The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Universal Audio Sony Oxford EQ
Old 11th August 2012
  #241
Lives for gear
 
mirrorboy's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYINGJAY ➑️
And its all true,so if defending UA makes you feel better fine.they received more than $3500.00 from me(that's more than any other software company,native instruments being close if not more.

I'm a uad fan boy!

But I'm already have native,you and UA WILL make me go all native!

As far as new customers as you stated,the platform is very expensive to get into these day.

UA can lose more old,than gain new.keep us happy first.

Do people discard something that has been proven to work?

Going on 3rd quarter!I'm running cubase 64 bit....screw that port!

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz App
You cut and snipped my quote to the point where it makes no sense. What an odd thing to do.

Didn't someone else call you out on that a while back?

Anyways, it's no competition for your post, my friend. Now that TRULY makes no sense in any language on any planet.

In all seriousness, I haven't a clue what you're talking about or what point you're trying to make.

I also haven't a clue whether you're attacking or defending UA. Simply put, what the hell are you taking about?!?

It never looks good to belittle or attack one's opinion when you can't form even the most basic of sentences.

In reality, it comes off as foolish, inexperienced and immature.

Even if English is your second language, I'd still consider this completely alien to the language.

Or any language for that matter.

--

Would love some clarification.


Thx.

Scott
Old 11th August 2012 | Show parent
  #242
Lives for gear
 
scruffydog's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
It's official.....some if not all UAD users have gone mad...this ghostly affliction will be know in years to come by the classical latin name of 'reaccuring thirtytwobit itus'....

symptoms range from a simple self delusional rant about the plugins working perfectly in 64 bit..to the more severe state of making no sense on any subject to do with audio recording at all.

alas..for some...the end did not come soon enough and a long and painful bounce down in a 32 bit environment was the only release...
Old 11th August 2012
  #243
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by mirrorboy ➑️
You cut and snipped my quote to the point where it makes no sense. What an odd thing to do.

Didn't someone else call you out on that a while back?

Anyways, it's no competition for your post, my friend. Now that TRULY makes no sense in any language on any planet.

In all seriousness, I haven't a clue what you're talking about or what point you're trying to make.

I also haven't a clue whether you're attacking or defending UA. Simply put, what the hell are you taking about?!?

It never looks good to belittle or attack one's opinion when you can't form even the most basic of sentences.

In reality, it comes off as foolish, inexperienced and immature.

Even if English is your second language, I'd still consider this completely alien to the language.

Or any language for that matter.

--

Would love some clarification.


Thx.

Scott
Your complaining about people complaints,period.

I didn't change what u wrote,I simple preserved the complaints you chose to mention 'in your post',which were perfectly valid,if a end user feel that way.

And yes someone has called me out on miss quoting them!

But it actually was not a miss quote,I actually stated that a GUI and mixing technique/workflow can change the out come of a mix!

Then he(the guy I quoted) admits to using a hardware desk protools controller.so I quoted him saying just that.

So the mods gave me a strike and band because they must feel,mouse strolling is just as good,as using a $10k protools controller with all kind of faders and short cuts?

That's doesn't change how I feel,nor does it change anything by pointing out what we already expressed or disliked.

Maybe that's why I was invited back!because it was not a miss quote!but thanks for remembering such a minute 6 month old detail about me hehe.I'm blushing!

I didn't miss quote you either...

We always got along bro,but I didn't miss quote you.

Sorry if you don't understand.

I actually text a lot will driving or doing other things.but you understand every word.

But maybe this will help,I'm.unhappy with the update.

I'm waiting for 64 bit.your not helping UA,by correct people,or by defending them.you've done it twice in this thread(and yes you didn't address me the 1st time).

Sorry we don't feel the same way about this release,and that's a good thing I hope?I respect how you feel,try to respect my opinions.

I hope they're reading so things can sway in the right direction.

Peace Scott.

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz App
Old 12th August 2012
  #244
Lives for gear
 
mirrorboy's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by scruffydog ➑️
It's official.....some if not all UAD users have gone mad...this ghostly affliction will be know in years to come by the classical latin name of 'reaccuring thirtytwobit itus'....

symptoms range from a simple self delusional rant about the plugins working perfectly in 64 bit..to the more severe state of making no sense on any subject to do with audio recording at all.

alas..for some...the end did not come soon enough and a long and painful bounce down in a 32 bit environment was the only release...
Scruffy this made my day!!!


Lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Scott
Old 12th August 2012
  #245
Lives for gear
 
mirrorboy's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYINGJAY ➑️
Your complaining about people complaints,period.

I didn't change what u wrote,I simple preserved the complaints you chose to mention 'in your post',which were perfectly valid,if a end user feel that way.

And yes someone has called me out on miss quoting them!

But it actually was not a miss quote,I actually stated that a GUI and mixing technique/workflow can change the out come of a mix!

Then he(the guy I quoted) admits to using a hardware desk protools controller.so I quoted him saying just that.

So the mods gave me a strike and band because they must feel,mouse strolling is just as good,as using a $10k protools controller with all kind of faders and short cuts?

That's doesn't change how I feel,nor does it change anything by pointing out what we already expressed or disliked.

Maybe that's why I was invited back!because it was not a miss quote!but thanks for remembering such a minute 6 month old detail about me hehe.I'm blushing!

I didn't miss quote you either...

We always got along bro,but I didn't miss quote you.

Sorry if you don't understand.

I actually text a lot will driving or doing other things.but you understand every word.

But maybe this will help,I'm.unhappy with the update.

I'm waiting for 64 bit.your not helping UA,by correct people,or by defending them.you've done it twice in this thread(and yes you didn't address me the 1st time).

Sorry we don't feel the same way about this release,and that's a good thing I hope?I respect how you feel,try to respect my opinions.

I hope they're reading so things can sway in the right direction.

Peace Scott.

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz App
Hey Jay-

No worries.

I'll get back to you on this over the weekend or early next week.

All is good, my friend.

Enjoy the weekend!

Scott
Old 12th August 2012 | Show parent
  #246
Lives for gear
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by polybonk ➑️
This Eq does not null with the Cambridge.

Also it does not null with the native version. Particularly with the low shelf cuts.

That said I prefer the native every time in blind a/b so far.
I got it to null with digital performer's bundled MW EQ pretty easily...
Old 12th August 2012 | Show parent
  #247
Lives for gear
 
Herb's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldTimey1 ➑️
I got it to null with digital performer's bundled MW EQ pretty easily...
Is that nulling 100%?

I don't have digital performer so I can't try.
Old 12th August 2012
  #248
Lives for gear
 
4damind's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I own the native version since a long time but don't use it this days. As stated from others we have better EQs today like DMGAudio stuff.
For Sonnox it's in my opinion only another platform where they can try to make some sales. UAD users spending a lot of money for plug-ins, many of them owning all available plug-ins. I think they playing a bit with this idea to be on a high profitable platform.
Old 12th August 2012 | Show parent
  #249
Lives for gear
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Herb ➑️
Is that nulling 100%?

I don't have digital performer so I can't try.
Well i don't know if it's 100% but I put one on one track, duplicated, it flipped phase, set the ox eq at something, then put MW on on the other one and messed with a few bands until I heard nothing. not a rigorous test, I'll check again tomorrow if i get the urge
Old 12th August 2012
  #250
Lives for gear
 
polybonk's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
If its only phase cancelling to -70 -80 that is not enough. I still pick the differences in blind tests.
The Brainworks Eq is a classic example of this. The naive one sounds blurry on the micro transients compared to the UAD version. I pick UAD every time as better even when they are phase cancelling to this amount.
Old 12th August 2012 | Show parent
  #251
Lives for gear
 
Herb's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by polybonk ➑️
If its only phase cancelling to -70 -80 that is not enough. I still pick the differences in blind tests.
The Brainworks Eq is a classic example of this. The naive one sounds blurry on the micro transients compared to the UAD version. I pick UAD every time as better even when they are phase cancelling to this amount.
The point is if it doesn't cancel to 100% it's not a null.

Kind of defeats the object of the test.

Don't agree with the rest of your post though as it seems to suggest that DSP processing is somehow superior to native.
Old 12th August 2012 | Show parent
  #252
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by polybonk ➑️
The naive sounds blurry on the micro transients compared to the UAD version.
Well, maybe that's because this version is too innocent. That said you really must have some golden ears heh.
Old 13th August 2012
  #253
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
I love when people find the differences between UAD and Native only they can hear. I am gonna make me some popcorn and read through all this nonsense again, just for laughs.
Old 13th August 2012 | Show parent
  #254
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxMulderFBI ➑️
I love when people find the differences between UAD and Native only they can hear. I am gonna make me some popcorn and read through all this nonsense again, just for laughs.
Gimme some please !
Old 13th August 2012 | Show parent
  #255
Lives for gear
 
polybonk's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by K-Slash ➑️
Well, maybe that's because this version is too innocent. That said you really must have some golden ears heh.
Nice catch on my Freudian slip.

Not golden ears. Its really easy to pick the difference. I am using a setup that is hand made and I had custom modified using the drivers out of the Focal grand utopia. Very big and very revealing.

And like I said. I pick the UAD every time in a blind test.
Old 13th August 2012
  #256
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Micro transients!

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz App
Old 13th August 2012 | Show parent
  #257
Lives for gear
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Micro-transients!

That's some new lingo right there.

can't wait for the micro transients war to begin!

what side are you on? Imma take the fewer micro transients=better side. I want my transients all macro.
Old 13th August 2012
  #258
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by polybonk ➑️
If its only phase cancelling to -70 -80 that is not enough. I still pick the differences in blind tests.
The Brainworks Eq is a classic example of this. The naive one sounds blurry on the micro transients compared to the UAD version. I pick UAD every time as better even when they are phase cancelling to this amount.
^^^he's the author,not me!^^^^

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz App
Old 13th August 2012 | Show parent
  #259
Lives for gear
 
mike1k's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYINGJAY ➑️
I actually text a lot will driving
Old 13th August 2012
  #260
Lives for gear
 
polybonk's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Well all the "tiny little transient details are better" doesn't sound as good.

Don't even get me started on limiters that preserve the micro dynamics.

Regardless the sonox wont null with Cambridge etc.

The difference is bigger than high end converter shootouts with people that swear that one is horrid vile filth not fit for my dead grandmothers hearing aids and the other is like a heaven of silken perfection has descended upon us. I just want to point out the devils view in light of the relentless deluge of pointless complaints lamenting yet more bothersome freedom to choose.
Old 13th August 2012
  #261
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by polybonk ➑️
Well all the "tiny little transient details are better" doesn't sound as good.

Don't even get me started on limiters that preserve the micro dynamics.

Regardless the sonox wont null with Cambridge etc.

The difference is bigger than high end converter shootouts with people that swear that one is horrid vile filth not fit for my dead grandmothers hearing aids and the other is like a heaven of silken perfection has descended upon us. I just want to point out the devils view in light of the relentless deluge of pointless complaints lamenting yet more bothersome freedom to choose.
It nulled everytime,what are you talking about?

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz App
Old 13th August 2012 | Show parent
  #262
Deleted e1b9f94
Guest
I think with this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by polybonk ➑️

Regardless the sonox wont null with Cambridge etc.

The difference is bigger than high end converter shootouts with people that swear that one is horrid vile filth not fit for my dead grandmothers hearing aids and the other is like a heaven of silken perfection has descended upon us. I just want to point out the devils view in light of the relentless deluge of pointless complaints lamenting yet more bothersome freedom to choose.
and this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by polybonk ➑️
Nice catch on my Freudian slip.

Not golden ears. Its really easy to pick the difference. I am using a setup that is hand made and I had custom modified using the drivers out of the Focal grand utopia. Very big and very revealing.

And like I said. I pick the UAD every time in a blind test.
You pretty much disrespected yourself and your super human hearing ability because Cambridge nulled it. I can't believe that in 2012 there are still people which are so sure of what they hear even after someone do scientific test which even the most partizan can not argue about.

I would like to know how the heck you can pick cambridge vs sonnox in a blind test since people posted result which nulled one with another giving you a fact(not opinion - scientific fact) that they are pretty much same thing.

Well i guess you can claim whatever you like since we are on forum place but i bet if you come to my studio and put all your studio gear at bet i am pretty much sure you wouldn't be able to pick up win on this one. But of course to each his own..
Old 13th August 2012 | Show parent
  #263
Lives for gear
 
zeljkom's Avatar
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
Just tested it. Cambridge and Oxford pretty much cancelled out to about -91 RMS so that's so close for me that I really don't need or want this one.
Old 13th August 2012
  #264
Lives for gear
 
mirrorboy's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
For some reason, anytime a thread turns into a 'Null Battle' (esp w EQ plugs), I peace out. Haha

The "sound" of this digital EQ was not something I was particularly interested in.

To me, the Oxford's charm has always been about its eq curves, filters, super small Q's to transparently remove, for example, snare ringing, etc, etc.

I've always been of the opinion that it's a great digital EQ that is very intuitive and one that can actually really improve work flow and allow you to some really, really detailed surgery, when needed. I mean this thing REALLY lets you shape frequencies to an insanely in depth and hyper-detailed degree.That's the just of it, anyway.

And that's why it's so commonly used at the highest of pro levels and has been for what, a decade or something.

--

Anyways, as far as digital EQ's go...I guess this is just not the type of plug that I turn to for mojo.

That's just me, though.

Peace out~

Scott

P.S. Jay, my friend, I still do plan to get back to you on your latest post and will later this week when I have time. Super slammed at the moment.
Old 14th August 2012
  #265
Lives for gear
 
polybonk's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
In my particularly heretical philosophical approach to all this, the point of testing an Eq (like the sonox vs Cambridge) for me is, not to see if I can find a way make it null. But if under real world working conditions of say a few boosts and cuts there are significant audible differences.

Now call me stupid to base approaching things like null testing and shootouts from such a radical place as I probably am biased towards practicality, given that its my job to be able to hear and choose gear settings on other peoples music and is something I do full time.

Under such unscientific conditions as null testing a low cut + a mid boost + a high shelf boost I get a phase cancellation of -27.1dB when matching the numbers and checking eq types between sonox/Cambridge. Its pretty easy to find settings on one that you cant null on the other.

Could I find a single setting that nulls to an inaudible amount on a given sample, probably.

The next thing I do is really silly and thoroughly unscientific.
I take no less than five reference tracks from my client folder and find useful settings for the given track and match them on both eqs. Then I sit with a button and a/b between the two with no way of telling what I am starting on and finishing on. This is done by turning off the screen. Then I see if I can pick one as better for the program material than the other! Crazy I know. If I can pick it every time, say 10 times in a row then, (and perhaps I am mistaken to assume this) I tend to think there is a difference worth paying attention to.

To me shootouts are about being able to distinguish differences, not look for sameness. Then to find if there is a practical use for those differences in my work flow. In this respect I find the sonox is not made redundant along side the Cambridge.
Old 15th August 2012 | Show parent
  #266
Deleted e1b9f94
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by polybonk ➑️
In my particularly heretical philosophical approach to all this, the point of testing an Eq (like the sonox vs Cambridge) for me is, not to see if I can find a way make it null. But if under real world working conditions of say a few boosts and cuts there are significant audible differences.

Now call me stupid to base approaching things like null testing and shootouts from such a radical place as I probably am biased towards practicality, given that its my job to be able to hear and choose gear settings on other peoples music and is something I do full time.

Under such unscientific conditions as null testing a low cut + a mid boost + a high shelf boost I get a phase cancellation of -27.1dB when matching the numbers and checking eq types between sonox/Cambridge. Its pretty easy to find settings on one that you cant null on the other. As far as i can see biggest practical difference is in graphical interface and that's about it.

Could I find a single setting that nulls to an inaudible amount on a given sample, probably.

The next thing I do is really silly and thoroughly unscientific.
I take no less than five reference tracks from my client folder and find useful settings for the given track and match them on both eqs. Then I sit with a button and a/b between the two with no way of telling what I am starting on and finishing on. This is done by turning off the screen. Then I see if I can pick one as better for the program material than the other! Crazy I know. If I can pick it every time, say 10 times in a row then, (and perhaps I am mistaken to assume this) I tend to think there is a difference worth paying attention to.

To me shootouts are about being able to distinguish differences, not look for sameness. Then to find if there is a practical use for those differences in my work flow. In this respect I find the sonox is not made redundant along side the Cambridge.

Man that's all ok and believe it or not your testing methodology is about the same as i do with plugs. I choose them by practical means in the way i test them to find with which one i can get result i want in fastest way. That's all ok and i am really not trying to split hair and i am by far not saying that sonnox is redundant or to make it clear i am not questioning your work at all.

You said that for your shtotouts are done to distinguish differences but the point of all this hate/rage/badmood/useless product in this thread or call it whatever you like is that there is really no difference in any PRACTICAL mean when you compare sonnox vs Cambridge. They even sound same and they null (that's why i responded since you claimed that you can hear difference each and every time which seems impossible if two products are giving 99% same sonical and practical result).

But as i said to each his own.

I am purely guessing here but i can safely guess that people wouldn't be so mad at this if sonnox at least included that another algorithm which would easily give this UAD version slight heading.
Old 15th August 2012 | Show parent
  #267
Lives for gear
 
Jorg's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
+1 on the micro transients.

On a full spectrum file which ranges over all the dynamic spectrum and the width of even low band material micro transients have been found to be essential.
It has also been proven that only UAD plugins have been coded to handle micro transients correctly.



....just wanted to add to the bullshit.
Old 15th August 2012 | Show parent
  #268
Lives for gear
 
DaveE's Avatar
^

You almost had me there. Was getting ready to do some research on micro-transients.
Old 16th August 2012
  #269
Lives for gear
 
mirrorboy's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by polybonk ➑️
The next thing I do is really silly and thoroughly unscientific.
I take no less than five reference tracks from my client folder and find useful settings for the given track and match them on both eqs. Then I sit with a button and a/b between the two with no way of telling what I am starting on and finishing on. This is done by turning off the screen. Then I see if I can pick one as better for the program material than the other! Crazy I know. If I can pick it every time, say 10 times in a row then, (and perhaps I am mistaken to assume this) I tend to think there is a difference worth paying attention to.
+1000

This is actually really great.

Never done this myself before but now that I think about it....doing this, turning off the screens, etc....is a really meaningful way to determine which plug (of the two you're comparing serves the mix best).

Not to mention this method could be used on any plug.

I gues now that I've read that post it seems like such an obvious test that everyone should do and know about.

20/20 Hindsight, right??

I knew there was a reason I joined this fantasy sonic circus!! Haha

Thx.

Scott
Old 16th August 2012 | Show parent
  #270
Lives for gear
 
polybonk's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpod ➑️
there is really no difference in any PRACTICAL mean when you compare sonnox vs Cambridge. They even sound same and they null (that's why i responded since you claimed that you can hear difference each and every time which seems impossible if two products are giving 99% same sonical and practical result).
I can't get them to null or even phase cancel to much of a degree. Its interesting that you can. Like I said when using 3 bands the closest I can get is around -27dB. This is on Win xp 32 bit. That's pretty easy to hear. If I could null them then different story.

If you can match sonox/Cambridge using a number of boosts and cuts and get a null that is very different to what happens on my setup.
πŸ“ Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 143 views: 15382
Avatar for papasan
papasan 2nd April 2019
replies: 836 views: 184144
Avatar for souljahh
souljahh 1st February 2022
replies: 518 views: 47672
Avatar for audslu
audslu 28th December 2015
replies: 422 views: 62955
Avatar for Neptune45
Neptune45 4th August 2021
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump