Vienna Suite Order of Plugins

[PauloRego]

Hi,

I just bought Vienna Suite and wanted to know if there is a specific ordering of the plugins when loading them up in the FX section in Vienna Ensemble. Does the the signal flow from top to bottom?

e.g. should the equaliser be loaded into the 1st (top) slot and the compressor be loaded into the 2nd (2nd from top) slot? (or does it matter?)

I'm just playing around with it at the moment but wanted to know if there is a 'workflow standard' when using these types of plugins for optimal results.

Thank you

P

[jasensmith]

I don't know if there is a "workflow standard" and I always thought it went from top to bottom because that's the order that you insert each plug in.

Personally, I start with the Power Pan, then a convulution reverb then EQ.  this all refers to within the VEP instance.  Then, if needed, I'll add compression, Limiter, or Exciter to the bounced audio track.

[Dietz]

Hi Paulo,

thanks for getting Vienna Suite.

The signal flow in Vienna Ensemble (Pro) is indeed from top to bottom. But there's no standard for the order of plug-ins, because it all depends on the goals you want to achieve.

As a rule of thumb (and talking about individual channels) I always apply all restauration and preparation stuff first (e.g. getting rid of unwanted frequency ranges like the lowes sub-bass, or correcting the stereo image), than I process the dynamics (e.g. a compressor), and thereafter I shape the result of these previous steps with some broad EQ strokes. The room / reverb / reflections / ambiences would be added as a final step.

That said, it is quite possible that I have a dynamic processor like a limiter at the end of a precessing chain (especially in the master bus). And there's absolutely no "ideal" place for sound design FX like modulation, filters and so on.

... in the end, some logical reasoning and your ears will tell you what to do. :-)

Kind regards,

[PauloRego]

Thank you both for your responses - they give me a nice starting point :)

P

[jasensmith]

@Dietz said:

As a rule of thumb (and talking about individual channels) I always apply all restauration and preparation stuff first (e.g. getting rid of unwanted frequency ranges like the lowes sub-bass, or correcting the stereo image), than I process the dynamics (e.g. a compressor), and thereafter I shape the result of these previous steps with some broad EQ strokes. The room / reverb / reflections / ambiences would be added as a final step.

That said, it is quite possible that I have a dynamic processor like a limiter at the end of a precessing chain (especially in the master bus). And there's absolutely no "ideal" place for sound design FX like modulation, filters and so on.

So Dietz, do you apply these plug ins within the VEP instance to each channel or do you apply some, or all, to the bounced audio tracks after recording the MIDI (velocity crossfade, expression, etc.)?

[Dietz]

Whew! There's no definitive answer to these questions, Jasen. The only "rule" I stick to is: Use as many plug-ins as necessary, but as little as possible. Most of the time I would prefer to work on the "live" MIDI tracks, because sometimes it makes more sense to change some minor details of the actual programming than changing the audio signal. But as mixing music is my main profession, I will work on audio files more often than not.

Workflow-wise, I try to get rid of annoying signal components on a track-level first, while I start shaping the pleasant aspects of the overall sound in the mix bus. I work towards the "heart" of the mix from both ends, so to speak. But it's important to understand that I'll re-adjust many parameters again and again while the mix develops under my hands. Nothing is written in stone, until I come to the conclusion that every further adjustment will just change the sound - without making anything better, actually. 

... that, or I'm just running out of time. ;-D

Kind regards,

[jasensmith]

That all makes sense Dietz.  Thank you for your response.