WAVES SSL 4000 DEMO IS BACK!!! YOUR THOUGHTS!!!!

[raal]

Originally Posted by thermos

Whether or not theother is right or wrong, it doesn't matter because the real one seems to sound leagues better. At least to me.

don't know about 'leagues better' (IMHO), but yes, better.

let's not forget the files were recorded at 16/44.1-- at 24/96 things will probably change, specially in the high end, and julian's comp wasn't an FX384 or a G console's compressor. could actually be better for all we know, it's been awhile since the G was introduced, but i doubt it's an exact clone.

from manual:

'The AWS 900 features one of SSL’s legendary G Series (ex Quad) compressors. This device uses the same 36-bit, Hi-Resolution MDAC as the master fader (see below).'

as we all know, G consoles didn't use MDACs, so even if the comp electronics are the same, when they go through an MDAC (AWS) or a VCA (G), they will no longer sound the same.

so..... i'm very curious to see how it fares next to my FX384. if someone does this before i do please let us all know.

and just for the record, he's right.

[JulianBrightnes]

Originally Posted by strauss

Hi Julian

How are the channel strips of the plugs when you 'overload' them?
I have never worked on a AWS, but like the way a E or G channel sounds when it hits the red lights!

Hi Strauss,

Just got in the studio, gonna get me some coffee, and later on I'll post a little EQ test.
didn't really drive 'm into the 'red', those plugs. Don't expect that to work...
but who knows...

See ya later,

Julian

[raal]

Originally Posted by strauss

Hi Julian

How are the channel strips of the plugs when you 'overload' them?
I have never worked on a AWS, but like the way a E or G channel sounds when it hits the red lights!

i'm not julian, but the gain structure and electronics on the G+ i worked on was very different to that of an AWS. the AWS never clipped (or audibly distorted) and i hit it hard... the channel and stereo bus meters were pegged.

G+ is a different animal.

[giles117]

Originally Posted by thermos

Whether or not theother is right or wrong, it doesn't matter because the real one seems to sound leagues better. At least to me.

I think we all agree the real deal sounds better, but does that discount or negate the usefulness and closeness of the plugin model. I want to hear how it compares to the pcs. they modeled not an updated upgraded AWS.....Even though I love the way those sound Gotta get me one this year ;)

Think of it this way...for all you sci fi buffs,... Is a clone ever as good as the original or "close enough"

Then the Q becomes how close. Lets hear some subjective comparisons with closeness....... Lets here it from all sides. The pcs are close enough for me that I can adjust to the differences, push em a little harder and get very satisfactory results....

Personally in my listening an duse tests these puppies are damn close. How close is a DIY SSL compressor? spot on or close enought that it doesnt matter that it might be 1% different.........

[raal]

Originally Posted by giles117

<snip>How close is a DIY SSL compressor? spot on or close enough that it doesnt matter that it might be 1% different.........

when cloning a pultec with QClone for example, it doesn't sound exactly the same, but it sounds great and the factory presets do too. could the differences lie in the converters? when i record anything to PT (192 interfaces) it doesn't sound the same as the original. when you mix to a 1/2" machine it doesn't either.

i think it boils down to whether these things are useful or not. i still haven't heard a software comp that could substitute it's hardware counterpart, but i eagerly await the day. i hope the Waves/SSL will be the first, and if not, it shouldn't be too long now. SSL, GML, Tritone...

BTW, i have 3 real EQH2s, one EQP1A, brand new tubes in all of them. caps are fine, but different transformers in some (peerless or triad). the point is they all sound great, but a little different.

[giles117]

Originally Posted by raal

could the differences lie in the converters?

i think it boils down to whether these things are useful or not.

2 Very good points. I;d like to hear opinions about these from people with Lavry, Cranesone or Prism Convertors on their systems.

I wonder what DA the wave guys used to listen to these, what monitoring system, what room...all those subjective details that change what you hear and how you hear what you hear......

I have a Lavry on the way (Finally) and I will be testing to see how much diff the convertor - and clock - makes to what I am hearing. Either way, when my demo expires next week I am purchasing these. They are a welcome addition to my plugin collection and will get heavy use in my mixes going forward.... For me, they are very useful.....

[The Press Desk at Gearslutz.com]

SOLID STATE LOGIC PARTNERS WITH WAVES TO DELIVER VINTAGE SSL SOUND TO DAW ENVIRONMENT
Emulations of the Classic Legacy Sound of SSL Now Available in the Box.

OXFORD, UK— For the first time, the legendary sound of Solid State Logic is available in software to users of DAW systems. Developed under licence from Solid State Logic, and with significant input from SSL engineers, the Waves SSL 4000 Collection includes emulations of technology from the console manufacturer’s legendary past: the G-Master Buss Compressor, E-Channel and G-Equalizer.

To capture the SSL sound, Waves engineers worked closely with SSL’s engineering team, spending over a year analyzing and modeling the distinctive sonic characteristics of SL 4000 factory reference consoles and components provided by Solid State Logic.

Chris Jenkins, SSL's director of commercial applications says: "I was one of those instrumental in establishing the E and G Series sound, assisting engineers and producers on countless recordings where these consoles gained their excellent reputation. There are numerous technical challenges in accurately emulating the subtle non-linearities of SSL analogue processor design that are an essential part of our characteristic sound and Waves have done a great job. For example, their emulation of the true r.m.s sidechain and 'overeasy' transfer function of the E-Series channel dynamics unit has faithfully captured the sound and performance of the original."

The collaboration with Waves marks a milestone for SSL as the first time the company has partnered with another organisation. “This is a very exciting time, we’re forging alliances to further a commitment to make our products work in a wide variety of creative environments,” says SSL’s managing director, Antony David. “Just as there are those who will always prefer our analogue technology, we also want to support those who prefer to work in the box.”

“To enable us to deal with the specific challenges posed by developing for TDM and Native systems we chose to partner with Waves. Their reputation for quality speaks for itself and they’ve proved to be the perfect partners for this project.”

Following their debut appearance at this year’s Winter NAMM, SSL will also be exhibiting at the Frankfurt MusikMesse for the first time. “There’s much more to come,” adds David. “I think it’s reasonable to say that this will be a very significant year in the history of SSL. See you at Frankfurt!”


The SSL 4000 Collection is distributed and supported exclusively by Waves.

[giles117]

If you hadnt seen this thread....

http://duc.digidesign.com/showflat.p...ev=#Post957129

He gives it an 8.9. which is pretty darn favorable if you ask me..... for a $500.00 to $1000 price point -Native/TDM) it seems well well worth it to me.

[giles117]

SO the processed file you posted is a file that ran through a da????or you listened to the file through your DA10??? into your adams????

Please clearly define your signal path upon which the ssl plugin was used and how/where you derived the final product.

As far as I can tell this file you posted was derived from a complete ITB solution....

[raal]

still waiting for my authorization, and i leave town sunday! don't want to bother with the demo. is there anyone here who's compared the comp to an FX384?

[robdarling]

If we're going to do tests, the first thing that needs to be done is that we have to know the zero vu reference level is for the models is.

Originally Posted by giles117

Just because you agree doesnt mean he was right.

Lots of people agree that Jesus was Crucified, and rose from the dead, that doesnt mean it is right... (or true...)

IF you are going to test something and have an honest test the guy was RIGHT THe crucifiction of Jesus was not a controlled experiment. So your comparison is STUPID at best

[giles117]

Originally Posted by no ssl yet

IF you are going to test something and have an honest test the guy was RIGHT THe crucifiction of Jesus was not a controlled experiment. So your comparison is STUPID at best

I was wondering who was gonna be the gullible person and fall into that trap. LOL. Ding!! We have a winner. Remember not everything a person writes is worth responding to even if you disagree.

;)

Originally Posted by giles117

I was wondering who was gonna be the gullible person and fall into that trap. LOL. Ding!! We have a winner. Remember not everything a person writes is worth responding to even if you disagree.

;)

[Lindell]

hey.....

[robdarling]

Originally Posted by robdarling

If we're going to do tests, the first thing that needs to be done is that we have to know the zero vu reference level is for the models is.

kids. relax.

get back on focus.

no comparison with audio files will be valid until this little bit of knowledge can be set up and a proper gain staging can be established.