You are here

Acustica

For feedback and suggestions about the SOS magazine, app, web site or forums.

Acustica

Postby Frogy » Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:00 pm

One word - Acustica.

Why has SOS stopped reporting news (or reviewing) any of the new Acqua releases?

UAD, Waves, Slate and Softube only have to drop a new plug in and it's front page news (see the Weiss release from Softube as a current example).

IMHO, and now a growing number of pro engineers, the latest Acqua releases, Ruby (DW Fearn), Azure (S*ma K*if) and Pink2 (A*I) set new standards for itb processing. And yet they appear to be totally ignored. What's going on here?

Are there any plans to re-address this apparent unbalanced reviewing of top level effect plug ins?
Frogy
Poster
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:00 am
Location: Colchester, Essex England

Re: Acustica

Postby blinddrew » Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:23 pm

There were two reviews in 2017, how many products did they release?
I guess it largely comes down to how many products they've submitted for review as well.
User avatar
blinddrew
Jedi Poster
Posts: 5323
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 12:00 am
Location: York
Ignore the post count, I have no idea what I'm doing...

Re: Acustica

Postby Kwackman » Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:28 pm

I thought I'd read something similar before....
https://www.soundonsound.com/forum/view ... 86#p541986
User avatar
Kwackman
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1180
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2002 1:00 am
Location: Belfast
Cubase, guitars.

Re: Acustica

Postby Frogy » Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:39 pm

Indeed. No replies though. That's why I've expanded the subject and put it under Feedback.
Frogy
Poster
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:00 am
Location: Colchester, Essex England

Re: Acustica

Postby Jack Ruston » Fri Mar 09, 2018 6:26 am

I’m a huge Acustica fan. I also review products for SOS. Because of my relationship with the guys at Acustica, I don’t review the plug ins. SOS is always careful to protect their impartiality. But I do suggest reviews to the relevant members of the editorial team. I’ve never had anything but positive responses when making these suggestions and reviews have certainly followed. The problem is that, as you can imagine, the sheer quantity of new software that emerges makes it impossible to review everything, and difficult to review new products quickly. Acustica release their stuff in rapid fire fashion which is hard to keep up with. We have talked about a very interesting review for one of the products you mention but it’s not for me to go into that further, and besides I tend to keep out of the loop for reasons discussed. BUT please understand that Acustica is still quite a niche product line. It requires powerful computers that many don’t have, and some quirky operational factors with which you will be familiar. While you and I are massive fans, some won’t be willing or able to run them. The magazine has to balance space in each issue against how many readers are going to be interested. J
Jack Ruston
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 3644
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 1:00 am

Re: Acustica

Postby Sam Inglis » Fri Mar 09, 2018 10:42 am

I'm working on reviews of Ruby and a couple of the other newish plug-ins. I've also reviewed White and Sand in recent memory. But there are far more plug-ins out there than we can ever hope to review in full, unfortunately, so we do need to be selective.

If their plug-ins are not being mentioned in News, that could just be something as simple as Acustica not sending press releases to the news desk. Some companies are much more pro-active than others on this front.
Sam Inglis
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 2345
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 1:00 am

Re: Acustica

Postby Frogy » Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:06 am

Thanks for the feedback Jack, I fully understand and agree with the constraints of what can/can't be achieved in a monthly mag but:

a) why is there no news of Acustica product releases on this web site anymore?

b) I think Acustica's very latest Acqua tech takes itb processing quality and realism beyond what UAD, Slate etc can achieve with traditional algorithms. I would expect a cutting edge magazine such as SOS to be first on the case. The quality of the sound warrants this in my view and I really think that Acustica are achieving an advancement in computing science here.

c) the very latest Acquas are far more CPU efficient (I have a 4 year old iMac running at 3.1Ghz and 16G RAM) and I have very few problems using 10-15 Aquas in a session. The GUI 'flakiness' has been greatly improved and the new releases mostly act like normal plugs now.

d) is it really a niche product now? If you go to Gearslutz under Music Computers the Acqua general discussion thread is not so very far off 1m views.

Just as a suggestion, for example why not shoot out Ruby vs the hardware version of the DW Fearn DT5? Perhaps you can bend SOS's ear? :)
Frogy
Poster
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:00 am
Location: Colchester, Essex England

Re: Acustica

Postby Agharta » Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:58 am

There is so much software released these days ..........
User avatar
Agharta
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 2850
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 12:00 am

Re: Acustica

Postby Jack Ruston » Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:40 pm

Frogy wrote:Just as a suggestion, for example why not shoot out Ruby vs the hardware version of the DW Fearn DT5? Perhaps you can bend SOS's ear? :)

No comment
Jack Ruston
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 3644
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 1:00 am

Re: Acustica

Postby Frogy » Fri Mar 09, 2018 1:32 pm

Agharta wrote:There is so much software released these days ..........

Not at this level of sound quality. That's the point I'm trying to highlight Agharta. Have you tried any of the Acustica plug-ins?
Frogy
Poster
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:00 am
Location: Colchester, Essex England

Re: Acustica

Postby Sam Inglis » Fri Mar 09, 2018 1:49 pm

Frogy wrote:Just as a suggestion, for example why not shoot out Ruby vs the hardware version of the DW Fearn DT5? Perhaps you can bend SOS's ear? :)

This was actually the plan, but alas it hasn't proved possible.
Sam Inglis
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 2345
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 1:00 am

Re: Acustica

Postby James Perrett » Fri Mar 09, 2018 2:26 pm

Frogy wrote:
Agharta wrote:There is so much software released these days ..........

Not at this level of sound quality. That's the point I'm trying to highlight Agharta. Have you tried any of the Acustica plug-ins?

I'm not sure whether they're doing anything unique though - this type of convolution modelling was pioneered by Mike Kemp at Sintefex and later used in Focusrite's Liquid series of hardware. The models may be more refined nowadays but, as I see it, the new Acustica plug-ins are just additions to their library using the same basic technology as their other products rather than something really new.
User avatar
James Perrett
Moderator
Posts: 7602
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:00 am
Location: The wilds of Hampshire
JRP Music - Audio Mastering and Restoration. JRP Music Facebook Page

Re: Acustica

Postby dbfs » Fri Mar 09, 2018 2:39 pm

I feel there is not enough coverage of Acustica's great offerings in general.

On the flip side, I am nauseated by the constant coverage of UAD across the board from forums to mags and to be honest I reckon that UAD is a racket. It probably does come down to UA being very proactive on the marketing side and constantly pushing and placing products in the media. If the amount of crap they send out to customers is anything to go by then that's probably it.
dbfs
Regular
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri May 07, 2004 12:00 am
dbfs

Re: Acustica

Postby Frogy » Fri Mar 09, 2018 3:53 pm

James Perrett wrote:
Frogy wrote:
Agharta wrote:There is so much software released these days ..........

Not at this level of sound quality. That's the point I'm trying to highlight Agharta. Have you tried any of the Acustica plug-ins?

I'm not sure whether they're doing anything unique though - this type of convolution modelling was pioneered by Mike Kemp at Sintefex and later used in Focusrite's Liquid series of hardware. The models may be more refined nowadays but, as I see it, the new Acustica plug-ins are just additions to their library using the same basic technology as their other products rather than something really new.

Sorry James that is totally incorrect.

Focusrite Liquid Mix employed Sintefex's Dynamic Convolution technique, whereas Acustica use a proprietary Vectorial Volterra Kernels technique. They are similar in a few respects, but VVK allows the capture of harmonic distortion, which makes significant differences when sampling a hardware unit - eq, compressor etc.

I'm not technical enough myself to give a greater insight, but there is a lot of information on Acustica's web site that will explain better.

Have you tried any Acqua plug-ins? They are easy to trial (30-days) and download. I think if you did try it might change your opinion. :) I was entrenched with UAD, Waves, Slate plug-ins a couple of years back and obviously do still find good use for them. But for the majority of my tracks and sessions Acustica's plug-ins are far more realistic, bringing additional depth and warmth to my mixes.
Frogy
Poster
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:00 am
Location: Colchester, Essex England

Re: Acustica

Postby desmond » Fri Mar 09, 2018 4:11 pm

dbfs wrote:I feel there is not enough coverage of Acustica's great offerings in general.

It sounds like they have some marketing problems, I guess.

dbfs wrote:On the flip side, I am nauseated by the constant coverage of UAD across the board from forums to mags and to be honest I reckon that UAD is a racket. It probably does come down to UA being very proactive on the marketing side and constantly pushing and placing products in the media. If he amount of crap they send out to customers is anything to go by then that's probably it.

UA certainly have a budget and a larger marketing team for sure.
As a UA customer, I can't say I get a "huge amount of crap" from them at all...
Not a racket, they just make good products the market likes, and they stay desirable because they aren't pirated and therefore not everyone can just "have them".

I've never been particularly attracted to the Acustica stuff, personally. Maybe it's because of the early high CPU and general flakiness of operation they had at the beginning, and that perception has stayed with me, maybe also I'm a bit turned off by their own marketing...
User avatar
desmond
Jedi Poster
Posts: 8236
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 1:00 am

Re: Acustica

Postby Frogy » Fri Mar 09, 2018 4:47 pm

desmond wrote: I've never been particularly attracted to the Acustica stuff, personally. Maybe it's because of the early high CPU and general flakiness of operation they had at the beginning, and that perception has stayed with me, maybe also I'm a bit turned off by their own marketing...

Give the latest Acustica releases a try Desmond, you may be pleasantly surprised. As I say 30 day trials and easy to download through their new proprietary Aquarius system.

Generally there is no flakiness of operation now and CPU efficiency has dramatically improved. :)
Frogy
Poster
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:00 am
Location: Colchester, Essex England

Re: Acustica

Postby Frogy » Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:23 pm

Sam Inglis wrote:I'm working on reviews of Ruby and a couple of the other newish plug-ins.

Just make sure Sam that you've got the latest HQ version of Ruby with Core 12 technology, released this week.
Frogy
Poster
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:00 am
Location: Colchester, Essex England

Re: Acustica

Postby Sam Inglis » Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:58 pm

I installed it yesterday, seems to be working fine so far.

Beginning to wonder how many Pultec-style EQs one really needs though!
Sam Inglis
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 2345
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 1:00 am

Re: Acustica

Postby James Perrett » Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:19 pm

Frogy wrote:Focusrite Liquid Mix employed Sintefex's Dynamic Convolution technique, whereas Acustica use a proprietary Vectorial Volterra Kernels technique. They are similar in a few respects, but VVK allows the capture of harmonic distortion, which makes significant differences when sampling a hardware unit - eq, compressor etc.

Hmmm - in the abstract at

http://www.aes-uk.org/forthcoming-meeti ... -software/

they specifically mention the use of VVK as a way of getting around existing patents. If I get time I'll watch that presentation and see if there's anything interesting there.
User avatar
James Perrett
Moderator
Posts: 7602
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:00 am
Location: The wilds of Hampshire
JRP Music - Audio Mastering and Restoration. JRP Music Facebook Page

Re: Acustica

Postby Frogy » Mon Mar 19, 2018 3:49 pm

James Perrett wrote:
Frogy wrote:Focusrite Liquid Mix employed Sintefex's Dynamic Convolution technique, whereas Acustica use a proprietary Vectorial Volterra Kernels technique. They are similar in a few respects, but VVK allows the capture of harmonic distortion, which makes significant differences when sampling a hardware unit - eq, compressor etc.

Hmmm - in the abstract at

http://www.aes-uk.org/forthcoming-meeti ... -software/" target="phpbbpopup

they specifically mention the use of VVK as a way of getting around existing patents. If I get time I'll watch that presentation and see if there's anything interesting there.

Why don't you just try a couple of the Aqua plug-ins James. Rather than get too engrossed in whether it is old or new tech. Just use your ears.
Frogy
Poster
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:00 am
Location: Colchester, Essex England

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users