Great example of how this type of video should be done. Instructive with enough depth and time given to explain the function of the ATR 102. Great use of A-B comparisons so that mere mortals like me can get a handle of how the processing affects the signal. The track used for this purpose also stands squarely up to the task. The man evidently has engineers ears as all Ampex effected components sound great. Like to hear the finished track!
Thanks for doing this review! I've been using this plugin for a while, but I didn't know the "input" setting was actually running through the electronics of the machine. Interesting!
Νίκος Πιτλόγλου Yes. There are no rules of course, but it is a little ironic that in this video, the multi track tape machine is being used on the stereo buss and the mix tape machine is inserted on individual tracks
Yea, I ended up getting the neve and API channel strips and the ATR-102. The Christmas sale really helped too, got a few more. Haven't had a bad plugin yet! Well, it helps you can demo haha.
Mixing is an art so you need to know the colors of music to interpret the harmonics. Take time to listen to every sound as it fuses into one another and than pay attention to the symphonic properties of each instruments, (This includes VOCALS). Train your ear to hear in a deeper level than you will see the paint brushes move on the canvas!
I have 3 uad plugins to choose within like 30 days, thinking the neve and API channel strips with unison tech and a tape (?), which tape emulation would you choose, if you just had one or the other? . . . And what do you think of my choices? Just got the Appolo twin and have a modest but usable collection of waves plugins already.
UAD has made partially a good job here but.... they continue to not think till the end on this. Needed are these: A gain match knob! A lowcut filter to leave the lows untouched. A mix knob to adjust wet and dry. and visual feedback with numbers in the eq adjustments. Its ok ok to faithfully recreate old good stuff... i'm with you. But in todays times we should make things better and more usefull. Right now i have to do a lot of tweakin.. parallel processing to get what i want from the Ampex ATR 102. Further the UAD App does have many problems.. doesnt open properly, crashes, does not recognize licenses, with lot of restarts needed. UAD should remove once for all this tedious Ilok system and provide licenses like any other modern manufacturer😊😊
Yesterday, I was using the 102 on a sub mix track. I put in a Buddy Miller preset for Nice, I think and suddenly I had this massive hiss just with the 102 inserted. What would cause this? Thank you in advance for replay.
+Chris M doesnt really matter for sound character . It would sound very much the same on all daw's , interfaces . Only eq matters , can be an analog recreation or a digital workhorse . IF that is part of your question
Curious if the Hammond tone wheel organ 'clone wheel' organs would benefit with tape emulation. The side by side comparisons of a real Hammond and a clone is intriguingly similar, but the key difference is the lack of magnetic qualities in the clone. Absolutely the genius of the original magnetic tone wheels was the ability for the tone wheels to 'glue' the sounds together. By tracking each tone wheel, or a mix of tone wheels ( final mix?) through analog tape emulation might be the ticket in achieving an even more authentic sounding Hammond clone. When I used to make tape loops I'd cut the splices on an angle so the last beat would blend with the first beat when it came back around. If you let the loop play for a couple of hours the oxide begins to literally mesh together. I have been researching the Wurlitzer electrostatic reed organs of the past (1945-1961) and feel that there is so much scientific knowledge to be gained by reentering the electromechanical methods of the past. The tone wheels of a Hammond organ were magnetic, not unlike a guitar string over a magnetic pick-up. The Wurlitzer electrostatic reed however uses vibrating reeds over conductive stationary 'pick-ups' which is actually nothing more than a screw head. When the reed vibrates a 300 AC voltage is applied to the reed(s). The charge essentially turns the reed into a capacitor, or variable capacitor. The pick-ups can be placed in many locations in front of the vibrating charged reed. Depending on where the pick-up is located determines the timbre, or tonal character of the note. In one location the reed sounds like a flute and in another like a violin or trumpet. This is the advantage the electrostatic reed technology has over the tone wheel technology. With reeds you can get many voices from the same reed. Just as the tone wheels are 100% electronic (not acoustic), the electrostatic reeds are also completely electronic. The early ES-Reed organs were designed so reeds only vibrated when a key was played, but in 1953 the created the 'free reed' organ in which all reeds vibrated continuously. This allowed an instantaneous attack when playing the keys. The reeds were hermetically sealed in soundproof enclosures. These ' free reed' organs were made by Wurlitzer from 1953 to 1961. The most popular are the model was the 4600 as was played by Ken Griffin on the album 'Anniversary Songs', '67 Melody Lane' TV show and album by the same name. Ken also made albums using the Hammond for one track and the Wurlitzer for the next. It is difficult for the listener to know the difference at time. Many have always assumed he only played a Hammond tone wheel organ. John Winters played the Wurlitzer 4800 on the album 'Organ Moods John Winters at the Mighty Wurlitzer'. The 4800 had a crescendo pedal as well. See 'North Suburban Hammond Organ Society + Wurli 4600 ' for a great article describing both Wurlitzer electrostatic reed organ design as well as Hammond tone wheel organ design.
dude, is a good review but you really gotta do something about the wet mouth noises. I was listening through headphones and it was quite distracting/disturbing
Ignore it, if you can’t do that then I can’t POSSIBLY imagine how you could even survive mixing a song if you can’t block out components that are distracting. Nothing is perfect and everyone is always going to find something to whine about.
@@GabrielXDrums are you serious? Do you even understand what mixing is? It's not about "ignoring shitty sounds" it's about removing them. What kind of hack are you?
Tqoratsos666 actually that’s where you’re wrong, you can literally look up some songs that Bieber had mixed in the latest Mixing with the Masters of Love Yourself and there’s a sound they didn’t intend that they kept in the mix, you wouldn’t notice it but it’s a frequency that sounds like shit so yes I understand what mixing is because you don’t “remove” sounds, if you don’t want that sound then don’t record it you “hack”.
I wonder why you have the ATR-102 on a mix when it is for mastering. The Studer 800 is for the mix. Mixes go to 2inch tape masters to 1/4inch and UAD even sell this as a mastering tape plugin...
wow i dont here any difference... hehe could i be so deaf ? iam listening on 500 USD USB-DAC with sennheiser HD650 headphones and honestly i cant hear any difference when the reviewer preses THRU button on and off... wow... so i guess i should stick to banging a stick on cooking pots and stay away from any music making :))) quite a disilussion... not all people hear the same way i guess :(((
![สาวเมืองเพชร - ธีเดช ทองอภิชาติ [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kEt7F9PvO3I/mqdefault.jpg)
Great example of how this type of video should be done. Instructive with enough depth and time given to explain the function of the ATR 102. Great use of A-B comparisons so that mere mortals like me can get a handle of how the processing affects the signal. The track used for this purpose also stands squarely up to the task. The man evidently has engineers ears as all Ampex effected components sound great. Like to hear the finished track!
Thanks for doing this review! I've been using this plugin for a while, but I didn't know the "input" setting was actually running through the electronics of the machine. Interesting!
I already bought this one really good ! lots of plug-ins in universal audio so amazing !
Studer on the tracks and Ampex on the master buss is the configuration you need.
I think he knows how tape machines work. It was 20 years ago, now you can do what you want.
what a wonderful presentation this was.
Pretty cool sounds. Love the compression.
Nice tape saturation and compression. It would be interesting to hear a comparison between the UAD ATR-102 and the Slate VTM.
It's very interesting that on the mix out bus, is plugged the uad Studer A800… which is normally to be used on track inserts...
Νίκος Πιτλόγλου Yes. There are no rules of course, but it is a little ironic that in this video, the multi track tape machine is being used on the stereo buss and the mix tape machine is inserted on individual tracks
Its Subtle but with time and once you know what to listen for its very obvious! very nice effect too!
Yea, I ended up getting the neve and API channel strips and the ATR-102. The Christmas sale really helped too, got a few more. Haven't had a bad plugin yet! Well, it helps you can demo haha.
Cheers Russ, your videos are great. Appreciated!
Just got this and love it. Studer is cool also!
what is this song??
Mixing is an art so you need to know the colors of music to interpret the harmonics. Take time to listen to every sound as it fuses into one another and than pay attention to the symphonic properties of each instruments, (This includes VOCALS). Train your ear to hear in a deeper level than you will see the paint brushes move on the canvas!
I have 3 uad plugins to choose within like 30 days, thinking the neve and API channel strips with unison tech and a tape (?), which tape emulation would you choose, if you just had one or the other? . . . And what do you think of my choices? Just got the Appolo twin and have a modest but usable collection of waves plugins already.
what did you choose? got the same case
Russ, will you do a Slate VTM review when it arrives?
I worry that I'm a cloth ears with tape plugins, cos unless it's audibly being driven/distorting.... I'm not sure I can hear it..!
How the hell do you pick this plug-in in Pro Tools ?
UAD has made partially a good job here but.... they continue to not think till the end on this. Needed are these:
A gain match knob!
A lowcut filter to leave the lows untouched.
A mix knob to adjust wet and dry.
and visual feedback with numbers in the eq adjustments.
Its ok ok to faithfully recreate old good stuff... i'm with you. But in todays times we should make things better and more usefull. Right now i have to do a lot of tweakin.. parallel processing to get what i want from the Ampex ATR 102.
Further the UAD App does have many problems.. doesnt open properly, crashes, does not recognize licenses, with lot of restarts needed. UAD should remove once for all this tedious Ilok system and provide licenses like any other modern manufacturer😊😊
uad plugins, doing it again, I got them in 2004, was one of the first to have an uad-1 damn, they rule eversince
Coldplay's producer used this on their Mylo Xyloto Album, I'm not shure ablout their previous or later work. But It's a cool Addon
Yesterday, I was using the 102 on a sub mix track. I put in a Buddy Miller preset for Nice, I think and suddenly I had this massive hiss just with the 102 inserted. What would cause this? Thank you in advance for replay.
You need to open the internal panel and turn off Noise. It's on by default.
how would you recomend the apollo for live preformances useing plugins live
thanks
Do you HAVE to have a UAD interface to use this? Says I need a UAD-2 device in order to buy the plugin?
jup
Not anymore
What channel eq and which version of Pro tools and which sound card did you use in this track?
+Chris M doesnt really matter for sound character . It would sound very much the same on all daw's , interfaces . Only eq matters , can be an analog recreation or a digital workhorse . IF that is part of your question
I can hear the difference on laptop speakers! It takes a while to tune your ears before you can properly hear it
Russ What the songs ?
yep
IT really gives the edge , and i can get it all now for 100 bucks .
Curious if the Hammond tone wheel organ 'clone wheel' organs would benefit with tape emulation. The side by side comparisons of a real Hammond and a clone is intriguingly similar, but the key difference is the lack of magnetic qualities in the clone. Absolutely the genius of the original magnetic tone wheels was the ability for the tone wheels to 'glue' the sounds together. By tracking each tone wheel, or a mix of tone wheels ( final mix?) through analog tape emulation might be the ticket in achieving an even more authentic sounding Hammond clone.
When I used to make tape loops I'd cut the splices on an angle so the last beat would blend with the first beat when it came back around. If you let the loop play for a couple of hours the oxide begins to literally mesh together.
I have been researching the Wurlitzer electrostatic reed organs of the past (1945-1961) and feel that there is so much scientific knowledge to be gained by reentering the electromechanical methods of the past. The tone wheels of a Hammond organ were magnetic, not unlike a guitar string over a magnetic pick-up. The Wurlitzer electrostatic reed however uses vibrating reeds over conductive stationary 'pick-ups' which is actually nothing more than a screw head. When the reed vibrates a 300 AC voltage is applied to the reed(s). The charge essentially turns the reed into a capacitor, or variable capacitor. The pick-ups can be placed in many locations in front of the vibrating charged reed. Depending on where the pick-up is located determines the timbre, or tonal character of the note. In one location the reed sounds like a flute and in another like a violin or trumpet. This is the advantage the electrostatic reed technology has over the tone wheel technology. With reeds you can get many voices from the same reed. Just as the tone wheels are 100% electronic (not acoustic), the electrostatic reeds are also completely electronic. The early ES-Reed organs were designed so reeds only vibrated when a key was played, but in 1953 the created the 'free reed' organ in which all reeds vibrated continuously. This allowed an instantaneous attack when playing the keys. The reeds were hermetically sealed in soundproof enclosures. These ' free reed' organs were made by Wurlitzer from 1953 to 1961. The most popular are the model was the 4600 as was played by Ken Griffin on the album 'Anniversary Songs', '67 Melody Lane' TV show and album by the same name. Ken also made albums using the Hammond for one track and the Wurlitzer for the next. It is difficult for the listener to know the difference at time. Many have always assumed he only played a Hammond tone wheel organ. John Winters played the Wurlitzer 4800 on the album 'Organ Moods John Winters at the Mighty Wurlitzer'. The 4800 had a crescendo pedal as well.
See 'North Suburban Hammond Organ Society + Wurli 4600 ' for a great article describing both Wurlitzer electrostatic reed organ design as well as Hammond tone wheel organ design.
im i the only one who couldnt hear the efx on the hammond organ at around the 14 mins mark? the wobbly effect wasnt wobbly at all...
dude, is a good review but you really gotta do something about the wet mouth noises. I was listening through headphones and it was quite distracting/disturbing
RX7 mouth de-click 😎
Ignore it, if you can’t do that then I can’t POSSIBLY imagine how you could even survive mixing a song if you can’t block out components that are distracting.
Nothing is perfect and everyone is always going to find something to whine about.
hahahaha now i cant unhear them
@@GabrielXDrums are you serious? Do you even understand what mixing is? It's not about "ignoring shitty sounds" it's about removing them. What kind of hack are you?
Tqoratsos666 actually that’s where you’re wrong, you can literally look up some songs that Bieber had mixed in the latest Mixing with the Masters of Love Yourself and there’s a sound they didn’t intend that they kept in the mix, you wouldn’t notice it but it’s a frequency that sounds like shit so yes I understand what mixing is because you don’t “remove” sounds, if you don’t want that sound then don’t record it you “hack”.
great experiences ….cool
Great plugin but I find the latency is really bad. Anyone else finding the same?
and a turntable dont was produce for scratchin but people do it : )
Wow. Time to get your hearing checked.
I wonder why you have the ATR-102 on a mix when it is for mastering. The Studer 800 is for the mix. Mixes go to 2inch tape masters to 1/4inch and UAD even sell this as a mastering tape plugin...
Or they go to whatever you want cause rules don’t apply in music ;)
22,222
lol man if you ever had to calibrate some of these
"the character" = (make no difference)
I listened to those for almost 4 minutes and the narrator said nothing of actual substance.
wow i dont here any difference... hehe could i be so deaf ? iam listening on 500 USD USB-DAC with sennheiser HD650 headphones and honestly i cant hear any difference when the reviewer preses THRU button on and off...
wow... so i guess i should stick to banging a stick on cooking pots and stay away from any music making :)))
quite a disilussion... not all people hear the same way i guess :(((
mizpulynmizpulyn I hear it, it’s subtle, even I hear it on my iPhone lol
What is the song?