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

[himalaya]

Shy didn't say that ONLY the SplitComp can imitate the taut sound of the Slate at low thresholds. He said EVEN the SplitComp CAN'T.

That's not what he said. This is the second time people put forward the wrong premise. Here it is again:

Since you want an example, instead of giving you an example of "fine analog compressor vs shitty plugin compressor", I'll give you an example of fine analog compressor vs the only plugin compressor that can cope with anything nearly as well as any analog compressor, without sounding like a broken mess.

So while the attack may be different, or there may be different 'colouration', that's to be expected, but the main thing for me is that there was no degradation of signal which Shy and Eric spoke about, at least I don't hear it.
I could perhaps further tune it when I get back home and listen to these files on my monitors - which reveal much more.

@kvaca, it is The Glue.

[kvaca]

None of the software examples emulated what it's doing to the kick. It's fine if you don't like or want that but the point is that none of the software represented so far could do what the hardware is doing. I did actually get there by using a crossover in guitar rig, with an LA2A on the low-end and an SSL Buss Compressor on high-end, although I'm not going to post it after all the grief you guys have given me over those stupid Maschine compressor examples.

well we cannot agree becouse I think that distorted kick is artifact and you do think its a good feature which cannot be simulated by none of the software
so at least we can agree that the main difference is in the kick drum

on the top of that I do think that this feature can be simulated by software /and you know how to do it it already if I have understood your post correctly/ and Im prepared to post you some demo that confirms it as soon as you post yours promised demos Im still ready to be amazed...

[kvaca]

@kvaca, it is The Glue.

I have thought it - its excellent and moreover without aliasing AFAIK, I MUST test it ASAP /and that duende staff too/ I only wish it got the same limiter-clipper as Compassion or Splitcomp got...otherwise excellent!

can you try if it can do my second example - which is called dry+extremecomp1 - too ?

[Fritze]

So here is a track which is recent where I have abused some good old Joe Meek bits along with some of the ITB dyamics/distortion I have available, ... - http://soundcloud.com/nekro-sounds-audi ... t-untitled

Hey Dean,

yeah, likee. Cool drums. Guitars are nicey!

On topic: I have to take the time to check out the Fatso that's hanging out in the U-He rack next door.

[Dean Aka Nekro]

So here is a track which is recent where I have abused some good old Joe Meek bits along with some of the ITB dyamics/distortion I have available, ... - http://soundcloud.com/nekro-sounds-audi ... t-untitled

Hey Dean,

yeah, likee. Cool drums. Guitars are nicey!

Cheers Fritze mate, Glad you enjoyed despite the dynamic nuking. Good to hear from you

On topic: I have to take the time to check out the Fatso that's hanging out in the U-He rack next door.

Yes that will be time well spent and totally enjoyable as a perk of the work to do that for a job. Especially so if there is going to be perhaps (I am purely guessing/making up stuff here, But hey why not) say a Uhbik-C (Compressor), Uhbik-P (Pre-Amp gentle colouring through to big dirty circuit mojo) and Uhbik-L (Limiter/Levelling Nuke) with possible RE versions to give Theo 3 reasons to be cheerful/excited

All the best and said I never get much good luck Still its all good

[Agemo]

Himalaya, you've consistently misunderstood Shy's post. To show the limitations of software (as he sees it), Shy created an example using what he considers one of the best software compressors. If he had chosen a plug-in that is not so highly regarded, people would say 'Yes, but have you tried...' That's why Shy began by strategically praising the SplitComp.

What you've done is quote Shy's praise for the SplitComp out of context, failing to grasp a straightforward argument in its entirety. By your own admission, you also hear no difference between the examples, and that leads you to conclude that they illustrate the opposite of what Shy intended, and that his assessment is 'incorrect'.

In fact, most posters here have taken the view that there's no 'correct' or 'incorrect'. 'Live and let live,' someone said. I return to this only because the examples are very interesting (a kind of reminder or warning), and it would be a shame if people were misled by what you are saying.

[kvaca]

agemo - you must be a lawyer or something like them, isnt it?

becouse thats YOU who DO NOT want to understand what Shy have written and still are trying to distort the meaning of his words...
can you please look again at himalaya post above and have a think about it? /or consider what are you doing here in case you are a lawyer/

[twisted-space]

AFAIK it IS possible to look forward in analog domain

I must be misunderstanding something here, because I think you've just suggested that analog compressors have built in time machines.

[Agreed]

agemo - you must be a lawyer or something like them, isnt it?

becouse thats YOU who DO NOT want to understand what Shy have written and still are trying to distort the meaning of his words...
can you please look again at himalaya post above and have a think about it? /or consider what are you doing here in case you are a lawyer/

You're reacting emotionally to a straightforward set of propositions. You did it earlier when you classified my explanation as me being "negative." If you feel that you are correctly understanding Shy's initial premise, while others are not, you have been challenged to point out where their logic is flawed. They have pointed out where they see your logic as flawed. This is a straightforward thing, we're discussing a matter of facts. You are not being attacked, but you are being called on to justify what a few posters here have pointed out is a logical error in your reasoning that is affecting the way that you approach the issue we're all discussing.

AFAIK it IS possible to look forward in analog domain

I must be misunderstanding something here, because I think you've just suggested that analog compressors have built in time machines.

I believe there have been analog compressors/limiters made which intentionally delay the signal, in an attempt to have a more complete picture to work with. Off the top of my head there was some Behringer unit in the '90s that was actually pretty neat on kicks although the concept works much better in the digital realm where an algorithm has complete "awareness" of the waveform as opposed to a slight and distorting ability to sort of pause time in increments via a delay to try to account for what are, relative to the input, upcoming peaks.

[twisted-space]

AFAIK it IS possible to look forward in analog domain

I must be misunderstanding something here, because I think you've just suggested that analog compressors have built in time machines.

I believe there have been analog compressors/limiters made which intentionally delay the signal, in an attempt to have a more complete picture to work with. Off the top of my head there was some Behringer unit in the '90s that was actually pretty neat on kicks although the concept works much better in the digital realm where an algorithm has complete "awareness" of the waveform as opposed to a slight and distorting ability to sort of pause time in increments via a delay to try to account for what are, relative to the input, upcoming peaks.

So less look ahead, more delay the input till we know what's happening then.

[kvaca]

AFAIK it IS possible to look forward in analog domain

I must be misunderstanding something here, because I think you've just suggested that analog compressors have built in time machines.

using delay line on input can do the trick /off course if sidechain is NOT delayed /...

[kvaca]

You're reacting emotionally to a straightforward set of propositions. You did it earlier when you classified my explanation as me being "negative." If you feel that you are correctly understanding Shy's initial premise, while others are not, you have been challenged to point out where their logic is flawed. They have pointed out where they see your logic as flawed.

Im sorry,but just tell me WHERE in this thread have Shy sayed that "even Splitcomp cannot imitate the sound of Slate at low thresholds" ?

[Ah Xoc Kin]

...although I'm not going to post it after all the grief you guys have given me over those stupid Maschine compressor examples.

I can relate
I'll say that there are some very cool people participating in this thread, but it gets a bit weird at times here at KVR.

[himalaya]

Himalaya, you've consistently misunderstood Shy's post. To show the limitations of software (as he sees it), Shy created an example using what he considers one of the best software compressors. If he had chosen a plug-in that is not so highly regarded, people would say 'Yes, but have you tried...' That's why Shy began by strategically praising the SplitComp.

What you've done is quote Shy's praise for the SplitComp out of context, failing to grasp a straightforward argument in its entirety. By your own admission, you also hear no difference between the examples, and that leads you to conclude that they illustrate the opposite of what Shy intended, and that his assessment is 'incorrect'.

In fact, most posters here have taken the view that there's no 'correct' or 'incorrect'. 'Live and let live,' someone said. I return to this only because the examples are very interesting (a kind of reminder or warning), and it would be a shame if people were misled by what you are saying.

Agemo, my friend, this post of yours addressed to me is just so bizarre. It's from another planet. I know very well what Shy wrote. It's all there on page 3.

The following warrants a response from me as I dislike when somebody attributes statements to me which I never made. Here, I never said this:

By your own admission, you also hear no difference between the examples, and that leads you to conclude that they illustrate the opposite of what Shy intended, and that his assessment is 'incorrect'.

I never admitted such a thing. I said that "the plugin I've used has managed to get extremely close to that Dragon sound". The 'extremely close' refers to the fact that the signal does not display any of the artifacts as outlined by Shy in several of his posts (he even posts a demo of said artifacts). They are not present in my demo.

My conclusion was (and I didn't know what my conclusion would be when I started) that Shy's alarmist tone was misleading, since he claimed that there are no plug-ins except the one he used (Algorithmics) which can do what his chosen hardware unit can (or rather approximate the sound of). By doing my quick tests, I'm convinced that his assessment is wrong, there are in fact other, very well known plug-in compressors which can do just fine. More than fine in my view.


And like you I also believe that there is no 'correct' or 'incorrect'. But what is meant by this in the context of conducting tests? Either the plug-in can approximate the sound or it can't. If it can, then it makes Shy's stand-offish claims less relevant. Can you see it?

@kvaca,
I can try that other wav file as well, but give me some time - I'm a bit busy just now, deadlines are looming.

edit:typos

[Uncle E]

In fact, most posters here have taken the view that there's no 'correct' or 'incorrect'. 'Live and let live,' someone said.

Agreed! Even though I wasn't able to emulate the Slate with the Native Instruments compressors, I did come across some cool settings and usages that I'll be trying on other things. Specifically, using Guitar Rig's crossover with an VC 2A on the bottom and a Fast Comp or Solid Buscomp on the top is a bad ass combo!