While it's true that the average listener doesnt have a high-end monitoring system, the subtleties and nuances captured by acustica plugins can still contribute to an overall better sound quality. This enhanced quality can be perceived even on less sophisticated systems. High-quality production isn't just about what can be explicitly heard; it's also about the depth, clarity, and feel of the sound, which can affect the listening experience across various devices.

Your argument about acustica's focus on EQs, compressors, limiters, and pre-amps, and the lack of variation between their products is a matter of personal opinion. Many of us appreciate the subtle differences between various iterations of similar equipment, valuing the specific character and vibe each one brings. By this logic, why does anyone need any plugins besides proq3 and pro ? We all have go to eq's, EQs, compressors etc for different use cases.

As far as fully sweepable eqs, theres plenty of analog gear that does the same, and even some algo plugins. Besides, acustica has recently started making more "fully sweepable" programs. I think they even opened up and modded some hardware to make this possible, pretty cool! Of course acustica has "failed to fully recreate a device". They arent magicians, nor are they selling hardware clones, they are creating something that is, to many, the closest possible thing to said device, next to owning one yourself.

I have ZERO issues with CPU processing, not until i start having 100+ tracks with acustica plugins + mastering in the same session. nor do i think the interfaces are tedious. Have you ever used some of the analog counterparts, they are oftentimes just as confusing until you get to know them. I actually enjoy the interfaces in a lot of them. An interface / user experience can influence how you work, for me thats a plus, i enjoy slowing down sometimes, and fiddling with knobs etc. If i need quick fix mix (while in a session with a client etc) ill just grab whatever shitty DAW comp, UAD, or proq3 etc.

 

Why are there programs where you press a button, and it does everything for you, so it shouldn't take you more than an hour. You have 23 hours left to talk about these things. Well, no, speaking seriously. We also have a social life. We're not making music 24 hours a day, so you take time to talk about other things. In my case, since I have to play on the street, I come back really tired and sometimes not in the mood. But when I'm at home working on a project, I want to distract myself for a while. In the case of this person, they felt the need to mock AA. in a "very particular" way. In my opinion, the topic of AA is over, as we say in Argentina, 'Ya fue" = "it's done" or "it's over."' But well, some people seem to be very angry with AA.

 

You can do a passable,decent mix with nothing but the Fabfilter plugins, stock fx, and something for audio repair functions like De-Click, etc. Something like Acon Digital or Accusonus ERA, or RX of course.

Anyway, my question is why do you mention Pro-Q3 multiple times in your post, but not Pro-C2? Do you not install the full Fabfilter bundle or do you just dislike the Pro-C2 compressor? There isn't a bad plugin in that bundle imo, even if people do prefer Valhalla more than Pro-R. Those plugins are basically the polar opposite of AA plugins. Everything does what it is supposed to, there are not more than one that do the same things, the interfaces are nice, they are low-resources, and they are clean for the most part.

 

Well it isn't just to mock them really. I wanted to like them, but for what bits I do like (there are some being fair about it all, albeit very few), there are far too many negatives. To be honest it is why I moved on from Nebula years ago after a short stint. People rave about the third party stuff, honestly... I just cannot fathom why. It is all clunky and behind the times. If Giancarlo hadn't spat the dummy out so badly I wouldn't have found it all so funny to be honest with you all. You lot might have all had your laugh about it and got over it, but I only started my laughing when I made this post.

EDIT: see it all went wrong when I downloaded gigabytes of Acustica data while knowing it was in fact much smaller than it would be if I had bought it, and when I fired it up I started to wonder why... just... why? That is what did it.

 

I use Pro C as well! great plugin! Although ive been using it less lately. Its good for quick clean compression, is also highly tweakable, very versatile plugin. I never clicked with Pro-R. Tried to for a while, as i own the bundle, but there are other verbs i prefer more. Including valhalla, liquidsonics, tc electronic VSS4, UAD Lexicon and recently the Wave Alchemy bundle. I use saturn from time to time, as well as proMB. Pro L i use everywhere as a sort of clipper. I never use the de-esser, just have better results with other plugins, nor their synths. I occasionally use their delay and filter FX too.

 

Yes, I understand the point, and I understand that there is a kind of accumulated resentment from many users due to certain attitudes of Giancarlo towards them. From what I've read, for example, if the GUI (Graphical User Interface) was too large, users were suggested to buy larger screens. Also, there were complaints about excessive protection measures that added significant weight for the user. At least, that's what I gathered from what I've read, although I don't speak English.

Now, when a person is upset, it's difficult for them to objectively judge whether the plugin is good or bad, as there's a preconceived idea that takes precedence. Seeing R2R defy AA (presumably the company or developer) is like a "release" for the user who thinks, "good, that scoundrel paid for it." However, as mentioned earlier, I believe that Giancarlo must have realized that he did something wrong to earn the users' resentment, not because his VSTs are on the sister site, since we see all kinds of VSTs there. I mean, it doesn't seem like a personal issue between R2R and Giancarlo.

But well, I think it's an opportunity for this person to reflect and do better, especially in dealing with his users, who ultimately are the ones supporting him. Personally, I find AA's VSTs good, especially the compressors. However, I do think they consume a lot of CPU, too much in fact. I'm not a user; I've only tried demos from the sister site. I wouldn't buy them; I would prefer something like Fabfilter or PA. But it seems to me that if AA works more on its products, they have the potential to improve.

 

i don't want to rate AA plugins here as good or bad, but in my opinion the whole thing is a bit hyped. before i could try them i thought they were overly good compared to other manufacturers, but after thorough testing this is not the case.

 

The DeEsser has a high frequency limiter as a preset that i use a lot of times with crispy material around 5 to 9 khz, especially on drums and mastering. Try out the "Mastering" preset "High End Transient Limit" on Pro-DS. Sort of a secret weapon. I don't use this plugin to Deess vocals, just for the HF limiter

 

thanks for the tip! ill check it out

 

We always find some time to talk shit between renders and blind tests

(But ofc there are people that doesn't render their songs, doesn't test their plugs and talk shit )

 

Sometimes when I have a part and it's sound is just "grating and annoying" for some unspecific reason, wether it is compression artifacts or just sort of abrasive sounding, @Riddim Machine is right and that Pro-DS HF limiter preset is one of the first things I consider using. But I change the frequency band down to around 7K-10K. Maybe someday I will switch up that move with some AA plugin; when I get a new supercomputer.

 

yup! just tried it out and @Riddim Machine brings the great tips! very transparent. cleaned up some grainy found sound type loops in a very nice way.

 

Doesn't worth, really. Pro-DS just obliterates that HF Limiter from AA

 

curious, have you tried "fire the de-ess"? its one of the only offerings from acustica i have yet to try

 

Tell us your pc specs

 

And they deserve all the criticism they get and more, imagine they where softube and they used the same GUI, same story, emulation claims and talk about lowering the memory pigs.

But I ask again, are we going to see more Mac AA stuff on the other side of the moon or was there a serious tantrum that caused the sister site to shut down over it?

 

Mac Studio M1 Ultra , 64GB. nothing super crazy.

 

No, from the Fire series i only liked FireClip and FireGold (the freebie). I would not use AA for those utility tasks as deessing, because i think algos can handle it better than any HW. Like multiband compressors and transient shapers. Technology made some things that were quite impossible on the analog world as softwares.

As i didn't tested it, i can't say nothing about it, but my main goal with AA is the mojo and building high quality virtual mixing consoles, in a way i can have a ton of palettes to choose from right at my fingertip on one single template. With algos, this task can be a lot harder and much less rewarding than with AA.

 

4000+ dollars without the screen is nothing special ? Whats special for you then ?

 

ah for sure, makes sense. also, i messaged you, check ur inbox.