Tube-Tech SMC 2B Hardware VS Plugin Emulation 

This is probably the best channel on RU-vid for plugin and hardware demos at the moment. Appreciate it!

Not subtle. Hardware has wider stereo image, nice presence on top. Thnx for comparison 👍

Oh, I already loved the sound of this unit, now I want it even more. Low end punch and separation between the instruments makes it soo good. Software is close, but the hardware just makes you feel the music.

Hardware sounds so much better in every way. Would love that a 20 euro plug in came close, but that is another realm

OMG!!!! A full test including analog path!!!! Thank YOU SIR!!!!!!

Thank you so much for putting the high quality audio on ur website, much appreciated!

To my ears the hardware’s low end is more controlled (tighter). Thanks Paul you’re the best.

your comparison videos are really great and helpful, thank you very much for your effort and keep up the good work.

top end opens up bit more and low end gets tighter on hardware, Plugins is very very close but sounds 2D, slightly muddier than hardware, Hardwares adds nice width to all the instruments as well, great comparison Paul, thank you.

I guess my monitoring system is pretty good. Pretty substantial difference but nothing that can't be fixed with a good EQ. Great demo!! Thank you

I think you described it perfectly... There are differences indeed, but they didn't model your unit which is a fact and what's more important they both not just sound great but feel great which is not typically guaranteed with plugins at all! How I'm able to get plugins closer in the low end solidity and depth is by using mix knob (especially if it messes with the phase just a bit you can find often this pleasant edge the hardware have) and also using either some very subtle saturator (some high quality for example the Softube Analog harmonics generator) and also all Softube plugins have extra panels where is phase flip but not for all frequencies but only below what you set I sometimes just flick it on and set below 5Hz and you can clearly hear how it changes the bass response below 20Hz. Other than that I'm very pleased with the quality of the plugins Softube is putting out lately and their new Clipper and Widener are quickly becoming my go to...

Hardware has more depth 3d, space, etched. Plugin is very close but a little flatter to my ears

Much Appreciated 🏆💁🏾‍♂️

Plugin sounds great! The transient clarity, weight and width is just a little more on the Hardware. It feels almost like the plugin adds a ssl gcomp style glue to the sound.

Another great comparison, thanking you kindly sir ! The plugin does not sound bad, it's not harming the material - which is something to watch out for with plugins. I just wish they could achieve that sense of front to back depth that hardware does, then it will be a wrap ! On the first example, you can hear how the plugin sounds like it only has a few inches of depth. You can also hear how hardware implemented it's own controlled groove, it even made it feel like the tempo had slowed down. The other examples didn't have that difference, like the Drum and Bass example. That's because those examples use sounds that are not created in their own real world space, just a digital vacuum, so there is barely a perception of depth. Hardware always has the subtle edge but if i could just get that sense of depth i would happily use the plugin. I'm not evaluating from a mastering perspective however, just mix stage.

Huge difference. I love Softube emulations but their plugins usually sound a bit darker and have more low end and low mids than the real thing. Softube usually goes for the warmer and darker sound in their compressors emulations

The loop at 5:30 I think reveals the most differences, but it's more difficult to A/B because the 2nd part (hardware) has a riser that the 1st part (plugin) doesn't.

I like the low end in the plugin version and the high end in the hardware, It just seems more pronounce to my ears.

Softube is incredible, great job 👏

It's the same difference I always here in plugin and analogue... the high end is always more vibrant and more alive... I do always wonder if you could add that with other plugins... if a plugin could be made to bring out the high end without copying analogue and I think that after each plugin would bring it a lot closer

Paul, I love your channel and your comparison videos, but I wonder if it can ever be a fair comparison when you use Burl converters (I think you do?) which add additional transformer "sound" to the hardware. Or do you use different converters that sound more "neutral"?

you are right , there is very small difference , hardware signal has bit more headroom space around sonic energy and that is resulting in more balanced harmonics around frequency , while plugin processing is resulting in a littlebit less headroom and that is causing more energy compression and increase level of upper harmonics around frequency so all together plugin makes it just slightly brighter increase in upper harmonic which means also there is just a bit more harmonic distortion that i noticed in high -mid range with littlebit less bass bottom stability , however difference in this example is really very small and most listeners wouldnt even notice without profesional ear and precise listening tool , so all together plugin is giving decent output and doing great job , very close to hardware but that still depends on few things to be careful in digital setup configuration , difference is small , plus i think or am sure with few of my private sonic voodoo solution patents i could improve that same plugin into outputing even better harmonic balance around frequency in comparison to original hardware , so next time you would do the same test it would be plugin providing you better result sonically . but actually my comment above applies for first comparison example ,... i just noticed in your second drum n bass example it seems that plugin sounded just a littlebit better than hardware . So i think you already having it at the good edge with quality difference vary from each example , so sometimes in proper configuration your plugin is able to beat your hardware . in third and fourth example hardware sounded better , but difference is really small . and to do the summary on subject , its not actually plugin crucial source which makes it sound as hardware , plugin just provides same parameters as hardware but sonic quality comes from something else and not plugin itself .

Interesting... does the hardware have an overall slower attack and release as compared to plugin when set to the same values? It also seems the center "mono" channel is more present on the hardware. It seems the frequencies are there but capture more for compression using the plugin vs hardware. Very Interesting!

To my ears the hardware has this depth and sheen to it. Reminds me a lot of using red silk on Rupert Neve Design products. Plugin still sounds impressive and could be very useful when you have larger mixes and need itb processing. So I would probably use the hardware on primary sources and the master bus and the plugin on everything else to improve workflow.

Sounds like the hardware has slightly more "rounded" low end (lower extension with a bit more phase shift?) and the tiniest bit more "crispiness" on the high mids and top (slight difference in attack character?). Overall, the compression character is pretty much the same to my ears. It's so small that I'm probably not even hearing what I think I'm hearing! Way too small a difference to even hear on my KH120s + 750DSP. Thanks for the demo!

Hardware takes the diamond spot for sure# this is way pass gold

The hardware has more energy in the 3K range, not a freq boost, more like a saturation thing in that area. Also a better stereo image

on the first example, to me it's night and day ! on the second very similar except a very tiny little bit in the highs !

The hardware is a little bit wider, and the mid-range has a better curve where it's glued together. That's how it felt.

For me, the hardware sounds more lively, the mix opens up more... the snare and the highs get more overtones, which makes the mix appear broader and brighter... But the DA/AD conversion certainly also plays a role, especially which converter you use!😉 Some color more, others less.. but softube plugin sounds really good..👍 What I notice is when I do a stereo mix digital master it doesn't sound as wide as when I send the signal from the DAW into the summing amp (SPL Mixdream) via the ISA preamp and send it back into the DAW.. the mix automatically becomes wider and has more depth...

The hardware gives the song a very pleasant density and a certain brilliance that makes the whole thing groove, but the plugin is a good alternative if you can't or don't want to spend a lot.

Plugin = lumpy low end (plugins cannot seem to control low kick drums without 'choking' them or making them sound slightly boomy, congested and slow). Hardware = Natural, punchy and open-sounding. The low end of the kick punches in and out QUICKLY without any artificial "boominess/subsonic laziness". The plugin worked well on the drum & bass example because there wasn't much low end to control but, the moment you introduce a kick/bass element with strong fundamentals below 120 Hz, the plugin starts to warp the waveform into an untamed, slow, boomy, unnatural lump. Plugins always struggle to handle fast/natural LOW END phase response and slew rates - (Acustica are the only ones that have gotten close to accurate analog phase reproduction).

Ive always wanted to get this plugin but just thought it was too expensive since I already have the Leapwing Dynone. It does sound good though.

Yeah, its damn close. But even on my phone I can hear the difference. Its that magic FINAL 1-5% that I'm always striving for in my mix and masters. There's just an extra gloss, 3D-ness and super subtle separation that lets the elements float in the sound stage. Thats where the extra £2,800 goes. For most people, plugin is fine. But for ultra obsessives like myself, I demand that magic! Im buying one later this year for my masters along with the RN MBT. I think that will be enough to get my tracks over the finish line I have in my mind.

on the last test piece the groove changes with the Plugin, making the upper transient on the 2 & 4 seem early in relation to the kick, sounds like it moved 10 ms... which is considerable, without comparing to the original hard to know which one is 'correct'... but I prefer the feel of the hardware.. if the plugin does throw timing out then that's a serious problem

Low and Low Mids are the area where the hardware bright, plus the deep of the tubes. Anyway this multiband tube compressor works better with acoustic mix material for my taste. In plugin you can try the PSP Version and the Acustica audio version (both to my ears works better than the softube version)

On the hardware, the low frequency content sounds almost “disconnected” from the rest of the mix (first example) so there might be some problems with the mix or the settings used. On the second example, that phenomenon is less pronounced, and the high mid frequencies pop out a bit more. On the fourth example (the chillwave one), the hardware and plugin are almost indistinguishable. The plugin sounds great all around.

Hardware as always more open (especially in transients area)

thx 4 using "normal music" so one can relate

The Plug-in lacks the micro details of the hardware. If you focus on the individual sounds they are more refined with the hardware. There's better separation with the hardware. For 4600 less the plug-in doesn't disappoint. Thank you for the comparison Paul.

I think it's clear as day. The hardware has a significantly better transient representation and the plugin has a weird nosey midrange. These comparisons usually just show me that I shouldn't be using the plugins. I have this plugin myself, but I will definitely be pairing it with some spiff at the very least

Biggest difference to me is the low end on the hardware feels tighter and the stereo image is wider on the hardware. Might also be a bit more shimmer on the top end.

To me they sound very similar. But let’s face it. Analog sounds best. It’s the depth. But yea 4500 vs 200. I don’t have that money for the unit so I’d settle and be happy using the plug. Great job to you and to soft tube.

hardware seems brighter,and a little wider

Do you want to see a high quality print of a Dali painting or see the actual oil on canvas face to face? Low end is tighter and the top half soundstage and separation is much better in the hardware....not really anything you could see in a waveform but 100% hear, even on earbuds.

Now we just need the follow up saying you had the labels reversed. So many gearsnobs heads would explode

On the hardware unit, high frequencies sound more interesting.

Don't hit me, but I like the sound of the plugin a little little bit better. It has a tiny bit more punch in the low mids in the second audio example.

The hardware is more open and wider in the stereofield.

plugin sounds mushy analog separates sounds nicely and adds this "3D sound " Hardware is also more open sounding

The compressors are comparable. The thing that stood out for me right off the bat. Your convertors. I thing they're Burl right? Maybe you should do a AD/DA convertor shootout one day. Going from low to mid to high end. Just to give people an idea of how important they are with hardware. Peace out.

Maybe there is a difference very very slightly in the low end. Then again maybe it is all in my head.

not event close, hardware has so much more dimensionality

I usually agree with you on most things, but not in this case. I have both myself and it's big difference between them. Not that plug-in is bad, but quite different. And your example sounds a bit too saturated before the compression? The strength of the hardware is to make it big, punchy without you hering the compression

why often in your comparisons there isn't any vocal content in the reference tracks ? personally i think is a huge downside that the most important element in a song is not present when making comparisons

Not subtle at all. I own the hardware and the plugin, and use the plugin for mixing and sometimes on the master bus to avoid turning on the tubes on the hardware without real need. As you can hear on the examples, the hardware cleans up low mids better, without losing punch, is more open, wider, and 3D. It's lush and round, lows sound full and controlled, highs sounds smoother. The plugin is correct, only.

plugin for glue, unit for space and low end

Why do 99% of plugins mess up phase ?

Well it is not subtle. On my iPad with the first example I could hear the differences with my eyes closed. Plug-in is more compressed, hardware breaths more.

very close but still think the plugin sounds a bit one dimensional like most plugins youll need multiple plugins to achive whats happening here. I doubt most would even hear the difference esp if they dont have proper room/speakers. Analog just has that openness/ clarirty- that you rarely can replicate 1 :1 and to be honest im talking a very small amount like a sprinkle or two on the ice cream lol

Pretty sure in a blind test and all these 'golden ear' viewers in the comments will be looking quite silly... it is very close, possibly closer if the plugin is tweaked by ear vs like for like on the knobs. Softube are excellent at what they do.

It's not day and night hardware to plugins is only a 5 percent difference between the plugins and hardware

could you please compare Rupert Neve MBT vs Kiive NFuse plugin?

night and day

PLug-in always harsh sounds ... I prefer the hardware model.

The dif is huge, I hear what is what with my eyes closed :/

Hardware

Too close to matter. If I scroll away and remove the visual, I can't tell when you're switching. Enough with the hardware elitism...

Both the hardware and the plugin are too expensive for my taste 😂