Normal
X32 ver 2.0 Effect QualityI have searched this discussion thread and not found any discussion on this. I hope I'm not duplicating.What are your opinions on the relative quality of the built in effects on the X32 compared to VSTs? I'm thinking regular VSTs; Waves, Cakewalk etc. Particularly the newer ver 2.0 effects like the 1176, the La2a and pultec EQs. I realize beauty is in the eye of the end of the tunnel - or whatever that expression is. But I'm looking for a more general 'they are vastly inferior to decent VSTs'; 'vastly superior'; 'pretty comparable'.My reason for asking is that I have an X32, a few nice preamps, but no external compressor or EQ. I was thinking about getting a pair of compressors to lightly compress and color when tracking. If the FX rack effects on the X32 are comparable to solid VSTs then perhaps saving my hardware compressor money and using the X32 comps to track would make sense.
X32 ver 2.0 Effect Quality
I have searched this discussion thread and not found any discussion on this. I hope I'm not duplicating.
What are your opinions on the relative quality of the built in effects on the X32 compared to VSTs? I'm thinking regular VSTs; Waves, Cakewalk etc. Particularly the newer ver 2.0 effects like the 1176, the La2a and pultec EQs. I realize beauty is in the eye of the end of the tunnel - or whatever that expression is. But I'm looking for a more general 'they are vastly inferior to decent VSTs'; 'vastly superior'; 'pretty comparable'.
My reason for asking is that I have an X32, a few nice preamps, but no external compressor or EQ. I was thinking about getting a pair of compressors to lightly compress and color when tracking. If the FX rack effects on the X32 are comparable to solid VSTs then perhaps saving my hardware compressor money and using the X32 comps to track would make sense.
