SLATE RAVEN AND MIXBUS 32C 2018 SOFTWARE

On the other hand, it certainly doesn't bring the warmth and the particular tone that the SSL or Neve console models from Brainworx, UAD or Waves have. In conclusion, it seems that 32C Channel and Mixbus 32C really do things that most 'digital' plugins don't usually do, and we already like them a lot for that. HOWEVER, this had a certain limit, and we started to feel some harshness when we used the EQ on a lot of different tracks exactly as we had experienced when we turned off the Mixbus tape simulator, with the difference, perhaps, that we found it impossible to make our mix without turning on the tape, whereas we didn't need to with the plugin version. Again, we were able to equalize in a way that we had never been able to do with a standard digital EQ, or even with some analog emulations from well-known developers. We put it on each tracks, and it really feels like we're getting some analog flavor (without the saturation and noise). There is something special about Mixbus.įor mixing with 32C Channel, our feeling was a bit different.įirst (despite the controversy, and, regardless of how Harrison modeled the original console), it certainly stands out from all the other purely 'digital' EQs we've used to date. It also seems that external plugins (especially EQs) sound better through the DAW. On the contrary, we were able to boost certain sensitive high frequencies without ever achieving any harshness, either with the channel EQ or the 3-band EQ of the master track.

We were immediately able to make the mix clearer and more open, which is often difficult to do with virtual instruments, without making them less realistic. It was our first time using this DAW and we were really surprised by the sound quality and the magic it gives off. For example, with 32C Channel, we had to attenuate some high frequencies with the EQ on the guitar, strings and saxophone to avoid bleeding, while we boosted those same frequencies with Mixbus without any unwanted artifacts. In addition, our settings between the two mixing versions were slightly different so that the end result was closer to what we were looking for. But this is perhaps accentuated with the virtual instruments In our case, we felt that turning off the tape simulation made the sound a bit too harsh in the high frequencies, with a character specific to digital processing. We could have turned this effect off, but it looks like this particular imprint is part of the final sound Harrison wanted.

SLATE RAVEN AND MIXBUS 32C 2018 SOFTWARE

In the video, we compared the new 32C Channel plugin to the Mixbus 32C software by making a quick and simplified mix with as few processing and external plugins as possible.įirst of all, let's mention that an exact comparison seems impossible due to the fact that Mixbus 32C uses a tape simulation on the busses and the master channel. OUR GOAL HERE IS ONLY TO GIVE AN OBJECTIVE OPINION ON THE SOUND DIFFERENCES THAT THERE MAY BE BETWEEN THE PLUGIN AND THE DAW, AND THAT IS ONLY ABOUT OUR OWN EXPERIENCE *** *** PLEASE DON'T READ THIS THREAD IF YOU WANT TO SPIT ON THE BRAND OR THOSE WHO DISAGREE WITH THE MARKETING.

Slate raven and mixbus 32c 2018