He wont, I rebuked one of his other videos in a comment a while ago. Dude just got all pissy. He is the ultimate example of a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Tools like plugin doctor are very useful IF you know what it is doing and what it can tell you vs what it cannot. People who 'debunked' Oxford inflator as just being a simple waveshaper also made similar mistakes by essentially ignoring how its behaviour changes over time and also how it changes with signal level. The behaviour of these plugins is not steady state.
I don't even think you needed to make this video but I'm glad you did. It's one thing to show that something can null at one setting, but how it sounds in context is what matters in the end.
When he showed the frequency response curve and not the hammerstein I immediate knew that this video response was coming. Dan Worrall *just* put out a video on non-linearity covering exactly that.
@@sonidojamon he did post a video on non-linearities right before all this iirc. It goes into the hammerstein graph and everything. Maybe not on this specific plugin, but it does enough to show the flaws of the way Paul Third approached testing. At the end of the day if you can pick a difference on an ABX test and you like the results go with mixhead, if those differences are meaningless to you, don't.
I respect how you handled this, really well done! I wish some of the commenters here would have had the same respect and grace you had in the video. We can disagree and still be kind to each other.
Well, to be fair, the video being responded to was neither kind nor graceful to either the product or those who see value in it - it was rather the opposite. But we'll stick to the facts.
@@MetricHaloAudio Fair enough. I look at it more as if he was stating his opinion. Everyone is entitled to their own thoughts and opinions. I understand the reason for this video and as I said, I feel like you guys handled it well in the video. You corrected the things you thought he got wrong and put it out there to let people make their own decisions. That should be done more often! Again, great video response.
@@matt_nyc_audioengineer Yeah - honestly I don't have any problem with him stating his opinion. Don't like how it sounds or looks? Fair enough; you are entitled to your opinion. Think it is overpriced? Again, I don't agree. But it is a valid perspective and he is entitled to it. But I (personally) believe that he went far beyond stating an opinion, and instead made claims the MixHead fully nulled with a relatively simple waveshaper that you can get for free, and as a result, that we were acting dishonestly and trying to deceive our customers. By extension, any one who purchased MixHead was a dupe that got taken for a ride by us. Certainly, based on the comments on that video, many of his viewers took the video to have said that (and shown it - even though it showed nothing of the sort). As I stated above, I don't consider that to be kind or graceful to either us or our customers. If what he said had been true, it would be one thing. But to be wrong, inflammatory and insulting is not a good look. There are some other videos that have reviewed the product, and from their perspective they didn't see how it was a good fit for them or their viewers - and fair enough; we didn't feel the need to respond to them. But the video this one is responding to makes claims that simply not true, so it goes beyond opinion and while we will always stick to the facts, I can understand why some of our customers are salty about that video - as it doesn't just impugn us, it also impugns them...
I love the mixhead, everything I put it on sounds a bit tighter and more polished. Like putting a fine coat of polish on a car. Some of these TH-cam mixers sound like they don’t actually do much mixing!
All I gotta say is this… even if MixHead was something that I could recreate exactly with other plugins, I’d still use MixHead because it gets me there faster and sounds damn good! Well worth the price of admission.
After that video came out, I tried replicating some of Mr. Third's tests, and long story short, we ended up getting into it a bit. I tried to explain the dynamic nature of the plugin and how the harder you hit it, the more diverse the signal processing becomes. Honestly, just the fact that he had to eliminate the high-frequency adjust to even produce his lackluster results makes his entire argument ridiculous. Bottom line, I’ve never put M Saturator on my mixbus, nor will I, even after testing it against MixHead. Its GUI is cluttered, it feels unintuitive, and the sweet spot for saturation is somewhere between -2 and +2. Any harder than that, and it’s just straight-up distortion. A plugin's worth is in the sound it creates and how easy it is to use. IMO, MixHead is great! It sounds good and is easy to dial in. The presets alone make it worth its price to me. Not to mention, its GUI is cool, and the HF adjust adds something you can’t find on many tape saturation plugins. It’s the best of both worlds: the low-end bloom of tape and the crisp crackle of digital hi-fi!
@@danthegeetarman You were neither the individual being asked, nor have you actually said you've done what was asked (AB test, not just 'using it for hours').
@@Mic1904 fair enough. But yes I have AB’d it. I did AB it a lot when I was first demoing it, to make sure it was something I truly liked, and it was indeed.
It’s pretty clear that guy had a result in mind that he wanted to prove before he even started doing any testing. But, unfortunately, outrage gets the clicks.
TH-cam has been full of "debunking" videos forever. It was a matter of time before they came into the audio community. I personally think they have their time and place but what bothers me is seeing these channels growing SOLELY from making these videos and not providing one piece of useful information outside that scope. You never see these people work or do any music- it's their purpose in life to look at diagrams with an "a-ha!"- type journalism. Yes, negativity sells on TH-cam- they know it and they milk that cow. At the end of the day, if you make a great piece of music I don't care what plugins you used. But if you don't show us what you do with all your diagrams- THIS is a problem.
You tube is also full of paid reviewers praising products as " game changer " or will give you the " sound " of succesful engineers . This side of you tube is much worse than the debunkers IMO
@@Dystopian84 yes, those exist too. But there are also great TH-camrs that show a plugin and actually DO something with it and you learn stuff that in the past you had to spend six-figure courses to learn about. I will take that every time. Debunking doesn't help anyone with their skills. It only prevents you from a "bad" buy. Advertising is everywhere in life whether we want it or not. There are demos for every plugin these days. The "danger" is overrated IMO. You don't have to believe every TH-camr that says "game changer"! Try the plugin- does it work for you? Great! Does it not? Don't buy it. There are tons of other things in life we are bombarded with that you cannot try and have to take the advertiser's word. Plugins is not one of them.
Am I understanding this correctly? If you drive Mixhead +15db or to some other unusable level, THEN you can see a noticeable delta in the frequency response vs M-Saturator? What would be the use case scenario where you would want to do that, especially on a bus? Again, maybe I’m just not understanding the debunking here.
No. What we are saying is that if you drive it too hard, you will get what is probably an unusable level of distortion (at least for a full mix bus, perhaps not for individual tracks where you can drive much harder). When you do that, the overall frequency response clearly diverges significantly. But even when you don't overdrive it, there is only one signal level where the response of the two plugins match, and they don't match at any other level - including all the levels that you would normally use to drive MixHead in its sweet spot. In addition, the dynamic response is different across the entire spectrum, and when you have a full mixbus worth of audio, you are hitting the process across the entire spectrum, not just one low-frequency sine wave. So again, the two processes are very different, and do different things to the audio. That's what we are saying - you cannot replace one with the other.
After watching Paul Third's video on MixHead I've been really hoping for a video like this. For me, this plugin has been helping my mixes a lot, which is all that really matters. Paul's video had some interesting points and it was cool to be introduced to a new plugin, however I was left with a sense of dissatisfaction. As I argued in the comment section for that video, I was yet to see an example of another (free or otherwise) plugin doing EXACTLY what MixHead does... this video has assured me that there isn't one - which I appreciate very much as an owner. Make Believe for the WIN.
@@NeilMacLeodMusic Hey thank you so much for this. That was the goal! Just correcting with the facts and to show it is not just a waveshaper. Thank you so much for watching and thank you so much for the support!
Paul, like a few others in his "field", can't really mix, so he turned looking at what plug-ins do into a business, for all the other people who think that in-depth knowledge of the code behind each tool is more important than practice and taste
@@akazicprod irrelevant, plug-in developers aren't using TH-cam to kickstart their mixing career. Paul wants to be a mixer and should spend time thinking about mixing, and actually mixing, instead of looking at graphs and making videos about plug-ins he wouldn't even know how to use at a professional level
@@Siile_ Well, we should ask him if those are his intentions. I think marketing is far more important these days to kickstart anything, and Make Believe and Metric Halo know that perfectly. Selling this waveshaper with subtle compression at that price is just hilarious.
@@akazicprod they spent time replicating the hardware's sound and behavior, a very expensive and rare unit. If that's what it does, that's what it does, and the potential customer can decide whether or not the price is in line with the results they get from it. Back when I purchased Inflator, it cost way more money compared to what it sells for today, no one was complaining about it being an expensive wave shaper
You definitely need better connection with the bloggers. Many brands sent me NFRs plus manual and short explanation of the plugin. And if I had questions they answered very fast directly or via their tech support.
And this is why _audio engineers_ should review plugins, and not hobbyist carpenters armed with a static sine wave and plugin doctor 🤦♂️….. oops did I say that out loud? 😁
@@matt_nyc_audioengineer I don’t disagree with what you’re saying, but the person in-question is literally everything I mentioned in my comment. A full-time carpenter who is a part-time audio enthusiast (on his own admission). Furthermore, in a lot of his videos he uses non-dynamic content to try to prove his points - which as Rick pointed out usually falters once dynamic program material is used. So while my comment may be poignant, it’s 100% accurate. It is possible we can still agree to disagree with my comment, which is fine, since I do respect your opinion on the matter.
@@matt_nyc_audioengineer I should also point out that his video is literally titled: “The Most Overpriced, Overhyped & Pointless Plugin of 2024”, so unfortunately seems like “the other party” hit below the belt well before anyone commented on this post. I would have to wonder if you would have the same sentiment in the comments section of that video, and whether they would heed that warning because, spoiler alert, they absolutely don’t. But I digress
Thanks for dropping this. It's instructive to try to find music actually mixed by some of these bedroom experts who spend their whole time trying to convince themselves and everyone who'll listen that everything is a scam and Reaper plugins are the same as real Fairchild 670 hardware. Their mixes are universally somewhere between terrible and bang average, and yet they manage to sound so smug trying to convince everyone they know better because they loaded plugin doctor one time. Paul Third is the worst, honestly Dan Worrall isn't far behind sometimes. Just keep building great stuff, please.
It would be great if both Paul and yourself jumped on a call to discuss the plugin. He strives learn the best ways of approaching his work, and audio. Reactions videos and going back and forth won't achieve this. Often I've found it's best to jump on a call, discuss curiosities, questions and come to a middle ground. I did this with Ian Shepherd on the loudness and dynamics discussion. It was super healthy and we both walked away from it with valuable insights and dialogue for our respective communities.
Bad take. If you're analysing what a digital software algorithm (1s and 0s) does, data measurement tools are objectively more accurate than fallible human senses and interpretation. Just like a tape measure will always be more accurate than squinting your eyes and guessing based on how you feel. It's why BOTH sides of this argument have used measurement tools to demonstrate their point. Software isn't actually magic (even if, in the right hands, a skilled engineer can make it seem that way).
@SirDolittle There's value in understanding how your tools work. Engineers used to care about this stuff, and now most people have no idea about the intricacies of the plug-ins they use.
@@SirDolittleit makes it better by weeding out the countless plugin companies that make money off people's backs by selling them reheated crap or straight up lies (like harrisson remember?), this is not directed at Makebelieve btw. Your take is very very shortsighted.
It's important to disclose what the product does. A lot of people felt bamboozled with some of the other Make Believe products as they were marketed as "magic" with not much explanation beyond it (with which you guys came out after your hand being forced). i.e., What am I buying here? I've heard enough of the "use your ears" as an explanation I'm tired of it (not just with Make Believe, with all plugin companies). Just be straightforward. Some people like to know what they're buying as it can change how they approach an instrument or mix. I am one of those people, even though I can probably figure out what it's doing fairly easily and match it with a few other plugins. My tolerance for new plugins is low these days.
We are pretty transparent on what all of those do. People on the internet wanted to say good math was a scam because they threw it into plugin doctor and turned everything up 9 db instead of listening to what it does.
@@makebelievestudio From page 4 of the manual (literally the only page describing what the product does): 'What is GOOD MATH? I have no clue. Call it a gain stage, call it a clipper, hell call it a rounding error just turn up or down each fader until you get the desired result (don’t forget to click the A-hole).' - I wouldn't say that was pretty transparent (more 'majorly opaque' 😸)
I demoed & liked the plugin (not enough to buy it). Definitely don't think it's snake oil. What I don't like is you kept teasing this as possibly a "free gift" on social media & then proceeded to hike up the price. Plugin developers just keep price gouging & at some point people are just going to stop opening up their wallets. That's where I'm at now. You should have made this one free.
@@DVNT we never promised this a free gift. We had an intro sale for 99.00 told people it wouldn’t last forever. Told them the date when it would end. Then extended it for another two weeks. We never said this would be a free plugin.
@@makebelievestudio yeah, you did. Looks like the post was deleted but less than a month before you were talking about a plugin that was in development & teased that you might give it away for free. I definitely made a mental note of it and was like "COOL!" Then the bait & switch. It was on Facebook, now it's gone, but I remember seeing the post even after you started selling mixhead.
I find it funny how wound up some people are getting about Paul's video when the last time I checked he isnt the one trying to sell you a product. If anything he's giving you information that informs a purchasing decision, there are other outlets that have equally expressed similar negative sentiments that are not sponsored and not affiliated and their testing was a whole lot more subjective than pauls. Even this video, which I condensed into a "it doesnt null all the time because dynamic program material makes it so" isnt having the affect that I need to go out and buy this thing, I believe it is simply to appease the the people that have already bought this thing and defend their honour, that is why the video will have been getting sent to Rick, the people that have bought in like "what are you gonna do about this?" I respect make believe and metric halo, and this video I believe was conducted well and was not seemingly an outright attack on Paul which is the professional thing to do, but leave it to the comment section on a video of what is still technically an ADVERTISMENT for their plugin to tear paul down calling him this that and the other for committing to a bit of consumer advocacy based on at least some objective and science based testing. Again... and with the greatest of respect to make believe and metric halo. It makes no difference to paul wether you buy the plugin or not, whereas to the other parties it does.
Well you will note that while there are other videos that said that they didn't feel that the product was something that they (or ostensibly their viewers) would value (either because they didn't perceive the benefit or felt that it wasn't worth the price), we didn't feel the need to respond to those videos. The folks that make these videos are certainly entitled to their opinion. The reason we responded to Paul's video is because he didn't simply express an opinion. He made specific (incorrect) claims about what the product is and how it works. And then he used a bunch of (incorrect and incomplete) measurements to justify those claims. So while we have a vested interest in people not being mislead, that doesn't change the fact that this video is primarily in place set the record straight and explain not only that the measurements and claims he made are not complete and correct, but also how and why. I will note that while we have a vested interest in the product, Paul has a vested interest (as a youtube content creator) in the views he receives by making strong (and in this case) incorrect claims about a product that was "hot", and his MixHead video has had a rather large number of views relative to most of his videos - no doubt due to the hyperbolic and negative perspective that he expressed. And to be fair to the people who have been expressing negative things about Paul, he did (at least imply) that we were charlatans, and that the customers who purchased the products were rubes. I can see why that would make people salty. Especially when the those implications were on the basis of a flawed analysis... He could have reached out to us with his results before publishing his video and we would have been happy to explain where we think he was going wrong in his evaluation. He did not. While that would have been unlikely to change his opinion, and he probably would have still published a video about why he didn't think the plugin was worth what we charge for it, at least he would not have made the mistake of claiming that it was a simple waveshaper, when it is demonstrably not the case. But he probably also would not have gotten as many views either...
I think having to do this video, you're kinda proving his point. Also his point was: people talk like this thing is what makes Serban Ghenea win grammies, or other tools as well, if he didn't use a mixhead, no one would care about a tape emulation of a tape emulation. Serban's ears and decisions are what matters, the things you do with tools, not the tools themselves. The goal of tape was to NOT have any color, but the tech back in the days wasn't transparent and had distortion. For example Hanes talks about using cla76... everybody always had that in their plugin bag, where are your grammies? And also, the cla76 is... well.. ass, It's full of aliasing and lacks quality compared to other emulations, so did they remove grammies to them because they use it? No. It doesn't matter how you get there or what you use, is the result that matters. Use mixhead, satin, uad... whatever you want... to hell with it, don't even use tape emulations at all if you don't like them... What if Serban uses the mixhead only once every 60 songs, would that change your perspective? It shouldn't. The secret is that there are no secrets... and yes overall tape machines are saturation and eq curves (+other small artifacts), but it's subtle stuff, not giant. Of course you can recreate any eq curve or harmonic creation with just 2 tools, so any expensive analog or digital machinery can be recreated perfectly and you shouldn't feel like that's what's holding you from achieving things... That said the workflow is different and matters (that's why emulations exist in first place), you can't always try to reverse engineer things or not always you know from the start want precise sound you want to achieve, with few touches I get a "distressor" sound, with pro-c I'm ass at tweaking it to that point, I get to 95% that sound, but it takes me more time. This goes also for this thing I suppose, throwing a mix under mixhead and msaturator + pro-q 3, I do get -40/50db differences (technically not null, but indeed subtle differences due to dynamic vs static).
MixHead is not a tape emulation. And while the original device may have intended to be a tape emulation, as far as I can tell, it wasn't. But it was interesting. And MixHead is not simply a polynomial waveshaper. So we're not proving his point in any way. His point was that MixHead is X. It isn't. Whether or not he (or you) thinks what MixHead does is useful to you is besides the point; that's an opinion, and you are welcome to it. But claiming something that is demonstrably not true about the product is not opinion. It is simply misleading and did need to be addressed. As far as what MixHead does, it is precisely the "not a tape emulation" aspects of it that make it interesting. Whether you choose to believe it or not, and whether you care or not, Serban did use the device on (virtually) everything, and he is now using MixHead in place of the device as it does the thing that he was getting from the device. The fact that he was using the device was a "secret" in the sense that he was not talking about it. Will using MixHead turn you into Serban? Of course not - we never suggested it would; what allows Serban to mix like he does is down to his experience, his taste, his ears and what is between them, and any given tool is not going to magically give someone all of that. But as we have said before, the point is that for folks who appreciate his work, his choice in tools is interesting and worth considering. And while using the same tool as someone else will not make you mix like them, it may very well be that you cannot replicate some aspect of what they do (at least not without a huge amount of effort) without utilizing the tool. And I can guarantee that, regardless of whether or not MSaturator is useful for other tasks, it is not going to get you what Serban (or anyone else) is getting from MixHead.
btw maybe the -40 -50db difference doesn't matter, maybe in a given occasion you prefer mixhead or maybe you prefer a cleaner msat+eq, I got bigger fish to fry when mixing, but A/B tests can give optionality and help also to understand what is going on, telling you what route you prefer in a given context, so you can choose that option from the start on similar future occasions.
@@dom2555 I don't disagree that it may be worth someone's time to do the A/B and better understand what the tool does (and does not) do. But that was not the point of Paul's video at all. And the difference is greater than -40-50dB. In any case, this is why we give people a 30-day demo - so they can decide for themselves. If the tool doesn't do anything useful for you, you should move on. But clearly there are enough folks who have determined that it does do something very useful for them, and a video (incorrectly) claiming that it does nothing different than a free waveshaper is simply disingenuous and misinformation.
@@MetricHaloAudio I understand what you're saying and why and what you're rightfully defending, what I wanted to convey is that it is apple and orange (we're in the world of subtle details)... but also it isn't. Of course it's 2 different things and for some people that's all the difference in the world, but if the difference would be worlds apart, the null test wouldn't return a -45db difference on a loud mix, Tim, Tom, Paul or whatever his name is wouldn't make his video and you guys wouldn't respond to it. Makes sense? The point I personally got from that video was more about how everyone is hyping for the name linked to it rather than what it actually is. This tool is as valid and as unimportant as any other tool (please don't take it the wrong way, I'm referring to the importance of what people do with machines rather than the machines themselves).
Well, to be fair, the null is at such a low volume that it is almost imperceptible for any human. Msaturator and a 1dB peak around 15kHz should do the job for no money.
No, that's really not true. I can certainly hear it blind. The best null we were able to get between MSaturator and MixHead with the settings that were called out was about -28dB (for the At Last track; more purcussive/louder tracks and individual instruments will have even less of a null). In fact that best null between MH and MSaturator is worse (e.g. less cancellation) than the null you get between the source and the source with a 0.4dB high-shelf @ 4.5k - and that is clearly audible (I believe for probably anyone). Whether you think the differences are worth it or not is your opinion and you are entitled to it. We think the differences are significant, and plenty of engineers agree. If you don't - that's fine. But the goalposts keep moving - first the claim was that it's identical (which it isn't)l, now it's that it is imperceptible (which it isn't), next it will be "well the alternative is good enough." If that's where you come down, thats fine.. What does it matter to you if there are other people who come down on the other side of that decision? If you think you can make due with MSaturator and a shelf - cool - go with the free stuff and be happy. But don't keep saying it's the same or there is no perceptible difference because that is not true.
@@akazicprod Exactly. Companies do this all the time. God particle - Jaycen Joshua, Manny Marroquin and CLA stuff from waves, diamond - Luca Pretolesi to name a few marketing examples. They use the name of big engineers to sell these plugins. Makes everyone think they can get the “sound” of these engineers with these processors. 🤣
Paul focused on the SG preset, and showed it nuls at about -60dB vs Melda with the HF set to flat. Why don't you recreate his test the way HE DID IT? Nobody's gonna buy this for the SG marketing buhoha and drive it with a +15 gain. You did not even give any details about the so called null test you did. What were the levels you used? Run a null test on the SG preset...
@rikkshow We did. It was the SG Preset with the HF Adj set to 0 (because MSaturator can't do the linear phase HF shelf) - we reproduced exactly what Paul described in his video. That's visible in our video. You can look at timestamp 1:53 to see the settings we used. We also found that the "null" he found in the Plugin Doctor occurred at the same settings in Melda (even though there is still clearly a discrepancy at the high end of the dynamics curve). Then we run all the followup tests with those settings for MixHead + MSaturator. But then we show that that is only the case that the processes closely match in the dynamics curve for low frequency signals. As soon as you use mid to HF signals for the dynamics curve, the behavior diverges significantly (as it should because the processes are not the same). The Hammerstein generates the frequency dependent harmonic distortion curves generated by the two processes. We run that with the same settings that Paul showed, and clearly the MSaturator has flat nonlinearities (as you would expect for a waveshaper) and MixHead does not (as you would expect for a process with frequency dependent dynamical behavior that is not simply a waveshaper). With the processes set the same the distortion is different (you can actually see that in Paul's video as well) for the fixed low frequency that he measures. But if you drive the input a bit higher than he did (and especially broadband) you see that the Linear Analysis reponse of the two processes diverges for all other levels than the one he matched at. Finally, again with the same settings we ran the Etta James "At Last" track (from the CD, with about 1.5dB of gain) into the two processors. When the two processors are bypassed the two signals NULL 100% (e.g. the difference is digital black). When the processors are active you get the difference signal shown in the video (we include the audio and the spectrum analysis of the difference signal). The difference signal is peaking around -30dB. That's not even close to a null. This was not being overdriven 15dB. This null test was done at a reasonable operating level for the plugin (e.g. the Drive meter peaking in the 6-12 dB range).
Dude! Are you serious? Paul Third completely exposed it! You're tripping if you think you can mental gymnastics yourself out of that! For that price.... Is snake oil.
We specifically show how Paul missed the point and got the analysis wrong. Watch the video. MixHead is not (simply) a wave shaper and it doesn't null with MSaturator. If you don't value what it does, that's cool. But what Paul completely exposed is that he doesn't really understand how to analyze stuff like this.
Shame you didn't even have a license for the plugin and seem to have beef with SPL. Hope SPL brings out the plugin soon. This plugin is so overrated. "bUt sErBaN !!!"
For years, countless plug-in companies have been releasing virtual equivalents of hardware units without having signed a contract with the original company. Do you see an SPL logo on the plug-in? Genius
![บุษบา - วงชานเมือง [LiveCoverVertion] Original : เมนทอล](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Dm81sKcd9rs/mqdefault.jpg)
@@PaulThird we're gonna need your rebuttal now.
He wont, I rebuked one of his other videos in a comment a while ago. Dude just got all pissy. He is the ultimate example of a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Tools like plugin doctor are very useful IF you know what it is doing and what it can tell you vs what it cannot. People who 'debunked' Oxford inflator as just being a simple waveshaper also made similar mistakes by essentially ignoring how its behaviour changes over time and also how it changes with signal level. The behaviour of these plugins is not steady state.
I don't even think you needed to make this video but I'm glad you did. It's one thing to show that something can null at one setting, but how it sounds in context is what matters in the end.
Sometimes you just gotta pop out
@@makebelievestudiocold 😂🥶
Plugin Doctor exists to give some insight into what a plugin is doing. It's not a complete top-to-bottom audio processing benchmark.
This is a debunk tutorial… “if you know, you know” has never been more real…
When he showed the frequency response curve and not the hammerstein I immediate knew that this video response was coming. Dan Worrall *just* put out a video on non-linearity covering exactly that.
I just turned on the "Dan Worral" light "a la" Batman on my rooftop. Let's hope it wont be long
@@sonidojamon he did post a video on non-linearities right before all this iirc. It goes into the hammerstein graph and everything. Maybe not on this specific plugin, but it does enough to show the flaws of the way Paul Third approached testing. At the end of the day if you can pick a difference on an ABX test and you like the results go with mixhead, if those differences are meaningless to you, don't.
I respect how you handled this, really well done! I wish some of the commenters here would have had the same respect and grace you had in the video. We can disagree and still be kind to each other.
@@matt_nyc_audioengineer people are going to say what they want to say. We just wanted to respond with just the facts of the matter!
Well, to be fair, the video being responded to was neither kind nor graceful to either the product or those who see value in it - it was rather the opposite. But we'll stick to the facts.
@@MetricHaloAudio Fair enough. I look at it more as if he was stating his opinion. Everyone is entitled to their own thoughts and opinions. I understand the reason for this video and as I said, I feel like you guys handled it well in the video. You corrected the things you thought he got wrong and put it out there to let people make their own decisions. That should be done more often!
Again, great video response.
@@matt_nyc_audioengineer Yeah - honestly I don't have any problem with him stating his opinion. Don't like how it sounds or looks? Fair enough; you are entitled to your opinion. Think it is overpriced? Again, I don't agree. But it is a valid perspective and he is entitled to it. But I (personally) believe that he went far beyond stating an opinion, and instead made claims the MixHead fully nulled with a relatively simple waveshaper that you can get for free, and as a result, that we were acting dishonestly and trying to deceive our customers. By extension, any one who purchased MixHead was a dupe that got taken for a ride by us. Certainly, based on the comments on that video, many of his viewers took the video to have said that (and shown it - even though it showed nothing of the sort). As I stated above, I don't consider that to be kind or graceful to either us or our customers. If what he said had been true, it would be one thing. But to be wrong, inflammatory and insulting is not a good look. There are some other videos that have reviewed the product, and from their perspective they didn't see how it was a good fit for them or their viewers - and fair enough; we didn't feel the need to respond to them. But the video this one is responding to makes claims that simply not true, so it goes beyond opinion and while we will always stick to the facts, I can understand why some of our customers are salty about that video - as it doesn't just impugn us, it also impugns them...
To all the "This is just a wave shaper idiots" mic dropped!!!!
I love the mixhead, everything I put it on sounds a bit tighter and more polished. Like putting a fine coat of polish on a car. Some of these TH-cam mixers sound like they don’t actually do much mixing!
We are glad you are enjoying MixHead!!
I was going to leave a comment on that video but then thought what's the point. I am glad you made this video.
@@paulf9814 thanks for watching!
Needs the “meet the grahams” music
Very nicely done. Hammerstein is such a fast way of showing that they are absolutely not doing the same thing
All I gotta say is this… even if MixHead was something that I could recreate exactly with other plugins, I’d still use MixHead because it gets me there faster and sounds damn good! Well worth the price of admission.
@@OwensDrumming thank you so much!! We agree! It’s a tool to get fast and familiar results
Very good point
What do you use it for exactly?
Very good, relaxed and diplomatic counter statement !
@@brianmartin7710 Thanks for watching!
After that video came out, I tried replicating some of Mr. Third's tests, and long story short, we ended up getting into it a bit. I tried to explain the dynamic nature of the plugin and how the harder you hit it, the more diverse the signal processing becomes. Honestly, just the fact that he had to eliminate the high-frequency adjust to even produce his lackluster results makes his entire argument ridiculous. Bottom line, I’ve never put M Saturator on my mixbus, nor will I, even after testing it against MixHead. Its GUI is cluttered, it feels unintuitive, and the sweet spot for saturation is somewhere between -2 and +2. Any harder than that, and it’s just straight-up distortion. A plugin's worth is in the sound it creates and how easy it is to use. IMO, MixHead is great! It sounds good and is easy to dial in. The presets alone make it worth its price to me. Not to mention, its GUI is cool, and the HF adjust adds something you can’t find on many tape saturation plugins. It’s the best of both worlds: the low-end bloom of tape and the crisp crackle of digital hi-fi!
@@davidasher22 thanks for doing the test for your self! We are glad you’re enjoying mix head
@@makebelievestudio you know it!
Great work, guys! Naysayers are an unfortunate reality!
@@danymalsound thank you so much!!!
Do a level matched AB test and see if you can HEAR the difference. Instead of looking at a plugin dr screen.
💯💯
Have you?
@@Mic1904 yes I have. I own the plugin and have used it hours on end. When you actually use the plugin it’s very apparent.
@@danthegeetarman You were neither the individual being asked, nor have you actually said you've done what was asked (AB test, not just 'using it for hours').
@@Mic1904 fair enough. But yes I have AB’d it. I did AB it a lot when I was first demoing it, to make sure it was something I truly liked, and it was indeed.
It’s pretty clear that guy had a result in mind that he wanted to prove before he even started doing any testing. But, unfortunately, outrage gets the clicks.
This explains the differences I've been hearing
no beef just facts, i respect that
My dad, who used to be a surfer in his younger years, was a wave shaper.
@@RealHomeRecording 😂
Expect a debunking the debunked debunk, Mr 3rd doesn’t ever seem to be wrong
@@chucknkd lol
Every video i watched of his he was wrong
@@mirkomarkovic3438which videos were those?
@@marvinrockon i don't remember specificly but two i remember, one was about the rs124 and the second was about the manley vari mu
I was going to buy it. Now I’m definitely going to buy it.
@@themattprior Thanks so much Matt!
Are those NS10s paired with Pro-Ac's woofers?
Yep! The old Pro-ac woofers!
TH-cam has been full of "debunking" videos forever. It was a matter of time before they came into the audio community.
I personally think they have their time and place but what bothers me is seeing these channels growing SOLELY from making these videos and not providing one piece of useful information outside that scope. You never see these people work or do any music- it's their purpose in life to look at diagrams with an "a-ha!"- type journalism.
Yes, negativity sells on TH-cam- they know it and they milk that cow.
At the end of the day, if you make a great piece of music I don't care what plugins you used. But if you don't show us what you do with all your diagrams- THIS is a problem.
You tube is also full of paid reviewers praising products as " game changer " or will give you the " sound " of succesful engineers . This side of you tube is much worse than the debunkers IMO
@@Dystopian84 yes, those exist too. But there are also great TH-camrs that show a plugin and actually DO something with it and you learn stuff that in the past you had to spend six-figure courses to learn about. I will take that every time.
Debunking doesn't help anyone with their skills. It only prevents you from a "bad" buy.
Advertising is everywhere in life whether we want it or not. There are demos for every plugin these days. The "danger" is overrated IMO. You don't have to believe every TH-camr that says "game changer"! Try the plugin- does it work for you? Great!
Does it not? Don't buy it.
There are tons of other things in life we are bombarded with that you cannot try and have to take the advertiser's word. Plugins is not one of them.
Love this man.
Thank you. 🙏🏿
@@MixedbyToryG thanks dude!! Happy to hear you dig it!
Am I understanding this correctly? If you drive Mixhead +15db or to some other unusable level, THEN you can see a noticeable delta in the frequency response vs M-Saturator? What would be the use case scenario where you would want to do that, especially on a bus? Again, maybe I’m just not understanding the debunking here.
No. What we are saying is that if you drive it too hard, you will get what is probably an unusable level of distortion (at least for a full mix bus, perhaps not for individual tracks where you can drive much harder). When you do that, the overall frequency response clearly diverges significantly. But even when you don't overdrive it, there is only one signal level where the response of the two plugins match, and they don't match at any other level - including all the levels that you would normally use to drive MixHead in its sweet spot. In addition, the dynamic response is different across the entire spectrum, and when you have a full mixbus worth of audio, you are hitting the process across the entire spectrum, not just one low-frequency sine wave. So again, the two processes are very different, and do different things to the audio. That's what we are saying - you cannot replace one with the other.
Has that Paul guy not mixed anything in the last 4 years or what? Where's the portfolio, dawg?
He's stuck in Plugin Doctor land.
His talent is in analyzing what plug-ins do, which will get him absolutely nowhere beyond TH-cam
That dude can't mix at all. He's good at being a TH-camr though.
I think the one thing EVERYONE forgets is that we are all In this together connected by our absolute obsession and passionate love for music.
@@Todzuum Music is amazing!! It’s why we are all here in the first place!
mixhead is so goated bro is probably sad he doesn’t have one
Who blocks their display with their monitors?
YES! Thank you for this Rick. Love mixhead.
After watching Paul Third's video on MixHead I've been really hoping for a video like this. For me, this plugin has been helping my mixes a lot, which is all that really matters. Paul's video had some interesting points and it was cool to be introduced to a new plugin, however I was left with a sense of dissatisfaction. As I argued in the comment section for that video, I was yet to see an example of another (free or otherwise) plugin doing EXACTLY what MixHead does... this video has assured me that there isn't one - which I appreciate very much as an owner. Make Believe for the WIN.
@@NeilMacLeodMusic Hey thank you so much for this. That was the goal! Just correcting with the facts and to show it is not just a waveshaper. Thank you so much for watching and thank you so much for the support!
@@makebelievestudio You're so welcome! Thanks for making such amazing tools. The sontec has been such a dream also. Sending love from New Zealand.
This plugin can be very subtle, but to a well trained/experienced ear it is not subtle at all.
Paul, like a few others in his "field", can't really mix, so he turned looking at what plug-ins do into a business, for all the other people who think that in-depth knowledge of the code behind each tool is more important than practice and taste
Most plugin developers can't mix either.
@@akazicprod Yeah - but Rick can.
@@akazicprod irrelevant, plug-in developers aren't using TH-cam to kickstart their mixing career. Paul wants to be a mixer and should spend time thinking about mixing, and actually mixing, instead of looking at graphs and making videos about plug-ins he wouldn't even know how to use at a professional level
@@Siile_ Well, we should ask him if those are his intentions. I think marketing is far more important these days to kickstart anything, and Make Believe and Metric Halo know that perfectly. Selling this waveshaper with subtle compression at that price is just hilarious.
@@akazicprod they spent time replicating the hardware's sound and behavior, a very expensive and rare unit. If that's what it does, that's what it does, and the potential customer can decide whether or not the price is in line with the results they get from it. Back when I purchased Inflator, it cost way more money compared to what it sells for today, no one was complaining about it being an expensive wave shaper
I can’t stand these TH-camrs that oversimplify audio processing.
Hey guess what?! It sounds good.
They've just released MixHead Debunk Debunk Debunk. Things are getting good now.
@@gffg387 haha where?
Studio needs a duster, dude needs to take his coat off lol!
I need a sale on the mixhead please!
You definitely need better connection with the bloggers. Many brands sent me NFRs plus manual and short explanation of the plugin. And if I had questions they answered very fast directly or via their tech support.
We have great relationships with tons of TH-camrs and publications.
My favourite plugin is mixhead. His is plugin doctor…..
@@clivemathieu9386 thank you!!
🔥
@@KreativeDevices 🔥🔥🔥
Personally, I find conjecture from both sides interesting. At the end of the day, I let my ears be the judge anyway.
MixHead sounds great!
Thank you!! We think so as well!
And this is why _audio engineers_ should review plugins, and not hobbyist carpenters armed with a static sine wave and plugin doctor 🤦♂️….. oops did I say that out loud? 😁
Love it😅😅😅😂😂😂
Bro, there is no need for all that. We can disagree and still be kind to each other!
100%. Full Dunning Kruger style
@@matt_nyc_audioengineer I don’t disagree with what you’re saying, but the person in-question is literally everything I mentioned in my comment. A full-time carpenter who is a part-time audio enthusiast (on his own admission). Furthermore, in a lot of his videos he uses non-dynamic content to try to prove his points - which as Rick pointed out usually falters once dynamic program material is used. So while my comment may be poignant, it’s 100% accurate. It is possible we can still agree to disagree with my comment, which is fine, since I do respect your opinion on the matter.
@@matt_nyc_audioengineer I should also point out that his video is literally titled: “The Most Overpriced, Overhyped & Pointless Plugin of 2024”, so unfortunately seems like “the other party” hit below the belt well before anyone commented on this post. I would have to wonder if you would have the same sentiment in the comments section of that video, and whether they would heed that warning because, spoiler alert, they absolutely don’t. But I digress
Thanks for dropping this. It's instructive to try to find music actually mixed by some of these bedroom experts who spend their whole time trying to convince themselves and everyone who'll listen that everything is a scam and Reaper plugins are the same as real Fairchild 670 hardware. Their mixes are universally somewhere between terrible and bang average, and yet they manage to sound so smug trying to convince everyone they know better because they loaded plugin doctor one time. Paul Third is the worst, honestly Dan Worrall isn't far behind sometimes. Just keep building great stuff, please.
😃 Preach
It would be great if both Paul and yourself jumped on a call to discuss the plugin.
He strives learn the best ways of approaching his work, and audio.
Reactions videos and going back and forth won't achieve this.
Often I've found it's best to jump on a call, discuss curiosities, questions and come to a middle ground.
I did this with Ian Shepherd on the loudness and dynamics discussion. It was super healthy and we both walked away from it with valuable insights and dialogue for our respective communities.
How about you tell Paul to call the devs before making a debunk video.
Oh god, paul third again? Jesus, side harmonics til the end of times. Just ignore him.
woo!
If a mix engineer spends all his time to “see” what a plugin does, rather than listening to it, he is in the wrong business!!!!
💯
Bad take. If you're analysing what a digital software algorithm (1s and 0s) does, data measurement tools are objectively more accurate than fallible human senses and interpretation. Just like a tape measure will always be more accurate than squinting your eyes and guessing based on how you feel. It's why BOTH sides of this argument have used measurement tools to demonstrate their point.
Software isn't actually magic (even if, in the right hands, a skilled engineer can make it seem that way).
@@Mic1904and how does that make your mix better?
You make a valid point but for the wrong profession, we engineer music not software.
@SirDolittle There's value in understanding how your tools work. Engineers used to care about this stuff, and now most people have no idea about the intricacies of the plug-ins they use.
@@SirDolittleit makes it better by weeding out the countless plugin companies that make money off people's backs by selling them reheated crap or straight up lies (like harrisson remember?), this is not directed at Makebelieve btw.
Your take is very very shortsighted.
It's important to disclose what the product does. A lot of people felt bamboozled with some of the other Make Believe products as they were marketed as "magic" with not much explanation beyond it (with which you guys came out after your hand being forced). i.e., What am I buying here? I've heard enough of the "use your ears" as an explanation I'm tired of it (not just with Make Believe, with all plugin companies). Just be straightforward. Some people like to know what they're buying as it can change how they approach an instrument or mix. I am one of those people, even though I can probably figure out what it's doing fairly easily and match it with a few other plugins. My tolerance for new plugins is low these days.
What MB plugins were ever marketed as magic?
@@MetricHaloAudio Good Math ?
@@MetricHaloAudio Definitely Good Math, and I would even say the parallel processors.
We are pretty transparent on what all of those do. People on the internet wanted to say good math was a scam because they threw it into plugin doctor and turned everything up 9 db instead of listening to what it does.
@@makebelievestudio From page 4 of the manual (literally the only page describing what the product does): 'What is GOOD MATH? I have no clue. Call it a gain stage, call it a clipper, hell call it a rounding error just turn up or down each fader until you get the desired result (don’t forget to click the A-hole).' - I wouldn't say that was pretty transparent (more 'majorly opaque' 😸)
I don’t trust anyone who owns a computer
I don't trust anyone who owns a cellphone
I demoed & liked the plugin (not enough to buy it). Definitely don't think it's snake oil. What I don't like is you kept teasing this as possibly a "free gift" on social media & then proceeded to hike up the price. Plugin developers just keep price gouging & at some point people are just going to stop opening up their wallets. That's where I'm at now. You should have made this one free.
@@DVNT we never promised this a free gift. We had an intro sale for 99.00 told people it wouldn’t last forever. Told them the date when it would end. Then extended it for another two weeks. We never said this would be a free plugin.
@@makebelievestudio yeah, you did. Looks like the post was deleted but less than a month before you were talking about a plugin that was in development & teased that you might give it away for free. I definitely made a mental note of it and was like "COOL!" Then the bait & switch. It was on Facebook, now it's gone, but I remember seeing the post even after you started selling mixhead.
@@makebelievestudio you didn't promise, you said something to the extent of it "might" be free. Or "should we give this one
away for free?"
@@DVNT that was another plugin we were going to put out. Then another company put out an emu of it for sale. So we decided to not do that one.
@@makebelievestudio I see. Yeah, from the outside it definitely looked like a bait'n switch deal.
I find it funny how wound up some people are getting about Paul's video when the last time I checked he isnt the one trying to sell you a product. If anything he's giving you information that informs a purchasing decision, there are other outlets that have equally expressed similar negative sentiments that are not sponsored and not affiliated and their testing was a whole lot more subjective than pauls.
Even this video, which I condensed into a "it doesnt null all the time because dynamic program material makes it so" isnt having the affect that I need to go out and buy this thing, I believe it is simply to appease the the people that have already bought this thing and defend their honour, that is why the video will have been getting sent to Rick, the people that have bought in like "what are you gonna do about this?"
I respect make believe and metric halo, and this video I believe was conducted well and was not seemingly an outright attack on Paul which is the professional thing to do, but leave it to the comment section on a video of what is still technically an ADVERTISMENT for their plugin to tear paul down calling him this that and the other for committing to a bit of consumer advocacy based on at least some objective and science based testing.
Again... and with the greatest of respect to make believe and metric halo. It makes no difference to paul wether you buy the plugin or not, whereas to the other parties it does.
Well said.
We just wanted to straighten out the facts and sort out the false information that’s being spread about our product.
Well you will note that while there are other videos that said that they didn't feel that the product was something that they (or ostensibly their viewers) would value (either because they didn't perceive the benefit or felt that it wasn't worth the price), we didn't feel the need to respond to those videos. The folks that make these videos are certainly entitled to their opinion.
The reason we responded to Paul's video is because he didn't simply express an opinion. He made specific (incorrect) claims about what the product is and how it works. And then he used a bunch of (incorrect and incomplete) measurements to justify those claims.
So while we have a vested interest in people not being mislead, that doesn't change the fact that this video is primarily in place set the record straight and explain not only that the measurements and claims he made are not complete and correct, but also how and why.
I will note that while we have a vested interest in the product, Paul has a vested interest (as a youtube content creator) in the views he receives by making strong (and in this case) incorrect claims about a product that was "hot", and his MixHead video has had a rather large number of views relative to most of his videos - no doubt due to the hyperbolic and negative perspective that he expressed. And to be fair to the people who have been expressing negative things about Paul, he did (at least imply) that we were charlatans, and that the customers who purchased the products were rubes. I can see why that would make people salty. Especially when the those implications were on the basis of a flawed analysis...
He could have reached out to us with his results before publishing his video and we would have been happy to explain where we think he was going wrong in his evaluation. He did not. While that would have been unlikely to change his opinion, and he probably would have still published a video about why he didn't think the plugin was worth what we charge for it, at least he would not have made the mistake of claiming that it was a simple waveshaper, when it is demonstrably not the case. But he probably also would not have gotten as many views either...
I think having to do this video, you're kinda proving his point. Also his point was: people talk like this thing is what makes Serban Ghenea win grammies, or other tools as well, if he didn't use a mixhead, no one would care about a tape emulation of a tape emulation. Serban's ears and decisions are what matters, the things you do with tools, not the tools themselves.
The goal of tape was to NOT have any color, but the tech back in the days wasn't transparent and had distortion. For example Hanes talks about using cla76... everybody always had that in their plugin bag, where are your grammies? And also, the cla76 is... well.. ass, It's full of aliasing and lacks quality compared to other emulations, so did they remove grammies to them because they use it? No. It doesn't matter how you get there or what you use, is the result that matters. Use mixhead, satin, uad... whatever you want... to hell with it, don't even use tape emulations at all if you don't like them... What if Serban uses the mixhead only once every 60 songs, would that change your perspective? It shouldn't.
The secret is that there are no secrets... and yes overall tape machines are saturation and eq curves (+other small artifacts), but it's subtle stuff, not giant.
Of course you can recreate any eq curve or harmonic creation with just 2 tools, so any expensive analog or digital machinery can be recreated perfectly and you shouldn't feel like that's what's holding you from achieving things... That said the workflow is different and matters (that's why emulations exist in first place), you can't always try to reverse engineer things or not always you know from the start want precise sound you want to achieve, with few touches I get a "distressor" sound, with pro-c I'm ass at tweaking it to that point, I get to 95% that sound, but it takes me more time. This goes also for this thing I suppose, throwing a mix under mixhead and msaturator + pro-q 3, I do get -40/50db differences (technically not null, but indeed subtle differences due to dynamic vs static).
MixHead is not a tape emulation. And while the original device may have intended to be a tape emulation, as far as I can tell, it wasn't. But it was interesting. And MixHead is not simply a polynomial waveshaper. So we're not proving his point in any way. His point was that MixHead is X. It isn't. Whether or not he (or you) thinks what MixHead does is useful to you is besides the point; that's an opinion, and you are welcome to it. But claiming something that is demonstrably not true about the product is not opinion. It is simply misleading and did need to be addressed. As far as what MixHead does, it is precisely the "not a tape emulation" aspects of it that make it interesting. Whether you choose to believe it or not, and whether you care or not, Serban did use the device on (virtually) everything, and he is now using MixHead in place of the device as it does the thing that he was getting from the device. The fact that he was using the device was a "secret" in the sense that he was not talking about it. Will using MixHead turn you into Serban? Of course not - we never suggested it would; what allows Serban to mix like he does is down to his experience, his taste, his ears and what is between them, and any given tool is not going to magically give someone all of that. But as we have said before, the point is that for folks who appreciate his work, his choice in tools is interesting and worth considering. And while using the same tool as someone else will not make you mix like them, it may very well be that you cannot replicate some aspect of what they do (at least not without a huge amount of effort) without utilizing the tool. And I can guarantee that, regardless of whether or not MSaturator is useful for other tasks, it is not going to get you what Serban (or anyone else) is getting from MixHead.
btw maybe the -40 -50db difference doesn't matter, maybe in a given occasion you prefer mixhead or maybe you prefer a cleaner msat+eq, I got bigger fish to fry when mixing, but A/B tests can give optionality and help also to understand what is going on, telling you what route you prefer in a given context, so you can choose that option from the start on similar future occasions.
@@dom2555 I don't disagree that it may be worth someone's time to do the A/B and better understand what the tool does (and does not) do. But that was not the point of Paul's video at all. And the difference is greater than -40-50dB. In any case, this is why we give people a 30-day demo - so they can decide for themselves. If the tool doesn't do anything useful for you, you should move on. But clearly there are enough folks who have determined that it does do something very useful for them, and a video (incorrectly) claiming that it does nothing different than a free waveshaper is simply disingenuous and misinformation.
@@MetricHaloAudio I understand what you're saying and why and what you're rightfully defending, what I wanted to convey is that it is apple and orange (we're in the world of subtle details)... but also it isn't. Of course it's 2 different things and for some people that's all the difference in the world, but if the difference would be worlds apart, the null test wouldn't return a -45db difference on a loud mix, Tim, Tom, Paul or whatever his name is wouldn't make his video and you guys wouldn't respond to it. Makes sense? The point I personally got from that video was more about how everyone is hyping for the name linked to it rather than what it actually is. This tool is as valid and as unimportant as any other tool (please don't take it the wrong way, I'm referring to the importance of what people do with machines rather than the machines themselves).
Lol
Well, to be fair, the null is at such a low volume that it is almost imperceptible for any human.
Msaturator and a 1dB peak around 15kHz should do the job for no money.
No, that's really not true. I can certainly hear it blind.
The best null we were able to get between MSaturator and MixHead with the settings that were called out was about -28dB (for the At Last track; more purcussive/louder tracks and individual instruments will have even less of a null). In fact that best null between MH and MSaturator is worse (e.g. less cancellation) than the null you get between the source and the source with a 0.4dB high-shelf @ 4.5k - and that is clearly audible (I believe for probably anyone).
Whether you think the differences are worth it or not is your opinion and you are entitled to it.
We think the differences are significant, and plenty of engineers agree.
If you don't - that's fine. But the goalposts keep moving - first the claim was that it's identical (which it isn't)l, now it's that it is imperceptible (which it isn't), next it will be "well the alternative is good enough."
If that's where you come down, thats fine.. What does it matter to you if there are other people who come down on the other side of that decision? If you think you can make due with MSaturator and a shelf - cool - go with the free stuff and be happy. But don't keep saying it's the same or there is no perceptible difference because that is not true.
I tried it and wanted to like it but no thanks, it doesn't do anything worth while for me and will certainly not give your mixes that magic.
You give mixes "that magic". If you can't, you simply aren't a good mixer
Sorry to hear that it didn't make a positive impact for you. Thanks for giving it a try!
Yikes, this comment section reads like a Gearspace post, pretty toxic.
@@Mr_Kri unfortunately people are going to say what they want to say.
Still doesn’t justify the pricing for me. There’s nothing revolutionary or special about this processor.
The marketing is the most revolutionary thing about plugin, without the Serban name on it nobody would be talking about this.
@@akazicprod Exactly. Companies do this all the time. God particle - Jaycen Joshua, Manny Marroquin and CLA stuff from waves, diamond - Luca Pretolesi to name a few marketing examples. They use the name of big engineers to sell these plugins. Makes everyone think they can get the “sound” of these engineers with these processors. 🤣
$30 the most
Paul focused on the SG preset, and showed it nuls at about -60dB vs Melda with the HF set to flat. Why don't you recreate his test the way HE DID IT? Nobody's gonna buy this for the SG marketing buhoha and drive it with a +15 gain.
You did not even give any details about the so called null test you did. What were the levels you used? Run a null test on the SG preset...
@rikkshow We did. It was the SG Preset with the HF Adj set to 0 (because MSaturator can't do the linear phase HF shelf) - we reproduced exactly what Paul described in his video. That's visible in our video. You can look at timestamp 1:53 to see the settings we used.
We also found that the "null" he found in the Plugin Doctor occurred at the same settings in Melda (even though there is still clearly a discrepancy at the high end of the dynamics curve).
Then we run all the followup tests with those settings for MixHead + MSaturator. But then we show that that is only the case that the processes closely match in the dynamics curve for low frequency signals. As soon as you use mid to HF signals for the dynamics curve, the behavior diverges significantly (as it should because the processes are not the same).
The Hammerstein generates the frequency dependent harmonic distortion curves generated by the two processes. We run that with the same settings that Paul showed, and clearly the MSaturator has flat nonlinearities (as you would expect for a waveshaper) and MixHead does not (as you would expect for a process with frequency dependent dynamical behavior that is not simply a waveshaper).
With the processes set the same the distortion is different (you can actually see that in Paul's video as well) for the fixed low frequency that he measures. But if you drive the input a bit higher than he did (and especially broadband) you see that the Linear Analysis reponse of the two processes diverges for all other levels than the one he matched at.
Finally, again with the same settings we ran the Etta James "At Last" track (from the CD, with about 1.5dB of gain) into the two processors. When the two processors are bypassed the two signals NULL 100% (e.g. the difference is digital black). When the processors are active you get the difference signal shown in the video (we include the audio and the spectrum analysis of the difference signal). The difference signal is peaking around -30dB. That's not even close to a null.
This was not being overdriven 15dB. This null test was done at a reasonable operating level for the plugin (e.g. the Drive meter peaking in the 6-12 dB range).
"when played music they don't null"
They null enough.
Dude! Are you serious? Paul Third completely exposed it! You're tripping if you think you can mental gymnastics yourself out of that! For that price.... Is snake oil.
We specifically show how Paul missed the point and got the analysis wrong. Watch the video. MixHead is not (simply) a wave shaper and it doesn't null with MSaturator. If you don't value what it does, that's cool. But what Paul completely exposed is that he doesn't really understand how to analyze stuff like this.
100% hype! 😂
Shame you didn't even have a license for the plugin and seem to have beef with SPL. Hope SPL brings out the plugin soon. This plugin is so overrated. "bUt sErBaN !!!"
For years, countless plug-in companies have been releasing virtual equivalents of hardware units without having signed a contract with the original company. Do you see an SPL logo on the plug-in? Genius
cool story bro!
the GUI sucks hard
Damage control