Slate Virtual Mix RACK

[wishtheend]

I find the coloring on the mixbuss can get a bit over the top if I have too many instances of it. I have a channel at towards the start of any chain on individual tracks (usually Neve) and then I will put a 2nd channel instance on the group buss towards the end of the chain usually 4K (kinda simulate console -> route to comp/eq/fx-> return to console). I only use the mixbuss on the 2buss but still do one towards the start of the chain, and then one at the return/end of the chain.

 

[Sloan]

Working great on Reaper x64 here.

 

[Deathprayer82]

where is the donation button? VCC2 is sooo great... I would pay for that free update! I love the new console!

 

[Ermz]

On a project I'm running with VCC 1.0, the mix bus instance is being hit at roughly 0dBVU. When I replace that instance with a VCC 2.0 version, the meter drops down to around -5dBVU. What's the deal?

 

[worldwideweapon]

On a project I'm running with VCC 1.0, the mix bus instance is being hit at roughly 0dBVU. When I replace that instance with a VCC 2.0 version, the meter drops down to around -5dBVU. What's the deal?

The meter is calibrated to -15 in default. You can change it with the screw under the meter.. Why it's defaulted like that instead of -18 is beyond me.

 

[exoslime]

i like vcc2.0 pretty well sofar, as well i demoed the other vmr plugins an really would have use for those, so now i´m waiting for the next deal on VMR, hehe
one thing that is missing somehow is to add group names. when you click on the numbers, you can edit the name, but when you confirm it still shows the numbes and not the name anymore, maybe its just a bug and get fixed.. having the group named would be great as otherwise you would need make additional notes in which project which group number belongs to whatever.

what i also would love to have is a simply high and lowpass module, as i set a highpass filter nearly almost on any of my tracks , and i have also the new vmr plugin on almost any track as insert now, it would make perfect sense to have such little helper already included in VMR, perhaps we can get one one day? steven

cheers
exoslime

 

[mva801]

Well the HPF is included in the 2 eq modules. God knows why they didn't include the LPF from the SSL eq, but the hpf are there. I don't see much sense in wasting a module space for just a set of filters.

 

[Studdy]

Well the HPF is included in the 2 eq modules. God knows why they didn't include the LPF from the SSL eq, but the hpf are there. I don't see much sense in wasting a module space for just a set of filters.

The modules have a coloration/tone to them, maybe he was referring to a having a clean/surgical set of hi/lo pass filters? Personally I tend to have a clean/surgical eq before vmr in the chain anyways for gain staging and filtering. A VMR De esser would be cool.

 

[exoslime]

The modules have a coloration/tone to them, maybe he was referring to a having a clean/surgical set of hi/lo pass filters? Personally I tend to have a clean/surgical eq before vmr in the chain anyways for gain staging and filtering. A VMR De esser would be cool.

yeah, exactly this, just a clean hp/lp filter block, without coloration and that fancy stuff we usually love slate plugins for the other thing is performance.. on a current project i´m working i got VMR (VCC2.0) instances plugin count on an total of 67 channels, (yeah, that much, i wondered myself ) so even if Slate VMR is very cpu-friendly, having 76times a full EQ plugin with the full algorithmns going on for mainly LP/HP filtering is very uneconomic.
i agree, if i decide to use any of the vmr EQs anyway in the signal chain, of course its a different thing, but thats most of the time (still) not the case yet.

 

[Studdy]

yeah, exactly this, just a clean hp/lp filter block, without coloration and that fancy stuff we usually love slate plugins for the other thing is performance.. on a current project i´m working i got VMR (VCC2.0) instances plugin count on an total of 67 channels, (yeah, that much, i wondered myself ) so even if Slate VMR is very cpu-friendly, having 76times a full EQ plugin with the full algorithmns going on for mainly LP/HP filtering is very uneconomic.
i agree, if i decide to use any of the vmr EQs anyway in the signal chain, of course its a different thing, but thats most of the time (still) not the case yet.

I use protools stock eq, its great for cutting and my cpu hardly notices many instances of it.

 

[BearOnGuitar]

I think there was talk at some point of Fabrice creating an AirEQ inspired EQ module for VMR, it was quite vague. Just recently on Facebook Fabrice said that he would be looking into creating a zero-delay tape based module due to the amount of requests to have VTM inside VMR too.

 

[LeSedna]

AirEq was mentioned somewhere yes.

Personnally, I think he should release an AirEq module where all you would have is the Earth and Air controls. They have something special and I find myself loading AirEq only for those bands, where even half a dB makes a difference. I also use it a lot for premastering as it is very gentle so I like its current GUI for this use. For other normal bells boosts or cuts, I wouldn't see a real interest over a more known ssl or pulltec EQ. I'd rather have it as a specific sounding module. It would be better if every module had a very distinctive purpose and I would definitely load AirEq just for these two controls.

 

[Heabow]

Damn, GASing hard for FG76/73 atm but Slate stuff are always buggy. At least on my 2 previous systems. Now that I'm on PT12, I want to believe that this wil be fine but...