obviously shouldn't happen. I reckon you're on Windows, right? Which version?

Thanks again.

Yeah Win 8.1 64, my VST folder is not on the root drive in case thats useful. BTW: my aversion to the wrappers is due to waves, not you guys. Only ever found it problematic. I'm grateful you folks offer an alternative. Not doing the same, is one of the chief reasons for me abandoning waves completely.

Nice plugin, I plan to buy it definitely.

-Cheers

*Also FYI: there is another DAW that doesn't support the wrappers that I and many around here use. For some (not me) its the only DAW they will use. MuLab http://www.mutools.com/mulab-product.html

[BlackRooster]

*Also FYI: there is another DAW that doesn't support the wrappers that I and many around here use. For some (not me) its the only DAW they will use. MuLab http://www.mutools.com/mulab-product.html

Thanks, for the info!

[BlackRooster]

Don't miss our Black Friday Deals --> https://blackroosteraudio.com

[cprompt]

Awesome! That's what I call a Black Friday deal.

[TheKid]

Will your plugins still work when your authorization servers go offline?

Yes, of course. Our activation process isn't run via a challenge/response protocol anymore, so no need to run via an authorization server.

Oh cool! With that generous Black Friday deal you can count me in as a customer. Thanks for this great message. Grüße in die alte Heimat.

[BlackRooster]

Will your plugins still work when your authorization servers go offline?

Yes, of course. Our activation process isn't run via a challenge/response protocol anymore, so no need to run via an authorization server.

Oh cool! With that generous Black Friday deal you can count me in as a customer. Thanks for this great message. Grüße in die alte Heimat.

You are welcome! Grüße zurück

[MogwaiBoy]

Oh such a good price for VLA-3A... guessing it blows the Waves LA3A away?

[cprompt]

Oh such a good price for VLA-3A... guessing it blows the Waves LA3A away?

And an almost-equally good price for Magnetite, which is rather lovely.

[gathda]

Got the complete bundle. Thanks for the discount!

[BlackRooster]

Due to the overwhelming feedback and support, we are extending our Black Friday Sale until Sunday night. Our sales & support team will gladly answer all your requests 24/7 all over the weekend. Thanks to our loyal customers! Enjoy our deals --> https://blackroosteraudio.com

[3ee]

Great sounding plugin, many thanks for the generous offering!

btw, an important feature request for this and basically all your plugins:

Please add a mono switch, that would in theory half the CPU usage..

Often when mixing, we have mono sources and it's just a pity to waste CPU cycles especially since top quality plugs aren't really CPU friendly... pretty please! ^_^

no auto-detecting channels as they won't work properly in all DAWs, just a simple mono sum at the input or something like that, I'm sure you know exactly what's needed!

[Rockatansky]

Every single one of these plugins uses at least 0.8% CPU on my big fat machine.
With the exception of the preamp plugin, which uses 0.4% CPU.
10 LC/HC filters, 10 EQs, 10 compressors - there's a quarter of my CPU gone.
Even with oversampling, it seems pretty excessive to me to have to waste 0.8% CPU on a basic LC/HC filter.

And I write basic, since the LC/HC plugin has no other effect on the audio than filtering highs and lows. There's no "analog character", there's no hiss, no buzz, no resonance, no saturation, no added harmonics. It's just a bog standard LC/HC filter combination. The 500/600Ω switch doesn't appear to do anything, has no detectable effect on volume or spectrum. The only thing remotely "special" about this LC/HC filter is how narrow/sharp the transition band is.

In comparison, I can get nearly equal LC/HC curves (with slightly wider/rounder transition band) in the also totally sterile Pro-Q2. That gives me no "high cut dip from the oversampling filter", but it does give me 0.1% CPU usage even in linear phase mode.

And that's just the LC/HC module... the supposed Pultec mid-band EQ is equally un-thrilling. No quirky curves, 100% cancellation of two instances in the phase reverse test, the list continues.

Do these plugins even have preset management? Not that I'd ever need a preset for an EQ or a compressor, especially the "vintage" type, but it just feels incomplete and immature if it doesn't even come with preset functionality. But good thing there are bright YouTube, twitter and Facebook icons on the GUI of a paid version (according to a Google image search). They hide the preferences icon really well.

Speaking of preferences, I had a dive into the Mac .bundles and it looks like the graphics are all rendered only for a single resolution, which is sized way larger than the largest (110%) option in the plugins displays. I guess that explains why the interfaces look slightly blurry at all size settings.

Also, reading back through this thread regarding oversampling, I get the feeling there's a lot more potential for improvement that I haven't noticed yet. The downsampling filter seems to only attenuate the stopband -24 dB at Nyquist, at least that's what a noise generator and spectrum analyzer tell me. Since the filter operates at the oversampled sample rate, if it doesn't attenuate frequencies above (original, un-oversampled) Nyquist below the audible range or noise floor, which is -144 dBfs at 24 bits, remaining frequency content above (original, un-oversampled) Nyquist are going to fold back into the audible signal.
Having a few dB fold back won't be a big issue, but with -24 dB stopband attenuation (below Nyquist) we're talking about up to 120 dBfs above noise floor here...

Which means, if this oversampling filter is used in any non-linear processor that creates additional harmonics above nyquist, so things that saturtate/distort a lot, there will probably be significant left-over frequency content above Nyquist that's folded back into the sub-Nyquist spectrum. That means it lets through aliasing and drastically lowers the justification for using up 0.8% CPU per instance, methinks.

I'm sorry, but if this is any indication as to how the plugins are coded otherwise, I'll stay out of this.

[BlackRooster]

Every single one of these plugins uses at least 0.8% CPU on my big fat machine.
With the exception of the preamp plugin, which uses 0.4% CPU.
10 LC/HC filters, 10 EQs, 10 compressors - there's a quarter of my CPU gone.
Even with oversampling, it seems pretty excessive to me to have to waste 0.8% CPU on a basic LC/HC filter.

And I write basic, since the LC/HC plugin has no other effect on the audio than filtering highs and lows. There's no "analog character", there's no hiss, no buzz, no resonance, no saturation, no added harmonics. It's just a bog standard LC/HC filter combination. The 500/600Ω switch doesn't appear to do anything, has no detectable effect on volume or spectrum. The only thing remotely "special" about this LC/HC filter is how narrow/sharp the transition band is.

In comparison, I can get nearly equal LC/HC curves (with slightly wider/rounder transition band) in the also totally sterile Pro-Q2. That gives me no "high cut dip from the oversampling filter", but it does give me 0.1% CPU usage even in linear phase mode.

No one forces you to use our (free) plug-in. If you think you can get similar results with Pro-Q2, fine. Just do so. Here's a brief insight into what makes the VHL-3C filters "special": http://nc-rec.com/blog/the-filters-are- ... they-seem/

And that's just the LC/HC module... the supposed Pultec mid-band EQ is equally un-thrilling. No quirky curves, 100% cancellation of two instances in the phase reverse test, the list continues.

No need to get offensive, Sir.

Do these plugins even have preset management? Not that I'd ever need a preset for an EQ or a compressor, especially the "vintage" type, but it just feels incomplete and immature if it doesn't even come with preset functionality. But good thing there are bright YouTube, twitter and Facebook icons on the GUI of a paid version (according to a Google image search). They hide the preferences icon really well.

We do offer factory presets.

Speaking of preferences, I had a dive into the Mac .bundles and it looks like the graphics are all rendered only for a single resolution, which is sized way larger than the largest (110%) option in the plugins displays. I guess that explains why the interfaces look slightly blurry at all size settings.

You have heard about things like Retina, HighDPI, don't you?

Also, reading back through this thread regarding oversampling, I get the feeling there's a lot more potential for improvement that I haven't noticed yet. The downsampling filter seems to only attenuate the stopband -24 dB at Nyquist, at least that's what a noise generator and spectrum analyzer tell me. Since the filter operates at the oversampled sample rate, if it doesn't attenuate frequencies above (original, un-oversampled) Nyquist below the audible range or noise floor, which is -144 dBfs at 24 bits, remaining frequency content above (original, un-oversampled) Nyquist are going to fold back into the audible signal.
Having a few dB fold back won't be a big issue, but with -24 dB stopband attenuation (below Nyquist) we're talking about up to 120 dBfs above noise floor here...

Which means, if this oversampling filter is used in any non-linear processor that creates additional harmonics above nyquist, so things that saturtate/distort a lot, there will probably be significant left-over frequency content above Nyquist that's folded back into the sub-Nyquist spectrum. That means it lets through aliasing and drastically lowers the justification for using up 0.8% CPU per instance, methinks.

I'm sorry, but if this is any indication as to how the plugins are coded otherwise, I'll stay out of this.

The answer is simple: Please don't try to tell us how to design decent interpolation / anti-aliasing filters. We understand our craft pretty well.

The overall offensive and smart-ass nature of your message implies that you feel you can do better and we can't keep you from creating your own plugins. Normally, we're willing to listen to factual criticism. In this case however, there doesn't seem to be much of a point in discussing any further, Sorry!

[Burillo]

if there's no non-linear processing, why the upsampling then? surely no harmonics would be generated?

[BlackRooster]

if there's no non-linear processing, why the upsampling then? surely no harmonics would be generated?

To compensate for the frequency warping introduced by the bilinear transform of an analog transfer function for example. There are methods for matching an analog response without having to resort to oversampling and we use them where applicable, but in some cases they aren't.