![]() | All Advertisers |
| Member Services Directory | Classifieds | Reviews | Jobs | Deal Zone | Merchandise | Marketplace | Facebook App | Books, DVDs & Gadgets | Video Vault | Tips & Techniques |
| |||||||
New Reply | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| | #181 | |
| Lives for gear | Quote:
You need to send a signal 32dB above the compressor's operating level to see the slightest amount of 3rd harmonic appear at -95dBfs. It's nothing like the hardware. When I get some time I'll post a spectral comparison between the UAD and the actual hardware unit, then you'll see what I mean. | |
| | |
| | #182 | |
| Lives for gear | Quote:
Best, Pat | |
| | |
| | #183 | |
| Lives for gear | Quote:
Sounds to me like we are talking about *exactly* the same thing: compression induced artifact. The 33609 has a very very soft knee and begins compressing well below the set threshold. Look at I/O levels instead of the GUI meter on the plugin and you'll see what I am describing. There is no 'modeled saturation' in the UAD plug. To answer your other question, the hardware "limit IN" and "Compression IN" switches are not hardwire bypass, thy simply remove the signal from the sidechain. | |
| | |
| | #184 |
| Lives for gear Joined: Nov 2007 Location: Orange CA
Posts: 2,469
|
In my opinion this test really demonstrated the fact that emulation plugs are not a substitute for the real hardware. They should be thought of as their own thing. Upon listening to the clips, the plug handles complex program material in a completely different manner than the hardware. Those 2 clips are not very similiar. I am willing to bet that the plug performs differently with less complex material. The hardware sounded exactly how I would expect an 1176 to sound, while the plug could have been anything. I would not have guessed the plug to be an 1176. There just wasn't any of the 1176 grab.
|
| | |
| | #185 |
| Gear maniac Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 194
|
The "big" flaw in this clip test is... The SECOND clip is labelled as mix ONE The FIRST clip is labelled as mix TWO So every time someone posted an opinion I was wondering which clip they were referring to and if they noticed this?? |
| | |
| | #186 | |
| Lives for gear | Quote:
1) no way a compressor with a medium atk and 1,6 sec release is going to give equal amounts of THD as a fatso when the "pinned" led is on. It would have to be a lightning fast atk and rls to get even close. 2) I know the sound of saturation vs gain reduction artifacts. It sound like saturation. 3) the GR characteristics are modeled exactly the same in the SE version, which does NOT show the saturation I am talking about. I will do more tests after the holidays. Best, Pat ps - just thought of a way o find out, if lowering the input signal 12 db and loweringe threshold 12dB the GR must be the same, but according to your theory the THD amount must be the same as with a higher input signal&threshold...will try this after the holidays. | |
| | |
| | #187 |
| Gear maniac Joined: May 2006
Posts: 294
|
Mix 2 is analog and sounds better, but not enough to convert me to hardware. Fun for us. Earbuds collapse the difference.
|
| | |
| | #188 |
| Gear maniac Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 194
| Nope... Mix 1 (ie. the second clip) is the hardware. If you preferred Mix 2.. lucky for you! Unfortunately I preferred the more expensive hardware version..
|
| | |
| | #189 |
| Gear maniac Joined: Nov 2005 Location: Europe
Posts: 270
|
Yeah, you guys pay attention... If you select both mp3 files and drag them at the same time to iTunes, sometimes Mix 2 will be placed on top of Mix 1 for some reason..! (and I don't mean the alphabetical sorting order) I couldn't believe when I read the results. I really took it as if the OP was cheating to see how we reacted, but then I realized the first iTune track was actually Mix 2 and vice-versa! |
| | |
| | #190 |
| Lives for gear Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,600
|
This thread is solely responsible for the fact that I don't own an 1176. Still can't figure out if that's a mistake. |
| | |
| | #191 |
| Gear interested | Obviously Flawed!
As a couple of sane people already noticed, this thread is completely flawed. Mixes 1 and 2 are upside down, and therefore every time someone says "I like Mix 2 better", he's actually referring to the one that appears below (the second one), which is Mix 1 (I agree with it sounding way better...). I must conclude that in this thread people picked the hardware 1176 as best sounding, and not the contrary, as many wished (me too, to be honest). |
| | |
| | #192 |
| Lives for gear |
WOW! I really liked Mix II - and hence thought it was the analog version. Come to find out I liked the UAD-1 version better. Good thing too, that it the one of the two I have. Really nice test. |
| | |
| | #193 | |
| Gear nut Joined: Sep 2009 Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Posts: 107
| Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #194 | |
| Gear addict Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 329
| Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #195 |
| Gear Head Joined: Dec 2007 Location: Stockholm
Posts: 42
Thread Starter |
EMPIRE PROD...ouch...thank's for pointing it out. That's truly a big flaw in the test...wish I had noticed earlier. Oh, well what to do ![]() Don't know if there's any point in re-posting? In that case it should probably be done from scratch...eeeehh, maybe just leave it and make some music BTW Mix 2 (the top file) IS the UAD Happy new year slutz/ Jonas |
| | |
New Reply
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| CAT-5 cable for analog and digital audio? | David Kulka | Geekslutz forum | 8 | 11th January 2011 03:32 AM |
| Analog or digital? Top 10 list for digital | RainbowStorm | So much gear, so little time! | 15 | 22nd January 2008 07:14 AM |
| |