Why Does It Null? (with ReaEQ) Harrison 32C Channel Strip
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 23 авг 2024
- In which I review the Harrison 32C channel strip plugin, and pontificate about channel strips in general.
If you like this type of content and you want to see it more often, consider signing up for Channel Membership: / @danworrall
Video edited with VEGAS Pro 17:
{affiliate link)
www.vegascreat...
It's absolutely embarrasing watching these companies milk the consumer.
And with a legendary brand such as Harrison, what a shame.
At a time when we really need developers to push closer to hardware, we are being sold presets instead.
The more of a scrutinous environment we create, the tougher it will be for them to even think of beginning a development like this, which should eventually lead to progress !
So hats off to Dan and all those who do the same, most preferably without invested bias, cough*
Yesterday i was reminded of something in terms of technical limitations of CPU. In the gaming emulation world, they hit upon some technical limitations of emulating certain old consoles, and it turns out, it doesnt matter how powerful a CPU can become, it will always have inherent latency and a couple other snags where the work a dedicated chip or 'else' does, cannot be transformed into software without the snags. The result, software alone cannot achieve the work of what the hardware is doing.
However ! Some clever guys came up with component emulation as a solution, so that the software believes it is using actual hardware components. But more so, they designed 'cores' on a board that could be utilised to emulate any component design. The result, a 99% clone of the original, with a major major reduction in any lag or snags.
I think this is the way forward. It would mean a dedicated piece of hardware, with the cores, but it would be flexible to emulate anything. Now, we appear to have circuit emulation happening in the audio plugin world already, Roland have done a good job with their synths with their circuit emulation tech, it's good, still not as nice as the hardware, but closer. And notably they use far more cpu than other vsts. I can only think that they are working within limitations of cpu. And then we have UAD who already have dedicated hardware, but they are not doing component emulation, it's basically the same software but offloading CPU work. Oh and also Acustica, who some feel gets closer to hardware, but are incredibly demanding on cpu.
So where are we at really in this audio plugin world. Why has the buck stopped here. Just feels like they stopped to milk the market being aware that the average consumer is happy with the current progress of plugins.
But i think they can push forward and bring us much much closer to what hardware does.
And if you can't hear the difference between hardware and software emulations, then i recommend using an 'ear gym' because it trains your ears to hear frequency, width, dynamics, etc. That sounds rude but believe me it really helps if you work with audio ! In the end you will be able to pinpoint the most subtle of changes accurately.
@@DoctorMcFarlandStudios I can understand that, but i bet if we compared it to the console it wouldnt sound the same.
@@HarrisonAudio Some of the claims : "32C Channel plugin brings Harrison's True Analog sound", "a complex emulation of the original Harrison 32C EQ. Every resistor, capacitor, and transistor is included in the model.". So why not provide comparisons between the plugin and the console you modelled. Because as Dan has demonstrated, it is a completely clean digital EQ that does nothing different to a stock digital EQ. Although i understand hardware EQ can be clean, i find it hard to believe that the hardware adds no additional harmonics and variances in phase shift etc. What is the 'True Analog Sound' here if it's simply a perfectly clean digital EQ ? This is the line i am complaining about, because it's like we are being sold the same product over and over -under the spin that it's 'True Analog' 'circuit modelled'. That is just a milking, where actually we are in need and desire to actually have a Harrison channel for example. Progress is being put on hold. That's also my complaint. I appreciate you have modelled the curves of the EQ, thats good to use, but thats not all of whats being claimed, and actually, we can simply share a preset on a configurable digital EQ and get a very similar result.
Now, i'd like to make it clear that this is not about Harrison Consoles, but the plugin market in general. Alot of developers have been doing this, for a while now. I appreciate Harrison Mixbus software, because it at least attempts to model the behaviour of a console, interactive behaviour. I am still searching for an interactive console emulator. Most of them add colour but dont have interactive behaviour. A few claim to, but i tested them and its actually just something else.
@@HarrisonAudio Doubt.
@@HarrisonAudio Harrison rep, why are you still trying to lie about this? Your claims are demonstrably false. It's literally impossible for (active) analogue gear to be completely linear, they will always have finite headroom. It's also impossible for analogue EQs to cramp at Nyquist since there is no Nyquist frequency in the analogue realm.
If you feel that Dan's tests were flawed then you need to explain how, not just restate the same BS claims over and over.
Harrison should just admit this plug in (and their "buss" plug) will NOT give you the same results as using the mixer in that awful DAW of theirs. Just try a comparison if you can be bothered. I've had it for years and simply can't bring myself to use it regularly, or ever. Did one stem mix in it, and while
it sounded admittedly quite good, with a sound I couldn't achieve in Ableton, the painful experience was not repeated ever again. Not worth it. It's shameful and very dumb that they refuse to port the actual sound of mixbuss to the plug in, yet market it in such a way that you think that's what you're getting. Absolute losing strategy they've got.
I think id rather take one thousand gruesomely-personal attacks on my character than wake up to a half hour video of dan worrall calmly and politely tearing my work to pieces on youtube.
bru, this man feeds on devs tears
Moloko I'd disagree "Dan is just very honest and unbiased" Is my take on his videos.
I disagree. I love listening Worrall's calm and monotonous but still warm and soft sound no matter what he tells. Which brings me to a point; I must scour his videos for clean voice tracks and feed them to AI to create a syntethizer with Worrall's voice and then listening my audio books once again. :D
@@anteshell It would be awesome if my selected text on the phone or pc can be spoken by Dan!
@@anteshell "i must steal the man's voice and use it forever without his permission"
Maybe Cockos did recreate every resistor, capacitor, and transistor of the original Harrison 32C EQ with ReaEQ? :)
I bet this is the correct answer. I dont believe Harrison can be such scammers :P
The mystery is thus solved then!!!
@@AGalanKh they did actually admit to making their emulation to be as clean as possible in Gear Space. Don’t remember why they justified it as such but it does kinda feel like a spit in the face after they advertised it as being a dedicated emulation. Ah well. Always was more of a Neve Guy anyways
It takes certain resister values to make an EQ have certain shape with the least amount of phase shift possible. The DAW and the plugin are identical to the original console. It is everyone else who thinks it needs to have saturation when the intention of the original design was to have the highest headroom and lowest distortion possible.
I cheer whenever Plugin Doctor comes out.
Ha me too
Agree. Science bitches. :)
They sold people their own stock eq for 50 bucks
Hell yeah
I'm glad you included the bit where you said that the Harrison EQ sounds a little warmer, richer, fuller bodied, "it's quite subtle but I'm confident I can hear it". Because that's the exact thought that goes through anyone's mind when they're trying out a new plugin that they have high hopes for, and perhaps spent money on. As mixing engineers and producers, we're doomed to try to recognize and eliminate this unavoidable placebo...
It wasn't placebo. The low shelf boost was 4db louder than advertised! That's pure manipulation...
13:44
@@mehi8145 Punchy Warmipulation and Oomphy Saturilation are in the Air-band, my friend!!
One could call it also less true to the transients and more muddy. I liked the reEQ version better 🤓
@@nichttuntun3364 a little bit info : ReEQ is actually a JSFX plugin developed by Justin Johnson to be basically the poor man's Pro Q (without the ease of use like keyboard input and multiple band selection, ofc. Which is perhaps in development because the GUI is already a bxtch to develop).
@@junkawakami3193 thanks for the information :) appriciated :)
All this constructive criticism is just a goldmine of information for beginners like me- hot damn.
dude, his videos are a gold mine for people like me- who've been recording and editing on a daw for 15+ years, are a gold mine too
@@variancewithin Totally agree, I bought the complete suite of Tokyo Dawn plugins after watching his superb review/tutorials.
I called out Harrison on their YT channel and got a smug reply from their rep. Basically, they thought they could put out a vanilla plugin and make some money from the Harrison legacy... instead they've embarrassed themselves, tainted the brand and lost out trust. Thanks Dan for providing a fair and rational analysis of Harrison's hollow promise.
The thread on gearspace is calling them out too. The Harrison guy "Ben" keeps doubling down. Although he eventually did admit that the plugin isn't an exact model of the original console but that it was "approved" by one of the original guys who developed the console 40 years ago and it sounds close enough?
Funny you mention them losing brand trust and reputation. Someone said the exact same thing on GS and the Harrison guy replied that they don't care because they have made bad products before and are still in business.
It's a bit sad when you could probably get closer to the actual hardware using Analog Obsession's Harqules, which is free. Maybe that's the reason why all Harrison plugins only have a nagging screen you have to click on in demo mode. People wouldn't use them otherwise.
@@jeffsymons7084 We're in the internet age... people are just too wary of false info/promises - so when the 5th best mixing desk company starts lying to sell a snake oil product it's a sad state of affairs. Honesty goes a long way - if anyone claims "true analogue" in a digital plugin I see red flags... digital emulations of analogue have only just reached a "Polar Express" computer graphics level - so we're still in the "uncanny valley" ;-)
@@jeffsymons7084 Wow what a killer argument, I bet they have no clue why other companies will put them out of business eventually
This honestly isn't anything new from Harrison. At least the first 3 versions of the "Mixbus" software nulled through their summing add on. As in, the summing that was the entire purpose of the product, actually did nothing at all. They got called out on that the exact same way as this, and their reaction was the same then. I have no idea if they even attempted to add some harmonics or non-linearities after that because I just lost interest and respect for the company.
"More controls does not equal more control" - so profound. Just imagine if automobiles had busy user interfaces like some audio plugins. They'd be even more dangerous than they already are.
They did, and they were. Navigation/entertainment systems had to be scaled back and/or made more voice responsive due to distracted drivers.
This is kinda the point of the why the 32c EQ was designed the way it was in the first place. The values from the components chosen is what makes the final EQ curve and overall response. If you want to adjust the Q then use a different EQ but if you want to try a proportional Q option then the Harrison EQ does a fine job of fixing the most amount of issues in the least amount of time. If you mix with your eyes and not your ears then maybe using an EQ with a graph is more up your alley. This is how mixing on a desk worked "back in the day" and some mixers still prefer that kind of workflow.
@@DoctorMcFarlandStudios If this vst really was made well, you could fix even more problems in even less time with no drawbacks. At least that's what I got from Dan's analysis
I just love listening to Dan completely excoriate a plugin.
I would love to watch Dan's video on Analog Obsession plugins.
Please.
Trust me , AO is a long way off yet. Mainly in the distortion algorithms. both in terms of analog behaviour, and in terms of very little specific modelling of hardware other than the visual interface. (So far from my measurements it's the same saturation algorithm in every plug-in, and it's not great)
Generous by him of course, but there's other freeware which gets much closer to good analog behaviour. (Like variety of sound)
very true, wonder why not one video about them
@@rautshsale1948 because of my answer above yours /\. One listen from any expert with experienced ears and a good listening environment, that isn't fooled by the interface usually means they know AO isn't worth looking at yet.
One guy doesn't pump out a plug-in every month and have it accurately model anything. You can hear (and measure it). He's a while off yet.
@@BuzzaB77 You're quite possibly the biggest fartsmeller i've ever seen on youtube. Jesus christ, how on earth can you have this insane level of lack of self awareness?
I get it, you're new, you think it's always been freeware. I bought a few plugins over 5 years ago over e-mail.
When your product is delicately torn to shreds through real analysis by the David Attenborough of Engineering. Love your work Dan!
I use the 32c DAW for everything and am getting great results. Just don't expect it to be magic on its own. This 'plugin' is part of every channel and is VERY fast to get a decent mix while tracking and so your client can hear something quickly before going home for the night. The real juice in the DAW is in the busses, which DO have coloration. These can also have sources run thru them quickly. You can make your clients confident they're going to get a good product while maybe only having to load a reverb plugin. Later on is when you dial it up with more task-suited plugins, which are just drag & drop from your favorites list at the left. Create channel presets when you hit on something cool. Create plugin presets (even if the plugin itself doesn't have that feature). The more you use it, the faster you arrive at a great mix. It's a wonderful tool.
hello Harrison rep
@@lukebogartmix if I was a harrison rep, I'd be saying Dan's null test was flawed and that the channel strip alone DOES have a sound, as per the marketing claims. I just like the DAW because I use it and get better & faster results. But thanks for stopping by.
sir this is channel strip plugin not the daw @@robwoodring9437
100% agree! The „if it sounds good it is good!!!“ people on GS are completely missing the point. Harrison‘s marketing implies some special analog sauce or at least an authentic emulation of the eq curves. But it‘s just a 20 year old digital textbook eq that cramps near nyquist. And like you said, the analog console definitely doesn‘t do that. So regardlesss of how the plugin sounds, the emulation fails to achieve its goals on a technical level and there‘s no way around that.
"Just trust your ears" they say... ah yes that totally subjective set of ears, easily influenced by placebo, marketing, bias, the room you are in, the speakers you are listening to, your mood or how much coffee you just drank. That same set of ears that has a 24 page thread on GS of supposedly expert mixing engineers with decades of experience thinking the most basic of digital eq is something magical.
Wait until you hear about the Presonus Fat Channel. I ran it in PluginDoctor back in the days of studio one v4 and it behaved like it should. Matching other emulations. But then in v5 they actually removed the saturation, and kept calling it ”perfectly modelled” and such. Support kept insisting the saturation present before v5 was not suppose to be there and that ”state space modelling” is still emulating every component in the actual hardware… i get a meltdown from just writing this… many bought the bundle for 500€ back when it was released. Then when they removed the saturation they lowered the price to 1/4 but never told anyone about why…
And it cramps, too. It sucks because there's so much potential but presonus doesn't care about it too much since the Marketing is obviously geared towards intermediate or beginning mixers
why would they nerf the product to sell it cheap? it doesn't makes sense, it's an already made software not a physical good you need to nerf in order to sell it cheap.
I wish I’d found you and your channel 10 years earlier! Thank you Dan for sharing your unique knowledge.
eversince i've stumble on this channel i've felt like i was blessed with a mountain of priceless knowledge.
every upload is nothing but amazing and deserves to be reexamined over and over again.
this is what, hopefully, students are learning in classes on all of the best schools in the world.
every topic is a masterclass and i'm very much down for anything but i'd like to ask for a similar review/construtive criticism of free plugins as i think this could be a subject of interest to some viewers globally while also getting some points with the algorithm in order to propel this channel to its deserved heights.
cheers mate.
I totally agree! I like to think of me as a man of science, not that I am a scientist in anny way, but I really like to understand what things do. And Dans channel really show and proves key elements. If you are smart and want to be smarter just listen to Dan! Amazing work and I love the style!
Videos like this have made me shift my philosophy from trying to figure out reasons to buy another plugin to trying to figure out why I do not need buy another plugin.
I don't know why Harrison even bothered with this thing. The whole selling point of Mixbus as a DAW is its coloration. I mean, that's literally the only reason anyone buys it. All its other features are woefully underwhelming. So why make a channel strip that completely lack that feature?
so how do you know the HMB DAW ACTUALLY ads any color to the signal? Sounds like something that needs to be investigated.
@@brianmorton4127 i guess it‘s clearly audible, but yeah would be interesting to test it
@@brianmorton4127, I don't know that it does. But I know that many people claim it does. I know that virtually everyone who claims to use it cites its coloration as the reason.
I don't really have a reason to doubt the claim, though Mixbus is based on Ardour and I have no idea how they went about modifying it.
@@sm5574 I use mixbus 7 (not 32C) and what is coloured is the 8 mixbusses and masterbus. They have a saturation control on there and I can say that I’m quiet pleased with the subtle colouration it provides. The reason I use mixbus is mainly for workflow. I’m not an advanced or experienced mixer but I love to be able to see al the routing going on visualy and for my workflow and music (acoustic guitar + vocal with some sparse overdubs) usually no more than 8 to 12 tracks it’s really clear what I’m doing and have “hands on” control. But to each his own I guess. It got me going allot faster than cubase or cakewalk. I also like the seperate window modes for mixing, editing and recording. I don’t need to see waveforms when I’m not editing so it cleans up the screen for the task at hand.
@This Guy, but it's an overcrowded market, and the plugin doesn't stand out. It's from a company most people haven't heard of, and most who have are serious enough that they won't be interested in this. And it's unlikely anyone who buys this will be driven to buy the DAW. This seems like an idea that should have been shot down very early in the process.
Reckon many of us have tried just about every single strip out there and, even though I don't use it specifically on an extremely high-percentage of projects, if I could have one and only one strip to choose regardless of the task at hand I have to go with Omni Channel. It's much deeper than you visually see on the surface, w/ hidden advanced features one is likely not to always use keeping the main interface relatively clean, logical, and efficient including hot-key features. It has enough tools to get you through most general mix chores as well as some more advanced tools (like the dual DS) and "color" options. Kind of crazy how many hundreds (maybe thousands) of $ spent on strips over the years and the one I'd choose today if I could have only one cost me around $20 on sale if I remember correctly. If any of y'all haven't given it a go, check it out sometime. Kindest regards.
Harrison's software division has steadily gone downhill over the years. Thanks for holding their feet to the fire, Dan!
Drum flow and their DAW are levels ahead
@@Reggi_Sample Reaper is better
Reaper is different than HMB. Reaper is great, has good stock plugins and is about as customizable as a DAW can get. Too bad you're going to spend hours setting everything up and mixing becomes a window click through hell. Record and edit in Reaper, mix in HMB because every single control you need is immediately in front of you. You shouldn't be taking longer than an hour to mix a song.
Matter of fact, when you go into an actual studio with an actual console normally you shouldn't take more than a few days to mix an entire album. Its gonna take you that long to click back and forth between plugins in Reaper
"What happened to all those resisters, capacitors and transistors?" Haha. I once developed plugins, and in my research, I found that this: Phat analog, transistor and tube sound emulation, was mostly just horseshizzle. And it is mostly just modeled-in difference, by manipulating the control to actual processing. So a 3db boost was actually a 4db boost, giving the impression of being warmer and bassier in comparison. There are even compressors out there, that EQ's the signal as you compress it, to give it a warmer sound. It is just too easy to manipulate listeners to fall for this marketing scheme. That's not saying that, in some cases, this signal manipulation doesn't sound good, it is just that it can be done with clean tools as well.
I love coloring compressors
sometimes the EQ effect comes from the sidechain curve of the compressor but yes I feel that some compressors EQ your signal to compensate something or just to give you a warmer feeling while still at unity gain. What plugins have you developed? Solo developer or for a company? I have a few ideas I want to develop but im not a coder. Can you give me some advise?
@@user-sd7eb6jq9y I developed both Solo, and some group projects. But during DSP research, and analyses of commercial plugins, I discovered that analog modeling, doesn't really exist in the way end-users think.
In regards to developing plugins. You should could start with a node modular like Reaktor to research, build and get a sense for how effects, processors and instruments are constructed / modeled.
From there you could move to scripting in Blue Cat's Plug'n Script. To get a sense for simple coding, here, prototyping in Reaktor can be immensely beneficial. Plug'n Script also lets you export your creations as standalone plugins. I think you can even sell them. But you are limited by its sets and libraries.
Next step is DSP coding in C++ with some framework like JUCE.. Math, and DSP forums are your friends here ;)
@@noxlupi1 Thank for the info! Will try and look into all of that.
Yeah. Transformers should be the only audible “coloration” especially if the hardware is getting a hot signal. If the transistors, resistors, etc are making an audible difference, there is something wrong with them.
I like Harrison and use Mixbus for final mix downs, so I’m familiar with the channel strip on the actual DAW. As a DAW feature, it’s fantastic. As a plugin? Meh.
You know it gets real when the drumbeat goes silent
Another excellent review, Dan - and funny too!
The only channel strip I ever liked using was Scheps Omni Channel. I never investigated the character aspects of it with plugin doctor or anything, but the interface is great, and there are enough adjustable parameters on all of the modules to make it as useful as advertised imho. Most of the other ones seem to just kind of scream "analog warmth!" and pray people will buy it because they put the same colors on the knobs as a Neve preamp.
I'd be really interested to see you do a video on the Scheps Omni Channel. I haven't used it much because I've been having so much fun with Pro Q3, but I think I'm ready to get back into "character" plugins, and I like the way the Omni Channel doesn't attempt to emulate specific pieces of gear, just the unique characteristics of certain circuit types, and allows you to audition between those types without having to change settings, particularly with the three types of compressors it offers.
Scheps isn't a character strip tho. Aside from the saturation strip, it doesn't add color.
@@croay the compressor has three modes based on classic circuit designs that don't add "color" per se if you take "color" to mean arbitrary changes in frequency response and added distortion but each mode works and sounds differently for a given control setting, which is like having different "colors" of compression, which you don't get on a straight digital compressor. I don't know how the differences in the modes are implemented. Could be anything from 3 different mathematical algorithms to actual component-level modeling. Neither one infers changes in frequency response or added distortion necessarily, but however the three modes do their thing, they're all doing something different which could be described as "color".
I also understand that the EQ is simply a digital EQ with curves based on approximations in curves from analog gear. I'm not suggesting there's "color" in the way of changes in frequency response or added distortion, just that limiting the curve to a few choices makes the Omni Channel "more" like those pieces of analog gear than, say, the Pro Q3, because even though you could absolutely use those curves with the Q3, your ability to use any curve you want makes the Q3 in general not sound at all like any particular EQ, whereas the Omni Channel EQ is limited to only sounding "sorta" like a particular piece of real gear. So again, I guess it's how you use the word "color". If the accepted definition in the audio world is changes in frequency response and added distortion then ya, it's not adding color but it does have a bit of a "flavor" then 😂 that makes it more like something specific rather than a surgical, super versatile, Swiss Army Knife EQ like the Q3.
@@TheZappazapper oh, sure, you got what I mean and I agree with you there, I think we should start differentiating these types of "colors". I personally use the omni channel and really like it.
Scheps Omni is a great/powerhouse mixing channel strip. It has everything you need except time based fx of course, hence the insert slot. I love it, many people don’t like the flavours of comp but for me I can make it work every time also love the dynamic eq.
@@croay This is strongly incorrect. First off, you should be able to hear it, but if you can't -- run Omni Channel through Plugin Doctor and you'll see significant harmonics added as soon as you engage the FET or OPT compressors, even without any compression happening. The VCA compressor has harmonics, too -- different harmonics and they react differently (increasing as you dial in more compression vs. the opposite for the other two.) There's also a little bass bump when FET or OPT is engaged. And even if it was "just the saturation strip" that adds color (and it isn't) -- you can't say 'aside from the saturation strip.' That's the point of it. Finally, the EQ curves are unique in shape as well. Take a look at the TONE vs MID wide band, for example. Wildly different from one another. The wide on MID band is uniquely wide - you can center it on a favored frequency and push it into the compressor for unique shaping options. You also get API style proportional EQ curves, and then P mode for standard functionality... Don't under estimate Omni Channel -- it's a unique, powerful, and colorful channel strip for sure.
"In case you don't get that reference, I just mean you'd need really long arms." 🤣
Dan Worrall hitting us with another info dump from the sound gods
Very informative video, as per usual. My analogy of most channel strips "You can't make a cabbage from an egg, but you can make a cabbage flavoured omelette".
Excellent, as I came to expect.
The ' Gearslutz = Gearsnobs' dig made me smile, hehe.
This in-depth analysis is so good, as usual, that you know when Dan likes something, it's going to be special.
I'm glad you showed VMR - my absolute favorite plugin by far. It has become indispensable for me when mixing. I keep hoping they could create a "Virtual Mastering Rack" with all the classic mastering gear in one UI
Probably the best plugin review in a decade or so!
Wow I just discovered you. Fascinating, scientific, and I love your cynical voice, so terrifyingly dark and amusing :) I've used the Harrison Mixbus 32-C DAW for mixing for about 2 years and once I tried it there was no turning back. Before that I was a Pro Tools user for over 20 years. I agree with your frustration about the limitations of the channel strips, particularly the weird ranges of the mid EQ and the lack of attack and release on the compressors. However, in the actual DAW, the sum is far greater than the parts. I get mixes that do sound more "analog" almost from the moment I import the stems. And it's fantastic having EQ, compression, bussing, and VCA's on every track. It saves me nearly a day of noodling per setup. The choices they made on implementation get me "somewhere good" a lot faster than I ever did in Pro Tools and it doesn't sound scratchy or tinny like Pro Tools does. I think the bussing in the DAW is very robust and that's where it shines. That said, I echo your thoughts about wishing they had gone wider with the options available. I find myself wanting to grab the knobs and push them past their ranges (and getting just as annoyed as you did). However, the EQ center frequency"shift" upward with gain increase is supposedly a Harrison thing...I dislike not knowing what actual frequency I'm working at but oh well. I've gotten used to the various eccentricities because at least it "feels" like I'm working at a real console again. Perhaps you could do a review of their whole DAW sometime, I would love to see that.
This was a sophisticated version of snake oil vídeo.
the hero we didn't ask for yet we needed
this is turning into sound investigating series... nice.
Funnily enough, console manufacturers were striving to make as quiet,clean and transparent signal chains, in the digital age where this is easily everybody is complaining about exactly this,, does this tell us something about the sources that engineers are being asked to mix these days, the real creative part of the sound was delivered at the inputs and the job was to balance out and put those signals as true as possible toe the source, these days the mixer has to do the „make it sound interesting“ part, I’ve been in this game mixing in the studio and (mostly) live for 44 years and the twist to the job in the last years makes me sad, the high point being told that I, and my mixing desk must be cheap shit because it doesn’t have auto-tune built in, the lady could not possibly perform without it, and she didn’t, funny used to be that people didn’t make it on to the stage if they couldn’t hit or hold a note in tune….like I said, strange twists the job has taken, and that was just one example of many, raising the bar isn’t the ideal these days, cheating and lying, like in many other areas of life these days has become the acceptable Norm, we used to joke that our desks had a couple of knobs missing, timing and talent compensation, well we wished for them and now we’ve got them, no wonder many people with genuine talent go under the radar and give up….might have to too while I’ve, apparently become cheap shit for trying to use my 44 years experience to get the good to come out and show up the shit without cheating and misleading, and that’s an ethic point that I never learnt.
You're totally right, myself having worked a little in the 80's, i'm refraining to use auto tune just for that, by principle. and at that time the Drum machine just made me think that, any *upid guy could have a rythm straight, what a ****
It’s like Photoshop for audio, no model will post a picture without it first being edited. If they did, then their picture would make them look inferior to the other models. Same goes for audio production these days. Drum replacement, comping, pitch correction, so on. It’s not like it came out of nowhere, this has been slowly evolving for decades. We call auto tune the t-pain effect yet Cher used it many years prior, in the 90’s. It’s not like engineers weren’t editing by cutting tape to create false realities way back. That was what the technology allowed so that’s what they did. Now the tech allows significantly more so us engineers do significantly more with it.
Good thing is, there is a wealth of previously released analog-only records of millions of songs we get to still enjoy, especially if you have the original vinyls. What irks me is all the digital remasters warping the overall frequency curve of these classics trying to make them like current songs but wind up sounding harsh and brittle. They just don’t give me the same feeling as when we listened to the original masters. I don’t mind the evolution of sound being heard in modern/new music, but from Pink Floyd to The Cure the remastering is unnecessary. But ya know, we’re engineers so of course we’re going to have a critical ear with our own opinions of what sounds good.
I will say this, there’s decent money in editing, especially if you get good at making it sound natural and can do it fast and efficiently.
Love Dan and love the person or person's that composed that piece. So good
As far as i know, Dan uses his own music in his videos.
Wow. I saw this video posted on all the mixing forums I'm on, so I had to check it out. I love your philosophy on tracking verses mixing plugins.
I, too, have been seeing the ad for this plugin a lot on all of the socials. Without having tried it out I felt an irrational aversion to it. Thank you for substantiating my hitherto unfounded skepticism.
schepps omni channel does not get enough love imo
Dan, you're awesome. I'm only 3 minutes in and I feel I can finally put my indecisiveness regarding "to hardware emu. or not to hardware emu." to rest. Writing this I feel like a recovering GAS-patient. Which is not far from the case truth be told.
As always, the start of my week suddenly got a lot better when this video poped up in my feed!
hey dan, i just wanted to say that you're the most useful and insightful mixing-related youtube channel on the whole platform (of the ones i discovered yet), please keep doing what you do!
i can't believe i just found your channel just two weeks ago after all those years of incredibly good quality content. i'm binge-watching your videos like a netflix-series right now.
some years ago i saw the videos you made for the fabfilter-channe and have been recommending them to anyone willing to learn about phase and oversampling ever since, i can't believe i didn't dig further who made them. thank you so much for your content and i hope you're doing well!
right around 10:00 you realize the tea is gonna be hot XD
man, watching these videos feels like going on a trip with a spaceship! Excellent content, excellent thoughts, amazing music! Thank you!
love that mysterious vibe in the music
What you call "cramping", I've seen referred to as "warping" by academics. Just something I thought I'd mention since it took me a while to figure out what name the phenomenon goes by.
well, "cramping" is certainly the academic term here in the uk. and you'll certainly get far more relevant search results from that term.
I prefer “cramping” because it evokes an uncomfortable feeling, which is what digital EQ’s without a natural phase response sounds like boosted. “Warping” sounds like a cool effect. 😂
It's like suggesting that you can write much better prose on typewriter emulators than in Word. Especially if you install a new one every week or so.
My total knowledge of mixing is from 3 of your videos. I didn't look for this information. The YT algorithm dropped it in my lap. I watched them because of your
- clarity and conciseness of presentation
- empirical approach
- dry humour
- lack of rancour in the face of other people's sub-optimal decisions and null justifications
I am now so interested that I'm considering buying a set of studio headphones so I can hear what you are actually talking about.
Ha! Apparently they modeled absolutely theoretically perfect squeaky clean resistors and capacitors that were immune to degradation.
Haha. Touché!
The intro music definitely implies something…
Plugin market is over saturated with snake oil.
I’ve started to notice the same tendencies on the hardware market - Black Lion Bluey doesn’t sound like the real thing even on RUclips demo by CLA, it does the compression but not the sound. And many more half baked potatoes on the market.
Polyend Tracker needs fix for the MIDI-Audio latency for about a year on the market.
Korg prologue with all analog tract has digital FX as a insert at the end of the chain without option to bypass it or use as a send return.
Yeah, the snake oil has really become endemic at this point. I really respect companies that are honest and straight forward with their products.
Dan, you nailed it again! Thanks for your critics on Harrison's channel strip. Hopefully they will revisit their plugin any time soon.
With regards to adding extra settings to the compressor section, Harrison could easily add a switch button to the compressor section, that flips the faceplate that then shows those extra required parameters for fine-tuning.
And in terms of color, they definitely should add a color section, that includes settings for changing the saturation, capacitors and transistors.
If they won't add any sort type of saturation, they should leave those claims in their marketing, since this misleading for those that want to buy or bought the Harrison 32C channel plugin.
Harrison did a good job in designing a great GUI. However, I'm afraid most of us still judge plugins by their cover...
Why would one assume there needs to be saturation at all? The capacitor and resister values were picked to define the EQ curves and not to add saturation. The claim is to provide an EQ that works just like the original console and has nothing to do with saturation. Hope that helps.
Was really enjoyable and interesting to listen to this -- I mix with the embedded versions of these controls in the Mixbus DAW, where I find them perfectly implemented (in many cases, I won't even need to load any actual plugins). Highly useful insight to see them microanalysed in an 'out of Mixbus' context. Thanks!
Speaking of channel strip plugins being free of non-linearities, I recently took a look at the new SSL Native plugins, specifically the Bus Compressor v2 and their channel strip.
Turns out, neither of those plugins adds saturation out of the box, harmonics created via compression not included. EQ section nullable via Pro-Q3.
For myself, that was the reason why I decided against the SSL channel strip. Same thing with the 32C shown.
To be fair I reckon it's because they push their Fusion Vintage Drive or X-Saturator to be used in conjunction.
Awesome review as ever. I likd that you outline the difficulties/decisions that need to be made when creating a plugin, make it look/sound like vintage bit of kit or make use of all the extra possibilities of computer data processing.
Great video! You've really cut through the bull on this one. BTW, your music is exceedingly cool... would love to see a video on how you do your glitching effects, which I notice you use quite liberally on your guitar tracks :)
Great videos, Dan. Every one I've seen has taught me something new, deepened my understanding of audio production and DSP, and has also been well paced and visualized. Great voice, too!
Mixbus 32c had that comp and Eq set
which when working quick in that DAW
yields some great results, but I always add more plugins and find the eq a limitation if I have a few extra minutes.
One of the more hilarious comments to come from this discussion was the phrase Nullshit. If someone put that on a t-shirt, I think I'd buy two.
This was very enlightening. I use Cockos EQ and Fab compression which does more than this DAW can do. I was about to buy the full version of Harrison 32C but have reconsidered after this video. I also agree with the opinion that Harrison has “marketed” their DAW as a digital substitute for the sound of their consoles. It does not achieve this. At best, it’s a partial graphic representation of a real console. The EQ is really not impressive and the compression incomplete. This video was greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Well... thanks for making this video Dan. I have to say as soon as a saw this plugin out I was thinking yet another "analog" channel strip with some bogus claims. The reviews and showcases also didn't show anything that seamed worth spending money on and switching my current tools. This video proves that in a great detail.
Hello Dan! Haven't followed you for that long but man am I loving your videos. You're like the polar opposite of HouseOfKush by UBK which is all about the feeling, emotion and art. I believe the information you so freely distribute is paramount in enabling us to better convey our feelings and art. I'm really fond of compressors and I have been recently playing with Softube CL 1B Mk II which is puzzling me out to no end. It is very aggressive with its settings and starts pumping very easily which doesn't seem to happen that easily with other products. It would really make my day if you'd find some time in the future to review the plugin and explain to my slow noggin why it's acting the way it is.
“Gear snobs, I mean gear space” 😂😂 either name fits that website for sure lol
The cynic in you which believes that the incorrect frequency and gain settings is a simple trick is probably 100% correct. It's exactly what I thought, the moment you managed to get it to null with reaeq. Great content as always!
Checkout their Multiband Compressor and Mastering Eq. Whilst the former is frustrating for its lack of options and the latter has an annoying GUI in some respects, they both sound absolutely great. And that includes the fact that the eq cramps at Nyquist.
Dan, thank you for having a unique space in the market and appealing to such a niche
OH YEAH! thank you for this, it's PERFECTLY timed for a conversation I'm having.
You don't need to show your face Dan 😉🤣
What a well done review!
And I have to say, I find it interesting that Harrison is being so bold in it's assertions, all the while basically burning their brand's reputation. They basically assumed that the people who they were selling to, audio engineers, are complete idiots. Frankly, that arrogance on their part is probably enough for some to avoid using Harrison's plugins, and tank the brand entirely for a younger generation.
Let's face it. The company might not have any idea who they are competing with. Frankly, I can get a pretty decent emulation of their EQ section from Analog Obsession with some of the Saturation modelling for free. I can get numerous channelstrips on the market, either for free or for a good price (like Harrison's introductory price) that either equals or exceeds the flexibility of the 32C channel.
So, to ask again, how do they think they can charge $49, and soon to be $99, for a plugin that is inherently less useful than literally any other channelstrip that is regularly on sale for $50 or less? Heck, you can still download the DeadDuck plugin suite, which includes 2 channelstrips, and both of those are infinitely more useful than the Harrison for mixing and free, and for tracking Analog Obsession basically clowns on this product, all while being free. Do the developers at Harrison recognize how sad that is that they are handly beaten by freeware, not to mention pretty much all of their competitors have far more competitive products when they go on sale for $50 or less?
The fact they can't even match the functionality of the Waves SSL E Channel? Sheesh.
A lamborghini kit car made on a Dodger neon frame will still make a guy feel like a racecar driver
Shoutout to Analog Obsession. Took me a second to look into it but they sound incredible
I love your videos. This is so informative, as usual. I love digital channel strips and was frightened by your intro.
Maybe the circuit modelling they refer to means they made a SPICE model of the complete original circuit, used that to determine the relationship between the nominal values and actual values on the controls, and then released a completely standard digital EQ with the control values offset accordingly...
The details of Dan's investigation here can't be argued with, and the video is INCREDIBLY useful for anyone considering this for a purchase. However, Dan has a very surgical mixing style. It makes sense. He's not a fan of arbitrary limits, and he makes a strong case. That said, if you embrace the limitations of 32C Channel Strip and 32 Bus plugin -- you DO get a characteristic sound. It is a sound which features issues that Dan would otherwise correct with tools capable of such correction.
But if you live with those limitations, it DOES result in a sound. Maybe a sound Dan wouldn't like, but a sound he and others wouldn't get if they had access to more detailed tools.
My only problem with these plugins is the price. If these were ~$15 tools I would enjoy them for this purpose. $25, tops... But Waves sells Scheps Omni Channel for ~$29.99 and that plugin addresses nearly all of Dan's issues while still having a hardware style feel to it. Harrison's plugins are overpriced, IMHO, but if they ever come down I will buy them for fun "intentionally limited controls" style mixing.
They have their plugs on sale all the time! $9, $39, $49….
thanks for saving us money.
Imagine selling "analogue" style VSTs that sounds exactly like a stock digital 100% sterile EQ from a DAW that costs 60 bucks..
Its kinda funny how they also throw shade at UAD for "colouring" the sound with their plugins. Yeah at least they do not sound like a stock plugin.
Dan, you promised us a face reveal at 50k subs. I'd love to see the person who's been helping me make better mix decisions and better music in general haha
The Kansas album with carry on o wayward son was done on a Harrison board I did a project on. It certainly was colored.
Id love to see a video from you that just showcases emails from developers you’ve upset
Yeah, SSS-style. Dan + Glenn definitely would not null.
@@joelluth6384 Dan's deadpan snark + Glenn's outright roasting is something i'd like to pay full price even with discounted tickets, like Reaper license lol.
@@junkawakami3193 Who is that Glenn guy? Ssems like I'm missing some interesting content?!
@@bjulin ruclips.net/user/SpectreSoundStudios
this video will literally not disappear from my feed.
song is Null And Void by Dan Worrall :)
I wasn't really interested in this plugin and after this I'm definitely not. I find that these days I mostly just reach for the Fab Filter eq, it does what I need and is reliable, which is what counts when you have tight production schedules.
Sounds like you compromise in quality for quantity
@@kylegushue Pro Q3 is one of the best EQs available. It's not sacrificing any quality.
Sounds like you comprimise in quantity for quality
@@privateer2584 just reaching for the same old EQ because of time restrictions is compromising. No single EQ is best for all things
Does that come with saturation option (FabFilter)?
I have nulled the overly expensive Trident EQ's which caused a huge debate on Gearslutz. Then I nulled the Bettermaker EQ, and i got attacked by at least 10 people on GS :D When i provided blind test sound examples, only 2 people reacted, both picking Crave EQ as the "better sounding".
Mr. Worrall,
I would very much like for you to consider demoing and analyzing the Focusrite SC plug-in from Brainworx as well as the RBass from waves.
I appreciate your hard work!
Outstanding overview. "Neither fish nor fowl" . Many thanks. 😊😊
I personally like their clean approach. I would much rather add saturation with other plugins in the chain, because tbh I really don't like what most plugins have baked in at all. So every time you said, it doesn't saturate, I thought - thank goodness! I love pushing analog gear but with digital clean is mean. Adding "character" is not the same, it's easily as much snake oil as anything here, and it's not what I want baked into my tools.
The limited control set here might not have been the best approach. It works baked into their DAW because there isn't room in the UI for all controls, not so much as a channel strip. I much prefer using the Legacy EQ and the MPC compressor, or for channel strips the Flow series. It's odd but I circled back to Harrison more than once already just because their tools work. I don't expect magic sauce and neither should anyone, from any plugin.
Thank you for this, I was curious as to whether it would null with a stock EQ, but hadn't got around to testing it myself.
I love the sound of a Harrison console, the way it sounds, especially when you push it, and was really looking forward to this so I could use it in Reaper, rather than as I would occasionally do - running stems through 32c, which does have that distortion that makes things just sound better to my ear.
Suffice to say, I was extremely disappointed, and like you, felt absolutely no reason to actually buy it, and when I can be bothered, will probably get rid of it from my plugins folder altogether. Until then, it'll stay in my collection in demo mode, as a stark reminder of what they could have done, but decided against to make this pointless piece of design nightmare.
@@CraigScottFrost even if it is the same as the DAW, the compressor was never what I was interested in. It's a nice enough compressor, but the input and output saturation was always what I was interested in. When running stems through 32c, I'd very rarely touch the compressor, and usually only do minor tweaks with the EQ. Without the saturation, this plugin is pointless for me.
I'm really curious to know how you get on with all that - please keep me updated!
I've wasted 2 years of my life trying to persevere with a crash fest- aka Mixbus32c under the premises that it was somehow more enjoyable and contained a mystical mojo ingredient that would make my mixes sound better. Any kind of criticism or technical query in the forum is treaded like a witch hunt and you are left feeling like a traitor where the problem is 'you're not appreciating the software for what it can do, as opposed to what it can't'. I have just moved back to Cakewalk and its like a breath of fresh air- stable, versatile and above all free!!!
Hey Dan, any chance in a video for the latest 32 classic harrison channel strip? Would love to know your thoughts
Very useful video for me! I have always wondered why anyone would want a 3rd party channel strip... as you point out, the mfgs may not even have thought that through. The plugins that most interest me are those that do something different that I like, and make it easy. You have helped me realize why intuition felt like this. Thank you! Sub.
Dan is definitely the favorite engineer of your favorite engineer ;)
Analog Obsession on a Dan Worral video!? Truly A sight to behold.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Dan should use Variety of Sound plugins
Got the Mr. Tickle reference. Loved Mr. Men as a kid! :)
Interestingly enough, I find the auto-settings of the compressor the most interesting part of this plugin. I wish more compressors had an option for auto. Sometimes I just don't wanna deal with attack and release. It hearkens back to using a DBX 165 on auto, with the Overeasy™ circuit. I always loved using that thing as part of a vocal chain: 1176 for the splat and the 165 for the invisible leveling.
So if Harrison is indeed taking this video and perhaps the comments section of it and gearslutz to heart and is thinking about putting together a standalone compressor with all of the settings Dan suggested, please leave the "auto" settings as an available option. I'd probably buy that the minute I got an email notification from Harrison.
*gearsnobs
i agree with you, and i keep saying that about ssl strips and what have you: make the eq fully parametric, and add a q to the low and high frequencies. i don't care if the original consoles didn't have them, there were reasons for that. those reasons disappeared when you moved to digital. if they don't sound as good as the real thing - and none of them do - so if you have the disadvantages of an emulation instead of the real thing, THE LEAST you can do is compensate by making use of the advantages of an emulation instead of the real thing. same thing with neves, and so on. give those stepped eqs a break, and make them fully sweepable. maybe keep the stepped mode in, as an option, if you want to replicate that work flow, but allow for the freq controls to be full range. and - for everybody - include an on/off switch for every filter, so you can properly a/b it, and hear what you're doing. i know, on a console you couldn't do that, i couldn't care less: we're not on a console.
i do, however, appreciate a good design of the gui, that's very important to me, as important almost as the sound, and obviously the options. if it doesn't inspire me, and doesn't get me in the mood of working and creating - like some caricatural oversimplistic, frankly hideous, "modern" interfaces out there, that are just some lines drawn by a kid - it's worthless, no matter how good it is otherwise. it will have to be amazing, and also the only choice out there, of its caliber, for me to overlook an ugly uninspiring interface.
and i also agree the 32c channel strip is crap. not just in comparison to the real whatever or not, but generally. i do like the sound of mixbus, the daw, so there seems to be something else happening there - maybe the interaction with the buses, i don't know - and for that reason i wanted to try to channel in other daws, but it's got no connection. and when you say "it doesn't have the preamp" - as if that excused an "analog" circuit behaving like digital - even that, by itself, makes you raise an eyebrow. beyond the deception of the idea, whose fault is it, if it doesn't have it? it SHOULD have a preamp, that's half the reason you use a console emulation, and not just an eq/compressor packed together. and, by the way, the daw console should have it, too. so maybe less lip, and more work?
and, by the way, all console emulations, if they want to be that, should have a tape insert between the pres and the monitor section, so that you can actually replicate the pre - tape - strip loop you would use in real life, since it needs to be after the pre, and obviouslt before the fader. where the tape is makes a difference in the tightness and roundness of the sound, and also saves you a lot of headache with the gain whenever you adjust the fader (into tape 😳??). the only ones to have that insert, so far, are the waves mixhub and soc channels. not even waves have it on everything, which is a darn shame. and also add a channel variation algorithm on all console emulations, plus bus/summer extensions. all these things listed above should be, in my view, standard for all console emulations. and then we can talk about it BEING a console emulation. those would be digital consoles beyond reproach - provided they sounded well, of course.
i'm so tired of manufacturers giving me "the character", "the vibe", an so on. everybody agrees the future of music producing is in digital. but everybody still behaves like a good sound in digital an option - like a "nice addition", or some kind of a toy, to use. if that's the environment we're gonna work in, give us the tools to work in it - the real ones. i don't want "the character", "the vibe", "the nuance", i want the real deal. the sound quality, the sense of space, the density, the behavior, the response across the board, the summing, the right chain order - all of it, and without the limitations. i don't want to have to tweak something for hours just to make it sound acceptable, it should sound great and out of the box, gain stage and there you go, just like great gear does. the tweaking is for getting the desired tone, not to try to make something you can live with.
i like your videos. all the best!
Who wants Dan's views on Analog Obsession ??? Would love to see those great minds in bringing knowledge to our table ❤
Null test is well and good but is it crazy to think you should do it on something with considerable dynamic range so that you can see if dynamics are effected as well. Thanks
yes man, you are right about everything, but even knowing all this, I bought it (on discount of course), because I used the leveler a lot when I used the Harrison mixbus console (software), and it sounds the same (even the console only colors if you pass for mixbuses, not for standard Channel strips): that's enough for me: being able to have my favorite leveler (which I use only in specific circumstances, but more than crucial for me, and yes, the attack control is enough for me to get this that I want). So at a discount I gladly took it and at a discount I will probably also take the next 32c bus plugin. Excellent analysis as always
I cannot get enough of this moremoremore!!
Dan is the best audio QA ever
Hi Dan,
I'm a fan of your videos but I think you missed the point of using this plugin.
I like the limitations of this plugin.
Sometimes you don't want to dial the Attack and release of the compressor because you want to move quickly and you just want something with a few options that sounds good. (For example waves Rvox)
I understand that the EQ section is probably all "bells and whistles" and marketing BS but it's still sounds great.
I found that while I'm using this plugin I can get great results in no time and part of it is because of the limitations that you mentioned in the video.
Same here. I have been using 32C since it came out. I find the plugin is quicker to use than the DAW controls. Maybe the comparison should have been between the 32C DAW and the plugin. Ya think they might null?? My clients budgets do not allow for me to spend too much time working with very complicated plugins.
You are correct. The design of the EQ is to fix the most amount of issues with the least amount of knobs therefore you don't get a Q knob. Same goes for the compression section which gives you very basic yet powerful controls to find a sound quickly and move on. If you really need all the extra stuff then this plugin is not for you.
Hah, busted! For all their bollocks about modelling every transistor, they've managed to make a relatively flavourless digital EQ that cramps at the top end. In that regard, a non-cramping overtly digital EQ is probably closer to an analogue Harrison desk. I hope this video causes them to address these obvious flaws in the way that your ReaComp video or White Sea Studio's Smooth Operator video did.
From the responses I've seen from them so far, I'd say that it's unlikely...
I'm glad you mentioned Smooth Operator. The way that company handled that was great. I really think they just made a mistake or didn't realize it would be a big problem and the fix they rolled out was solid. This seems more manipulative...
I was suspicious when I saw that this plugin introduces zero latency to the signal - it shouldn't be really possible to make to do such complex emulation without any latency.
Mixbus 32C makes a fantastic live mixer for streaming if you bypass the EQ, comp/level/limiter, and mixbuses.
This was like watching a condensed version of what I figured out over the last few months.