Oh my ... Just as I thought I was covered using a combo of the NLS, SSL and CLA (compressors) plugins, Waves comes up with this monster.
I demo'ed it, and it sounds very, very good. The EQ sounds a bit different from the Waves SSL 4000 (E), especially in the mid range, where the MixHub sounds more pleasing in a way. But it's too noticeable, why I believe it's not exclusively modeled after the channel (CLA him self must have "tweaked" the results somewhat to optimize what he thinks lacks on the hardware – which by no mean has to be something bad). On the other hand, I don't have any real life experiences using the SSL hardware, so I can't really be a judge of how close to the real thing this is. But anyhow, this is some piece of plugin. Not only the sound, but the concept as well.
The only thing that bothered me a little was its CPU usage – ridiculously CPU hungry for its plugin type. But i guess new times, new demands are coming. (Initially I also reacted on the fact that the plugin's missing pans and mute/solo, but then I realized that it has its reason, design-wise.)
As for mute, I am guessing you would do that via the standard MCP. There is a pan control there - if that is what you are referring to.
The EQ sounds really nice, I like it.
I've gone through a whole bunch of free eq plugins, most of which I did not like - they either sounded horrid or were just a pain in the coight to use. The main eq plugin I use now is the Focusrite 110 EQ, for a free plugin it has a nice sound, I like it anyway Only one drawback, if you use the EFQ-1 variant it clicks when you start/stop playing. It does not effect the output sound of your rendered mix, just annoying when you hear this clicking all the time when you start/stop a lot.
I have not played with it (MIx Hub) a lot yet, but I do like the idea of having input, eq, dynamics all in the one box. I will muck around with it more over the next few weeks.
There is a pan control there - if that is what you are referring to.
Yes, but like I replied to 'bladerunner', it's only in the stereo version (but only in channel view, not in bucket view).
Obviously, pans and mute/solo will have to be done from the DAW itself (at least for now), because design-wise it's more than just "solo it" ... what should be muted when you hit the button? Just the tracks with in the bucket, or the whole DAW?
Just to point out that with REAPER's fx track controls you can have knobs for anything you want all visible in the mixer and/or TCP. Not limited to 8 at a time.
Something you can't do in Pro Tools or Logic (don't know about other DAWs).
The whole marketing schtick for this is that it recreates console workflow, but the big thing it fails to deliver is the ability to move multiple faders and turn multiple knobs at the same time.
Just to point out that with REAPER's fx track controls you can have knobs for anything you want all visible in the mixer and/or TCP. Not limited to 8 at a time.
I don't understand all these plugins putting in (even if they are historically accurate) these extremely crippled as gates. gates were a HUGE part of the the earliest REAPER versions and a reason why so many chose to take a look at it. These 1970's gates being emulated bring nothing to the table that a better gate can't do.
Gates still need way more advancement, its one of the few areas where you can really say that retro brings NOTHING to the table. their entire abilities fit into the venn diagram circle of a decently modern gate
I don't really see the difference between this plug and one of their other SSL channel plugins
I don't understand all these plugins putting in (even if they are historically accurate) these extremely crippled as gates. gates were a HUGE part of the the earliest REAPER versions and a reason why so many chose to take a look at it. These 1970's gates being emulated bring nothing to the table that a better gate can't do.
Gates still need way more advancement, its one of the few areas where you can really say that retro brings NOTHING to the table. their entire abilities fit into the venn diagram circle of a decently modern gate
I don't really see the difference between this plug and one of their other SSL channel plugins
I agree. Using emulated 19xx-gates makes no sense since, let alone limited functionality, it's actually not even a character plugin (or is it?). On the other hand I personally close to never use gates anyway. And if I would, I find ReaGate good enough, far better than those on, say, SSL plugins.
Although, the difference between this plugin and other SSL 4000 emulations is that this one have a ducker style added.
Newbies or potential REAPER users reading this thread might not!
Been using reaper for 18 months and didn’t know this! I thought I had to open up an effect to change its parameters. Tell me how to put fx parameter knobs on the mixer and the tcp, please!
Been using reaper for 18 months and didn’t know this! I thought I had to open up an effect to change its parameters. Tell me how to put fx parameter knobs on the mixer and the tcp, please!
I think I could make use of that too... contest comin up an all...
__________________ Rockin the Not_Room...Kali LP6|iLoud |Mackie Big Knob |AXE I/O |Bugera |Ibanez |Fender |Nektar |Amplitube |PRS Supermodels |iRig Stomp I/O |ARC 3.0 |
I thought I had to open up an effect to change its parameters. Tell me how to put fx parameter knobs on the mixer and the tcp, please!
You can do it from the FX window via Parameter button, FX parameter list, Show in track controls. Below an example with one FX parameter already added into the TCP. How exactly the parameters are shown in the TCP/MCP depends on the theme.
I use one of these to control the knobs, if you set up and save an fx with track controls as an fx chain it recalls the settings. You can use different midi channels to control different fx in the chain. These things are cheap and handy as hell:
I post a mini-review of a new plugin with great sound and cool concept, and fanboys show how to do "the same thing" with customization within REAPER ...
I post a mini-review of a new plugin with great sound and cool concept, and fanboys show how to do "the same thing" with customization within REAPER ...
Thank you!
Erm, or a forum member asked how to do something that was mentioned in the thread and people were helpful enough to give answers...
Waves has a 30% off code today for V-Day. I have been on the fence about Mixhub since it was announced. I like my ssl channel strip, and have several others. Do I need another one? Yup! But two things have put me off trying it:
- CPU usage. I have found conflicting reports, but most say it's pretty cpu heavy. But by how much? Is it comparable to say, the ssl channel and nls channel together? Or, more than that? It's not clear to me, but I am reading all the feedback as heavier than the two together, so no...not worth it for me.
- It's intended to be used on every track in order to mix like on a console, sounds like a great idea. But, I don't want to end up using the same thing on every track. Using certain eq's and comps on certain tracks is important, and I don't want to take away from that. Sure I can still use my own things as I need to, but if that's the case then why bother with this?
Would love to be swayed the other way, but I think for now I'll pass. Honestly I wish the Slate VMR worked this way, which would give you the best of both worlds: options for processing but with an overview of all instances. And....not cpu hungry!
Curious to see how this compares to Satson Channel Strip that just launched for the same price. The interface looks great but I'm pretty annoyed with Waves's licensing situation. Worth a shot, though.
Waves has a 30% off code today for V-Day. I have been on the fence about Mixhub since it was announced. I like my ssl channel strip, and have several others. Do I need another one?
I got the 30% off email a few days ago but just couldn't make up my mind which plugin to buy. Then I decided I wasn't going to buy a plugin just for the sake of buying a plugin, even 30% off!
I really do not know what to make of this plugin. I like the sound, but then i like the sound of my PA strips too, plug i like the new Satson strip (a bit more probably)
The satson strip seems to have nicer saturation too. Some people over at GS were (speculating) that the CLA plug has the same saturation as the NLS plugin. It has a very similar harmonic profile. I don't know for sure though.
All in all it does sound good, but it is a bit cluunky to use, and as others have pointed out, great thingd ca be done right in reaper. These days i am using the DAW more and more, it is more efficient and i get better results.
This plugin seems a bit too heavy on CPU to use it extensively across a whole mix.
Debating selling mine TBH. Made me realise that i need to stop buying shiny new things, unless they are made by DMG lol.
Even though I LOVE this plugin I decided not to purchase it – yet. Waves will have to go over the obvious bugs (not so many in REAPER, though, but on other systems) and definitely do something about the embarrassing CPU usage. (I guess I'm lucky, though, because "my" REAPER could handle nearly 40 mono before it totally capitulated. And I do not have a super computer.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathByGuitar
I'm pretty annoyed with Waves's licensing situation. Worth a shot, though.
The Waves licensing handling is not that complicated today as it perhaps was in the past. One just has to get used to their "central" (which, yes, is somewhat poorly designed). Although, other developers have similar, like XLN Audio for example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Carlyon
people over at GS were (speculating) that the CLA plug has the same saturation as the NLS plugin. It has a very similar harmonic profile. I don't know for sure though.
I would guess that the GS's are partially right. Both plugins are modeled on the same console brand, so ... (I'm thinking reusing code with modified input values etc). Still, I actually did a test when I demoed the MixHub, because I as well was a little suspicious. But I really didn't think they sound the "same", and I don't even have the super ears many others are gifted with
Even though I LOVE this plugin I decided not to purchase it – yet.
I have been using this plug for awhile now and I like the sound of it.
As for the 'using it as a mixer', which you can if your so compelled to do so, I prefer to mix within Reaper - especially if you are not using Mixhub on every channel, or at least the majority of. To me the mixing capability is not something I care for.
As for the advertising blurb where it says "You can now mix as fast as CLA" well if you believe that, good on ya. Don't know anyone that can wrangle two or more mouses at a time - if it was even possible to have that many in use at once If you had an external control surface you could assign the faders from Mixhub to that may be a different thing. Having said that, you can do that with Reaper and a control surface as well - the the mixing part I feel is a bit of a gimmick rather than anything valuable.
In hindsight would I buy it again today?
Hmmmm hard to say - As I said, I like the sound of it a lot and you can do a lot with it. Although I am sure there are many other plugins that can do the same, or maybe ever better.
Even though I LOVE this plugin I decided not to purchase it – yet. Waves will have to go over the obvious bugs (not so many in REAPER, though, but on other systems) and definitely do something about the embarrassing CPU usage. (I guess I'm lucky, though, because "my" REAPER could handle nearly 40 mono before it totally capitulated. And I do not have a super computer.)
The Waves licensing handling is not that complicated today as it perhaps was in the past. One just has to get used to their "central" (which, yes, is somewhat poorly designed). Although, other developers have similar, like XLN Audio for example.
I would guess that the GS's are partially right. Both plugins are modeled on the same console brand, so ... (I'm thinking reusing code with modified input values etc). Still, I actually did a test when I demoed the MixHub, because I as well was a little suspicious. But I really didn't think they sound the "same", and I don't even have the super ears many others are gifted with
Yeah, i agree with most of the sentiments expressed here. I like the sound of it, butdidnt buy it for the workflow - because it is ot a great worklow.
I am quicker with the plugin alliance stuff.
The one i am looking at is the console one. That to me seems quite tempting in Reaper. Even though i am using a lot of proudly modern plugins to mix with, i really like that hands on approach. I am tempted to sell all of my ssl plugs (as much as i love them) and just consolidate it to one system.
And yeah i think using a channel strip plug then mapping the eq/comp to reapers mixer is a great way to work. If only you could imbed metering for gain reduction etc.
What i am learning is - most things are quicker with reaper.
As for the 'using it as a mixer', which you can if your so compelled to do so, I prefer to mix within Reaper - especially if you are not using Mixhub on every channel, or at least the majority of. To me the mixing capability is not something I care for.
As for the advertising blurb where it says "You can now mix as fast as CLA" well if you believe that, good on ya. Don't know anyone that can wrangle two or more mouses at a time - if it was even possible to have that many in use at once
Yes, the "you can now mix as CLA"-thing is a bit too goofy ...
But as a channels trip plugin, this is the most interesting I've come over. Ever! In the past I thought very little of channel strip plugins until Waves introduced the SSL 4000 Collection (still it took years till I decided to buy it). I was even a very annoying (yes, I know, I'm still annoying) anti-analogue-emulation-plugin critic who claimed all that could be achieved with any stock plugins in various, clever combinations (which I still believe you can, I mean: ReaComp + [plugin] ... Hey!). Just as "annoying" as some (early) in this thread have been when they demonstrated how "the same thing" as MixHub could be done with customizations within REAPER ...
Aaaaanyway ...
I also like the bucket concept. But it will hardly replace my main mixing routine. I will need fully functional panning, solo'ing, mute'ing and so on to even consider trying to change my routine.
Just as "annoying" as some (early) in this thread have been when they demonstrated how "the same thing" as MixHub could be done with customizations within REAPER ...
I am sure if someone was adapt enough they could get Reaper with stock plugins to emulate a good number of commercially available plugins, or close to.
I guess there are two things at play here:
1. Some just want a plug n play result, where they still have some manual control.
2. Some don't have the time, patience or in some cases know-how to chain up multiple plugins or customisations to achieve a desired sound - by that I mean which plugins, in which order, and what settings to use on each. That is something that comes from a lot of experience and experimenting.
I would say I fall into both categories. I like knowing that plugin A will get me a certain sound and plugin B a certain sound etc. I'd rather spend five hours toying around with automation than one hour trying to get a 'sound' from a chain of plugins.
De-essing would be a good example of this, sometimes I will use ReaEQ to trigger ReaComp as a sidechain de-esser - but it is not the magic bullet. I've tried a few de-ess free plugins, and honestly I get better results from the Rea sidechain combo. Although 99% of the time I will de-ess by using automation, you have full control over how it is happening and the end result. Yes it can take a lot of time, but the results are definitely worth it.
And really option one is probably why most buy a particular plugin in the first place, to get a certain sound without fuss.
Added: Over 250 new artist presets to CLA MixHub.
Added: CLA MixHub Lite (Mono and Stereo) components for reduced CPU consumption (up to 30% reduction depending on processor type).
Improved: Both CLA MixHub Channel View and Bucket View can now be opened simultaneously.
Improved: Any individual CLA MixHub module (Input, EQ, Dynamics) can now be added as an extra insert plugin inside the CLA MixHub Insert slot.
Fixed: Various bugs in CLA MixHub, Abbey Road TG Mastering Chain and Scheps Omni Channel ...
REAPER v5.973+dev0316 and the latest CLA MixHub (VST3) update don't like each other. REAPER crashes. Although, with the latest official REAPER release (v5.973) it seems to work fine.
Hoping to see CLA MixHub on promo soon … will likely add.
FYI _ Metric Halo Channel Strip 3 down to $25. now @ Audio Deluxe (usually $179.)
Interesting, might chrck that out. Always just wrote it off as 'old' but it does seem to be popular!
think i found a buyer for my mixhub. I like it, it is a pretty good plug, but doesn't seem to make sense for me with my reaper workflow.
What i am thinking of doing is using the cash and selling my brainworx ssl strips and buying a softube console one. I think that workflow looks pretty damn good in reaper.
As others have mentioned, waves will likely put Mixhub on a ridiculous sale soon, if anyone wants it.
I'm a big fan of Waves plugins, however, the confirmation bias is massive for me.
I bought Kramer HLS Channel awhile back and I thought it sounded good in demo form. Once I downloaded the full version, I found I couldn't find a use for it. So it sits.
Another Waves bias story: I demoed the API 550 plugins and they sounded (to me) incredible. It had a soft roundness I found really pleasing, much like a great tube amplifier. Then a kindly Reaper forum member pointed me in the direction of Hornet. The sound was very similar, but the GUI was a bit less impressive. I felt I could hear a crispier edge than the Waves.
That's when I knew I was biasing myself. I wanted the "real deal" so I was hearing things that probably weren't there.
Waves has a great marketing team and excellent graphics. CLA is a big name and the rollout on this plugin is huge. Those youtube ads sound and look amazing. When we dl the demo, we WANT it to sound that good. So it does.
The experts among us who have found ways to recreate the functionality and even tone within Reaper's stock self are living proof. I'm sure they're getting precisely the same thing as Mixhub. The only difference would likely be the user-friendliness. Parameter modulation is a bit more involved than a plugin with an easily readable UI.
Don't mistake: I prefer knobs, buttons, and faders. They help me visualize the workflow better. However, they don't inherently sound better.
It's your money, you can make your own choice, of course. If you feel Mixhub will help you work better, then go for it. But no plugin will ever be a "game-changer."
__________________
"I've never trusted Klingons and I never will. I can never forgive them for the death of my boy."
I don't understand all these plugins putting in (even if they are historically accurate) these extremely crippled as gates. gates were a HUGE part of the the earliest REAPER versions and a reason why so many chose to take a look at it. These 1970's gates being emulated bring nothing to the table that a better gate can't do.
Gates still need way more advancement, its one of the few areas where you can really say that retro brings NOTHING to the table. their entire abilities fit into the venn diagram circle of a decently modern gate
I don't really see the difference between this plug and one of their other SSL channel plugins
The funny thing to me is that the 1st mixing console I learned to work on was an SSL 4000E. The thing back then was the 4000E was never really known for it's sound quality. If anything it was always highly criticized for it's harsh sound since it was well, "Solid State" transistor op-amp based. Where the SSL 4000E shined for it's time was in it's routing capabilities and the fact that it had parametric EQ as well as having a full dynamics section with side chaining capabilities on every channel strip. The Mic pres were nothing to write home about. The main attractiveness of an SSL was that you could really dial things in and route any channel to another channel. It made it simple to route a kick drum to a side chain gate of a bass line track to tighten up the low end groove on a mix. The gates on every channel were mostly used to help cut down the noise floor coming from the 2in Analog tape. You had to close the gate on a track when that track wasn't playing any music. You have 48 tracks of tape hiss going into a console like we did, that noise adds up and becomes rather loud in the mix.
In another room in the same studio there was an API console. Now that didn't have the routing flexibility or dynamics on every channel like the SSL but it definitely had a much smoother sound where the sound of that mixer was highly regarded. The API eventually had to be retired due to needing constant repair but the owner of the studio had me build API lunch boxes out of the mic pre-amp and EQ sections. Those things sold like hot-cakes on the order of $3K-$5K a piece. SSL channel strips that were going on the fritz? We couldn't give those away.
The funny thing to me is that the 1st mixing console I learned to work on was an SSL 4000E. The thing back then was the 4000E was never really known for it's sound quality. If anything it was always highly criticized for it's harsh sound since it was well, "Solid State" transistor op-amp based. ...
Great story! Thanks for sharing!
I suppose you’re right. Back then half the battle was to control and/or get rid of the unwanted sounds and noises. Today we can almost fully concentrate on the wanted sound and, ironically enough, add some of that unwanted sound whenever we feel like it, because we think it sounds so ... great!
I have always been an great fan of the sounds of the seventies, why it may seem a little odd that I’m such a fan of SSL, when instead I should have gone for the Neve stuff and the likes. And I actually love plugins like the Waves V-series for instance. But having an “analogue” channel strip with all the necessary tools “in one” for processing my sounds not only helps me getting the sound I want fast, it also make the mixing fun. (Before the old Waves SSL 4K I wouldn’t touch a channel strip plugin.)
The CLA MixHub is not only about the sound, though, it’s also about how easy it is to get the sound you want. This plugin is crazy that way! As well as pretty damn good looking, I might add! (Yes, I love eye candy!)