Coral - mastering channel strip

[giancarlo]

Yes they are auto releases

[Beatworld]

Yes they are auto releases

Thanks very much, good to know.

Is it the same in position 6 for the Sand Detector ?
I note Sand only has 5 release positions, the 5th being auto, does that make a difference ?
What happens at Slow with Sand selected?

cheers

[giancarlo]

Yes position 6 for sand
Position 5 was derived from 6 but without autorelease

[Beatworld]

Is the Coral Compressor inspired in any way by the SPL Iron Mastering Compressor ?

[SoundForSoul]

Is the Coral Compressor inspired in any way by the SPL Iron Mastering Compressor ?

You might say so, judging by the looks, at least

[kingslanemusic]

I just installed the Coral trial, but there are only the single components,
the channel strip is missing.
Is this a demo limitation ?

[giancarlo]

main coral will be released around the middle of november (even a bit earlier)

[HDNebula]

Is the Coral Compressor inspired in any way by the SPL Iron Mastering Compressor ?

The design seems similar, but I doubt very much that is inspired by spl iron, because if the compressor were a spl iron then eq logically should be spl pq (passeq V2) or passeq, but eq is baxandall, so they are different things.
I'd like if these aquas were spl iron and spl pq, and after they release this baxandall eq with more baxandall eqs (danger bax eq for example) and with HP/LP, but unfortunately for me, isn't the case.

[giancarlo]

the compressor is inspired but on steroids.
Take the same thing but add 5-6 new concepts and release it
The equalizer created by us is clearly better that one; speaking strictly about bax designs it is better than if we sampled ANY existing hardware one. There are two main point to evaluate:
- no hardware bax filter has more than few frequencies. No one
- the passive equalizer used by the other company is a "normal" passive equalizer. What you miss normally in the hardware realm is such a powerful equalizer, but it's sad, it would be too much expensive


Said that, the bax was not "computer generated". It is a true bax created in the hardware domain, but we sampled a step after an other step after careful tuning. This thing would not so easy in the commercial world: just a "simple" sontec is priced more than 10K.

Sampling the "cell" allowed to reduce all kind of possible noises; this thing would be impossible sampling a black box like dangerous. Compared to Coral their eq is very very limited.


-> yes we were inspired by several devices:
- M*****c for the elliptical filter, but we preferred to build our "perfect" hardware crossovers and sample them
- dangerous for baxandall equalizer, but we preferred to build our "extended" and "perfect" hardware one because that one is very very limited
- a naive approach to filters (they are hardware btw)
- spl for the comp, but basically we extended the design and concept and ended with a very powerful competitor.

I want to add an important consideration.
Today there is NO software company doing what we are doing.
Basically the "digital" tool software companies are releasing tools which are not derived by hardware but from ditigal dsp appoarch
The "analog emulation" software companies are releasing basically clones (and imho worse clones than hardware).
Acustica is the "first" company to merge those two concepts.
We create an hardware device, and we sample it. The hardware device we create is "perfect", in a way no commercial hardware tool can. Than we can add further features, not present in original units and get the same soul but with better performances at least for accuracy and general specifications




* please note, the companies I listed are not endorsing in any way acustica or coral. They are different trademarks and not affiliated with us

[HDNebula]

Hi G - coral is an excellent concept- the compressor is particularly tasty- please permit me to give you some constructive criticism on the eq - I think it's not transparent enough for true mastering - especially for modern music. Is there anyway you can provide an option to switch off the colour? As I say this still an excellent product- good stuff!!

Yes, you are right. For this reason I suggested to make an aqua eq with some baxandall eqs (this eq + danger bax for example) and 1-2 eqs only with shelfs (clariphonic, electrodyne for example), with different tones and with HP/LP. I wouldn't include a specific eq like this in a channel strip (coral).
Baxandall eqs or eqs only with shelfs are usually a one trick pony at best, so the possibility that they don't work on a lot of tracks is high.

[giancarlo]

guys

1) there is no "color" (just grab an analyzer:the curve is perfectly flat, there is no harmonic distortion, phase is the one just generated by the bax design)
2) a normal bax eq is just featuring a single frequency. Period. Check the frequency they are using and that's all. There is no magic about this. Just grab an analyzer and check it. Than if you cannot use a bax eq or you don't like the concept go on.

I think there are several myths about what dangerous or clariphonic are doing. They are exactly the same (if they are implementing the design correctly), but they can play a single frequency. Normally for mastering you should have choices, not reducing them.

So: if you need a bax for mastering (or for mixing) coral is the answer. If you cannot find the answer in coral -> bax design is not for you. Please note: several mastering engineers are already using coral. We'll post some cool audio demo this week

[giancarlo]

just to be clear on this point: I don't want to convince all mastering engineers on earth they need the bax design. For the same reason I will not convince all them they need a sontec, or a M*****c or whatever. Several ones use M*****c, other ones just a manely. Several ones like baxs, and they try to use the things they can find on the market.

I'm quite sure the other baxandall products are not aimed to mastering (even if used sometimes). Yes, on mastering you could use whatever you want (even a pultec if the music requires it), but they are not devices specifically designed for mastering (in the mastering-grade unit sense) and this is the main reason you don't find a mastering unit featuring bax. If you limit the number of frequencies the result will be very limited.

[Avgatzeblouz]

Hi Giancarlo, I would like to understand how the hw you build to sample is "better" than the one we can buy ? Not an attack at all, I don't design hw, and Acustica basically replaced my hw needs, but I find it intriguing. Are you saying most hw builders are cutting corners to make things not too expensive (even if they can be damn expensive !) ? Or are you talking about phase issues we usually find, or specifically the number of eq bands on Coral ?

[giancarlo]

Because you
1) can sample the internal cell, bypassing all elements you are forced to add to the hardware for getting it more flexible (ie impedance, gains....) and calibrating the levels in a sort of ideal path
2) you can choose carefully components testing them for the exact frequency you are going to sample. Such kind of precision is rare, expensive and quite impossible in a practical commercial company
3) because in the hardware world such device is almost impossible to build. You should go for a project like sontec, moving costs to the stellar region

Check the user manual, there are good tips. In a normal world the baxandall is idealized (software, with often aliasing issues) or limited to few frequencies (hardware)

[giancarlo]

I see stedal is connected, he will tell you more