Undertone Audio UnFairchild 670M mkII plugin
- KVRAF
- 20810 posts since 22 Nov, 2000 from Southern California
I had the hardware Stamchild. The UA version sounds just as good/pretty much the same.
MJUC is different.
MJUC is different.
-
Funkybot's Evil Twin Funkybot's Evil Twin https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=116627
- KVRAF
- 12492 posts since 16 Aug, 2006
I've got the Stam 1176-ADG (SA76-ADG), and I can't hear much of a difference between that and the UA 1176AE plugin other than the noise floor. It's annoying.Uncle E wrote: Thu Oct 03, 2024 8:17 pm I had the hardware Stamchild. The UA version sounds just as good/pretty much the same.
- KVRAF
- 25031 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
It's certainly more flexible, so it depends a lot on how you dial it it (and of course you need to set it to "Limiter" to compare it to other fairchildish comps... )
- KVRAF
- 20810 posts since 22 Nov, 2000 from Southern California
Also, no 9 month wait to get the plugin.Funkybot's Evil Twin wrote: Thu Oct 03, 2024 8:54 pm I've got the Stam 1176-ADG (SA76-ADG), and I can't hear much of a difference between that and the UA 1176AE plugin other than the noise floor. It's annoying.![]()
- KVRAF
- 20810 posts since 22 Nov, 2000 from Southern California
It's thicker sounding no matter how you dial it. UA 175 and 176 are more comparable, IMO, which is saying a lot because those are great compressors.jens wrote: Thu Oct 03, 2024 9:11 pm It's certainly more flexible, so it depends a lot on how you dial it it (and of course you need to set it to "Limiter" to compare it to other fairchildish comps... )
- KVRAF
- 25031 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
Yes, I agree with that - I already mentioned the thickness before... there's ways to make it less pronounced (setting it to Limiter already helps a lot), but it's true that I didn't manage to quite get rid of it - Unfairchild sounds leaner, no matter what.
I don't do UAD, but I have the Antelope one (Tube 176) - I guess I'll have to look into that...UA 175 and 176 are more comparable, IMO, which is saying a lot because those are great compressors.
-
- KVRist
- 48 posts since 15 May, 2017
I think it has a bit of a different flavor to MJUC. I never felt that MJUC was the greatest on buses, whereas this one is great.
- KVRAF
- 25031 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
Fair point - I normally don't use busses, so I wouldn't know...
- KVRAF
- 20810 posts since 22 Nov, 2000 from Southern California
You are forbidden from ever expressing an opinion again!jens wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2024 9:48 am Fair point - I normally don't use busses, so I wouldn't know...
But seriously, why wouldn't you use busses? Serious time saver. I used to exclusively bus mix, meaning I would bus all the individual channels and do the mixing there. Does this mean you also don't compress the main bus?
- KVRAF
- 25031 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
For me it's just more tracks to (pun maybe intended) keep track of. I mostly don't see the point.But seriously, why wouldn't you use busses? Serious time saver. I used to exclusively bus mix, meaning I would bus all the individual channels and do the mixing there.
I simpy enjoy working on/mixing individual instruments more than semi-arbitrarily grouping several of them together... but then again I don't use that many tracks anyway -
my project usually have only around ten to fiveteen tracks (sometimes even less)...
having said that:
I use Superior Drummer in 2 channel-config, so that could be considered a bus -
and yes, if I would record real drums instead, I might group them -
but then again I'd probably use the Glyn Johns setup or something similar,
so I might not bother using a bus after all.
Does this mean you also don't compress the main bus?
What do you mean? The master? Of course I don't!
- KVRAF
- 20810 posts since 22 Nov, 2000 from Southern California
Similarly to you, I've moved away from bus mixing because the projects I work on are a lot smaller now. I now only do it to get the sound of bus compression. But when I was mixing other people and working on huge projects, it was a huge time saver and made mixing a lot easier. I would get a basic mix with the channels, assign them to busses, and then hide the channels and rarely look at them again.
- KVRian
- 1369 posts since 29 Apr, 2012 from Paris
Such a buggy release, GS thread is full of bug reports. I've became tired of that "release day beta testing" with Kiive plugins especially when Eddie seems to repeat the same mistakes every time (broken recalls and oversampling issues, mix knob phase issues)...
Don't know how it was beta tested and if the dev really takes feedbacks into account during this phase.
Don't know how it was beta tested and if the dev really takes feedbacks into account during this phase.
-
comfortablynick comfortablynick https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=358558
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 338 posts since 15 May, 2015
Still enjoying this plugin. The VAR attack/release settings are great; they give you a Fairchild sound but still allow you to preserve some transients.
-
comfortablynick comfortablynick https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=358558
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 338 posts since 15 May, 2015
As I posted on GS, I haven't experienced those issues. I don't use PT but the VST3 version has been fine for me. I haven't used the mix knob much but I didn't hear an audible phase issue when I tested it.Endor-8o8 wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2024 7:38 pm Such a buggy release, GS thread is full of bug reports. I've became tired of that "release day beta testing" with Kiive plugins especially when Eddie seems to repeat the same mistakes every time (broken recalls and oversampling issues, mix knob phase issues)...
Don't know how it was beta tested and if the dev really takes feedbacks into account during this phase.
