I can control the UA Console application, and any plugins inserted there too, which is nice for tracking.īut what is missing - to me - is a really good plugin to provide whatever magic it is that a good 2-mix summing stage provides. I can substitute a bunch of UA plugins for the Softube plugins in Console 1, which is nice. It too sounds great, and I really like the control surface. I like both! Brainworx has talked a lot about their ability to make minor variations, but I'm not hearing the effect, so I haven't invested yet (probably the only Brainworx stuff I don't own!)
WAVES SSL E CHANNEL VS G CHANNEL SOFTWARE
I don’t own any other single piece of software that packs as much bang for the buck, all while sounding beautiful and having a staggeringly low CPU-footprint.I've focused on the UAD and Brainworx channel strips. And this is with browsers and miscellaneous crap open in the background. And the CPU was only at about 35%, give or take. I loaded 72 channels, each one with an instance of Channel EQ (Logic), an instance of bx_console N (with dynamics and EQ all active), and some audio.
Of course, if you want it cleaner, you can set everything to channel 1 (their “golden channel”), turn the noise/THD down, and create something more precise.Īnd here’s the best part - it’s the most efficient plugin I’ve ever seen. In other words, I need to learn the desk. Certain channels seem to step out, so the trick will be making note of the channels that I like, just like I would have to do with a real console. I printed a few randomized bounces and phase-cancelled to hear what was left, and there were definitely things left over. But it’s when I started pushing the V-gain (noise) and the THD, and then randomized the TMT channel, that I really began to hear some “console” variances. It's got a nice analog sound to it straight away. It doesn’t do crunchy, although you can hit it hard and blend it in parallel. The compressor is clean and smooth, and the Mix and HPF are very handy additions. The gate/expander is just fantastic - transparent and easy to dial in. I can boost as much as I like and it never gets ugly.
The EQ is glorious, especially the highs and high-mids. Ok, after a couple days of solid testing… I think this plugin is pretty special. Well, I still have a lot of playing around to do to get a better feel for it, but I wanted to share my initial findings with you. Or it could just be that the Maag is just too awesome It could be the programme material, or it could be that the tolerances between the different modeled channels really are very small after all (and that’s not an unfair expectation with a Neve console). Perhaps my ears just aren’t that tuned in to the subtleties involved, but I didn’t hear a big (or any) difference between the channel 1 bounce and the various randomized channel bounces. Where the BX might fall down for me is the individual channel modelling, and that's only because this feature is central to the marketing.
WAVES SSL E CHANNEL VS G CHANNEL HOW TO
There were definitely differences, but I imagine that some of these are likely attributable to my not knowing the various bandwidths/slopes on the Maag and how to replicate them on the BX, if even possible.
I really love the way the Maag sounds, and I was pleased to find that the BX matched it very well. For the BX bounces, I bounced things a few different ways - first, with all channels set to channel 1 within the plugin (channel 1 of the virtual console, in other words), then 3 separate randomization bounces (where each instance of the plugin uses a different virtual console channel).
I also avoided using any feature of either EQ that the other one didn’t also possess (gate, compressor, AIR band at 20k or above, center frequency, etc.). I replicated the settings as closely as I could between the two, both on each channel individually, as well as on the drum bus. I took 6 channels of drums from a recent session and decided to do a shootout between the BX and the Maag EQ4. UPDATE: I’ve since downloaded bx_console N and activated a trial.
0 kommentar(er)
