There are also people that claim Virtual Synths like a Roland JP-08 sound identical to an actual Roland Jupiter 8. But to me it is obvious and Steven Slate or UAD can post as many shootouts as they want and thats fine. These differences can be subtle or more obvious at times, they are very much are dependent on the quality of the source material and application and I'm not necessarily saying there is anything wrong with plugins. I feel something like a real LA-2A or 1176 or DBX 165a is so much more non-linear over the span of its operation than a plugin which gets you 1 uniform sound pretty much (program dependent or not) across different reduction settings. Real character compressors have 3 or 4 sounds in them, certain pockets where the 'magic' happens, and can sound totally different over-driven or under-driven etc. Whereas instead if I have the real thing, its usually 1 or 2 knobs and instantly sounds like a classic record, so much more fun.ģ. Usually I need to EQ a little, add more saturation, add more harmonics, add a little bit of distortion, attempt to repair the top end which has been degraded etc.so in the end, it becomes quite a job and taxing on my CPU. For me, it can be possible to re-create and get close to an analog compressor in the box, but it takes much more time and about 5 or 6 plugins or more sometimes. And also youtube compression etc, doesn't always capture what is doing on very well.Ģ. If you were to go into Ocean Way or any reasonable decent room with a pure and great signal path and record something then process it, i think you would hear more details of this top end phenomena. *i also think the big reason people with DAWs don't hear this as often is because they are listening to shoot outs of sub-par or already consumer-fi audio samples. If its a very subtle thing you are going for, I think a plugin can get quite close, but once pushing things a bit the results are very obvious to me. An analog compressor stays much more 'open' and doesn't collapse on itself as much past a few db of compression. I'm sure many will disagree and that is fine.īut the main conclusions I personally have come to are:ġ. I still can hear a difference in plugin vs hardware compressor. No matter what Steven Slate or whomever says. The GR meters were looking similar when matched at these settings.ĭual_LA3A.wav has left/right signals of the two unitsĭual_LA3A-nulltest.wav is the mono difference of those two signals The gain knobs were very similar, at 3.4 each. It was very easy to bring the two so close - the gain reduction knobs were set to 7 vs 6.3 or so. To avoid the conclusion that each HW unit is different and therefore how accurate could a plugin be to any particular HW unit, I ran the test signal through both of my LA-3As (no stereo link) and subtracted the two signals: dual_LA-3A_nulltest.wav. (converters_null_test.wav) This is much quieter than the subsequent plugin null tests which incur no signal path loss. To understand how much error occurs via this round trip, I ran the test signal through this signal path and through a new API 550B on bypass and did a null test with the original file, which demonstrates the magnitude of error incurred by the AD/DA signal path.
#ROOSTER WAV FILE PATCH#
The shootout is performed by sending this test file out through a Liquid Saffire 56, via ADAT to SSL converters at 44.1khz to a patch bay and to the Ureis and then back in reverse. I began with a uncompressed.wav test file with a variety of signals at a variety of levels. The Ureis are NOT stereo linked.ġ) It was very easy to make two hardware units nearly null completelyĢ) The plugins do not attack and release like the real thing, especially from 0 to extreme gain reduction levelsģ) The harmonic overtones that the plugins produce are not correct In this shootout I compare a pair of Urei LA-3A compressors on compress mode to a variety of plugin emulations.
0 kommentar(er)
