What's with all compressor maniacs around these parts? I can't really understand the obsession. Why don't you get obsessed with music theory instead?

Are WE there yet? Where will WE be in 10-15 years time? Are you somehow in the same crowd with plugin developers? I think not.

Come on, let's just have some perspective here!

There are literally a boatload of plugin compressors that are perfect in every scientific sense of the word. Do they sound like the hw ones? WHY SHOULD THEY???

Don't 'like' them? Buy a hw compressor and use it. End of story!

Hi sheikh, Yes, quite right, let's keep perspective with what's really important: the quality of the music. Point well taken.

Just let me say that the reason for my thread was the latest offerings from the developers (specifically, SlateDigital's VTM), which got me wondering how far plugins have come given the desire to simulate the vibe of hardware, and in this case consoles and tape machines and what they impart to sound. Same thing with all the latest compressor offerings and programmers' efforts to raise the bar...Anyway, I thought I'd ask the music community how they felt about where we are in the digital area.

Compressor plugins that don't crack and stutter compared to analog ones with equivalent settings are very rare, but since you're so determined that things are already "perfect" then enjoy, but at least don't tell everyone here who cares about sound quality that they're maniacs, OK? Thanks.

its not quite the same in my experience. I think its because compression in the analogue and digital domain is a different process...each one has pros and cons and I think its best to recognise them and use them accordingly. If you want a certain 'sound' to your music - you might need to consider which creates that sound - and use it. However its perfectly possible to make good music using either or. There are cheap plugins and cheap hardware available. Plugins of course are a bit cheaper and some excellent ones are free.

Compressors, digital or analog, are most welcome. Sometimes clean compression is what is desired, then it's time for a plugin. Analog adds harmonics in a more refined way because of continuity of the processing, compared to discrete digital. And there are one trick ponies which have their place somewhere, sometime.

This is a question adressed to all those in this thread who stated that software compressors in general sound significantly different to hardware ones:


You have a lot of experience with hardware compressors and I take it you have regular access to some of them. So could you please upload a few processed/unprocessed examples to show those of us (e.g. me) who do not have any experience with hardware compressors, what all the fuss is about?

I am very curious and are really looking forward to your examples.

I once bought a cheap preamp 2nd hand for around £100. Original value was around £250, the EQ was extremely harsh and crackly and was a proper waste of money. Compared it to the neon from PSP whih when it fist came out was reviewed as being as smooth as any analog out there, especially with the FAT and double sampling one. I tried the normal demo and it blew the analog eq out of the water so Im guessing if you really want to sample a"Proper" analog EQ or compressor your going to have to be ready to spend at least a good few hundred quid, more so with the Equalizers anyway.

Not yet, but it doesn't matter so much as was mentioned.

Yeah that might be - but if you read through this thread you will find that there are several very knowledgeable and experienced engineers participating in this discussion. They have access to high-quality hardware, I'm sure of it.

What's with all the compressor "maniacs" in the Effects forum?

I don't know, what's with all the music theory "maniacs" in the Music Theory forum?

In that case you'll probably find software superior. I don't see any way how analog hardware can track the incoming signal accurately, which is required for any compressor or limiter. While there's some clever circuits to do this, digital compressors can memorize past states and thus get a more ripple-free tracking signal. Furthermore, the compression curve and the smoothing can be completely arbitrary and optimized for a clean and transparent sound.

So from the perspective of "doing the job", it's hard to beat plugins. On the other hand, to obtain audible compression with a colored sound, it may be hard to beat analog hardware.

Richard

I don't understand it either - I don't think I've ever used a compressor in a track.

Looks like a misunderstanding.
Sheikh meant a compressor that is mathematically perfect (that includes any plugin that works in 64 bit and oversamples in order to avoid creating any hearable errors) and you Shy mean a perfect software emulation of an analog hardware compressor.
2 totally different things.

It is just like with digital vs analog summing.

2+2=4 in digital world and that perfect in my vocabulary.
But in the analog world there is only something like this:
A value close to 2 + a value close to 2 = a value close to 4
Of course for simplicity not counting resistances, conductivity, inductances etc...

yes you have to be careful in what you pick if buying low end hardware...a lot of it is quite mediocre...

however there is a lot that is pretty good...

lets say you wanted to try a hardware compression solution for your music.

You could get a FMR RNLA for your bass, vocal and stereo sources. Around £150 second hand.
You get a DBX 160 for punching drum tracks and stabs. £150 second hand.
You get a SSL Clone for the main bus. Around £400 on the used market.

Thats £700 in total. However you could prob get by just with the RNLA and 160 for £300. I dont believe many artists need 10 types of compression. Just a few good ones.

This type of money is not too far from what a lot of people pay for in plugins over time.

Its just personal preference if you want to go down that road - there are of course a lot of positives for plugins. Personally I realised that I actually didnt need more than 1 SSL type/bus compressor per track, so the advantage of multiple instances was moot. Cost and recall is however a valid advantage. I could afford to pay a little more for something solid - and Im not a professional mixer but an artist of my own work - so retrospective recall is not a big deal for me. The mix is an artistic expression.

I agree EQ is sadly more expensive to get something usable in hardware. It seems you need to spend around £500-£800 to get anything decent in stereo. However GAP EQ73, Chameleon Labs and Toft make some affordable mono units.

Im away from my studio - but there are numerous a/b tests on the web. It really depends on each person...some people are really not bothered by the difference - to others its a big deal.