OK, I wish I had a different veredict... my little journey:
Good starting point. I think I recognize the Burl´s signature on the tracks. Pumpy and peaky with a self contained mid /low range. ok.
Go back and forth between ITB And Studer A810. I dont particulary care for that tape sound but its more glued. Fine so far.
The Otari MX80 is a bit more clear sounding. One tad preferred over the A810.
Ampex ATR102. At first I cant listen to the difference. Is this thing turned on, am I listening to a plugin? Back and forth between all the other files. OK. There is a gold sheen on top of everything, and the sound is more transparent, and glued, but up there. The stereo separation is at the same more evident AND glued. Probably as a result of some harmonic distortion... but it doesnt feel like so, it feels like... liquid? Its like this was the starting point and and the ITB was an effect that degraded the signal, if it makes any sense. ATR102 has more detail and is more live and transparent than the source. WTF.
Anamod ATR 102 (calibrated) someone took the lights out? great glue, vintagey. Its eating transients. Its compressing things. I hear it doing its thing. Not the Ampex sound though. Maybe like an Ampex running old tape?
Anamod ATR ( flat ) so close in sound to the calibrated one. Maybe a tad more transients? is it more saturated? louder? mmmm kind of like this more over the calibrated one, whatever the difference is.
UAD ATR 102. Interesting, this has the same luminosity of the Ampex, has a tiny bump in frequencies that the Anamod is missing - but none of the sheen! sheen, where are you? I like the eq curve but it becomes hard to listen to / fatiguing after a few loops. Back to comparison with the Ampex. F**k it, I cant listen to UAD.
UAD A800 30/15. Someone took the Studer A810 sound that I didnt care for and put a blanket on top of it, then a carpet, then squashed the transients with a hammer. But something about it still sounds digital. Not my thing.
Waves MPX. Interesting. I hear a midrange sheen here gluing things. Very pleasant. And compression. Comparing it to the Ampex 102 a few times, this one renders the Ampex "less interesting" so there might be a difference in dbs somewhere. Moving to the chorus part, the MPX is breaking the highs in a way the 102 doesnt, but the breaking somehow compensates for the lack of sheen up there. Cmon, this is seriously compressing the signal. Im a sucker for compression so this thing aint playing fair. There is a digital flatness to this thing, but its a good plugin. Not close to the Ampex 102 though, maybe closer if the 102 had an eq control plus a compressor. The Ampex still sounds like it was the source, with improved stereo separation and sheen. Whatever. Interesting stuff.
Anamod 351. Ok, seriously chewed up sound. There is a kind of contradiction because the highs and upper transients are sort of intact. The midrange and bottom are more compressed and chewed up, but some upper transients escape and keep it sounding modern. I wouldnt do this to a track unless I wanted it to sound really old - then I would do like four passes. Very nice as a saturation fx.
MY VEREDICT:
For the tape feel, Ampex ATR 102 wins over the other hardware tapes.
Anamod sounds like hardware. It probably sounds like tape. It sounds more vintage and "tapey" and chews up more transients than any of the real tapes there though, which in comparison sound more hi fi. I like the Anamod 102 over Studer and Otari.
Waves MPX is a cool plugin.
UAD - I want to like UAD. Like. I paid already right? I want to like them. Please?
I wish I could get the Ampex 102. I´ll probably get the Anamod.
Or, how if you keep your Ampex and I send you my mixes for you to run through? would that be very expensive?
Thanks a lot for doing this shootout. I would love to hear the effects of these units on every track.