Why "audiophiles" don't use VSTs?

[ZolaIII]

I use IK Multimedia’s ARC 3 software, running as a VST/AU in SoundSource for all of my music listening over speakers and equalization for my headphones. ARC 3 is an automated version of EQing using REW that measures 21 points from both speakers in predetermined patterns for various setups. In addition to EQ it will adjust balance and phase to optimize the stereo image. You can have as many setups as you want. I have one for my near field position and one for farther away position. You can also PEQ the resulting EQ to taste. And it will simulate various other forms of speakers (laptop, sound bars, headphones, etc. which is nice for mastering).

While I have treated my room a bit, it is non-ideal in size and symmetry so I consider ARC3 non-optional to the extent that I run my turntable through my computer. And since I’m doing that, I use de-clicking VSTs as well. If I could find a good one, I would likely use a noise filter as well, but all the ones I have tried still alter the music.

I don’t consider myself an audiophile, just someone who really enjoys listening to and making music.

You record only the noise pattern of an device that produces it and then use it as filter to remove only that from recorded material.

 

[IPunchCholla]

You record only the noise pattern of a device that produces it and then use it as filter to remove only that from recorded material.

Sure. But the part of the device is the highly variable quality of the vinyl, which would need to be sampled for each record. Plus, noise filters always have some measurement errors and the sample overlaps with “not noise” to some degree causing degradation in the signal. I’ve used noise filters in video and audio projects (non-music) and it can help suppress noise in those applications to a high degree, but we don’t have knowledge of other people’s voices the way we do of music, and I still haven’t found one I find acceptable for vinyl playback.

 

[ZolaIII]

@IPunchCholla I told you how I (and probably everyone else) used to deal with different self noise from different equipment (you name it from noisy guitar amplifiers to pretty much everything else) when I did mastering. Of course I did it on separate input channels and only specific for one containing it not on the master mix one's. Can't remember now what I used for click, pop, hiss removal for vinyls it whose long, long time ago. If I remember I let you know.

 

[Multicore]

Why "audiophiles" don't use VSTs?

Good question!

I don't count myself as audiophile but I gave my reasons why I don't use VSTs here

Interesting video: The Audiophile's Philosophy

it's a great word but at variance with the meaninglessness here due to its fixed denotation

www.audiosciencereview.com

They are purely pragmatic.

I do use room EQ. And I would use a loudness control of I had one or could be bothered to set it up as a preset in the MiniDSP Flex. I could maybe use a multiband compressor limiter for parties but I need someone else to figure out the settings.

 

[ZolaIII]

@Multicore guess you could try by hand on given calibration point if you tend to listen on same level. JRiver has it (equal loudness normalization) but only on PCM trough internal volume controls and its fairly easy to set it up.

Best regards and have fun.

 

[IPunchCholla]

Also, if there is an AI VST out there that I can simply remove all sax solos/riffs, I’d totally buy that.

 

[F1308]

I have very many VSTs, and add more on a daily basis.

Making own music is so great I cannot tell you.

 

[Multicore]

@Multicore guess you could try by hand on given calibration point if you tend to listen on same level. JRiver has it (equal loudness normalization) but only on PCM trough internal volume controls and its fairly easy to set it up.
View attachment 265832
Best regards and have fun.

Thanks @ZolaIII . To check U understand right, are these positive SPL dBs? For example, if I'm designing a loudness eq for 50 dB SPL listening, I might find a curve that boosts 11.4 dB at 250 Hz and cuts 1.3 dB at 2 kHz.

 

[Suffolkhifinut]

Thanks @ZolaIII . To check U understand right, are these positive SPL dBs? For example, if I'm designing a loudness eq for 50 dB SPL listening, I might find a curve that boosts 11.4 dB at 250 Hz and cuts 1.3 dB at 2 kHz.

Boosts by 11.4 db @ 250Hz and cuts by 1.3 db @ 2kHz.
Why?

 

[ZolaIII]

@Multicore yes with exception od one at 4K at 5 dB level but no one listens so quietly.
@Suffolkhifinut well that's what equal loudness normalization really is. Boost is larger in bass because of physical dispersion properties of low frequencies.
It works good on normal level's (60~70 dB), helps on quiet level's but that's about it.

 

[tuga]

 

[phoenixdogfan]

I consider myself an audiophile, and have been one for the last 47 years and I use VST plugins on JRiver and have for at least the last 10 years. I have Dirac Live which is a vst plugin. I used to use Sonarworks which is also a VST plugin for custom headphone eq. I have experimented with a VST plugin which simulated tube amplification, and I had a couple of VST plugin EQs. So I think the answer is, some audiophiles who have kept up with the times do indeed use VST plugins, but I'm sure there are other traditionalist audiophiles who eschew using them or any other new fangled stuff like DSP, EQ, software based crossovers, streaming platforms, etc.

 

[charlielaub]

Hmmm, although I can't say I like the term "audiophile" and that can mean a lot of things, the entire basis for my DSP crossover platform is LADSPA plugins (the fore-runner of VST plugins). I even wrote a few myself.

I don't do the sort of processing I think the OP had in mind - to EQ the loudspeaker response in the room, either once (like a sort of IIR DIRAC or room EQ) or as tone controls to change the bass level or whatever from track to track as needed. I only perform crossover functions. But as such I find that to be very powerful and I can do more than on most DSP platforms. I also like that the combination of software (LADSPA processing and host routing) and hardware is very flexible and portable. I can change DACs or audio interfaces quickly. I can port everything to a new computer and be up and running in short order. I can update the software when new versions come out, or even the entire OS (Linux/Ubuntu) to improve functionality or bring new ones. Only the hardware costs me any money at all, and this appeals to my DIY audio self. I have several system in my home running under this schema for almost a decade now.

 

[Multicore]

@Multicore yes with exception od one at 4K at 5 dB level but no one listens so quietly.

I just chose from the middle of the table to check I understood. If I do this I'll get out my calibrated SPL mic and measure actual desired levels in the different social listening contexts. I got 4 presets so I need to allocate those. Interesting optimization problem.

1. Alone listen to music
2. With her listening to music, TV, movies from the couch
3. Card games, dinner parties sitting over there at the table
4. While I'm in the kitchen getting dinner ready and my booze on

 

[Multicore]

Hmmm, although I can't say I like the term "audiophile" and that can mean a lot of things, the entire basis for my DSP crossover platform is LADSPA plugins (the fore-runner of VST plugins). I even wrote a few myself.

I don't do the sort of processing I think the OP had in mind - to EQ the loudspeaker response in the room, either once (like a sort of IIR DIRAC or room EQ) or as tone controls to change the bass level or whatever from track to track as needed. I only perform crossover functions. But as such I find that to be very powerful and I can do more than on most DSP platforms. I also like that the combination of software (LADSPA processing and host routing) and hardware is very flexible and portable. I can change DACs or audio interfaces quickly. I can port everything to a new computer and be up and running in short order. I can update the software when new versions come out, or even the entire OS (Linux/Ubuntu) to improve functionality or bring new ones. Only the hardware costs me any money at all, and this appeals to my DIY audio self. I have several system in my home running under this schema for almost a decade now.

What you describe there is less audiophile and more nerd.

And I mean that with all respect from someone with two Rpis in my nerd AV system.

 

[charlielaub]

I gladly take that label as a complement any day.

 

[ZolaIII]

@Multicore somehow I think I will like the most your forth preset.

 

[Trell]

Objectivists don't like anything interfering with the sound either. You see that all over ASR - pursuit of ever lower distortion figures, more perfect SINAD, compliance with the Harman curve, pursuit of perfect spinoramas, and so on. Anything that might colour the sound, e.g. vinyl playback or valve amps, gets forcefully derided by many here on ASR.

If there is to be any coloration/distortion during playback then it’s because I want that whenever I want it in the way I want it. With “transparent/neutral” gear I can and do apply DSP like dynamic loudness and the occasional use of tone controls, in the amount I want, whenever I want.

With “non-transparent” gear you don’t have that choice as it’s plastered on anything to listen to. If you happen to like it that way then it’s great for you.

 

[markanini]

If I'm using a VST for listening it means the mixing or mastering was screwed up originally.

 

[fpitas]

If I'm using a VST for listening it means the mixing or mastering was screwed up originally.

Which certainly happens. The normal audiophile tunes that away with distorting amps and magic cables. A VST is sure cheaper.