Recommendation - Kush Clariphonic

[jim1960]

The "Is compression in post necessary on solo acoustic fingerstyle recordings" thread got me thinking about what I might find useful for that specific genre. I don't swim in that pool but I think the Kush Clariphonic would be a great pick for solo acoustic. I own both the hardware and the plugin. And while they're different, there both fantastic, imo. Kush lets you demo plugins and if any of you are feeling adventurous, I'd be curious to hear what you think of it.

Note: this isn't a compressor and that's why I didn't post this in the other thead mentioned above.

[AcousticDreams]

Very interesting thanks for posting.

Can you tell us what is the difference between the plug in and the analog version?

From the demo, it seems to open up the source....almost as if it is targeting the harmonics. And yes seemingly this could be killer on Guitar if it opens it up like that.

What are your feelings about what this unit actually does?

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

Very interesting thanks for posting.

Can you tell us what is the difference between the plug in and the analog version?

From the demo, it seems to open up the source....almost as if it is targeting the harmonics. And yes seemingly this could be killer on Guitar if it opens it up like that.

What are your feelings about what this unit actually does?

I didn't want to oversell it but I agree, I think it would be killer on solo guitar.

The hardware unit is different in two respects...

• If I set the controls exactly the same, the track with the hardware unit is significantly louder.
• The hardware unit is a bit more musical. The sound it imparts has the kind of 3D character that you'd expect from really great gear.

The hardware is better but as you've heard, the plugin is no slouch. It does go on sale at various times and the best I've seen is half off. The hardware is superior but if it's not in the budget, the plugin for a hundred bucks is a great buy.

[Doug Young]

I tried to download the demo, but it doesn't show up in either Logic or Audition after installation. Not sure why... I don't typically use EQ like this, but I'm up for checking anything out.

[AcousticDreams]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

I tried to download the demo, but it doesn't show up in either Logic or Audition after installation. Not sure why... I don't typically use EQ like this, but I'm up for checking anything out.

I will be really interested to hear your thoughts on this device.

I have never really gotten into EQ, However, this sounds like it works differently.

Got a Call from John Hardy today, My unit ships tomorrow! yahoo, Six months I have been waiting.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

I will be really interested to hear your thoughts on this device.

I have never really gotten into EQ, However, this sounds like it works differently.

Got a Call from John Hardy today, My unit ships tomorrow! yahoo, Six months I have been waiting.

Congrats on the Hardy. Still no luck, I tried reinstalling, and it appears I'm getting a validation error. I assume it doesn't work on Catalina.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

Congrats on the Hardy. Still no luck, I tried reinstalling, and it appears I'm getting a validation error. I assume it doesn't work on Catalina.

Just checked the Kush website and the release notes for version 1.2.3 says now compatible with Catalina ????
I am out of town until Saturday but will try the demo on my system then

[Doug Young]

After restarting my computer this morning, Logic now recognizes the plugin. Odd, a reboot isn't usually required for an AU plugin.

Anyway, with a very quick look, it's about what I expected from the description. Basically a 2-band high shelf EQ with overlapping ranges, and various tweaks to the slopes. The Focus control seems to be gentle lift starting fairly low (500 Hz), while Clarity is a steeper lift starting at around 2K. Lots of subtle changes depending on switch positions. And of course, you can affect each channel separately, or use it in MS mode to affect the sides vs the mid. The sound kind of reminds me of the Neve 1073, which also has the ability to add a somewhat distinctive sheen to the high end. The Kush seems more subtle than the 1073, tho.

Certainly could be useful for acoustic guitar, tho I'm usually looking for warm, round tones and usually don't want that high end sparkle. The Clarifonic does a great job of accentuating clicks and squeaks, which I'm usually hoping to downplay :-) But just my taste. It seems especially useful for an acoustic rhythm track where you want a crisper sound, or for fingerstyle where more presence is needed.

[AcousticDreams]

I did a little googling today and from an post on GearSpace(the new name for GearSlutz) from 2019 I found this reply:

"It takes your input, splits it into two signals, one in phase and one out of phase, and then creates parallel versions of one of the signals for every single band on the front panel. Each band has its own set of high and low cut filters and op amp to isolate the signal to just that frequency range. Then after all your adjustments, it has a summing circuit where it sums all the bands back together into one signal and mixes it back in. Wow. It also explains why it's impossible to get a completely flat signal, even with every knob flat."

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

Anyway, with a very quick look, it's about what I expected from the description. Basically a 2-band high shelf EQ with overlapping ranges, and various tweaks to the slopes. The Focus control seems to be gentle lift starting fairly low (500 Hz), while Clarity is a steeper lift starting at around 2K. Lots of subtle changes depending on switch positions. And of course, you can affect each channel separately, or use it in MS mode to affect the sides vs the mid. The sound kind of reminds me of the Neve 1073, which also has the ability to add a somewhat distinctive sheen to the high end. The Kush seems more subtle than the 1073, tho.

Certainly could be useful for acoustic guitar, tho I'm usually looking for warm, round tones and usually don't want that high end sparkle. The Clarifonic does a great job of accentuating clicks and squeaks, which I'm usually hoping to downplay :-) But just my taste. It seems especially useful for an acoustic rhythm track where you want a crisper sound, or for fingerstyle where more presence is needed.

It's become a staple of my mastering process. I've used it on dozens of songs and, to date, there has only been one instance where I felt it did not improve the song. But like anything else, it's not going to be everyone's cup of tea. I do find, however, that it brings something more to the table than just a two-band EQ and I suspect more people would find it useful than not.

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

I did a little googling today and from an post on GearSpace(the new name for GearSlutz) from 2019 I found this reply:

"It takes your input, splits it into two signals, one in phase and one out of phase, and then creates parallel versions of one of the signals for every single band on the front panel. Each band has its own set of high and low cut filters and op amp to isolate the signal to just that frequency range. Then after all your adjustments, it has a summing circuit where it sums all the bands back together into one signal and mixes it back in. Wow. It also explains why it's impossible to get a completely flat signal, even with every knob flat."

Was that explanation from Kush? If that's what is going on, then I guess that's why it does something I cannot get from a simple two-band eq setting.

[AcousticDreams]

Originally Posted by jim1960

Was that explanation from Kush? If that's what is going on, then I guess that's why it does something I cannot get from a simple two-band eq setting.

This was just from a Gearspace member who had done a lot of research on the unit.

He actually had found the Patent for this and it is basically described as such(in a more technical way) under the "Detailed Description"

https://patents.justia.com/patent/5805716

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

This was just from a Gearspace member who had done a lot of research on the unit.

He actually had found the Patent for this and it is basically described as such(in a more technical way) under the "Detailed Description"

https://patents.justia.com/patent/5805716

Interesting. I could read that for six months straight and still have no idea what any of it means, but I do know there's some magic in that box. The first time I used it on a master, I started giggling.

[Doug Young]

I played with it a bit more tonight, just checking thru some of the presets. It seems like one of those effects that once you get used to it on, things sound duller when you turn it off. I ran a short clip thru a handful of different stock presets (many of which use pretty subtle settings). Curious what people hear?

Here's the examples in order (screen shots for settings below, in order):
1. Raw track, No Kush plugin
2. "Airy Widening" preset
3. "Acoustic Guitar Duality" preset
4. "Classic Mastering 1" preset
5. "Acoustic Guitar Mid-Focus" preset
6. "Acoustic Guitar Lift and Sheen"preset




Airy Widening.jpg

DUality.jpg

Mastering1.jpg

MidFocus.jpg

SHeen2.jpg

[FrankHudson]

Interesting.

My one pass through listening. I can see what you are saying. Most of the results are brighter. My monitors tend to bring out some shrillness in many brighter EQs or presets, and so may not be the best to judge "airiness" vs "brittle." There also seemed to be some time dimension changes with the Clariphonic in many of those examples, like delays or changes in how the original track's ambience translated.

For myself, for my own tastes, on my monitors, none of them were clearly better than the original track, though I'd give another listen to a couple if I was choosing for myself, particularly the first and last Clariphonic examples.

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

I played with it a bit more tonight, just checking thru some of the presets.

Doug, I saw your post and my first thought was, "There are presets?"
I'm not an anti-preset guy but I found the Clariphonic so easy to dial in that I've never looked for presets. Then again, I haven't spent a lot of time with the plugin. I actually bought the hardware first as a B-stock but it arrived with a L-R output imbalance so I had to send it back to them for repair. They wound up sending me a new unit and they threw me the plugin as a little bonus.

I thought most of the presets you used made the guitar sound too thin but I did like 4 and 6.
Like any eq, if you push certain frequencies too hard, you can really wreck a track. My main use for this box is as a sweetener in the mastering process so any changes I make to the track are going to be subtle and very specific to the song I'm working on. Presets can work well on some things like individual voices but I don't think they're particularly useful for mastering, at least not in a global sense where you start with the same preset for every song.