Digital effects for tube and/or analog sound?

[jensgk]

What are the best (preferably standalone) digital effect units for experimenting and listening with different "sounds" (tube or "analog" sound) on your otherwise transparent hi-fi system (where the audio comes from digital sources) ?

Would you use some stereo guitar effect/multi-effect units or would you need to invest in more expensive units like the Eventide series?

Or is it better to use computer plug-ins?

Or is it better to drop it, and just buy some real analog pre-amp?

 

[Frgirard]

foobar2000:Components/Tube Sound (foo_dsp_tube) - Hydrogenaudio Knowledgebase

wiki.hydrogenaud.io

12 great free and paid-for tube emulation VST plugins

The best tube emulators on the market

www.musicradar.com

or

Préamplificateurs JP200MC Jadis Electronics

Détail et caractéristiques techniques : Préamplificateurs JP200MC Jadis Electronics

www.jadis-electronics.com

tell us

Thanks

 

[jensgk]

foobar2000:Components/Tube Sound (foo_dsp_tube) - Hydrogenaudio Knowledgebase

wiki.hydrogenaud.io

Thanks. I tried to download and install the Foobar2000 component you linked to, but it didn't load. I can se that the DLL is from 2007, so unfortunately it seems too old for new versions of Foobar.

 

[oversorrow]

What are the best (preferably standalone) digital effect units for experimenting and listening with different "sounds" (tube or "analog" sound) on your otherwise transparent hi-fi system (where the audio comes from digital sources) ?

Softube Tape, Fabfilter Saturn2, UAD Tape Bundle, and Klanghelm SDRR.
These are analog emulation plugins I often use in music production.
I can't tell you which is the BEST, because each of them has their application, some on a single track, some on the main bus.
But if you want to do some listening tests, I recommend the Saturn2.

Would you use some stereo guitar effect/multi-effect units or would you need to invest in more expensive units like the Eventide series?
Or is it better to use computer plug-ins?

Yes, amp simulation and effect plugins like Neural DSP and AmpliTube are what I'm using right now, the overall sound is "OK" to me, but, to people like well-experienced guitarists, they might not choose these plugins to play with.

Or is it better to drop it, and just buy some real analog pre-amp?

It actually depends on your budget and your situation.
For example, I am a bedroom musician and I work (play) in my tiny sweet home studio, and when I'm about to record guitar I simply don't have enough space for a big-sized amp and cabinet, and I have to consider my neighbors. So I HAVE TO record the DI signals into the computer and do some processes in post.
So the main problem is LIMITATION I guess, if I can do anything I want, I will definitely choose the real analog one.
BUT, I guess what you really want to ask is the difference or the gap between the REAL one and the DIGITAL one, well that's a hard question, gearspacers have already argued this topic for many years, you should go there and ask this.

 

[mhardy6647]

The notion of a digital analog sound emulator brings a smile to my face.

Perhaps it's because it's sort of like one of those mathematical expressions that can be simplified.

 

[jensgk]

The notion of a digital analog sound emulator brings a smile to my face.

I don't know what it means either, but I would like to know. Anyways, I think it is ok to experiment with adding effects to music, to see if it adds something, as long as I can turn it off again

 

[Matthias McCready]

I equate "analog sound" with distortion/compression of some sort.

Note that certain types of harmonic distortion can sound quite pleasing to the ear.

As a mix engineer; I often use harmonic distortion to add detail to sources. In the right circumstances, it can make the top end feel fantastic, and it can actually add "fidelity" if you will.

---

Personally I prefer my system to be fairly uncolored, as I know the mix and mastering engineers involved already made some decisions there. So this is not something I would be chasing....

However different strokes for different blokes, so in aid to your search if you had a way to run a plugin something like the Kush Blyss plugin used at subtle settings could be cool.

Essentially I would look for something oriented towards mastering.

 

[Matthias McCready]

Now that I have a little more time:

"Analog Sound" could be better defined as something which is non-linear in some way. Meaning that what you put in is not the same as what you get out.

In the early years of analog a linear signal chain was simply not achievable. Preamps and other devices had lots of distortion, a high noise floor, and other problems. Every piece of equipment left its sonic finger prints on what passed through it. This became the "sound" that are familiar with. And I do agree many of these non-linear elements are quite pleasing.

As technology has progressed we now have equipment which is essentially linear, and does not impart a noticeable sonic signature of its own.

---

On the recording side this is great. We can have a non-colored linear preamp and AD/DA conversions. And we have the option to introduce non-linear elements where desired (artistic prerogative and all that).

---
The most non-linear elements involved in audio are the transducers (mics and speaker drivers). Which is why these are arguably the most important part of the chain. When I am doing live audio work a nice microphone will still sound great on a cheap speaker system (within reason). Inexpensive microphones (within reason), and inexpensive processing will still sound great on a high-end speaker system. Obviously a quality microphone coupled with a well deployed high-end speaker system is the best of all worlds.

---

So usually what I am looking for in a speaker system is the most linear system possible (flat).

1. For listening to music this means I hearing the album in the way it was intended.
2. When I am mixing it means I am getting out of the system what I put into it.

 

[jensgk]

Now that I have a little more time:

"Analog Sound" could be better defined as something which is non-linear in some way. Meaning that what you put in is not the same as what you get out.

In the early years of analog a linear signal chain was simply not achievable. Preamps and other devices had lots of distortion, a high noise floor, and other problems. Every piece of equipment left its sonic finger prints on what passed through it. This became the "sound" that are familiar with. And I do agree many of these non-linear elements are quite pleasing.

As technology has progressed we now have equipment which is essentially linear, and does not impart a noticeable sonic signature of its own.

I think that is a good analysis of it. Many who like "analog" sound have probably had a lot of exposure to equipment and/or recordings with that sonic signature, and therefore have that as their end goal. The new, cleaner sound, for them, sounds too harsh.

I also read (somewhere in here), that adding noise in the music can give a spatial experience. I suppose, something like the crackling noise in the "Eurykah Badu - Appletree", except there the noise is very forward.