upgrading to 4.1 and please compare PMB with Waves

[tiger vomitt]

2 questions here

when i tried upgrading from 3.9 to 4.0 i saw that none of my settings would load up after upgrading. IOW the knobs were all at default positions in my songs after upgrading. so im still using 3.9 but i wanna try the new MB compressor. does anyone know if im still gonna lose settings if i upgrade to 4.1? im on a mac, 10.3.5 (it works for me and i dont wanna mess with something that works JUST FINE) and DP4.52 on a dual gig G4 (quicksilver)

since i cant try the precision multiband for myself just yet (i have a few albums to finish for people before i go horsing around), can anyone please compare the MB with waves c4 or the linear phase multiband? ive used the waves ones quite a bit so you can be specific if u wanna

thanks everybody!

 

[Eurocide]

Lucky you.
I just made some tests today at a studio with the Waves Lin MB.
We took the preset settings of the UAD PMB and transferred the values to the LinMB.
The PMB ratio values had to be \"translated\" to the range values of the Lin MB. But after some tweaking it worked.
Then we tested the plugins with rock, dance music and pink noise.
The result was VERY similar to each other.
With the Lin MB we've got hotter RMS values (+1 to +2db)
But we found that the UAD PMB has got less harsh high frequencies.

Both are fine and play in the same league.

 

[fj]

Do you mean to say that you were able to get a better RMS level without distortion or that with the same settings the Waves plug-in was louder than the UAD?

 

[Eurocide]

Do you mean to say that you were able to get a better RMS level without distortion or that with the same settings the Waves plug-in was louder than the UAD?

the second but only slightly.
The test required a lot of self discipline because of the "the louder the better" psychoacoustic effect. So we corrected the output levels first to match the peak values and after that to match the perceived volume.
Out main interest was not the loudness gain but the overall sound of the influenced frequencies.
And in this case both plugins behave very similar.
Maybe UAD PMB a little bit "smoother" but only a little bit.

 

[Arys Chien]

PMB is more intuitive than Waves LinMB.

They sound different, not better or worse. For my own taste I prefer the PMB.

I always have this strange impression that those Waves Linear Phase stuffs take something important out of the music.....

 

[neil wilkes]

PMB is more intuitive than Waves LinMB.

They sound different, not better or worse. For my own taste I prefer the PMB.

I always have this strange impression that those Waves Linear Phase stuffs take something important out of the music.....

I agree with you here.
The Linear Phase tools can introduce a type of ringing sound in the upper midrange & top end - which is why I prefer the Min Phase option in PMB.
To be honest, I don't really like Lin Phase at all - okay, it is phase perfect on output but the disadvantages outweigh this advantage.
Min Phase sounds to me much more, well, human. More analogue sounding and definitely warmer.

Ever since UAD and Nomad Factory, my Waves bundle has not been updated to v5, as I really don't use it much. About all I ever use there is the X-tools, and I really wish that UA would introduce a top quality restoration bundle. That I would pay for. But that's another post.

 

[Dan Duskin]

both should (theoredically) sound virtually identical... they are both linear-phase, so the filter algorithms are the same... no additional ringing, fuzz, warmth, or other buzzwords could make any real scientific-sense. the difference is the features and the way they work, not the sound. if you got a higher rms with the waves it was surely do to something not matched 100%

 

[neil wilkes]

The PMB has a Min Phase option, so it's not fixed as Linear Phase.
There is the big difference IMHO.

Not had time to sit down & get to grips with it yet, even though I bought it immediately (had to - the coupon would have run out otherwise) so cannot comment any further yet as it would not be right.

 

[Dan Duskin]

true... you can do non-linear phase with it, which is a different sound. and the difference in features alone can and will give you different results... but if you could perfectly match linearphase settings with eath-other they should be virtually identical. that said, i'm sure the knee of the compressor is different between these two compressors anyhow.

\"ringing\" sounds are usually associated with phasing or aliasing issues.

 

[neil wilkes]

Sorry Dan - I meant \"Pre-Ringing\", not ringing.
This happens with Linear Phase filters.

See http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc ... page3.html
for some thoughts on this.
Min Phase stops this happening.

 

[csl]

For electronica/dance styles, with the 808/909 style kick sounds, minimum phase will result in an obvious 'rounding' of the kick sound, whereas linear phase will keep the attack of the kick very clean and tight (just different tracks might prefer difference phase settings). Took me a while to realise this was why the PMC sounded a little strange to start with, as I didn't think the min phase option would be too audible. Granted, I only really notice a difference at a glance with the kick sound.

[Edited to make sense. :lol: ]

 

[neil wilkes]

I guess this is the beauty of having the options available, as different things work well in different situations on different material.
It's part of what makes all these discussions subjective rather than objective in a way.

Not posting anything more in this section though until I have had time to sit down & learn what this can do.
Should be around February, as we are running fully booked for at least the next 3 weeks, and from Mid feb, there are a couple of really nice 5.1 mixes lined up too.

Roll on Multichannel UA....I really, really need that functionality.

 

[Dan Duskin]

gotchya...

my point was that \"pure\" linear-phase should be the same as another \"pure\" linear-phase.

linear-phase is not always prefered... that's absolutely right. and afaik (from memory) the waves lin-eq is purely 100% linear time phased.

 

[Mark Edmonds]

Even if both are meant to be linear phase, I'd be willing to bet there are varying degrees of implementation here. I don't know where but I can't see the algorithms matching 100%.

After that, let's not forget the compression/expansion characteristics and the crossover filter implementations.

I would be highly surprised if PMB and LinMB when set on as near as possible identical settings would invert and null 100%.

If chosing between the two for purchase, don't forget that PMB can do gating too.

Mark

 

[Akis]

I bought it immediately (had to - the coupon would have run out otherwise)

Not so important now, but your coupon would be valid till 31/3/2006.

 

[daustin@pavilion.co.uk]

I have both, C4 and PMC, and at the moment, dare I say it, I'm still favouring the C4, just, at least on my material (pseudo orchestral filmy stuff).

I like the top end on the PMC, but somehow I feel the C4 still has a subjective edge, especially in the 'glue a mix together' department. (I know, get the mix right in the first place..) It's also more intuitive to tweak, though of course that could be because I'm more familiar with it than PMC.

I don't claim to be an expert engineer, I'm a do it yerself muso, and it's still early days with PMC, I need to spend more time with it, but this is my 2 cents worth...

Derek

 

[tiger vomitt]

For electronica/dance styles, with the 808/909 style kick sounds, minimum phase will result in an obvious 'rounding' of the kick sound, whereas minimum phase will keep the attack of the kick very clean and tight (just different tracks might prefer difference phase settings).

say what?

 

[tiger vomitt]

I have both, C4 and PMC, and at the moment, dare I say it, I'm still favouring the C4, just, at least on my material (pseudo orchestral filmy stuff).

I like the top end on the PMC, but somehow I feel the C4 still has a subjective edge, especially in the 'glue a mix together' department. (I know, get the mix right in the first place..) It's also more intuitive to tweak, though of course that could be because I'm more familiar with it than PMC.

I don't claim to be an expert engineer, I'm a do it yerself muso, and it's still early days with PMC, I need to spend more time with it, but this is my 2 cents worth...

Derek

u know, i like C4 better than the Lin Phase MB too
soemthing about it, it sounds nicer or something super simple like that. whenever i hear that kind of situation happening, i tend to not question it and i just go for whatever sounds best fast

thanks for all the opinions everybody! very helpful!

 

[csl]

For electronica/dance styles, with the 808/909 style kick sounds, minimum phase will result in an obvious 'rounding' of the kick sound, whereas minimum phase will keep the attack of the kick very clean and tight (just different tracks might prefer difference phase settings).

say what?

Seriously! I'll try and present some mp3s of what I mean. The min phase sounds rounder, or woolier than the lin phase, as you might expect.

 

[tiger vomitt]

For electronica/dance styles, with the 808/909 style kick sounds, minimum phase will result in an obvious 'rounding' of the kick sound, whereas minimum phase will keep the attack of the kick very clean and tight (just different tracks might prefer difference phase settings).

say what?

Seriously! I'll try and present some mp3s of what I mean. The min phase sounds rounder, or woolier than the lin phase, as you might expect.

no no reread what you wrote :lol:
i use 808's a lot too, i wanna know!