P&m Plug-ins Suggestions, Any cool plug-in you'd like us to do ? Post it here ! Options

[DontCrack]

Dear friends,

As stated in our product pages :

Once you have purchased or upgraded to V.I.P. Bundle status, all subsequent plug-ins released for the V.I.P. bundle will be free of charge ! In 2012 we will expand the DontCrack V.I.P. bundle to over 40 plug-ins - and as you are a V.I.P. customer we won’t ask you for any more money.

Therefore, if you have any suggestions about new plug-ins you'd like us to create, please let us know. Keep in mind that DontCrack plug-ins must be simple and quick to use. So don't ask us to create a new DAW or a complete multi effect plug-in. That is not the point...

We look forward to completing our DC V.I.P. Series bundle with nice & easy plug-ins that inspire creativity, not restrain it !

Thanks in advance for your collaboration.

Kind Regards - Peter

[Carl Kolchak]

Hi Nick,

a couple of suggestions for improvements in your existing plug-ins :

Octaplexer : could we have a 3 pole switch added, giving the options of the regular 2 octaves below (sub-octaves) mode, 1 octave above / 1 octave below mode, and 2 octaves above (would that be sur-octaves?) mode.

Ambiosoniq : could the throw of the graphic EQ faders be extended / enlarged. Whilst the current design is adhering to the general aesthetic principles of P&M, the faders are rather bunched up, which makes them difficult to use when subtle changes are required.

I'm slowly getting used to the oblique naming conventions for some of the plug-ins (that's all part of the charm), and I'm gratful that you've taken the time to tag the plug-ins in terms of functionality, or I'd probably never find some of them in Pro Tools.

Please don't go too way out there with the names of future plug-ins, as I do sometimes find myself hunting around, and auditioning several of your plug-ins, whilst trying to find a specific one which isn't immediately obvious in terms of it's name - that may just be me, but all those minutes add up at the end of the day, and considering the manifesto of Plug & Mix, it's a little ironic that whilst the plug-ins themselves sound fantastic, and help speed up the workflow, finding the right one can slow things down because of something as simple as the plug-in's name.

Love the product though, and really looking forward to the new additions.

Cheers!

[Nick]

Hi Nick,

a couple of suggestions for improvements in your existing plug-ins :

Octaplexer : could we have a 3 pole switch added, giving the options of the regular 2 octaves below (sub-octaves) mode, 1 octave above / 1 octave below mode, and 2 octaves above (would that be sur-octaves?) mode.

Ambiosoniq : could the throw of the graphic EQ faders be extended / enlarged. Whilst the current design is adhering to the general aesthetic principles of P&M, the faders are rather bunched up, which makes them difficult to use when subtle changes are required.

I'm slowly getting used to the oblique naming conventions for some of the plug-ins (that's all part of the charm), and I'm gratful that you've taken the time to tag the plug-ins in terms of functionality, or I'd probably never find some of them in Pro Tools.

Please don't go too way out there with the names of future plug-ins, as I do sometimes find myself hunting around, and auditioning several of your plug-ins, whilst trying to find a specific one which isn't immediately obvious in terms of it's name - that may just be me, but all those minutes add up at the end of the day, and considering the manifesto of Plug & Mix, it's a little ironic that whilst the plug-ins themselves sound fantastic, and help speed up the workflow, finding the right one can slow things down because of something as simple as the plug-in's name.

Love the product though, and really looking forward to the new additions.

Cheers!

Hello Carl,

With the Octaplexer, we thought that having the 2 octave spread would be enough as a lot of the instruments that would be treated would into go into a region where they would be conflicting with those all important Bass Drums and Bass guitars and synths. Going down another octave would also put a lot of energy into the sub-sonic range that can cause compressors to react in a way that causes all kinds of weird behaviour and should be filtered out. Most of the instruments we all use are in the lower end of the spectrum and would fall into this category.

Yes, Ambiosoniq has a tight arrangement of its faders, could suggest automating them with your DAW? I sometimes do this with other plug-ins that have a busy interface, using the DAW interface to enlarge the parameter in question until it is on a large scale that I could do microscopic edit if I want to, listen back and adjust till its exactly what I want. I'll pass your suggestion to see if there is any way to make it more comfortable.

With ProTools now there is a way of grouping the effects according to their "family" EQs, compressors, etc on the inserts, maybe your DAW does this as well as it really helps sorting out your plug-ins when you have a lot. So when you have discovered what they do you can put them a "family" with all the similar "brothers" and "sisters".

The good news is that there are another five coming very very soon Stay tuned.

Best Regards,

Nick

[Carl Kolchak]

Hello Carl,

With the Octaplexer, we thought that having the 2 octave spread would be enough as a lot of the instruments that would be treated would into go into a region where they would be conflicting with those all important Bass Drums and Bass guitars and synths. Going down another octave would also put a lot of energy into the sub-sonic range that can cause compressors to react in a way that causes all kinds of weird behaviour and should be filtered out. Most of the instruments we all use are in the lower end of the spectrum and would fall into this category.

Yes, Ambiosoniq has a tight arrangement of its faders, could suggest automating them with your DAW? I sometimes do this with other plug-ins that have a busy interface, using the DAW interface to enlarge the parameter in question until it is on a large scale that I could do microscopic edit if I want to, listen back and adjust till its exactly what I want. I'll pass your suggestion to see if there is any way to make it more comfortable.

With ProTools now there is a way of grouping the effects according to their "family" EQs, compressors, etc on the inserts, maybe your DAW does this as well as it really helps sorting out your plug-ins when you have a lot. So when you have discovered what they do you can put them a "family" with all the similar "brothers" and "sisters".

The good news is that there are another five coming very very soon Stay tuned.

Best Regards,

Nick

Hi Nick,

with regards to Octaplexer, I was suggesting adding two octaves above the input signal (not another two octaves below the existing sub-octaves).

For exactly the reasons you stated, it can be really useful (on occasion) to take a bass instrument, and generate higher octaves above the input signal.

Often you'll get guitarists using octave dividers to create the impression of a doubled up bass line. What I'm suggesting would be the exact opposite - a bassist adding upper octaves to create the impression of a lead line.



I'll take a look at your suggestion for using automation lanes to adjust the controls of Ambiosoniq .

Generally I prefer to dial the sound in, before adding automation, as it can upset the workflow a little downstream, and I also had a feeling that in the past I was automating a P&M plug-in (can't remember which right now) and the units displayed in the automation lane bore no relation to the units used on the plug-in GUI - like one was in dB, and the other was in percentages - which made things a little tricky.


I am using Pro Tools, and as I mentioned, your plug-ins are sorted by category, as well as manufacturer, which has certainly helped me track down some of the more obliquely named plug-ins - I just found that some of the names were not immediately obvious as to the plug-in's function, or one did what you expected another to do, going by name alone (the number of times I've pulled up Liquid Air Q, when I was looking for Ambiosoniq, or I've been hunting around the amp simulations, unable to find the Vox simulator, because it's name does not adhere to the convention established by your other three amp sims, and it's much further down the list of plug-ins available).

I totally get where the names come from, or how they are derived, and it's certainly part of the charm.

Like I said, It's probably just me being a bit thick at times, but I feel it definitely is a case of having to learn the P&M plugs by names, as much as function - and I feel that slightly goes against your original ethos.

If perhaps there were additional meta-data / tags that could be included "behind the scenes", so that for example, all your amp simulations appear next to each other in the plug-in list (whether in the manufacturer list, or the category lists), and likewise with your EQ's and dynamics, rather than being scattered around alphabetically - which relies on numbskulls like myself actually remembering the names (though I am getting there).

It's not so much a problem when manufacturers only have a handful of plug-ins to choose from, but as we're now looking at 45 plug-ins - only a handful of which I use on every mix, the others being pulled up as and when the situation demands - that's a lot of names to remember.

Still, I really can't wait to get my hands on those five new plug-ins!

Cheers!

[Nick]

Hi Nick,

with regards to Octaplexer, I was suggesting adding two octaves above the input signal (not another two octaves below the existing sub-octaves).

For exactly the reasons you stated, it can be really useful (on occasion) to take a bass instrument, and generate higher octaves above the input signal.

Often you'll get guitarists using octave dividers to create the impression of a doubled up bass line. What I'm suggesting would be the exact opposite - a bassist adding upper octaves to create the impression of a lead line.



I'll take a look at your suggestion for using automation lanes to adjust the controls of Ambiosoniq .

Generally I prefer to dial the sound in, before adding automation, as it can upset the workflow a little downstream, and I also had a feeling that in the past I was automating a P&M plug-in (can't remember which right now) and the units displayed in the automation lane bore no relation to the units used on the plug-in GUI - like one was in dB, and the other was in percentages - which made things a little tricky.


I am using Pro Tools, and as I mentioned, your plug-ins are sorted by category, as well as manufacturer, which has certainly helped me track down some of the more obliquely named plug-ins - I just found that some of the names were not immediately obvious as to the plug-in's function, or one did what you expected another to do, going by name alone (the number of times I've pulled up Liquid Air Q, when I was looking for Ambiosoniq, or I've been hunting around the amp simulations, unable to find the Vox simulator, because it's name does not adhere to the convention established by your other three amp sims, and it's much further down the list of plug-ins available).

I totally get where the names come from, or how they are derived, and it's certainly part of the charm.

Like I said, It's probably just me being a bit thick at times, but I feel it definitely is a case of having to learn the P&M plugs by names, as much as function - and I feel that slightly goes against your original ethos.

If perhaps there were additional meta-data / tags that could be included "behind the scenes", so that for example, all your amp simulations appear next to each other in the plug-in list (whether in the manufacturer list, or the category lists), and likewise with your EQ's and dynamics, rather than being scattered around alphabetically - which relies on numbskulls like myself actually remembering the names (though I am getting there).

It's not so much a problem when manufacturers only have a handful of plug-ins to choose from, but as we're now looking at 45 plug-ins - only a handful of which I use on every mix, the others being pulled up as and when the situation demands - that's a lot of names to remember.

Still, I really can't wait to get my hands on those five new plug-ins!

Cheers!

Hello Carl,

As we have a lot to do and responded quickly here I missed the "octaves above". The logic of the plug-in is to add bass not move things up, so I jumped on that.

It is a great idea but it will mean some added development time to pitch shift up rather than just down.

And it is a difficult thing to do and sound "natural" unless you want a strange sounding guitar. have you heard some of the "octavizers" on guitar that give a 12 string sound? Some of them are not very pretty, unless you like "trashy" sounding 12 strings, which can work in certain styles of music.

Strange coincidence, we just sent out a newsletter with the focus on a fantastic pitch shifter by IRCAM LAB that is unbelievably musical. I really thing you should check it out, if you didn't get the newsletter, drop me a line and I will pass on the link where you can try it out until the 10th of June.

With regards to Ambiosoniq, I also prefer to dial the sound in like you, then add automation to correct the details. If there is a different in the naming of the scales dBs become percentage, it is hard for me to know why as I didn't program them, to know if this is P+M problem or ProTools. In the end it all comes down to the sound. Sometimes I close my eyes while adjusting a plug-in to not be influenced by the settings I see in the plug-in and it is a good thing as the settings are at +20db in some cases, but it sounds right for that particular mix or track.

About the names I can see your point even with the sorting one can do with ProTools, I have never looked into whether one can "rename" or "nickname" the plug-ins, but I doubt we can in ProTools so they have an order that corresponds to our usage.
It is a bit late to re-adjust them now and we are going to add to your problem by adding another 5 that have some interesting names as well

All the best,

Nick