EQ 73 and EQ 81 New T-RackS Custom Shop classic British EQ models released

VST, AU, AAX, CLAP, etc. Plugin Virtual Effects Discussion
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

sergiofrias wrote:
still waiting for a answer from Peter...
Ah i see sine sweep police dropped already.

What are you expecting really? It's like you are expecting that they should give an answer to a plot which is compared to Nebula in a way that Nebula plot is holy shit reference laser engraved in stone. What the heck?? Tell me why should IK Neve follow Nebula plot or why should they need to be same? What the heck? It's a sampled program going through chain of AD/DA. And one can't exactly be sure how dude sampled it..

I am not saying that Nebula is worse or better all i am wanting to point out this that you really should compare this plugin to hardware and post a plot. Not a sampled hardware. Come on..It's lame..


Guys these are really good sounding EQs. You should really try them out. They easily outperform other plugins in this Neve area (it's my imho of course).

Post

kmonkey wrote:
sergiofrias wrote:
still waiting for a answer from Peter...
Ah i see sine sweep police dropped already.

What are you expecting really? It's like you are expecting that they should give an answer to a plot which is compared to Nebula in a way that Nebula plot is holy shit reference laser engraved in stone.
:hihi: :hihi:

Post

Out of curiousity, does anyone have any music mixed primarily with T-Racks plugs? I'm curious to hear what kind of results people are getting.

Post

kmonkey wrote: Guys these are really good sounding EQs. You should really try them out. They easily outperform other plugins in this Neve area (it's my imho of course).
Maybe. But the rent is too high!

Post

yevster wrote:Out of curiousity, does anyone have any music mixed primarily with T-Racks plugs? I'm curious to hear what kind of results people are getting.
I'd say it's about the same as anything else. Back when I got the "british" bundle for 75 bucks I sold myself on the idea that the buss was terrific and the channel strips were just a bonus. I don't really use them anymore. I think the solid mix buss comp is a bit better and the channel strips are kinda meh to me. Originally I liked the gates in them but I guess I was just gasing at the time because I don't care for it much now.

I love the 432 though. It easily outperforms the premium tube series for a nice after eq on a full mix.

Another real gem is the "black" compressor. Nothing else I've tried comes close imho.

Post

sergiofrias wrote:here is a demonstration:

t-racks
Image

Nebula
Image
Come to think of it, two things clearly glare at me.

Nebula's Noise Floor is fairly high at -60dBFS. This is unusual for Alex B, who modifies his gear to have lower noise floor and barely any crosstalk. In turn, T-Rack's British EQ noise floor is unholy low at -132dBFS. I expected more like noise at -100dBFS (which is still barely noticable).

Then again, I think that the T-Racks plugin (from the sweep animation) might suffer aliasing, as (also see my comment on page 1) there seems to be a harmonic mirroring in the lower frequency ranges as soon as the sweep reaches 8kHz. Chances are, this plugin doesn't use oversampling. Also, the 4th harmonic is really jumpy - which in turn means "no static fingerprint".


So... yeah... "sweep police" indeed in control again.
Further tests are needed. That comparision along only provides assumptions and no really usable data.
[ Mix Challenge ] | [ Studio Page / Twitter ] | [ KVRmarks (see: metering tools) ]

Post

kmonkey wrote:
sergiofrias wrote:
still waiting for a answer from Peter...
Ah i see sine sweep police dropped already.

What are you expecting really? It's like you are expecting that they should give an answer to a plot which is compared to Nebula in a way that Nebula plot is holy shit reference laser engraved in stone. What the heck?? Tell me why should IK Neve follow Nebula plot or why should they need to be same? What the heck? It's a sampled program going through chain of AD/DA. And one can't exactly be sure how dude sampled it..

I am not saying that Nebula is worse or better all i am wanting to point out this that you really should compare this plugin to hardware and post a plot. Not a sampled hardware. Come on..It's lame..


Guys these are really good sounding EQs. You should really try them out. They easily outperform other plugins in this Neve area (it's my imho of course).
Hello Kmonkey,what i expect it's to have the best emulation at my hands(i'm a little tired of seing so many emulations on the market and haven't found one that is 100% or even near acurate modelled...it would be nice to see some comparison since i don't have the real unit .Just because someone tells you that the product it's accurate modeled, doesn't prove that it's 100% true .when i mentioned Nebula,it's because it samples (using Volterra kernel)and should provide accurate measurements of the real unit,so that is the one that i used for my test.AlexB nebula programs are usually high quality,and you are right that there is always some doubt on the sampling procedure,but i dont think so...so we get to a dilemma...how should we know? it's also true that no unit it's pefectly equal,so it's better to compare to the hardware used by IK multimedia in their testings,if they could provide their comparison plots it's the only way to know how precise they were at the modeling...Also i'ved asked a few months ago for some plots of the harmonic distortion on Gearsluts (see below),i've seen some similarities on the harmonic distortion,but i don't understand how some new emulations like waves scheps 73 don't seem to match...the curves are very similar but the harmonic distortion ,not so much.

here is a example from the real unit provided by a user at Gearsluts:

Image

Here is my comparisons done in the past against other emulations:
Image
...want to know how to program great synth sounds,check my video tutorials: http://www.youtube.com/user/sergiofrias25

Post

sergiofrias wrote:>snip< ,what i expect it's to have the best emulation at my hands(i'm a little tired of seing so many emulations on the market and haven't found one that is 100% or even near acurate modelled...it would be nice to see some comparison since i don't have the real unit . >/snip<

And the debate can end right there. Because there is ultimately no best or one and only solution. I've been there, I tried to create listings of hardware emulation, people will have a different opinion about this.

You should learn one thing:
Each module sounds different - unless it's part of a set and each of them is finetuned.


So if Developer A measures Unit A, but Developer B measures unit B - chances are that the outcome will be different. Some people might like a more prominent sound (again, the Alex B sweep has a huge noise floor - was this thing recorded individually or through the console - which changes the sound drastically), other might like a more digital approach. While yet another fraction of people is happy with what they get.

If we go even more into detail, then stuff like crosstalk (with stereo modules) and stereo/multi mono processing is just as important. Stuff that is not posted with screenshots.


The plot from GS you posted shows me, that this device was measured directly (read: pulled out of the console, and not ran through). And it has fairly low values in terms of both total harmonic distortion (-70dBFS), a SNR ratio of 70dB (which is the dynamic range before the signal drowns into the noise). The harmonics on the hardware are fairly low however - so the effect of the saturation might be more than subtle.

Looking at your plot comparison, the harmonics are way higher. Sometimes reaching up to -40dBFS - therefore the total harmonic distortion (value) might be higher (smaller value), and therefore also the SNR ratio (dynamic range).

Also, I'm surprised that the N-Ten-AT4 is considered as saturator - last time I tested I didn't remember seeing harmonic distortion. PSP Classic Q is "inspired by" (and the plot gives me the impression to be a standard digital waveshaper - just like with N-Ten-AT4). Tessla Pro is (IIRC) also "inspired by" - unless bootsie had access to a Neve module at that time. That are small but important details.

I also miss the Nomad Factory, the Waves and the UAD versions. MelloMuse also has a Neve esque EQ - but IIRC, no saturation. Which is however somewhat built into SATV. Then I also miss Slate Digital's and Waves' console plugins (granted, two totally different Neves - even if they're from similar timespans and both utilize the 10xx as EQs).

If you're after the preamp (saturation) only - there's still a lot to test for you. If you try to find your holy grail.



Which one is superior?
Whatever sounds best to you and makes you feel the most comfortable. Add to that a personal preference of "being based upon" (which is sometimes a guess-timation) or "modeled after" (which is usually measured) and you should have the answer you're looking for.


Sorry - but we can't solve your quest.
[ Mix Challenge ] | [ Studio Page / Twitter ] | [ KVRmarks (see: metering tools) ]

Post

Thank you Compyfox,you are correct on every statement...but still i believe my quest would be solved by having the developers comparison plots, imho it's the only way to know if they modeled correctly the nonlinearities of the hardware (that they have at their hands) :D.

Apart from this discussion i want to mention that T-racks version is a nice eq ,i like the look of the knobs,and the curves are very identical to other competitors as for the saturation i can't tell yet,bu they seem better that other emulations.And i've also enjoyed to see that they got the frequency response modeled (slight bump on the low end,and slight loss at the highs)wich imparts a warm tone very characteristical of the original.
...want to know how to program great synth sounds,check my video tutorials: http://www.youtube.com/user/sergiofrias25

Post

Shouldn't whether you like the sound or not be the end of it? That's what I go by.
Brian Garrison
Tracks In The Box
YouTube | Facebook

Post

b15fliptop wrote:Shouldn't whether you like the sound or not be the end of it? That's what I go by.
this.

The other stuff just confuses me. I mean, I want the best possible (money allowing) but either it hits the sweet spot or not :)

Post

Finally got to give this a shot. Very nice indeed. I wasn't sure I'd ever buy another plugin EQ since I almost exclusively use EQuilibrium at this point, but I really like how colorful this is. There is a LOT going on here, and a small knob adjustment can go a very long way here. I also really like the difference between the Line and Mic transformers. If you shut the EQ off, but leave the unit itself on, you essentially end up with a Neve channel strip. No need for VCC or another channel plugin. You can even chain together multiple with one on Mic and another on Line for a nice, colorful, combo.

Anyway, I really like this, but $125 for one is too much. I'll probably hang back and check out Slate's VMR, or wait for a Group Buy so I can get a T-Racks Neve bundle for cheap.

Post

Compyfox wrote:
sergiofrias wrote:here is a demonstration:

t-racks
Image

Nebula
Image
Come to think of it, two things clearly glare at me.

Nebula's Noise Floor is fairly high at -60dBFS. This is unusual for Alex B, who modifies his gear to have lower noise floor and barely any crosstalk. In turn, T-Rack's British EQ noise floor is unholy low at -132dBFS. I expected more like noise at -100dBFS (which is still barely noticable).

Then again, I think that the T-Racks plugin (from the sweep animation) might suffer aliasing, as (also see my comment on page 1) there seems to be a harmonic mirroring in the lower frequency ranges as soon as the sweep reaches 8kHz. Chances are, this plugin doesn't use oversampling. Also, the 4th harmonic is really jumpy - which in turn means "no static fingerprint".


So... yeah... "sweep police" indeed in control again.
Further tests are needed. That comparision along only provides assumptions and no really usable data.
Eh? I think you are confusing the two pictures. It's the exact opposite way around, no?

I can't see any noise at -60dBFS on the neubla image. On the contrary, the noise is way down.. there are some harmonics pretty high up but that's it.

The t-racks version has obviously modeled the noise as it sits around 90 to 100dBFS.

EDIT: -60dBFS noise in the t-racks at very low frequencies.

Am I missing something?
"Wisdom is wisdom, regardless of the idiot who said it." -an idiot

Post

Man... working with paint and having a broken sleep rhythm sure must have messed with my head. Totally messed up here.

I indeed mixed up Nebula with T-Racks. In this case, damn the noise is high on this plot. But from this plot alone, I'd still say the noise is around -90dBFS (which is acceptable, but still fairly high). Now if I'd take a closer look at this plugin, I'd test the stereo mode next (is it processing each channel independent or as if it's mono), then crosstalk (which could in such plots with that type of noise), how the frequency response is (behavior of the filters), etc.

Taking another look at it, there are also no distinct harmonics - the plot for T-Racks looks like a plain waveshaper, continuously "rippling on" (also no oversampling?!). While the Nebula plot (which I mixed up in the first place) has both an ultra low noise floor; and due to the limit of Nebula (IIRC no oversampling - unless the presets are in 96kHz and measured at 96kHz) thrown back harmonics as soon as the sweep passes 8kHz.



Of course this could be an issue with the test files and the measurement tool. But now that I look at it again - it sure is glaring into your face compared to the actual hardware plot, Waves VEQ3. And I also remember old tests I did with Slate VCC and Nomad Factory's British EQ - they look more like the Nebula plot, but with modeled noise.

Dunno what I should think about that to be honest.
[ Mix Challenge ] | [ Studio Page / Twitter ] | [ KVRmarks (see: metering tools) ]

Post

Compyfox wrote:
antithesist wrote:Comply fox need PSP... Amek and MCI there just for you.
You probably mean McQ. Tried that one once, used the Noble Q at a clients place.

Don't like the GUI/the handling, certain prices are off the roof. PSP is nothing special anymore. Especially compared to such excellent freeware like SlickEQ recently, or low other budget tools.

But I like the idea (even if it's a fixed concept), same with the RedlineEQ or the currently way too much out of my pricerange exisiting "EQulibrium" by Dave Gamble (which in turn is a logical evolution of concepts like AIXcoustic's ElectriQ). That is IMO forward thinking.

Though clones do have a right of existence. If it wouldn't be the same all over again.
Dude, are you a girl or what?

The consoleq is Amek and mcq is MCI(Sony).

I think you'd like equilibrium... we have that, equality, equick and pitchfunk from DMG.

Make some money and buy quality (though you do have a point about good free stuff like TD, etc.).

I'm actually glad there are new models of classics.

That's how things get better.

I would also like to see some less or even first modeled gear as plug-ins too, though.
WEASEL: World Electro-Acoustic Sound Excitation Laboratories

Post Reply

Return to “Effects”