Today, Universal Audio released a couple of new modeled plugins. One is an upgrade to the Neve 88RS channel strip plugin to make it a Unison plugin for the Apollo interface. One was a Marshall-approved amp modeler plugin, about which more in a moment.
The way UA's Unison plugins work is that they send a digital instruction to a real analog preamp, and the preamp changes its actual physical topology in several ways, The plugin then adds some digital color to the sound in other ways. I have three Unison plugins, and already had the channel strip plugin, so the upgrade was kind of a no-brainer, although it was a $150 no-brainer, which is damned expensive for a version upgrade for a plugin. But the point is, this combination does work pretty well, and I think one reason it works is that it includes a physical analog preamp whose circuits change a bit and have the character of a real piece of hardware.
I'd rather have a couple of Neve preamps, which I used to have, and so that is going to happen, but in the meantime, a preamp isn't an instrument, and you hear more mic and instrument than you do preamp, so I can temporarily live with these. But I'm moving back in that analog direction for that soon.
OK, so much for that.
Then I listened to the UA Marshall plugin demo video. I was hoping for goodness. The website said it was the best amp plugin ever, maybe.
The video started off saying in effect, "The classic Marshall blah blah blah does this and that..." the idea being that you were supposedly listening to a real Marshall as the camera was focused on the real amp, a cab, a mic, in a studio.
I immediately said, "That's not a very well recorded Marshall, it sounds more like a model." Immediately the video said something to the effect of, "You have actually been listening to the new Marshall plugin." And it went on to say how it might be the best Marshall model ever, etc. All I could think was, "It wasn't very convincing at all." It is a typical digital amp plugin, somewhat two dimensional, somewhat lacking dynamics, with a mushy attack. I wasn't fooled for one second!
You know, UA, you can pee on my shoe, but for goodness' sake, don't tell me it's raining. I have a Plexi style amp in my studio, and I know what they sound like in a recording. Not fooled.
Later in the evening, I happened to read a Tape Op review of the Big Trees 2.5 watt amp and pedal combination made by Audio Kitchen. It was interesting, Audio Kitchen makes some superb stuff that gets used on records, and while it's a little on the unusual side to say the least, it's also cool. So I went to the website and watched some video.
In one, the famed producers Flood and Alan Moulder came on the screen, and they started talking about how modeled synths don't sit in mixes, using the same terms I often use when I discuss these things with people. How they sound great solo'd, but when you put them in a mix they turn to mush - I think Flood said it's just a "cloud".
So they talked about how they do something that I've also been doing off and on for 13 years with digital synths: They run the tracks through tube amps. Suddenly they sit in the mix much better, and all is well with the mix. And it's true, I've done it many times, and it works. Evidently they find this pedal/mini amp useful for that purpose.
I think they are talking around the same phenomenon I've discussed - digital distortion sounds different from the nonlinearities and harmonics generated in an analog circuit. Most of the soft synths these days try to emulate that analog circuit nonlinearity and distortion, but they fail to do it convincingly, at least for those who understand what putting together good recordings is all about.
In any case, I felt a lot better hearing two world famous record producers discussing issues I think about a lot, but it also reinforced something I've been thinking about. Namely, acoustic instruments sound wonderful and pleasing because they generate fundamentals and many harmonics. Electric guitars do the same thing through guitar amps. But when one gets to modelers and sampled sounds, nuance is missing, and that nuance is something that is important to the ear.
I used to do a trick with sampled drums. I'd play them back through my studio monitors and put up a couple of mics in the room, record that signal, and blend it with the sampled drum sounds. I stopped doing that at some point because so often there just wasn't time. But the sound of the room, recorded via mics, and into mic preamps, did something for the mix, and the drums sat better. I'm going to start doing that again.
In any case, I've decided that it is my obligation not to my clients, but to my art, to use real instruments or at least run digital synths into amps, whenever possible. I'd recently stopped using sampled basses and modeled guitar amps altogether. I have already switched from digital delay to a real tube tape delay for things I want to sound like a real tape delay.
If I use a soft synth, it will be run through an amplifier and cab.
Will my clients hear a difference? Who knows. Will I hear a difference? Yes. And it will matter to me and give me more inspiration and satisfaction in my work. Mixing and recording is fun if you aren't rushing through it and if you care enough to do the most artistic work possible. And ultimately, even TV ad music is an art form, albeit a commercial one. But if I can do better audio work, I think that's a good thing.
As they say, the devil is in the details, and I've decided to spend what relatively few years remain in my studio life thinking more about, and attending to, those details. I think I'll enjoy my work, and therefore my life, more. :top:
End of Manifesto.
The way UA's Unison plugins work is that they send a digital instruction to a real analog preamp, and the preamp changes its actual physical topology in several ways, The plugin then adds some digital color to the sound in other ways. I have three Unison plugins, and already had the channel strip plugin, so the upgrade was kind of a no-brainer, although it was a $150 no-brainer, which is damned expensive for a version upgrade for a plugin. But the point is, this combination does work pretty well, and I think one reason it works is that it includes a physical analog preamp whose circuits change a bit and have the character of a real piece of hardware.
I'd rather have a couple of Neve preamps, which I used to have, and so that is going to happen, but in the meantime, a preamp isn't an instrument, and you hear more mic and instrument than you do preamp, so I can temporarily live with these. But I'm moving back in that analog direction for that soon.
OK, so much for that.
Then I listened to the UA Marshall plugin demo video. I was hoping for goodness. The website said it was the best amp plugin ever, maybe.
The video started off saying in effect, "The classic Marshall blah blah blah does this and that..." the idea being that you were supposedly listening to a real Marshall as the camera was focused on the real amp, a cab, a mic, in a studio.
I immediately said, "That's not a very well recorded Marshall, it sounds more like a model." Immediately the video said something to the effect of, "You have actually been listening to the new Marshall plugin." And it went on to say how it might be the best Marshall model ever, etc. All I could think was, "It wasn't very convincing at all." It is a typical digital amp plugin, somewhat two dimensional, somewhat lacking dynamics, with a mushy attack. I wasn't fooled for one second!
You know, UA, you can pee on my shoe, but for goodness' sake, don't tell me it's raining. I have a Plexi style amp in my studio, and I know what they sound like in a recording. Not fooled.
Later in the evening, I happened to read a Tape Op review of the Big Trees 2.5 watt amp and pedal combination made by Audio Kitchen. It was interesting, Audio Kitchen makes some superb stuff that gets used on records, and while it's a little on the unusual side to say the least, it's also cool. So I went to the website and watched some video.
In one, the famed producers Flood and Alan Moulder came on the screen, and they started talking about how modeled synths don't sit in mixes, using the same terms I often use when I discuss these things with people. How they sound great solo'd, but when you put them in a mix they turn to mush - I think Flood said it's just a "cloud".
So they talked about how they do something that I've also been doing off and on for 13 years with digital synths: They run the tracks through tube amps. Suddenly they sit in the mix much better, and all is well with the mix. And it's true, I've done it many times, and it works. Evidently they find this pedal/mini amp useful for that purpose.
I think they are talking around the same phenomenon I've discussed - digital distortion sounds different from the nonlinearities and harmonics generated in an analog circuit. Most of the soft synths these days try to emulate that analog circuit nonlinearity and distortion, but they fail to do it convincingly, at least for those who understand what putting together good recordings is all about.
In any case, I felt a lot better hearing two world famous record producers discussing issues I think about a lot, but it also reinforced something I've been thinking about. Namely, acoustic instruments sound wonderful and pleasing because they generate fundamentals and many harmonics. Electric guitars do the same thing through guitar amps. But when one gets to modelers and sampled sounds, nuance is missing, and that nuance is something that is important to the ear.
I used to do a trick with sampled drums. I'd play them back through my studio monitors and put up a couple of mics in the room, record that signal, and blend it with the sampled drum sounds. I stopped doing that at some point because so often there just wasn't time. But the sound of the room, recorded via mics, and into mic preamps, did something for the mix, and the drums sat better. I'm going to start doing that again.
In any case, I've decided that it is my obligation not to my clients, but to my art, to use real instruments or at least run digital synths into amps, whenever possible. I'd recently stopped using sampled basses and modeled guitar amps altogether. I have already switched from digital delay to a real tube tape delay for things I want to sound like a real tape delay.
If I use a soft synth, it will be run through an amplifier and cab.
Will my clients hear a difference? Who knows. Will I hear a difference? Yes. And it will matter to me and give me more inspiration and satisfaction in my work. Mixing and recording is fun if you aren't rushing through it and if you care enough to do the most artistic work possible. And ultimately, even TV ad music is an art form, albeit a commercial one. But if I can do better audio work, I think that's a good thing.
As they say, the devil is in the details, and I've decided to spend what relatively few years remain in my studio life thinking more about, and attending to, those details. I think I'll enjoy my work, and therefore my life, more. :top:
End of Manifesto.
Last edited: