Can someone explain these Bombfactory Essentials

[angopop]

ProTools comes with a set of Bombfactory Essential plugs, and these three I'm not really sure what it is exactly they do, and how I'm supposed to use them. I haven't found any good explanations online either.

*Correlation Meter: Solve tracking and mix problems, and troubleshoot
phase coherency with the BF Essential Correlation Meter. It works on stereo tracks or stereo submixes. Use it to stop phase problems before they start.

*Meter Bridge: The BF Essential Meter Bridge provides best-ofbreed VU metering on any channel while using minimal DSP resources. Enjoy the ease of use afforded
by a needle, a big meter, and a faithful emulation of the decades-old standard for meter ballistics. Select RMS or Peak metering, and calibrate instantly for useful viewing at any signal level, just like a pro tape machine.

* Noise Meter: The BF Essential Noise Meter is three meters in one:
? Set to ?A,? it?s an A-weighted noise meter
? Set to ?R-D,? it?s a Robinson-Dadson equalloudness meter
? Set to ?None,? it?s a VU meter with 100 dB of visual range.

Other that this last sentence, I don't know what any of this means. Are there good reasons I should know this stuff?

Specific questions:

Correlation meter: where is the meter ideally supposed to go?
Noise meter: what are "A-weighted noise meters" and Robinson-Dadson equalloudness meters?
Meter Bridge: should I go RMS or Peak metering, and what's the difference?

Hmmm. Thanks,
Arthur

[joel hamilton]

They are all completely useless, just like the funk logic stuff...

Dont even bother with them.

[Dave Nutz]

They are all completely useless, just like the funk logic stuff...

Dont even bother with them.

is that useless as in "they just dont work" or "what they show isnt accurate enough to make any important decisions based on the results they show" ?

[joel hamilton]

They are all completely useless, just like the funk logic stuff...

Dont even bother with them.

is that useless as in "they just dont work" or "what they show isnt accurate enough to make any important decisions based on the results they show" ?

They are useless in my opinion, because they simply dont seem to contain any usefulness....

For real though, I cant see ever using any one of those things. I am not sure what on earth you would use virtual VU meters for, anyway...

[ryangeller]

virtual VU meters add some nice analog-style warmth. they also slightly scoop the lower mids and add a touch of high end sparkle.

correlation could be nice over the mix bus to check for phase issues while tracking...

bomb factory went under and was picked up by digidesign- so the more plugins the digi hardware ships with, the better the value you get for your money right??

[angopop]

Hmm, ok. Well, what is the correlation meter 'supposed' to do. Should I be checking for phase problems in my mix? Does anyone check for phase problems in their mixes?

The only thing I check for is make sure that the Master Fader in ProTools doesn't go in the red when I'm mixing, and that's it.

I guess no one uses these things....

-Arthur

[Mark Alan Miller]

virtual VU meters add some nice analog-style warmth. they also slightly scoop the lower mids and add a touch of high end sparkle.

Really? They're meters, not filters...

[Dave Nutz]

They are all completely useless, just like the funk logic stuff...

Dont even bother with them.

is that useless as in "they just dont work" or "what they show isnt accurate enough to make any important decisions based on the results they show" ?

They are useless in my opinion, because they simply dont seem to contain any usefulness....

For real though, I cant see ever using any one of those things. I am not sure what on earth you would use virtual VU meters for, anyway...

Its for us poor folks with LE who cant afford real VU meters.

[joel hamilton]

They are all completely useless, just like the funk logic stuff...

Dont even bother with them.

is that useless as in "they just dont work" or "what they show isnt accurate enough to make any important decisions based on the results they show" ?

They are useless in my opinion, because they simply dont seem to contain any usefulness....

For real though, I cant see ever using any one of those things. I am not sure what on earth you would use virtual VU meters for, anyway...

Its for us poor folks with LE who cant afford real VU meters.

Now for real. They are useless. The metering in protools is totally good. At what point would you want the ballistics of a VU meter in the digital domain?

I wouldnt meter the tape machine with protools, not because it is protools, but because the two dont have anything to do with each other meter wise!?!???

I will eat my words gladly if someone has a scenario where VU meters even apply to what is happening in a DAW type scenario. I am one of those crazy people that actually LIKES protools. VU's are quaint and everything, but whatever. I am happy to use the meters that actually tell me something when i am getting levels. After that: all ears.

[Aerophone]

virtual VU meters add some nice analog-style warmth. they also slightly scoop the lower mids and add a touch of high end sparkle.

are you kidding?

[ryangeller]

[mikehattem]

where do I get THAT meter??

[JGriffin]

The metering in protools is totally good.

Save for the whole "no numbers" thing.


But cereal, metering is much less of an issue when not dealing with analog tape, since you don't have to deal with the results of too much or too little signal applied to that recording medium. You can get away with more in DAW-world.

As far as RMS vs. Peak...the difference is in response time/ballistics/et cetera, and the resulting sound when setting levels based upon what the meter is telling you. But again it's tied to tape, and means little in DAW-world. So a whole generation of young recordists will neither know nor care what the difference is, leave it at that.

Should I be checking for phase problems in my mix? Does anyone check for phase problems in their mixes?

Yes and yes.

[mikehattem]

i record in DAW and I usually switch between Peak and RMS, though since it is digital - i leave it on Peak for tracking and setting mix levels and then I like to check RMS levels especially on tracks with a lot of hard transients to see how loud they really are and not just the peaks... I agree about the VU metering not having much place in the digital world... I have some plugs that use VU metering (PSP Vintage Warmer, etc...) and I find I never rely on them much - except for a comp plug in and seeing GR.

Mike

[Studio2roll]

a scenario where VU meters even apply to what is happening in a DAW type scenario

I'm not looking to make anyone eat their words at all here. But I find that if I watch the VU meters on analog channel''s input when Im tracking and keep the needle average between -3 and -5 I get a more consistant, clean sound from track to track. Than if I were judging it by the protools "faux-peak" meters.
And on my master fader I watch the output of AC1's VU when I bounce down and keep the needle around -3 to -5 and have much cleaner mixdowns for mastering.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Protools meters (as I understand it)aren't "real" peak meters, as they'll let things clip for a certain amount of samples-seconds without ever registering a clip. And you're much better off (if you're recording in 24bit) not cramming all the sound info into the top 4th of the meter.

I don't like to let textbooks or papers lead my sound, so I blind A/B different methods/gear/software all the time. On the protools meters vs. AC1 VU's I found the -3 to -5 way to sound the cleanest and most consistent.