Why I Don’t Use Channel Strip Plugins
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 июл 2024
- Why do I hate channel strip plugins? I’ll explain my thoughts on why I don’t use channel strip VST plugins (like Waves SSL Channel, Waves Abbey Road, Waves plugins, Plugin Alliance channel strip plugin) and what I use instead. My view on channel strips explained. Watch to find out!
→→→Support my Patreon: / palebluedotstudios
→→→ Support my channel! Plugin Boutique affiliate link-buy plugins from their amazing deals & selection!: www.loopmasters.com/?a_aid=62...
→→→ ADSR affiliate link to buy plugins & samples: www.adsrsounds.com/#a_aid=pale...
----Timestamps----
00:00 Intro
00:25 Channel Strips Explained
01:38 Crime #1: Bypass-ability
03:20 Crime #2: Memory Issues
04:27 Crime #3: Janky Controls
07:42 Crime #4: Oversampling
08:23 Conclusion
#vst #audio #musicproduction 
Видеоклипы
Thanks for watching! What did you think of channel strip plugins? Am I off my rocker? Let me know in the comments below!
Definitely off your rocker 👍👍
Agreed!
@@palebluedotstudios channel strips are actually limited on purpose, that’s what I like about them.
@@AmagrasMUSIC Makes sense. I tend to stick to my 2-4 favourite EQ and compressors, even after installing every plugin ever created! Limitations are good.
@@palebluedotstudios I’m new to your channel, what’s your go to eq and compressor? I can put myself In your place because most of the time I just get away with one band eq and stock compressor 😁
I never used channel strips my entire career (nearing 20 years) until Michael Brauer (god) mentioned using an SSL9000j on “every session.” I bought it , and absolutely loveee it. Really adds so much excitement and presence. Very useful. However , I respect the video here. Truth be told , we all have our own methods. None are right or wrong. No rules. It’s all about the results ! 🎶
Well said, my friend! Yes, if you find the SSL9000j works for you, then rock that thang! Haha. I assume we're talking about the brainworx SSL?
@@palebluedotstudios precisely!! They had a sale so I grabbed it! I was formerly, exclusively using UAD/ Waves , but I’m expanding my horizons. Found myself getting too comfortable with my creative process and looking to continue evolving. I really like the plugin alliance/ Brainworx stuff so far. Turns out UAD/Waves are not the only developer that can make good stuff lol.
@@JordanMeyer Oh man, brainworx have been killing it for years. I remember when their stuff came out in the early 2000s; mostly targeted at mastering professionals. You could tell they knew their stuff. Now it's great that their stuff is more accessible now via Plugin Alliance. Their guitar and bass amps are very underrated, too. Highly recommend! Maybe I'll try a whole mix with the SSL and see what happens; see if I hear the magic. Cheers!
Oh hell yeah dude, I live and die by the bx SSL9000J. Absolutely nothing else can beat it, it changed the game for me. I think it really thrives in the digital world because it was originally built to sound as close to digital as analog would get-- "the Superanalogue" thing. I think it has the most useful default placements on the EQ, and the compressor gives you just enough options to be flexible, but not too many to overwhelm if you are trying to move quickly and not overthink it. I've got it all over my current sessions.
The high and low pass filter is a secret weapon as well. I think analog emulating high and low pass filters are very forgiving sonically. There's a lot of smart intentionality to the 9000J.
The 9000J sounds good but I don't understand why they can't turn off the hiss even when the V-Gain is all the way down. @@danielburns4483
Moving from the SSL-XL to mixing entirely in the box, I find the SSL flavor channel strips to be highly valuable. I'm currently using the CLA Mix Hub as I find the character and capabilities to be spot-on. You can certainly mix without them, but properly used, the proper channel strip is pure gold.
For sure. if anyone finds the sound/workflow works for them, who am I to disagree? And it's funny, because CLA Mix Hub brings a lot of value with its included effects, and can null against the new EV2. Plus you get the neat bucket system (which I need to try out sometime)
@@palebluedotstudios I really like the bucket system. It's worth playing with to see if it fits your workflow. The strip is very easy on resources as well and can easily go on all 60 tracks with just a medium powered computer.
@@timhewitt32 Good! I would have been surprised if it ate up resources. It has to be lean and able to run on all tracks. And I assume the 1176s are the same CLA ones that have always been extremely light. I could probably run a million of those on my iMac! I'll definitely check out the bucket system soon, might be a fun video!
Can you use channel strip on master mixer channel
Hey man. So I think you might be missing the point of newer channel strips (SSL Channel, Scheps Omni, etc). I noticed that when you were using the SSL channel, you had the Analog switch in the off position. This bypasses the analog modeling (the actual modeling of the hardware that was done to create the plugin) and gives you a clean digital signal, which doesn't give you the characteristic sound of the plugin.
If you were to, say, clean up your track and do your EQ cutting beforehand, maybe some Soothe, and then use an SSL Channel with the analog switch on, boost the EQ hard into its own compressor (by selecting the CH OUT in the dynamics section), you'll have it acting as your "color" plugin rather than trying to make it work as an all in one. These are meant to give you the sound of the consoles that they've been modeled after, and they really accomplish that well if you know how to use them.
Thanks for the response! I hear you there. For the record, I use Sonimus Satson Channel & Bus on all my mixes, for the subtle console flavour. Again, for me, it's a single insert that I can easily see and bypass, without loading a whole compressor and EQ. But if you are looking for a very specific, well-done analog crosstalk/noise modelling, then something like the Lindell or SSL is a great choice! I appreciate the feedback. Cheers!
I'm convinced. I am new to this and all I have used are channel inserts. Your explanation perfectly covers my work process.
Great to hear! There are so many get plugins available these days, I just like sticking with inserts. Cheers!
I have been doing some mix shootouts using channel strips. Never thought of this. Some good info. Thanks for the video...
Thank you so much for watching!
I’m sort of mixed on this, I get overwhelmed at times going through my plugins folder, sometimes I spend time trying to choose the right eq or compression because I have so many. The channel strips help to just ease my mind, i know they are limited but I find they help you to focus sometimes. However I like to use channel strips that have features I need or would like to use to mix, it’s obviously not the only plugin in use but it’s a good first line of defence on a track. They can be very useful.
Good call. My stance always is: if people find it simpler and easy to use, then I would never oppose that. I just like to pick my favorite separates and stick with them. But it is nice to have your tools all in one place, for sure! Thanks for watching!
Good points! I've been/ am into a few strips only lately and trying to love them, testing the workflow. Haven't landed on one exactly and am not sure i will go with them. Fuse Audio Labs VCS-1 though, has oversampling on only the preamps, has 3 preamp flavours, a great sounding EQ and VCA style comp AND has a 'mix view' where you can see/use ALL plugin instances and bypass all modules + use output gain from one window. you can also find and click (for example) ch 13 'snare' from the mix view and open that ch plugin in full. It's a step in the right direction imo but still not 'perfect' for a few points you mention and also the eq layout needs learnig to get used to (there you go again!)
That "mix view" sounds cool! Could be a good way to recall instances and their settings more easily. I'll have to check that one out. Thanks for watching!
@@palebluedotstudios Cool :-) Cheers
@@hettovennik2887 Cheers!
Mix decision fatigue... nice one! I don't like channel strip plug-ins either. Good points you make. Also, many of them are graphically crowded and busy looking, have smaller text and knobs and all of it crammed together to fit the available space.
That's a really good point! I find myself often wasting time, scanning these interfaces with, as you say, tiny fonts. And wondering which way to turn knobs. No thanks! And thanks for watching!
100% agreed!
@@greedokenobi3855 Awesome! I just can't get into them. Thanks for watching!
That's a really interesting video which I thoroughly enjoyed although I have reached a slightly different conclusion for myself personally. I never used channel strips and tbh just couldn't see the point for many of the reasons that you covered in your video. What changed my mind was that relatively recently I was working on a mix and I just couldn't seem to get it sound "right". It just lacked a certain cohesion and sonic signature and I just seemed to be circling around the place I wanted to get to. So I scrapped the whole thing and decided to re-mix it and try not to end up going down the exact same musical road and, since I'd never actually completed a mix with channel strips, thought I'd give it a go. Well, you can see where this is going - it was a revalation. Everything just ended up exaclty where I wanted it to be and very, very quickly.
I don't exactly know why but whether it was using the same compressor, similar eq curves, same "sonic signature" or just that it made me make mixing decision that I could have made with the individual plugins (but didn't) I really don't know. But I have changed my workflow since then, added a few more channel strips to my toolbox because they all sound a bit different, and pretty much every mix I've completed since then is based on (although not restricted to) a channel strip plugin.
I don't especially have an issue with not knowing what it's doing because, let's face it- it's filters, eq and comp on every channel and whether it's individual plugins or a channel strip there are no clues on the mixing page (although I do change the name of the plugins when it's something specific so I can see it).
And when you're using the same channel strip across every channel then you quickly get the hang of the GUI even if you've not used it for a while.
And, since you mentioned it, I do use the LIndell 80 but only for the preamp emulation.
So I don't disagree with a lot of what you say but in terms of imparting a sonic signature to a mix and making everything play nicely together I do think there's a role for channel plugins. Not to complete a mix but to do a lot of the heavy lifting.
Wow, thanks for the thoughtful comment! So, first off, it totally makes sense that you could scrap a "usual" mix and get a great mix with channel strips. I'm certain that I could do that also, a fresh perspective helps. Pretty much all these plugins sound great (although most of them fall quite short of their hardware brethren in tests, but I digress!), and the limited choices can help you focus. Definitely a good thing.
Curious: did you mention which channel strip you used in your story? I'd love to try doing a whole mix with it.
Oh, and the Lindell 80's compressor sound amazing on "NUKE" setting. :)
And what DAW do you have where you can rename inserts? I'm guessing Reaper or Live? This would be a great feature for Cubase.
Thanks again for the detailed comment! Lots to think about there. And thanks for watching!
@@palebluedotstudios no, I didn't mention which channel strip because I didn't want to suggest I was promoting one over another, it was just a methodology comment.
But since you ask ;) - I used the SSL channel strip v2 which I had actually bought as part of a promotion with the SSL bus compressor. I only really wanted the bus compressor but I then had this channel strip knocking around so decided to try and use it to get our of the musical dead end I found myself in. I had previously tried (and failed) to mix a song with the Lindell 80 but had actually succcessfully mixed a song with the SSL channel strip 6 (the strangely names predecessor to the v2) but only because I forced myself to as an academic exercise and didn't do it again. Until a few months ago.
I then bought the brainworx SSL 9000J which I've also used successfully on quite a few mixes. I could be making this up but the 9000J sound a bit more open and "pop" whereas the one from SSL sound a bit more punchy. BUT that could be a self-fulfilling prophecy because I use the 9000J on more open/pop song and the SSL on more rock/midrange type of song so I could be fooling myself a bit.
I've also got a Neve emulation (also from brainworx) but haven't used it yet. Although I'm going to use it on the next mix so I should know soon whether to add it to the toolbox.
I've thought about adding an API or another flavour of SSL/Neve but given that pro studios tend to have one desk which is used for a range of music I don't think that's necessary (even if it's possible). I'm not saying that these plugins rival the hardware, I'm just saying that I don't think you have to mix a certain genre of music on a certain desk. Imho :)
I like the Lindell 80 preamp (I'm a bit of a sucker for preamps tbh) but just couldn't get on with the eq or compressor sections. Far too limited for my liking, as you alluded to in your video. But thanks for the tip on using the compressor - I'll give it a go.
I'm a studio one user and you can simply rename any plugin so that when you look at your inserts it can say "high shelf" rather than "PRO Q3" or "kick ducker" rather than "PRO C2". I don't really know any other DAWs but I would have thought that was fairly standard. It's super helpful for all the reasons you mention in your video, particularly if you come back to a mix after some time away.
Enjoying your channel (long time lurker) so keep doing what you do
@@Big_Stewdio Why thank you, long-time lurker! Haha. New product-review video coming out tomorrow! :)
The SSL naming conventions are bizarre. I use the v6 SSL Bus Compressor on every mix, but now it's discontinued (without warning), and you have to get the new one, either with the subscription model or for $329(!). I have the v2 channel strip as well, but I found the compressor lacking, which I do find is a problem with a lot of these strips plugins. I liked NUKE mode on the Lindell, but found the standard compressor to be weak.
To date, I haven't been sold on VST pre-amps. I tend to want to control my saturation and use oversampling. I might try an experiment where I A/B an entire mix with just the pre-amps activated on a strip/modelling plugin.
My point exactly 🙌🏽🙌🏽🙌🏽🙌🏽
I find channel strips useful at the recording stage. in my small home studio I cannot get perfect sound even after treating the room so I often use channel strips to improve the sound, it helps with comparison of the overall mix.
When mixing down I will use more selective processing.
That's cool, makes a lot of sense to use them to get a certain analog sound you like, then mix from there. Then you don't have to keep track of their purpose as much. Thanks for watching!
Recording is the perfect spot
I always liked the idea of mixing and matching whichever eq or comp that I wanted, so that's what I did. Then they gave away the Focusrite strip for free. To my surprise the TMT sounded Great, so I put it on every channel. As I mixed, I started just using the strip's EQ rather than spending a decision on which EQ to use. Then the same thing happened to compression. Since the strip was sufficient 80% of the time, my decision fatigue was greatly reduced and I became more productive. So I eventually became a channel strip convert without meaning to.
That's very cool. I hear you about decision fatigue, and I think that's why I finally settled on Pro-Q, and then changing it up if I need something specific. I actually forgot that they gave away that channel strip-it usually goes for $349! Wow.
I see your point. I'm just getting into these strip racks. I really enjoy them so far; my rigorous pursuit of getting the mix to perfect really pushes me to ignore these small annoyances. I suppose if had to mix for a living, I would surely understand you better.
Thanks for taking in my point! I'll always say: if you enjoying working a certain way, then that's all you need! You do make me wonder if working full-time in production has shaped my view on this...probably! Thanks for watching!
I absolutely agree. The mouse operation of hardware GUIs is often a disaster. I don't understand why plugin designers create software and expect operating it like hardware units?! One is to be operated with a mouse and the others with two hands (and ten fingers). This is called "ergonomics"!
You get it, my friend; you get it. :)
I’m right with ya! Tried channel strips many times and I have the same issues.
Glad to hear I'm not alone! It's interesting, because they sure do seem to sell..
this is a huge point! let me go back and play with the WaveArts TrackPlug because thats the only out of all CS has more options plus with a parametric EQ which i love
It's a real classic!! Thanks for watching!
I just think it's wholesome that you read and like comments below, that basically contradict a bit to what you said, way to go ! I'm now a sub
Aw, cheers man! Yeah, well, I love having a healthy debate, and everyone here is pretty cool about it. trust me: after a few years, you develop a pretty thick skin, haha! Thanks so much for watching and subbing! Cheers!
At the end of the day what ever works for you works , no one will care if you used a channel strip or created your own chain of plugins , if it sounds good it is good. What su ks for one will absolutely rock for another. Knowing your gear inside out.. plugin or hardware .. way more important
I agree! It can be fun for us audio guys to debate the fine points, but at the end of the day, if you know how to make a good mix, the listener does not care! Thanks for watching!
Well said.
Slate need to break their plugs out of the VMR so you can easily use them, a bit like how Kilohearts plugs work in Snap heap, or individually.
Agreed. Yeah, that would be super cool; Khz-style! Cheers!
I think you’re totally on point with this. I still buy analog modeled plugins and love working with them but using more modern plugins will also give a good result. Sometimes it’s not better, it’s just “different”
Yes, for sure. I think it's mostly about finding what works for you specifically, but these days, I find I don't need it to behave and look like an old console in order to get professional results. Cheers!
Mixing for a living, day in and day out, you gotta get there fast and precisely, channel strips help with that. I couldn’t be as consistent and on point without it.
That's great to hear! I mix for a living too, but I find channel strips slow me down. If they work for you, then they're good! Cheers!
@@palebluedotstudios No offense but it sounds like you are over thinking, which is common around here. What i gather is that you have a bias and feel you have to do it a specific way using a specific thing. I dont intend to sound combative, i am a poor text only communicator. I can only go off the limited perspective i have of you from 2 videos.
@@jonathansoko1085 No offense taken! This is a very subjective thing, and I'm sure I have my biases. I think those biases stem from being a digital-first mixer, with limited experience back in the 1990's on consoles. That being said, I think it is a legitimate issue that some console plugins just aren't as mouse-friendly as plugins designed to be used with computers. But again, to each their own! Thanks!
Your points are felt and valid. But if you are emulating the actual channel strip that means going back to how mixing was mostly done in those times.
It is very limiting but most are going for character of sound based on the modeling.
If any plugin designers are watching, now is the time to break apart the channel strips into separate plugins...or make your strip modular. I prefer separate pieces because I may want to put another type of plugin between the strip's modules.
Thanks for the thoughtful response! I too would like it to be more modular, but I guess Slate users would say "it already is! Just mix and match!", but it's hidden inside a container. Anyway, great points. Cheers!
Good points I’ve been using the fat channel on studio one and it allows me to turn on and off each individual processer
That's great to hear! Thanks for watching!
Spot on. In 14 years of production/mixing/mastering, not once have I ever used a channel strip plugin in any major project.
Nor do I intend to do so, for pretty much the same reasons you mentioned. Workflow and speed of access to data relevant to the project are paramount.
Thanks! Yes, I find I just forget about them and use plugins that I can select and control better. Thanks for watching!
I love Console 1 and that's a channel strip. I like SSL channel strips because I used to mix on their consoles many moons ago. I would probably like an Audient channel strip, if anyone made one, for the same reason. I like Neve 1073 EQs for the muscle memory of using the hardware.
So I guess I like analog emulations of gear I've actually used, as there is no learning curve, and it has familiarity and muscles memory.
But I prefer modern interfaces for new things and new concepts. Each has a place.
For sure. If you have experience with the originals, or own Console 1, that makes them even more viable. I have experience on consoles, but that was a loooong time ago, haha. Again, if they work for anyone else, I'm all for it! Thanks for watching!
In my home studio, I certainly don't use channel strips on every track. I have an Analog Obsession fake Neve channel strip that I use to tame my own vocals, and it's so easy to use. I can throw in a little EQ, some compression, de-ess a little, and it's all so gentle and easy. I also have an Waves SSL that I use from time to time to get that specific sound. But your point is generally well taken.
When I'd go to studios in the 80s and 90s to record, I generally recall engineers having to really pay a lot of attention to trying to sound clean, and it was always a balance between trying to get the signal hot enough and avoiding unwanted distortion. Now we're just slathering our stuff with fake-analog color, and you can hear it when you listen to it. I'm also with you about the work flow. I like the easy graphic intelligibility of modern style parametric EQs, compression, limiters, etc. OTOH, once you get used to a plugin, it's not a big deal.
It's funny: in the 80's, we were obsessed with getting cleaner recordings, working around all the hiss and noise. And now we're piling it back on! Haha. I like your take on this, always great to hear from a professional! Cheers!
@@palebluedotstudios Thanks. I'm not a pro, nor do I have pro skills, but I have been around a while!
Sounds like a pro to me! :)
I’ve been consistently making records for 37 years, (over 3000) and did not like the channel strips that were available for Pro Tools when I switched over from analog, other than sometimes the SSL E series from Waves. I always loved the snap of that compressor for certain things, having used the consoles a gazillion times, and it had a similar vibe. Like you, I also didn’t see the point of most channel strips until recently. Now I appreciate channel strips more, especially on vocals. They allow me to quickly sculpt a vocal into something listenable; some vocal tracks from even major artists are recorded shockingly badly. It gets me to point “a” quickly and efficiently, so I can move on to other elements of the mix. I then, more often than not, will add other compressors, EQ’s, saturation, whatever is necessary to get the desired results. Not surprisingly, that’s often how we did it back in the day. Broad strokes from the console, and add vibe and character using outboard gear. It’s still how many engineers who mix on an analog console work. I’m really liking the Brainworx Amek 9099 channel strip at the moment. It’s very flexible and musical. However, I do turn off the noise/hiss from these modeled plugins whenever possible. I don’t miss that part of the analog world at all. And as I’ve used many different consoles and outboard EQ’s, when I see an 80 series Neve style EQ, I automatically think upside down and backwards. In fact, the Waves VEQ-3 (an early Neve 1081 emulation) sometimes confuses me as it’s not upside down, nor backwards like the UAD 1081. 😂 While I only use them on certain tracks, the new channel strips are really fun and interesting. I did try to use the same one on almost every channel of a mix recently, with the tolerance modeling making each channel slightly different, but didn’t find it to be of any benefit, not on that particular mix at least. But it didn’t hurt, and was fun to try. I do find knowing the character of lots of different makers of gear helps me make quick decisions in the box. I instinctively can feel that a Neve V series would be good on this, an API on that, an SSL for this and so forth, so having these tools really helps me mix quicker. I like the Fabfilter Q3 for more surgical things, dynamic EQ, or when I want no added color…but for me, I enjoy all the colors of then sonic rainbow…
Wow, thanks for this thoughtful reply! Yes, so clearly since you have experience with the real things, then the channel strips make even more sense for you. I worked in studios in the 90s, but really cut my teeth once everything moved to computers (for better and worse), so the incentive to use analog-modelled gear (which sometimes can be quite gimmicky too, as you point out with the noise and hiss) was low for me. But of course there are plenty of analog-modelled plugins I adore and use to this day (SSL Bus Comp, anyone?), but again, mostly for me, it's about not seeing what I'm using or being able to control the signal chain in the way that works for me. I'm also not sold on analog EQ models, but that's for another video I'm working on...
I found your comment really helpful. I’m 60 but don’t have your experience, so I come to YT not just for information, but also practical advice. I’ve been using an Apollo x4 and UAD plugins for 4 years and it’s great. Recently I bought the Lindell 80 and Brainworx SSL 4000 E for when I’m mobile, using an EVO audio interface. They seem great too. The main advantage of the UAD channel strips are the integration with the Unison pre-amps, which I like when I’m in the studio. However, I’m not skilled enough to hear the difference between the Apollo/Unison/UAD plugins versus say the Brainworx/EVO combination. Do you have your own videos or tutorials?
@@JeffyGHi JeffyG! Thanks so much for your comments. I'm curious: are you wondering if I have videos/tutorials about those specific plugins, or about technique and learning to hear the difference? Cheers!
I’ll go against the grain on this - Waves Shepps Omni Channel is a game changer - and you can bypass any of the separate entities at any time. Not only that - I can move the chain around - compression before EQ or after, saturation before or after EQ, the list goes on.
Great! Yes, I've had many viewers push back on the Shepps Channel, and I totally hear you. The only way it fails my personal test is that you still have modules all included in one interface, which you need to remember if you used EQ, compression, saturation, etc. But I do love the sound and modularity of Omni Channel! Cheers!
Starting out being 45 years old (in 2011) i really enjoyed the analog "look" of channel strips. But i totally agree with your vision: although some offer wild improvements, their "swiss army knife" approach mostly obscures a decent workflow
Thanks so much for your comments! And thanks for watching!
I particularly use channel strips only in the mix or Master Bus to give me that little analogic emulation color to the overall track.
Good call. I use the SSL bus comp, and just set it and forget it. Thanks for watching!
Use what you are comfortable with. Being an ssl console user, I find it much easier working with ssl emulations with interface like the console channels. Either you know and can use or not. But these problems you are figuring out isn't universal
I agree, my issues are not universal. I wanted to explore why I, personally, don't tend to use channel strips. I'm just not a fan! Thanks for watching!
I completely see your point, but at the same time what does one do when the modules in a ch. strip plug-in sound good like in Slate and it virtual mix rack? You make exceptions I guess, LOL Great video.
Happy mixing!
Thank you! Yes, that is exactly the case. I still reach for Slate plugins when I think they're right for the job. Thanks for watching!
With all parameters linked to my control surface (faderport 8), a channel strip is actually easier to use than fabfilter for me
Yes, that makes perfect sense. FabFilter is designed from the outset for computer/mouse use.
Whilst I disagree on certain points, this is a terrific discussion of modern audio. The laws have changed. I have templates with SSL, Neve, etc., but I also have an empty one for creative soundscaping. Thank you for this. Everyone has opinions, you should listen to all of them and decide for yourself.
Agreed! I'm glad you enjoyed the video and approached it with an open mind. I completely respect the position of people who love mixing with analog emulation channels, I just had to explore why I kept ignoring them whilst mixing-even the ones I paid a lot of money for! Cheers, and thanks for watching!
I partially agree with this video, Slate digital has decent virtual console emulations and I pretty love how they sound but the problem is I couldn't find any alternative plug-in yet. I really hope slate digital make the Virtual Channel and Virtual Bus as a separate stand alone plug-in not in the channel strip.
I agree. I'd love to have them free of the rack. Personally, I find it annoying to constantly scroll vertically on the left to pick your plugin from a long list, drag it into the rack, and then lots of horizontal scrolling if you have a big chain. It bugs me that the whole Slate suite is sometimes in the rack, and sometimes out. It's inconsistent, and I'd just prefer separate plugins, please. Cheers!
I've been using ssl UC1 controller for a while
you get channel strip v2 + 4k b + bus compressor 2 bundled with it for free
so I made a template in ableton and use channel strip 2 or 4k b on every channel
it's really great to be able to tweak the knobs without looking at the screen or using a mouse
you can scroll the channels through the controller and quickly get to the next ssl plugin
so there's definitely improvement in the workflow
it also reduced my use of endless plugins
That sounds amazing, and you've nailed the difference with integrated hardware; you can now use those classic designs the way they were intended: with your hands! For the record, I'd be more than happy to use one of those (SSL, if you're listening...) Cheers!
Why would you not want to use oversampling on a compressor in a channel strip? Compressors produce harmonics as well.
That's a great point! Depending on the compressor, and the amount of compression, you could reduce enharmonic content with oversampling. But if you're using a gate, or a (clean) EQ, you don't really need it. Inserting these plugins individually, in my DAW chain, allows me to control oversampling per-effect. With most channel strips it's all or nothing. Unless you insert another channel strip? haha. But you make an excellent point. Cheers!
You could easily make the counter argument: channelstrips allow to focus on mixing as opposed to spending finite cognitive power on choosing the right individual modules for thr task browsing through huge plugin collections.
There is also the advantage of consistency and knowing your tools in and out.
Ultimately its a preference. Personally i use individial eqs, comps etc. because I'm used to that workflow
I agree on the Plugin Alliance channelstrips being awfully designed though.
I totally agree with you. Limitations are good, but even better is choosing one tool and learning it inside-out, instead of hoping some analog-emulated channel strip will make your mixes "sound better". I just like to see what my separate processors are doing. Cheers, and thanks for watching and commenting!
Wonderful!
Thank you! And thanks for watching!
You make a strong point! “Individuated” just added to my vocabulary 😂 I’ve always understood that popular channel strips from UAD or Brainworx were adding some color beyond the sum of their parts. That the embedded algorithms could not be duplicated with individual compression, dynamics, gates and limiters. Maybe I’ve been sold a load of crap? But, I’ve also been critical of vintage console hardware. All that expense…and does it really add anything more than what I could add with individual plugins in my DAW? Then, if we’re going to challenge the status quo, isn’t there an argument that all EQs are the same? I’m serious. Sure they all have different controls and precision, but there’s only 1 frequency spectrum. If a single bass and single treble knob cover the spectrum, why do we need anything more?
I'm so glad you said that about EQs. I've been meaning to put out an "All Digital EQs are the Same"-style video, but I keep putting it off. I just don't get excited (nor do I purchase) new EQ plugins; I just don't need them. I might make that video soon.
@@palebluedotstudios I’d watch it! There are dynamic EQs like Fab Filter and a few others that are popular. I can mimic dynamic EQ by just having multiple tracks of the same part, each with different EQ settings, then mix or automate. But I get it. A lot of producers are looking for a dynamic EQ to do magic on a single track - like a single track vocal. In that “magic one button” category I’ve been using Izotope Nectar 3+ (is it A.I. well not really). Again, these advanced plugins are cool, but are they necessary?
@@JeffyGI'd say dynamic EQs are definitely necessary, but need to be used carefully. The new AI (Izotope, Accentize, Sonible, et al.) stuff is exciting, and can be great, but I'm sure you'd agree that it's a little scary that some younger producers are going to start their careers using soothe2 on EVERYTHING by default. But good old classic EQ, automation and good technique is always a great idea!
nice article - appreciate the view that screen real estate is an issue.
Re the Neve channel / upside down eq knobs. That's the way the real thing was. If, like me, you did many sessions on old Neve desks, it becomes natural very quickly. Its still clockwise to increase, the zero dB is at the bottom so you can see it when sat in front of the physical console.
I like the comment about alternative skins, so an old school person can use the original emulation while those who prefer a more 'normal' (zero boost at 12 o'clock) can also be happy.
Thanks! I hear you, for sure. I'm certain I'd have a wonderful time with a real Neve desk if I had some time with it, but I was just trying to demonstrate the barriers that realistic GUIs can give a new user, compared to bespoke digital EQs, which I think you understood. Thanks so much for watching! Love the feedback from pros. :)
You have a point. Digital plugins are there for us to make the best out of them.
But here's the philosophy behind channel strips: when you have that much "freedom" you become self-indulgent.
I've read some authors advocating you should think EQ'ing in 4 ranges (of course, they're not considering notch filters to remove unwanted resonance).
And if you think about it, you still have a lot of freedom because, in the analog world, you would have to be REALLY rich to have one compressor per channel!
And, of course, there are the flavors of your favorite consoles.
So, there's no right or wrong here. Only different paradigms.
I completely agree, Paul; a very nuanced take. Limitations are good, and I find myself really working on reducing my plugins and focusing on what really works in my mixes. If that's an analog-modelled EQ for one user, that's great; if I prefer mouse-friendly parametric EQs, then that's great, too. I just found myself really wondering why I never used these painstakingly-crafted analog channel strips I was so excited about, and had to essay it. Thanks so much for watching! Hope to hear your thoughts in the future. Cheers!
I am 💯 with you on all these points. Great explanations and demos. IMO channel strips are ideal for people who have spent years on physical consoles and the don’t want to learn new interfaces, and the want to replicate their old workflow. That is not me.
Yes, I’m sure they appeal more to someone who has lots of physical console experience. Sometimes I think they should just make an SSL DAW, so the user gets the whole workflow. But then again…thanks for watching! Glad you enjoyed it! :)
@@palebluedotstudios Cubase 11 Pro had all you need, complete studio channel strip
@@anthonyjunior3335 For sure, plus it's modular AND can be treated like inserts in the Edit View. But I find I still forget about it and favour my own personal plugins. But definitely a great channel strip inside the DAW.
You don't need channel strips in it's current form you're right BUT to achieve an analog coherent sound you need at least something like sonimus plugins to all channels or busses.
I would push back a bit on the idea that the only way you can achieve a coherent analog sound is via some type of console emulation...think about it: almost every LP mixed in Pro Tools from the late 80s to the 2000s was mixed without Sonimus or anything like that. Do they sound "cold"? I don't think so...
And I'm glad you mentioned Sonimus! He is a real pioneer in the console department! I've owned Satson since it came out, and I used to use it in every mix, but I've backed off a bit lately. I still use it as my standard VU meter for gainstaging, though!
I understand that you want control but that may not be everybody's goal. Sometimes the goal is efficiency. I wish FL studio had a channel strip so I don't have to pull up a separate plug-in. I enjoy Luna for that reason. Not control, efficiency. I don't need to pull up 4 different plugins when I can just use one and get results. Plus it's slightly less CPU intensive (depending on which one you use). Nowadays I go for a stock parametric EQ for subtractive EQ then SSL native channel strip. Usually, I get good results faster because the extra controls distract me from what I was trying to do lol ... Keep up the informative content tho💪🏿
Thanks my friend! I'm going to tackle analog compressors next! Stay tuned! And you make great points. I hear Luna is great for that minimal, classic console vibe. I'll have to get around to that soon. Cheers!
For the past 15 years I have not used a channel strip, before that I always used a Mixing Console of sorts running into delta 1010s into the box for tracking only. However, the project I'm working on now really needed a channel strip on just the instrument tracks themselves so I can quick load everything to make fast edits for workflow, though my mix buses and master bus are strictly preset VST FX chains. This is to aide in faster production.
It took some time to find the right one, months actually. I had all the problems you talk about here to overcome. I also refused to use strips MODELED after old devices. The EQs are never accurate due to the hardware they emulate. However and Ironically I discovered the channel strip you actually have pictured in this videos thumbnail, the FUSE AUDIO LABS VCS-1. It literally fixes most all the complaints you & I both have and does some things none of the other channel strips do. Even in 2 years now, since this video was posted, it still seems to reign supreme and at a great price. I wish I had found it sooner.
Sorry to necro the comments, but it was worth sharing for those still searching. It's made by a single developer who's a guitarist & drummer.
Toodles, Noodles.
Thanks for the thoughtful response! Yes, I really love Fuse Audio Labs; very underrated developer. I didn't spend a ton of time with the VCS-1, but I'll revisit it. I can see that the signal flow is fully swappable, and I know their quality is good. I'll check it out! And please necro my comment section anytime, haha! Cheers!
I make my own chains as well as using channel strips. Scheps Omni Channel has real colour and character. This has the ability to turn off individual blocks.
I agree with you from a mixing standpoint not seeing what is going on leads to fatigue.
Thanks, Jay! I recall really liking the compressor on Scheps Omni, but it's been awhile. I do like the flexible routing on it; beats part of the issue! Cheers!
I simply just appreciate the freedom on picking a specific tool from several go to options,channel strips feel a bit restrictive to me.
I totally agree. I don’t like having the extra stuff! Thanks for watching!
What’s your opinion on the SSL UC1 with their channel strip plug-in workflow?
I haven't used the SSL UC1, but that's a situation where channel strips make more sense: it's a hardware controller that is tactile and actually gives you similar workflow to using a console. I'd have to test that out for awhile to see it I'd get used to it, but I also don't have much luck sticking with controllers either. I'm such a mouse guy! Perhaps that's another video...
I have Softube Console 1 and I think it's perfect for what you said are your complaints about channelstrips, you can bypass every part like eq, compression, gate separately or all at once, you can rearrange them with click of a button, and you can create your hybrid console for me it's always working SSL 9000K XL compression with SSL 9000 EQ if I want analog one or Weiss EQ for ultra clean digital one, SSL 4000 for dynamics section gate, transient designer, bum done I can save it as preset or copy to other channels, bum done, easy don't have to touch a mouse to open window of each channel I have this inserted instead of mousing around the mixer, I don't have any problems with mouse I'm used to mixing with mouse, but if you learn this thing, you create a bit of muscle memory you can close your eyes or look down to console instead of screen which will offload your visual operator and thus help you to focus more on sound instead of light and It can be halpful tbh, all those shiny GUIs take away some portion of attention which could be used for listening, I dig this thing I don't have many things to complaint about when using the Console 1.
It's different while I also agree using limited features in plugin where it makes zero sense to not add modern features that are nearly impossible to add to real analog console is stupid development choice that still many companies does, I found that sometimes having less choices makes you less distracted and sparks some extra creativity which in the end may end up with better overall mix decisions.
@@danielkisel5661 Thanks for the great comment! Some other viewers have said they love using the Softube Console 1, I'd love to try one out! Because, yes, that changes the issues completely; if you're using actual dials and faders, then you're using it in exactly the way the design pattern was intended! Otherwise, mouse, mouse, mouse. Maybe Softube will hook me up one day! Thanks for watching!
When you opened with bypassability i thought that this video would be at least 8 years old. Channel strips have come a long way..
8 years! Not quite, haha. For sure, individual module-bypass is more common now in channel strips. Just to be clear, my "bypass-ability" refers to being able to bypass and see each effect in the mixer chain, without opening a separate container first. Thanks so much for watching, cheers!
wow, I don't usually disagree with all the points one makes during a video, but in this case it happened. every stance is so debatable! to each his own I guess...
That's cool! This video is VERY subjective, even more so than my "Why I Don't Buy Analog EQs" video. It's really just my experience; I was curious why I simply never used channel strips anymore and I wanted to interrogate that. Cheers!
@@palebluedotstudios absolutely. it's just that since channel strips are such an integral part of my mixing process, I couldn't help but wince at some of the takes here. but respect nonetheless
@@TheSecondNature Hard not to wince when people challenge our personal preferences, but I love the friendly, professional discourse. Cheers!
I agree with a lot, but When you was faffing around with the Lindell strip. people who buy these plugins are buying them to actually use them and spend a lot of time with them. Some might have a slight learning curve, but it's like going from driving a Lorry to a car, or different side of the road in other countries sometimes. Both get you there but you can't expect things to work the same. I do however think as cool as some of these plugins look they should have an alternative view with sliders more suitable for mouse.
nice vid btw, :)
Thank you, my friend!!
100% you can always use boring goddamn pro q
@@andreisidius8237 That's for sure! Thanks for watching.
Very interesting and entertaining feature. I like to make my own channel strips, preferably with a visual readout so I know just WTF is going on. Most channel strips are missing this crucial feature, so it’s easy to overcook things. I think the channel strip is a product of a bygone era, and mostly redundant unless you’re into nostalgia and pretending you’re really mixing on a console. Why would you want to, with all the flexibility that individual plugins offer? Finally, there’s either too much going on in the GUI, or it’s gigantic.
I like Arturia’s preamps for vocals and drums, but even there I’m more likely to reach for an EQ.
Good stuff.
Thanks for this thoughtful response! Yes, I agree. We're in a new era, we don't need to be shackled to the old. I'm curious, when you say you make your own channel strips, do you mean that you code your own?
I mix for a living. Channel strips are more efficient. I can do the job of 5 plugins in Waves Omni faster and it sounds good. Depends on what you're going for and how much time you want to spend on things...but it's crazy to not use them ever.
I hear you. If it optimizes your workflow, then it IS good. I think the main thing for me is that I don't see what separate effects I'm using right away.
@@palebluedotstudios I don't understand. what can't you see? It's all laid out, nothing is hidden. It's basically a bunch of plugins in one, usually doing nothing until you turn a knob. I don't get what you're saying.
@@petefaders I tried to explain it in the video. When I use my own inserts, I can see the plugin's in the effects rack of my DAW at a quick glance, and I can re-order them, without opening a secondary container interface. I can also see exactly what's been bypassed or not, and change effects on the fly. I just find it an extra step to open a channel strip to do this.
there's channel strips out there that tackle a fair few of your complaints. A good example is TBProAudio's CS-5501V2. It's strength being that each control takes a minimal amount of space.
I still agree that using individual plugins is more practical however.
Yes, that is a very flexible channel strip. I love the perceptual A/B loudness matching! Thanks for watching!
Sorry, but please figure out what you're doing before using something like the Lindell 80 as an example to prove your point . . . you have the EQ bands switched off, of course nothing will happen when you boost or cut. Select a frequency band then try again. The compressor and gate modules are on, did you want them on? You can bypass any of the modules with one click. On most channel strips you can switch the order of the modules around any way you wish with a move or 2. The Lindell 80 is an emulation of a 70s Neve console and works pretty much like the hardware did, and for certain kinds of music (not all) it's a fantastic tool. On most channel strips you can switch the order of the modules around any way you wish with a move or 2. Each to his own, if you prefer mixing using individual plugins that's cool, but the way you demonstrate this it's hard to take you seriously . . .
I appreciate your feedback. I will add that it was my first time using the Lindell, and my main point was: it's not very intuitive compared to individual plugins like FabFilter, et al. This has nothing to do with the sound, features, or analog-modelling accuracy. It's more about user experience and memory fatigue. This is of course my experience, and I'm totally happy if you and others enjoy channel strips! I just keep not using them (even when I like them) and I wanted to question why that was. Thanks for watching!
@@palebluedotstudios yeah your demonstration of the Lindell was not supportive of the idea that it hurts workflow if you take zero seconds to figure out how it works. We as engineers are presumed to have musical and technical understanding, so just saying, "see this thing is doing nothing" undercuts the whole field you are in. I would bet that you would probably get proficient at these strips and probably greatly benefit your mixes if you tried. That's not me saying that you should or shouldn't use them, but you don't really put forth a sound argument as to why they're not useful.
@@keithferris9574 Some other people have left similar comments, and I think I could've been more clear about that point. My point with that demonstration is that as a first-timer using some of these channel strip plugins, they can be obtuse and counterintuitive, and you need to waste time figuring things out. Whereas if any engineer opened up, say, FabFilter Pro-Q or a stock EQ plugin, they would know what to do immediately and get to mixing. It's just more memory fatigue instead of mixing. Again, this isn't even about the quality of the plugin's sound or anything. Just the little things that lead me to ignore channel strips. Thanks for your feedback!
SSL Native Channel Strip 2 is #1 hands down.
Good to hear. What do you like about it?
@@palebluedotstudios
First... the GUI is super nice and classy. It's just laid out so simple and is very intuitive for an easy workflow. I LOVE IT!
You should reconsider and try using that one if you already haven't.
@@tri-unetrl3966 I'll revisit it, although I recall being underwhelmed by the compression. I find most SSL emus are too light for me, haha. I'll grab the demo if I can still get a license. Cheers!
You had me until the Neves. You don't know how to use the most classic EQ ever made? That felt forced for point. But i get what you're saying. Mix fatigue is real.
I hear you. I've actually never used the Neve EQs, so my confusion is genuine. For me, the learning curve isn't enough to warrant shelling out for a channel strip for a digital modelled EQ. But that's just me! Thanks for watching and commenting!
I must admit even as a hobbyist I know how it works. I use ddmf's The Strip pre-fx on all my home recordings in Reaper. And if I like something in the mix, I just print a stem, then mute and offline all the plugins on the parent track and hide it in the TCP and Mixer, freeing up system resources, and no eye cancer from 100 Plugins.
I understand all your valid points, I believe the best software to use notwithstanding it's quality, is to use the one you know best how to use. No learning curve. So if a prominent engineer, is used to channel strips then they'll keep using it, and when they buy dedicated ones they'll go through the learning curve and usage factor. For me the song and it's sonic values are being optimized is what I care for the most. So if it takes me longer so be it, the reputation of a great finished work get's the better accounts. This is not to say that you don't. Excellent points and Demo.
Thanks so much!! Yes, I agree: The best tool is the one that works for you and gets results. Great points!
Gate keeping is quite the issue in the youtube audio space. Anyways, it all depends on the user. You can give someone a waves mastering suite (most people are pirates but thats another story) and they can produce TRASH (which is the case with youtube "producers" 95% of the time). Or you can give somone just a mpc one with its stock fx and mastering tools in standalone and they can produce a classic album that sounds incredible. It all depends on who is at the helm
Excellent point. I think back to the 90s, and I was making great mixes with what I had: Cakewalk Pro Audio on an ancient PC, with stock plugins. Daft Punk made some of their biggest hits with a shit studio and retail speakers. Nothing replaces good ears and talent. Thanks for pointing that out! Cheers!
I Mix in Mixbus 32c, that's one giant set of channel strips.
That's a cool angle, if it's designed from the ground-up that way; literally trying to emulate a console, so I think that has some merit. I haven't really used Mixbus, but I'll have to check it out soon. Thanks so much for watching, cheers!
good viewpoint, just i don't know why but the channel strip applies more depth in the sound
I'm going to guess it's because Softube plugins are of the highest quality. ;)
good points, but you miss one of the main points of using a channel strips - use it on all of your tracks in your mix session - it creates a certain sound that can help to glue the song together and make it sound like it was mixed on a certain console. it can make the mix shine (or collapse). if you just use it on only one track the effect won't be very noticeable, but if you multiply that on all the tracks - the EQ, compression and the combo gives you a special sound you can hardly emulate with other separate plugins - maybe you can, but you would have to work very hard to achieve it. sure, most restrictions seems old-fashioned, but they provide you 'that sound' they are legendary for. if you don't like it, of course don't use it, and sure, if you prefer flexibility - use fabfilter and separate plugins. different tools for different tasks. some for the interface - most people want to see it as it was and older guys who know it very well from working with the real thing prefer it that way. I agree - i could be made easier to work with in the digital world in 2022, but it doesn't mean it don't make sense. you have your own workflow (with separate maybe more modern plugins) and you don't have to change it if you like it. but saying it sucks is not very clever when you dig deeper. I can see why you think it does, but you look at it from the viewpoint of ease of use and flexibility - and CS are especially not good for that, but great for other things. (and you can use both!) cheers!
That's a good point. I would push back a little on that and suggest that the only way you're getting a truly unique "console" sound is through crosstalk and shared saturation/noise. Think about it: at the end of the day, the compressors and EQs are just digital EQs that have been modelled after specific hardware. But using that modelled EQ on every track in and of itself is no different than inserting a Pultec emu (or a stock EQ with custom slopes) on each channel. But those EQs don't "talk" to each other or share processing at all. But, something like the Lindell, or console emus like Satson do indeed spread analo-style crosstalk and non-linear saturation/noise across all the plugins. So I would say that crosstalk can give you a unique (probably very subtle) console emulation. But just the EQs and compressors on their own will simulate the activity of the original hardware, but don't sum up unless they're deigned to do so. So I think that's a good thing to look for in these type of plugins. (Full disclosure: I use Sonimus Satson on every channel in every mix, but that's not a channel strip per se.)
Thanks so much for your thoughtful comments!
I have a ton of them and spent good money on them ( all likely on sale ) but I don't really have any particular channel strip as a go to plug-in , but I'm sure they could sound pretty good, I worry about CPU if I were to use them across the mix like it's partially intended for . Ii think about using them all mixed up using various ones that should be an interesting way to get analogue variation from digital plugins lol.
Hey, why not? Give it a try! As for CPU use, that is a concern with some plugins. For example, even though Slate Virtual Mix Rack is mostly just standard compression and EQ, I can't run as many instances of VMR on my mix as, say, FabFilter EQ and compression (which I can use a literally unlimited amount!); so that's something. Thanks for watching!
I use Schepps Omni Strip. All or any part can be bypassed, the order switched around and the new one will insert 3rd party plug ins.. All on a window that fits on your screen. It's been very useful for me and has none of the drawbacks mentioned in this video.
Schepps has to be by far the most popular response I get to my channel strip issues. I LOVED the sound of Schepps, and I've used it a few times, but again, thanks to the all-in-one paradigm, I tend to forget about it! Purely my experience, but I totally agree that it's flexible and addresses the issues I noted. Cheers!
SSLJ9000J is my go-to channel strip :)
From Plugin Alliance? Good stuff!
Yes I had slate it was heavy for my PC I more recently boot from an SSD but I have so many plugins now that I wouldn’t need a subscription, although slate is one of the best , various plugins do that you need to do trial a error
Like waves SSL strips aren’t to bad not sure about my plugin alliance ones , Softube seems a bit heavy, and there’s so many more .
Need to record more finish up some songs and find out lol . Thanks have fun !
Hey thanks for watching, and sharing your opinion! I hear you: we all have so many plugins now, do we even need dedicated channels strips (that might be heavier on CPU anyway). But you're right: let's get out there and finish some tracks with the tools we have! Cheers!
I think you can bypass or turn off each module from the Abbey Road Mastering Chain by waves. Not all channel strips are bad.
I like that channel strip a lot and i can memorize the modules and layout easily.
In fact, i love the Abbey Road Collection of plugins by waves, they sound amazing and have nice controls.
Great points. I love the Abbey Road TG12345; blows the doors off with massive compression! Haha. Again: if you love it and it works for you, I'm not here to tell anyone they're wrong! Cheers!
Your point about everything being global, is good, so is the point about UI's. However, many people use CS plugins because of reduced strain on Processors (depends on the plugins , both individual and CS based).
#1 is a good point
#2 I get the fact you cant just tell what you have previously done to the track by seeing the insert, that was really it. The rest of that point came off at best subjective, and at worst , a little "what grinds my gears", because there was not much else of substance in the points you raised there
#3 is a good point, but not really specific to CS plug ins, it really applies to pretty much any out board gear emulation in plugin form. The bit about "I'm supposed to know..." was like come on wtf is that? Fair enough its not very beginner/new to the UI users but once you have used it you know what each thing does, not sure what they problem is there. You have a point about the UI, and maybe tool labelling, but again this has nothing specific to do with CS plugins although it is a common aspect of them
Overall I think you made a medium strength case for your premise, which contained some good points, but ignored the plus points of CS plug ins, and at point was padded with weak points that seem no more than moaning to fill time. Overall though I would say most of what you said is strong logic, and makes some sense
FTR I use hardly any CS plugins and when I do its for , usually, a specific part of it like the EQ or comp or whatever, so I have no axe to grind here. I
Hey Jack! Thanks for the feedback. You raise some good points, and when I look back, I think I could have set up some of my arguments a bit better. You raise a good point about UI in general, and I agree with that. But, I can't stress this enough-this is my own experience with CS plugins. They simply slip out of memory for me, and I continue using my trusty plugin chains. But I fault no one who uses them. Thanks for watching!
The only channel strip I use is CHANNEV by Annalog Obsession. In this one there's a mix dial and a bypass on every part, except the global saturation that you can just turn all the way off. Aside from this one that I absolutely love, I too really dislike them and don't use them (except for certain applications where a specific channel strip has a preamp with a tube saturation that would complement the sound I'm looking for)
That's great to hear! I haven't had a chance to try out CHANNEV by Annalog Obsession yet; probably for obvious reasons, but I really like his stuff. For me, it's just hard to think of a channel strip where I feel like I can't get the desired result by combining plugins, but if I like the sound of a strip, I'll use it! That always trumps everything else. Cheers, and thanks for watching! I'l check out CHANNEV.
@@palebluedotstudios I don't like to feel restricted either, so I just try to see the strips like any other effects and use it as such, not as a do all end all like it leads to believe
@@DoomickthePancake Good call, my friend! It's so interesting to get everyone's opinions on this, it's been quite controversial. Let's see what happens when I complain about digital EQs next...heh heh... 🤣
That's a great plug-in, but it constantly crashes Reaper.
@@RolandDeschain1 I have to say, I find Slate plugins to be a little unstable sometimes. They feel like a real holdover from the "wait 5 days for the plugin to load" iLok era. Probably another reason I don't use them on every mix. Some killer compressors in there, though...
thank you for saving me from a painful mistake
My pleasure! I always encourage viewers to try different tools, but channel strips just never really worked for me. Cheers!
Perhaps a solution for people who feel the way you do is a second “linear gui skin” that all look the same. For many like myself, if a plug-in totally models hardware, I want the option to interface with the original limitation and quirks and go beyond them at tasteful junctions if desired.
That's an interesting point. In Cubase, you can switch to a generic plugin GUI, so it would be a bunch of generic sliders. Personally, since I think I can get "analog" sound on my own, I prefer to build that with individual plugins that can be bypassed separately. As always, I'm happy for you if you love using these channel strips. I just tend to forget about them! Cheers!
@@palebluedotstudios ah that’s cool Cubase has a version of that! I think maybe Logic might be able to do that, I’ve seen it do that in an ugly way when using the iPad to control 3rd party plugin. I’m a bit nostalgic and so I like ‘feeling the gear’ but I think it limits my speed, at the very least. I’m slowed down by not thinking the way you do, you’re more efficient. But also although hindered, I’m me and my inefficiency may lead me to be myself if properly managed. I digress! Ha!
@@HunterHendricksonMusic No digress! That's a good point. Limitations can very helpful and, while I think it's good to make decisions quickly while mixing, slowing down and not being distracting by too many plugins is great too!
schoeps Omni channel
u can do that, bypass modules, even rearrange them u safe like 4 insert points in your daw, plus the plugin can host plugins….
Good call! I forgot Scheps could load other plugins too. I guess I would counter that loading other plugins inside another plugin creates an extra hidden layer, but that is typical of any plugin chainer, like StudioRack, with I use all the time. Cheers!
I am kinda lazy in terms of channel strip usage, so I'm either using the ready-to-use presets or the separate modules of them - only an EQ, compressor, preamp etc.
That's a good point; a good channel strip can great for loading a preset and tweaking. If you like that sound, then just go with it, and all the controls are there. I dig it. Cheers!
might be interesting/ useful to compare which way sounds better / how the sound varies using say 3 separate ones vs ch strip w a similar 3 components
That’s a great idea for a follow-up. It’s been a couple years now, I’d love to revisit the issue. Cheers!
The Lindell strip is beautiful man, if you don't even know how it works, why do you even bother use it as an example? And with your workflow, if you want to change something, you still have to open up the plugin, but one of the time, with a strip its one click and there you go.
I hear you. I wanted to approach it as a new user, as an example of how confusing a new channel strip can be, compared to, say, a dedicated EQ or compressor. Cheers!
That's your opinion and I respect it, but I love using channel strips in the box
And I respect yours! This is purely my experience with channel strips. Cheers!
Not to mention but lot of DAWs, even the free Cakewalk have pretty good channels strips already built in that are much easier to use.
That is a really good point! That occurred to be too, because I don't bother with Cubase's, haha. I'll add that to part 2.
Cubase's strip is awfull 🤣 I have Cubase and I've never use it.
@@realcasper81 It's basically a collection of stock effects. I like the transient designer, but that's about it.
The Cakewalk VX-64 vocal strip is awesome. You can use only some of the modules and reorder them, but for some reason it contains a delay. It sounds great, but it seems unintuitive to have a delay in that setting.
@@keithferris9574 Oh, Cakewalk...my first DAW...I miss ye sometimes...❤️ Looks like a great plugin-but you're saying it has a latency delay?
I'm with you on not using channel strip plugins.
The bypass issue is a major factor, and like you say the interface design choices are terrible.
Skeuomorphism in interface design is the absolute worst issue we have with modern plugins. That lindell strip is terrible. I could never use it for mixing.
Software designers have the opportunity to completely re-design how we interface with dynamics and eq processors, while maintaining what is desirable from hardware.... which is basically EQ curves and harmonic saturation. And if you measure that, you'll find that hardware sounds very clean, and much of the "vibe" of vintage/analogue gear is completely imagined.
Personally, I don't like individual plugins for mixing and love the Slate approach, as most of my processing is in one window, and one click away. I can quickly reorder modules, and bypass. As opposed to having multiple windows on top of each other.
What would be better.... is if an audio soft brand reimagined what a channel strip would look like for purely in the box use. All controls on one interface, with modular components that can be bypassed and interchanged to bring in the musicality of hardware EQ curves and dynamic characteristics.
What would a modular channel strip from Fabfilter look like?
Having said all that Serban Ghenea uses the Metric Halo Channel strip, so maybe we're all missing the point.
Agreed! I only pull out Slate occasionally when I want a specific processor, but that's about it. Thanks so much for watching!
I have a large number of channel strips and almost never use them anymore..
Yep, my experience exactly. Thanks for watching!
I'm not a professional (more like an upscale hobbyist) but I love my channel strips. Having said that, you make very good points when it comes to decision fatigue. Great video!
Pardon the late response! I haven't been getting comment notifications! Anyway, I'm glad you found some perspective from my video. I just like to see what I'm doing in my mix! Thanks so much for watching! CHeers!
good points.. I actually use channelstrips, but often only use the preamp and compressor sections. Cause the EQ I rather do myself and control the oversampling.. oversampling EQ makes absolutely no sense unless it does saturation, which Id rather have in a separate plugin.
😃🤚 20+ years behind the board here, starting in the 80’s - all analog. 😎
2005 comes along and ITB recording and mixing is finally really good at prices below $20,000 for all you’d need.
….and I HATED THE IDEA of having any of it mimic the analog realm. Hell, I’d never even put it into “mixer view”.
I decided I’d rather approach everything as “INSTRUMENTS”… and YES, the only thing that made sense to me was using exactly what I wanted, exactly how I wanted it, with as little clutter as possible, and THE MOST flexibility possible.
However… now, I actually LOVE committing to a console for an entire mix. I’ll explain why in a moment, but first let me make clear that I find ONLY a few console channel strips good enough for the challenge - a couple from Brainworx: the Amek, the Neve, and the SSL - and a couple from UAD: basically their versions of the same consoles.
AGREED - They must be fully featured or it’s not enough tools to make the game worth it.
AGREED - They must operate in a clear and reasonably intuitive manner or it’s just nonsense.
WHY I like it -
It’s a challenge and therefore keeps me fresh in my thinking.
These console strips are good enough that, to a great extent, you CAN use very little except for just them for entire recordings in typical music genres.
It’s going to nudge me into something that works, but that may be a wee bit more interesting than what I would have come up with if left to my usual “no limitations” workflow.
It’s interesting so it keeps me a little more connected to what I’m doing. A little more actively mentally involved.
I’ve spent years working on consoles like these so there isn’t any kind of learning curve or slowdown.
There are reasons these consoles “have a sound” as people would say.
What that really means though, is that their particular type of distortion plays a role over the course of an entire recording.
And it means that the style design of the EQ’s and Compressors that are on that console all build up and contribute to the sound over the course of the recording.
It’s cumulative.
NO console ever had a unique enough sound to be distinguishable by just running one source through a pair of channels. That’s just not credible. But when you run all the sources through everything on the console multiple times, THAT’S when the uniquenesses of design “show their colors” and show the “signature sound” of the console.
My goal,in using console strips across a whole recording, is to create something that sounds great, but yet is also nudged to sound different from what my own normal expectations would be.
It gives me the gift of being able to be a little surprised by my results, without having to worry about them being not in the ballpark that they need to be in.
😎👍👍
Wow! Thank you so much for this thoughtful and well-written comment! There's a lot to consider there. I strongly agree with your sentiment; if you have fully-executed console strips, then those "limitations", and the cumulative effects of the non-linearities/crosstalk add of to a little bit of magic.
And I really hear what you're saying about challenging oneself: when I tried switching to Logic, I made some of the cleanest mixes I'd done in years, despite pulling my hair out and being confused and frustrated. Why? Because I couldn't rely on my old tricks. In many ways, it was back to square one: send everything to nameless busses, and it's up to me to keep track of a mix. No search functions or cheating! We need to challenge ourselves, and you are fully correct in pointing that out.
Thanks for that, your message was very insightful, and makes me want to grab a good console emu and test this out. Cheers, and thanks so much for watching and commenting!
softube console 1 really did make a channel strip super easy to use with a ton of flexibility. even without using the hardware.
Without the hardware? Do tell! I thought you needed the hardware to use it…
@palebluedotstudios you can't swap modules without the hardware. But i use it as a plugin all the time. You can also save modules setups as presets and it does load up properly. Technically you aren't supposed to but you can.
@@IntheDAW Oh, that's very interesting. So this basically becomes an alternate plugin host, in a way, like Vienna Ensemble. Very intriguing...
palebluedot studios yes
As long as you have the license the plugin instance works. The hardware unlocks the 3rd party control software. The point was its a great channel strip. That's flexible. But if it didn't have all the options I bought from getting each console series module add on. I probably wouldn't use it as much as I do lol.
@@IntheDAW Understood, haha. :)
I use the SSL E strip on every track just to add a slight touch of compression and EQ. Everything else is added after that.
Good plan. The E strip has distinctive, tasteful compression and EQ. Sometimes I use Slate VMR just for the specific plugins. Thanks for watching!
@@palebluedotstudios Yeah, it gives a nice, subtle bit of saturation that can bring out the best in a track before any additional processing.
It has become an essential "set and forget' part of my workflow template.
@@RolandDeschain1 I hear you. I should try a full mix with the E Channel. My essential secret weapon is Sonimus Satson. I put the channel plugin on every track and run the bus plugin on my 2-bus. It just does...something, with the smoothest high/lowpass filters on the market. One of the first console emus, and still one of the best. Cheers!
I think we need to put enough time into learning anything we use as tools. At the end of the day they are just tools. I use the softube console 1 system. It has few solutions for few of your 'problems'. To me personally it comes down to workflow which helps with time and focus.
Thanks for your comments, I totally agree with putting in the time and knowing your tools. If you are using a the Console 1 system with the hardware, that is totally different that using just the mouse; now you're getting closer to the true, tactile experience of using a console and their original design language. I'd like to snag that system one day; it might get me back on channel strips. Thanks for watching!
At the very most, a channel strip plug-in would be to very fast hear what suggestion are. Very seldom that would be a hit, something to stay at. Do not spend money, just demo to maybe widen possible scenarios.
Good advice! People should definitely demo the plugins to see if they work for them! Thanks for watching.
Finally some one is telling the obvious truth! Totally agree..... although..... I do like the dedicated Izotope channelstrips (I have Nektar plus, Ozone Standard and Neutron standard). I don't see myself as a complete beginner, but I find that the AI can actually help me to work faster. Also, the quality of the plugins in the strip is generally pretty good with a clear and quick to use interfaces with a lot of options. I guess Izotope (with a little extra tweaking) just gets me better results. My biggest problem is that I want to be able to insert a non- Isotope plugin in the chain (like the MV2 upward compressor on a vocal) and I can't unless I open 2 instances of Nektar. Where's the ease of use then? So in practice I'm forced to use MV2 before Nektar. I like Ozone, because mastering in a not so fantastic room with not so fanastic speakers is difficult and takes a lot of practice (none of which I have). Ozone just gets me a reasonable result which I would never get with separate plugins without the AI. I'm not sure if Neutron has much added value, I still have to try that one more often to find out. Nova GE, a few charachter EQ's and a couple of decent compressors, maybe a transient designer, a few distortion plugins and of course delays and verbs get me a long way. One problem that a dedicated choice for Izotope could solve is that I can finally clean up my rediculous collection of (often free) mixing plugins. Maybe there's something to be said for Neutron then? Sorry just a late night ramble......
Update: I just stumbled on an ability of the Neutron compressor: it CAN do upward compression! Just set the ratio to below 1:1 and the compression goes upward. So no need for MV2. And multiband options as weel which MV2 doesn't have. One more argument to stick with Neutron?
Thanks for this thoughtful response! I was about to do some quick research on Neutron and upwards compression, but you figured it out! Great to hear! No need for MV2. I like MV2, but it's gain compensation is SO aggressive, I find it hard to balance sometimes without thinking that your ears are getting fooled by loudness. Anyway, thanks for the info-and thanks for watching!
The Scheps Omni Channel is the best!!!!! Very dope.
I really like that one, sounds awesome! Cheers
I think I totally get where you’re coming from but I’m actually working in Ableton and I’m kind of mixing as I’m going along producing EDM tracks and the cool thing is I can keep my plug-ins totally hidden and assign the parameters to macros and when I select a track, I can just see all those macros And know what’s been done and control it all with push and soon a daw controller like icon platform m+
That sounds great! That will be super-powerful with a controller. Macros are super-powerful, and I often envy Ableton's speed and flexibility.
@@palebluedotstudios well you don’t have to envy, join us. Come to the dark side! We have snacks! And performance mode!
@@avgytenjoyer91 Hahaha! I love snacks! God, the thought of learning another DAW makes me want to gouge my eyes out...but Live would be up there!
Idk...what's your thought about Neutron and Ozone? Since those are channel strips too...just with a modern UI design...with everything you just asked for...plus a lot more capabilities...
I find channel strips to be invaluable when trying to do something fast and SSL/Neve emulations to be great bc the impart the sound with a bit of "character"....and yes they take a while to learn...but thats the whole point of improving your craft as you progress your skills as a mixer/engineer....my main point is actually...channel strips can print a certain "flavor" onto tracks which give it the type of vibe you are after...much better than digital can. With the quickness of everything being "right there" when you open up 1 plugin instead of opening up 3-4 plugins at the same time....I can't see myself going back to "just throw on 3-4 plugins 1 after the other in the same order you always do"...when 1 can do the same but add more flavor than 3-4 combined...but thats just me!
First off, I'll say again: if you enjoy using channel strips, and you find them quick and like the sound, then I'm totally cool with that! They just don't work for me.
I'd like to push back a bit on your statement that channel strips give a "certain flavor...much better than digital can". At the end of the day, a channel strip is a digital plugin that's been tuned to try to match hardware curves and responses. Unless they add noise, saturation, or especially crosstalk (almost no channel strips offer crosstalk), all you have are EQs and compressors that can be matched (or exceeded) by other plugins. But, there's a lot to be said for limitations! And do I really want to spend an hour matching a Fairchild EQ slope manually? Probably not, haha. Again, if it sounds good, it IS good. :)
As for Neutron and Ozone, Izotope obviously makes great-quality stuff, but I don't find myself mixing with them much. I find a lot of their mixing tools seem more like gimmicks, but there is no reason you can't make a great mix/master with that stuff. I tend to reach for Izotope stuff when I have a technical problem to fix, especially RX.
Cheers, and thanks for commenting!
@@palebluedotstudios Fair enough, newer Neutron update stuff is trash compared to when it was first released...the AI assistant is actually a gimmick...but I actually find CPU usage/delay compensation to be lower when I just load 1 channel strip vs 3-4 plugins! Either way...whatever works for you! As long as it sounds good in the end!
Certain Brainworx channel strips does add crosstalk! Most channel strips besides Avid Euphonix Channel Strip adds a bit of harmonic distortion...for example Waves SSL adds harmonic distortion by default, and then adds noise/phase when you put Analog switch to "on".
My gripe with channel strips is actually the standard inability to Oversample it...despite the fact that harmonics are being added and then folded down with Nyquist Freq! Therefore I usually have to force the project to 88200 or higher when I want to actually render it out! Or else the "flavor" it imparts sounds more harsh than good! Either way...Izotope DeHum/RX/fixup suite is epic!
@@DJUwU Agreed! Unless you're using Reaper (where you can oversample any plugin chain), you're stuck without the option to oversample most channel strips and risking enharmonic content in your mixes. Again, if I build my own chain, I can choose my own saturation plugin with oversampling, but it might be different than the desired console emulation.
And that's a good call on the brainworx thing. I believe the Lindell 80 that I used in this video does a very interesting form of crosstalk, and Sonimus Satson introduced crosstalk into its console emu waaaaay back in 2010, and I use that in almost every mix. Does it make the mix better? Hard to say, but Satson has the smoothest highpass/lowpass filters on the market, and a great VU for gainstaging, so I follow best practices. :)
Good thoughts here, DJ. It is good to be aware of things like oversampling, and I do hope to see all analog emus that use saturation to include that option. Cheers!
That Lindell 80 is Amazing on Low mids through High mids . . . ! . . . 🙂
(-;
Is it? I'll have to run it through Plugin Doctor to see what it's doing...I'm making a video on analog EQ models soon; stay tuned for my results. Cheers!
i love your content and really appreciate your channel....i know im gettin gin on this video late but i have 2 words...or is it one i dont know..i was never a fasn of this company until recently but......console 1 .....it can change everything
Never too late! And thanks for the kind words-that means a lot! I've had a few viewers recommend Console 1, and with good reason. If you have Console 1, then the channel strips become TACTILE again, and you're not clicking around on a design that was never meant for a computer mouse. I will definitely pick one up, one day. I'm also looking the Steinberg CC controllers for Cubase. Anyway, thanks so much! New content coming out soon!
Where is the mix separation course?
A great question! I had to move for a job and it took me away from completing the course. It's shelved for now. Thanks for asking!
@@palebluedotstudios Will it ever be de shelved?
@@mihkeljurima1007 Yes, I'm going to release my course! Still working on it, just need some time while I'm working full-time. Cheers!
@@palebluedotstudios i think you forgot to add that i should subscribe to be up to date with this.
Channel strips are not the most convenient work flow but bring invaluable color and character to the mix or even tracking. There's nothing out there, and I looked, that produces the sound of those transformers from the Focusrite Forte Console, except for the emulation from Brainworks. Take the Helios 69, that is a unique sound and characteristic inaccessible to individual plugins. If workflow is your thing and there's a problem following your mix plan, then consoles and strips are not for you and that's understandable. But they don't suck.
Well-said! I suppose my title could be tad clickbait-y, but I'm merely relating my experience. If you love the sound of certain plugins, and they sound like the hardware that you're clearly experienced with, then who am I to disagree? Personally, I've just grown more dubious of "analog" plugins, the older I get. But that's just my experience. Love the comments, thanks so much for watching! Cheers!
Subbed!
Thank you so much! Stay tuned for more!
Use what ever gets you to where you need to be.
Absolutely! I know many people love and swear by channel strips. Whatever works for you! My brain just does not like them. Thanks for watching!
@@palebluedotstudios Ha ha yer we are all different.
Different strokes for different folks. 😎
Different dials for different styles? 😝 cheers!
Parece que solo tú piensas así, porque los comentarios es todo lo contrario a lo que dice el video.
Your point about all-in-one plugins is valid. However, it seems to me you didn't read the user manual for the Alliance Plugin Lindell plugin. PA plugins have the little question mark at the bottom of the plugin which when clicked opens the plugin user manual. People who don't read user manuals before using a plugin seem to waste a lot of time just turning knobs, which can be fun and creative, but if you're trying to get some work done it seems to me you would learn how to use the plugin first.
Valid concerns! I can assure you I did read the manual. My point here was specifically how much harder it is to get going with some of these channel strips, as opposed to plugins with familiar, intuitive controls. I could've done a whole mix with Pro-Q and RComp in the time it took me to muck about with Lindell. I will say that Lindell is a very well-made plugin. It has cool nonlinearities in the EQ, and I really liked the NUKE compressor, but I was reaching for it as a random example.
@@palebluedotstudios Haha. You would not have made a nicer sounding mix or even a SIMILAR sounding mix with Fabfilter plugins than working with the Lindell, because those Fabfilter plugins are incapable of the preamp color / drive, and NO you can't make that same color with Saturn. You read the instruction manual and still left the EQ's in the off position in the video. SMH.
@@vigilantestylez Yep, you're exactly right! I was approaching the Lindell as a first-time user, and my main point was that these channel strips, and their obsession with modeling old, manual workflows, often hinder getting down to the business of mixing. This is my own personal experience.
@@palebluedotstudios they only hinder you because you don't know how to use them. They speed up the process for many and give consistent results. Plus for you to get the sound that a channel strip can provide you would need about 7 plugins to do what 1 channel strip can do. I read you have a powerful gaming computer so you can abuse your CPU to death with massive plug-in chains but you also would not get a consistent sound and your mixing time would be extended exponentially. Channel strips force you to mix with your ears as opposed to your eyes. But do what you like best but don't knock those who do because the top mixers in the game ALL use channel strips.
@@vigilantestylez I never intended to knock anyone who does like channel strips. I find that I purchase and get excited about a channel strip, but over the years, I never use them, and I wanted to explore that. I did go back and read the manual for Lindell, and it was obvious what I was missing once I knew how it worked. I have no doubt I can make great mixes with channel strips, but I would argue with that "7 plugins" idea a bit. Even if that number is correct, every DAW comes with perfectly good stock EQs, gates, and compressors. And many of these channels are just that: stock filters and compressors with maybe some custom Q settings. But I know that Lindell actually has proper non-linear saturation and channel crosstalk. Paul Third demonstrated that. So I'd be more inclined to use something like Lindell for that reason. But I still prefer being able to bypass and reorder individual plugins in my DAW mixer, and I feel confident enough in my mixing skills to know that I can recreate analog signal flows with my plugins-of-choice. Anyway, this is exactly the kind of conversation I was hoping the video would produce! Cheers.