There are actually several scenarios:TheoM wrote:if the IK one is modelling all the nuances of the hardware, and VCC is modelling say an analog desk i/o path, and someone uses a real 1073 hardware to record something, but they are mixing the song afterwards thorough a real analog desk (let's say for this scenario someone has tracked the audio to the computer but each audio interface output is going back into an input in the analog desk), wouldn't this also reproduce the "undesirable" scenario that VCC and 1073 plugin together produce? I mean my point is, i am sure in life, there has been every possible combination of analog hardware interfacing with other analog hardware...and in all these years there has been some great sounding music...
1073 -> ADC -> Host (Tape machine) -> DAC -> analog mixing console
Host (tape machine) -> DAC -> analog mixing console with the 1073 built in
1073 -> ADC -> Host (Tape machine) -> console plugins -> DAC
There is either the NEVE console with the 1073 or the 1081 built in - so this should be considered as "one device" (preamp -> EQ), even if it's technically several modules connected (preamp -> filter band with an own circuit per band -> next filter band, etc), and then there are the NEVE outboard modules (like one of the many hardware clones) that come with with the same (or a similar) preamp built in.
But this is not part of a console. It's a rack module. So it only has an input, and an output. It isn't forwarded to a summing bus or something.
So what Slate can do in theory with VCC -> VMR (Neve) is actually creating one 1073 module with a preamp, but spread over two plugins. While the IKM has this all built into one - and each individual modules can't be turned off. Mixing and matching wouldn't be that easy in modern environments or out-the-box thinking.
Well, this is why Gain Staging and actually "underdriving" the console was (and still is) so important. Add to that, that for each pass through a tape, and back through a console again, you need to add some high shelf compensation.TheoM wrote:What happened to those before digital recording even existed and they were using a 1970 early edition 1073 and an old school console? They would have no choice but to have them plugged in together, and then recording to tape to top it all off! (the tape would obviously be going back through the desk).
This can be easily reproduced in your host.
i.e. with an 8 track mix. Load VCC as first slot, then have a tape at the end of the chain, render it (print to tape). Reload the rendered tracks, load VCC as first insert again, as last insert (per channel) once more a tape machine, render. Rinse and repeat. Though the changes should be drastic after 2 prints already. Especially if the signals were properly gain staged (therefore the VU needed hovering in the hotspots).
You will notice a somewhat desired "distortion" of the signal (which let it sound warm, fuzzy and nice - in modern buzzwords). But you will also notice a considerable high frequency loss - worst case scenario even a bass boost. This needs to be compensated.
Ever wondered why certain recordings in the late 60ies to early 80ies sounded either muddy or too midrange heavy? This is one of the reasons.
Yes - with restrictions, and a close ear on what needs to be compensated if frequencies are lost or emphasized (due to the saturation).TheoM wrote:So, in theory, one should even be able to use vcc/satson/NLS, VTN/Satin/Reelbus etc ect, AND the ik all on the same channel.. as this would have been done in the real world in analog many times!
This is the thing... IKM is not "wrong" per se... they just take on a different concept and took my comments down the wrong pipe. They don't see the EQ and the preamp as two different modules in one shell. They see it as a whole.TheoM wrote:My question therefore is, is it possible IK did not model the circuitry of the 1073 correctly?
I am sure if we push them they will add a switch to turn it off, i mean they are a very receptive company, and just use it as an EQ. When you think about it, so many plugins are offering some sort of analog modelling "mojo", that it all stacks up, of course. But this has been going on for years and your comment took me by surprise that the IK can't really be used in combination with a console emu. I never heard this about other plugins.
Again:
Slate thinks of each module as "individual module" in a console. Hence VCC and now VMR (with very little added preamp "sound" for either the NEVE or the SSL, but saturation on boost for the NEVE - think TDL SlickEQ). So you load VCC Channel -> VMR = NEVE/SSL channel strip.
This is a highly flexible concept, and you can mix and match your console with a custom EQ to your hearts content. In my case, I love to mix the VCC Brit N with either the Focusrite Midnight or NF British NEQ (1081). Or with VCC RC Tube and the ALL-TECH 9063B (US-ified, "bastardized" REDD.37)
IKM's NEVE looks more like a 19" rack module. Plug in the cables in the back, send a signal through it, then the output goes into the PC. The PC itself is then the "digital console". So you get both the preamp effect, and the EQ saturation (on boost!). And that is also it's main problem: you can't separate the "sound", or mix and match to your liking without certain restrictions.
If you mix and match with another console within the DAW environment, you add "more" on top of what's already there. This makes it less flexible IMO. Or on the other hand, this makes other plugins obsolete (like console emulation -> EQ -> summing bus emulation). However you want to see it of course. And depending on how far you want to "abuse" that.
Personally, I prefer flexibility.
If IKM would say "okay, let's add a switch to turn off the preamp, but still offer the EQ including it's saturation per band/boost"... then it's just as flexible compared to what's already on the market. And then, there wouldn't have been such an uproar about my comments.
I think this is all down to personal taste and personal preference how you work for sure.TheoM wrote:So, the scenario is, a hardware 1073 going through a analog desk do not sound good in the real world, OR, the IK is modelled inaccurately, OR it's just your personal taste. It has to be one of those three.
You understood my posts perfectly at this point.TheoM wrote:I need to try this out in combination with other analog emulation plugins myself, but i guess if there is a problem, it's quite easy to just not have a vcc or equivalent on that channel that uses the IK neve, or even just use the Ik never on every single channel as a vcc alternative for certain projects (i.e not necessarily using the EQ portion).
Would love to hear your further thoughts
Busy over here, but I'm fine. Thanks.TheoM wrote:Cheers, hope you been well!