MTurboComp Requests

[Svama]

What I don´t understand, why they modelled (machine learning) from a model?
Which emulations did they use therefore? UAD? Waves? And it´s just the attack/release/knee/.... behaviour and not the saturation. That´s all the same for the different Melda models.
Why they didn´t go into a professional studio and used the compressors of the studio for machine learning? Like they do for their new drum libraries.
And yes, it would be so great if I could switch between the different models in MTurboComp without adjusting the compressor from start. Inside PSP Infinistrip, dmg trackcomp 2 and other companies I can switch between different models without adjusting anything new and just can hear the diference between the different models with the same parameters. At this point I´m really dissapointed from the programing inside MTurboComp.

[aquataur]

Inside PSP Infinistrip, dmg trackcomp 2 and other companies I can switch between different models without adjusting anything new and just can hear the diference between the different models with the same parameters.

I agree with you in general, but I really bedoubt this. Consider the following.
An optical unit will have a slow response in a way, but not akin to a long attack time.
Looking at the manuals of those revered hardware units, they have time constants all over the place, and mostly intertwined.
It is thus highly unlikely that switching between such models will yield any meaningful comparison. This is like comparing apples to pears.

As a matter of fact, (and this comes out of their mouth...), they refrain from displaying meaningful units for controls like attack and release, citing the very explanation above.

However this nulls the very purpose of locking some controls through model cycling. In fact it nulls the purpose of cycling through models at all. What further renders this impossible is the fact that the odd model is totally incompatible by means of input level (as mentioned above).

As mentioned earlier, those apparent inconsistencies lead me to the desire of investigating the original hardware units better. This revealed that they did not try to wholly encompass any unit´s behavior, just to get the general swing of it. Which were fine, if it were declared.

It is thus almost as if they have created new devices. You cannot go and read the user manual of any of those hardware units and think you can apply this to those models. There is too many simplifications and generalizations they have made. Plus some things I do not consider right.
So how can the purchaser of their unit harness such a compressor if there is no manual or even a situation to compare to?

Actually, I am sick and tired of the kill-all argument that you have to listen. So everybody who feels tempted to recite it - please refrain. Those guys from the time, where those units were created, were sound engineers, meaning technically educated people who thoroughly understood those units. And likely had the ear too.

I am amazed that noone of the staff ever chimes in to discussions like that. Bad rap is not what a product needs. The paradox thing is, it could easily be fixed.

[Held]

According to this article, we don't need analog gear or simulations.
https://www.meldaproduction.com/tutoria ... conclusion

Welcome to the capitalist world, where everyone is telling you which is better not based on which actually is, but what they are selling. The truth is, the only remaining advantage of analogue processing is the fact that there is no latency. But customers don't know that and the companies developing analogue gear are much wealthier than software companies, so they needed to come up with some serious marketing. So now every bad thing about analogue is marketed as an awesome positive feature providing warmth, depth or other descriptive words. So what are the "advantages" of analogue that these marketing experts and dinosaurs stubbornly insist on filling you with? Let's enumerate...

So I'm wondering why MTurboComp exists in the first place...

The new Three-Body Technology Cenozoix Compressor looks more like what I'd imagine a TurboComp to look like. Hopefully we'll get an upgrade (after the MixingRevolution is done, of course ) https://www.plugin-alliance.com/en/prod ... essor.html

[Hexspa]

I disagree with the premise that we don't need analog emulations. They're part of the vocabulary of audio production. Foregoing them is akin to removing adverbs from a language. You can work around the limitation but for what? To prove some techno-moral point?

While I appreciate that Melda has distinguished themselves by _not_ chasing the emu dragon, as MTurboComp and MTurboEQ demonstrate, there's a valid place for such tools in the meldaverse. Heck, Melda is even using Neural Amp Modeler which is nothing but an attempt to make a carbon copy of an analog device. So it's the contrary: I hope that Melda will innovate in this domain and bring us neural compression and modulation modules which are missing in the linear time-invariant captures that we have at present.

[aquataur]

4) If we don't have analogue gear, we need simulations.
The important question is why we need analogue gear in the first place, and we summed that up above. Why should it sound exactly like that?? Maybe it can be better!

Nothing speaks against that. But better or worse in what respect?
That is marketing rap.

Assume those models are different. No, the references are unmistakeable references to the iconic models. A digital (I mean non-character) compressor may be used with just a fundamental knowledge of the inner works of a compressor, but not if it is a character compressor with a lot of peculiarities you don´t know about. Particularly if the controls bear cryptic names like "punch". Even more if you cannot effectively cycle through the models to "just listen".

I insist on the view-point that there should be some useful documentation. Something like "1176" is hint enough to borrow from the hardware unit´s manuals, but some models simply are unfathomable or made "better" beyond the point of recognition.

Melda folks, please understand, we are not complaining about the quality of the models. It´s the lack of documentation, the guess-work and the uncertainties.

[Frankie.T]

I think people get this stuff from a wrong point of view.

Let's start with hardware:
Every unit is different. I.e. If you try 2 different 1176 made from the same company they sound different.

Same is for plugins from different companies. I made a comparison between (almost) every damn analog emulation, if you wanna check it you check my youtube channel, go into my playlists and have fun watching "Plugin Wars".
Long story short, apart from few exception they sound all different, even by a lot. So if you say 1176 plugin, you are telling nothing than a brand, cause sound wise i've heard "slow compressors" to act faster than some 1176 (that should be pretty fast).

So the point should not be what i saw wrote here, but to train your ears to listen if what is happening is good or not. Once you achive that, you can chose the model you like the most and tweak it as you prefer. I even recreated in MTC other compressors from other companies. Ofc they are no 100% the same, maybe 90% but the difference isn't neither better or worse, just different.

So when i apply compression to sounds i listen if it's good or not, and this is what makes the most sense.

Try to follow me. When you apply compression, you do that cause there is something you try to achieve. So you should know what's wrong with the dry signal.
Once you apply compression, you should be able to listen if this is what you needed or not. If not, understanding what's still not right is the only key.


There is no magic or better outside. The results comes from you not from your tools.
A sword it's objectivelly "stronger" than hands, but a karatè guy can be more harmful with their hands, than one of us with a sword.

Same is for audio plugins/hardware

[Hexspa]

Oh boy. Last thing I need was something else on my watch later playlist

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLW4P ... Wdabpmfrxj

[Frankie.T]

Just remove the other videos in your watch later playlist, easy

Jokes apart, when you finish to watch this series, let me know what do you think.
It was an enlightening experience to me, and i hope to be the same for viewers, to enlarge their knowledge about "emulations"