Antress Firechainer vs IKmultimedia 670 vintage compressor/limiter

[spitboxer]

Here you go

UAD Pultec EQP-1A vs Antress Black Dragon.



UAD Fairchild 670M vs Antress Fire Chainer.




hmm

[vikernes]

Here you go

UAD Pultec EQP-1A vs Antress Black Dragon.



UAD Fairchild 670M vs Antress Fire Chainer.




hmm

I'm still a little hungover so I'll have to rewatch those vids, but from what I saw... amazing. The Fairchild is spot on. The Pultec is very, very close but I think there's some difference in the highs. Even with that in mind, just shows you how great these plugs are.

I imagine a TDM version with a price tag of something like 1000€ for a bundle would be a the next best thing in the pro audio world

edit: listening again, the compressor isn't as spot on as I thought at first but very close. You should provide the wet wavs (and settings) for those of us that don't have UAD's so we can toy.

[bullshark]

Thing is, I'm very much a preset guy when it comes to using compressors...

Presets for dynamic plugs?!? Sorry, but to me it make no sense, as in none whatsoever.

To learn what dynamic sound shaping does, it help to set the plug with all settings pretty much maxed out. So, attack at minima, release at maxima, ratio at maxima and bring the threshold at least below the output level minus the ratio; then, one by one bring the settings down in value and listen closely to the changes in sound. Listen as you bring the release time down, then bring it back up, then do the same with attack time etc.

Presets might make sense on EQ or reverb unit, most filtering plug in fact, since there are somewhat of a standard frequency spectrum generally used for each type of instruments in bog standard pop music, but even then you'll end up tweaking and adapting to your own material eventually.

[bullshark]

I've had all the Antress plugins. I like the gui's more than the sound of them and while it's all a matter of personal tastes, I wouldn't say they are even close to being in the league of my $200 plugins like my fabfilter pro-c, Sonalksis compressors, urs channel strip. Owning all of those I'm able to compare them side by side and well, no comparison. I mean Antress plugins are ok but not in the same world as these plugins though good for what they cost.
I don't think they were meant to compete with $200 plugins and imo, they don't.
That's not to say though, that I think every $200 plugin is worth $200. I think most are overpriced but I'm speaking strictly in terms of quality and design.
At the end of the day though, I'd rather hear great music with less than ideal plugins than sh#tty music with top of the line stuff.

You are a bit stuck in the "surely it must be better because it costs money!?" state of mind, eh?

Well let me tell you, as one who owns nearly ALL available compressor plugins on the whole market and one who has access to quite a wide variety of outboard compressors as well, that some of these Antress plugins do sound extremely good and definitely rival some of the competition that costs serious money. We've done ABX blind tests with the antress 1176 wannabe, comparing it to FET compressor from softube and the 1176LN from UAD.. all shooting against a real silverface, revision H. None of the software could match the hardware, in any setting, and ALL of the software had their own take on the 1176 compression action. None of them was more "authentic" than the other. They were ALL very useful and could thus easily justify their own existence.

My personal favorite in that shootout was the softube FET but mainly because of it's subtle (sometimes not so subtle) saturation modeling and the flexibility of it's design. However, having said that, the Antress 1176 fared very well too, giving it's own character on the test material. Not better nor worse than the others.

It is perfectly fine if you are of the opinion that only money can buy you quality stuff but perhaps for your own sake it might be beneficial to dig a bit deeper and actually listen to the things to determine where these various tools shine. Because nothing sounds like Antress and Antress plugins sound like nothing else it is logical to conclude that there might be situations where only one of these will work!

Cheers!
bManic

This should be stickied.

I must have tried most, if not all, dynamic plugs out there, but I get the sound I want to hear on my Fender Precision using Antress Modern comp. Should I use something else because it cost more and should, therefore, be better? Or should I satisfy my ears?

[TheD20]

I saw this on another forum and was pretty impressed!!!

[LBN]

YouTube is hardly the place to post audio comparisons. If you want to watch cursors bouncing around the screen and virtual knobs being turned, I suppose it's good, but the audio compression YouTube uses, even at "HD" level, is beyond crap. If you want A/B you really need to post uncompressed or lossless files.

[spitboxer]

YouTube is hardly the place to post audio comparisons. If you want to watch cursors bouncing around the screen and virtual knobs being turned, I suppose it's good, but the audio compression YouTube uses, even at "HD" level, is beyond crap. If you want A/B you really need to post uncompressed or lossless files.

I agree but also disagree... Youtube IS the new media delivery system, well one of them. So, take from that what you will.


I still think the comparison has some value. To me they sound very close.

[LBN]

I agree but also disagree... Youtube IS the new media delivery system, well one of them. So, take from that what you will.

It's a delivery medium. Nothing more. Nothing less. Nothing new about it. It streams audio that has been compressed using a horrible lossy method. Take from that what you will.

[spitboxer]

Is there an echo in here?

[LBN]

My point is that it's stupid to use YouTube to host your A/B audio comparisons. The sound is shit. Host them in lossless form somewhere else. Unless, of course, you need to pander to your audience with animations of knob twisting and mute butttons.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

My point is that it's stupid to use YouTube to host your A/B audio comparisons. The sound is shit. Host them in lossless form somewhere else. Unless, of course, you need to pander to your audience with animations of knob twisting and mute butttons.

Agreed. I don't know what point the delivery system comment was trying to make. I also don't get people getting excited about A/B comparisons you can't hear clearly. I'm not trying to knock anyone's product but this is a horrible test. It's like trying to judge the quality of a mix based on the Myspace player: what you hear is not representational of what you'll hear in the real world.

[alteregoxxx]

My point is that it's stupid to use YouTube to host your A/B audio comparisons. The sound is shit. Host them in lossless form somewhere else. Unless, of course, you need to pander to your audience with animations of knob twisting and mute butttons.

Agreed. I don't know what point the delivery system comment was trying to make. I also don't get people getting excited about A/B comparisons you can't hear clearly. I'm not trying to knock anyone's product but this is a horrible test. It's like trying to judge the quality of a mix based on the Myspace player: what you hear is not representational of what you'll hear in the real world.

I agree...like the test i proposed on the start of this thread,all my other tests are done using wave files...you can go here and hear clearly
http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=3717147