DigitalAudioSoft - EQ Suite

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 7:17 am

What do you think about it....?

I`ve done a small comparison between DAS N1084 and the URS Neve 1084 http://www.ursplugins.com/ursN.html

and I have to say that I like the DAS version more.
It sounds more like analog gear and more heavy.
But I have never heard the original outboard gear.

So is the Scope system becoming also a replacement of an U-Audio card.

Now I have the two Scope cards for only about 4 days and I am totally convinced about my investment....

The synths are the best I have heard, and the FX too....
The standard Creamware FX sounds like the best VSTfx and the extras(like SPL, DAS, ....) are just one class better I think...

The only fx I miss in my Scope environment is the CSR from IK-M. (I won`t buy that again, because I have CSR)

And there are tools you cannot replace with anything in VST world.

For example there is nothing that sounds like a SPL attacker in the VST world. And this is heavenly good plug-in.

These 2 cards are sooo sweet. I can`t believe it....

Hopefully Creamware gets much money with their ASBs and are able to bring out new synths and fx-plug-ins...

I love the whole environment and the classic way of routing your gear.

[ This Message was edited by: hifiboom on 2006-08-11 08:22 ]

ernest@303.nu · Post by **ernest@303.nu** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 7:59 am

welcome to the world of Scope-addicts

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 8:48 am

jeah !!!

there is only one cause for selling you scope board: to get a bigger one with even more DSP. (I think I need 3x Scope Pro)

katano · Post by **katano** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 9:56 am

On 2006-08-11 09:48, hifiboom wrote:
jeah !!!

there is only one cause for selling you scope board: to get a bigger one with even more DSP. (I think I need 3x Scope Pro)

these are exactly my words!!! unfortunately, i only have two pci slots in my cheapo dell

now you could suggest which cards sit in these slots...

i began with one LunaII (scope home now) and finally ended up with 2 powerpulsar2, 15dsp each.

this is what i call music, damn!!

[ This Message was edited by: katano on 2006-08-11 10:56 ]

Eric Dahlberg · Post by **Eric Dahlberg** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 9:59 am

I'll try to compare the DAS 1084 with the UAD-1 1073 over the weekend. Are any of you using these plug-ins in XTC mode?

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:00 am

Yes I also do only have 2 pci slots on my nForce4 board...

so I cannot pull a further Scope board inside.

But if you consider the price of the cards, its not much more money to spend for a new board with more pci slots...

hahah

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:05 am

On 2006-08-11 10:59, Eric Dahlberg wrote:
I'll try to compare the DAS 1084 with the UAD-1 1073 over the weekend. Are any of you using these plug-ins in XTC mode?

never touched the XTC mode since now...

But the EQs are really good I think...

Of course the Creamware EQs are also very nice, but I had the feeling that the DAS EQs can achieve more clarity with the higher frequencies and smoother at bass.
And if you boost mid-range the sound gets that "heavy" quality. Really nice...
It has some analog character.
I did try it on classical orchestra and you can really boost the indivual instruments without affecting the other too much.

It has its own character....
Generally it sounds more like the URS EQ than the Creamware standard. But from my tests I like it more than the VST URS

Be careful if you compare, the knobs don`t seem to show the exact setting...

You never know, which level they are...

Maximum should be 18dB, I think.

[ This Message was edited by: hifiboom on 2006-08-11 11:12 ]

[ This Message was edited by: hifiboom on 2006-08-11 11:13 ]

digitalaudiosoft · Post by **digitalaudiosoft** » Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:58 am

hi,

thanks to compare das to urs !

[ This Message was edited by: digitalaudiosoft on 2006-08-12 11:14 ]

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Sat Aug 12, 2006 11:14 am

at least there is some problem with the neve plug.

The clipping light is not working correctly at all.

Sometimes it clips and light is of....

(And its right the reverb RMX160 has some crackles instead of the reverb sometimes...)

[ This Message was edited by: hifiboom on 2006-08-12 13:35 ]

bassdude · Post by **bassdude** » Sun Aug 13, 2006 4:14 pm

On 2006-08-11 10:59, Eric Dahlberg wrote:
I'll try to compare the DAS 1084 with the UAD-1 1073 over the weekend. Are any of you using these plug-ins in XTC mode?

Thanks, I would be very interested in what you have to say.

[ This Message was edited by: bassdude on 2006-08-13 17:15 ]

bill3107 · Post by **bill3107** » Wed Aug 16, 2006 11:34 pm

As sl9000 and Poltec sound different, it is obvious that both plugins are not scope effects with new gui !!!!! I definitly agree these are good EQs. SSL technics and dynamic EQs on scope is perfect for those - like me - who mix under scope...

I know that the vintage bundle is a success as many have already purchased it (i have a good spy

). The strength of the SL9000 is that it runs the algo like the ssl (!), it is very intersting.

For those looking for a very sharp sound under 60 hz, polteq or n1084 are amazing !!! Of course, you should have very good monitoring to feel the difference (with scope EQs) on high frequencies for those 2 plugins.

Real cool plugins...

Jo

voidar · Post by **voidar** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 12:08 am

As they are being sold in the CWA-shop - and as they denied them selling their mastering-processor due to the BX-resemblance - I am pretty sure they are not regular Creamware EQ's with a new interface.
It is after all possible to construct new devices by using low-lever atoms. There is no reason to reinvent the wheel.

Eric Dahlberg:

Have you been able to compare yet?

steffensen · Post by **steffensen** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 1:26 am

Yes, would be interesting to see what u've come up with Dahlberg.

MCCY · Post by **MCCY** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:59 am

The context of this discussion has been changed several times, so I drop this discussion.

voidar · Post by **voidar** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 4:37 am

I have not bought them yet, but I am considering, and asap as I would like the free SL9000 Mastering Comp too.

Did you try this you say? What where the results?

digitalaudiosoft · Post by **digitalaudiosoft** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:28 am

MCCYRANO wrote:Did really nobody else (than me) do the test to kill poltec with a normal phaseinverted CW EQ? Why discussing and argumenting, when something can be proved.

Martin

that's true....here is the official test

http://www.planetz.com/phpBB2/viewtopic ... 02&start=0

digitalaudiosoft · Post by **digitalaudiosoft** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:30 am

On 2006-09-23 01:08, voidar wrote:
As they are being sold in the CWA-shop - and as they denied them selling their mastering-processor due to the BX-resemblance - I am pretty sure they are not regular Creamware EQ's with a new interface.
It is after all possible to construct new devices by using low-lever atoms. There is no reason to reinvent the wheel.

Eric Dahlberg:

Have you been able to compare yet?

hi voidar,

we have develloped a new m/s eq and we will sell it soon.

eric

digitalaudiosoft · Post by **digitalaudiosoft** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:32 am

On 2006-08-17 00:34, bill3107 wrote:
As sl9000 and Poltec sound different, it is obvious that both plugins are not scope effects with new gui !!!!! I definitly agree these are good EQs. SSL technics and dynamic EQs on scope is perfect for those - like me - who mix under scope...

I know that the vintage bundle is a success as many have already purchased it (i have a good spy ). The strength of the SL9000 is that it runs the algo like the ssl (!), it is very intersting.

For those looking for a very sharp sound under 60 hz, polteq or n1084 are amazing !!! Of course, you should have very good monitoring to feel the difference (with scope EQs) on high frequencies for those 2 plugins.

Real cool plugins...

Jo

On 2006-09-23 04:59, MCCYRANO wrote:
Did really nobody else (than me) do the test to kill poltec with a normal phaseinverted CW EQ? Why discussing and argumenting, when something can be proved.

Martin

[ This Message was edited by: MCCYRANO on 2006-09-23 05:00 ]

hi bill,

of course ,you are right

but it seems that there is a newbie in sound and with sdk here

his name is martin or mccyrano...

@ martin,

don't be so ridiculous with your phase test...if you are not able to hear the difference on polteq or sl9000 ,go the see a doctor or let people hear by themselves.

why are you so jalous when other devellopers do better plugs than yours ?

eric

[ This Message was edited by: digitalaudiosoft on 2006-09-23 09:07 ]

MCCY · Post by **MCCY** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:32 am

??? The context of this discussion has been changed several times, so I drop this dischssion. What I said only make sense in its old context.

digitalaudiosoft · Post by **digitalaudiosoft** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:33 am

martin,

i have never seen a man like you !

go playing with your sdk...

bye

eric

[ This Message was edited by: digitalaudiosoft on 2006-09-23 06:39 ]