Benefit of Third Party Saw Plugins Versus Native VST Plugins

[Adam Christopher]

Hi,

I'm curious about what you third party Saw plugins you use and how you like them versus today's native vst alternatives. I'm guessing the biggest draw is that they are guaranteed to be more stable than others plugs? But are they way more dsp-efficient or something or sound better? Otherwise, I don't get the point.

The Sonoris Parametric Eq in particular has piqued my interest. I'm not sold on getting another parametric eq yet but Im kind of in the middle of revamping my rig and rethinking things. I have come to rely so heavily on the Nebula sampler programs for its sheer sound quality but Saw doesn't seem to handle this sampler nearly as well as other hosts because Nebula lives off complex multicore processing and ram. Bouncing tracks all the time can be a bit cumbersome and there is no freeze function so now I am looking to go more dsp friendly in other areas is a priority so I can use their sampled hardware preamp, eq, tape saturation programs liberally.

So I've been toying around with firewire and card-based systems and am starting to be more pleased with my results using the Liquid Mix for compression and hopefully soon Powercore for reverb and other effects since my newest reverb is not playing nice with Saw. I love the Saw eq but sometimes its just faster to have those graphs there for visualizing how wide your q is. My current parametric eq kind of sucks up dsp and I'm hearing that DMG and Pro L are top of the heap for parametric eq and very stable but at the same time are very heavy on cpu.

If anybody has any endorsement for Sonoris Eq I'd love to hear how it holds up in your mind (sound quality-wise, workflow-wise, and dsp-wise) to some of today's better eqs in 2013 and know more about what the benefits of running plugins in Saw format. I'll check it out myself at some point but value the input of my fellow Saw users.

Curious too if anybody has any thoughts on Anwida Spazio for verb versus other alternatives. I find most algorithmic reverbs in the box to be quite disappointing and VSS3 (card-based) Audio Exponential Phoenix Verb have been the only ones that really impressed me so far.

Thanks!

AC

[Grekim]

Because I was using other DAW's until about 2008, I had a substantial investment in Waves and UAD-1 plug-ins. So I still have those working for when I need them. But, for the past year or so I just don't have the interest in trying 5 different EQ's on something. I'd rather spend the time on mic selection, placement, and a great mix. The last big project I mixed had a lot of Anwida and a fair amount of Sonoris plug-ins. If you need high/low shelves you will need something like the Sonoris EQ.

Bob's plug-ins are more efficient than any other plug-ins whether SAW native or VST's. You should be able to have an EQ and compressor working on 70-120 channels without bogging down even one core of your computer.

I have very mixed feelings about EQ graphs and even metering like gain reduction in general. How much do we rely on our eyes when it should be all about the ears?

For reverb I usually use Spazio, but lately have been getting into Bob's reverb a bit. The Waves IR-L is on hand as well as the UAD-1 140 Plate.

[Ian Alexander]

I don't know if this is true for all SS Native plugs, but many can be automated. (Bob's reverb is one that can't.) I use SS automation on the Sonoris Comp fairly often. I suppose I could achieve the same thing by patching any comp post fader and automating the fader, but it's a nice feature. I'm happy with the way the Sonoris Comp sounds and I really like the look-ahead 0 attack for controlling transients.

I haven't used the Sonoris EQ.

[Adam Christopher]

Thanks Grekim and Ian. Ian, I appreciate the comments on the Sonoris stuff.

Grekim, you know you are right.... I tried out the Sonoris eq and it was cool and all. And also tried out a bunch of other digital eqs. And for sound quality and dsp, the internal Saw eq just can't be beat.

I'm actually feeling good about making the internal saw eq my go to for filtering and surgical cuts. For shelving eq I use Nebula exclusively so I won't be using something like Sonoris or any other parametric for that.

The biggest thing though is I like having the graphs because it shows you what the q looks like and can be quicker for surgical cuts and knowing how far to narrow your bandwith when sweeping around. I guess part of that is getting more comfortable using the eq itself.

[Grekim]

Also, keep in mind that on the SAW eq's you are not adjusting Q, but bandwidth. So a larger number is for a broader range.

[TotalSonic]

The main advantage of SAW native plugins over VST or DX alternatives is that the SAW native ones are potentially fully automatable within SAWStudio.

The Sonoris EQ is truly excellent imho. Fully automatable, excellent gui, each band can be selected to be applied across L/R, L or R only, or Mid and Side only, and any of these channels can be solo'd to be monitored as well. It's "HQ" double sampling mode also offers an option that allows for smoother sounding high frequency boosts as well. I use it almost every day for my mastering work.

It's important to also note that most digital eq's using standard minimal phase parametric design are in fact actually the SAME! - just with different gui's that tend to shape chosen options - but that if you take the time to actually match the filter shapes of two different digital eq's and invert the polarity of one you will find you can usually get these to get results that null!
Check out this following linked article to gain greater understanding of this:
http://rhythminmind.net/1313/?p=36

fwiw - the built in SAWStudio channel eq's and the SAW native JMS Audioware Hi-res EQ plugin can be made to null with each other (I greatly prefer the gui and options that are available with the JMS Hi-res EQ though). However - the Sonoris EQ does not null against these - as apparently it offers a different algorithm from the standard one.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Bruce Callaway]

The Sonoris EQ is truly excellent imho. Fully automatable, excellent gui, each band can be selected to be applied across L/R, L or R only, or Mid and Side only, and any of these channels can be solo'd to be monitored as well. It's "HQ" double sampling mode also offers an option that allows for smoother sounding high frequency boosts as well.
That's my view as well. I use the Sonoris Linear Phase EQ on the overall mix output for fine tuning. I use SAW's EQ most everywhere else with good results. I also use the JMS Audioware Hi-res EQ plugin on occasional submixes. I recently bought the Sonoris Mastering plugins including the EQ and it is very good IMHO.

[Adam Christopher]

Thanks very much, Steve and Bruce. Great input from both of you as always.

I actually own quite a few of Eric Beam's Nebula programs and have seen your posts Steve about nulling. Really appreciate that information.

Bruce thanks for posting your insights as well. It's great to get feedback on eqs you use and for what purposes.

AC

[Himhui]

Hi Adam, I advise you to stick on saw's eq cause it is clean and efficient. I tried different platforms, Saw is the stablest and the best to work with Nebula. The only downside at the moment is that saw's still X32 which couldn't fully utilize the ram over 4G. I can add up to 60 instances of nebula via Jbridge, though sometimes edl will be currupted. Also, on X32 platform, you cannot open more than 14 instances of nebula with same name, otherwise it won't open after project quited. You can use the nebula-setup to create different dlls with different names such as neb EQ, neb Comp and so on.

[Adam Christopher]

Hi Adam, I advise you to stick on saw's eq cause it is clean and efficient. I tried different platforms, Saw is the stablest and the best to work with Nebula. The only downside at the moment is that saw's still X32 which couldn't fully utilize the ram over 4G. I can add up to 60 instances of nebula via Jbridge, though sometimes edl will be currupted. Also, on X32 platform, you cannot open more than 14 instances of nebula with same name, otherwise it won't open after project quited. You can use the nebula-setup to create different dlls with different names such as neb EQ, neb Comp and so on.

Thanks Himhu! I agree the saw eqs are so clean efficient. I love them. Just getting used to finding the right bandwith as I'm so accustomed to q and sweeping around without the graphical interface. Might have to give the JMS hi res eq a try but I love how efficient and great sounding the Saw eq is.

Really encouraging that Nebula is most stable with SAW. Saw seems to be the only DAW anyways to me that has an "analog feel" to it besides maybe Harrison Mixbus and that thing is slow and buggy as hell, which is totally uninspiring.

Also psyched to know another Nebula user is onboard. Might have some Nebula questions for you in the future but I love the combination of Nebula and Saw :)

Although I think I might go Powercore for the reverb and I'm using the Liquid Mix for comps so that is helping cpu big time.

I'm hoping Powercore works with Windows 8 though. I don't see why not though because it works with Windows 7, which is very similar to 8 drivers wise.

[Himhui]

Thanks Himhu! I agree the saw eqs are so clean efficient. I love them. Just getting used to finding the right bandwith as I'm so accustomed to q and sweeping around without the graphical interface. Might have to give the JMS hi res eq a try but I love how efficient and great sounding the Saw eq is.

Really encouraging that Nebula is most stable with SAW. Saw seems to be the only DAW anyways to me that has an "analog feel" to it besides maybe Harrison Mixbus and that thing is slow and buggy as hell, which is totally uninspiring.

Also psyched to know another Nebula user is onboard. Might have some Nebula questions for you in the future but I love the combination of Nebula and Saw :)

Although I think I might go Powercore for the reverb and I'm using the Liquid Mix for comps so that is helping cpu big time.

I'm hoping Powercore works with Windows 8 though. I don't see why not though because it works with Windows 7, which is very similar to 8 drivers wise.


Powercore has been ceased for several years ...

Why not take a look at ValhallaDSP or QL Spaces? They maybe the great complement of nebula reverb !

[Adam Christopher]

Powercore has been ceased for several years ...

Why not take a look at ValhallaDSP or QL Spaces? They maybe the great complement of nebula reverb !

Thanks Himhui. Nice suggestions. When I heard the Powercore effects, I was really impressed. I like Ql Spaces but want to go algorithmic and I never really loved the Valhalla stuff despite its popularity. I guess right now I'm using the MuVerb and am fairly happy with the results but I like what TC offers. Disappointing though that it got discontinued so hopefully their drivers will still work.