Need some very good ears...

Here are the settings for C (of course, don't take those as gospel...) :

All those are for one of the 4 available band of course...
Frequency : 86 Hz
Q-Fact : 0.4
Type : Bell
Gain : -8.0 db 100% dyn
Attack : 16 ms
Release : 25 ms
No side chain
Linear Phase was switched on
Threshold was set so that the Eq only kicks in during low rumbling parts (-23.5 db on this particular case)

What I like with the Dynamic EQ :
- it doesn't eat up any computer CPU (since it's Powercore),
- you can also use it as a static EQ, or as a mix between Static and Dynamic EQ (you set the ratio),
- you have a side chain for each band,
- the Audition button allows you, when switched on, to evaluate the amount of processing taking place by listening to the difference between the original and the processed signal,
- I have it legally :).

What I don't like with it is that, like all the Powercore plugins, if you set your levels it too hard, you hear digital clipping...
 
Hey Brett, what do you think of the rest of the Powercore? I've been looking at various options and was considering one a few weeks back. I"m curious to know if you think they're worth the money? I'm particularly interested in the DynamicEQ (which you obviously like), the Vintage CL and 24/7 C compressors, and the Voice Channel. Do you think the Compressor's stack up against plug's from Waves, UAD, etc? IS the Vocal Channel actually useful for vox? Any insight is helpful...:cool:
 
Actually I've been pretty disappointed when I got it, I was having high hopes for it (especially the reverbs and the MasterX3) and it didn't rise to my expectations. DynamicEQ is good, 24/7 C is bad (compared to it's UAD equivalent 1176), and Vintage CL was a good surprise. Vocal Channel is nice but not groundbreaking. Actually, the good plugins for the Powercore are optional and VERY expensive for most of them (Sony Oxford, Virus Powercore, MD3)... I really prefer the UAD-1. So if you don't have an UAD-1 card yet, you might consider this before the Poco...
 
Thanks for the input. I'll definitely have to check into the UAD stuff. I was looking at Waves, but the prices are pretty high, and I've been hearing a lot of horror stories lately about their business practices and customer service.
 
At first, I liked to think of the UAD-1 and Powercore as peanut butter and jelly respectively. Each is ok on it's own, but the two together are quite complimentary.

Unfortunately, the Powercore turned out to be more like KY jelly in that you have to bend over, lube up, and get the Sony plugins to really take advantage of the Powercore platform. Or to really have the Powercore platform take advantage of you...

Oh, and thanks for the settings, Brett! :)
 
silverwulf said:
Hey Brett, what do you think of the rest of the Powercore? I've been looking at various options and was considering one a few weeks back. I"m curious to know if you think they're worth the money? I'm particularly interested in the DynamicEQ (which you obviously like), the Vintage CL and 24/7 C compressors, and the Voice Channel. Do you think the Compressor's stack up against plug's from Waves, UAD, etc? IS the Vocal Channel actually useful for vox? Any insight is helpful...:cool:

I am not Brett ;-)

But i find the UAD Plugs way better. The Voice Channel as well as the Vintage CL is pretty useless for me, the 24/7 is nice for crunching clean/crunchy guitars.

But the Reverbs (Megareverb, Classicverb) are great!

I use my Powercores mainly for the Oxford EQs and Dynamics as well as the reverbs. The Tubifex is worth a try, btw!

The TC System 6000 Plugins wich are availeble for the Powercoreplatform are shurely some of the most professional (and expensive) Plugins availeble.

The UAD comes with the Fairchild, the Pultecs and other VERY great Plugins.


I think nothing can beat a combo of both worlds ;-)


@ Brett:

The anoying clipping is caused by the fixed point processing of the PoCo. If you are used to have unlimited Headroom in a 32bit float enviroment (Nuendo/Cubase) you have to take care here....


brandy
 
I'd be curious to hear a shootout between UAD Cambridge and TC Sony Oxford EQs on a variety of source material with comparable/identical settings.
 
Kazrog said:
I'd be curious to hear a shootout between UAD Cambridge and TC Sony Oxford EQs on a variety of source material with comparable/identical settings.


People tend to say, that these EQs are sounding very same.

They don't.

The cambridge isn't that great - but very flexible.

In one situation the Cambridge could win the race, in an other the Oxford.

I never used the Cambridge for mastering.


Currently i have not much time, but maybe i am able to post 2 Version (maybe i donwload Bretts' A/B/C Sounds and aply some EQ on them) tomorrow.

brandy
 
Kazrog said:
I'd be curious to hear a shootout between UAD Cambridge and TC Sony Oxford EQs on a variety of source material with comparable/identical settings.

I recently did that, applying the same EQ from the Cambridge and the Oxford demo to a white noise (since someone here reported that the difference was very big), then inverting the phase on one of them and summing them... For most uses, the difference is almost inexistant, just a slight difference in the very high end at high eq boosting (+10db or more), but that's using Type I. I know that the Massenburg curve included with the Oxford sounds way better, but it's not included in the demo, so I didn't bother to post the result to my test. But just like the test between C4 and DynamicEQ, the difference is not enough to justify the buy, at least at the stage I'm in, I'd rather buy another UAD card or save to get a Quad G5 for the moment...