Analog Obsession releases two new plugins! (Reduced prices)
-
- KVRian
- 1091 posts since 28 May, 2010 from Finland
I prefer the Fetish over Waves CLA-2A for example. Sounds warmer and distorts peaks less.
- KVRAF
- 10359 posts since 3 Feb, 2003 from Finland, Espoo
Are you trolling?soundmodel wrote:I prefer the Fetish over Waves CLA-2A for example. Sounds warmer and distorts peaks less.
Serious question. This is the second time in a short while you are comparing two completely different compressor topologies (the other being the Elysia Alpha vs SSL).
I mean, you can compare two vastly different units of course but perhaps then say "I prefer FET compression vs Opto compression" instead of making it sound like two plugins that try to be the same thing where one does it's thing "better".
Perhaps a language barrier here?
/off topic
"Wisdom is wisdom, regardless of the idiot who said it." -an idiot
-
- KVRian
- 1091 posts since 28 May, 2010 from Finland
It's sound similarities that I'm referring to. It could be rough approximation, but this is how I categorize.
To me (in practice) Fetish serves a similar purpose as the CLA-2A. Thus the comparison. If I want that kind of compression I either use CLA-2A, or as of now I usually put Fetish instead.
Similarly, I use Alpha and SSL G somewhat interchangeably, just that I perceive G to be more funky and classic, whereas Alpha is thick and modern, but their snap, "swell" and density sound similar enough to me. They're not interchangeable, but slightly different flavors of the same category.
Comparably, the MJUC sounds very different from Fetish to me. It has a 1176 model and I perceive it to be more aggressive, but also smoother then the Fetish, which I perceive to act more on "peak level" as does LA-2A. I find that a 1176 style compression works more on averages leading to denser and "punchier" compression, whereas (C)LA-2A to me is a bit squishy (since it acts on peaks).
To me (in practice) Fetish serves a similar purpose as the CLA-2A. Thus the comparison. If I want that kind of compression I either use CLA-2A, or as of now I usually put Fetish instead.
Similarly, I use Alpha and SSL G somewhat interchangeably, just that I perceive G to be more funky and classic, whereas Alpha is thick and modern, but their snap, "swell" and density sound similar enough to me. They're not interchangeable, but slightly different flavors of the same category.
Comparably, the MJUC sounds very different from Fetish to me. It has a 1176 model and I perceive it to be more aggressive, but also smoother then the Fetish, which I perceive to act more on "peak level" as does LA-2A. I find that a 1176 style compression works more on averages leading to denser and "punchier" compression, whereas (C)LA-2A to me is a bit squishy (since it acts on peaks).
- KVRAF
- 5943 posts since 8 Jul, 2009
I think you guys have a gap in communication due to two different contexts: soundmodel is talking about the scope of compressors in general, where-as bmanic is thinking in terms of a family of similar compressors or even as specific as a particular model. These are of course all valid comparisons but it's important to be on the same page what the context or scope of your coparison is. Trying to have a conversation with differing contexts will lead to confusion and possibly conflict.soundmodel wrote:It's sound similarities that I'm referring to. It could be rough approximation, but this is how I categorize.
To me (in practice) Fetish serves a similar purpose as the CLA-2A. Thus the comparison. If I want that kind of compression I either use CLA-2A, or as of now I usually put Fetish instead.
Similarly, I use Alpha and SSL G somewhat interchangeably, just that I perceive G to be more funky and classic, whereas Alpha is thick and modern, but their snap, "swell" and density sound similar enough to me. They're not interchangeable, but slightly different flavors of the same category.
Comparably, the MJUC sounds very different from Fetish to me. It has a 1176 model and I perceive it to be more aggressive, but also smoother then the Fetish, which I perceive to act more on "peak level" as does LA-2A. I find that a 1176 style compression works more on averages leading to denser and "punchier" compression, whereas (C)LA-2A to me is a bit squishy (since it acts on peaks).
#NONFR Check out my music at Bandcamp Free Streaming!
Free music with your support on Patreon | Youtube: Music of Plexus Videos (music videos) | Youtube: Plexus Productions (audio related) Stop whining. Make music.
Free music with your support on Patreon | Youtube: Music of Plexus Videos (music videos) | Youtube: Plexus Productions (audio related) Stop whining. Make music.
- KVRAF
- 10359 posts since 3 Feb, 2003 from Finland, Espoo
Well each to their own. Still.. there are no similarities between a 1176 and a LA-2A, hence they are usually used together as they cover completely different types of compression.soundmodel wrote:It's sound similarities that I'm referring to. It could be rough approximation, but this is how I categorize.
In fact, they are so different that you may as well compare anything to anything else. Doesn't make much sense in my opinion.
"Wisdom is wisdom, regardless of the idiot who said it." -an idiot
- KVRAF
- 10359 posts since 3 Feb, 2003 from Finland, Espoo
You are further confusing things.. what on earth do you mean with "scope of compressors in general"?plexuss wrote:I think you guys have a gap in communication due to two different contexts: soundmodel is talking about the scope of compressors in general, where-as bmanic is thinking in terms of a family of similar compressors or even as specific as a particular model. These are of course all valid comparisons but it's important to be on the same page what the context or scope of your coparison is. Trying to have a conversation with differing contexts will lead to confusion and possibly conflict.soundmodel wrote:It's sound similarities that I'm referring to. It could be rough approximation, but this is how I categorize.
To me (in practice) Fetish serves a similar purpose as the CLA-2A. Thus the comparison. If I want that kind of compression I either use CLA-2A, or as of now I usually put Fetish instead.
Similarly, I use Alpha and SSL G somewhat interchangeably, just that I perceive G to be more funky and classic, whereas Alpha is thick and modern, but their snap, "swell" and density sound similar enough to me. They're not interchangeable, but slightly different flavors of the same category.
Comparably, the MJUC sounds very different from Fetish to me. It has a 1176 model and I perceive it to be more aggressive, but also smoother then the Fetish, which I perceive to act more on "peak level" as does LA-2A. I find that a 1176 style compression works more on averages leading to denser and "punchier" compression, whereas (C)LA-2A to me is a bit squishy (since it acts on peaks).
How is there a "context" where 1176 and LA-2A are being compared, unless it's a discussion about where one model is more suitable than the other? These units sound literally nothing alike.. their "box tone" is different. Their compression action is different. The physical operation and maintenance of these are different.
"Wisdom is wisdom, regardless of the idiot who said it." -an idiot
-
- KVRian
- 1091 posts since 28 May, 2010 from Finland
Better just trust ears. Plug-ins can offer denser parameter ranges as well as the models might be "approximations" or alterations on the "principles" of the original hardware, but they are not 1:1.
Thus it's possible to find similarities between plug-in models. Particularly, because in DSP (as well as in electronics) a lot of stuff is usually based on iterating on the same algorithms/functions, with slight tweaks. Same with saturation, one often finds a lot of tan-function.
Thus it's possible to find similarities between plug-in models. Particularly, because in DSP (as well as in electronics) a lot of stuff is usually based on iterating on the same algorithms/functions, with slight tweaks. Same with saturation, one often finds a lot of tan-function.
- KVRist
- 416 posts since 22 Nov, 2015
You're getting confused, MJUC is a vari-mu style compressor whilst Fetish is an 1176. And the 1176, with its ridiculously fast attack, is about as peak compression as you get, it was even released as a "true peak limiter"soundmodel wrote:Comparably, the MJUC sounds very different from Fetish to me. It has a 1176 model and I perceive it to be more aggressive, but also smoother then the Fetish, which I perceive to act more on "peak level" as does LA-2A. I find that a 1176 style compression works more on averages leading to denser and "punchier" compression, whereas (C)LA-2A to me is a bit squishy (since it acts on peaks).
- KVRist
- 415 posts since 3 Jun, 2017
Just turn the input gain on the Fetish to 5 o'clock, that's the best and most analog sound you'll ever get out of it. I wonder why Waves and all the others didn't model this absolutely authentic behaviour.soundmodel wrote:I prefer the Fetish over Waves CLA-2A for example. Sounds warmer and distorts peaks less.
Wise words, wise words.soundmodel wrote:Better just trust ears.
Confucamus.
-
- KVRAF
- 2256 posts since 29 May, 2012
That plugin simply doesn't work at all in my opinion (I've just tried). Turn the input gain all the way up and it mutes the output.Rockatansky wrote:Just turn the input gain on the Fetish to 5 o'clock, that's the best and most analog sound you'll ever get out of it. I wonder why Waves and all the others didn't model this absolutely authentic behaviour.soundmodel wrote:I prefer the Fetish over Waves CLA-2A for example. Sounds warmer and distorts peaks less.
Wise words, wise words.soundmodel wrote:Better just trust ears.
~stratum~
-
- KVRian
- 1091 posts since 28 May, 2010 from Finland
It has three different modes. Mk2 is "1176" style, which I refer to.Havok wrote:You're getting confused, MJUC is a vari-mu style compressor whilst Fetish is an 1176. And the 1176, with its ridiculously fast attack, is about as peak compression as you get, it was even released as a "true peak limiter"soundmodel wrote:Comparably, the MJUC sounds very different from Fetish to me. It has a 1176 model and I perceive it to be more aggressive, but also smoother then the Fetish, which I perceive to act more on "peak level" as does LA-2A. I find that a 1176 style compression works more on averages leading to denser and "punchier" compression, whereas (C)LA-2A to me is a bit squishy (since it acts on peaks).
https://klanghelm.com/contents/products ... models.php
- KVRAF
- 23459 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
176, not 1176 - that is a totally different comp (one FET, the other vari-mu) - you appear really confused and clueless
"Preamps have literally one job: when you turn up the gain, it gets louder." Jamcat, talking about presmp-emulation plugins.
- KVRian
- 715 posts since 3 May, 2007 from UK
Mk2 in MJUC is wonderful.
It has some quirks depending on the ratio, density and istage settings, but can add a really nice depth to the low end in mastering when dialled in right. I use it a lot for it's "boxtone" and with almost no compression happening
Cheers
Scorb
It has some quirks depending on the ratio, density and istage settings, but can add a really nice depth to the low end in mastering when dialled in right. I use it a lot for it's "boxtone" and with almost no compression happening
Cheers
Scorb
I once thought I had mono for an entire year. It turned out I was just really bored...
-
- Banned
- 4 posts since 21 Mar, 2018
Because it's an EQ. You're boosting the lows just by using it. Tweak the settings and the curve changes a little. So what? You couldn't have done this with a normal EQ?
-
- KVRAF
- 2256 posts since 29 May, 2012
Nope. It's analog warmth or something. The bass has just gotten phatter.mod.killer wrote:Because it's an EQ. You're boosting the lows just by using it. Tweak the settings and the curve changes a little. So what? You couldn't have done this with a normal EQ?
Seriously though, I wonder how many people actually ask this question, or whether they can hear any difference an analog EQ makes or not.
~stratum~