SCOPE EQ & DYN. vs. CUBASE SX EQ & DYN. vs. X...

[CreamWare4Ever]

Hello,

This post and my questions may sound a bit provocative, but my intention is NOT to criticize any manufactures plugin. Instead, I will try to get help as I need a conceptual direction that will follow me for a important CD project, and maybe for many years ahead. Let me in short terms explain what it is about.

As I have very sensitive ears when it come to sound, especially EQ part (...), I have noticed that I personally can't quite accept the result which Cubase SX in house EQ gives. Especially when it comes to low cut at 150 Hz.

I'm NOT saying that they don't have a good quality, just that Cubase SX EQ part does not give ME personally satisfied result for my purposes. But I'm familiar with Cubase and still want to use it, and I will upgrade to Cubase 4.5 in couple of days.

In Scope environment my primary use of PEQ 4M is as a insert for low cut during recording of vocals. I'm still using Scope v.3 with Luna card (3 DSP) So now comes my questions:

In short terms: For professional use, can Scope PEQ 4M EQ be compared to Nomad Factory EQP-4 for example? Or when it comes to sound quality or/and character, can mixers dynamic and EQ section be compared with for example Nomad Factorys Blue Tube Series?

Or Scope Compressor M with Nomad Factory BT Compressor CP2S-3?

Do someone use Scopes Mixer EQ for purposes I have described? Or in mastering?

Maybe the easiest way is to set up EQP-4 as insert in Cubase to process signal DURING recording? I haven't tried this and I'm afraid that it will cause latency for recording?

If you a suggestion for some other plugins that I can try as ALTERNATIVE of Scopes built-in, please let me know. Yet in Scope environment, because I don't use itin XTC mode (yet?). Maybe I can purchase now because of WINTER SPECIALS until 31.12.2008

I really hope that you understand my concern, I just want to build a setup with 'correct' peaces on input, because the sound will be only so good as weakest link in whole audio chain.

Thank you.

[darkrezin]

Not totally sure exactly what you're asking here, but I wasn't too impressed with Nomad Factory plugins.

If you need a good native EQ, have a look at the Sonnox stuff, or something like BX_Hybrid by Brainworx.

[Music Manic]

I have never liked the Cubase Eq.

Try http://wolf-audio.com/wad/devices/Entri ... Qtrum.html
It's very versatile.

[alfonso]

As a side note, any dynamic or filtering process during recording has, i.m.o., only sense before the sound hits the converters in order not to clip them, unless it's not directly related with the performance itself. Everything done after the converters can be equally obtained after the track has been recorded, with the obvious benefit to be completely reversible.

[CreamWare4Ever]

As a side note, any dynamic or filtering process during recording has, i.m.o., only sense before the sound hits the converters in order not to clip them, unless it's not directly related with the performance itself. Everything done after the converters can be equally obtained after the track has been recorded, with the obvious benefit to be completely reversible.

Yes, I agree with your statement. My problem is that the low cut that I have in my mic preamp at 90Hz, for my ears, is not enough. So I'm following an old school tip to set as many low cut in the chain, before recording, as possible...

[CreamWare4Ever]

Not totally sure exactly what you're asking here, but I wasn't too impressed with Nomad Factory plugins.

Please give me some more info regarding this as I'm very close to purchase them. Thanks.

[darkrezin]

Well they just didn't sound too great to me at all... wasn't impressed by the 'tube' saturation or supposed analog colouring etc. But if you're about to buy them I assume you've tried them out? If you're happy with the sound then it's not important at all what I think of them. But if you haven't tried them and are just going on word of mouth or whatever, you should probably try out a few EQs before you buy something that might not be that great. There are many many good EQ plugins on Windows... Voxengo, Sonnox, Kjaerhus, etc.. have a look on kvraudio.com

[pollux]

Wolf's spEQtrum is very good. DAS EQs (vintage and modern ones) are really nice too.
Wolf's Kompressor and DAS compressors, are also very interesting options.

[maky325]

If you look for decent VST eq you should check airEQ, or Nebula 3 EQ section. For scope i like peq4 but you really cant compare it to Nomad stuff since Nomad is different and i dont like nomad at all.

[CreamWare4Ever]

For scope i like peq4 but you really cant compare it to Nomad stuff since Nomad is different and i dont like nomad at all.

I which way? Please explain.

BTW both airEQ and Nebula 3 EQ are very interesting stuff, I will try that out later.

[dawman]

I just started using a Compressor live for the first time and it really makes a big difference in my mix.
It's a trick that I learned by reading a Cubase thread here from MD69 about Sidechaining.
Although it was a Cubase trick, I applied it to the Scope platform and since the DAS Compressors are liked by many guys here and have Sidechaining, I tried it and it works for Bass & Drums perfectly.
Optimaster also works well w/ the Crossover freq.'s, but seems better suited for an entire mix. The DAS 1610++ is just more tweakable for this particular use.
On VDAT #1, I have taken the L & R Kick drum tracks and sent them into the Mixer, and " Y'd " a second pair to the Sidechaining inputs of the 1610++. The entire live performance and pre recorded tracks are sent into the 1610++ and Compressed by the Kick Drum's SC'ing so now all synth/Bass low freq's get compressed only when the sound of the Kick drum triggers.
Pretty neat shit actually, as I was never happy mixing a Live 5 string Tobias, w/ pre recorded drums and an Analog Synth Bass simultaneously. Just too much shit going on.
It now has a much better polished sound. The poor Bartender has his head at speaker level as we are on an elevated stage behind the bar. He could even hear the difference as the Sub doesn't rattle his pyramids of glasses as much.
I also use a great Channel Strip that takes the lead vocal Direct out, where mono gets converted to stereo, and sent to the DAS C350 Channel Strip for EQ and and the final treatment of it's Gate. The Gate allows me to use giant reverb Halls & Algo's, and maintains all of the transients pre & post, but clips the tails and totally eliminates any stage noise also.

I could not even be having this discussion if it wasn't for the insane amount of routing that the DAS Mixer allows. I mix 4 sets of wireless ear monitors, 4 x Barbetta powered monitors w/ a SUB, and an additional Rotary Cabinet. I can switch from the Cue Mix to the Mains for adjustments on the fly to a particular ear monitor mix, etc. Mute the Mains, etc.
I am aware of no other mixer in ProTools, VST or hardware that can do this. Actually we were using our Bassists hardware rig which was a pair of Crest XRM's, and with his help I learned all of the hidden details in this single DSP application only after using hardware during our pre production rehearsals last Spring. Outdoor rehearsals in Tahoe with ear monitors while smelling the Giant Redwood trees was a first for me. Totally inspiring.

[garyb]

i'd agree, the Scope developers have made some excellent tools which are approriate for the most proffessional use. which you prefer is best left up to you, however for the price of the waves tools, you could own just about all of them, which places Scope at a huge advantage, once you own a card, imho...

[CreamWare4Ever]

Well they just didn't sound too great to me at all... wasn't impressed by the 'tube' saturation or supposed analog colouring etc. But if you're about to buy them I assume you've tried them out? If you're happy with the sound then it's not important at all what I think of them. But if you haven't tried them and are just going on word of mouth or whatever, you should probably try out a few EQs before you buy something that might not be that great. There are many many good EQ plugins on Windows... Voxengo, Sonnox, Kjaerhus, etc.. have a look on kvraudio.com

Well yes, I have tried them and I think that they are doing a great job on female vocals. Especially because they don't add that ugly harassed sound on higher parts in frequency band. That is very important to me. But I guess that low cutting is the easiest part, for any EQ? Even Scopes built in PEQ 4?

Thanks.

[Neutron]

I just started using a Compressor live for the first time and it really makes a big difference in my mix.
It's a trick that I learned by reading a Cubase thread here from MD69 about Sidechaining.
Although it was a Cubase trick, I applied it to the Scope platform and since the DAS Compressors are liked by many guys here and have Sidechaining, I tried it and it works for Bass & Drums perfectly.
Optimaster also works well w/ the Crossover freq.'s, but seems better suited for an entire mix. The DAS 1610++ is just more tweakable for this particular use.
On VDAT #1, I have taken the L & R Kick drum tracks and sent them into the Mixer, and " Y'd " a second pair to the Sidechaining inputs of the 1610++. The entire live performance and pre recorded tracks are sent into the 1610++ and Compressed by the Kick Drum's SC'ing so now all synth/Bass low freq's get compressed only when the sound of the Kick drum triggers.
Pretty neat shit actually, as I was never happy mixing a Live 5 string Tobias, w/ pre recorded drums and an Analog Synth Bass simultaneously. Just too much shit going on.
It now has a much better polished sound. The poor Bartender has his head at speaker level as we are on an elevated stage behind the bar. He could even hear the difference as the Sub doesn't rattle his pyramids of glasses as much.
I also use a great Channel Strip that takes the lead vocal Direct out, where mono gets converted to stereo, and sent to the DAS C350 Channel Strip for EQ and and the final treatment of it's Gate. The Gate allows me to use giant reverb Halls & Algo's, and maintains all of the transients pre & post, but clips the tails and totally eliminates any stage noise also.

I could not even be having this discussion if it wasn't for the insane amount of routing that the DAS Mixer allows. I mix 4 sets of wireless ear monitors, 4 x Barbetta powered monitors w/ a SUB, and an additional Rotary Cabinet. I can switch from the Cue Mix to the Mains for adjustments on the fly to a particular ear monitor mix, etc. Mute the Mains, etc.
I am aware of no other mixer in ProTools, VST or hardware that can do this. Actually we were using our Bassists hardware rig which was a pair of Crest XRM's, and with his help I learned all of the hidden details in this single DSP application only after using hardware during our pre production rehearsals last Spring. Outdoor rehearsals in Tahoe with ear monitors while smelling the Giant Redwood trees was a first for me. Totally inspiring.

whats with the photoshopped mixer? i dont understand

[CreamWare4Ever]

I just started using a Compressor live for the first time and it really makes a big difference in my mix...Totally inspiring.

I admit that routing possibilities of Scope platform is fantastic! I remember when I went over to Scope platform that it was a whole new world opening its doors.

I have worked with several well known EQ and dynamic plugs in my host application Cubase but I have never used Scope in XTC mode. Now, I want try to find Scope compatible EQ and dynamics that on Scope board sounds equal as this expensive EQ and dynamics plugins that I have been using in Cubase, as *awes, *omad *actrory, CSR *Classic *Studio *everb etc.

What is confusing me, is that I could not find so many established developers that are doing stuff for Scope platform. And that is a big enigma to me I must admit. So I don't have a easy task here, I will appreciate your inputs.

Regards.

[sonolive]

hi cw4e

As I have very sensitive ears when it come to sound, especially EQ part (...),

hey that's fantastic !
why not use them & try by yourself ...

But if you haven't tried them and are just going on word of mouth or whatever,

agree...

have a look at DAS website ... http://www.digitalaudiosoft.com (a non "established" company), here there are plenty of eq & comps, in demo versions, they were made for this : TRY BEFORE BUY ... i you like them ... for sure !

more : it's winter special till dec 31 ... you could save money.

cheerz
olive

[garyb]

I just started using a Compressor live for the first time and it really makes a big difference in my mix...Totally inspiring.

I admit that routing possibilities of Scope platform is fantastic! I remember when I went over to Scope platform that it was a whole new world opening its doors.

I have worked with several well known EQ and dynamic plugs in my host application Cubase but I have never used Scope in XTC mode. Now, I want try to find Scope compatible EQ and dynamics that on Scope board sounds equal as this expensive EQ and dynamics plugins that I have been using in Cubase, as *awes, *omad *actrory, CSR *Classic *Studio *everb etc.

What is confusing me, is that I could not find so many established developers that are doing stuff for Scope platform. And that is a big enigma to me I must admit. So I don't have a easy task here, I will appreciate your inputs.

Regards.

if you think those plugins are really great(*awes, *omad *actrory, CSR *Classic *Studio *everb etc.), then i'll bet you haven't used much of the real gear that inspired them...

i'd be glad to have a discussion over wires or face to face about it, i just can't type that much or in that much detail. pm me if it really matters..

as to major established developers, that's a sad reality and also no big deal at all. it's a sad reality because Scope devices aren't developed in the same process as a vst plugin and there are relatively few systems out there, so the major guys won't be doing much with Scope because there's not enough dollars for the extra work for them. it's no big deal because there are a number of talented guys making WORLD CLASS devices for Scope. most of the TOOLS required for an audio engineer to do his job are included or available for Scope. you can STILL use any vsts that you like, it's win, win.

the gear business is a funny one. it's all about publicity. the thing is, as i always say, is does the gear sound good? if it does, then it is NEVER obsolete.

most who will buy a computer and make music don't even know what to listen for. they have opinions, but no real knowledge of how gear works or what it's for and then they use lots of plugins and are deleriously happy. there's NOTHING wrong with that, it's all happiness, but i'd say that those who know real gear will appreciate Scope and they will find that they have real TOOLS(that word again) that an audio professional needs to do real work. if Scope plugins like compressors and eqs available currently aren't good enough, then the user needs more scholling on how to use them. jmo, backed up by gladiator's oscar for sound and two consecutive years' grammy nominations(from a time BEFORE Brainworx' and Wolf's and DAS's excellent eqs and dynamic processors).

[CreamWare4Ever]

hi cw4e
have a look at DAS website ... http://www.digitalaudiosoft.com (a non "established" company), here there are plenty of eq & comps, in demo versions, they were made for this : TRY BEFORE BUY ... i you like them ... for sure !
olive

Yes I will, I guess the only way for me to find what I need is to do it 'hard way' - listen, measure and add to tracks...

[CreamWare4Ever]

I just started using a Compressor live for the first time and it really makes a big difference in my mix...Totally inspiring.

I admit that routing possibilities of Scope platform is fantastic! I remember when I went over to Scope platform that it was a whole new world opening its doors.

I have worked with several well known EQ and dynamic plugs in my host application Cubase but I have never used Scope in XTC mode. Now, I want try to find Scope compatible EQ and dynamics that on Scope board sounds equal as this expensive EQ and dynamics plugins that I have been using in Cubase, as *awes, *omad *actrory, CSR *Classic *Studio *everb etc.

What is confusing me, is that I could not find so many established developers that are doing stuff for Scope platform. And that is a big enigma to me I must admit. So I don't have a easy task here, I will appreciate your inputs.

Regards.

if you think those plugins are really great(*awes, *omad *actrory, CSR *Classic *Studio *everb etc.), then i'll bet you haven't used much of the real gear that inspired them...

i'd be glad to have a discussion over wires or face to face about it, i just can't type that much or in that much detail. pm me if it really matters..

as to major established developers, that's a sad reality and also no big deal at all. it's a sad reality because Scope devices aren't developed in the same process as a vst plugin and there are relatively few systems out there, so the major guys won't be doing much with Scope because there's not enough dollars for the extra work for them. it's no big deal because there are a number of talented guys making WORLD CLASS devices for Scope. most of the TOOLS required for an audio engineer to do his job are included or available for Scope. you can STILL use any vsts that you like, it's win, win.

the gear business is a funny one. it's all about publicity. the thing is, as i always say, is does the gear sound good? if it does, then it is NEVER obsolete.

most who will buy a computer and make music don't even know what to listen for. they have opinions, but no real knowledge of how gear works or what it's for and then they use lots of plugins and are deleriously happy. there's NOTHING wrong with that, it's all happiness, but i'd say that those who know real gear will appreciate Scope and they will find that they have real TOOLS(that word again) that an audio professional needs to do real work. if Scope plugins like compressors and eqs available currently aren't good enough, then the user needs more scholling on how to use them. jmo, backed up by gladiator's oscar for sound and two consecutive years' grammy nominations(from a time BEFORE Brainworx' and Wolf's and DAS's excellent eqs and dynamic processors).

I admit that I haven't used so much external hardware when it comes to EQ, so I can't quite say if he plugs sounds as they do.

Basically, I don't want EQ to give any extra 'color' to applied tracks, just that it does NOT add that awful harassed sound on high frequencies, and that it have a more analog like processing curve when it come to precision.

That because compressor I use tend do give that 'analogue' color, just a bit, so there is no point to do it twice. That is just a fragment of whole story (...), but yes, my intention is to try to do one complete mastering and mix with Scope (3 DPS) in XTC mode. In that way I will see if it is possible to me to go over completely on Scope based plugins, or its built in mixer...

[garyb]

well, the 3dsp card can only help you.

i mean no disrespect. i am always tempted to poke at someone who is looking for something more "analog", when they haven't used much high-end analog gear. analog can certainly be as crappy as "digital", that's for sure. the comment about the bad distorted high frequencies i understand, however. if it makes you feel better, the stock eq was used in the Fairlight Constellation, one of those 1/4mil$ consoles a few years ago. it's pretty good. eqs that color are pretty darned cool too, depending on what you're doing. "coloring" is kinda why you put a filter on it anyway, but for say just a clean low or high pass or a simple notch, the stock eq is pretty clean. Wolf's is better if you prefer something more scientificly minded(but musical still, it's nice sounding) and DAS makes both eqs that mimic older classic sounding units and more "transparent" models.

you really can't have too many eqs, but you can use too many. you'll find something that you like and use it more than the others, and that's fine, whatever you like. really though, if you need to do a lot of eqing, you'd be better off fixing the room and choosing a better mic and mic pre for the job(better, not necessarily more or less expensive). mangling a nice signal usually works better than mangling a poor one.

really analog vst compressors? no, not really. i own a dbx 165, 160 and 166 among others, and have used LA2As and 1176s. ProTools H/D and Scope have real compressors. vsts are useable, sound great, and i'm even willing to condone money paid to the developers, but unless they are very resource hungry, aren't remotely like the real thing(actually, much "analog" gear has been digital for quite some time).