1: The SPL Machine Head (which the "mixhead" emulates) was never used to sound like tape. Because it was not tape, but a digital clipper. Nothing like tape. 2) It is a useful plugin. I have mastered albums on the hardware SPL Machine Head for 10 years. Sometimes I drove it hard. Sometimes very soft. I never mastered onto tape, basically because the mastering studio I worked in did not have any tape machines that were good enough, IMHO. In conclusion, yes, I like the Mixhead. It reminds me enough of the original unit that I feel it IS in the ballpark. Also, I use UAD Ampex. But I never try to make them sound the same. They are different beasts with different strengths. And both are great.
I bought it - it's a time saver, convenient - I could get the same effect with a compressor, saturation & EQ but in MIxHead it's ready to go - it adds gloss, glue and tightens the bass
I clearly prefer the smooth ATR-102 tape sound (which I use myself) over the Mixhead results. The latter can become a little bit in your face one-dimensional, not sure how to name it for lack of better wording.
Hey! Thanks for making this video! Only thing worth noting is that the MixHead operates pretty much the opposite of what tape is doing and most tape plugins including the atr!
@@makebelievestudio yes each has its own sound! Both useful! Since the original box was also supposed to emulate tape (as I understand it), it’s still worthwhile to see what the results are when you use either of these plugins. At least, I wanted to know myself 😉.
@@LanewoodStudios the original box its self did a very terrible job of emulating tape but it also sounded really cool. I see why Serban gravitated to it.
Pulls the vocal forward. Pops right out with the mixhead. Which you prefer would depend on the track. Need to hear what it does to instrumental stuff. But it's deffo pulling the vocal forward so probably has some subtle mid boost going on under the hood.
Mixhead sounds more compressed and has a high frequency thing going on. It makes the music sound more upfront. The ATR-102 sounds more smooth like an analog tape.
On the mix comparisons, Mixhead sounded a bit darker than the ATR102. I have used the ATR102 for years now, but picked up the Mixhead during the intro pricing as I really liked the HF boost in particular. It can boost things a lot without sounding harsh. The drive is not as flexible unfortunately. It seems to distort in a fairly unpleasant way, but they just updated it with oversampling, so need to get familiar with the new features!
honestly it's a more subtle plugin that id expect. I love the UAD tape by far but I also think that the mixhead is very good for submixes. it's a much less beefy tone but it changes the interaction from the drums and vocals.
The MixHead has a touch more bottom and is rounder in the lows (while still having definition) than the ATR but the ATR sounds more like real tape does. This coincides with my findings using both as well. That said, I would audition them plus other emulations when I'm mixing, or mastering, to listen for what's right for the material.
they are very different, in my opinion. Don't use Mixhead if you want tape emulation. But use it if you want that old fashioned SPL clipping. UAD Ampex is the tape emulator. MH Mixhead is the emulation of the digital SPL Machine Head.
I could bet my life if Serban Ghenea only had a couple of basic plug ins and mixed a song, everybody would say: OH MY GOD, what did he use??? 😂 You know what he used??? Skills and years of mixing
The diffferences are probably really subtle like that. I provided the downloads as well. You should be able to hear those differences on a full range system. Then again, is that worth it? 😉
@@LanewoodStudiosYes that's a good point! 😃 I kind of think that sound hasn't really improved since the 70s, if anything it's got worse, with compression/levelling algorithms, less than optimal listening conditions etc., though at the same time we do now have a very good digital emulation for very cheap, so companies are constantly trying to get a gnat's whisker of improvement or some imagined magic of yesteryear in some on-screen box of tricks, to get us to part with yet more cash, when really we should be focussing on making great ideas, developing our listening skills and using the already great tools we have. My two cents 😉.
What i think ?! I heard and saw the video on my mobile phone... a popular playback system today... Result... i don't buy the Plugin, cause the effect is... really hard to hear in the consumer world... I prefer Plugins and Hardware which make the sound better of a track, even on a mobile phone... I have my hybrid chain for that... with real tubes, real transformers and useful Plugins... This Plugin is way overhyped today ! I wouldn't buy it, even when the price will be 10 bucks... The Plugin gets a hype, cause of the person behind... and the price... Same situation as with "The God Particle" Same show... same hype... same nonse...
@@haraldklingsporn4087 ok i get it. Most of what we do you cannot hear on a mobile phone though so for me personally that’s not really a determining factor. I still want to slave away at making it sounds as nice as possible on a full range playback system. And you can hear the difference on such a system. But that’s just my opinion of course.
@LanewoodStudios Yes... sound good on a fullrange, 20 to 20 system it the top goal... But when the master is good... you can easily hear the difference on a mobile system... In this case here... the difference is not so much, as with other Plugins... Yes a mobile phone, is not a good playback system... but when you can hear a difference on that... the Plugin do his thing... for me... I don't buy the Plugin, cause, i have really enough tools, to create a lot of sonic fingerprints for each song... or for each single track in a mix... And i am to old to run after hypes... i hear a plugin and when the sonic fingerprint is a good one... i buy it... but never to the original price.. i can wait :-)
What do you think? Is this a useful plugin? Do you like the UAD one better maybe? Let us know!
1: The SPL Machine Head (which the "mixhead" emulates) was never used to sound like tape. Because it was not tape, but a digital clipper. Nothing like tape. 2) It is a useful plugin. I have mastered albums on the hardware SPL Machine Head for 10 years. Sometimes I drove it hard. Sometimes very soft. I never mastered onto tape, basically because the mastering studio I worked in did not have any tape machines that were good enough, IMHO. In conclusion, yes, I like the Mixhead. It reminds me enough of the original unit that I feel it IS in the ballpark. Also, I use UAD Ampex. But I never try to make them sound the same. They are different beasts with different strengths. And both are great.
I bought it - it's a time saver, convenient - I could get the same effect with a compressor, saturation & EQ but in MIxHead it's ready to go - it adds gloss, glue and tightens the bass
@@TheGurner1 👍
I clearly prefer the smooth ATR-102 tape sound (which I use myself) over the Mixhead results. The latter can become a little bit in your face one-dimensional, not sure how to name it for lack of better wording.
Thanks for listening and commenting!
Hey! Thanks for making this video! Only thing worth noting is that the MixHead operates pretty much the opposite of what tape is doing and most tape plugins including the atr!
@@makebelievestudio thanks for mentioning that. Explains some of the differences you can hear.
@@LanewoodStudios Yep they are going to behave completely different. both are great
@@makebelievestudio yes each has its own sound! Both useful! Since the original box was also supposed to emulate tape (as I understand it), it’s still worthwhile to see what the results are when you use either of these plugins. At least, I wanted to know myself 😉.
@@LanewoodStudios the original box its self did a very terrible job of emulating tape but it also sounded really cool. I see why Serban gravitated to it.
@@makebelievestudio ah yes, it's from a different era of course.
Pulls the vocal forward. Pops right out with the mixhead. Which you prefer would depend on the track.
Need to hear what it does to instrumental stuff. But it's deffo pulling the vocal forward so probably has some subtle mid boost going on under the hood.
Thanks for listening.
Mixhead sounds more compressed and has a high frequency thing going on. It makes the music sound more upfront. The ATR-102 sounds more smooth like an analog tape.
Yes, very much like I hear it!
On the mix comparisons, Mixhead sounded a bit darker than the ATR102.
I have used the ATR102 for years now, but picked up the Mixhead during the intro pricing as I really liked the HF boost in particular. It can boost things a lot without sounding harsh.
The drive is not as flexible unfortunately. It seems to distort in a fairly unpleasant way, but they just updated it with oversampling, so need to get familiar with the new features!
Thanks, will need to try that oversampling update!
honestly it's a more subtle plugin that id expect. I love the UAD tape by far but I also think that the mixhead is very good for submixes. it's a much less beefy tone but it changes the interaction from the drums and vocals.
Yes it can be quite subtle unless you push it. Good idea 👍.
Great video! I like MBS very much, It soften trasients nicely and its sound quite warm.
Thank you! Yes it definitely has its own sound.
@@LanewoodStudios Yes it does! I will wait some discount season.
@@RaunoPaananenAudio always a good idea when it comes to buying plugins 😉
@@LanewoodStudios I already have too much plugins and hardwares but... 😀 . Have you tried Acustica Audio Nebula and Cupwize AX102 library, I love it!
The MixHead has a touch more bottom and is rounder in the lows (while still having definition) than the ATR but the ATR sounds more like real tape does. This coincides with my findings using both as well. That said, I would audition them plus other emulations when I'm mixing, or mastering, to listen for what's right for the material.
Thanks for listening. I actually heard less lows on the mixhead but maybe it was more the low mids then.
@LanewoodStudios Yeah, could be. A bit rounder for sure.
👍
they are very different, in my opinion. Don't use Mixhead if you want tape emulation. But use it if you want that old fashioned SPL clipping. UAD Ampex is the tape emulator. MH Mixhead is the emulation of the digital SPL Machine Head.
@@kvalsoniclab9152 good way to look at it, and also confirmed by the comments of Make Believe Studios on this video!
ATR for me win❤
👍
ATR for the win 🏆
Thanks for your vote 😉
The UAD tape emulation sounds better and more natural, IMHO.
Yes it’s tape emulation algorithms from much later. As I understand it now, MixHead is not doing exactly that but it has another desirable sound.
I could bet my life if Serban Ghenea only had a couple of basic plug ins and mixed a song, everybody would say: OH MY GOD, what did he use??? 😂
You know what he used???
Skills and years of mixing
Of course. No plugin will make you sound like Serban.
@@LanewoodStudios By the way i do love your channel 😎
@@damirvucic thanks, I do like that 😉.
Well for this price I’ll go with the Ampex native at 39$
@@johndoe_1984 yes that is a great deal at the moment. Check out my affiliate link 😉.
I personally like the plugin.. can other tools do what it does.. yes.. but i like it on my drum buss
@@triplebeam23 haven’t used it specifically on the drum bus yet.
Judging from this demo, if this plugin sold for $1, it would be a waste of money.
😬
I tried it! It was pretty cool. But I didnt really know what to do with it.
Fair enough. Thanks for commenting!
UAD Ampex is better
Thanks for listening!
I don’t think the FATSO can be beat for me….as soon as I got it I said goodbye to the ATR tape Emulation…..
👍
To my ears and earbuds (sony wf-1000xm4) I hear no appreciable difference between any of the mixes over the RUclips app on Android.
The diffferences are probably really subtle like that. I provided the downloads as well. You should be able to hear those differences on a full range system. Then again, is that worth it? 😉
@@LanewoodStudiosYes that's a good point! 😃 I kind of think that sound hasn't really improved since the 70s, if anything it's got worse, with compression/levelling algorithms, less than optimal listening conditions etc., though at the same time we do now have a very good digital emulation for very cheap, so companies are constantly trying to get a gnat's whisker of improvement or some imagined magic of yesteryear in some on-screen box of tricks, to get us to part with yet more cash, when really we should be focussing on making great ideas, developing our listening skills and using the already great tools we have. My two cents 😉.
What i think ?!
I heard and saw the video on my mobile phone... a popular playback system today...
Result... i don't buy the Plugin, cause the effect is... really hard to hear in the consumer world...
I prefer Plugins and Hardware which make the sound better of a track, even on a mobile phone...
I have my hybrid chain for that... with real tubes, real transformers and useful Plugins...
This Plugin is way overhyped today !
I wouldn't buy it, even when the price will be 10 bucks...
The Plugin gets a hype, cause of the person behind... and the price...
Same situation as with "The God Particle"
Same show... same hype... same nonse...
@@haraldklingsporn4087 ok i get it. Most of what we do you cannot hear on a mobile phone though so for me personally that’s not really a determining factor. I still want to slave away at making it sounds as nice as possible on a full range playback system. And you can hear the difference on such a system. But that’s just my opinion of course.
@LanewoodStudios
Yes... sound good on a fullrange, 20 to 20 system it the top goal...
But when the master is good... you can easily hear the difference on a mobile system...
In this case here... the difference is not so much, as with other Plugins... Yes a mobile phone, is not a good playback system... but when you can hear a difference on that... the Plugin do his thing... for me...
I don't buy the Plugin, cause, i have really enough tools, to create a lot of sonic fingerprints for each song... or for each single track in a mix...
And i am to old to run after hypes... i hear a plugin and when the sonic fingerprint is a good one... i buy it... but never to the original price.. i can wait :-)
Fair enough 👍
@@haraldklingsporn4087I want to listen to your songs. Where can I find them?
Too expensive..
@@JohnWuMastermind 👍
Mixhead sounds dead as compared to the Atr. Mixhead one dimensional.
Thanks for listening!
hype and overpriced
Thanks for your input!
Its a waste of time plugin.... if you can't do a great mix without it your not going to do a great mix with it.
Is that not true for any plugin? No single plugin will get you a great mix. My question would be more: can this plugin improve the sound of my mix.