iZotope Nectar, mixing vocals

[hubird]

I'm subscribed to the newsletter of iZotope just because that's where my old Phatmatic Pro lastly got parked.
Dead now, as higher than OSX10.6 isn't supported anymore and doesn't work right also, tho I can load it.
I never bought something from iZotope, but they are making very nice stuff.
Like this vocals effect:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDXnfT-M ... e=youtu.be

I don't often read on Planetz about iZotope, do you guys following it?
This post looks like spam, haha, but I'm just curious.

I'm working on (lets say, untrained) vocals, and I think this plug would help a lot.
It's also helpfull for special vocal effects on parts of the vocals.

[Sounddesigner]

I'm a huge fan of Izotope and think they have the best concept out there for plugins when it comes to high sound quality and workflow. They have very versatile channel-strips with many different effects and processors forming one plugin. The all-in-one plugin is layed-out well and is a powerfull concept IMV. I usually don't think too highly of Native plugins but Izotope and Acon Digital and IK (the latest T-racks custome shop plugins) are definitely Titans to me, and make some of my favorite tools to work with and they are tools that compliment SCOPE well.

The Nectar 2 is arguably Izotope's biggest bang-for-buck plugin tho most of their plugins are a bargain and I own a good percentage of them (Nectar 2, Trash 2, Spectron, Ozone 5 Advanced/Insight). Nectar has a lot of really good and great sounding algorithms/modules. The Plate 140 emulation in Nectar is special imo and one of my favorite reverbs, it has a really deep sense of true space when heard, the downside is it like some of the rest of Nectar effects doesn't have a lot of parameter controls but for me generally a lot isn't needed. The midi controllable harmonizer sounds nice and pitch correction sounds good to me, the fx i.e. flanger, chorus, phaser are simple but the best sounding Native ones imo (I usually don't like Native fx like these). The compressors are a weak point and I prefer IK multimedia's T-racks 3 in that department. The Izotope compressors tend to make things sound flat and 2 dimensional but still can be used. EQ's are really nice sounding imo. The deesser is modeled after a dbx 902 and is very transparent. Nectar has ALOT of different effects and processors rolled into one plugin, I really like the integration and workflow. There is a main single page to control most of Nectars effects from. The Nectar 2 Production suite bundle is the best version to buy of Nectar imo. Nectar I think is the most complete vocal channel-strip with all its different modules, buy a couple of these hugely versatile type plugins and one won't need much or anything else. Izotope tends to have a focus on clarity and if you love clean , clear sounding plugins you may end up loving their's.

They are not often mentioned with the best Native developers on forums partly I think because they earned a bad reputation for having plugins that destroy your music. Plugins that are ear candy and sound great at first but over-time you realize they do harm or are easy to use too much of. But Izotope's algorithms have greatly improved over the years and they are one of the bigger Native companies so they must be doing something right . In the last email I got from them it stated they have hireing of workers underway in EVERY department. Their plugins may not appear to be a big success on forums but we all know forums often don't tell the whole story and sometimes have a vocal minority painting a illusion. Izotope are a constantly growing company with a increasing nice sized collection of software plugins and hardware some of wich have no equivelants imo.

EDITED

[jhulk]

i use izotope

they have some great sound synthesis tools

there sample additive tech is amazing

iris you can draw a stencil across a samples harmonics and just play those frequencies

and adding your own sample content is easy you can make very out of this world samples

[hubird]

sounds good so far!
thanks for info and recommendations.
Some time ago I checked their restauration tools and more, and got a good feeling about iZotope.

Got to have that Nectar thing

[Marco]

Why restoring, record it new!

[hubird]

I don't record, I mix recorded tracks...
not sure what you mean, but Nectar isn't a restauration tool.

[kensuguro]

izotope seems to be a staple now. Almost 100% of people I know use it or at least have it. I think it was their mastering suite (ozone) that really established their brand, but they may have been around before that. Early on, when my friends just started using ozone, I thought it was a "one touch make good" type of solution for people who didn't know what they were doing. (because it made not so great compositions sound great) Fast forward about 10 years, last year, I actually messed with it at my friend's studio and found out it was way more "serious" than I thought. The exciter section does a really good job. The key, I think, is that they have really good presets.

[braincell]

I bought Isotope Iris on a whim. Going to be using their mastering software when my album is done. The 10 day trial is unrestricted. Wish I had bought Ozone instead of Iris now. Probably will buy Ozone in the future. I like this company a lot. The unrestricted trial builds good will towards the company and helps spread the word.

[garyb]

gee, if you use good equipment and techniques, this kind of stuff isn't really necessary. it's not that i wouldn't use it, it's just that it's very disturbing to see people thinking that the right plugin is what's required to get a great sound. in fact, it's usually the opposite. if you have a great sound to begin with, a great plugin is icing.

[kensuguro]

true!

[braincell]

I'm just using the best VSL samples, a few Waves plugins and nothing else so it is all the highest quality with expensive gear. I will let you know how the icing sounds. I'm months off from using the 10 day trial.

My gut feeling is it can't hurt!

[Sounddesigner]

I think that's why some of us have SCOPE cause we know great sound begins at the source and sometimes end there (instruments, recording), and why I always felt SCOPE was the best dsp platform because it focused on instruments the base and often only-needed sound (Instruments imo is still a flaw in Native, UAD, Protools, etc). I've heard many say the instruments don't matter and that their UAD plugins, etc will make any sample or synth sound good wich I always thought was backwards. Instruments are the base sound and often effects aren't needed when the instruments sound good, atleast with my music. I'm A EXTREME minimalist when it comes to effects and have songs where only 1 reverb was used on vocals nothing else. Nothing on drums, nothing on synths or anything else and love the clean and natural sound generally (when I use effects I usually try to use the most transparent effects to preserve as much as the original source as possible). Ofcourse there are some effects that are considered a extension of the instrument like guitar amps and distortion, and reverbs on vocals are close to being as important as a instrument to me for it contributes to the style I go for with my music (but even it's not essential to make good music but still very important). But that being said, when I do use effects some do work better than others thus having the right ones in your arsenal is a good thing IMV. Some people believe you can put on a blind-fold and choose for use any effects and that their skills solely will take them to the mountain top. I believe being skillfull is not only in how you use your tools but also in picking wisely the right tools to use (the tool choice like the way it's used is a creative choice as well and part of the process of making music as well IMV), both choice and use require good judgement and is consequential to outcome (my philosophy ofcourse, and I'm speaking generally not stating a absolute, I know some disagree, to each their own). I don't believe in polishing a turd (putting good effects on bad instruments) or using any random choice effects with good instruments, nor horrible source with horrible effects, but i believe in great source material with little use of effects that meet a certain standard. And i'm a EXTREME minimalist, around 15-20 tracks and average about 2 or 3 effects (but sometimes use less).

Modern music is over-processed generally IMO and somehow people consider the overprocessed sound as 'the professional sound' or 'the radio sound'. And unlike the pre-computer-music-era such as the mid 1990's when I built my first home studio wich was hardware now in computer era it is easy to have 1000 different effects in ones arsenal unlike back in the days when small money and available space would not allow many of us home studio musicians to have much but some of us just worked with what we had (much of the cheap gear back then did sound horrible and pro standard gear was very expensive back then, and variety of effects types was very small for many, relatively insufficient in some cases). As computers get more powerful more instances and simultaneouse plugins can be ran and more are being ran just cause people can. It's not hard to find around a 100 track pop song with effects/multiple-effects on most tracks. The times have changed and appear to be getting worser. My opinions of course, to each their own.


EDITED

[braincell]

Mixing and mastering is totally subjective but you do want it to somewhat match what will be played before and after your piece as much as possible.

[Nestor]

I think that's why some of us have SCOPE cause we know great sound begins at the source and sometimes end there (instruments, recording), and why I always felt SCOPE was the best dsp platform because it focused on instruments the base and often only-needed sound (Instruments imo is still a flaw in Native, UAD, Protools, etc). I've heard many say the instruments don't matter and that their UAD plugins, etc will make any sample or synth sound good wich I always thought was backwards. Instruments are the base sound and often effects aren't needed when the instruments sound good, atleast with my music. I'm A EXTREME minimalist when it comes to effects and have songs where only 1 reverb was used on vocals nothing else. Nothing on drums, nothing on synths or anything else and love the clean and natural sound generally (when I use effects I usually try to use the most transparent effects to preserve as much as the original source as possible). Ofcourse there are some effects that are considered a extension of the instrument like guitar amps and distortion, and reverbs on vocals are close to being as important as a instrument to me for it contributes to the style I go for with my music (but even it's not essential to make good music but still very important). But that being said, when I do use effects some do work better than others thus having the right ones in your arsenal is a good thing IMV. Some people believe you can put on a blind-fold and choose for use any effects and that their skills solely will take them to the mountain top. I believe being skillfull is not only in how you use your tools but also in picking wisely the right tools to use (the tool choice like the way it's used is a creative choice as well and part of the process of making music as well IMV), both choice and use require good judgement and is consequential to outcome (my philosophy ofcourse, and I'm speaking generally not stating a absolute, I know some disagree, to each their own). I don't believe in polishing a turd (putting good effects on bad instruments) or using any random choice of effects with good instruments, nor horrible source with horrible effects, but i believe in great source material with little use of effects that meet a certain standard. And i'm a EXTREME minimalist, around 15-20 tracks and average about 2 or 3 effects (but sometimes use less).

Modern music is over-processed generally IMO and somehow people consider the overprocessed sound as 'the professional sound' or 'the radio sound'. And unlike the pre-computer-music-era such as the mid 1990's when I built my first home studio wich was hardware now in computer era it is easy to have 1000 different effects in ones arsenal unlike back in the days when small money and available space would not allow many of us home studio musicians to have much but some of us just worked with what we had (much of the cheap gear back then did sound horrible and pro standard gear was very expensive back then, and variety of effects types was very small for many, relatively insufficient in some cases). As computers get more powerful more instances and simultaneouse plugins can be ran and more are being ran just cause people can. It's not hard to find around a 100 track pop song with effects/multiple-effects on most tracks. The times have changed and appear to be getting worser. My opinions of course, to each their own.


EDITED

Well, I tend to agree with most you say here... I am too concerned about these many plugs people are using for their mastering, way too much in many cases... kind of a fashion of the moment I guess... I get tyred listening to these kind of songs...

[garyb]

nobody does real mastering with vst plugins. nobody.

mastering houses have custom designed analog and digital hardware of the highest caliber. a single eq or compressor often costs what some people make in a year. the funny thing is that's NOT what makes the mastering house great. it's just that no expense is spared if you want to be a pro.

the engineers in mastering houses are actually ENGINEERS. like, they have a degree in audio engineering from a place like MIT and can construct audio tools from scratch.

the crown of the mastering house however is the playback system, the amps, the speakers and most importanly THE ROOM. more money is spent on a mastering house's room than any house that the members of Planetz live in. if you can't hear it clearly, how can you make clear decisions?

of course, there are levels to everything. i spent a several thousand on playback, speakers, room, etc and i do mastering with Scope. but don't get it twisted. my mixes and masters sound great, but i don't do REAL mastering. no one pays me thousands or gives me points on movies grossing nine figures and while it could happen by some fluke of good fortune i suppose, i probably am not in line for a grammy.

[garyb]

of course for mixing...


actually, i would only use a vst in mixing if it were a special effect. truthfully, i already have better tools in Scope and even if a native effect was the same quality, why would i buy it if i already have what i need? anything that promises to do all the work for you is probably extracting a high cost in creativity and quality, but then i use the wizard in the optimater before teaking the settings to my liking so....

and what is with people using presets with compressors and eqs? i can understand the convienience of recalling settings and everything, no problem there, but people aren't actually trying to finish work that way are they? a compressor needs to be set properly for each source, no two are the same, even if two might be very close to each other. anyone doing work this way seriously needs to learn more about their equipment and how it works or give it up. anyone who is not willing to learn about what gear is and exactly how it works(or something) is not fit to have a studio. stop spending money on new plugins and spend the money in an engineer's studio. he will help you by knowing how to use the things you want to play with. this has just become an old man's rant. it's not personal toward anyone, even if you only use presets...

again, you do not get a good sound by tweaking with a plugin. you have to start with a good sound. tweaking with a plugin is great! if you have a good sound you can do all kinds of cool things to it. you can also do cool things to a bad sound, but then it's still polished shit. of course, a shit sculpture might be completely amazing...

[braincell]

I wasn't very happy with the Scope mastering suite. Honestly, they can't compete with Waves and Izotope. Sometimes a company doesn't know when to quit. They aren't relevant in the modern market. DSP chips made a lot of sense when computers sucked which was the original idea but that became a really a stupid idea when computers have advanced enough. It was quite a predictable situation but it is human nature to absolutely never admit you are wrong. The more you dig in, the deeper the hole gets. If Scope is so good then why the hell don't they make it into a VST platform so they can widen their market? The reason is because nobody is going to buy it because there is too much competition. It's just too late. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

I agree plugins are not the best way to master but they are better than nothing. There are a lot of cheap mastering mom and pop places that do not do a good job so if you are going that route it is better to have the basic Ozone package. The small mastering places is who this will really hurt. The best ones will survive.

[Mr Arkadin]

If Scope is so good then why the hell don't they make it into a VST platform so they can widen their market?

Which shows how little you really ever understand Scope.

I have nothing against VSTis, but you'd be better received at KVR. Telling us Scope is shit I think indicates you're on the wrong forum (both in content and in your comprehension of a system obviously beyond your grasp).

Leave those of us that actually have Scope products and know how to use them to our little forum.

[Bud Weiser]

Which shows how little you really ever understand Scope.

Telling us Scope is shit I think indicates you're on the wrong forum (both in content and in your comprehension of a system obviously beyond your grasp).

Leave those of us that actually have Scope products and know how to use them to our little forum.

thx !

thumb 2.gif

Bud

[braincell]

Sorry guys but I can not read this.

"This post was made by Mr Arkadin who is currently on your ignore list.
This post was made by Bud Weiser who is currently on your ignore list. "