@strayesignal9312 as your tubes start to heat up the beans start to gently roast. If you clip an alert comes up saying have a coffee you're clearly not concentrating.
I believe they would have to prioritize recallable gear first. Transitioning to recallable gear is expensive, and this move could jeopardize previous productions and put the business at risk of failure. With time, definitely! I see cranborne taking these steps as they’d have less to lose here with their relatively short run.
Yep, definitely that needs top priority. Now that hardware is a niche for larger budget studios, I would bet that most of them don't care about the additional cost too much. But I might be totally wrong.
Paul, I agree with your value proposition regarding plugin control, but... All of this ability to tweak, analyze those tweaks and make minute adjustments in the pursuit of perfection (which recall makes infinitely more possible) doesn't necessarily equate to an improved soundscape. I won't name the song because it'll give away my advanced age but the other day, I heard a 2017 remaster of a song released in the 1970's. It was everything you'd expect a remastered work from 50 years ago to be. No overlapping frequencies in the midrange. Punchy drums. Louder, but still dynamic. Objectively, a huge improvement. And yet...it was like the soul had been sucked out of it. Subjectively, it was a disaster. Gear (and technology) is important, but who's doing the work is so much more important. I've heard plenty of the work you and Nick do and it doesn't surprise me you guys master at the same facility. It's your ears. That's where the magic is. And no amount of tech is going to make some amateur like me hear things the way you guys do. So since you're clearly in a "product idea" headspace today, let me make a suggestion. What I'd really like is a box that sits on my console and has your, Nick's, Sylvia Massy's, Mutt Lange's, Bob Katz' and Michael Romanowski's combined ability to hear what I'm doing and simply says "Yup" or "Nope" as I make eq, compression and limiting decisions during mixing and mastering. Can you invent that?
@AS-mm3wi they've been kind of trying to do this with AI in the likes of ozone etc. Nowhere near what you are asking as its all guesswork and 9 times out of 10 it's wrong. The issue is that every song is different and every song needs a human ear to feel vibe and expression. That's what a robot can't do. It can't technically feel like a human does. So really the only way to get expert ears on a song to advise on changes is to physically have them listen to it.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio Absolutely. I was kidding about a "yup/nope" box being a real possibility. The greater point is, as much as I'm guilty of looking for the next great piece of gear that's going to solve all my problems, it really is the talent of the engineer that matters at the end of the day and you can tell who has that natural talent by finding consistently great results over a body of work. That's one reason why I think AA is gaining a reputation that's placing it up there with some very lofty company in mastering circles. And as a subscriber to your channel, it's nice because when you talk about a product or a concept in mastering, I know there's real world experience behind it. As for the video (which I apologize for getting way off track regarding), it would be awesome if a gear manufacturer would partner with AA and release some digitally controlled analog mastering processors that also doubled as control surfaces for multiple plugin instances.
@AS-mm3wi as much as you are kidding it got me thinking. Sometimes we kid about things and then we think hey wait a second that could actually be possible. I'm now wondering if in the future it'll be possible to clone my head and you could essentially have a talking head in your room that just advises on mixes. Absurdly ridiculous but in 10 20 years time who knows where we will be at. I partnered with Hendy Amps to develop the Michelangelo XL which came out incredible. Better than I imagined. I had an idea and Chris had the ability to build it and make it work. I'd love to do more like this. I like to think what is missing, what would I want. Where is there a gap in the market. It's really fun.
Manufactures are currently in the process of upgrading existing devices to include digital recall. Don't think any would create them multi channel though.
As an example I guess Wes is closest to this already. if they implemented software versions of their hardware circuits and built them into their existing control software. But this idea is in a kind of conflict with the original concept, which is to get the sound of analog with the control and recall of software. So they went through all that trouble to get software control of analog hardware, just to add a software plugin doing the same as the hardware so you can have it both ways. I can see it could be a flexible system, but I would think that most analog circuit engineers, except some dont think its much fun to add digital control circuitry to their analog hardware to start with, which is challenging to do without making a mess, and then you ask them to go a step further to add not only a digital control of their hardware but the same unit completely in software in addition. These are layers and layers of complexity. Im an ex software developer and I would dread it tbh as it starts to touch different domains, DSP is a different domain of coding entirely from "simple" control software and thus you need engineers also versed in DSP. Due to complexity it detracts from the "fun" of making such products which is why you dont see too many currently doing it successfully. But more than that the "reverse use" case envsioned needs to be justified in numbers to be worth it, and this is already a niche business. So its a niche of a niche, hence very exotic territory and probably not profitable as the demand is simply not there or atleast not yet.
Yes a company like Wes Audio it wouldn't be beneficial for. However a company like SSL who already heavily create plugin emulations of their products and I would argue they make more from their plugins than they do from their hardware, it would be ideal for. It'll get people who otherwise wouldn't have bought hardware into their hardware. They could even transfer audio over USB C with internal converters as an option to really supply that one box plug and play device that also doubles as a controller. Give it about 5 years and digital recall will be the standard in most hardware. Every company who has contacted me to consult about it feels this way and wants to jump on the gravy train. You'll see a lot of high end brand entering this domain next year and it'll be a case of all units come with it feel free to use digital recall or not.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio Yes Ive would already expect maybe Heritage to be interested as they are starting to make software versions of their hardware. And heritage already proven they can do miniaturization with their grandchild. And Elysia also got plugins and the new preamp channex|studio will have digital control. I hope Elysia bake digital control into every unit forward. And as for SSL that is as you said it would make great sense for them to do it, and I find it infact strange they have not already done it. SSL has done interesting stuff in the past like their Duende DSP box.
I bought a few months ago my first piece of pro top end analog hardware for the mix bus, and now I have three of them on the mix bus. The difference is not 5% (on a mix bus; maybe in the mix there's no so much difference - there you're right) but it's like night and day Vs. the plugins. It's like "ugly girl" Vs. The miss Universe. Sometimes you want that nasty "ugly" in your mix I agree, but it's a joke to say there's only 5% difference. Yes, If you don't know how to use it or the hardware is not top notch. The idea is great, and I see your point, because from your perspective (you have a lot of analog gear) it's faster, better workflow and an additional option to tweak those knobs making the mix better, faster with all the tools ready to go (analog and plugins), not changing so much position as you lose momentum when you're mixing. You want that to be fast, like flying F16 Jet or driving BMW. Just a few essential knobs on a dashboard (not the whole mess of knobs), fast response, great results ... More quickly becomes less when you have so much gear and plugins, or better said so much options. It's nice, it's benefitial, but you have to use it in a moment, fast and that's where your idea comes into play if I understand correctly.
Have you compared the Fusion to the plugin. The Fusion plugins are very close. That's not saying the plugins are good, the hardware just isn't that amazing. It's very clean very digital sounding. I didn't hear me say all plugins. I only referred to the Fusion. If it was 5% across the board, I wouldn't own as much hardware as I do.
They would argue that you have that with the UF8, UC1 combo and you would just bank through. The avid S4 I have behind me in this video is basically what you are requesting.
Basically just a control surface option built into there units….Synthesisers have done this for decades….sysex data or Midi CC… Use that technology to control a plug in version shouldn’t be hard but it would be very expensive on the units RRP… Is it really worth it… Also when using the unit it would jump around when you move the dials unless the dials are rotary faders with led markers… Very expensive option…. A controller surface is a much cheaper option for a few hundred dollars…
@drorlando2416 it's not expensive at all as it's already being done in all the gear you see around me. It is just a case of allowing you to select which plugin you are controlling. Select if the hardware is turning the hardware plugin or the software plugin. Wouldn't add anything onto the rrp of a piece of hardware that already has a plugin emulation of it.
@drorlando2416 no. SSL will inevitably release a digitally recallable version at some point, it just makes sense for them to go down this route in 2025. But whilst they are at it, they already have a plugin version built and could implement this idea quite easily by just allowing the hardware to control a software version.
Quick question how many units do you have with USB or MIDI connections… These units need to talk back to the computer… Putting a controller interface on a Manley face plate or a GML 8200 and then keeping them up to date with software is way too expensive… They would have done it by now if they could… I use my mastering equipment very differently…Your on the right ideas keep them coming….😎
@drorlando2416 I have about 35 unit with digital recall via a USB connection. Adding digital recall to an GML 8200 would be stupid. I can't see GML ever doing that, just doesn't make sense. Bettermaker however already have plugin emulations and digital recall. For them this would be as simple as they telling the hardware to stop controlling the hardware for the plugin and start controlling the software plugin. It's already doing everything it needs to do it's just not being told to control anything other than the hardware plugin.
I do think a control surface would be more realistic. Something like the Softube Console One, that has very powerful drivers and DAW compatibility. Where you can open up an SSL 9000 from plugin alliance, map it once, and then every time thereafter it will just work - LED screens showing the name and values of the parameter. They are almost there with the console one. That would be superior in my personal workflow, because I can stay in my listening postition with one dedicated controller - and the use the recallable analog. With such a configuration- one should be able to use this hypothetical controller, even on the analog devices with digital controll. To me that is the ideal. An extremely powerful controller
@Rhuggins yeah as I say I'm using the Avid S4 which is a console one on steroids. And the points you make are good and very valid. My only counter would be that when using a controller you know your on a controller. Your brain knows you are on a controller. Whereas if the hardware doubled as a controller your brain could effectively be tricked into feeling like you are using hardware with plugins.
I have another idea to add but first... all they will need on the hardware units is a button to switch from the unit and it's dedicated plugin control and DAW control. You idea isn't too complicated becuase you are not asking it to control all plugins just the plug that is emulating the hardware. Only one flaw but maybe something they could add, it the extra control for the extra controls you often find in the plugin. My added idea is to be about the have a export option where a DAW will now use the analogue unit for each tract you used the plugin version, this would of course be a over night export thing as it's take ages of course but that could be within the pricing and of course a 24 hour turnaround is still possible as it'll be ready next day but only one track could be ready next day unless there was a DAW option to do this with multiple tracks. There is a problem that it might sound too different at the end but maybe while mix you can select tracks as one that will be later sent thought the hardware with the plugin settings and ones that will just remain the plugin so it's then just a little better not too different. This idea of course is mainly for studios that can't yet afford the amount equipment you have. I have always though that companies should make cheap controller versions of their plugins, but like what TC Electronic do... SSL did with 3 plugins but it was super expensive. Hands on control does make a huge difference in how efficiently you use something and how you end up using it, nearly always you do something better with hands on control. Although, saying this... you do have the AVID controller, I'm guessing it just helps to have the dedicated controller as it's less complicated for the mind to just use that for that. What becomes complicated to the mind is why a lot of controllers out there end up becoming more of a headache to use... that's why dedicated controllers often are better than control everything controllers. Softube did really well with their new controllers to included enough to cover all without running into the headache of something that tries to control everything.
Yeah in analogue ideal world you could render through the hardware. Maybe one day we will have some kind of advanced tech that'll allow rendering through analogue hardware relatively instant. Can't see that any time soon. I'm not keen on the over night idea. The Avid s4 maps out identically with every function. My issue being that your brain knows you are on a plugin. If you were using a controller that was the hardware and you didn't know which was the hardware you could trick yourself into a placebo effect where you just felt every plugin was hardware if the emulation was good enough and not obvious.
I've been thinking about this for almost 2 years myself. I was wondering why no one was making outboard gear with daw control capabilities. Asaudio engineer students, most of us study in the box, and this kind of gear would make the transition to analog so much easier
Interesting idea but i suspect we might be in the final days of hardware with how good machine learning is about to get. Emulations will level up, at this point its just about training the machine learning on existing gear and cloud analog services like accessanalog, mixanalog etc could contribute to that.
No chance. Analogue processing is more favourable than it was 10 years ago. It's on the up. Plugins won't take over hardware. Digitally controlled hardware will take over though.
@AudioAnimalsStudio Hmm, machine learning is on the up now too, it's going to be a close one but I wouldn't under estimate how good that is getting. It could easily replace hardware in a few years from now with the trajectory it is on.
SSL already has the UC1 and it's now possible to use it with every plugin on the market, I already mapped mine for the Fusion plugin, all my SSL plugins and all my UAD and Slate plugins with the UC1. So it's already available
@pluginhoarder the blackbox HG-Q is a prime candidate for this idea. They already have a plugin emulation and digital recall hardware. I have mentioned this to them and I really hope they do it.
I already use the WES hardware on every master I do, and sometimes the Bettermaker Limiter over the (better sounding) HUM LAAL simply because I don't need to recall manually if the client is not 100% satisfied. The only company I would really wish to implement total recall PLUS control over the plugin counterpart would be Elysia though, because the Alpha is still my go-to compressor day in day out and I haven't found a real competitor. Though I often find myself using the Weiss MKIII, since it is almost as good. Your idea is obvious, but take into account that hardware and plugin must match very accurately! It makes little sense to turn the knobs controlling the plugin if you get a different sound, which happens to large extend with the Fusion (to give an example) or the Manley MP as well.
@MFASonic there would be zero difference to how it currently works as an emulation. It's literally acting as a controller. No different to me using a S4 to control a plugin version of the hardware. Now imagine a digitally recallable alpha. That you could use the hardware as a controller for the plugin if you were using it in the mix just by selecting the plugin. Even if the plugin was off by fair bit. You are still using the plugin in a much more fun and hands on way.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio Yes, I got your point. It would also be thrilling to see how much of the "hardware is better"-feeling that I experience most of the time is only a placebo :) I stay tuned and thanks for this unbiased, pro channel.
@MFASonic yeah 100% being hands on can trick the mix. I know if I use the plugin to control my hardware I instantly feel worse about the sound of the hardware. For instance when I use the mcdsp apb fairchild I don't get the same feel as using a fairchild. However in a blind test they are near identical and you can't tell them apart.
A control surface already does this but yes. But what a control surface doesn't do is map exactly as the hardware does or feel like using the hardware does. The difference here is that you are buying the hardware for the purpose of using the hardware. The added benefit here is that at no extra cost you are also able to use it as a controller for the plugin emulation. It adds value to the hardware.
Don't hate me for saying, but people have been asking for this for a long time. I was chatting to someone about exactly this at NAMM about 6 years ago, when programmable analog on a pro level was becoming a thing, like the Wes 500 units. There are companies and people aware of the desire, but it's not as simple as it seems. There are tradeoffs, limitations and added complexity to the analog design, and the software work makes people want to run and hide. I was trying to push a company down this path, we started sketching up a product and then key collaborators and financiers ultimately balked at the complexity and cost, and made a synth instead, which was as complex and costly, strangely. Still, it is a good idea, you are on point.
@danielsanichiban I think maybe you misunderstood. This isn't complex and costly at all. It's incredibly simple and can be implemented it straight away if you already have a plugin emulation of the product. Let me explain and you can tell me if your idea is different. Think of it like this. The Bettermaker bus is already a plugin on the market. It's also a piece of hardware on the market. Both stay exactly as they are. But now when I select a Bettermaker bus comp plugin in the daw the Bettermaker bus comp hardware becomes a controller for the plugin. That's all. It's just a case of allowing the hardware to control the plugin. This is incredibly simple and would only require a software and firmware update I'd imagine. The hardware already has the ability to control plugins. All that needs to happen is that when you select a Bettermaker bus comp plugin it tells the hardware to start controlling that plugin instead of the hardware. And then when you select the hardware plugin you start controlling the hardware again. There's no way this is the complex and costly idea you are thinking of. Explain your idea. I bet it's totally different and in fact, is costly and complex. Of every company I've spoken with about it it's the first anyone's heard of it.
@ not saying it was my idea, i was talking about having matching hardware and software devices, where you can automate /control the plugin and have your hardware follow that, or use your hardware controls and record those parameter changes in the plugin and DAW, with the added bonus of emulated (not as great) processing in the plugin when the outboard hardware isn’t connected. The plug-in basically serving as an interface between DAW control and hardware control I’ll watch again and pay attention
@danielsanichiban that's just a controller for a plugin though what you are referring to. Isn't it? What analogue processing is this doing? I feel this is the key difference. This is a piece of hardware in its own right. Without the plugin emulation option I'm talking about you have a digitally recallable piece of hardware with analogue io as normal. All I'm proposing is that on top of that there's the option of it being a controller for the plugin emulation as well.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio not making controllers, no. Using plugin versions of programmable /automatable /recallable hardware, as a bridge between the hardware and DAW automation.. And then also putting an emulation of the hardware in the plugin so when you’re out on the road, you have an emulated version of your hardware to fallback on. Basically a way to integrate programmable analog into DAWs better, without the hurdles and shitty workflow of using the existing MIDI. I think we’re talking about the same thing?
@danielsanichiban pretty much the same concept but you are referring to replacing the hardware due to being on the road. I'm proposing for studio use we use it in addition to the hardware. We're just now at a stage in our lives where it can be implemented at a tiny cost. Take the bettermaker vspe for instance. There's a plugin emulation of this out. The hardware just needs to be told to control that instead of the hardware plugin recall software.
I think we need a universal access of only one company taking care of the software and the hardware company let them control the hardware by using the software, also we need a separate hardware which can connect to the hardware and computer ? software company have to make a separate hardware that let you choose and pick the connections let’s call that the INTERCONET - if you change your MAC and the connection change from thunderbolt to something else you still can connect to your hardwared via thunderbolt or DANTE or Catm5 etc…. I thought about it too when I see your MCdSP , I also send him a email regarding that . I won’t buy a MCDSP until I know I can still use it 20 yrs from today . Great hope my extra will help .
@ramonfelizjr really interesting. I would hope mcdsp will be compatible in 20 years. The good thing about the mcdsp is that the thunderbolt usb c card can be removed and changed if it needs to be. So if for instance something was to change which I'm told it can't they will be able to perform an upgrade.
I'm fully itb. One of the things that's put me off hardware is I would only have 1, whereas I could put the plugin on every channel in the mix. This idea would sway me more towards analogue tho
Wow that will be nice! It’s so funny that today I was thinking about my Alpha Compressor hoping that the company will come up with something like an adapter that can be added to the Alpha Compressor for digital recalls or pay for an upgrade to digital recalls. Though I use the Ngbus for some things but the Alpha is the everything you can think of (tracking’ mixing and mastering) . Paul I think it’s a brilliant idea. 💡 I’m with you on this.
@OfficialAlexZitto I can see an alpha coming within a few years. My production with Elysia is they'll do the channel x digital recall then move onto the x filter and 500 series. We will see an alpha by 2030 once they tested the water. But can you imagine a digital recall alpha on your mix bus and plugin on your buses being controlled by the hardware. It would be amazing.
I think if the hardware is better it is better to print trough the hardware. You mix with the plug-in emulation and then there is a system of auto printing which go to all the stems and print them automatically with the plug-in settings. Hope it is clear, english is not my main language.
@FortheSoulFtS in an ideal world this would be amazing. Only issue at present would need to be printed in real time. In the future you may be able to bounce through the hardware faster without loss of quality.
@AudioAnimalsStudio you are mixing with the plug-in version but you are printing the final mix through the hardware once it is done. If the plug-in is 95% there you add the analog flavor but you don't lose the balance. But honestly I don't want to buy hardware where the the plug-in is 95% there.
Arturia did pretty much exactly that with the Minifreak. Admittedly, not outboard in the sense discussed here, but still kinda outboard. I would also very much welcome more of this, both for synths and other outboard.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio Pretty much. There‘s a VST which allows you to control the hardware, and you can use the hardware to control the VST, but the VST also functions completely independently from the hardware. The VST comes with the hardware but you can also buy the VST without the hardware. If you have both, you can decide if you want the audio from the VST or the hardware. I think it‘s pretty much your idea, just for a synth.
Still, the Minifreak is mostly digital, only the filter is analog. It would be much more exciting to see this for the Polybrute, which is fully analog but digitally controlled. It has a VST that controls the hardware, but the VST has no emulation. In that sense, it‘s very much like the Wes Audio gear. It‘s already quite useful, but…
8 годин тому
Interesting idea, but I don't think there's that many gear that are so versatile that you'd use their plugin emulations in that many instances. For example I do use Fusion hardware but I never use their plugins (only violet EQ is somewhat useable but nothing else) and don't even want to use plugins in anywhere in my mix anyways.
So it wouldn't be for you. But for someone who is all in the box and their first piece of analogue gear is a Fusion to put on their mix bus. To now have a Fusion plugin with hardware control as well as an analogue unit over the mix bus. That would be highly appealing.
@@hiddenmaterial I had a Dave Smith mopho a good 15 plus years ago that had midi control and recall. The issue with it was stability. Stability is really good now.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio for sure, as a modern example every Elektron device post 2012 release has Overbridge VST support and full usb streaming to control all parameters remotely with full recall and automation. Its very stable as well and there is far more data throughput than anything a piece of outboard requires. On top of that they work as audio interfaces and A/D D/A converters.
Wonderful. I had the Wes Audio ngBus comp and was used to the plugin for recall. Sadly I sold it. But your idea is fantastic. I bought recently a Elysia XFilter. I was wondering about buying the MuseEQ. But the plugin is so good that I stick to the plugin. If the release a MuseEQ with recall and the possibility to drive the plugin I’m in !
@skiiizo I know imagine that. A museq piece of hardware you could use as a plugin controller. The plugin emulation of the museq is brilliant. Would be perfect to do this idea with. I really hope elysia consider this option.
Most likely by 2030 I just hope that all companies can agree on 1 standard future proof communication protocol like RTP midi. I would love to see more use of the ethernet port in all recallable gear that way you can have it in another room and run it along with something like Dante all in one cable for something like preamps or have something like a split room setup where you can use different pieces of hardware from different studio rooms.
@thegsalmon yes I think all digitally recallable hardware should have ethernet. This covers you just in case. Doesn't rely on drivers. Just works. If mac decide to change their ports, it doesn't matter. There are EU laws now that prevent people like Apple changing their ports so products are no longer compatible.
@AudioAnimalsStudio It would be brilliant! I think it can also be used as local communication port the only thing is figuring out how to physically adapt it to a serial bus port like usb c without causing confusion amongst other adapter but that it can do it it cann
Well it’s mostly been thought of already and it’s coming. Blackbox HG-Q hardware will be digitally controlled but not just with a seperate plugin. But with the PA release. However not sure if it will be able to control the plugin. But u will be able to process with plugin if hardware isn’t there automatically in place. So they are 95% they way there.
The thing is, for this idea you also need dedicated D/A A/D for every hardware unit. This also means no direct hardware chaining without conversion. Unless you build the converters into the actual hardware unit as a switchable, parallel option. But even then this would make the hardware units a lot more complicated. As well as driver handling and latency. Even though it's a nice thought, but imho this will never happen, sorry.
@JBrm no you're thinking of something totally different. The hardware would be connected as normal. No change there. The only change is in the box. Instead of only controlling the plugin that controls the hardware. You are also able to control a plugin with the hardware. Your thinking of making it way too complicated with internal conversion and using the USB connection to transfer audio. This will never work. We need analogue IO as normal and a choice of converters we want to use. As we normally do.
From what I've heard, the new plugin black box HG-Q from plugin alliance is a real treat, and if there's a hardware addition to the plugin, it would be exactly what you're looking for!🤗😉
SSL Fusion plugins (drive and stereo image v1) are really close about -10% to hardware ! and this is usual , because the sound in the hardware passing through a courant while the emulation is just your digital sound engine ..
I believe blackbox eq will operate like that. ironically the blackbox eq is a similar concept to the Michelangelo xl ...kinda weird. hope you didn't tell them the ideas lol
@Javarrockamore I have spoken with them about this idea as I want them to use it and build the best product possible for everyone. Hopefully, it'll be implemented into the hardware. Their product would be perfect for it.
I had a similar idea years ago for making a LA 2 and 1176 faceplate that could transmit and receive midi dater to control my waves comps just didn’t know how to do it.
@simonleesax4788 there was a company in Brazil i think building these with faceplates that looked identical to the hardware. This idea was possible. Had zero analogue processing though. Was just for control. I loved this idea when it came out.
TC Electronics got half of that done with their Icon series but yeah if the Big players implement the digital recall revolution then that will be great!
@@AudioAnimalsStudio No,, It goes both ways, there is HW integration , for all kind of models, you want a controller for plugins that is also a HW. with recall. I mean your idea would be a controller for all the instances in the mix and analog for one. to integrate this would probably make all the switches etc in the hardware quite expensive. as you don't want to change the settings of the hardware...Anyway, sounds ridiculous with the super good controller intergrations these days, I think Wes audio went the right way with the Tube Eq. Could probably be used as a controller, I just don't see the point the make hardware more expensive with this added layer in all the controls .
@womelovski it's no way more expensive. It already does exactly what I'm talking about. So there would be no additional cost. What spectrosonics hardware are you referring to. They don't mention any 100% analogue units in their catalogue that can do this. You sure it's not virtual analogue you are mistakening it for? Acess virus did this 15 odd years ago with the TI range with virtual analogue and synths. It seems to me there's some confusion here as to what I'm referring to.
@PedalPaddlePush this is another one I've spoken in length with companies about, but it just seems too painful to do. You could essentially apply the settings using a plugin then select to re-render through the hardware. Would need to be real-time which just makes me think it's pointless. The idea is there and this could be something someone can develop further.
I think i am agree with you , is time to wait for new gears with recall , i think is not time to buy gears , because New things is about to come , that can be totally recall gears that can stay for long term in hour Studio , Best regards from Poland
@carlos-pratspratsonthebeat1145 Poland are leading the charge with digital recall. Some of the best companies in pro audio are Polish. Really impressed with Poland at the moment. I'm in the same boat as you. I'm holding back buying gear without recall because 2025 is going to be so good for recallable gear.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio Yeah is From here very close to me Wes Audio COmpany Is amazing , but we want to see also Universal audio , ssl , etc etc More Compnies doing amazing Gear Recall , Thats why i prefer to wait instead to spend in some gear now.Thanks for your answer and opinion
@carlos-pratspratsonthebeat1145 I think in 2025 we will see a lot of companies going down this route. I know a few who are really going to surprise you.
You said it yourself, your talking about a plugin controller dedicated to 1 plugin. It already exist. Combining it with hardware controler isnt an unique idear. I dont think it would be financial intering for manufacturers because then box users are forced to buy expensive hardware to control a plugin. And manufacturers will then be forced to also produce dedicated controllers for the box users. Companies will always choose the cheapest way and the biggest Market. That means that a cheap dedicated controller will win from an expensive hardware controler with midi out. But just adding midi out via usb to hardware is also a easy win.
No you've missed the point. This is an added feature for us hardware owners that easily implanted. What idiot is going to buy a dedicated controller for one plugin. Come on man you'd just buy a daw controller. Anyone with an understanding of digital recall and analogue hardware knows this is an additional feature to an existing product. You're looking at it all wrong.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of TC Electronic Icon series owners suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
@@gtk_NO at the price point we’re talking about you’d be mental to pay £2k plus to control just one plugin. Any intelligent person would buy a controller and control all plugins. Tc icon series is like £100. That’s not stupid. If you were paying £2k plus for each Tc icon unit I’d call you stupid to your face.
@hakangurdol you'll love it. I have 6 units and it's one of the best investments I ever made. The gift that keeps on giving as they build new modules for it every few months. And they are free.
But where's the upside for any hardware company to do this? First they'd have to engage a separate software company OR create a software division - in either case, costing a significant amount of money -- only for the sake of, +best case scenario+, supplanting an existing product that I can sell you multiple times (hardware) with a piece of hardware I can really only sell you once along with a speculative new product (software) that has a much lower profit margin and is also vulnerable to pirating. (I can count on one hand the major audio software releases that were NOT cracked w/in a month.) Ultimately, you'd just be turning hardware companies into software companies. Suggesting that Mercedes should get into the hamburger business, if you will. (What happens to these companies' manufacturing plants? The workers and designers therein? etc.) I don't see what the value proposition would be to any company that is already profitable. MAYBE, I'm missing something.. but, I don't think I am.
Firstly this would only apply to companies who plan on releasing both software and hardware with digital recall. Which is why I used the example of a company like SSL who already have the plugin built and emulated. They could move into digital recall which I feel they will be doing in the future. The benefit for them being that we're all going to buy the hardware regardless of if this idea is implemented. But if it is added, it's a great additional feature. People who are buying it for the use in analogue won't stop at one. Why do people still buy hardware when there's plenty of control surfaces already available. I get your point but if its already a part of what you do it's not costly. And if a plugin emulation isn't something you do, it's something that will bring in additional revenue through the sale of the standalone plugin without hardware connectivity. It's just a nice additional feature that could be added to hardware that has digital recall as well as a plugin emulation.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio That makes a bit more sense and I understand better. I just fundamentally think your idea would cut into analog(ue) sales. Like...if they DIDN'T cut into analog(ue) sales, then that would be an indicator that the new controller/product failed (in its design or possibly pricing). You're inclined to think it WON'T cut into sales and, if true, then sure...an additional income stream always makes sense.
@nilespeshay1734 I mean yes it could cut into analogue sales but ultimately the reason we are buying analogue hardware is because of its superior sound. So as long as the hardware is always superior. It wouldn't affect sales. Releasing a plugin emulation actually increases sales of hardware interestingly. I think arguably adding a feature like this bridges the gap for uses moving from plugins to analogue.
I don't think you'll find this in analogue synths. Digital or virtual analogue synths maybe but I'm yet to see anything 100% analogue do this. What analogue synths (not VA) have digital recall and a seperate plugin emulation for additional processing independent of the hardware? I don't know of any
@@AudioAnimalsStudio If analog is just that, theres still a moment it requires to be implemented in the digital domain.... DSP.. CPU.. No matter... Like REAL analog synths with mods...... Its still takes midi or some to talk a language.. However.. I guess Rolands DCB came close... Analoig voltage signals...... Sure.. Im just bit picking. Just saying theres always a cost ... To Add.. I own an OG Microwave 1.. The New VI also allows me to swap between them, with all parameters,,,, ect,,, And yeah, the plugs damn close... Call it your 95%.... But as I say, The language between the hardware and software is nothing new... Its a matter of costs and how you implement.... And yeh... Not saying we all dont want those features.. It still comes down to costs... Its not a new idea....
@Rhythmattica there will be zero cost to units like the bettermaker vspe that already have digital recall and plugin emulations. You're thinking more in terms building a product from the ground up. I'm referring to adding an additional feature that hasn't been thought of or done before in high end signal processing.
@@budaalamalamusic no they don't. You realise I'm surrounded by Wes audio and Bettermaker in this video. They have digital recall. The plugins are just for recall. Zero analogue emulations in recall plugin.
literally everyone has thought of that! it wont work. cause you would still have to bounce plugins mostly, and it would be easier just to make a control surface
@bachelorgamer8001 No, you've totally missed the point. Your counter argument is exactly what I said. You're literally saying what I said as how it should be done. Think of it like this it's a controller for plugins. But it's also a digitally recallable piece of hardware. The plugins do not record through the hardware. That's a stupid idea. As it'll need to be done in real-time and it'll print the audio. The plugin is active always it's just being controlled by the hardware. No analogue processing. Understand it now?
@@AudioAnimalsStudioI guess what he is saying, is that i you have this for the SSL, you will want to have it for the rest of the plugins and you end up at the control surface? I for instance would be happy to have a Pultec as you described it. It’s a great idea because you use less tools in a better way. How‘bout a Q5 like this?
@patrickriggenbach3127 but the key difference being you are buying the hardware because you want to use the hardware. The primary function is the hardware being it's own product with the option of controlling the plugin if you wish to. Yes you could use a control surface to do exactly the same thing. However this idea expands on the functionality already in the hardware you've bought and add an extra feature it can possibly do. If you bought the hardware purely as a controller with no intention of using it as an analogue processor you might as well have bought a control surface.
@RoomAtTheTopStudio they have hardware with digital recall but not a plugin that processes alongside it that is independent from the hardware it is controlling. At least I'm not aware of this if they do.
I have 6 mcdsp ABP units in this room. McDSP isn't a plugin emulation. Look it up. McDSP is analogue with digital control using a plugin. The key factor we are talking about here is hardware control. It's the one thing McDSP doesn't have.
Yes you don't need it, you can use a mouse but you will find you work different when you are hands on. Not only faster and more efficient. But also you feel the music more.
The liquid mix was very cool. However it was DSP and wasn't analogue. It effectively wasn't a plugin. It was like a controllable UAD satellite. This is hardware with that double as a controller for the plugin emulation. The liquid mix was hardware control for DSP without any plugin emulation using the computers CPU so you were limited to I think it was 16 instances on the DSP.
@TwstedTV SSL did not do this with the uc1, the uc1 is a controller for plugins. There is zero analogue processing involved. You've totally missed the point.
@SydneyValette yeah let's see this link to him talking about this. Want to see if its remotely similar and you aren't confusing this idea for a simple controller.
@SydneyValette wes audio is totally different. The plugin is for control only. This is not a plugin emulation. I can see where you got confused now. So that plugin we all use with wes audio gear does no digital processing at all in the box. It is purely just to control the hardware and act as a way of instantly recalling a the settings. This is nothing new and is not what we're talking about here.
Paul is going to turn my coffee machine into a recallable plugin. Give the man his royalties!!
@strayesignal9312 if someone invented a piece of hardware that doubled as a coffee machine I'd be all over that.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio Kickstarter Alert! Granular, gently compressed, tube roasted aromatic saturation.
@strayesignal9312 as your tubes start to heat up the beans start to gently roast. If you clip an alert comes up saying have a coffee you're clearly not concentrating.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio Brilliant. Take my money!!
Good idea
Sequential worked With Omnisphere to map analog synth to Vst synth
I believe they would have to prioritize recallable gear first. Transitioning to recallable gear is expensive, and this move could jeopardize previous productions and put the business at risk of failure. With time, definitely! I see cranborne taking these steps as they’d have less to lose here with their relatively short run.
Yep, definitely that needs top priority. Now that hardware is a niche for larger budget studios, I would bet that most of them don't care about the additional cost too much. But I might be totally wrong.
100% the primary use is the hardware. The plugin emulation is very much secondary to the hardware as a little added bonus.
Paul, I agree with your value proposition regarding plugin control, but...
All of this ability to tweak, analyze those tweaks and make minute adjustments in the pursuit of perfection (which recall makes infinitely more possible) doesn't necessarily equate to an improved soundscape.
I won't name the song because it'll give away my advanced age but the other day, I heard a 2017 remaster of a song released in the 1970's. It was everything you'd expect a remastered work from 50 years ago to be. No overlapping frequencies in the midrange. Punchy drums. Louder, but still dynamic. Objectively, a huge improvement. And yet...it was like the soul had been sucked out of it. Subjectively, it was a disaster. Gear (and technology) is important, but who's doing the work is so much more important.
I've heard plenty of the work you and Nick do and it doesn't surprise me you guys master at the same facility. It's your ears. That's where the magic is. And no amount of tech is going to make some amateur like me hear things the way you guys do.
So since you're clearly in a "product idea" headspace today, let me make a suggestion. What I'd really like is a box that sits on my console and has your, Nick's, Sylvia Massy's, Mutt Lange's, Bob Katz' and Michael Romanowski's combined ability to hear what I'm doing and simply says "Yup" or "Nope" as I make eq, compression and limiting decisions during mixing and mastering. Can you invent that?
@AS-mm3wi they've been kind of trying to do this with AI in the likes of ozone etc. Nowhere near what you are asking as its all guesswork and 9 times out of 10 it's wrong. The issue is that every song is different and every song needs a human ear to feel vibe and expression. That's what a robot can't do. It can't technically feel like a human does. So really the only way to get expert ears on a song to advise on changes is to physically have them listen to it.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio Absolutely. I was kidding about a "yup/nope" box being a real possibility. The greater point is, as much as I'm guilty of looking for the next great piece of gear that's going to solve all my problems, it really is the talent of the engineer that matters at the end of the day and you can tell who has that natural talent by finding consistently great results over a body of work. That's one reason why I think AA is gaining a reputation that's placing it up there with some very lofty company in mastering circles. And as a subscriber to your channel, it's nice because when you talk about a product or a concept in mastering, I know there's real world experience behind it.
As for the video (which I apologize for getting way off track regarding), it would be awesome if a gear manufacturer would partner with AA and release some digitally controlled analog mastering processors that also doubled as control surfaces for multiple plugin instances.
@AS-mm3wi as much as you are kidding it got me thinking. Sometimes we kid about things and then we think hey wait a second that could actually be possible. I'm now wondering if in the future it'll be possible to clone my head and you could essentially have a talking head in your room that just advises on mixes. Absurdly ridiculous but in 10 20 years time who knows where we will be at.
I partnered with Hendy Amps to develop the Michelangelo XL which came out incredible. Better than I imagined. I had an idea and Chris had the ability to build it and make it work. I'd love to do more like this. I like to think what is missing, what would I want. Where is there a gap in the market. It's really fun.
That would be absolutely brilliant. All existing audio devices would need to be upgraded and made multi-channel capable with digital recall.
Manufactures are currently in the process of upgrading existing devices to include digital recall. Don't think any would create them multi channel though.
As an example I guess Wes is closest to this already. if they implemented software versions of their hardware circuits and built them into their existing control software. But this idea is in a kind of conflict with the original concept, which is to get the sound of analog with the control and recall of software. So they went through all that trouble to get software control of analog hardware, just to add a software plugin doing the same as the hardware so you can have it both ways.
I can see it could be a flexible system, but I would think that most analog circuit engineers, except some dont think its much fun to add digital control circuitry to their analog hardware to start with, which is challenging to do without making a mess, and then you ask them to go a step further to add not only a digital control of their hardware but the same unit completely in software in addition. These are layers and layers of complexity. Im an ex software developer and I would dread it tbh as it starts to touch different domains, DSP is a different domain of coding entirely from "simple" control software and thus you need engineers also versed in DSP. Due to complexity it detracts from the "fun" of making such products which is why you dont see too many currently doing it successfully. But more than that the "reverse use" case envsioned needs to be justified in numbers to be worth it, and this is already a niche business. So its a niche of a niche, hence very exotic territory and probably not profitable as the demand is simply not there or atleast not yet.
Yes a company like Wes Audio it wouldn't be beneficial for. However a company like SSL who already heavily create plugin emulations of their products and I would argue they make more from their plugins than they do from their hardware, it would be ideal for. It'll get people who otherwise wouldn't have bought hardware into their hardware. They could even transfer audio over USB C with internal converters as an option to really supply that one box plug and play device that also doubles as a controller.
Give it about 5 years and digital recall will be the standard in most hardware. Every company who has contacted me to consult about it feels this way and wants to jump on the gravy train. You'll see a lot of high end brand entering this domain next year and it'll be a case of all units come with it feel free to use digital recall or not.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio Yes Ive would already expect maybe Heritage to be interested as they are starting to make software versions of their hardware. And heritage already proven they can do miniaturization with their grandchild. And Elysia also got plugins and the new preamp channex|studio will have digital control. I hope Elysia bake digital control into every unit forward. And as for SSL that is as you said it would make great sense for them to do it, and I find it infact strange they have not already done it. SSL has done interesting stuff in the past like their Duende DSP box.
@gtk_NO every yeah I do a production that SSL will do digital recall and every year they prove me wrong. This is the year
I bought a few months ago my first piece of pro top end analog hardware for the mix bus, and now I have three of them on the mix bus. The difference is not 5% (on a mix bus; maybe in the mix there's no so much difference - there you're right) but it's like night and day Vs. the plugins. It's like "ugly girl" Vs. The miss Universe. Sometimes you want that nasty "ugly" in your mix I agree, but it's a joke to say there's only 5% difference. Yes, If you don't know how to use it or the hardware is not top notch. The idea is great, and I see your point, because from your perspective (you have a lot of analog gear) it's faster, better workflow and an additional option to tweak those knobs making the mix better, faster with all the tools ready to go (analog and plugins), not changing so much position as you lose momentum when you're mixing. You want that to be fast, like flying F16 Jet or driving BMW. Just a few essential knobs on a dashboard (not the whole mess of knobs), fast response, great results ... More quickly becomes less when you have so much gear and plugins, or better said so much options. It's nice, it's benefitial, but you have to use it in a moment, fast and that's where your idea comes into play if I understand correctly.
Have you compared the Fusion to the plugin. The Fusion plugins are very close. That's not saying the plugins are good, the hardware just isn't that amazing. It's very clean very digital sounding. I didn't hear me say all plugins. I only referred to the Fusion. If it was 5% across the board, I wouldn't own as much hardware as I do.
Really Seems to Be The Next Step
Well explained 🤘
Take my wallet now!! I love this idea
I wish SSL would build a large format control surface. Basically a great big 4000 but it’s actually a control surface. I can dream.
They would argue that you have that with the UF8, UC1 combo and you would just bank through. The avid S4 I have behind me in this video is basically what you are requesting.
Basically just a control surface option built into there units….Synthesisers have done this for decades….sysex data or Midi CC…
Use that technology to control a plug in version shouldn’t be hard but it would be very expensive on the units RRP…
Is it really worth it…
Also when using the unit it would jump around when you move the dials unless the dials are rotary faders with led markers…
Very expensive option….
A controller surface is a much cheaper option for a few hundred dollars…
@drorlando2416 it's not expensive at all as it's already being done in all the gear you see around me. It is just a case of allowing you to select which plugin you are controlling. Select if the hardware is turning the hardware plugin or the software plugin. Wouldn't add anything onto the rrp of a piece of hardware that already has a plugin emulation of it.
@ Cool does the SSL FUSION have a USB connection or a controller interface installed on it…
Love ❤️ your channel…👍🏾
@drorlando2416 no. SSL will inevitably release a digitally recallable version at some point, it just makes sense for them to go down this route in 2025. But whilst they are at it, they already have a plugin version built and could implement this idea quite easily by just allowing the hardware to control a software version.
Quick question how many units do you have with USB or MIDI connections…
These units need to talk back to the computer…
Putting a controller interface on a Manley face plate or a GML 8200 and then keeping them up to date with software is way too expensive…
They would have done it by now if they could…
I use my mastering equipment very differently…Your on the right ideas keep them coming….😎
@drorlando2416 I have about 35 unit with digital recall via a USB connection. Adding digital recall to an GML 8200 would be stupid. I can't see GML ever doing that, just doesn't make sense. Bettermaker however already have plugin emulations and digital recall. For them this would be as simple as they telling the hardware to stop controlling the hardware for the plugin and start controlling the software plugin. It's already doing everything it needs to do it's just not being told to control anything other than the hardware plugin.
I do think a control surface would be more realistic. Something like the Softube Console One, that has very powerful drivers and DAW compatibility. Where you can open up an SSL 9000 from plugin alliance, map it once, and then every time thereafter it will just work - LED screens showing the name and values of the parameter. They are almost there with the console one. That would be superior in my personal workflow, because I can stay in my listening postition with one dedicated controller - and the use the recallable analog. With such a configuration- one should be able to use this hypothetical controller, even on the analog devices with digital controll. To me that is the ideal. An extremely powerful controller
@Rhuggins yeah as I say I'm using the Avid S4 which is a console one on steroids. And the points you make are good and very valid. My only counter would be that when using a controller you know your on a controller. Your brain knows you are on a controller. Whereas if the hardware doubled as a controller your brain could effectively be tricked into feeling like you are using hardware with plugins.
That is really a great ideia. And unique.
I have another idea to add but first... all they will need on the hardware units is a button to switch from the unit and it's dedicated plugin control and DAW control.
You idea isn't too complicated becuase you are not asking it to control all plugins just the plug that is emulating the hardware.
Only one flaw but maybe something they could add, it the extra control for the extra controls you often find in the plugin.
My added idea is to be about the have a export option where a DAW will now use the analogue unit for each tract you used the plugin version, this would of course be a over night export thing as it's take ages of course but that could be within the pricing and of course a 24 hour turnaround is still possible as it'll be ready next day but only one track could be ready next day unless there was a DAW option to do this with multiple tracks.
There is a problem that it might sound too different at the end but maybe while mix you can select tracks as one that will be later sent thought the hardware with the plugin settings and ones that will just remain the plugin so it's then just a little better not too different.
This idea of course is mainly for studios that can't yet afford the amount equipment you have.
I have always though that companies should make cheap controller versions of their plugins, but like what TC Electronic do... SSL did with 3 plugins but it was super expensive.
Hands on control does make a huge difference in how efficiently you use something and how you end up using it, nearly always you do something better with hands on control.
Although, saying this... you do have the AVID controller, I'm guessing it just helps to have the dedicated controller as it's less complicated for the mind to just use that for that.
What becomes complicated to the mind is why a lot of controllers out there end up becoming more of a headache to use... that's why dedicated controllers often are better than control everything controllers.
Softube did really well with their new controllers to included enough to cover all without running into the headache of something that tries to control everything.
Yeah in analogue ideal world you could render through the hardware. Maybe one day we will have some kind of advanced tech that'll allow rendering through analogue hardware relatively instant. Can't see that any time soon. I'm not keen on the over night idea.
The Avid s4 maps out identically with every function. My issue being that your brain knows you are on a plugin. If you were using a controller that was the hardware and you didn't know which was the hardware you could trick yourself into a placebo effect where you just felt every plugin was hardware if the emulation was good enough and not obvious.
I've been thinking about this for almost 2 years myself. I was wondering why no one was making outboard gear with daw control capabilities. Asaudio engineer students, most of us study in the box, and this kind of gear would make the transition to analog so much easier
This is exactly my point. It'll bridge the gap for people moving more easily from digital to analogue gear.
Interesting idea but i suspect we might be in the final days of hardware with how good machine learning is about to get. Emulations will level up, at this point its just about training the machine learning on existing gear and cloud analog services like accessanalog, mixanalog etc could contribute to that.
No chance. Analogue processing is more favourable than it was 10 years ago. It's on the up. Plugins won't take over hardware. Digitally controlled hardware will take over though.
@AudioAnimalsStudio Hmm, machine learning is on the up now too, it's going to be a close one but I wouldn't under estimate how good that is getting. It could easily replace hardware in a few years from now with the trajectory it is on.
SSL already has the UC1 and it's now possible to use it with every plugin on the market, I already mapped mine for the Fusion plugin, all my SSL plugins and all my UAD and Slate plugins with the UC1. So it's already available
That's a controller. Not what we're talking about here is it. You've missed the point.
The future of audio hardware, is my electrical toothbrush in combination with my Rhode microphone. 🎉
@Pottwerke bit of duct tape and away you go. What's stopping you.
@AudioAnimalsStudio Nothing is gonna stop my electrical toothbrush and me! Riding into the sunset forever.
@@Pottwerke just remember to pack the charger for it
Superb and it actually feels like a logical development 👍
Great video! This kinda whats supposed to happen with the Blackbox HG-Q once it released I think/hope can’t wait for that!
@pluginhoarder the blackbox HG-Q is a prime candidate for this idea. They already have a plugin emulation and digital recall hardware. I have mentioned this to them and I really hope they do it.
The Electra one controller seems great for this
Exactly….Any controller can do this….Forget the hardware trying to do this it would cost a fortune to the manufacturer to do this…
I already use the WES hardware on every master I do, and sometimes the Bettermaker Limiter over the (better sounding) HUM LAAL simply because I don't need to recall manually if the client is not 100% satisfied. The only company I would really wish to implement total recall PLUS control over the plugin counterpart would be Elysia though, because the Alpha is still my go-to compressor day in day out and I haven't found a real competitor. Though I often find myself using the Weiss MKIII, since it is almost as good.
Your idea is obvious, but take into account that hardware and plugin must match very accurately! It makes little sense to turn the knobs controlling the plugin if you get a different sound, which happens to large extend with the Fusion (to give an example) or the Manley MP as well.
@MFASonic there would be zero difference to how it currently works as an emulation. It's literally acting as a controller. No different to me using a S4 to control a plugin version of the hardware. Now imagine a digitally recallable alpha. That you could use the hardware as a controller for the plugin if you were using it in the mix just by selecting the plugin. Even if the plugin was off by fair bit. You are still using the plugin in a much more fun and hands on way.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio Yes, I got your point. It would also be thrilling to see how much of the "hardware is better"-feeling that I experience most of the time is only a placebo :) I stay tuned and thanks for this unbiased, pro channel.
@MFASonic yeah 100% being hands on can trick the mix. I know if I use the plugin to control my hardware I instantly feel worse about the sound of the hardware. For instance when I use the mcdsp apb fairchild I don't get the same feel as using a fairchild. However in a blind test they are near identical and you can't tell them apart.
Forgive me if I’m not understanding but doesn’t a control surface essentially do this?
A control surface already does this but yes. But what a control surface doesn't do is map exactly as the hardware does or feel like using the hardware does. The difference here is that you are buying the hardware for the purpose of using the hardware. The added benefit here is that at no extra cost you are also able to use it as a controller for the plugin emulation. It adds value to the hardware.
Don't hate me for saying, but people have been asking for this for a long time. I was chatting to someone about exactly this at NAMM about 6 years ago, when programmable analog on a pro level was becoming a thing, like the Wes 500 units. There are companies and people aware of the desire, but it's not as simple as it seems. There are tradeoffs, limitations and added complexity to the analog design, and the software work makes people want to run and hide.
I was trying to push a company down this path, we started sketching up a product and then key collaborators and financiers ultimately balked at the complexity and cost, and made a synth instead, which was as complex and costly, strangely. Still, it is a good idea, you are on point.
@danielsanichiban I think maybe you misunderstood. This isn't complex and costly at all. It's incredibly simple and can be implemented it straight away if you already have a plugin emulation of the product. Let me explain and you can tell me if your idea is different.
Think of it like this. The Bettermaker bus is already a plugin on the market. It's also a piece of hardware on the market. Both stay exactly as they are. But now when I select a Bettermaker bus comp plugin in the daw the Bettermaker bus comp hardware becomes a controller for the plugin. That's all. It's just a case of allowing the hardware to control the plugin. This is incredibly simple and would only require a software and firmware update I'd imagine. The hardware already has the ability to control plugins. All that needs to happen is that when you select a Bettermaker bus comp plugin it tells the hardware to start controlling that plugin instead of the hardware. And then when you select the hardware plugin you start controlling the hardware again. There's no way this is the complex and costly idea you are thinking of. Explain your idea. I bet it's totally different and in fact, is costly and complex. Of every company I've spoken with about it it's the first anyone's heard of it.
@ not saying it was my idea, i was talking about having matching hardware and software devices, where you can automate /control the plugin and have your hardware follow that, or use your hardware controls and record those parameter changes in the plugin and DAW, with the added bonus of emulated (not as great) processing in the plugin when the outboard hardware isn’t connected. The plug-in basically serving as an interface between DAW control and hardware control
I’ll watch again and pay attention
@danielsanichiban that's just a controller for a plugin though what you are referring to. Isn't it? What analogue processing is this doing? I feel this is the key difference. This is a piece of hardware in its own right. Without the plugin emulation option I'm talking about you have a digitally recallable piece of hardware with analogue io as normal. All I'm proposing is that on top of that there's the option of it being a controller for the plugin emulation as well.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio not making controllers, no. Using plugin versions of programmable /automatable /recallable hardware, as a bridge between the hardware and DAW automation.. And then also putting an emulation of the hardware in the plugin so when you’re out on the road, you have an emulated version of your hardware to fallback on. Basically a way to integrate programmable analog into DAWs better, without the hurdles and shitty workflow of using the existing MIDI. I think we’re talking about the same thing?
@danielsanichiban pretty much the same concept but you are referring to replacing the hardware due to being on the road. I'm proposing for studio use we use it in addition to the hardware. We're just now at a stage in our lives where it can be implemented at a tiny cost. Take the bettermaker vspe for instance. There's a plugin emulation of this out. The hardware just needs to be told to control that instead of the hardware plugin recall software.
I think we need a universal access of only one company taking care of the software
and the hardware company let them control the hardware by using the software, also we need a separate hardware which can connect to the hardware and computer ?
software company have to make a separate hardware that let you choose and pick the connections let’s call that the INTERCONET - if you change your MAC and the connection change from thunderbolt to something else you still can connect to your hardwared via thunderbolt or DANTE or Catm5 etc…. I thought about it too when I see your MCdSP , I also send him a email regarding that . I won’t buy a MCDSP until I know I can still use it 20 yrs from today . Great hope my extra will help .
That’s is an opportunity to open a company and make serious money . That’s something no one is doing . You won’t have any competition.
@ramonfelizjr really interesting. I would hope mcdsp will be compatible in 20 years. The good thing about the mcdsp is that the thunderbolt usb c card can be removed and changed if it needs to be. So if for instance something was to change which I'm told it can't they will be able to perform an upgrade.
I'm fully itb. One of the things that's put me off hardware is I would only have 1, whereas I could put the plugin on every channel in the mix. This idea would sway me more towards analogue tho
@@ZaccariahMusic this is my thinking. It almost bridges the gap for people are 100% itb.
Wow that will be nice! It’s so funny that today I was thinking about my Alpha Compressor hoping that the company will come up with something like an adapter that can be added to the Alpha Compressor for digital recalls or pay for an upgrade to digital recalls. Though I use the Ngbus for some things but the Alpha is the everything you can think of (tracking’ mixing and mastering) . Paul I think it’s a brilliant idea. 💡 I’m with you on this.
@OfficialAlexZitto I can see an alpha coming within a few years. My production with Elysia is they'll do the channel x digital recall then move onto the x filter and 500 series. We will see an alpha by 2030 once they tested the water. But can you imagine a digital recall alpha on your mix bus and plugin on your buses being controlled by the hardware. It would be amazing.
I think if the hardware is better it is better to print trough the hardware. You mix with the plug-in emulation and then there is a system of auto printing which go to all the stems and print them automatically with the plug-in settings. Hope it is clear, english is not my main language.
@FortheSoulFtS in an ideal world this would be amazing. Only issue at present would need to be printed in real time. In the future you may be able to bounce through the hardware faster without loss of quality.
@AudioAnimalsStudio you are mixing with the plug-in version but you are printing the final mix through the hardware once it is done. If the plug-in is 95% there you add the analog flavor but you don't lose the balance. But honestly I don't want to buy hardware where the the plug-in is 95% there.
@@FortheSoulFtS yeah I hear that
Arturia did pretty much exactly that with the Minifreak. Admittedly, not outboard in the sense discussed here, but still kinda outboard. I would also very much welcome more of this, both for synths and other outboard.
@@mischief82 aren't they virtual analogue. I always thought of them like the access virus TI synth.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio It‘s digital sound generation with engines of all sorts and an analog filter.
@mischief82 does the minifreak use a plugin emulation though that totally bypasses the hardware and the hardware only functions as a controller?
@@AudioAnimalsStudio Pretty much. There‘s a VST which allows you to control the hardware, and you can use the hardware to control the VST, but the VST also functions completely independently from the hardware. The VST comes with the hardware but you can also buy the VST without the hardware. If you have both, you can decide if you want the audio from the VST or the hardware. I think it‘s pretty much your idea, just for a synth.
Still, the Minifreak is mostly digital, only the filter is analog. It would be much more exciting to see this for the Polybrute, which is fully analog but digitally controlled. It has a VST that controls the hardware, but the VST has no emulation. In that sense, it‘s very much like the Wes Audio gear. It‘s already quite useful, but…
Interesting idea, but I don't think there's that many gear that are so versatile that you'd use their plugin emulations in that many instances. For example I do use Fusion hardware but I never use their plugins (only violet EQ is somewhat useable but nothing else) and don't even want to use plugins in anywhere in my mix anyways.
So it wouldn't be for you. But for someone who is all in the box and their first piece of analogue gear is a Fusion to put on their mix bus. To now have a Fusion plugin with hardware control as well as an analogue unit over the mix bus. That would be highly appealing.
Crazy to think that midi has been doing this controlling "analog circuits" on synthesizers forever
@@hiddenmaterial I had a Dave Smith mopho a good 15 plus years ago that had midi control and recall. The issue with it was stability. Stability is really good now.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio for sure, as a modern example every Elektron device post 2012 release has Overbridge VST support and full usb streaming to control all parameters remotely with full recall and automation. Its very stable as well and there is far more data throughput than anything a piece of outboard requires. On top of that they work as audio interfaces and A/D D/A converters.
Wonderful. I had the Wes Audio ngBus comp and was used to the plugin for recall. Sadly I sold it. But your idea is fantastic. I bought recently a Elysia XFilter. I was wondering about buying the MuseEQ. But the plugin is so good that I stick to the plugin. If the release a MuseEQ with recall and the possibility to drive the plugin I’m in !
@skiiizo I know imagine that. A museq piece of hardware you could use as a plugin controller. The plugin emulation of the museq is brilliant. Would be perfect to do this idea with. I really hope elysia consider this option.
Most likely by 2030 I just hope that all companies can agree on 1 standard future proof communication protocol like RTP midi. I would love to see more use of the ethernet port in all recallable gear that way you can have it in another room and run it along with something like Dante all in one cable for something like preamps or have something like a split room setup where you can use different pieces of hardware from different studio rooms.
@thegsalmon yes I think all digitally recallable hardware should have ethernet. This covers you just in case. Doesn't rely on drivers. Just works. If mac decide to change their ports, it doesn't matter. There are EU laws now that prevent people like Apple changing their ports so products are no longer compatible.
@AudioAnimalsStudio It would be brilliant! I think it can also be used as local communication port the only thing is figuring out how to physically adapt it to a serial bus port like usb c without causing confusion amongst other adapter but that it can do it it cann
Well it’s mostly been thought of already and it’s coming. Blackbox HG-Q hardware will be digitally controlled but not just with a seperate plugin. But with the PA release. However not sure if it will be able to control the plugin. But u will be able to process with plugin if hardware isn’t there automatically in place. So they are 95% they way there.
@hiltonstroud1399 Yes, the blackbox is perfect for this idea. I've already mentioned it to them and hopefully they will be the first to implement it.
The thing is, for this idea you also need dedicated D/A A/D for every hardware unit. This also means no direct hardware chaining without conversion. Unless you build the converters into the actual hardware unit as a switchable, parallel option. But even then this would make the hardware units a lot more complicated. As well as driver handling and latency. Even though it's a nice thought, but imho this will never happen, sorry.
@JBrm no you're thinking of something totally different. The hardware would be connected as normal. No change there. The only change is in the box. Instead of only controlling the plugin that controls the hardware. You are also able to control a plugin with the hardware. Your thinking of making it way too complicated with internal conversion and using the USB connection to transfer audio. This will never work. We need analogue IO as normal and a choice of converters we want to use. As we normally do.
@AudioAnimalsStudio ah, you mean using the hardware as a controller only. Now I'm with you - and that'll work :)
@JBrm yes exactly that. So it's essentially a plugin controller as well as a hardware unit. Brings something extra to the hardware.
This would be good over a network connection controling all hardware
From what I've heard, the new plugin black box HG-Q
from plugin alliance is a real treat, and if there's a hardware addition to the plugin, it would be exactly what you're looking for!🤗😉
@@mosermichael4404 I'm hoping they use this idea as its perfect for that product.
SSL Fusion plugins (drive and stereo image v1) are really close about -10% to hardware !
and this is usual , because the sound in the hardware passing through a courant while the emulation is just your digital sound engine ..
100% with you Paul!
I believe blackbox eq will operate like that. ironically the blackbox eq is a similar concept to the Michelangelo xl ...kinda weird. hope you didn't tell them the ideas lol
@Javarrockamore I have spoken with them about this idea as I want them to use it and build the best product possible for everyone. Hopefully, it'll be implemented into the hardware. Their product would be perfect for it.
I had a similar idea years ago for making a LA 2 and 1176 faceplate that could transmit and receive midi dater to control my waves comps just didn’t know how to do it.
@simonleesax4788 there was a company in Brazil i think building these with faceplates that looked identical to the hardware. This idea was possible. Had zero analogue processing though. Was just for control. I loved this idea when it came out.
They better give you credit when they do it!!!
@mrmorpheus9707 let's hope so. We shall see. I just want someone to do. I don't care who.
TC Electronics got half of that done with their Icon series but yeah if the Big players implement the digital recall revolution then that will be great!
2:40 or if it could replace it if it’s not I. The chain for whatever reason
@blessed_by_welfare5922 yeah you can even use it without hardware at all and have a very expensive digital controller.
@ lol 😂 it will be pretty though
Spectrasonics came up with this, like 3-4 years ago.
That's a controller. There's nothing new there. We're talking about analogue processing. You've missed the point.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio No,, It goes both ways, there is HW integration , for all kind of models, you want a controller for plugins that is also a HW. with recall. I mean your idea would be a controller for all the instances in the mix and analog for one. to integrate this would probably make all the switches etc in the hardware quite expensive. as you don't want to change the settings of the hardware...Anyway, sounds ridiculous with the super good controller intergrations these days, I think Wes audio went the right way with the Tube Eq. Could probably be used as a controller, I just don't see the point the make hardware more expensive with this added layer in all the controls .
@womelovski it's no way more expensive. It already does exactly what I'm talking about. So there would be no additional cost. What spectrosonics hardware are you referring to. They don't mention any 100% analogue units in their catalogue that can do this. You sure it's not virtual analogue you are mistakening it for? Acess virus did this 15 odd years ago with the TI range with virtual analogue and synths. It seems to me there's some confusion here as to what I'm referring to.
Class compliant audio over usb, render plug in track via analog bus.
@PedalPaddlePush this is another one I've spoken in length with companies about, but it just seems too painful to do. You could essentially apply the settings using a plugin then select to re-render through the hardware. Would need to be real-time which just makes me think it's pointless. The idea is there and this could be something someone can develop further.
I think i am agree with you , is time to wait for new gears with recall , i think is not time to buy gears , because New things is about to come , that can be totally recall gears that can stay for long term in hour Studio , Best regards from Poland
@carlos-pratspratsonthebeat1145 Poland are leading the charge with digital recall. Some of the best companies in pro audio are Polish. Really impressed with Poland at the moment.
I'm in the same boat as you. I'm holding back buying gear without recall because 2025 is going to be so good for recallable gear.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio Yeah is From here very close to me Wes Audio COmpany Is amazing , but we want to see also Universal audio , ssl , etc etc More Compnies doing amazing Gear Recall , Thats why i prefer to wait instead to spend in some gear now.Thanks for your answer and opinion
@carlos-pratspratsonthebeat1145 I think in 2025 we will see a lot of companies going down this route. I know a few who are really going to surprise you.
Genius 🔥
I would say you have to pick up some decend engineers and develop your own product.
You said it yourself, your talking about a plugin controller dedicated to 1 plugin. It already exist. Combining it with hardware controler isnt an unique idear. I dont think it would be financial intering for manufacturers because then box users are forced to buy expensive hardware to control a plugin. And manufacturers will then be forced to also produce dedicated controllers for the box users. Companies will always choose the cheapest way and the biggest Market. That means that a cheap dedicated controller will win from an expensive hardware controler with midi out. But just adding midi out via usb to hardware is also a easy win.
No you've missed the point. This is an added feature for us hardware owners that easily implanted. What idiot is going to buy a dedicated controller for one plugin. Come on man you'd just buy a daw controller. Anyone with an understanding of digital recall and analogue hardware knows this is an additional feature to an existing product. You're looking at it all wrong.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of TC Electronic Icon series owners suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
@@gtk_NO at the price point we’re talking about you’d be mental to pay £2k plus to control just one plugin. Any intelligent person would buy a controller and control all plugins. Tc icon series is like £100. That’s not stupid. If you were paying £2k plus for each Tc icon unit I’d call you stupid to your face.
Good video…
My next hardware will be MCDSP APB16 equal to 8 hardware.
@hakangurdol you'll love it. I have 6 units and it's one of the best investments I ever made. The gift that keeps on giving as they build new modules for it every few months. And they are free.
But where's the upside for any hardware company to do this?
First they'd have to engage a separate software company OR create a software division - in either case, costing a significant amount of money -- only for the sake of, +best case scenario+, supplanting an existing product that I can sell you multiple times (hardware) with a piece of hardware I can really only sell you once along with a speculative new product (software) that has a much lower profit margin and is also vulnerable to pirating. (I can count on one hand the major audio software releases that were NOT cracked w/in a month.)
Ultimately, you'd just be turning hardware companies into software companies. Suggesting that Mercedes should get into the hamburger business, if you will.
(What happens to these companies' manufacturing plants? The workers and designers therein? etc.)
I don't see what the value proposition would be to any company that is already profitable.
MAYBE, I'm missing something.. but, I don't think I am.
Firstly this would only apply to companies who plan on releasing both software and hardware with digital recall. Which is why I used the example of a company like SSL who already have the plugin built and emulated. They could move into digital recall which I feel they will be doing in the future. The benefit for them being that we're all going to buy the hardware regardless of if this idea is implemented. But if it is added, it's a great additional feature. People who are buying it for the use in analogue won't stop at one. Why do people still buy hardware when there's plenty of control surfaces already available. I get your point but if its already a part of what you do it's not costly. And if a plugin emulation isn't something you do, it's something that will bring in additional revenue through the sale of the standalone plugin without hardware connectivity. It's just a nice additional feature that could be added to hardware that has digital recall as well as a plugin emulation.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio That makes a bit more sense and I understand better.
I just fundamentally think your idea would cut into analog(ue) sales. Like...if they DIDN'T cut into analog(ue) sales, then that would be an indicator that the new controller/product failed (in its design or possibly pricing).
You're inclined to think it WON'T cut into sales and, if true, then sure...an additional income stream always makes sense.
@nilespeshay1734 I mean yes it could cut into analogue sales but ultimately the reason we are buying analogue hardware is because of its superior sound. So as long as the hardware is always superior. It wouldn't affect sales. Releasing a plugin emulation actually increases sales of hardware interestingly. I think arguably adding a feature like this bridges the gap for uses moving from plugins to analogue.
100% agree!👍
All roads lead to the Fusion.
I would predict 2025 we will see it. It just makes sense
Good idea. Best/Mathias
Im sure thats already a Thing..... Even if recent.... As for Synths,..... Way more than 1 1/2 years ago....
I don't think you'll find this in analogue synths. Digital or virtual analogue synths maybe but I'm yet to see anything 100% analogue do this. What analogue synths (not VA) have digital recall and a seperate plugin emulation for additional processing independent of the hardware? I don't know of any
@@AudioAnimalsStudio If analog is just that, theres still a moment it requires to be implemented in the digital domain....
DSP.. CPU.. No matter... Like REAL analog synths with mods...... Its still takes midi or some to talk a language.. However.. I guess Rolands DCB came close... Analoig voltage signals...... Sure.. Im just bit picking. Just saying theres always a cost ...
To Add.. I own an OG Microwave 1.. The New VI also allows me to swap between them, with all parameters,,,, ect,,, And yeah, the plugs damn close... Call it your 95%.... But as I say, The language between the hardware and software is nothing new... Its a matter of costs and how you implement....
And yeh... Not saying we all dont want those features.. It still comes down to costs... Its not a new idea....
@Rhythmattica there will be zero cost to units like the bettermaker vspe that already have digital recall and plugin emulations. You're thinking more in terms building a product from the ground up. I'm referring to adding an additional feature that hasn't been thought of or done before in high end signal processing.
Wess Audio and Bettermaker they already have something similar
@@budaalamalamusic no they don't. You realise I'm surrounded by Wes audio and Bettermaker in this video. They have digital recall. The plugins are just for recall. Zero analogue emulations in recall plugin.
@ oh ok thank you for that information I misunderstood
Love the idea!
100%.
😳✌🏼👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Wow!
literally everyone has thought of that! it wont work. cause you would still have to bounce plugins mostly, and it would be easier just to make a control surface
@bachelorgamer8001 No, you've totally missed the point. Your counter argument is exactly what I said. You're literally saying what I said as how it should be done. Think of it like this it's a controller for plugins. But it's also a digitally recallable piece of hardware. The plugins do not record through the hardware. That's a stupid idea. As it'll need to be done in real-time and it'll print the audio. The plugin is active always it's just being controlled by the hardware. No analogue processing. Understand it now?
@@AudioAnimalsStudioI guess what he is saying, is that i you have this for the SSL, you will want to have it for the rest of the plugins and you end up at the control surface? I for instance would be happy to have a Pultec as you described it. It’s a great idea because you use less tools in a better way. How‘bout a Q5 like this?
@patrickriggenbach3127 but the key difference being you are buying the hardware because you want to use the hardware. The primary function is the hardware being it's own product with the option of controlling the plugin if you wish to. Yes you could use a control surface to do exactly the same thing. However this idea expands on the functionality already in the hardware you've bought and add an extra feature it can possibly do. If you bought the hardware purely as a controller with no intention of using it as an analogue processor you might as well have bought a control surface.
@ I see
Doesn't Tegeler do products like that?
@RoomAtTheTopStudio they have hardware with digital recall but not a plugin that processes alongside it that is independent from the hardware it is controlling. At least I'm not aware of this if they do.
This is already being done by McDSP. Look it up.
I have 6 mcdsp ABP units in this room. McDSP isn't a plugin emulation. Look it up. McDSP is analogue with digital control using a plugin. The key factor we are talking about here is hardware control. It's the one thing McDSP doesn't have.
@ ah I see. But you don’t really need hardware control if you can use the plugin.
But I can see how turning a knob could be quicker than mouse.
Yes you don't need it, you can use a mouse but you will find you work different when you are hands on. Not only faster and more efficient. But also you feel the music more.
LIQUID MIX
The liquid mix was very cool. However it was DSP and wasn't analogue. It effectively wasn't a plugin. It was like a controllable UAD satellite. This is hardware with that double as a controller for the plugin emulation. The liquid mix was hardware control for DSP without any plugin emulation using the computers CPU so you were limited to I think it was 16 instances on the DSP.
SSL did this with their UC1. This is not a new idea.
@TwstedTV SSL did not do this with the uc1, the uc1 is a controller for plugins. There is zero analogue processing involved. You've totally missed the point.
Lol David talked about it 10 years ago
David who? let's see a link to David talking about it. And let's see if it's remotely similar.
@ Gnozzi
@SydneyValette yeah let's see this link to him talking about this. Want to see if its remotely similar and you aren't confusing this idea for a simple controller.
@@AudioAnimalsStudiono he was talking about Wes Audio etc already around 2015 , when first units came out. Anyway enjoying your channel too!
@SydneyValette wes audio is totally different. The plugin is for control only. This is not a plugin emulation. I can see where you got confused now. So that plugin we all use with wes audio gear does no digital processing at all in the box. It is purely just to control the hardware and act as a way of instantly recalling a the settings. This is nothing new and is not what we're talking about here.
You did a whole video of you just talking 🙄
Welcome to the channel. We do a lot of talking here. But please explain to me how you propose somebody show how something works that doesn't exist 🙄