Audio Skeptics Society - Bakeoff

[fHumble fHingaz]

Ok folks, cast your vote for which one you think sounds best, & try to describe the differences you hear... You might need squint mode for this...
This is a test to try to determine the value of a certain product & to test it's claims... Just for fun, have a guess as to what I might have done to create the difference.

[kakeux]

ok to me those sounds quite close...But, I feels like there is a difference in the lows. Sounds to me like Mamalade has more punchy lows and a bit deeper. I know I will guess wrong, but this would be the kind of difference that a plugin like a Studer A800 could do or some tape machine sim.

I'm normally all wrong a those kind of game...

Oh and Marmalade sounds best to me..

[fHumble fHingaz]

Don't forget to vote!

[Rockerdude]

I like the stereo image of Jam, It seems a bit wider with more definition in the upper mids/highs than the Mamalade clip. The Mamalade clip seemed a little fatter in the low end but the highs seemed rolled of and when switched to mono The Jam clip sounded better to my ear, I don't know if that matters. In the Mamalade clip the vocals sounded too blended into the track and tubby, they cut a little better in the Jam clip and were more intelligible.

[m24p]

The sibilance is gone from Mamalade, and the mix feels more "glued" and smooth than Jam, at the expense of some mix clarity. But the mix is already very clear and punchy on both, so I don't think the clarity lost is a big deal. The bigger deal is all that hiss at the beginning. Mamalade = SS VTM? It's more pleasant to listen to overall, even if it's a bit hissy.

[bozmillar]

marmalade seems to have lost a bit of the crispness that jam has. Basically the same thing everyone else has said. I don't know which I like better.

[redworks]

I really can't say i hear too much of a difference but marmalade felt tighter in the low end and a little more 'musical'. It is like there was some of the edge taken off. I am probably way off base but i think that is was the result of the steven slates virtual tape machine.

[garageband]

I like the Jam. It has that pretty lower midrange I'm always trying to get. I think that one is the processed job and probably has one of those tape-y plugs so fashionable these days.

[m24p]

I like the Jam. It has that pretty lower midrange I'm always trying to get. I think that one is the processed job and probably has one of those tape-y plugs so fashionable these days.

...but why would it have LESS hiss than mamalade?

[bobbybovine]

The kick drum being much thicker on the Mamalade one is what jumps out to me, adn there seems to be an overall fattening of the low end on Mamalade, but I prefer Jam. Seems more controlled to me, and has a crispness to the sound I like.

Edit: Is it one of those new Slate thingies, possibly VCC??

[garageband]

...but why would it have LESS hiss than mamalade?

'Cause part of the sim is Dolby SR? I don't know. Just guessing on the reason. Wouldn't it be funny if the treatment, whatever it is, removed the part I liked?

[aj113]

Marmalade is fuller, fatter, wider, better. Sounds like Jam put very tastefully through a limiter.

[garageband]

Music Moves Me

I just noticed that this was above my signature line.

"Well, if music's gonna move me, it's gotta be action packed!" - Johnny Dollar

I like that.

[fHumble fHingaz]

Thanks for the comments & listens everyone - you won't have to hold your breath too long... still, a few more listens & votes would be helpful.

[garageband]

Thanks for the comments & listens everyone - you won't have to hold your breath too long... still, a few more listens & votes would be helpful.

I'll wake the neighbors and have them come over.

[brandondrury]

I'm in the control room on this one (something I should probably do more when dealing with the site).

No squint mode required. Tupelo Jam.mp3 sounds pretty much perfect. Tupelo Mamalade.mp3 sounds like I did it. Tupelo Mamalade.mp3 is overkill in the low end by far. What was the perfect blend of tightness and all other stupid ass adjectives to describe good low end, Tupelo Mamalade.mp3 has pretty much mushed it up. It's muddy and woofy in comparison.

I've got a sneakin' suspicion of what you are up to and I'm guessing you took a damn good finished mix and slapped a certain new tape emulator on it. We'll see.

My monitoring isn't perfect HOWEVER, I can't imagine ANYONE sitting where I'm sitting would vote for Tupelo Mamalade.mp3. The striking factor to me is not necessarily that Tupelo Mamalade.mp3 isn't ideal, but just how FREAKING perfect Tupelo Jam.mp3 sounded in here.

Brandon

[aj113]

Very interesting. As my sig says, I listened on AKG K77 cans, so I didn't pick up the low end stuff that Brandon describes, and without that low end dodgyness going on, marmalade definitely sounds better to my ears.

[brandondrury]

Very interesting. As my sig says, I listened on AKG K77 cans, so I didn't pick up the low end stuff that Brandon describes, and without that low end dodgyness going on, marmalade definitely sounds better to my ears.

Now that's where this gets FUN!.....and stupid. (Not you, aj113. I'm referring to the stupidity of this damn gig.)

The beans were spilled to me (although I guessed right). So the real issue is what role Mr. Gadget plays in this gig. I don't know the conditions of the test yet. As good as the jam clip was I think it was a mostly finished deal before Mr. Gadget was added.

For the benefits in the midrange and top end (something I didn't even make it to as I had already decided my thoughts based on the low end) I'm wondering if this is something a person could benefit from mixing into. There would definitely be some fixing that would have to be done in the low end, which does strike me a bit as counter-intuitive as the low end was DAMN good on the jam track. When I do this kind of meddling I rarely get what I want particularly if the source tracks are really good.

On the other hand, maybe the non-low end benefit warrants it. I can't wait to hear from fHumble on this one.

Edit: Is it one of those new Slate thingies, possibly VCC??

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say NO WAY. VCC isn't something I get right all the time in my blind tests. I'm still trying to figure out what I think of it. This Audio Skeptics Society test is dramatically more overt than VCC in my opinion.

Brandon

[redworks]

hey when are we going to find out the answer?

[garageband]

hey when are we going to find out the answer?

When fHfH is on next, I trust.

[ncls]

I choose Marmalade too.
I choose the one I prefer and nothing else. As the second listen, I'd say the same things as others allready said.

About what you did, I don't what to choose:
it could be one amazing plugin with that kind of magic (this is the word I take when I don't have a clear idea )
it could be an obvious and simple trick but used with skill
it could a psychoacoutic thing to make the mix different

[fHumble fHingaz]

hey when are we going to find out the answer?

When the poll closes

[fHumble fHingaz]

Okay, okay... reveal time...

Well, our good man Brandon got it right (even before I told him, that is.)

I've got a sneakin' suspicion of what you are up to and I'm guessing you took a damn good finished mix and slapped a certain new tape emulator on it. We'll see.

I suppose he did know that I now have the Slate VTM, thanks the the Slate Cup! This is exactly what I did...

I took a mix that I had done that I was extremely happy with - I took all my mastering gizmos off it & stemmed it out - Guitars, Drums, keys, Bass, vocals.

I then put Slates VTM on each stem, & on the master buss. I didn't adjust anything to compensate for the changes it made - I simply adjusted the output levels so they were more-or-less matched in volume. Now I'm not yet really familiar with how to get the best out of the VTM, so I just guessed (& took a quick stab at the manual too). I tried to make sure each stem was hitting the VTM around 0dBVU, as the manual recommended - I adjusted to tape type & machine model to suit what I thought sounded best for each element; I didn't go "under the hood" & fiddle with the more esoteric parameters... To sum up...

Tupelo Jam - Original Mix (without mastering)
Tupelo Marmalade - Stemmed out mix (without mastering) with Slate's VTM on each stem & on the master buss.


I do actually feel the original mix sounds better - to my ears it is more balanced, with a less "ballooning" low end, & more defined high mids & top end. For me, Jam has a great "smack" to the snare & a really nice bite to the guitars. I think I detected a little more stereo width from Marmalade, & I love the "roundness" of the low end, though.

Keep in mind, that I originally did this mix using Slate's VCC, as well as Waves Kramer Tape plug on some things - I also used UAD2's Studer 800 on the master buss of the original "mastered" track (which I took off) ... My point being that these "analogue emulation" processes & plugins are simply flavors that can really add something extra to your mix, but they won't make a bad mix into a good one. As I (I think I) have illustrated here, you need to use these plugins right from the start of your mix to really make the most of them.

It stands to reason that plugins that (fairly accurately) model analogue behavior give you, not only the "good stuff" that we love about analogue sounds, but also the not-so-good-stuff as well. If you mix "through" these processes (VCC, VTM), you get the opportunity to "accentuate the positive; eliminate (or play down) the negative" in a similar way to how engineers of times previous did it, but in a much more convenient & flexible digital environment.

Before getting the VTM, I already had the Kramer Tape & UAD2 Studer plugins, so I was quite familiar with what these type of plugins do. In view of that, there were no real surprises with VTM - However, it does seem to be designed to work in a slightly different way - more like the VCC in being an "interactive process" than just another "character plug" to put on single tracks. Is it more like tape than the other plugs? I have no idea - While I have used analogue tape to record to in the past, it was most definitely in a non-professional, non-studio environment - & my memories of that experience are not particularly fond. I'm sure that using true professional-grade high end tape machines & tape was very different.

I'm looking forward to the opportunity to use VTM on a mix from scratch -

This experiment was very similar in approach to my previous blind test with VCC here: Audio Skeptics Society: Keen-Eared

... Whilst it gave a good indication of what VCC could do for a mix, it wasn't taken to the logical conclusion because, again it was only across stems from a pre-existing mix. Since then, VCC has become integral to my workflow & mixing style - it simply makes mixing easier...

From this brief experiment, I expect that VTM will be very similar in it's affect on my mixing once I start using it regularly.

Hope that is helpful to y'all!

[gruzina]

THANKS for the time you took to make this nice and interesting test for us
I really like the low end abilities of the VTM , it can really round up the low's and loose some un-necussery hight if needed... although I redder use it on individual tracks than on a master bus , and maybe on drum bus(group) ...
I really enjoy the song by the way , and the guitars just sound amazing IMO ! what guitars did you used in this track , and what is the signal chain (pre's mics , or DI etc...) if you don't mind of course

[fHumble fHingaz]

THANKS for the time you took to make this nice and interesting test for us
I really like the low end abilities of the VTM , it can really round up the low's and loose some un-necussery hight if needed... although I redder use it on individual tracks than on a master bus , and maybe on drum bus(group) ...
I really enjoy the song by the way , and the guitars just sound amazing IMO ! what guitars did you used in this track , and what is the signal chain (pre's mics , or DI etc...) if you don't mind of course

Hey Gruzina - thanks for the comments...

Sorry, I can't help you with the information on the tracks - I only mixed it; I didn't record it.... Having said that, I'd tend to give much more credit to the playing than the signal chain.

I actually did this as a practice mix after downloading the files here, so you can check them out if they still have them up:
Good Time - Archangles Cover