Transient Monster +1000

[gdougherty]

Well worth having in your plugin arsenal. It rocks on drums as has already been mentioned around here, but it's pure magic on a spoken word mic. It's a simple non-artifacting de-verb plugin that follows the input level. For our recorded sermons I've setup series compression using gentler ratios and thresholds to subtly shape things in the same manner as my old FMR RNC in Supernice mode. Each step gains things up followed by a limiter. Before pushing to the web it's normalized with a touch of lookahead peak limiting and the result of everything brings out the room and wall reflections. Pulling back the sustain in Transient Monster leaves some of the room but squashes the delayed speaking audio leaving a tight close mic'd sound. Glad I have flac encoded originals so I can go back and reprocess them.

[IraSeigel]

This guy makes some awesome plugins. And I THINK he's a member of this forum.

But I would use his plugins if the GUIs weren't so huge and, well, ugly. They take up WAY more screen space than is necessary. And they probably add CPU load just to run the graphics, but I'm just guessing.

Sorry for insult. Just my .02

[RandyHyde]

Well worth having in your plugin arsenal.

+2000

[sstillwell]

This guy makes some awesome plugins. And I THINK he's a member of this forum.

But I would use his plugins if the GUIs weren't so huge and, well, ugly. They take up WAY more screen space than is necessary. And they probably add CPU load just to run the graphics, but I'm just guessing.

Sorry for insult. Just my .02

Not insulting at all...tastes vary. I'll say that far more people like them than dislike them, but it's certainly not unanimous. If nobody objected to it, all that it would mean is that it was boring and average. The gent that does the graphics does work for others aside from me, and the people that hire him do so for what they think is good reason. See http://www.houseofwhitetie.com/ for a partial portfolio and client list. I'm certainly thankful that I found him first.

The CPU use is virtually nil for graphics...all you're doing is blasting a bitmap to the screen. It doesn't redraw that graphic unless it's required by something obscuring and re-exposing it...just like any other well-written application, and it certainly doesn't draw the pictures pixel by line by curve, like a meth addict with a pencil. Doing that WOULD chew up CPU time, and would take me months and large portions of my dubious sanity to write the code to do it. The graphics engine is VERY highly optimized, but it's mostly just moving a chunk of memory from here to there. In the case of Transient Monster, there's only two miniscule LED graphics that get updated just enough times per second to take advantage of persistence of vision, like a film. If it doesn't change, it doesn't (re)draw.

If the GUI isn't open then even that code doesn't execute...zero CPU load.

I certainly pay attention to the CPU use of my plugins. While I may not write in hand-optimized assembly language, my plugins are certainly comparable with most other reputable commercial plugins.

I don't take offense, Ira, but I do feel that I needed to sort of defend myself or refute something stated that strongly (although it WAS stated politely, for which I thank you).

In most other hosts, there is an option to turn off the plugin's GUI (or "editor" in VST terms), and use a UI provided by the host...usually a very plain one with no ornamentation, just faders or knobs for each control. SAW and SAC don't provide that ability. If it was there, I'd just suggest you use that mode and avoid derblinkenlights...I promise you that we wouldn't get upset.

It's all good...

Scott

[IraSeigel]

Not insulting at all...tastes vary
...
It's all good

Scott

Scott,
Thank you for a great reply.
You're right, of course. Setting the controls and then hiding the GUI is the best solution if, in a SAC-user's case, screen area is valuable.

So, since I have you here, may I ask: Is there any interest on your part in making some of your plugins native for SAC? Is that possible with the way Bob has things set up? Or, are your plugins skinnable, to allow for alternative (perhaps smaller) looks?

And compliments on some really cool technology.
Regards,
Ira

[sstillwell]

Scott,
Thank you for a great reply.
You're right, of course. Setting the controls and then hiding the GUI is the best solution if, in a SAC-user's case, screen area is valuable.

So, since I have you here, may I ask: Is there any interest on your part in making some of your plugins native for SAC? Is that possible with the way Bob has things set up? Or, are your plugins skinnable, to allow for alternative (perhaps smaller) looks?

And compliments on some really cool technology.
Regards,
Ira

It's already in the works...there's other stuff that needs completing ahead of it in the pipeline, so I can't even speculate on when beta versions will be available, much less release versions, but I'm certainly interested in making it happen...as much for my own personal use with SAC as to sell them.

As far as a progress report goes, there isn't even a broken version yet...I'm still working out how to integrate the SAW/SAC API into my code, which already supports VST and AU, 32 and 64 bit, Mac and PC from a single code base. Anything I do MUST NOT break existing functionality...I might as well cut my own throat first.

It's a lot less likely that I'll come up with a different or switchable GUI, but if I can't integrate SAC into my code, I may do it the hard way and just write separate SAC versions of the plugs. In that case, they can be as simple or ornate as I or anyone else likes.

Thanks for the compliments...they're appreciated.

Scott

[Naturally Digital]

But I would use his plugins if the GUIs weren't so huge and, well, ugly. They take up WAY more screen space than is necessary.

Ira, I'm not meaning to debate or take away from your opinion but I just want to mention I feel the opposite FWIW. I prefer larger GUI's on plugins (life-size on an average monitor is good for me) and I've always thought Scott's GUI's were quite attractive.

I'm getting ready to invest in some Stillwell plugs real soon.

[IraSeigel]

Ira, I'm not meaning to debate or take away from your opinion but I just want to mention I feel the opposite FWIW. I prefer larger GUI's on plugins (life-size on an average monitor is good for me) and I've always thought Scott's GUI's were quite attractive.

I'm getting ready to invest in some Stillwell plugs real soon.

Almost all of Scott's plugins have a very consistent and polished look - the "brushed alumininum", which I like, too. I was remembering only a couple that didn't follow that motif - the Mojo one, and the Olga and Oligarc ones. Those have a different look, and unfortunately I lumped all of his GUIs with the memory of those.

So I take back my "ugly" comment