![difference between the waves ssl e channel and g channel difference between the waves ssl e channel and g channel](https://iconcollective.edu/wp-content/uploads/Best-Channel-Strip-Plugins.jpg)
- Difference between the waves ssl e channel and g channel mac os#
- Difference between the waves ssl e channel and g channel pro#
- Difference between the waves ssl e channel and g channel free#
While this is a helpful feature, it isn't a deal-breaker for me, as the most frequent use of side-chain EQ is for de-essing, and to do that properly you need a proper de-esser with a frequency-selective side-chain and signal path. The plug-ins also vary as to whether they include side-chain EQ. Providing there is good dynamics metering telling me what is going on in the dynamics section, I would prefer to lose the dynamics display, as a graphical display of the EQ curve is a lot more useful. However, to keep the graphical user interface (GUI) sensible, a number of the manufacturers have chosen to make compromises such as losing the graphical displays of the EQ and/or dynamics sections.
![difference between the waves ssl e channel and g channel difference between the waves ssl e channel and g channel](https://static.bhphoto.com/images/fb/1408921.jpg)
One of the obvious benefits of a channel strip plug-in is that you have control over your EQ, gate and compressor from within a single window. The vocal in question has a wide dynamic range that will test the compressor sections well, and the original sound needed warming and brightening, hence the requirement for EQ. I then used each channel strip plug-in in turn and tried to replace at least the EQ and compressor in such a way that I could reproduce the same sound, or even maybe improve on it. To test each plug-in's sound quality, functionality and ease of use I took an existing vocal track which already had all five insert points in use. Remember that you still need to watch your level architecture even with double-precision plug-ins, as although the plug-in may be able to handle the extra level, you may experience headroom problems once it gets out. The figure for internal bit depth shows what the internal headroom of each plug-in will be like, where that information is available: some manufacturers have not published information on this. I was able to achieve figures in excess of 100 percent because my system is based on a dual 1.42GHz G4 mirror door Mac, making my ceiling 200 percent.
![difference between the waves ssl e channel and g channel difference between the waves ssl e channel and g channel](https://dt7v1i9vyp3mf.cloudfront.net/styles/news_large/s3/imagelibrary/p/ptworkshop9-h0ERNP3Nw5M2WoUDRv9JuBz2cOkbJRCV.jpg)
Difference between the waves ssl e channel and g channel mac os#
In the end I had the Mac OS Activity Monitor window open and noted the increase in percentage processor use when I added 32 instances of a particular plug-in, the idea being to simulate a situation where one channel strip plug-in was used on every track of a 32-track session. However, measuring the processor use of the RTAS versions was a little trickier. With the System Usage window open and on Gas Gauge, I just added instances of a particular plug-in until they filled a chip. The test for how many would fit on an HD DSP chip was reasonably easy. We have 11 channel strip plug-ins under test here, and the table above (click to enlarge) lists the details of exactly what each plug-in includes, along with my comments on each one and measurements of the system resources they require. What Is A Channel Strip?ĭifferent manufacturers incorporate different features into their channel strip plug-ins, but for the purposes of this article, a plug-in must have at least an EQ and a dynamics section to be considered a channel strip.
Difference between the waves ssl e channel and g channel free#
A channel strip plug-in that combined at least some of these functions would free up some insert points.Īnother potential advantage is that having one plug-in window covering all the channel strip functions would help to simplify and streamline our workflow, compared with having five plug-in windows open simultaneously to manage and make adjustments on all these separate plug-ins. If you then wanted to add, say, a treble enhancer or an ADT effect, you'd find all your plug-in slots already used up. For example, on a vocal track you might have an EQ followed by a pitch-correction plug-in, compressor, de-esser and reverb or delay.
![difference between the waves ssl e channel and g channel difference between the waves ssl e channel and g channel](https://www.audiodeluxe.com/sites/default/files/styles/product_display_slideshow/public/products/ssl_1.jpg)
Difference between the waves ssl e channel and g channel pro#
There is a brick-wall limit of five insert points on each track in Pro Tools, and you can quite quickly fill them up with routine plug-ins. The most obvious reason for using channel strip plug-ins is to free up insert points. Do they offer anything you couldn't get by using separate EQ and compressor plug-ins, or are they just a clever marketing trick to get us to buy more plug-ins? And which ones shine from the bunch? There has been a mild explosion of channel strip plug-ins in the Pro Tools universe recently, so I thought it would be good to take a look at what makes them tick. It saves on insert slots, but do channel strips offer any other benefits, and which ones stand out from the crowd? The trend among plug-in designers is to integrate commonly used processes such as EQ and compression into a single plug-in.