All about compressors (links broken: sorry!)

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

A: This one seems to dull the high end slightly and doesn't handle the transients as well as B. Also collapses the stereo image slightly.

B: My favorite in all three examples - This one let the transients through the best. It did wonderful things for the kick drums in each example and I
like the way it pumps just a tiny bit in that first clip.

C: Sounds a lot like A only less transparent with a little more low end and a clearer high end. Better stereo image than A also. I didn't like this as much as B, but I prefer it to A.

So A and C sound the most similar overall, with C having a slight preference for what it does to the stereo image, and the slightly better high and low end. Other than that, they respond very very similarly. B on the otherhand sounds the best on all three examples.

So here's what I want the answers to be:

A) UAD SSL
B) The Glue
C) hardware SSL

Here's what I really don't want the answers to be:

A) The Glue
B) hardware SSL
C) UAD SSL

[audiovet]

DELETED

[audiovet]

DELETED

[audiovet]

DELETED

[badmunchkin]

I like C the best and A the least. Why not add Waves to this shootout?

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

wait, funkybot, there's no waves in this..if im not mistaken

I knew that, yet totally had my brain fart out for a few minutes. Corrected! Thanks.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

Finally, I want you to note that The Glue is not a direct copy of the SSL buss compressor ...It also features some added time constants to the attack and release. I'm not exactly sure which release time constants on The Glue matches the hardware so I used my ears to get these results (which means that they may be incorrect).

I actually know the answer to this (it's somewhere in the 100 something page Glue thread):

.2 on The Glue equals .1 on the SSL. The following release step on The Glue equals the following release step on the SSL and on and on. The reason is that Andy measures the .1 release time on the actual SSL as being approximately 180ms (i.e. .18 sec), so Andy rounded this up to .2 sec, etc.

[Spyrow]

I think B is the more "professional" sounding but I really like the pumping and punching way A sounds. I like that modern, agressive sound.
Anyway, I wouldn't say which one is which, for me it seems just like A release is the shortest. With fixed ratios it's a "Trial and error" thing and the release time affects so much in these cases.
But for sure these 3 compressors are very good. I've been demoing the Glue and I really like it, much more than Waves one.
I'll probably demo the UAD one this afternoon to know if I'm buying the Glue or not.

[Igro]

A and B sound similar. Sounds fresh and punchy. They are better than C. C made the sound bit dull.

[Kingston]

Oh fun! blind shootout with my handiwork. I have not ever heard either the Glue, or the UAD SSL, so I only set out to find the hardware, and did it with the shittiest headphones I could find (some kind of cheap eighties walkman type).

C is hardware.

I can tell it from the hallmark Opamp and VCA smear. No digital plugin would ever have this, and definitely should not either. "better stereo image"... It's just more distortion. For some material "lifeless" would be aptly put as well.

As for the A and B (likely the plugins), either is close enough. Seem like great plugins, both of them.

[hardware rambling]

A little disclaimer about the hardware SSL clone. It has much higher quality and upgraded components (caps and opamps) than a real SSL desk ever would (also with a dual sidechain filters on steroids and two compression modes as well). The NE55XX based world-standard I/O (talk about opamp smear!) of the E4000 series bus compressor sounds like ass, and you can rid this evil with opamp upgrades. Opamps (semiconductors) have improved dramatically since the eighties. Why not take advantage of this?

Well actually, if you do this to the sidechain opamps, the compression behaviour is changed dramatically (for the worse), because there is less distortion in the sidechain, and the signature SSL fat is gone. Hardware liposuction.

I find it extremely odd that a 100 000e mixing desk runs all it's audio through 30cent chip balancing IO, *not* in a differential mode either. The 3000e "superanalogue" SSL hardware compressor is different though. It runs differential and is airy and smooth, but also has about 2000e of air in the price.

[/hardware rambling]

so based on that you can easily deduct that those plugins are *much* better than any SSL desk compressor ever was. I'm glad there is finally a plugin that does *just* the compression, and not the ass.

One thing I really like about the hardware is a "thrust" mode in the side chain (copied from API). It completely transforms the compressor. This is also why I find the Glue plugin more exciting, because you could replicate this with the external sidechain (UAD SSL has none I think).

[SWAN808]

Ok my guess is:

A: GLue
B: UAD SSL
C: Hardware

It seemed that A was having duller highs that I have noticed with the Glue. B I liked but I noticed that C held the bass freq a bit tighter and fuller. I did test test before reading the answers!

[Cordelia]

I don't know which is which, but I liked B, A, then C in all examples.

[mystran]

A sounds kinda standard crap to me. Timing seems ... well either it seems off or too much there, depending on how you look at it. Like it didn't have a soul.

B sounds kinda fun and bouncy. The particular compressor design we're looking at (and I mean all of them collectively) isn't quite my idea of nice kind of bouncy, but B clips gets closest to having the type of feel you get in your stomach when a fast elevator starts going down.. or a roller coaster comes down on a ramp and there's a bump in the middle and you fly up from your seat a bit. I like that kinda of bouncy in compressors, and B gets closest I think... where A sounds a bit like it's just your head that's being pulled off your body and C...

well C on the other hand sounds like the best thing for smashing stuff as it seems to hug the sound closer, follow the dynamics much tighter, and generally sounds the most forced (in a good way for the purpose of smashing stuff) and either it's pulling some dirt up or distorting the signal a bit (or I'm hallucinating which I guess would also be possible). This one actually sounds more like the elevator started to go UP so you feel heavier and not lighter.

Now... I haven't ever tried tweaking the UAD or the hardware so can't really guess which is which other than maybe vote for C being the hardware based on the dirt/distortion that someone is probably going to tell isn't there. As for the other two.. hmmh.. I didn't like the Glue that much when I tried it, so maybe that's A 'cos that's the one I like the least of these? That'd leave UAD for B? But would have to tweak UAD and the hardware live to be able to make more educated guesses.

As for preference: if these were the only compressors available, I'd probably pick either B or C (which sound the least like each other), depending if I'm trying to make stuff more flat or more bouncy: for flattening C, for bouncening B (or decide I'm going to flatten rather than make bouncy because none of these sounds like they'd be any good for really bouncening stuff...)

[macattackamac]

i guess:

A. Hardware - OK
B.UAD - sounded really good
C. Glue - almost as good as B.

[bmanic]

btw, the "Dagroove clip" is actually "Cutebeat" again. just a heads up

Fixed. Thanks for the heads up!

Keep the comments coming. This is very interesting to say the least.

Cheers!
bManic