The following is extra conversation from our feature interview with Mateusz Wozniak .
I noticed your Leslie speaker simulator, L'otary, uses a lot of CPU.
L'otary puts a heavy load on the CPU, that's true. We are constantly working on this; it will be better. But you have to keep in mind the complexity of the Leslie sound. Not even considering its tube amplifier, mechanics and transducers, from an acoustic point of view a rotating speaker is an unbelievably complex issue. Recreating the complete Leslie sound is virtually impossible - we did what we were capable of doing in a certain timeframe and what current CPUs are capable to process. This was such a complex project that we had to take optimization into account from the very beginning. Most of the acoustic processes that happen in Leslies have been truthfully recreated in L'otary. Then we started fine-tuning it to make sure that we leave only these aspects of sound, which make sense in a musical context. It's actually very similar to the mastering stage in music production - we were mastering the algorithm. We never wanted to settle for less with this plug-in, or any other plug-in for that matter. We'd rather create a plug-in that can only be used on four tracks, but sounds great than make a plug-in which can be used on 40 tracks, but offers a mediocre sound. There are many difficult choices to be made, and we always look for a solution that doesn't force us to reduce the quality of the sound. Instead, we try to raise the bar of what we can do every time. Filters are one of the most difficult elements, as they require very high precision. Currently our MasterQ2 is working on 80-bit float type, which, if you are familiar with C++, is a long double type, it is the longest word length currently used that CPUs can handle natively.
How does it translate to the actual sound quality? Are we able to differentiate it?
There is a noticeable difference between 32 bits and 64 bits, which are perfectly measurable and audible. 32-bit filter can easily be heard when used with a high Q value on low frequencies. Any frequency analyzer will clearly show this, and anyone with good monitors will be able to hear that, it only needs a bit of practice. On the other hand, most of our EQs or devices where filters play crucial role use upsampling. This in turn causes the low frequency problems move an octave higher, which is the point where we say a definite no to 32-bit filters. In fact, all of our filters work on at least 64 bits.
Is there a limit above which it will no longer make sense to increase these parameters any further?
It's difficult to say. Currently people are saying that MasterQ2 sounds fantastic. And this comes from the people who have been working on the mastering field for many years - they are the people who I trust the most when it comes to critical listening. I cannot state that we still need more bits then in 64 or 80 bit floats. It seems that 64 bits are optimal for most applications. However, I still want to offer the mastering guys something more. I want to provide them with solutions which ensure that working on a digital environment is no longer a problem. We don't create plug-ins which sound cool, but have a digital feeling to them. There is no more of that harshness or digital flavor. The algorithm can be good or bad, but from technical point of view everything is correct - lack of precision is no longer a problem.
I remember talking to the rest of the PSP crew and there were some thoughts about leaning towards hardware industry. Any update on this?
We were thinking about it, but many things happened along the way. Anyway, we were considered a software company from the very beginning. When we went to NAMM for the first time, people were already familiar with our work. It meant a lot to us, as it showed that our plug-ins matter - that people are actually working on it.
You've helped create an iPad app, [WaveMachine Labs] Auria. Can you tell us more about how it came to be?
We were approached by a developer, who we met earlier at the NAMM show. He was working on an iPad app - it was going to be a DAW. He asked us whether we could provide him with some EQs and compressors. It seemed like an interesting opportunity to check what iPad is capable of, so we happily agreed to work with him. We did Channel Strip, Master Strip and couple of other plug-ins.
MP3
I heard there are some studies showing that our MP3 generation is not able to listen to music other than the one compressed to a lossy format. This is very saddening, especially given that recording studios are slowly dying. There is also less and less people who know how to make the music sound right. I was talking to a great polish engineer at AES after party and he said that when listening to top 50 on the radio, there were only two tracks that sounded like music. The rest was just garbage – it seems that people don't know what they're doing. Ability to use personal computer for music production is a great thing, because it makes everything more affordable. The only problem is that studio is not a recorder or mixer by itself, studio is a place, its sound, a set of microphones and preamps and most of all a producer or a sound engineer, who stands behind all that gear, who nows who to play with it. People believe that they can get themselves a new PC or Mac and they will make a great record. Unfortunately for them, this whole thing is much more complicated than this. Once we had to be very motivated to become a skilled sound engineer, we had to learn a lot, if we where lucky enough we could be a trainee.
Auria has to compete with very popular apps, such as Garage Band.
Yes, Garage Band was already on the iPad app store. It's a great app, but Auria is something brand new. It's in continuous development; the path chosen by its creators is very ambitious. From the very beginning Auria has been designed to allow musicians to quickly record audio material, do a rough mix and share it online. It allows musicians to work on the train or in the hotel room using their headphones. The quality it offers is very close to what we had on our desktop computers just couple of years ago. It's a full-featured professional app. There are some issues related to the iPad itself, though. I think Antoni shares my view on this - most people are not too keen on paying for something that is going to be used on a mobile device.
Which DAW do you use?
Most of the time it is WaveLab. Quite often I lean towards Reaper, though. It has its pros and cons, but what I like about it is that I don't have to use my USB key to run it and it starts off really quickly. Reaper gets better with every release, so it's worth to keep an eye on it.
These days DAWs offer impressive number of bundled plug-ins, samples and instruments. Aren't you worried that this may result in third party developers' plug-ins being neglected by the users, as the quality difference will not be as noticeable as it was couple of years ago?
We are fully aware of what's happening on the market and we are doing our best to face all problems that are coming our way. One of the major problems is huge corporations' tendency to buying medium sized or small, promising companies. Apple bought Emagic in 2002 and ever since then it has continued to devour the whole segments of our lives just to incorporate it in their ecosystem. It's difficult for the market, because it basically ruins the creativity of young players. It's not possible for the market to grow in an unnatural situation where just one company is constantly sweeping the board. Another factor, which has a strong impact, is the economic crisis, of course. Ever since the recession started, people seem to have stopped appreciating the intellectual property enough to pay for it. Certainly the Internet has helped this trend to spread. It's very easy to reach for any software you want. Many people are not realizing that in order to create a good piece of software, many people need to spend a lot of time working on it. There is no way around it - if you want it to be good, you need to work on it 50 or 80 hours a week, this is nothing else but a job. The fact that we are doing it as a result of our passion does not imply that it costs us nothing. It costs us hundreds of hours of work. And even after a project, such as plug-in, is finished, we still need to provide support and maintenance for every new version of host software and hardware that comes out in the meantime.
What do you listen to after work?
Actually, I don't listen to music at home very often. I am having hard time finding music that would satisfy my needs. The records I buy are mostly the old ones.
So why the heck to you keep writing these plug-ins? [laughs]
Maybe it's some form of a sophisticated masochism... Some people are finding happiness in choosing their audio cables, the others prefer to write algorithms. Sound is what fascinates me. I find the technical aspects and the nature of sound more interesting than playing it. When I listen to music, I expect it not to cause me a headache. The kind of music fulfilling my demands seems to be a dying genre these days, I'm afraid.
What equipment do you use for listening?
Mostly these are some top quality headphones - luckily, I have couple of them. After releasing our first plug-ins, we got ourselves Sennheiser 545 Reference, which still remain among the best headphones I ever owned. They are not perfect from technical point of view, a dimmed low band and a bit veiled top end but their sound is incredibly musical. They can be used for any kind of music and always sound clear and not tiresome, which is the main reason why they remain one of my most important tools. We test out many headphones. If we like them, we purchase for ourselves or our developers to make sure they are using the best tools for the job. We also own Audeze LCD3, which is a phenomenal American product. You have to remember, though, that all headphones have their cons. Even if you are looking into the most expensive high-end products, they always will be lacking something. Great thing about Audeze is that they sound very clean and quite even - many headphones have more of a resonant sound in the lower frequencies or they lack the bottom range altogether. ATH-R70 has recently been added to our collection - in contrast to the Audeze, they are incredibly light, yet still they offer a surprisingly evened out sound. When it comes to monitors, we also use various models. We don't have any perfect ones, due to financial reasons. I am quite picky when it comes to choosing monitors. I really like APS AEON, which is among the best monitors in their price range due to their flat response, detailed yet fast sound and uncommon space. We also own B&W 805, but they tend to emphasize resonance in the upper mids, yet still have a huge gap within this range. Our main tool for the job are headphones and DAC. A good set of those is a must if you want to make hi-end plug-ins. We used to work on Grace m902 and some other converters and audio interfaces. Now we rely mostly on Mytek Stereo192-DSD DAC, which is the best converter I've ever worked with. It not only gives us a very true sound but also provides us with a very pleasant listening experience. Both of these units are equipped with TosLink inputs. I usually work with sample rates up to 96 kHz, so I can just connect the converter with a fiber optic cable to my MacBook Pro - no drivers, no additional system configuration, just plug and play.
What's next for PSP?
We are constantly working on various audio-related projects and we keep learning from all of them. More and more people are joining our team - currently there are four core developers. We all share our skills, knowledge and try to look deeper into the hardware trying to figure out where the particular sound comes from.
PSP is growing, but so are other companies.
This is the result of bundling plug-ins with DAWs. The plug-ins quality has significantly improved, especially in the last 5 years. It applies to all DAWs - from Logic, through Cubase to Sonar - all the important DAWs are loaded with great plug-ins.
So you need to be better than them.
We're not saying that everyone should buy plug-ins from PSP, because they are better than everything else. We respect other plug-in developers - having many plug-in companies competing for the market results in a constant improvement of software quality. In PSP we always try to find solutions, which are not possible to incorporate in the analog devices due to technical limitations. We are not going to make yet another plug-in with GUI similar to some old device with a hope that people will like it, it is not enough. PSP is an ever-changing company, and so are we as individuals. We are constantly learning and meeting new people. That's why you can see us at NAMM in California or the AES Show. We are talking to real people, who quite often happen to be fantastic professionals who know what they are talking about. Talking to them and listening to their experiences with our plug-ins or with sound in general shows us the way to go.
So you are drawing inspiration from other engineers?
These meetings are very inspiring. I can only hope that they are equally inspiring for everybody involved. And again, this is all an educational experience - we learn a lot from it and probably people who we talk to are also getting something out of these meetings. Sometimes they are asking very fundamental questions and our role is to guide them towards the right solution and to help them understand the issue. For instance, an interesting thing for us is to understand the old analog stuff. It often was designed as is not only because of technological limitations, there was often unbelievably clever idea behind it which lasts out to these days.
Good hardware, just like good music, never gets old. VintageWarmer showed that the same rule can be applied to plug-ins as well.
Some people moved on from using VintageWarmer and switched to other tools, while the others are still using it as a foundation of their sound. There are also those who took a break from VintageWarmer, but after testing out many other plug-ins they realized that it is the VintageWarmer that does exactly what they need in their mix...
