McDSP 6050 on sale

VST, AU, AAX, CLAP, etc. Plugin Virtual Effects Discussion
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

just got this as stopped my slate subscription recently

Post

JerGoertz wrote: Sun Oct 20, 2019 7:42 pm
reggie1979 wrote: Sat Oct 19, 2019 1:44 am
jochicago wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:28 pm I think among the requirements to be a KVR senior community member is to have at least 50 compressors.

:lol:
+1
AND to participate at least at 50 threads which compare them to any existing compressor [or compressors that are in the ballpark]

Post

Question: Are the separate 6020 Ultimate EQ and 6030 Ultimate Compressor plugins just their respective modules taken out of this channel strip?

I own the 6030 and I'm considering getting the 6020 EQs... but maybe I should have just bought 6050 to begin with?

Post

MogwaiBoy wrote: Mon Oct 21, 2019 5:50 pm Question: Are the separate 6020 Ultimate EQ and 6030 Ultimate Compressor plugins just their respective modules taken out of this channel strip?

I own the 6030 and I'm considering getting the 6020 EQs... but maybe I should have just bought 6050 to begin with?
Not completely 100%, but you could consider the 6050 as [(6020+6030)+even better]
It does not hurt to have the 6020 and 6030 as well.
:tu:
“In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.”

Post

Any must have McDSP plugs beside 6050, 6060, or Filterbank??

Post

Additional question: What about the Futzbox?

Post

Futzbox is "ok" but it's not speakerphone. I've got the RE and I know I got it on sale.

Post

The 8-band limiter is pretty nice sounding and versatile. I like their noise suppresion plugin, it works pretty well. I also like their multi-band compressors, sonically and workflow. I can't recall the product names at the moment. :scared: :phones:

Post

plexuss wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 3:48 am The 8-band limiter is pretty nice sounding and versatile.
TBH, all their limiters are very good. the tragedy is that one easily forgets that in the sea of processors... [And I have all the prominent limiters in the market. Paid or otherwise]

Post

Anyone know the difference between the ML-8000 and the ML-4000?? Isn't the 8000 an upgraded 4000???

Post

Symphony Sid wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 3:56 pm Anyone know the difference between the ML-8000 and the ML-4000?? Isn't the 8000 an upgraded 4000???
Dude, honestly... read the product pages. The answers are there...

https://www.mcdsp.com/plugin-index/ml8000/

https://www.mcdsp.com/plugin-index/ml4000/

Post

plexuss wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 5:36 pm
Symphony Sid wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 3:56 pm Anyone know the difference between the ML-8000 and the ML-4000?? Isn't the 8000 an upgraded 4000???
Dude, honestly... read the product pages. The answers are there...

https://www.mcdsp.com/plugin-index/ml8000/

https://www.mcdsp.com/plugin-index/ml4000/
Thanks for the heads up. Sorry to be an annoyance but other than 4 more bands on the 8000 vs the 4000 and the 8000 being newer the difference is not clear to me. If I buy the 8000 why would I need the 4000??

Post

Symphony Sid wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:43 pm
plexuss wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 5:36 pm
Symphony Sid wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 3:56 pm Anyone know the difference between the ML-8000 and the ML-4000?? Isn't the 8000 an upgraded 4000???
Dude, honestly... read the product pages. The answers are there...

https://www.mcdsp.com/plugin-index/ml8000/

https://www.mcdsp.com/plugin-index/ml4000/
Thanks for the heads up. Sorry to be an annoyance but other than 4 more bands on the 8000 vs the 4000 and the 8000 being newer the difference is not clear to me. If I buy the 8000 why would I need the 4000??
You raise a good point: just because there is product info it doesn't mean you have all the info necessary to understand what each product is for and why one ove the other or both. On the surface they look very similar and I see how that can be confusing. The answer is right there, though: 8 band limter vs 4 band dynamics. This is the primary difference. It's actually quite a huge difference. Why? Because 8 bands gives you 2x the spectral contol over the audio - with 8 bands you can have more bands of dynamics control. You'd use this over 4 band when you need more than 4 bands. You might be surprised at how much more control you have with 8 bands and there are certain mixing and mastering duties that would benefit from 8 bands. That's the primary reason of one over the other. The ML4000 has 4 limter bands but also has 4 bands of other types of dynamics (expander, gate etc). This can also be useful for certain things. I can't really get into the possible examples of why you'd use one over the other: really it comes down to what would work best for the audio you are working on.

If you are on a budget and want one over the other, the main points are:

ML8000 - 8 bands of limiting with different modes, mastering quality limiter
ML4000 - 4 bands of various kinds of dynamics, mastering quality limiter

They are actually different enough that the over-lap isn't as much as you might think. Both are useful dependng on what you need to do.

I'd say the ML8000 is more of a "transparent" mastering tool. The ML4000 has less bands to deal with (faster workflow) and more modes making it perhaps more versatile at the cost of more complexity.

Does that help??? :phones:

Post

Greatly appreciated. You are one of the few that could answer in such detail. Thank you for suffering me, if not quite gladly ;-)

Post

Symphony Sid wrote: Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:52 pm Greatly appreciated. You are one of the few that could answer in such detail. Thank you for suffering me, if not quite gladly ;-)
You're welcome!

I suppose McDSP could have rolled them together into a 4/8 band dynamics processor: have a toggle between 4/8 bands and then bring over all the dynamics processing from the ML4000. You might wonder why would they separate them into two separate products? Initally it would seem it would be out of greed. But once I started working with them, and other McDSP products, I realized part of the McDSP "thing" is to really focus each tool on a speicifc kind of workflow, rather than rolling tons of features together into a more complex tool. I personally like having them separate and the workflow well thought out because in use, for me, I find it faster and easier to remain focused. It's a kind of suble User Experience refinement that you don't find with my other companies. :phones:

Post Reply

Return to “Effects”