Warning – this is really long, but it is the culmination of months of looking for something on the Internet which is apparently not there, despite the raging debates on the subjects which are commonplace.
<o:p> </o:p>
In about a year, my wife is graduating from school, and I am going to do some serious damage to my credit via some major gear acquisitions.
Despite my willingness to spend, my pockets are not infinitely deep, so I’m looking to make the smartest purchases I can, and use this next year to research more into some of the outboard/plug-ing debates around here that will be influencing my purchasing decisions.
<o:p> </o:p>
One frustrating thing I’ve noticed is the lack of sound samples to back up assumptions of outboard gear vs. plug-ins. I’m planning on traveling up to the Boston area to do my own gear testing in person, and also to rent some gear, however I’d also prefer the efficiency of being able to quickly compare a sample of one compressor to another in my own studio
in a blind manner, in a similar fashion to what can be done using Lynn Fuston’s 3d mix CDs. I thought this post was great:
<o:p> </o:p>
Waves SSL vs SSL FX G384 vs URS 1980 - The advanced Test
<o:p> </o:p>
Interestingly enough my wife was able to easily pick out the hardware G384 sample and had a strong preference for its sound, even though she had no idea of or really didn't care what the test was, that hardware vs. software was being compared, or where the sound samples came from. My testing methodology was very imperfect - I knew the point of the test I was conducting, and she saw me as I clicked on the different wav files I saved to my desktop.
<o:p> </o:p>
I would ideally like to find more comparisons similar to the above thread between software EQs and comps and hardware EQs and comps. I understand that some people don’t believe in the value of these comparisons, or in the validity of single or double-blind testing, but I’m not buying equipment for them, and this type of comparison would give me more confidence in my future buying decisions. My impression of some of the best software EQs and comps out there are as follows:
<o:p> </o:p>
UAD – Neve series (EQ and comp), Pultec, Precision <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">EQ</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">LA</st1:state></st1:place>-2A, 1176, Fairchild 670
<o:p> </o:p>
Eliosound – AirEQ
<o:p> </o:p>
Sony – <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Oxford</st1:place></st1:city> EQ
<o:p> </o:p>
Waves – SSL EQ, SSL Comps, Linear EQ
<o:p> </o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Some of the hardware I’m interested in looking at includes (but is not limited to):
<o:p> </o:p>
Purple MC77
<o:p> </o:p>
Portico stuff
<o:p> </o:p>
SSL G384 (older model)
<o:p> </o:p>
Alan Smart C1/C2
<o:p> </o:p>
All API EQs and comps
<o:p> </o:p>
Great River EQ
<o:p> </o:p>
Buzz Audio Essence
<o:p> </o:p>
SSL X-logic rack range (EQs and comps)
<o:p> </o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
I have searched this here Interweb far and wide to find good comparison samples for auditioning in my own studio, and have come up largely empty. So my question is twofold:
<o:p> </o:p>
<!--[if !supportLists]-->1)<!--[endif]-->Is there some secret repository for plug-in vs. outboard comparison samples?
<!--[if !supportLists]-->2)<!--[endif]-->If not, would anyone like to participate in creating one with me?
<o:p> </o:p>
I would like to have two methodologies, although I am more than flexible on how this could be carried out. I’d like to make comparisons for the purpose of:
<o:p> </o:p>
<!--[if !supportLists]-->1)<!--[endif]-->Determining which sound I prefer
<!--[if !supportLists]-->2)<!--[endif]-->Determining which plug-in sounds most like the original unit it is trying to model
<o:p> </o:p>
Within these comparisons, I would like to compare the sound of one plug-in to a hardware model on a single track, and also with the way that track sits in a mix. For example, I’d love to hear UA’s LA-2A and Neve 1073 plug-in emulations compared to the real thing on a single track, and also in the context of a full mix, ideally where multiple hardware units are used (say 16 mixdown stems each with treatment from a hardware unit, and an identical mix with treatment from the plug-ins only, both using identical summing (ITB or an external summing unit), and with quality A/D 24-bit/96kHz conversion (Lavry/Mytek/Prism/Weiss/maybe Apogee AD series w/o soft-limit), and without trying to replicate any effect that additional A/D and D/A conversions might impart on the sound by going OTB as opposed to using a plug-in).
<o:p> </o:p>
Here’s the best part. Assuming these types of comparisons don’t exist on the Internet, I can offer only two things:
<o:p> </o:p>
<!--[if !supportLists]-->1)<!--[endif]-->The desire to see these tests performed
<!--[if !supportLists]-->2)<!--[endif]-->Testing via the plug-ins
<o:p> </o:p>
I would like to make the samples available for public download, and controlled, anonymous test results available for public viewing, so that ideally an individual could perform these comparisons in an enforced double-blind environment, upload their results anonymously, and then be allowed to see their specific results and the general, summarized anonymous results of the total group. My desire is to avoid as much as possible tainting the results by two factors:
<o:p> </o:p>
<!--[if !supportLists]-->1)<!--[endif]-->The natural bias that hardware owners and sellers have that their hardware sounds better than plug-ins because they are significantly invested in their decision, and perhaps because their initial experience with older plug-ins formed an opinion and assumption in their mind which is difficult to overcome despite tech improvements
<!--[if !supportLists]-->2)<!--[endif]-->The natural bias that software-only owners and sellers have that their plug-ins sound just as good because they are significantly invested in their decision, and perhaps because they are unable or unwilling to invest in a necessary amount and quality of outboard hardware, or simply have not had significant experience listening to outboard hardware
<o:p> </o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
I, for one, have flip-flopped back and forth on this subject based upon my limited experience with quality hardware. I’ve heard some really good sounding plug-ins that made me think I’d never need hardware, and some really good sounding hardware that made me think what the hell am I doing with all of these tacky plug-ins. I’m sick of the absolute statements made expressing strong opinions without evidence or really anything quantifiable, and I’m interested to see how others opinions really hold up in the face of what I would consider to be a testing methodology that, while not unassailable, is good enough for me. I would find it especially interesting if most people were unable to tell the difference or prefer the outboard a statistically significant amount of the time, while a smaller group of people were able to identify and consistently prefer the outboard hardware, as this would be in line with my suspicions. Most of all, I’m interested in doing the test to determine what my preferences are in an environment with the least amount of assumptions and outside influence.
<o:p> </o:p>
Here’s my final assumption: Some of you have read this far, and are interested in the same type of thing I’m interested in. How do we get started?
<o:p> </o:p>
-Nathan
New Reply 
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
