Are we close to getting plugin compressors that sound like real ones?

[klinik]

I'm hearing much less gain reduction in your examples than in anyone else's.

Thanks Uncle E. Didn't heard other examples than the original files, thats my reference and the only one I need since it seems the goal is aproaching that specified slate sound. Maybe others tried to reach the sound thru threshold instead of ratio/att/rel combinations. I'm not hearing the same than you referenced to the original files, and also I'm not "seeing" that just looking the waveforms. Is easy to spot that

Saturation is a form of dynamics control. It's a clipper. To be fair, the Slate appears to be saturating on its own but it doesn't sound as smashed as your F example, which is extremely smashed and has all the artifacts Shy talked about. Again, if you dial it back a bit, it will probably be a lot better.

Saturation is a more than a clipper (btw, clipper is distortion, not saturation, maybe soft clipping...) and I think fxpansion used a more complex algo than plain sof clipping there. Anyway Busscomp is the only comp I tried in the dcam package and dont convice me to buy, but as I said I'll try the others when I get some time. I'm not going deeper in the test, sure you can aproach the reference file better but I'm not spending the time since I have other comps better suited for this kind of settings.

Also, would be great if Shy could tell us what limiter he used for his files. I'm hearing some clipping there, pretty sure he was clipping the AD when recording back from the hardware compressor.

I think Shy has (wisely) given up on this thread.

Yes... but since he used an aditional dynamics processing would be fair to know whats there..

[Agreed]

I wish he'd come back, I think he took the fact that I found his demeanor unnecessarily combative as a good reason to ignore me. I've got a question for him, maybe you can answer it Uncle E - I hope you haven't found my treatment of the topic combative or assholish, by the way, I quite respect you as a KVR contributor and hope I haven't conducted myself so poorly as to leave a bad impression - but I have to ask, can we please, please, please define what specifically is the bad thing that we're all flailing around trying to get our compressors not to do, which the analog compressor does not do?

I'm up for a color-by-numbers description, or fingerpainting-level, at this point, because I keep seeing clips that sound fine to me judged as either doing it or not, when I look at the waveforms and the hardware waveform I can't SEE the difference, I run it through my best visualization software and I've been working on quality monitors. Not talking BFs or high-end Genelecs here, but I'm using higher end KRKs with a proper sweet-spot setup measured and solid, not Rokkits or Behringer or whatever, and definitely not headphones. Although as elusive as this issue has been, I've been tempted to run through my cans trying to hear this "thing" that is apparently sticking out like a sore thumb to, er, it looks like three posters in the thread, maybe, and baffling others.

Maybe my k701s would show it if it's a snare issue, they've got crazy analytic mids; or my DT990s if it's more in the upper mids/treble region and bass as well, they've been super useful on drums before; or my DT770s if it's all in the bass, nothing punches like they do; or my HD-650s if it's something "overall" that I could pick out if I had a refined picture in my head here... or some of the lower end ones I keep around too, maybe Audio-Technica ATH-A900s, not exactly ideal for much other than,w ell, using as nice sounding but not particularly accurate headphones, non-starter? Or drop down to the least in the collection, not that they're horrible, JVC HARX900s? Maybe not, but who knows, if you think it'll help I'll try it. I've got proper headphone amplification, if it's something my monitors aren't showing, so... anything, really, to point me in the direction of seeing the problem you're seeing would be fantastic!.

I'm not saying "the emperor has no clothes," I just need some help finding the strings so the rest of the garment materializes. Or, to leave metaphors alone, couldja tell me what the artifact is, in specific terms? If Shy were still participating, I'd happily take a browbeating response if he'd use his ample knowledge to educate me at the same time, if you dig it, but he does seem to have abandoned the topic. You haven't, credit to you, so I beg some help figuring out what precisely is wrong with the bad examples, and what isn't with the good examples, and what is perfect with the original analog example. Please (pretty please )!

[kvaca]

Yes... but since he used an aditional dynamics processing would be fair to know whats there..

AFAIK he didnt used any clipper or limiter-Ive asked him about it in case of KD test which is in many ways similar /have you tried it?/...but you can pm him as I did

[himalaya]

Why don't you just make the adjustments I suggested? I'll shut up once you nail it!

Try this (one is Slate Dragon, one is mine):
www.electric-himalaya.com/stuff/Compression_match_e.wav

[himalaya]

Perhaps they are not sufficient to you, but I was responding to Shy's post and his descriptions of sonic characteristics to look for, and so that was my point of reference.

You're going by the letter, not the spirit. Look, my example avoids the artifacts just as well as yours do but I think we can both agree that it proves nothing, given how far my example sounds from what is intended. Do you see how this also applies to your examples? Your examples are much closer than mine is but they're still not the same, and until they're the same, we're not learning anything.

Well, your example wasn't level matched. Once it is, it clips. That says a lot, and you should know it too. So that does not apply to my example in the least. You need to try and close in on the overall output of the original file. This has been pointed out a few times now.

And can they ever be the same? By your own admission:

Waves API 2500 compressor is the bee's knees.

It is and it also sounds different from the hardware it's emulating.

So let's recap. Software plugins which emulate hardware do not do it successfully, and yet some would like a plugin like The Glue (in my example) which does not emulate the the Slate Dragon to sound exactly like it.
And yet, when it gets into an extreme approximation of the Slate Dragon example, with no artifacts whatsoever, almost the same output level, GR, etc...it is still far off?? I do hear a difference even in my last demo (marked 'e'), but is this really the difference that fails the original challenge?

[jens]

Wrong old man: http://www.mediafire.com/?22391ogv12uh11t

That clean enough for you No distortion that I "hide" behind, Never have.
You will have to try abit harder next time Jens "the "Musician" whom tends to make music

Is four tracks all you got to show for nearly forty years? I'd no doubt be a useless, bitter troll if I were in the same position

Dean aka noise for music's sake

Do you really think I would waste bandwidth on downloading this? Why should I? I have no interest in you at all. It's you who pesters me, not the other way around. Amongst the most pathetic things you can possibly do on the internet is what you are doing right now... you are trolling the thread - by dragging it so far off topic, not me.


But since you asked:

it is beyond me, how you managed to listen to Rusty Magic on myspace and at the same time fail to realize that the first file (called "teasrer1") contains snippets of three very different songs (so that would make six all in all) - but I don't know where you get the ridiculous idea that these few songs might be 'all I got to show'. Seriously: WTF???



If you have issues, seek help - don't drag them online in such a pathetic way as you do here.

[IncarnateX]

One thing is heatened disagreement. Another is name calling and patronizing attitudes, but the lowest most pathetic scum-like behavior at KVR must be pissing at each others music and arts to make a point.

[jens]

but I have to ask, can we please, please, please define what specifically is the bad thing that we're all flailing around trying to get our compressors not to do, which the analog compressor does not do?

Let us ask more to the point:


will a hardware compressor other than the Dragon manage to come significantly closer to Shy's example than the software examples posted here?


Those who say hardware compressors can't be matched with software ones should be able to easily do so with their (hardware) compressor of choice - else Shy's example is not a valid one.

It was me, who asked for an example of a hardware compressor, so please allow me to explain what I was after:


A file, which clearly shows what hardware compressors can typically do that software ones can't. 'Typically', of course, because it otherwise has no relevance to this thread at all.

Personally I am highly suspicious, that Shy failed to provide the example I have been asking for.


Slat themselve claim that

The Slate Pro Audio DRAGON is unlike any dynamic audio processor you've heard before.

If there was any truth to this claim, then how could a file that takes the Dragon to its extremes, possibly be a valid example of how a hardware compressor is typically superior to a software one?

There is a lot of discussion in this thread, what Shy could have meant, could have wanted, etc. , yet no-one so far questioned his choice at all. I find that funny.

What is Shy's example showing that is typical for a hardware-compressor as opposed to a software one?

Can someone with access to at least one other hardware-compressor please replicate this typical behaviour?


Otherwise there is a lot of noise in this thread, but barely any signal.

Any takers? Uncle E. perhaps?



edit: typos

[jens]

One thing is heatened disagreement. Another is name calling and patronizing attitudes, but the lowest most pathetic scum-like behavior at KVR must be pissing at each others music and arts to make a point.

Exactly. Just to make sure: the noise&distortion remark I made was meant to be tongue in cheek, not really serious. I usually don't comment on other's music negatively - that would be pointless, since it's all so much a matter of taste.
Saying 'this music is bad' is no more valid than claiming 'orange is an ugly colour'.

[himalaya]

but I have to ask, can we please, please, please define what specifically is the bad thing that we're all flailing around trying to get our compressors not to do, which the analog compressor does not do?

Let us ask more to the point:


will a hardware compressor other than the Dragon manage to come significantly closer to Shy's example than the software examples posted here?


Those who say hardware compressors can't be matched with software ones should be able to easily do so with their (hardware) compressor of choice - else Shy's example is not a valid one.

It was me, who asked for an example of a hardware compressor, so please allow me to explain what I was after:


A file, which clearly shows what hardware compressors can typically do that software ones can't. 'Typically', of course, because it otherwise has no relevance to this thread at all.

Personally I am highly suspicious, that Shy failed to provide the example I have been asking for.


Slat themselve claim that

The Slate Pro Audio DRAGON is unlike any dynamic audio processor you've heard before.

If there was any truth to this claim, then how could a file that takes the Dragon to its extremes, possibly be a valid example of how a hardware compressor is typically superior to a software one?

There is a lot of discussion in this thread, what Shy could have meant, could have wanted, etc. , yet no-one so far questioned his choice at all. I find that funny.

What is Shy's example showing that is typical for a hardware-compressor as opposed to a software one?

Can someone with access to at least one other hardware-compressor please replicate this typical behaviour?


Otherwise there is a lot of noise in this thread, but barely any signal.

Any takers? Uncle E. perhaps?



edit: typos

Very good post with excellent points, jens.
Personally, I didn't question Shy's choice of the Slate Dragon as I accepted that this is his favourite unit, perhaps one which displays some excellent sonic characteristics. BUt you do have a point with regards to the typical hardware sound. If the Dragon is not a typical example, but a very esoteric one, then we are chasing the rainbow. Still, even though you write that there is a lot of noise in this thread, I feel the signal is present and strong too with lots of audio examples posted.

The issue is that people have different expectations as to how far the audio should emulate the original. Shy has posted an example of the artifacts which demonstrate the inferior software sound, so we DO have a point of reference of what he's after. We have the good emulation (Algorithmics) and we have the bad example (the non-descript audio file). This one --->

The typical result is more or less this)

But like you mentioned, perhaps it is only the Slate Dragon, which can nail that sound, lol. Or perhaps we ought to test that Dragon file with something like Voxengo's Soniformer which allows an absolute fine control of everything in the audio file, using multi-band processing. Perhaps that would be just as unfair as Shy's non-typical hardware sound example. !

[Dean Aka Nekro]

One thing is heatened disagreement. Another is name calling and patronizing attitudes, but the lowest most pathetic scum-like behavior at KVR must be pissing at each others music and arts to make a point.

Well it takes a bit of being an arsehole towards an arsehole to stop them being an arsehole then I'd do it again in a f!cking heart beat

Jens no hard feelings and why not just ask questions/make decent points most of the time man, Really is it that difficult?

[Ah Xoc Kin]

I think we can also try to emulate a hardware compressor, Slate in this case, with multiple plugins.

Let's see:
DRAGON Specs
* 1176-style FET Gain Reduction Circuit
* 1073 Class A Discrete Amplifier
* 3 EQ-Emphasis Character Filters
* Parallel Compression Mix Knob
* Vintage and Normal Modes
* Analog Tape-style Saturation Modes
* High Pass Filter Side Chain
* Ratios 2:1 to Squash

"...The first setting is BOOM. This setting adds sub bass harmonics in a unique way that when combined with some compression, can make basses sound massive and kick drums pound like you've never heard before. The second setting is BITE, which adds a gentle forward character that makes the source more defined and clear. BITE is superb on bass, snare, vocals, and guitars. Last, is SHEEN. This character setting adds an airy gloss to the source, reminiscent of classic opto tube compressors..."

"...The DRAGON has a three setting saturation selector. This saturation can add subtle harmonics or even gritty distortion to the source..."

As Agreed mentioned, any very specific feedback regarding the posted samples is welcome. I'll give this another try today.

[frankjcc2003]

Why don't you just make the adjustments I suggested? I'll shut up once you nail it!

Try this (one is Slate Dragon, one is mine):
www.electric-himalaya.com/stuff/Compression_match_e.wav

I'm convinced that the slate Dragon has something going on in the low end that attenuates the sub bass as in a steep roll off and possible a tiny bump just before the roll off, which when we get close in software like your example, it pumps more. When the kicks hit back to back it holds the gain reduction down too long, so I can tell that the second clip is not the slate because of that pumping.

[antithesist]

Has anyone else tried that free kingtao KT-C comp? I just played around with it a little on the dry.wav and thought it sounded surprisingly good. Plus the interface is nice, especially for free/donation-ware.

[Ah Xoc Kin]

No experience with kingtao KT-C comp but noticed they work on Mac so I'll give their plugins a try. Thanks