Originally Posted by elegentdrum

The main limitation of digital is that the rate of feeback (measure volume, adjust volume) is limited to the sample rate vs. the speed of light (electricity).

That stated, a hardware compressor I really like is digital, the TCE M5000 MD2. It is a great multi band compressor from 20 years ago.

Depending on the digital compressor design, and if working with existing recorded material, look ahead solves this problem.

In real time, and to help out the converters with a stronger signal (more bits used) this is where analog is the only way to go.

If doing all compressing after the fact, a plug makes sense for ease of control, recall, and cost.

If you want to hear the compression in real time while singing, in the box is a poor choice.

Each has it's place and sound. Use each tool to maximum benefit and to fit your budget. There are no rules be creative!

Originally Posted by elegentdrum

The main limitation of digital is that the rate of feeback (measure volume, adjust volume) is limited to the sample rate vs. the speed of light (electricity).

Originally Posted by elegentdrum

Depending on the digital compressor design, and if working with existing recorded material, look ahead solves this problem.

Originally Posted by FabienTDR

This is a bit like saying: The biggest problem of modern rockets is the shape of their sails. It sounds cool to laymen, but of course it doesn't make any sense.

A dynamics processor is something taking a value, and returning one. Instantly.

Here's a dynamic range compressor:

y = tanh(x)

What exactly is the problem of finding out the value of y?!


A compressor doesn't have to "wait" for results. It simply looks at the input, and returns an output. Maybe the best counter example, perfectly showing how ridiculous this idea of a "delay problem" is: Digital clipping.




No. There is no general problem. Zero difference to analogue circuits. Takes an input, returns an output. Simultaneously.

Originally Posted by elegentdrum

This is true for analog. Not for software. In software a measurement has to be taking, oh it's volume 5, so X=5. Then that goes into the software, get's your math done to it. then that reports back to the signal and adjusts the signals level. It takes at least one sample, and very often many samples for the signal to have it's level changed. The first sample of "Too loud" does not get compressed unless some "look ahead" is built into the software. This is typically the case. That introduces lag.

So sure it can work that way. But in the digital world, at the cost of lag. In the analog word, no lag required. Even though in practice, they way compressors are designed, it's lag rate is commonly what's desirable about how it operates.

Originally Posted by elegentdrum

This is true for analog. Not for software. In software a measurement has to be taking, oh it's volume 5, so X=5. Then that goes into the software, get's your math done to it. then that reports back to the signal and adjusts the signals level. It takes at least one sample, and very often many samples for the signal to have it's level changed. The first sample of "Too loud" does not get compressed unless some "look ahead" is built into the software. This is typically the case. That introduces lag.

So sure it can work that way. But in the digital world, at the cost of lag. In the analog word, no lag required. Even though in practice, they way compressors are designed, it's lag rate is commonly what's desirable about how it operates.

Originally Posted by Raaphorst

I prefer digital. Look-ahead and total control.

Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb

Outboard Hardware Compression. Here’s a peak [sic] at some of my secret settings! :-o}>
that said i do use ITB compression for band specific tasks such as de-essing.
jt

Originally Posted by soundmodel

I would suggest using "best of the both worlds".

Originally Posted by Paul_G

So which are we supposed to use again? Analogue or Digital?

Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb

Outboard Hardware Compression. Here’s a peak [sic] at some of my secret settings! :-o}>
that said i do use ITB compression for band specific tasks such as de-essing.
jt

Originally Posted by Carl Freeland

Seems like you have the 'blue silk' switched on but the blend all the way down?

Originally Posted by soundmodel

I'm actually waiting for plug-ins to sound more and more like expensive hardware. Because then it's nice to get multi thousand dollar sound with just few hundred at most.

Millenia TCL-2 and Vertigo VSC-2 are pretty good at this already. Lindell and airwindows stuff also.

I think they could be getting there.

Previously people have argued that digital "quantization" and such could make it impossible to "match" analog tone, but I believe that given sophisticated and complex enough computations, it will eventually be able to approximate analog tone well enough.

Some digital things have even surpassed the analogue gear. E.g. U-he Diva was preferred in a blind test over hardware, analogue Oberheims and stuff.