Are all plugins standardized?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bigus Dickus
  • Start date Start date
B

Bigus Dickus

New member
I know there are DX plugins and VST plugins. All of these plugins should work with any audio program supporting DX and/or VST plugins (DX with DX support, VST with VST support), right?

Question 1: Is the final quality dependant on the quality of the plugin, or the quality of the audio software doing the effect? It seems (from reading here) that some effects, reverb for example, can be found in a wide variety of plugins/softwares. It also seems that not all are created equally sonically. I'm wondering if the difference is in the algorithm of the plugin, or the algorithms the software uses to implement it (if there is even such a distinction, which I wouldn't think there is, but I want to make sure).

Question 2: Are there proprietary plugins? In other words, are there plugin packages for SoundForge that only work with it, and are better/worse than the proprietary plugins for Sonar?

Question 3: Is there anything else about effects plugins I should know about? I'm trying to decide which software to purchase. It would seem that, aside from the number of tracks the software can handle, the quality of its effects would be the major distinguishing feature. However, if all the plugins are standardized, then shouldn't n-Track render the same sonic final result as, say, ProTools?
 
Plugins "should" work with programs supporting their format, their are occasions when problems arise but those situations are generally rare.

Its been argued that some programs sound better than others, but the difference, if there, is unnoticable to me in the various programs i've worked with. Once the audio is in the computer, however you process it, I.E. plugins, affects the sound quality. A dx reverb should sound the same in any dx compatible program, because its the same programming code.

In regards to your second question, i can answer from experience, but i would guess that say the waves directx and vst bundles, for example, sound the same.

Here is an interesting point, pro-tools and n-track use different plugins, but if they didnt, theoretically, they are capable of the same results (assuming you are also using the same hardware, which you probably arent). The reason people choose pro-tools is for the interface and funcitonal power which allows you to more easily achieve a good sound. But for basic functions like volumes and pans and such, my guess would be that the processes that pro-tools and n-track use arent at all very different if not exactly the same.
 
KingstonRock said:
Here is an interesting point, pro-tools and n-track use different plugins, but if they didn't...
Click to expand...

That's the part I'm a little unclear on. What makes the plugins ProTools uses "different?" Does ProTools use a propietary package of plugins then? I'm kinda getting the vibe that ProTools is a different kind of animal from the other software packages.... seen a few references to non-standardized drivers, and references that indicate different plugins, etc. (such as yours above).

What I want to avoid is shelling out a few hundred bucks for a particular software package, and then learning that another package has noticeably better sounding plugins which aren't compatible with my software. I'd feel like an ass.

n-Tracks is of course attractive due to price, but also because it supports both DX and VST. My biggest concern is that there are "samples" or "plugins" for some other more expensive packages that just aren't compatible with or available for less expensive programs like n-Track.
 
your question is a GREAT one, and a very important one. One that many app manufacturers dont truly understand themselves and that they would rather you not know the answer to

I only have part of the answers, and in a lot of ways these are more philisophical of questions than you would think

"Question 1: Is the final quality dependant on the quality of the plugin, or the quality of the audio software doing the effect?"

both and more. the EXACT same plugin in two different apps, given the same settings can have different results. On a related front, watch the meters of the same plug, in different apps, they respond at different times. In the case of sidechainable plugins, the plug may work fine in one app and be completely useless in another( sidechaining action happens at the wron time)

"I'm wondering if the difference is in the algorithm of the plugin, or the algorithms the software uses to implement it (if there is even such a distinction, which I wouldn't think there is, but I want to make sure). "

the way the host app handles dx or vst can be vastly different than another host app. Some companies will deny this till the end of days, but some rendering tests can confirm the difference easily enough

"Question 2: Are there proprietary plugins? "

yes, many. Samplitude has its own eq, comp and other things. Sonar got DSPFX to make some plugs for them that dont seem to work in other apps( though they show up as DXi's). Logic has some EXCELLENT plugs that cant be used anywhere else. PT has RTAS and TDM, and there are others

"In other words, are there plugin packages for SoundForge that only work with it, and are better/worse than the proprietary plugins for Sonar? "

different is different, but youll likely not find yourself enjoying most proprietary plugs anyhow

Stubbornheaded sonic foundry seems to be the only real holdout to integrating VST and ASIO, which is a major bummer, you can check their forum for details, tho it looks as if vegas 4 may have asio
 
Pipeline: Can it be said that say SONAR or CUBASE actually sounds better than n-track, or vice versa?

I really never though of software that way, it was always the usability that i made my decisions based on.
 
Given the same set of circumstances, one oughtta sound as good as another, though maybe different.

I would ask Sonusman about this. almost all rendering is supposed to be the same, though so many claim it is not. Its a hot topic

there is a difference of when the plugs happen, plugin delay compensation and things like that

but I bet the best sounding app for you will be the one that you enjoy working with. For instance, I know logic is pretty damn powerful, but it takes me so many damn steps to get anything done with it that I dont bother trying new things, so the mix suffers. Othjer apps are easier to my way of working, so the final mix sounds better. Logic maybe easier for you, or cubendo, or samplitude or sonar, or whatever, but I wouldnt worry too much sound quality wise about n-tracks vs sonar
 
Thanks for the responses.

My initial thought was that the plugin effect algorithm should direct exactly what is done to the sample. I was curious though if the host software could alter that, and it sounds like the answer is "yes."

It also sounds like, though there may be 'differences' between software packages, there shouldn't be one that sounds particularly 'better' (at least not by much).

And, though there are proprietary plugins, it kinda sounds like any particular software choice is going to have some unique plugins that work for it, and some problems with some standardized ones that should work but don't.

Choose your poison, eh?
 
Aside from the quality of plugs, one of the BIG distinguishing factors between n-track, CEP, samplitude on the one hand and sonar, cubase, logic and nuendo on the other (aside from MIDI) is automation. Parameters of effects (for instance, the ratio, threshold and gain on a compressor) can be automated over time in a track instead of just putting an effect over the legnth of a track. This actually saves resources as you dont hae to run 12 dif renComps each with dif ratios, you can run one and adjust the ratio where you want. Right there you have a pretty significant dif in sound quality, given that feature alone.
 
thats true plugin parameter automation is a big one, or at least can be! Traditionalists arent very used to automated FX, so we dont know what were missing sometimes.

Expect to see plugin parameter automation in other apps soon, but if this is something important to you, heed pilgrim's advice well!
 
How the recording/mixing application "sums" the audio at it's master mixing buss is going to be quite different. It shouldn't be, but it is.

Ultimately, when yor are monitoring the music, it is ALL effected by master buss. A plugin could very well sound very different from one program to the next just because of this. There are many other factors that could effect how a plugin sounds in an application too, but I have yet to find any technical information on the net where software code, and how it is done in any given application is done. I don't think you will find ANY official info from the manufactures because they don't want their software getting scrutinized by those that know something about code writing. The ONLY thing I have ever read about "code" contained in an application is a little thing a digidesign code writer wrote about the new algorithm on the master buss of version 5.3 ProTools software where it is almost impossible to clip the master buss. I have heard the "effects" of this code on audio that had no other DSP applied to it and compared those results to other popular applications. Indeed, it sounded different. Better or worse? That is up to YOU to decide. I don't like what ProTools does at the master buss. You might like it.

Pick your software and run with it. Unless you want to start talking about a more "high end" application, like Sadie, Fairchild, or Sonic Solutions, you will be getting some "junk" in the DSP. High quality DSP in software takes TONS of computing power, and manufactures HAVE to make sonic sacrifices to make their software run on the average computer box. WHAT sonic sacrifices they make to keep it's performance up is going to be very different from application to application, and I doubt you will EVER read anything from the manufacture that explains what THEY cheesed on to make their application work on a PII 400MHz machine. You know what I mean? :)

Ed
 
Also, I am far from the expert about this kind of shit around here. I DON'T mix in software yet (although the studio I am working at is leaning that way...:(). Slackmaster is the only guy I know around here that has actually written a VST plugin, the Suck Knob, and he might have a little more insight into what goes into mixing things via DSP. I will ask him to reply with whatever insight he might provide. But I doubt he is going to be able to shed much more light into this subject.

Ed
 
Both VST and DX plugins have very similar interfaces - you basically have inputs where you receive samples from the host application, and then you have outputs where you toss your effected samples. Whatever happens in between is 100% up to the plugin. What happens on the outside is 100% up to the host.

Ed brings up summing and that's really what it's going to boil down to if you're concerned about plugins "sounding" different in different applications. Actually I wouldn't say they "sound" different, I'd say they "interact" differently. How the signal is sent to the plugin and then mixed back in introduces all sorts of issues (just like it would in the analog domain).

Along the same lines we also have to consider data conversions when using plugins. The VST plugin standard, for instance, specifies that the incoming and outgoing audio streams be a 32bit floating point value normalized between -1.0 and 1.0, which definately might not be the internal data representation used by the software. While this may or may not introduce any "error" (basically when we talk about error in this sense we're talking about rounding/truncating and that sort of thing), the potential is certainly there, and would be applied to every single sample.

Then there are ways that the host can simply not work right...timing problems and things of that nature crop up here and there. Usually host problems just mean that you can't use a plugin, which I suppose is better than the plugin working incorrectly!

One thing people have to realize is that digital is potentially "perfect", and that doesn't sound good. A lot of effort is put into making digital applications sound more analog...more "natural". Hence they indeed should sound different - hence there are 100 ways to dither, for instance. This is going to be the case on all mediums, because sound is subjective!

On an aside, I recently read an article about a company writing plugins that really do model analog circuits. They measure and then recreate every single resistor, capacitor, etc in an analog circuit using software. Very time consuming and difficult, very hard on the ol' processor, very cool!

Slackmaster 2000
 
Interesting.

So the bus mixing may effect the final sound of the effect blended back into the mix, but the actual processed effect should sound the same from program to program, assuming the same data is sent to it, which may not always be true if one program is rendering internally in 32 bit or whatever the plugin requests.

In that case, I'll just try the demos and go off of functionality and interface, and not worry so much about sonics.

As I said... choose your poison, eh? :)
 
put a sidechaining plug in one app keyed from the kick, and controlling the bass guitar, do the same thing in another app. Watch WHERE the sidechaining happens
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top