i dont know where to post this
There are two basic kinds of VST plug-ins. Those that are hardware accelerated, like UA and TC-Electronic offerings.
Similar to the Pro-Tools TDM. , they don't use the native processor in your PC or Mac. This saves horsepower there,
and leaves more of that for the other plug-ins you use that are native-based. But,
you're limited by how much power the hardware PCI cards (or remote boxes they offer) will provide.
They offer varying levels of power/price, and are usually expandable, and they are very powerful, so this usually isn't going to be a problem.
The plug-ins they offer are exclusive to that hardware. You can't use them without the hardware, and few offer the same emulations they do,
of very famous hardware. Depending on who's review you read, some say they are as good as the original or close, some will swear the original hardware (they probably own and use and have all wired in) sounds noticeably better. Having paid for those expensive items, well, that could sway their judgement a bit.
Most who read this may not have such hardware, so they can compare with a clean slate.
Compare? Really? Well, the typical home studio owner can't own or rent those to compare, very often.
So I guess that's moot. Having them all in one box, minus the real estate they cover in your small studio, the length of wire connecting them to and from your recorder/mixer/etc.
And the noise they create as well, that may not be missed. Though some may consider that good somehow.
Again, it's about what you want. Color and vibe, yeah, they've got it. A quest for as little alternation as possible.maybe the clean, simple, in the box route is better.
One thing I encourage, in stepping back and looking at the big picture, is seeing the similarities of the more ubiquitous native VST effects.
Third party, and those included with your main software DAW (Digital Audio Workstation). I've gotten pretty close to what I want with a variety of EQ plug-ins in various platforms
. Once you get the hang of it, they're quite similar. Especially since many are made not to color the sound
. The differences then may be the host they are in (ie. Sonar having a 64 bit float bus vs. the 32 float or 24 / 48 fixed integer bus others have.
Does it make a difference? I compared old work done in Sonar prior to the 64 bit bus. I did hear a difference.
Though not as great a difference as I hear when comparing sample rates (ie. 44.1 or 48 khz vs. 88.2 or 96 khz).
The main thing is headroom, you can go hotter and experience less distortion. It improves sound, but also becomes something you quickly get used to.
It's nice to just set and not worry about distortion at the plug in's output. I have heard this, and it's not pretty.
You heard me mention Sonar, you'll hear a lot of that in the future.
You'll also hear about the included VSTs by great companies like Sonitus and my favorite VST company,
Voxengo. It's ironic Voxengo is the cutting edge VST effects offerings they include, since they were my favorite 3rd party plug-ins prior to the relationship with Sonar that developed.
This while I was using Sonar. I guess it was meant to be. Certain ears like certain things. The focus I find in both is high fidelity, and color only when you want it.
And headroom. Those guys at both companies know how to create it for days in their software.
You may not be using much by either company. This look at them may not change your mind. It's not my intent.
I will focus on dozens of plug-ins by almost as many companies that I've used at home and in other people's studios,
or read about extensively out of my pure obsessive interest in such technical things.
But like Craig Anderton, you'll hear the most about my favorite platform, Sonar.
And like a small group of happy customers, our favorite VST maker, Voxengo. I have to base it on something,
and those two are going to be it. Stay tuned.