[RWP] Recabinet 4, general plugin frustration and suggestions

Tue Nov 25 14:09:42 EST 2014

Well, although positive changes to plugin accessibility don't happen
anywhere near as often as I'd like, sometimes following up on
conversations with a nudge to remind them that you're still around,
still waiting means that stuff does get done eventually. Eventually is
better than never right? As for making scripts that might break in the
next version and that bolt-on approach to accessibility in general,
I've run with that approach a few times in the past when it became
clear that native accessibility wasn't going to happen within the
timeframe of needing to be able to use specific plugs on specific
projects. Less of an issue nowadays because there are usually 10 ways
of skinning every cat. Although it sucks and you can't pass the cost
of scripting along to the artist who's hired you, sometimes you just
have to take matters into your own hands, grin and bare the hit to
your finances and/or time if that's what it takes to make sure you've
got a good project in the bag. The whole topic is kind of demoralising
I know, but I really don't think it's as simple as saying "well, if
they don't prioritise accessibility, screw them", because if that was
your approach 100% of the time, what would you be left with to use?
This is different from a developer showing flat out disinterest or
disregard to accessibility. When it comes to that, sure, there's a
time to decide that your energy and money would be better spent
elsewhere.

On a brighter note, I'm excited to find out what you've got going on
there for 2015 man... sounds hopeful! Keep us posted whenever you know
more.

On 11/25/14, Hadi Rezaee <hadirezaei at gmx.com> wrote:
> Hmmm. You might be right Scott, But you also just, answered your own
> argument. If a developer doesn't care about accessibility improvements,
> Then why would you send him lots of mails, and try to make scripts for
> his software which would break in the next versions?
> Although I do not mean this that you should not show interest in
> great-sounding VST plugins and let  the developers know about
> accessibility.
>
> I have a very great news about amp simulation accessibility for Scott,
> Alex and Peter, and possibly all the guitarists who are looking for one,
> though it's too soon to speak of it, I should wait a while then make
> sure that It is happening, I won't speak too soon without seeing one
> good move from the developer.
> Just know this: The most best sounding amp simulation suite might become
> fairly accessible in 2015! eight, I wonder if you can guess which one :)
> (No It's not guitar rig, that one sounds like a toy compared to one that
> i'm talking about)
> On 11/25/2014 5:18 PM, Scott Chesworth wrote:
>> Hmmm, I'd take issue with one thing here. Hadi says "There is no
>> reason to press hard on developers who do not care about
>> accessibility". I've managed to get a few positive changes made over
>> years of banging my head against this wall, but I'm yet to find a
>> mainstream developer who does seem to truly care about accessibility
>> to the point that they'll go out on a limb to make it happen. I'd
>> argue that if a product sounds good to your ears, then it's worth
>> pressing for. Obviously, you won't win them all, but if nobody presses
>> anybody, nothing will change.
>>
>> Alex, I'm likely gonna get some eyes on the task of saving out a bunch
>> of presets from one of these amp sims soon because I'll need it for
>> the next TMH record. Which one should they be spending time on in your
>> opinion? I like the sound of Recabinet from what I've heard, but think
>> I remember you saying that one of the problems with it are that
>> tweaking the automatable parameters doesn't have any effect? If that's
>> true, I'd be hesitant to put time into saving presets for that,
>> because for me presets are only ever a starting point, they always
>> seem to need some extra tweakage.
>>
>> On 11/25/14, Hadi Rezaee <hadirezaei at gmx.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Alex
>>> Thanks for updating us about Recabinet! I also  would expected to hear
>>> that.
>>> I have arrived also at the same conclusion, that maybe let's not waste
>>> our times to  fiddle with the app, instead of that you could play the
>>> guitar and compose more music. Though i've been using your Recabinet 3
>>> presets that you probably spent a lot of time to make, thanks for them!
>>> There is no reason to press hard on developers who do not care about
>>> accessibility. There's no reason to also give our money to them and buy
>>> their software.....
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/25/2014 2:40 AM, Alex H. wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> A somewhat quick update on Recabinet 4. Kazrog [finally] put out a
>>>> demo version, and while it's got decent tones (with the Psycho A and
>>>> Psycho B models which are 5150 and 6505+), it's still as inaccessible
>>>> as Recab3. No more than I expected. I also don't care for how muddy
>>>> the amp modeler portion is generally, so I don't think it's worth
>>>> anybody's cash to get it unless you wish to play with Ocr and scan for
>>>> hours trying to craft up your most used patches. All my general tricks
>>>> don't work, either, as in Recabinet3 (manually editing preset files
>>>> and other boring stuff).
>>>>
>>>> No go with Bias Desktop on Win either. I hear that the Mac version
>>>> might be possible to hack and get working, but I don't have time to do
>>>> that when I have plenty of low-cost and free sims that do the same
>>>> thing. Better or not is subjective, but the supposedly really good
>>>> stuff, as always, is out of reach pertaining to accessibility.
>>>>
>>>> I'm going to drop Kazrog another line and see if they can shed some
>>>> light on any possible solutions. Maybe if nothing else pre-made
>>>> presets in .rpl format, or a bank (FXB) with some templates and such
>>>> of all the amps. It's nowhere even close to ideal, but I'd rather do
>>>> something while whining here on this list about how audio and plug
>>>> tech passes us by, as has been stated numerous times before. Control
>>>> surfaces will only get us so far at any rate.
>>>>
>>>> Any other ideas for this, or in plug access in general? I'm all ears.
>>>> :D
>>>>
>>>> Have a good one
>>>> Alex
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> RWP mailing list
>>>> RWP at reaaccess.com
>>>> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> RWP mailing list
>>> RWP at reaaccess.com
>>> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RWP mailing list
>> RWP at reaaccess.com
>> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RWP mailing list
> RWP at reaaccess.com
> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>