Comparison Hardware vs. Software Emulation

[optX]

Brainworx Vertigo VSC2 vs. Vertigo Hardware
$299 vs. $6000
http://www.musotalk.de/video/brainworx- ... ugin-test/
Video is in german... The mastering guy says he wouldn`t be able to say what`s the plugin and what`s the hardware in a blind test.

Softube PE1C vs. Tubetech PE1C
$219 vs. $3000
http://www.bonedo.de/artikel/einzelansi ... pe-1c.html
Texts in german too, but you can listen to the sound samples.

[deccard]

Brainworx Vertigo VSC2 vs. Vertigo Hardware
$299 vs. $6000
http://www.musotalk.de/video/brainworx- ... ugin-test/
Video is in german... The mastering guy says he wouldn`t be able to say what`s the plugin and what`s the hardware in a blind test.

he´s not saying that he cant hear a difference. also denying he wouldnt hear it in a blindtest. maybe you should listen better

[oblioblioblio]

It's a tricky subject. I don't know how worth it it is to get into the whole debate but I feel like adding my 2 cents.

I love digital, the sound of it is all over some of my favourite records, that not quite real but hard to tell kind of vibe. Lots of early analogue pioneers like Autechre and Aphex twin are covered with digital effects.

8 bit computer game characters look beautiful. Digital imagery like David Lynch's Inland Empire and Chris Morris' Jam are stunning.

For me in music gear, a good analogue piece has no equivalent. The interface is also essential, although by saying that you open yourself to the argument that you can get the same thing with some midi control or whatever.

I think digital is amazing too. Digital can do things that analogue can only dream of. But I think you're limiting digital by just using it to emulate the limitations and quirks of analogue circuits.

There are lots of myths about analogue, like high noise and poor stability. My pure analogue circuits are totally temperature stable and very very low noise floor. Their character is not in either of these 2 things.

For me, I want to use instruments that make no distinction between analogue and digital. Whatever tool does the job the best for the price you can afford. Everyone wins. In the end the distinction between analogue and digital is quite small, both can accurately represent sound with good points and bad points, and both can be used musically as an instrument. I don't want to paint myself into a corner by turning these differences into something bigger than it is, although it is certainly worth being sensitive to the subtleties that any system can offer for a specific task.

[deccard]

it is certainly worth being sensitive to the subtleties that any system can offer for a specific task.

this

a lot people dont hear a difference between analog highend gear and the plug in simulation cause their ear isnt trained. listening is focussing. if you dont know on what to focus...
i have a friend who wants a hardware comp cause he thinks it would help his mixing. he already has tons of analog and 80ies digi stuff. mixed in the computer and used uad.
but he couldnt use the comps right. always wrong compressionsettings cause he couldnt hear it how he does harm instead of good to his sound.
so whats the use of getting a 1500 euro hardware comp when you cant use your uad comps?
the difference between analog and the simulation often gets really obvious in more extrem uses. for example for filtersimulation computers arent fast enough. there are still a lot shortcuts used to get results. i read posts from known software developers admitting that. rest is marketing blah and not trying to harm sales of your own product.
in the end you just need to know what you want and need for yourself.

[patrickmrd]

sorry.. but i have a big uad card. i also have hardware compressors like the fatso , elysia xpressor.etc and outboard eq too. if you can,t tell the difference between a hardware vertigo and a real one ..you are an idiot.
Analog jus,t sounds fatter! period. if people would have tried hardware compression for themselves.instead of listening to A and B examples from others, they will hear it straight away..there will not even be a discussion.
i, mean uad is nice . and the fatso plug is nice too. but nothing beats the real thing.. if it is true that there is no sound difference .why this high end market still is booming.
i really don,t wanna pay 3 or 4 or 5 thousand euro,s if you cant tell the difference in sound.and i think i,am not alone in this.
and not to mention the dynamic range of such devices.

[patrickmrd]

And if the mastering dude says he can,t tell the difference...he really should quit his job!!!!

[nakoradiomies]

this may go bit off topic, but some one told me that "analogue mastering suits well when music is made inside computer with software synths and fx, but for full on hardware made music it may not add anything good to the sound"

well, i really don't know anything about mastering..
but if i really think the process of building my sounds i quite often use analogue fx with digital synths and digital fx with analogue synths.

[optX]

Brainworx Vertigo VSC2 vs. Vertigo Hardware
$299 vs. $6000
http://www.musotalk.de/video/brainworx- ... ugin-test/
Video is in german... The mastering guy says he wouldn`t be able to say what`s the plugin and what`s the hardware in a blind test.

he´s not saying that he cant hear a difference. also denying he wouldnt hear it in a blindtest. maybe you should listen better

Yes, you are right, sorry, my fault. I confused it, it`s been a while since I watched the video. The guy in the blue shirt does a short blind test and guesses the original right but confuses the hw/sw versions.
The mastering guys comments are : Visual behaviour of the software seems to be right (needle jumping the same way). Lows are slightly better on hardware and also more air and open. He would use the plugin for stem mastering.

Anyway, I am not a guy who says plugins sound the same as hardware. Wanted to show what I found in the web and let the discussions roll. But please don`t make an analog vs digital discussion here, awesome outboard comps/eq/consoles can be digital too.

I have several outboard equipment in my studio too, preamps like Pacifica, vintage Neumann/Siemens or an old 1176... I even was thinking about getting a Harrison 4032. I appreciate it`s sound and I know that there is something about it which hardly gets reached just with plugins. I am looking for a transformerbalanced or even tube comp for the mix buss in api 500 format...
I just love hardware too but I more often get the feeling that it`s maybe a little bit "overrated". Of course you get an awesome sound when working on a SSL with boutique hardware on every insert and a Shadows Hills Mastering comp on the main buss but do I have to use such an arsenal of weapons to make a good sounding song? No, absolutely not. But it`s fun to do it this way. But something like a point is the fact that a $6000 Vertigo can sound like a plugin or even worse when used wrongly. And obviously, when used right, it`s sound is slightly better than the plugin. If you are not able to use a boutique outboard gear right AND you are using low end converters you won`t benefit from your investment and probably got the same results just with plugins.

When thinking of my 1176 I don`t hear a lot differences to a 1176 plugin or any other sw comp in terms of compression, just acts like a compressor. It does more or less the same thing. But I hear a difference because of it`s transformers which are doing something beautiful to the sound the plugin doesn`t do. But I do think that you can get damn near to such results just with itb mixing. Imagine a touch of Bad Buss Mojo and a tape sim and maybe a nice eq plugin and you are maybe in that area.

My TL Audio Fat Track always widened the stereo signals and I think that made the most hearable effect. The tubes are nice but when I tracked it through my old MOTU interface I didn`t benefit from it. With RME it got much better but GAS is always around and I just can imagine what it would sound like with really good converters like Prism. Which means that good processing requires good converters and good monitors and a well treated room. That`s getting very expensive ...
I sold the Fat Track because summing with Slate`s VCC gives better results (to my ears). Now I miss its tube pre/eq...

But what I realized when working with outboard processing is that mixing gets easier/faster (at least for me).

if it is true that there is no sound difference .why this high end market still is booming.

Because most of us are men. Like deccard said, I believe that there a a lot of people buying expensive hardware and don`t know how to work with it. Just look at the second hand market, there you can buy everything, lot`s of expressors all the time and especially lot`s of big format consoles.

this may go bit off topic, but some one told me that "analogue mastering suits well when music is made inside computer with software synths and fx, but for full on hardware made music it may not add anything good to the sound"

hmm.. I`d say you can achieve the most obvious differences on itb mixes when run through analog outboard. But it definitely does nice things on analog mixes too. Tracking my analog hardware synth through a tube preamp or an A-Designs Pacifica enhances it`s sound in some way.



Nevertheless I am excited that plugins are getting better and even doing nice tonal things to your signals. A Softube CL1B is coloring the signal in a nice way I think whereas most SSL type comp plugins are on the cleaner side. This means you can achieve coloring with plugins or you can avoid it.
Let`s see what plugins can do in 10 years.