ANALOG HARDWARE VS DIGITAL PLUGINS: ru-vid.com/group/PLmcBOB8VmXMI_rvJtWcGnXpnBbWDK8jQL Full playlist of every shootout I've done included some not mentioned in this video 🤓
Hey Paul, admirer of your work here. I’ve raised this before - chasing a sound set by the hardware, isn’t the same as using the hardware creatively. I suppose with enough dedication, time and patience and some amazing ears, you can replicate an end result of something, but this isn’t really what we set out to do in a session, unless there is a technical reason for doing so, mostly we just want inspiration and speed. I personally find that hardware is much more encouraging in use, with more obvious sweet spots, in my experience its actually easier to find the settings on the plugins once you’ve used the hardware for a time, however, I think this might be the biggest difference between hardware and software. In practice, setting a real Pultec, is quick and easy, it provides forward momentum and everything sounds great, its more a question of which great you want to choose. You are quite right to say as you have previously, that there is no experiment to test this claim, but I think this is the elephant in the room. Obviously, if you find you have a twin and were separated at birth, we might then see some sort of potential for a dual mix experiment. Now thats content!
I can't stop using the IK Comprexxor. I own a fair number of compressors, hardware and software. I know how they all work, and frequently take into account The finer aspects of ballistics when choosing and dialing in a compressor for the task at hand. It's gotten to the point now that once I have something set, if it's not the comprexxor I'll go ahead and dial up relative settings on the comprexxor to see what the difference is. Half the time I choose to comprexxor. I don't know if it's the nonlinearities and the signal path that I like. But for years now when it comes to any gear I've started to wonder if it's just the way the controls are laid out that just seem more logical in my head. Or lend themselves to a workflow that is more productive.
I have Nebula TimP libraries but recently purchased an Audioscape Bus Comp (SSL G Bus NOS). Honestly, although i'm gonna keep the Audioscape, I would recommend everyone purchase Nebula and buy Tim's LComp instead. Audioscape gives me that final 5% saturation difference but the actual sound of compression is SO SIMILAR that Nebula is the clear winner for ease of use, 3rd party library costs, etc. I've been telling all my friends lol
I actually like recording on my 4 & 8 track tascam cassette recorders with my old nasty Alesis 3630 compressor and my Aphex "dominator 2" analog mastering limiter. I love this setup, because it's unpredictable, you never know what you're gonna get or how the song is gonna turn out....The plugins are great, just too precise for me, no matter how "analog" they try to make them sound...
If I could afford all analog stuff I might do it BUT that won't ever be the case. I have too much other stuff to worry about... But all the plugins you mentioned are pretty much awesome! I like Softube. I discovered them just last year after Christmas. I heard about them, but I never tried anything. I got the Mike E first thing LOL its a strong choice... I got most of the best from each plugin company basically. BUT Acoustica and some other new ones. I have mostly Softube, Fab Filter, Waves and Plugin Alliance stuff. I just got some Universal Audio plugins as well. They had a deal a few weeks back and I got the Pultec and some other things in a deal. I like the Reverb Lexicon unit they emulate. I should do shoot outs as well and make a channel but again Been busy trying to work and write music and keep the bills paid... Not always easy in this world lately!
I appreciate your take on this subject! I’m less and less inclined to reach for my hardware after tracking unless my sounds need a lot of love and could benefit (dull sounding vocals recorded directly into an interface for example)
I'm half surprised the 5500 made into your video! I've always thought that piece of gear was hard to replicate and to also get a sound subjectively better from any plugin based on it's intended uses. Great video and looking forward to more. Was great seeing the pie get a mention.
The main issue with "mastering grade" eq's is that they are built to be as clean and consistent as digital ie least tolerances possible, with increased headroom so you can push hotter signals through them without crapping out. However this means that when the bells and shelves are standard with near to no band interaction.. Its basically the same as using a good digital eq. There isn't really much audible non linearities in play to give you a sound that can't be matched in the box. When i stuck a sweep through 5500 it was as clean as a digital eq. It was SUPER clean which is mightily impressive in the analog domain BUT redundant when compared to digital which is as clean as one can get with nearly unlimited headroom
Allen Sides (Ocean Way Studios owner) he spoke here on YT about eqs and he was saying that UAD Pulltec is the only digital eq that he likes (above 10k about +4dB is what he was talking about specifically)....many people say it is a great sounding eq plugin...I have it and I love it as well. It simply has that analog sizzle and depth. Regarding UAD ch.Strips...I have Neve 88RS and SSL E as well...I really like that Neve eq in higher frequency registers as well. Hopefully soon it will be native as well because I have only PCI duo. I have tried that API against Neve and did not really like it tbh. It didn't have that top end sizzle that I like....but still very nice sound and plugin.
Thanks Paul, nice Vid! I have nearly all TIMP’s libraries and truly love them! I also have hardware and the way TIMP samples HW is amazing! They usually sits on my group mix busses and doing well giving that analog Vibe! Cheers and thanks again😊
Man.... that's how I'm feeling about my Mackie fx12 versus the SSL SiX... because to some degree you can do more with the fx12 even though the SSL cost more
I Have a Fx22 and had a SSL Six. Ended up with the Mackie. Summing my mixes through that mackie sounded better to me that the ssl six. Plus as you mentioned you can do more with a Mackie FX than the SIX
Hey Paul! Here are 2 questions or ideas to talk about in one of your vids: 1. What tape delay you use? I think tape delay is one of those thing that is dearly imposible to emulate, and the could generate a lot of aliasing, and delay the aliasing haha there are a lot of bad sounding plugins in this regard. 2. Talk about the TDR Nova. Is an amazing plugin that just sounds good. I'm currently working on a mix, and I tried DSEQ3 (kind of a cheaper and better soothe2), Reso, Trackspacer and spent a lot of time doing that. A LOT. I was suprised, none of those plugins sounded better than the free nova. All of those plugins over-do things and they could sound so unnatural so easily! Nova stayed in the mix, and I don't want to buy any automatic plugin! I mean, I don't have the money for a Fabfilter Eq3 or a soothe2, but I feel like I don't need neither of those if I learn to use nova. Love your content!
1. I normally use arturias Roland space echo for that or an echoplex 2. Dan Worrals already done TDR nova on youtube. Nice sounding eq, well coded but nothing I would personally have a use for
The reason uad can get closer is there are inherent issues with convolution in general. Correct Saturation models have their own envelopes/memories independent of the signal, loading up a circuit twice in a row with 2 separate spikes should result in 2 different outcomes as the circuit 'heat' recovers from the 1st. Convolution can't really account for that in a truely dynamic way.
@@ojvic7297 I'm not bigging them up specifically, you'll see plenty of rants against them from me. I'm specifically referring to Paul's comment when he was shocked the uad pultec was closest Vs a convolution unit. I haven't used them for nearly a decade now but credit where credit is due they were the first to get virtual analog right. Plenty of others just caught up. I swapped to Slate when they embarrassed uad with the mix rack launch.
Paul... any chance you'd take a look at Fuse Audio Labs plugins on the channel? Underdog plugins, analog emulations of interesting gear, from a reputable coder. Think it'd be interesting. Cheers!
Sorry man, the whole rare analog stuff is not for me anymore. Truth is, I'm pretty bored by the analog emulation thing now unless it's a hardware unit that is a huge staple within the industry. I've just got way too many emulations to the point where I've genuinely bored myself with them 🤣
can you check out some Sknote plugins? they are great, would like to know your thoughts! also Positive Grid has the EQ series and Compressor series that are awesome in my opinion
Have you ever played around with the analog obsession donate-ware plugins? I’ve found myself really enjoying them, and they’re free! The bugs tho can be annoying
@@EdwinDekker71 I’ve been really loving FRANK but after analyzing it in plug in doctor I think it’s a bit to saturated for most applications but on drum busses, really harsh lyrics, and other things in that category, it rounds things off really nice
@@EdwinDekker71 in cases I’m looking for that neve diode bridge compression I typically find myself reaching for the Lindell 254e, the Britpressor sounds mushy to me. But I like thr eq on the Brit channel and I love the BUSTERse just because of all the sidechain control!
Hey, i went over to in the box mastering, too - just by the lack of real studios around. And yes, find yourself an introductory software comp that does the trick - hard to before ever going into multiband compression ( uuuuhh, just don't unless you do tv stuff)
But bro .... Analog always sounds better. That's why I bounce all my boxes to cassette tape during mastering for that old school analog warmth! 🤪😂 There's a lot of other great sounding plugins as well. Especially if your not getting to recreate a specific piece of hardware.
Hey Paul great video. Have you tried the analog in the box apeq which is a 550b emulation on nebula? I've been wondering how it compares to the uad version
I much prefer the UAD Distressor to my hardware Mike-E on vocals, so that’s really weird to me that you would prefer the softube Mike-e to a hardware Distressor
Just a subjective thing. I'd need to go back to the video to find out exactly why I did on vocals but I'm pretty sure I recall preferring it on everything
I agree. The UAD Pultecs are the best, but Magenta sounds better than the UAD Manley stuff. I like that Magenta channel strip has settings for SSL Fairchild, and Shadow Hills too! I recently tried Viridian and felt it made most things sound worse, so I'm hyped to try the Waves PYE. Mostly not too impressed with their emulations, but I don't really care if it sounds authentic; just good. The only reason I could see to spend money on analog gear, at this time, is if you are working in/as a studio and you feel like having those things might get you more money from clients than you are spending on the gear. (I spent all my money on 'gear', but I don't mean the kind you plug in!) I recently got the Arturia Comp Diode. I'll check your older video for the tip. I love that their fully functioning demos last forever. I'm not saying don't buy their stuff...I'm just saying if you can't afford it now, you can get their demos (which last for 20 minutes before they stop working) and bounce down whatever you need to use them on. Thanks for the info!
Love the video Paul! I bought a Warm Audio Bus Compressor around the same time as I saw you saying that the TimP SSL G Bus was great. As I put the TimP on my mixbus, my face as I realised I'd wasted a few hundred quid = 😐. I already had Nebula from a deal (I think I paid £99 or something). Do you think I should sell my Warm Audio?
@@PaulThird Thanks for taking the time to reply, Paul. I think I was holding back, somehow just thinking that although it's not as well regarded as the OG SSL, or X-Logic/G384 etc, it was still a piece of tangible, physical "hardware" with real live circuits and that therefore if I couldn't hear an improvement, it was somehow a problem with my critical listening (or hearing!). I could use it to track but for various reasons, I doubt I will do because plugins offer so much more convenience (I am on UAD Apollo X interface gear, so also have Unison etc.) So, overall, I find this is a trend increasingly the case with the best plugins. It's akin to the esoteric world of hifi, where you can buy £35,000 Nordost speaker cable that actually might make things sound worse but the confirmation bias is so powerful, like £35K powerful, that it's a morphine hit where you somehow think it MUST sound better! That's why I think your analytical videos are so helpful to those of us on a budget. It's a sorry day whenever some poor sod (like me!) spends money on the wrong things that aren't going to make tangible mix improvements. Maybe that's a video for you - where should an aspiring engineer/producer be spending their money for the most significant positive impact. I know about a million people will scream "room" and another two million will shout "source" but for those of us that know those things ring true but are still going spend their hard-earned on more plugins and gear (#GAS!), well if you MUST do it, what's the first ports of call if your goal is making your mixes sound more professional? If you don't do it, I might even do a video on it myself but the world doesn't need to see another ginger haired audio geek (I don't even have your disarming youth!) now does it?
Tbh I invest in my ears. Gear is great for tracking if you already have the best listening environment and monitoring setup and don't want to invest in the UAD infrastructure, but if you can squeeze more quality from what goes into your ears.. Go with that all day long
please for the love of god make more of these videos, and a part II of this one I want more plugins Here's another one - Elysia karacter indistinguishable, check out white sea audios review of it
Convolution is pretty heavy in its nature but I chain his libraries using metaplugin and for whatever reason it can be pretty low compared to acustica. The vari level is a good example
I tested all plugins and I tested all analog gear processors so i believe that analog processors provide the best warmth and true analog sound.The key is not to confuse equalizer waves with analog waves that's why it's so difficult for many producers to achieve analog sound without disturbing the sound
Or just that acustica has finally found out how to measure compression envelopes properly? haha hope it's genuinely good though as they've been needing to work on their compressors for the longest time
@@PaulThird I dig some of the compressors they make, but I threw it on a bunch of tracks last night and the sound was much different then what I have heard. free so no harm, but it might be making regret buying any comps over the years...
I'm a non native English speaker and it is extremely difficult to understand what you're saying. Subtitles would be appreciated because it truly seems you know what you're talking about
@@PaulThird I suggest you research. They claim to be replicating analog signal chains by award-winning engineers along with real console signals. I bought it, I am using it. Really true if I'm not mistaken :)
I refuse to use Acoustica audio because abuse I don’t have an extra 6 terabytes of space for their anti-piracy software. There are WAY too many equal/better alternatives.
When you say "compared to the hardware" what exactly do you mean there? Like with the Pye, in my experience the Waves isn't even remotely like any hardware Helios comp that I've used. So perhaps in this exercise in some cases one could just be matching a really bad example.
Watch it and you'll see what I did. Set the hardware first to how you would intuitively set it in the context of a mix, then match the settings and gain reduction in the plugin. Then level match and listen over and over and tweak the plugins in whatever way you can till they can't sound any closer to the gear. Do that on multiple sources, sum them all together, ensure that's level matched as well and then AB the results. In my experience it's not "one could just be matching a really bad example" Its more "one can be poorly matching the plugins to the hardware" Its not a 5 minute thing. I take a long time with the plugins to get it right as looking at the meters and setting exactly to hardware never works in reality. Meters can be misleading so you've got to tweak with your ears at the final stage. Eq's are easier cause I found a way of curve matching access analog gear with plugins in the daw so in that instance you simply just curve match, level match and then listen to the results. If it's a colourful eq then I'll also print a sweep to test harmonics so I know if I need to go into the plugin harder.
@@PaulThird Ok thank for the explanation on your process. I think what I'm pointing out in some cases though is you're matching crap to crap😆. There's some wonderous 1176 etc. out there, and then ones of the same model and year that sound like crap. I at least feel like that's what's might be happening with the Waves Pye. It's an accurate model of a Pye, but perhaps not a good one. A Helios comp, or even an 1176 or Varimu, is a much more varied thing than a dbx 160x. Enjoy the video all the same.
@@PaulThird The video was mostly about compressors and I think the only EQs mentioned were from UAD. Ok, we have Spark now, but let's say that there are still people who refuse to buy into UAD and would love to know if there are EQs that sound as good as the hardware. I know you use Ruletec a lot, what about Overloud? That would be the only contender that would come to my mind in the Pultec world at least. Just food for thought, idk man, make of it what you want.
Tbh man eqs are the easiest of the bunch to replicate. As long as you get the curves right in most emulations you won't hear the difference. I didn't know the bertom / metaplugin trick i made back when I made the shootouts. It was all done by ear. Now I can match pretty much bang on if it's a good emulation. I made a video showing harmonic analysis of tons of gear and eq's are soooo clean. Pultec included. Analog eq's are a waste of time if you ask me, compressors are much harder to nail. SSL, maag, pultec, api etc you name it, if the curves match exact and the filters have been modelled correctly, you won't hear a difference. Fabfilter took the eq crown years and years ago
As for ruletec it's way too rich in saturation to be like most standard eqp1a's. Rumours are it was modelled on a modded pultec In terms of pultec emulations, if the curves are modelled right and you match them correctly you won't tell a difference unless there is quite an audible harmonic difference
@@PaulThird Not sure if it's good or bad but that confirms my views. I'm using Kirchhoff as second EQ and Abletons stock EQ as first choice because the OS version has lower latency than Kirchhoff. You are right, Compressors might be harder to nail, though I recently tried Analog Obsession and was kinda impressed. I use TrackComp because I'm lazy and trying to figure out how to get low latency mode in Reaper. Cheers Paul, I think you're a cool guy ✌
I pulled those frequencies out of the detection via the sidechain as the plugin was being triggered too much by the snare so I had to tweak by ear till I had the snare punching through like the hardware but still getting a similar level of gain reduction. If you want the hardware then tweak the sidechain eq till you hear the body of the snare coming through more and dial the input drive to taste
I have them, and they sound absolutely good. Different and better sound than algo plugs, and they have the compression action better than Acustica, but perhaps not TimP
So, I know what the difference between analog and digital is technically. But my question is: what exactly is the "analog sound"? Further, as plugins evolve, we are getting to that point where hardwear is now becoming obsolete - not just comps, EQs or channel strips but also amp simulations, FX, etc. But it's one thing to say "can't hear the difference" but what exactly is that analog sound?
Honestly.. The "analog" sound that people idolise is basically noise & harmonics. That's really all you add to a digital eq to make it analog. If you want it even more analog then you'd add some very slight randomness into the signal like what UniChannel or gsat+ does. That's about it really.
I use the advanced for the dialogue deverb. Not a fan of the other rx deverbs but that dialogue one is the best by far. I refuse to limit my voice overs/podcasts past -16 lufs. Any more its just gonna bring out more of your room. I use a smart limit and it's been doing the job ever since I got it
@@PaulThird Yeah -20 rms / -16 LUFS is what I heard for podcasts. Looking into mixing podcasts for people lately, I think its a good area to freelance. Thats my reason to learn RX. Doing some training and also refining my plugin list for that. Fun stuff, as I’m not used to dealing with vocals. Not too concerned about noise floor or room noise with Spectral Denoise and Clarity VX being so good. But I don’t know theres a reason to go higher than -16 LUFS it seems like the standard.
Be careful with the denoise stuff though. None of them are completely transparent. Even the waves one. There's always some imprint on the audio compared to without. I don't use a lot in RX. 10-12% max. The more noise you have in your signal the more processing you'll need, the more processing, the less natural it'll sound and limiting will only bring that stuff up more. For voice over its all about signal to noise ratio for me. Get up close to the mic and speak at a good level. always do what I can to limit noise in my signal as if its too much you'll start to get unnatural sounds with it via de-noise plugins. Good signal to noise ratio combined with consistent speech and gating are your friends. Its only when you limit to loud levels you really hear the noise floor. That's why i like waves de-breath as its a gate as well as a debreath tool
I think anyone who lives for that old analogue sound has got it backwards. Why on Earth do we covet this old analogue crap? We spent decades ironing out the horrible sounds audio gear made, and eventually arrived in the promised land of digital, where we can get an absolutely clean signal chain (if things are done right) from start to finish. We can THEN add any flavour of colouration we like, and we can dial it in with absolute precision. We can meter and measure everything so we can hear (and see) exactly what's happening to our audio. But for some unknown reason some people want to go back in time to the bad old days. All those albums you love from the golden age of analogue were made by engineers, producers and musicians who were desperately trying to rise above the limitations of the very expensive gear they had no choice about using. The original versions of Sgt Pepper sounded awful (compared with the modern remixed versions) for a reason. There's a reason why Dark Side Of The Moon was held up for decades as the best sounding album ever recorded, and it was because you COULD'T hear the analogue gear working, not because you could! Jimi Hendrix died before he got the chance to make a decent sounding album, a significant factor being the inability of the existing analogue gear to handle any sustained volume.
IMHO - The biggest reason for an analog input is the result, quantum level interaction of the elements and compounds that make up the the physical audio path. The plugin is, at best, an approximation of phenomena that today's modern physicists can't concretely define. The analog input also has the advantage of "above zero" operation - the very attribute that the plugins attempt to model - where the various golden standards like Neve, API, etc, get their characteristic sound, or "color if you prefer.
The easy answer is because young engineers would rather believe that its the gear that made today's big engineers sound the way they do. Truth is, most look for shortcuts instead of learning actual engineering cause its "boring" so they get themselves to a certain level and find it easier to believe that if they have xyz gear it'll make them sound more pro. This is blown up beyond belief by plugin marketing and it took me years to find out that nearly all of it is all BS. Add that to today's Instagram "Pro look" and you end up with an amalgamation of history and smoke and mirrors. This analog emulation trend will be round for many more years to come
@@detective4719 Prove me wrong! They sound terrible! Compare the original Sgt Pepper to the modern remix. Chalk and cheese. Sadly, I don't think the Hendrix master tapes survive.
@@periurban the proof is in the albums. If you can’t hear it then I don’t know what to tell you. Your also talking about music that was recording to 8 track machines so the track count was limited.
