10th January 2012
|
#1 | | Gear Head
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 64
Thread Starter | quick test: Smart C2 vs Waves SSL Comp on familiar tune
Thought I'd throw this up to see what people heard when comparing with a familiar track. It's 30 seconds of a tune - one time running through the Smart C2 hardware comp, and another time through the Waves SSL Bus Comp (and through a round of AD/DA to match). Same settings on each comp (4:1, 3ms attack, auto release), same amount of gain reduction, level matched RMS. Analog mode is of course "on" on the plugin. Which is which, and which do you like better...?
| 
|  | |
11th January 2012
|
#2 | | Gear addict
Joined: Jun 2009 Location: Europe
Posts: 342
|
Thanks buddy! I can't describe why, but file 1 sounds slightly nicer glued to me. I guess 1 is the Smart C2 but hopefully I'm wrong. please pm me the result, can't wait for it.
| |
| | |
11th January 2012
|
#3 | | Lives for gear
Joined: Jun 2009 Location: Paris
Posts: 1,456
|
Thanks for the shoot-out
Quick listenning, file 1 seems a bit more "alive" to me...?
A.
| |
| | |
13th January 2012
|
#4 | | -
Joined: Apr 2007 Location: Toronto
Posts: 307
 |
No. 1 sounds better so I'm guessing it's the hardware.
| |
| | |
13th January 2012
|
#5 | | Gear Head
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 64
Thread Starter |
Keep em coming ...  | |
| | |
13th January 2012
|
#6 | | Lives for gear
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 633
|
Ha ha ha!
If number 2 (two) is the software, then I am in luck!
I like number 2 better.
I really hope it's the software! )
Cheers!
EDIT: On another listen, I seem to like number 1 better. Whatever! They both sound ok.
| |
| | |
15th January 2012
|
#7 | | Gear interested
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 20
|
From my experiences with the C1, file 2 sounds like the hardware to me, though I like file 1 better.
| |
| | |
15th January 2012
|
#8 | | Lives for gear
Joined: Jan 2007 Location: Germany
Posts: 2,501
|
I like file1 better, because it does not mess up with the bass so much and it sounds more open and less squishy. And it sounds as if a bit less GR happens here, so maybe both units were not dialed in for the same amount of GR? I once tried to compare a Waves SSL against my DIY GSSL and on nice sounding settings, the needle on the GSSL was barely moving... So they were a bit hard to match.
If I could hear the non-compressed original, it would be easier to say which one is which, so it's just a guess: file1 is the Waves and file2 is the C2, because I can hear some analog components on file2 while file1 is more clean.
__________________
Too many options kill creativity.
| 
| | |
26th January 2012
|
#9 | | Gear interested
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 20
|
Soooooo excited, what the result is...  | |
| | |
27th January 2012
|
#10 | | Gear interested
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 10
|
I would agree with RiF observations. I'd put it this way - 2 is more compressed and in your face, it is also abit flat against the 1. 1 is slightly more 3-dish but it also could be jerkier if put against the unprocessed which I don't have so can't say for sure. Shows the two are different in responce.
| |
| | |
4th February 2012
|
#11 | | Gear nut
Joined: Mar 2011 Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 107
|
File 2 definitely sounds better. But maybe just because it has more presence and in your face like someone posted above.
| |
| | |
4th February 2012
|
#12 | | Gear interested
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 2
|
Thanks for the comparison, very interesting... So, is number one the software. It has a slightly more clean and open sound to it.
| |
| | |
5th February 2012
|
#13 | | Gear maniac
Joined: Feb 2008 Location: Houston
Posts: 231
|
File 1: Hardware
File 2: Still nice but it has the ITB sound
| |
| | |
12th October 2012
|
#14 | | Lives for gear
Joined: Jun 2005 Location: Maryland U.S.A |
lol. I guess the op got busy with something.
| |
| | |
12th October 2012
|
#15 | | Gear addict
Joined: Mar 2007 Location: Tellus
Posts: 327
|
File 1: Hardware
File 2: Software
| |
| | |
24th October 2012
|
#16 | | Gear Head
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 67
|
File 1 = Smart
File 2 = Waves SSL
| |
| | |
8th November 2012
|
#17 | | Gear maniac
Joined: Oct 2012 Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 235
|
so?
| |
| | |
5th January 2013
|
#18 | | Lives for gear
Joined: Apr 2007 Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 1,583
|
1. hardware
WTFreak... u post and never reveal???
| |
| | |
2 Days Ago
|
#19 | | Gear Head
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 64
Thread Starter |
Ha whoops! Completely forgot I did this! And the answer...
File 1 is the hardware. Seems like most of you guys called it. They really are almost imperceptibly close though, at least in terms of the gain reduction. Perhaps they are doing slightly different things harmonically.
| |
| | |
2 Days Ago
|
#20 | | Lives for gear
Joined: Apr 2007 Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 1,583
| Quote:
Originally Posted by lurker94  Ha whoops! Completely forgot I did this! And the answer...
File 1 is the hardware. Seems like most of you guys called it. They really are almost imperceptibly close though, at least in terms of the gain reduction. Perhaps they are doing slightly different things harmonically. | the depth/width (or lack thereof w/ the plugin) was the giveaway.
| |
| | |
21 Hours Ago
|
#21 | | Gear Head
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 67
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by LonDonsen Thanks buddy! I can't describe why, but file 1 sounds slightly nicer glued to me. I guess 1 is the Smart C2 but hopefully I'm wrong. please pm me the result, can't wait for it. | I thought the audio was SLIGHTLY LOUDER on #1 so i voted for that one.......
I like these tests! Quote: |
Originally Posted by lurker94 File 1 is the hardware. Seems like most of you guys called it. They really are almost imperceptibly close though, at least in terms of the gain reduction. Perhaps they are doing slightly different things harmonically. | Yes they are VERY CLOSE!!!!!
I had to listen 2 times to hear the louder audio on #1 (When i first played #2 i thought it was slightly softer so i replayed #1 and verifyed it was indeed)
| |
| | | |
New Reply 
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
