I hate deceptive, or otherwise terrible marketing. Here's some examples I've encountered.

Sonnox Oxford Inflator

Perhaps the most well known example. But, let's take a look at their claims.

"Louder mixes without the issues associated with compressors"
"Add apparent dynamic range to previously clipped signals"
"A unique and powerful plugin to increase loudness, without sacrificing sonic quality or dynamic range."

It's a fucking waveshaper

And they're outright lying to you too. Like all basic waveshapers, it DECREASES the dynamic range, they claim it does the opposite by INCREASING it. The "split band" function afaik is unique to it but it just splits the saturation effect into different bands so whoopdeedoo.

Now, the effect itself is actually quite nice, but that doesn't justify their bullshit marketing on it.

Baby Audio Smooth Operator

"Smooth Operator combines the benefits of Resonance Suppression, Spectral Compression and Equalization into one, smart workflow. "
"Adapts to your audio in realtime and automatically combats fatigued frequency areas"
"Lets you creatively sculpt and shape your tonal balance without nasty artifacts"

It's just a spectral compressor. Spectral compressors inherently reduce resonances as well as equalize signals, and there are artifacts.
TBProAudio's DSEQ is just a better version of this in just about every way.

Softube Trident A-Range

"Sweet but edgy sound, and organic, musical interactions between the bands make this a more powerful companion than it may seem."
"Its four frequency bands also have a way of integrating in sometimes rather unpredictable ways."
"EQ with a will of its own"

It's just a generic analog EQ

Now, the filter curves maybe their own original design, or maybe the saturation algorithm is different than others, but for the life of me I can't understand how this has received their claimed "legendary status". Nothing about this is very bad, nor very unique, which makes their claims just puzzling to me. I can understand the love for pultec EQs, so it's not just that I dislike analog EQs, but I can't hear, or see, any particularly unique filter curves with this plugin, certainly nothing that makes it worth the $200 pricetag. If you want an EQ with nice saturation try Voxengo's EQs or Black Rooster Audio KH-EQ1.

These 2 aren't nearly as bad as Oxford Inflator, but nevertheless I still felt deceived on their operation before I actually tried them out. I'd like to see more examples.

 

Couldn't agree more. I actually made a thread about bad plugin marketing. I had my hands full with just one particular plugin that, well, was outrageous. Not long after came the "Marvel CU"-like marketing of the "God Particle" plugin.

I was planning of making a second part but this just might be it.

 

Well that's the full price, everybody knows that's not the real price, it's just to make sales look more atractive. Just look at PA, $300 per plugin on full price? Hell naw. Back to Softube, the A-Range is usually at $80 i think, which is pretty close to any Trident inspired plugin out there (except for Analog obsession's TREQ). So yeah, hyperbolic marketing is just a memeworthy joke at this point, it sucks but you just learn to ignore it or laugh at it.

They claim it increases APPARENT dynamic range, which is very subjective imo, but "out there" enough for them to get away with it.

If you're talking about Trident, no idea either, i know their stuff was used on important records but i can't really recognize the "trident" sound, maybe i just haven't used their stuff often enough. If you're talking about this specific plugin, the only other option for the A-range i've tried is Arturia's, but Softube's has a bit more bite, which i guess people like? I do, won't pay $80 for it though.

Freakshow industries backmask:
*We eliminate the learning curve by making it impossible to learn.*
*Only the best for you, you precious little snowflake.*
*We fight crime by legalizing it.*
I mean, it's bad but.... I love these guys.

 

Attached is a typical sales pitch. "Hello, I am from Audiosexpro and I am looking for a powerful EQ":

Legendary British console EQ, defining the "Golden Era" of rock music.

Licensed and authorized by Trident Audio Developments, the Tridentt®A-Range Classic Console EQ plug-in for UAD-2 hardware and Apollo audio interfaces provides a perfect emulation of the legendary EQ heard on recordings such as David Bowie's The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust, Lou Reed's Transformer, and Queen's Sheer Heart Attack, among countless others.

Trident's A-Range console has cult status and is deservedly one of the most popular, classic Trident consoles. The Trident A-Range EQ is especially appreciated for the unique interplay of the different EQ bands and the special filter combinations and has changed the sound of rock music forever. Source: www.uaudio.de/uad-plugins/equalizers/trident-a-range.html

It's always the same scam, then comes the glossy brochure with a well-known audio technician, the 48 track mixer in
the foreground (note: the audio technician says what do I have to say for $40 - just say you mix everything with it)
back to the topic, then at the end there are User reviews with fantasy sentences Kang like sweet caramel... !

 

I remember that well, I made my own rant post about inflator
https://audiosex.pro/threads/beat-the-system-get-sonnox-oxford-inflator-for-free-legally.62559/

Though the marketing terms are meaningless, just as with virtually every plugin, I have to say that this plugin produces EQ curves that are quite uncommon:



look how the falling curve is noticeably steeper

so "EQ with a will of its own" is actually quite fitting

 

Sonnox Oxford Inflator
"A unique and powerful plugin to increase loudness, without sacrificing sonic quality or dynamic range."

It is a volume knob?

 

I did my own tests with Arturia's version of this EQ and it's remarkably similar. I've actually grown a liking to this EQ, definitely is funky.

 

OMG

 

The A Range is great, I use it all the time. But yeah, it's just an analog eq, however it's one that's been deemed musical through the years. It's "legendary" because the original was among the first with that sound profile, that's about it.

 

Funky might not be the word for this one. Stunning, perhaps. I have seen 0 marketing actually, but I do not visit PA. ;)

 

Last edited: Nov 4, 2022

Nope, they don't.

Nope, Sonnox claims:

And Sonnox is absolutely right about that.

 

Terrible Marketing and Deceptive Marketing are two different animals. They are almost diametrically opposed.

One ends up with a customer who does not buy a product. The other ends up with a customer who does.

 

"without sacrificing sonic quality or dynamic range"
They dropped the apparent part, and yes, it does noticeably decrease the dynamic range.

 

Surprisingly, not necessarily (maybe even not at all, didn't test it a lot)
As you can see for the same TP, LUFSm,s,i increased while LRA remains the same (ok, went 0.1 up, could be rounding error)


Why? It's not a dynamic tool, it's a waveshaper.

 

You can reduce the dynamic range with Inflator, which leads to an increase in loudness, or you can increase the dynamic range, which leads to an accentuation of the transients and thus lower loudness. It's all a matter of the transfer curve you use.

 

So can you please then explain how this is better/not better represented by increase/decrease in Signal to Noise Ratio, as this plugin has been proposed to introduce some level of saturation or wave shaping within it's "black box" ? I hope I have asked this in a way it makes sense. I am reading about it.

SNR is measured at the specific point when the exposure is stopped whereas dynamic range is calculated at the saturation point of the pixel. SNR takes into account all noise sources.

 

Nope. I don't know what length your material is, but remember, LRA is a long-term measurement.
It's all about the transfer curve. But they still didn't lie. They just express themselves very precisely, which can easily be misinterpreted.

 

Once upon a time, at a forum I can't remember now (prolly this one or kvr) I took an extensive beer shit on Melda's exaggerated claims like THE ONLY ONE ON THE MARKET THE FIRST ONE GUYS REALLY THIS STUFF IS UNIQUE whereas more than half their stuff is other plugins often badly reproduced lol

 

MeldaProductions is partly why free plugins have a bad rep

Couple of possibilities
1. They changed the algorithm in V4
2. The multiband mode significantly reduces the dynamic range loss
3. Some other reason
Either way I despise the fact they bend over backwards just to avoid telling the consumer what the damn thing actually is/does, in a literal way. Even in the documentation

 

My bad phrasing, I meant due to display rounding like 6.96 -> 7.0 and 6.94 -> 6.9.
However, your pic gave some more insight.