FYI the IK multimedia was planned to be included but its only allowing me to demo IK t-racks as a whole so as I demo'd the Dynamu it basically acted as my entire demo and I've tried but I can't demo any t-racks related IK plugs 🤔
If you get in a bind with the IK stuff again in the future, I own most of them and can coordinate some processing for you. I may get Magenta for the Massive Passive, but at 96K I can get the VariMu/DynaMu to null down to -40 to -50 dB. I'm still testing though.
I chose A. I was surprised that the actual Studer didnt sound as good to me. I have the UAD tape plugins and Ill probably use them a lot more now. Its funny that we're always looking for better when what we already have is more than good enough to do the job well. Great shoot out Paul. Thanks.
I liked the UAD and the dry most of the time. In the final test, I again preferred the UAD and dry. The Studer did add a nice snap to the snare but there was a slight loss in overall energy. But for pretty much all the tests, I preferred the dry. I've done tests like this and what I've found is that once you take something already mixed in the digital domain and then pass the tracks (or busses) through console channels, or something, there are things gained but also things lost. To me (and to at least one of my clients) there's an immediacy to a digital mix that gets lost when simply summing it through analog. The top and bottom does get sweeter, but everything in between seems to get softened a little too much. Vocals become less intense and some of the intelligibility of the bass goes away. But this does depend on the program material. A better test would be to mix something from scratch through analog and then compare. Of course, these won't be one to one comparisons because you'll be making different decisions based on how you're hearing things, but it will show a truer difference between what analog does vs what digital does.
A for sure. C had weird bass phasing issues and B sounded like it moved behind my head, probably also related to phase. Gotta pickup that UAD Studer plugin!
Paul (see previous comments) - your videos are amazing because we can truly hear each plugin individually and see what its doing - so we can judge what to use in different circumstances - no one else really does this in a shoot out . Im excited about this mix project because we can see how all the elements from the individual tracks then feed into the MB - and we'll see how the choices hold up ... when its done, we can see about dropping the UAD (or real Studer) on the finished mix and see if its truly the icing ... onward and upwards ...
I'm really happy with the session idea as its giving me more ideas and giving everything better context 🤓 I'm really excited to see how it all transpires with all the shootout ideas I have
ok but isn't the STR102 considered best for Mix Buss, and the Studer more for individual tracks? That's what most UAD owners say., at least from the reviews. In short - which one do I have to throw my money at?
@@levondarratt787 that's the classic use of the original machines, multi track against master track. We can mix the plugins and use both for tracks or for stereo bus, testing which one sounds better in that particular project. For example, I often use UAD Oxide on every track of my project [which is low dsp demand], then I test between Studer and Ampex on the Stereo Buss and choose the best. For example, Tchad Blake has the Studer on his Stereo Buss, other famous producers has Ampex, so it's personal choice. I bought Ampex, and studied it for months, then bought Studer. Demo both, and choose your favourite to start.
I chose A! Some UAD plugin are for me worth every single penny as they bring something to the table that very few other plugins does. Even if other 3rd party plugins may sounds good, there is just something about using a tape emulator that has official STUDER A800 name printed on it(gives me confidence) . I also think Ampex ATR-102 is very special and offers me something no other piece of equipment (except perharps a real Ampex tape machine) can give me.
Dope Video.. Since i sold my UAD i sometimes feel i miss out of the Tape Sims and this video was great to show me otherwise. Ive used Softube for years now and the shaping is great, especially the Crosstalk knob is pretty magical. Interestingly i preferred Softube over UAD in the shootout, but probably its a sound im used to now. The end results was most interesting, i played over 3 times with PMC monitors with eyes closed and all 3 times i preferred C, B close second and A i lost the vibe. Additionally when i had UAD i did prefer the ATR every-time over Struder. Thanks for your hard work.
blind: I liked A>C>B. knowing what they were I like A>B>C. A just sounded more vintage to me, less separated. But I was only listening on laptop speakers. Thank you for the shootout!
I also did a shootout on plugins to the mix analog studer. None of them seem to get that vibe the real tape machine has. The closest one out of my plugins was the "reelbus" from TB. Set it to 30ips professional and it sounds pretty close but still not the same. The harmonic distortion from the real tape machine is so smooth in comparison to the plugins. Really silky smooth. It immediately gives me that polished classic 80s 90s vibe on the actual tape machine. I know they can do this with plugins but I haven't heard it yet from the tape machine plugins that exist at this moment.
Tbh im a bit confused why anybody would want to print to tape in this modern day in regards to a full mix. There's a really good comparison with a studer mix compared to burl converter mix and you lose a lot of with tape. It's narrower, less high end, less detail and clarity and more distortion. Don't get me wrong, tape has a sound and can work for a certain context but for everyday mixing I'd go for clarity every day. That's why I'd never use tape for mixing. I'll use tape on Acoustic guitars to round off the high end and transients and stuff but it's more of an effect than a must have
@@PaulThird it's mostly for the vibe. Good master tape is pretty clean and it smooths out the frequencies, makes everything sound a bit more natural. I like to use it when I'm doing something that sounds like a particular era. So if I'm doing old school hip hop and want it to sound like an old Dr Dre record from the early 90s, or if I'm going for that Paula Abdul or Phil Collins sound for an old school RnB or Pop song. Yeah, I don't use tape on modern sounding stuff. Modern should sound a bit more edgy I think. 😊
Yeah, that's what I hear most is that many engineer's only use it for a certain nostalgic sound these days. Most sit and just gather dust haha I remember I pinched an old revox tape machine when the radio shack was closing and I remember staring at it thinking.. Wtf am I gonna do with it now 🤣
It's not the studer though if I was to do that, but I get your point. I had to be fair with this comparison. If I was to bring in console eq curves it would muck up the comparison
Whats really amazing about the Softube is that its zero latency and has an incredibly low CPU hit. For my system its about 8 instances of Tape = 1% CPU.
I only just saw this I picked the Studer - and you know why - I felt the elements were just cleared - specially noticeable on the hats which seem to disappear without the real tape. I think the plugins are fine as you could adjust mix elements for this to some degree, but the real tape doesn’t smudge as much. Great video Paul!
Hey Paul, really love your videos.. I was extremely surprised, almost felt wrong, but I basically preferred the DRY mix almost all the way. I really love tape, but I think in this case it was such a subtlety, I probably unconsciously went for the less expensive scenario ahah. No but really, with tape I look for sonic realness/three-dimensionality/thickness, the real Studer tape definitely added that. but I think It was too subtle for me, especially given the fact you utilised real good productions/samples, which brings me to a serious point: in my experience, you get the most out of tape when you record straight on it at the beginning. (duh?!) Nothing will ever defeat tape, we kinda all know that, cause that's not about binary digits. Also a truthful tracking (here's comes analog) of a sound source matters the most in my opinion. All the rest is just as you said more than once: all subjective. Cheers
Nice video as ever. I've noticed you like a lot of polished, tickly, high end in your mix, I'm actually the opposite way inclined and for that reason i love Taupe!!
Dunno why but I am partial to some nice crispy top end Haha I'm quite particular about it actually 😅.. Or my hearings shit in the top end and I mix brighter to compensate. I had to tell my mastering engineer to reign in the darkness of my last single as it wasnt bright enough for me 😅
I worked as a full-time recording engineer from 1985 to 2000. I always hated 2-track tape effects, with the exception of a Studer 1/2-inch machine running at 15-ips. That provided a fat, smooth, low end bump that you’d be hard pressed to get anywhere else. 1/4-inch always just sucked. All it was is signal loss. You lose noticeable lows on 1/4-inch 30-ips(which was standard), and you get a little loss of fast transients, highest frequencies, and clarity. To me it was never a plus. Sure, you lose some of the lows that vinyl requires you to lose, but the vinyl mastering engineer is going to do that anyway. Plus, we had CD’s. Why lose anything? 1/2-inch was a lot better on every measure, except price of tape, and compatibility at facilities you might send that tape to. Everyone I knew who was super serious about sound quality was mixing down to 1/2-inch. I bought a Mitsubishi X-80A digital 1/4-inch reel-to-reel machine that allowed you to edit the tape with a razor blade! And since I worked in Chicago during the massive dance music explosion there, I made THOUSANDS of razor blade edits on that machine. Mind you, this is YEARS before recording to burnable CDs was a thing. This was years before SoundTools was a thing. Yeah, before there was ProTools, it was called SoundTools. That was the original name. Stereo recording only. The whole “sound of tape” thing came mostly from the MULTITRACK. And the approach was totally different. If you wanted a high quality recording of the source sound, then you followed all the rules with your gain staging and you’d get the best representation the machine could deliver. Always with losses similar to how I described 1/4-inch 30-ips. But if you hit the tape HARDER then you could get the compression and tone changes that we know as saturation. Worked great on ROCK and some dance music and some hip-hop. One of the most useful aspects of the tape machines and tape saturation is that it diminishes fast sharp transients. The type of percussive elements of sound that can be annoying or fatiguing to listen to. Like percussion instruments, bells, and Yamaha pianos. This is because the process of recording a sound magnetically onto tape is a process that takes time. And little fast, short, and spikey transients would usually be lost in the process to a degree. It varied by tape brand and formulation, and also by the specific machine you were using and how it was calibrated. As a working engineer you had to be totally familiar with ALL of this. It was just a basic matter of knowing how to use the tools. When digital came along, the preservation of those fast, short, spikey transients was a big part of what made people describe digital as “hyper realistic” or “sterile”. The fast transients caused fatigue for a lot of listeners. They found listening to digital recordings more tiring. Even tedious. D-to-A converters are much better now, and we are all just a lot more used to the sound. Bottom line: most tape artifacts sucked. Most didn’t help in hardly any way. But a few of the artifacts made magic. It was always a love-hate relationship. I’m not so interested in a plugin simulating 1/4-inch tape at 30ips like these Studer 2-tracks. Gimme a Studer A800 24-track calibrated to +12! Now THAT’S the tape saturation we are all after! 🤘😆🤘
I know this is an old video but if you ever think about revisiting the topic I would be fascinated to hear a comparison of hardware tape emulations vs the uad studer. In particular the neve 542’s
Glad u pointed out the thing about slate auto gain, it used to be my fav tape plugin until one day I properly gain matched it and compared it with other tape plugins XD
Hi Paul - A. UAD, Sounded the best to my ears on the entire mix, by far. However, we have no way of knowing what tape stock or how the actual Studer was maintained etc. If you had the actual tape deck in your studio and could fool around with settings, bias, tape, speed, levels etc.(my knowledge of tape is limited) it might have sounded better than the plugin, who knows. On a side note the other one that sounds very good to my ears is HEAT, on tape setting (turn knob to left), which is a proprietary ad on for Pro Tools HDX. It was developed by the guy from Crane Song Dave Hill and like the UAD ads some space, width and presence on a mix. Thanks for doing the shootout.
You inspired me to AB a guitar track in one of my songs for the UAD to the MixAnalog Studer. And wow I'm glad. I tweaked the UAD to match the MixAnalog best I could. I did 6 tests: 0-500Hz solo, 500-1k solo, 1k-5k solo, 5k-20k solo, Full EQ Guitar Solo, Full Band Mix. 0-500 I preferred the Tape because it was denser and richer. I was 3/3 in correctly identifying the Tape. 500-1k I preferred UAD because it was thicker and more present. I was 2/4 in my guesses. 1k-5k I preferred UAD because it was smoother. Tape sounded rougher, more like a "toy", but also more present. So I wondered how it'd sit in context. I guessed wrong first time and then I was 3/3 in guessing. 5k-20k I preferred UAD because it had more sparkle, more "magic", but I wondered if it might sound cheap in context. Tape sounded duller. I guessed wrong first time and then I was 4/4 in these guesses. Guitar solo full EQ I felt both sounded good but I preferred the Tape (after I volume compensated the Tape to be 1.3db quieter) because the UAD sounded muddier. I was fairly surprised by this. I described the UAD as "woodier", sturdy, but also duller. I guessed 3/3 once I figured out which was which. I was clueless on my first guess. In the full mix I hands down preferred the Tape because it felt more alive, more present. More of that "tape vibe" that I'm used to. The Highs seem to jump out of the speakers with that tape. So all in all, a very surprising and valuable AB experiment. I'm stoked to do more of these! Thanks for the inspiration!
There's something about the Softube Tape that's so 70s and evocative. A lot like being in a posh uncle's front room at chrimbo and getting your greasy little fingers all over his HiFi while all the adults are getting pissed up in the back room. Type B for me at 15/30 ips for instruments and busses. Might stick a project through that Analog Works if I've got some pennies and fafteen mannats spare soon.
Just remember you pay for bouncing as well so if it's like a 5 minute track mind and work fast if it's 15 minute session. If your track is set up right though then it should be alright.
Interesting comparison. I found the Studer to have a rather subtle effect overall in the final comparison, but if you can push the levels and get it to saturate and compress a bit more, it might be worth using mix:analog to put drums or bass through real tape as it might equal or surpass even the best tape plugins.
it's actually a lil bit off from what i imagine... the single printed track using studer all sound more steady, stable and weighty compared to the original tracks, i feel like it's draging the original sound downwards. But in the final test, the most "weighty" sound, in my opnion, is C, the studer actually opens up the whole mix, makes the side information more perceivable and of course, more musical. the UAD opens the sound as well but more likely upwards, maybe like a firework into the sky.. appreciate your work Paul!
Hi Paul, great video. I have to admit all the way through I kept choosing the Dry version! Then on the final showdown I picked the real Studer. It just sounded fuller and dare I say it...warmer.
A definitely wins. Something about the clarity, separation, and transient punch. Very surprised that B was the Studer. I was sure that B was the dry since it lost that "forward-ness" that the other examples had. I'm listening on 16" MBP '19 speakers though, so anything in the low mid/bass range is probably not translating well. Great shootout, very informative!
TBH I just discovered your channel and I really like it! This is the second video I watched so far and I can really relate to what you have to say! Keep going!
After carefully listening for 4 times I was sure B sounded the best before seeing the results. And thank god I was right because I was starting to doubt my listening skills lol ..and for me the difference between them was very subtle and almost subjective. This hole blind test kindda made me listen more "feeling the vibe" than to analytical frequency wise.
Well that was unexpected. I have the UAD system, but not the Studer plugin. I have ended up preferring the UAD version over all of the others. Thank you for making this video!
First all of dude you are the real MVP!! From the last test I could definitely tell which one was the dry and much preferred the other two. When it came to UAD vs the real Studer I think the difference wasn't night and day. Perhaps there'd be a bigger difference if you really pushed them hard into clipping but in this context I think UAD really came through, though there's definitely a bit extra special sauce from the real Studer, like in the low mids and width, but definitely not the kind of difference that would make the price of admission and maintenance worth it in my opinion. Would be really interested in hearing how UAD vs the real Studer compare in more heavy handed scenarios like driving the heck out of some drums or really distorting a vocal track, that's kinda thing! Also we need to get one of these two companies to add some analog tape or tape-esque emulation (fatso, mas, rnd 542, etc) to their roster!
I agree. The differences between the 2 are so subjective that owning and recording your tracks through tape is just a hassle and waste of money in my book. Plus dealing with the noise as well. However I may do another test at the end of the session comparing puting a mix through an ampex compared to plugins to see how a mastering setup would compare 🤓
@@PaulThird i watch some of his vids and like the guy but the premise there seems to be that if something can't be almost instantly satisfying to dial in having only taken a perfunctory glance at the manual then it's not worth bothering with. that seems to slide too easily into the general attitude these days. oh no i'm turning into a fully paid up member of the Back In My Day Brigade. it's over.
You can hit red with a tape machine and it will compress your tracks but if your going in clean make sure you where hitting it15 ips. 30 is too clean and doesn’t sound like tape but it also doesn’t sound digital.
I wish I hadn't picked B. There still seems to be a gap between real tape and plugins. May I add: I watched that video on TV with its built-in speakers.
The real Studer tape sounded like it had a slight bump in the low mids. The UAD was by far the best sounding all-around. I actually use it all the time in LUNA. Very interesting comparison, thanks.
Hi Paul, big respect for explaining the effect each tape emulation plugin are doing to the input source. I have a 16track tascam at home for tracking and Softube Tape on my MBuss. Works a treat. Great vids keep up the good work bro.
i picked B, for more energy in base.. i guessed A was uad and C was dry during test.. I have UAD studer and tried mix analog's studer, prefer mix analog.. don't know why.. i want to rather use plugins..
I use the softube religiously for faking univibe sounds with the pitch stability and crosstalk. When you threw in the actual Studer it sounded like someone went in and switched the whole input list to ribbon mics, such a pleasant darkness to it. I have all the uad tape's and I've tried acustica/slate etc, but (don't laugh) I actually found the Aberrant sketch cassette plug is the only thing that does the high freq thing right, although it can be over the top. Would love to see you do something with the UAD Oceanway plug, that thing has alot of .... stealthy capabilities.
LOL, I did the same with the Slate, Sounded to muddy and dirty. Stopped using it about 6 years ago, Just Bought Taupe cause the Summer sale is on. It has its uses and combined with the Eq and Comp. Its a nice tool set. You really have to know where all these curves are. I wish they organized them from transparent to creative.
I've got taupe but yeah it's just too much choice haha I should really give it a proper go and try out different varients but the studer sound did put me off a bit. That's why I use reelight pro from tone empire. Good amount of options but not too much. Oversampling as well
In the final test, I liked A&B most, C least. C sounded heavier in the low mids than the other two to me, and I usually prefer clarity over weight in such styles as this. Strangely, perhaps, in the first three tests, I preferred 1. Slate 2. UAD 3. Dry. These inconsistencies undoubtedly disqualify me. I'm listening on Sonarworks IDReference corrected Dynaudio Core 59s.
I straight up cannot hear the difference between a lot of these. They all sound great...so it would ultimately come down to price and I can get the Softube Tape for $50 USD which is a bargain compared some of these.
I can’t go for days on this comment but I have the Luxury to choose between tape and emulation on a daily basis and I always choose to print mix stems through actual tape. The main thing to remember is to set and Match the tape inputs and Source inputs to catch the VU sweet spot. That is the true way of getting “that sound”. It’s entirely different on every song since the mix bus can either be In the box Hybrid or 80/20 Analogue/Box, thus needing adjustments verses a template. 25+years in studio (6 years on Producers Engineers Wing Board of The Recording Academy, Grammy, Platinum Plaques, Gold, Tele Award, 75+ Billboards. I’m not trying to say your wrong but if I really truly wanted to I could find a session where the final sounded identical to tape but over all after all the years of artists, producers, Tv and Movie sessions Tape wins every time. This is very informative and I’ll be doing some more experiments and comparisons of my own, I’ve seen how you total obliterate anyone who doesn’t put their money where there mouth is but, I feel confident with all my Accolades I have a good handle on what gear does and doesn’t do. Keep up the good work. These videos are very very well put together.
It's been a very interesting one for me. The poll is so in favour of the UAD which I didn't expect. I thought it would be way closer. Also the dry and the studer being so close to many who thought either was the other. Thats what surprised me the most but really it shouldn't that much as when I spoke to Tim Petherick about when he sampled the modded j37 he had he told me that good tape machines are actually quite clean if you set them up right and maintain them. The studer actually reminded him of the J37. The UAD to me just compliments this specific track more in my opinion but was a great experience for me none the less 🤓 However, it's one track and one tape machine. I could take mix analogs telefunken tape machine and run it through a metal mix and loads of people prefer that over the plugs. I just see them all as tools now. No one right answer or one rules all. Just whatever works best for the source
After further sound shoot outs....seems like...IK Media hands down are the best Tapes..they sound the most natural and open on the mix......you want some saturation glue...but you DONT WANT...your tape...changing the coloring added from level mixing, eqing and Compression...that sets the tone of the mix....you dont want the tape coming behind that and giving it a new town...AA Tape emulation is to blaring....it takes over your current color of the mix.....open and transparent saturation sounds better...matter of fact...IK Media...PA Karater and Analog Black box...hands down smoke the rest......
just thought I should mention, that Slate defaults with a preset calibration...especially the low end, so that's most likely what you were hearing with the increase in level, so you need to go into the settings first and zero it out in order to get a fairer comparison.
@@PaulThird"it wouldn't sound like what it's meant to sound like"? So in other words, those switches, dials and bias settings aren't supposed to be used? That's just strange logic. It would be the same as saying that every reverb, delay, eq or any ofther effect plugin's "intended" sound is the default it opens with? So Slate's VCC plugin should just be left on the SSL 4k setting? Because that's what it defaults to...so I guess that must be it's "intended sound" ummmmm okey dokey....
No what I mean is that the bass calibration is in a hidden menu. It's an optional tweakable extra if you are not liking the modelled sound of the studer. But as slate uses it, it's more to reduce the bass bump. It's not a by default thing. If I touched the hidden calibration menu I would have created the variable that it was my fault that the slate sounds the way it does in that video. Either way I watched that section back and I said I felt that the slate lacked weight. Which is funny though as it comes with an inheritant big bass bump. So I wouldn't have reduced any low end. The low end calibration wouldn't have brought back any transients or made the mix sound any bigger which was my biggest issue with the slate
@@PaulThird ah, ok...I understand what you're meaning now 🙂...one characteristic of tape though, is that if you're hitting it with more low end (like the bass bump) it will saturate sooner and reveal more compression artifacts, which may be what is smearing the transients somewhat...I'll try some tests here myself and check it out....but just to be clear...I actually liked the hardware best as well...(I started my recording career on tape 25yrs ago) and so I appreciate seeing videos showing the advantages of tape. Not just from a transient and warmth perspective, but also from an imaging perspective (pun intended)
Crazy how I preferred the dry to the real studer tape... I got my UAD v the other day after several years for £32 hahah worth the wait for that kinda bargain.
I graded the same 1.UAD, 2dry, 3TAUPE. I think it's because, like with Pultec, the UADs sound has the most weigh. It just sounds massive like adding a bit of the Decapitator on parallel ch. But is it the most accurate emulation? I don't know I've never listened to an actual Pultec outside the of hi end studio with a lot of preamps and sound going trough an SSL E and what have you. I would have to bring it home and even then if I use different sounding amps it will perform differently in terms of nuances we are trying to distinguish here. For example - Is the electrical grounding in your house or a building done like it's done in professional music studios?? Tape should round up and smooth outh al the Hi Fq and Lo Dist. transients made by analogue gear make the whole track a bit more raw but more natural like.. You can only feel it, I can't explain it especially to these generations that had never listened to a tape cassettes. Some nicely produced and mastered album on some high quality gear, like they used to be, with components in a row: record player, preamp with eq, amp, cassette player and later also cd. Even on tape cassettes with 45db dynamic span you could hear the depth and the clearness of a sound even with hf tape noise underneath. They improved it later with Dolby and different iron emulsions for tape. So my opinion Is go with what feels the best to you, more accurate emulation can sound worst than some other emulation in your particular situation. It even rhymes.
There's so many variables. Even when you consider the studer is going through the burl converters that makes a difference. All we can do is compare differences in our setup and see how close the plugins get 🤓 I've no doubt that passing electrical currents through different systems will cause different sounds compared to chaining plugins. If I think about it too much though it gives me a sore head 😂
@@PaulThird not to mention that every peace of, especially old, analogue gear sounds a tiny little bit different from another unit of the same brand and model. No two transformers have the identical output...and so on...🤯
@@PaulThird That's really interesting, I didn't do the test until this morning when I could run it through my Kali In-5's and my honest opinion was that only two stood out to me, I didn't like the Softube, sounded a bit dead to me and amazingly the one I liked most was the Slate, the opposite to you! To me it just had more character, but it maybe that I'm just used to the sound it makes. Thanks for the test though, excellent. Just got the SSL Channel Strip 2 and I really like it especially as it comes free with the 360 console software which to me is a game changer for speeding up workflow, now I'm dreading the moment when you post a video showing how it totally messes up my mixes! 😜
A sounds most compressed and warm. B sounds a bit fresher and C is most dynamic and alive. I was between B and C, liking the glue of B but also liking the dynamics of C. So I bet it depends on the taste and vibe in the end whether I choose one or another tape plugin or not at all. Tape on individual instruments is nice tho. UAD is indeed very nice. Which setting did you use? And also which one on Taupe did you use? nice video!
A is UAD, B is Studer and C is unprocessed 🤓 The UAD was all default bar the tape which was the GP9 if I'm right. I didn't tweak the internal settings which surprised me how good it sounded just straight out the vox. Taupe was the stereo studer A820 setting (C1) im pretty sure
@@PaulThird C1 on taupe is not good for mastering, takes too much tops off. Best options are C7-C9. Also UAD can be tweaked more. So of course different settings give different results. Cant judge plugin on initial setting only:)
Get what your saying but it was about trying to manage the variables where possible. As it's a studer tape I made it a studer style shootout with only studer plugins. That's why softube is in (B) and that's the only 15 ips stereo studer in taupe and I didn't want to add in eq variables in the UAD that the others didn't have. Plugin devs can be funny in shootouts and have a tendency to blame any variables. It's worse enough they aren't modelling the exact same studer but I just treated it as close as I could to the tape which was go into it with peaks at -6 and hit the tape hard without going into the red. In youtube as soon as you add in other variables the excuses start coming in. If I was to use the UAD in a mix I would tweak every seperate instance and if using taupe I'd pick a flatter response but even when I did my own tests with taupe in different settings I still didn't get the same feel as I got from UAD. In the end the tape thing is all still very subtle and very very subjective
Great video! Thanks for taking the time to test all this out! I’ve had various tape plugins over the years and my favourite so far is magnetite by black rooster audio, would love know how close it sounds to the real deal tho.
Im kind of a bit wary to do a part 2 as after hearing slate and taupe, I have a suspicion that most other tape plugins will follow suit and ill end up disappointing lots of people haha
@@PaulThird yeah I get you, although I can honestly say the same, I had slate VTM and softube tape for a month and really wasn’t impressed but then I got the black rooster bundle on a wim because it was on sale and discovered that I really love their tape!
@@PaulThird yeah haha, I would be very interested in that if you did do it because I haven’t seen black rooster in many plug-in comparisons maybe as they are a smaller company but I think they’re making amazing plugins!
nothing really touches the UAD tape plugins in terms of 'feel' as you say. The Studer plugin itself can sound very different with different tape stock / speed and calibration too. The UAD Ampex 102 is absolutely magic on busses and mixes, nothing does what it does IMO. The only other tape plugin I really use (and I have most) is the IK multimedia 'Tape Machine' series, they are very good, they use a combination of sampling and algorithms. As much of an Acustica fan as I am, I never got into Taupe, it doesn’t do it right, can be an interesting lofi effect though. Part of that volume increase with the Slate VTM is the amount of low end it adds, you can can fix this a little by lowering the “bass aligntment” setting, regardless the Slate can make things mushy… it’s funny because in their original marketing of VTM they took a swing at the UAD tape plugins… not a good look.
Little bit late to this video, enjoyed nevertheless! I picked B in the final shootout, whilst listening in BD 770 pros 250ohm. After you pointed out the guitar & cymbals width and clarity, it seemed B had the best stereo spread, whilst balancing depth and warmth in the low end. Tape just seems to make things more ‘natural’ sounding, which is kind of bizarre. A) was definitely more balanced sounding than C, but had to listen a couple of times to make sure. Thank you for the video, very insightful. Cheers 🍻
Wow, that was crazy. Honestly? I immediately leaned into B, but then heard C and thought, "Okay, B is 2% better than C, but A is right out." So puzzling how finnicky that can be. Feel like I'm willing to bet I'm the only B > C > A lol.
Mix:Analog is the best of the bunch... for obvious reasons... but it's also expensive and often has issues which make it even more expensive... lol... but it's the only one that ACTUALLY gets that tape sound IMO.
I know. The bouncing thing kills me. 15 minute session and you have a 5 minute bounce. 10 mins to ensure you've got the right setting. Constant sweating hoping the bounce doesn't lapse the session time 😅 haha
@@PaulThird one word: "Rewinding" 😂 😂 I just push finished mixes through at 3 or 4 different gain settings then volume match and choose my fave. Such an incredible sound. Between that and the FREE 1176 I'm on M:A nonstop. Amazing idea... But lol... You don't need to rewind a compressor. 😂
@@PaulThird I'm used to paying for it in studios... But not for paying for non-tape machines to 'Rewind' - which I assume is just a bug. But saying all of this... It's still worth the hassle. One of the best kept secrets in music production land.
Spoiler Alert******** I just shot out IK Media's Tape 99, 440, 24 and 80 and Black Rooster's Mag set on Blue Tape with +3 Bias at 15ips...and guess what.....Acustica Audio....sounds the same as the other two...I...matter of fact they are a DSP nightmare...but....IK Media actually has the best sounding tapes.....they seem to be the masters at satuarion......smh....your better off using your favorite regular plugins you like on a good mix...that you prefer...and then use 3-4 acustica audio plugins...to put analog polish on your sound and mix you colored the way you want it......seems like only certain Acustica Audio plugins sound good on master bus...and I can tell you, in some ways....as far as sounding natural...IK media sounds better than acustica audio or UAD.....
i really like the slate VTM, it does compress a bit, but i don't think it makes stuff feel small at all i use it on the master bus most of the time. i used it once in every channel with the console emulation on every channel and didnt like it, i might have over done it.
@@PaulThird kind of, VTM gives you a low mid bump and some high mid stuff.. plus the low bump, that level bump i cant get with other plugin combos easily, VTM just does that very easy, thats why i use it on the master bus only, just gotta keep an eye on the needle to steer away from over compressing
I use USD’s LUNA DAW, they have a Studer extension that’s not a plug-in but integrated into the mixer, I think I’m going to buy it based what your saying👍 love your vids! Keep It Up! I don’t have access to my head phones right now so I can’t make fair comparison.
UAD interface + BM15A's + BeyerDynamic 797. Honestly, couldn't tell the difference in ANY of those tests. They just sounded like standard loops of the same sample. I would have blamed the RUclips compression if people weren't commenting they could easily tell the difference. Could it be my age (46)? Still, last time I had my ears checked, I was above the average (of my age of course). Being unable to hear any difference at all is kind of worrying me.
I've got the Studer and use it a lot! For my 2 buss though I use the Ampex more! Try that one if you don't have it! It's excellent! The UAD tape plugins are the ONLY reason I bought into their ecosystem! I could not get that TAPE sound from anything else. I only bought a Solo card as well for $200 back in the day. Still have it. I just use it for those few plugins. Although I do have a few more plugs that it came with, and some I've gotten over the years. So I should update to a larger one, but the prices are too ridiculous for me to do that! The Quad has not changed since it came out with the 2nd iteration sometime before 2008ish. It was $499 and that was a lot for me back then. Now it's $800. That's just crazy when the only thing that's changed is the brand new one's outer shell, and the Thunderbolt 3 input/output port. I've never been a Mac user so I use the PCIE cards which are the fastest and best way IMO, as it plugs right into the motherboard! It's very sad that we've gotten away from that and all interfaces nowadays use external things like ub2 and ub3 for Windows(which is inferior to Thunderbolt) and Thunderbolt for Mac. Sadly Windows-those people who make it are all communist asshats just like Apple which sucks, will not update their drivers/software for professional use so it's always a pain in the ass to use it for audio or video work over Apple! But you can get way better hardware for 1/4 of the price. For instance the $10,000 Apple computer for Video editing will cost you just over $2500 to build it yourself on Windows. Or it used to until this past year or so with Covid and the prices now are from the companies gouging us and blaming it on Covid which is false btw! Especially MSI...those guys are crooks to the 10th degree!
actually, everything has changed many times since you got in. From Quad to Quad MK2 to Quad X and now the X4...dynamic range is at 130db, netter interfaces with TB3. Also Apple will not update their BLABL For professional use is just uneducated talk, sounding like a 90 year old. They have everything built in, and it works, No pro would ever use a PC, they are based on 1990ies Kernels. Nothing you can build on windows can come close to even a 1000 dollar M! silicon MacBook Air running 200 tracks. You're delusional if you think you can talk down Apple. It;s like a Prius driver from 2008 yelling at Tesla ...hey I will race you, I am angry, I am better I have more money than you, damn you Tesla....
It's really subtle. I picked A and B as better. Didn't have a huge pref between those two, maybe A by a hair. I was thinking about getting Taupe so this was helpful for me to not get it, as I already own UAD Studer, Softube Tape, and VTM (from subscription). Your description with your hands is actually probably the best one I've seen for tracking tape lol. Now that I hear it, it's almost like the transients are extended a bit longer so they have the space to hit harder, even though overall level is probably down. It's a specific kind of compression that emphasizes the transient by extending it. At least that's how it sounds. Mastering tape I feel is more obvious. UAD's Ampex ATR just makes every track knock harder. It's one of the few plugins on master bus that I consider "auto-better".
Yeah no way id be choosing to record everything to tape haha too much hassle, time and money for not enough return. BTW I'm glad somebody understood my hand thing. Sometimes I think it's just me when I say what I hear 😂
@@PaulThird Oh yeah absolutely. So much hassle with analog tape, especially since it's a "every track cumulative" thing. Between Softube and UAD, I'm well covered in this department. Re: hands, you never know what analogy will click with someone! Multitrack tape has always been something I struggled to really pick out and hear, found it hard to conceptualize what I was hearing.
I wanna Plus 1 on the hand gestures. I often use physical gestures to express between say: something Bumping vs Pounding vs Banging vs Bouncing vs Popping vs Snapping. The words convey something, but the physical movement conveys feeling.
UAD FTW again! You've got great ears, Paul. And I'm not just saying that because we usually pick the same thing 😆 Great content. Have you tried UAD's Ampex ATR-102 master tape?
Interesting thing is. In the poll the UAD won by a landslide. It went uad 63%, Studer 22% & dry 15% haha I was very surprised that so many people thought the dry was the studer
FYI the IK multimedia was planned to be included but its only allowing me to demo IK t-racks as a whole so as I demo'd the Dynamu it basically acted as my entire demo and I've tried but I can't demo any t-racks related IK plugs 🤔
Ah, noooo :( Thanks anyway. Your channel is great! Thanks for all of this.
🤓🤓🤓
That is a shame because I found the IK Revox to be closest to Mix Analog's Studer.
Yep... The Studer emulation did not sound closest to the real one.
It just goes to show how different analog tolerances are.. Especially in tape machines!
If you get in a bind with the IK stuff again in the future, I own most of them and can coordinate some processing for you. I may get Magenta for the Massive Passive, but at 96K I can get the VariMu/DynaMu to null down to -40 to -50 dB. I'm still testing though.
I chose A. I was surprised that the actual Studer didnt sound as good to me. I have the UAD tape plugins and Ill probably use them a lot more now. Its funny that we're always looking for better when what we already have is more than good enough to do the job well. Great shoot out Paul. Thanks.
🤓🤓
I chose A as well
It's all about the state of the machine, tape type, bias, calibration demag of the head, so this test its meaningless. And -6db compare to what?
I liked the UAD and the dry most of the time. In the final test, I again preferred the UAD and dry. The Studer did add a nice snap to the snare but there was a slight loss in overall energy. But for pretty much all the tests, I preferred the dry. I've done tests like this and what I've found is that once you take something already mixed in the digital domain and then pass the tracks (or busses) through console channels, or something, there are things gained but also things lost. To me (and to at least one of my clients) there's an immediacy to a digital mix that gets lost when simply summing it through analog. The top and bottom does get sweeter, but everything in between seems to get softened a little too much. Vocals become less intense and some of the intelligibility of the bass goes away. But this does depend on the program material. A better test would be to mix something from scratch through analog and then compare. Of course, these won't be one to one comparisons because you'll be making different decisions based on how you're hearing things, but it will show a truer difference between what analog does vs what digital does.
A for sure. C had weird bass phasing issues and B sounded like it moved behind my head, probably also related to phase. Gotta pickup that UAD Studer plugin!
100% agree about the UAD Studer in the second blind test. I had the same reaction you did.
🤓🤓
Paul (see previous comments) - your videos are amazing because we can truly hear each plugin individually and see what its doing - so we can judge what to use in different circumstances - no one else really does this in a shoot out . Im excited about this mix project because we can see how all the elements from the individual tracks then feed into the MB - and we'll see how the choices hold up ... when its done, we can see about dropping the UAD (or real Studer) on the finished mix and see if its truly the icing ... onward and upwards ...
I'm really happy with the session idea as its giving me more ideas and giving everything better context 🤓 I'm really excited to see how it all transpires with all the shootout ideas I have
I picked UAD, on the last and every shootout. It's an unbelivable plugin, and the ATR is astonishing as well, nothing can beat it on the stereo buss.
🤓🤓🤓
@@PaulThird snakkkoooilllll drive up that preamp looooooool
ok but isn't the STR102 considered best for Mix Buss, and the Studer more for individual tracks? That's what most UAD owners say., at least from the reviews. In short - which one do I have to throw my money at?
@@levondarratt787 that's the classic use of the original machines, multi track against master track. We can mix the plugins and use both for tracks or for stereo bus, testing which one sounds better in that particular project. For example, I often use UAD Oxide on every track of my project [which is low dsp demand], then I test between Studer and Ampex on the Stereo Buss and choose the best. For example, Tchad Blake has the Studer on his Stereo Buss, other famous producers has Ampex, so it's personal choice. I bought Ampex, and studied it for months, then bought Studer. Demo both, and choose your favourite to start.
@@TheMonkBeatsOne ok makes sense. and dang... demo / study for months...we really have to learn to hear those subtle differences..
I chose A! Some UAD plugin are for me worth every single penny as they bring something to the table that very few other plugins does. Even if other 3rd party plugins may sounds good, there is just something about using a tape emulator that has official STUDER A800 name printed on it(gives me confidence) . I also think Ampex ATR-102 is very special and offers me something no other piece of equipment (except perharps a real Ampex tape machine) can give me.
you should check toneboosters reelbus 4, if you haven't yet.
There was so many I had to limit it haha my list started off at like 15 different tape plugs 😅
All TB plugs are tops!
Dope Video.. Since i sold my UAD i sometimes feel i miss out of the Tape Sims and this video was great to show me otherwise. Ive used Softube for years now and the shaping is great, especially the Crosstalk knob is pretty magical. Interestingly i preferred Softube over UAD in the shootout, but probably its a sound im used to now. The end results was most interesting, i played over 3 times with PMC monitors with eyes closed and all 3 times i preferred C, B close second and A i lost the vibe. Additionally when i had UAD i did prefer the ATR every-time over Struder. Thanks for your hard work.
🤓🤓
B did something nice to the snare.
blind: I liked A>C>B. knowing what they were I like A>B>C. A just sounded more vintage to me, less separated. But I was only listening on laptop speakers. Thank you for the shootout!
I also did a shootout on plugins to the mix analog studer. None of them seem to get that vibe the real tape machine has. The closest one out of my plugins was the "reelbus" from TB. Set it to 30ips professional and it sounds pretty close but still not the same. The harmonic distortion from the real tape machine is so smooth in comparison to the plugins. Really silky smooth. It immediately gives me that polished classic 80s 90s vibe on the actual tape machine. I know they can do this with plugins but I haven't heard it yet from the tape machine plugins that exist at this moment.
Tbh im a bit confused why anybody would want to print to tape in this modern day in regards to a full mix. There's a really good comparison with a studer mix compared to burl converter mix and you lose a lot of with tape. It's narrower, less high end, less detail and clarity and more distortion. Don't get me wrong, tape has a sound and can work for a certain context but for everyday mixing I'd go for clarity every day. That's why I'd never use tape for mixing. I'll use tape on Acoustic guitars to round off the high end and transients and stuff but it's more of an effect than a must have
@@PaulThird it's mostly for the vibe. Good master tape is pretty clean and it smooths out the frequencies, makes everything sound a bit more natural. I like to use it when I'm doing something that sounds like a particular era. So if I'm doing old school hip hop and want it to sound like an old Dr Dre record from the early 90s, or if I'm going for that Paula Abdul or Phil Collins sound for an old school RnB or Pop song. Yeah, I don't use tape on modern sounding stuff. Modern should sound a bit more edgy I think. 😊
@@PaulThird oh! And using tape is great for synthwave. Really makes everything feel 80s, in a good nostalgic way.
Yeah, that's what I hear most is that many engineer's only use it for a certain nostalgic sound these days. Most sit and just gather dust haha I remember I pinched an old revox tape machine when the radio shack was closing and I remember staring at it thinking.. Wtf am I gonna do with it now 🤣
@@PaulThird I thought about getting an old cassette tape deck for the same reason. 😂 Yeah it would just sit around for me too. 😂
Picked the Studer at the end, because I liked it overall, but it actually made some elements too bright for my tastes.
🤓
If I'm honest, all I'm hearing is 'Santa baby, hurry down the chimney tonight' 😄
It is pretty similar haha
If you're missing the top end in Acustica Taupe, well, it comes with a channel strip to tweak it up.
It's not the studer though if I was to do that, but I get your point. I had to be fair with this comparison. If I was to bring in console eq curves it would muck up the comparison
Whats really amazing about the Softube is that its zero latency and has an incredibly low CPU hit. For my system its about 8 instances of Tape = 1% CPU.
Yeah especially as I've been told the ik one is a proper cpu hog
But it brings aliasing. I loved Softube but I don't get why they are not adding x4 oversampling
@@jno8039 i read somewhere that softube has default oversampling enabled on their plugins
UAD is FANTASTIC and cpu friendly.Taupe needs the EQ to match UAD's thingy.Use them both etc etc
🤓🤓
I only just saw this I picked the Studer - and you know why - I felt the elements were just cleared - specially noticeable on the hats which seem to disappear without the real tape. I think the plugins are fine as you could adjust mix elements for this to some degree, but the real tape doesn’t smudge as much. Great video Paul!
🤓
Hey Paul, really love your videos.. I was extremely surprised, almost felt wrong, but I basically preferred the DRY mix almost all the way. I really love tape, but I think in this case it was such a subtlety, I probably unconsciously went for the less expensive scenario ahah. No but really, with tape I look for sonic realness/three-dimensionality/thickness, the real Studer tape definitely added that. but I think It was too subtle for me, especially given the fact you utilised real good productions/samples, which brings me to a serious point: in my experience, you get the most out of tape when you record straight on it at the beginning. (duh?!)
Nothing will ever defeat tape, we kinda all know that, cause that's not about binary digits. Also a truthful tracking (here's comes analog) of a sound source matters the most in my opinion. All the rest is just as you said more than once: all subjective.
Cheers
Nice video as ever. I've noticed you like a lot of polished, tickly, high end in your mix, I'm actually the opposite way inclined and for that reason i love Taupe!!
Dunno why but I am partial to some nice crispy top end Haha I'm quite particular about it actually 😅.. Or my hearings shit in the top end and I mix brighter to compensate. I had to tell my mastering engineer to reign in the darkness of my last single as it wasnt bright enough for me 😅
Interesting. Definitely don't miss the tape hiss of the old analog tape.
I worked as a full-time recording engineer from 1985 to 2000. I always hated 2-track tape effects, with the exception of a Studer 1/2-inch machine running at 15-ips. That provided a fat, smooth, low end bump that you’d be hard pressed to get anywhere else.
1/4-inch always just sucked. All it was is signal loss. You lose noticeable lows on 1/4-inch 30-ips(which was standard), and you get a little loss of fast transients, highest frequencies, and clarity.
To me it was never a plus. Sure, you lose some of the lows that vinyl requires you to lose, but the vinyl mastering engineer is going to do that anyway. Plus, we had CD’s. Why lose anything?
1/2-inch was a lot better on every measure, except price of tape, and compatibility at facilities you might send that tape to. Everyone I knew who was super serious about sound quality was mixing down to 1/2-inch.
I bought a Mitsubishi X-80A digital 1/4-inch reel-to-reel machine that allowed you to edit the tape with a razor blade! And since I worked in Chicago during the massive dance music explosion there, I made THOUSANDS of razor blade edits on that machine. Mind you, this is YEARS before recording to burnable CDs was a thing.
This was years before SoundTools was a thing.
Yeah, before there was ProTools, it was called SoundTools. That was the original name. Stereo recording only.
The whole “sound of tape” thing came mostly from the MULTITRACK. And the approach was totally different.
If you wanted a high quality recording of the source sound, then you followed all the rules with your gain staging and you’d get the best representation the machine could deliver. Always with losses similar to how I described 1/4-inch 30-ips.
But if you hit the tape HARDER then you could get the compression and tone changes that we know as saturation.
Worked great on ROCK and some dance music and some hip-hop.
One of the most useful aspects of the tape machines and tape saturation is that it diminishes fast sharp transients. The type of percussive elements of sound that can be annoying or fatiguing to listen to. Like percussion instruments, bells, and Yamaha pianos. This is because the process of recording a sound magnetically onto tape is a process that takes time. And little fast, short, and spikey transients would usually be lost in the process to a degree.
It varied by tape brand and formulation, and also by the specific machine you were using and how it was calibrated. As a working engineer you had to be totally familiar with ALL of this. It was just a basic matter of knowing how to use the tools.
When digital came along, the preservation of those fast, short, spikey transients was a big part of what made people describe digital as “hyper realistic” or “sterile”.
The fast transients caused fatigue for a lot of listeners. They found listening to digital recordings more tiring. Even tedious.
D-to-A converters are much better now, and we are all just a lot more used to the sound.
Bottom line: most tape artifacts sucked. Most didn’t help in hardly any way. But a few of the artifacts made magic. It was always a love-hate relationship.
I’m not so interested in a plugin simulating 1/4-inch tape at 30ips like these Studer 2-tracks.
Gimme a Studer A800 24-track calibrated to +12! Now THAT’S the tape saturation we are all after!
🤘😆🤘
man I'd love to see a part 2 with Satin, airwindows ToTape4, TAIP, possibly the tape saturtion in Harrison Mixbus as well
I know this is an old video but if you ever think about revisiting the topic I would be fascinated to hear a comparison of hardware tape emulations vs the uad studer. In particular the neve 542’s
Nah. After hearing a real studer I have no urge to look at anything involving tape
Glad u pointed out the thing about slate auto gain, it used to be my fav tape plugin until one day I properly gain matched it and compared it with other tape plugins XD
🤓🤓
I chose C. Thanks Paul. That was fun.
🤓🤓
picked C inthe last blind test, sounded more natural to me
Hi Paul - A. UAD, Sounded the best to my ears on the entire mix, by far. However, we have no way of knowing what tape stock or how the actual Studer was maintained etc. If you had the actual tape deck in your studio and could fool around with settings, bias, tape, speed, levels etc.(my knowledge of tape is limited) it might have sounded better than the plugin, who knows. On a side note the other one that sounds very good to my ears is HEAT, on tape setting (turn knob to left), which is a proprietary ad on for Pro Tools HDX. It was developed by the guy from Crane Song Dave Hill and like the UAD ads some space, width and presence on a mix. Thanks for doing the shootout.
I always forget about HEAT and I used it on my last single haha
okay... Why not... Thanks for the feelings here.
You inspired me to AB a guitar track in one of my songs for the UAD to the MixAnalog Studer. And wow I'm glad. I tweaked the UAD to match the MixAnalog best I could. I did 6 tests: 0-500Hz solo, 500-1k solo, 1k-5k solo, 5k-20k solo, Full EQ Guitar Solo, Full Band Mix.
0-500 I preferred the Tape because it was denser and richer. I was 3/3 in correctly identifying the Tape.
500-1k I preferred UAD because it was thicker and more present. I was 2/4 in my guesses.
1k-5k I preferred UAD because it was smoother. Tape sounded rougher, more like a "toy", but also more present. So I wondered how it'd sit in context. I guessed wrong first time and then I was 3/3 in guessing.
5k-20k I preferred UAD because it had more sparkle, more "magic", but I wondered if it might sound cheap in context. Tape sounded duller. I guessed wrong first time and then I was 4/4 in these guesses.
Guitar solo full EQ I felt both sounded good but I preferred the Tape (after I volume compensated the Tape to be 1.3db quieter) because the UAD sounded muddier. I was fairly surprised by this. I described the UAD as "woodier", sturdy, but also duller. I guessed 3/3 once I figured out which was which. I was clueless on my first guess.
In the full mix I hands down preferred the Tape because it felt more alive, more present. More of that "tape vibe" that I'm used to. The Highs seem to jump out of the speakers with that tape.
So all in all, a very surprising and valuable AB experiment. I'm stoked to do more of these! Thanks for the inspiration!
🤓🤓
@@PaulThird i 2nd that haha too much fun
There's something about the Softube Tape that's so 70s and evocative. A lot like being in a posh uncle's front room at chrimbo and getting your greasy little fingers all over his HiFi while all the adults are getting pissed up in the back room. Type B for me at 15/30 ips for instruments and busses.
Might stick a project through that Analog Works if I've got some pennies and fafteen mannats spare soon.
Just remember you pay for bouncing as well so if it's like a 5 minute track mind and work fast if it's 15 minute session. If your track is set up right though then it should be alright.
Ouch that hurts..I use Slate VTM on everything. Gonna have to go back and check it all.
It's all taste and opinion at the end of the day. If you like it then you like it
Interesting comparison. I found the Studer to have a rather subtle effect overall in the final comparison, but if you can push the levels and get it to saturate and compress a bit more, it might be worth using mix:analog to put drums or bass through real tape as it might equal or surpass even the best tape plugins.
it's actually a lil bit off from what i imagine... the single printed track using studer all sound more steady, stable and weighty compared to the original tracks, i feel like it's draging the original sound downwards. But in the final test, the most "weighty" sound, in my opnion, is C, the studer actually opens up the whole mix, makes the side information more perceivable and of course, more musical. the UAD opens the sound as well but more likely upwards, maybe like a firework into the sky.. appreciate your work Paul!
🤓🤓
I grabbed the Softube yesterday for 50% off. I've got no reason to renew my Slate subscription now lol.
🤓🤓🤓 Yeah I really need to cancel mine.. Like today 😅
Hi Paul, great video. I have to admit all the way through I kept choosing the Dry version! Then on the final showdown I picked the real Studer. It just sounded fuller and dare I say it...warmer.
🤓🤓
A definitely wins. Something about the clarity, separation, and transient punch. Very surprised that B was the Studer. I was sure that B was the dry since it lost that "forward-ness" that the other examples had. I'm listening on 16" MBP '19 speakers though, so anything in the low mid/bass range is probably not translating well.
Great shootout, very informative!
It's been great looking through the comments already. Interesting that another engineer said the same as yourself about the studer 🤓
A with C a little behind, B sounds flat in comparison!
TBH I just discovered your channel and I really like it! This is the second video I watched so far and I can really relate to what you have to say! Keep going!
Second video... You have a lot to catch up on! Haha good to know you are enjoying the vids 🤓
I had picked B but I thought that was the dry one. It sounded the clearest and most under control to me
I've had a lot of people think the studer was the dry haha
After carefully listening for 4 times I was sure B sounded the best before seeing the results. And thank god I was right because I was starting to doubt my listening skills lol ..and for me the difference between them was very subtle and almost subjective. This hole blind test kindda made me listen more "feeling the vibe" than to analytical frequency wise.
🤓🤓
Well that was unexpected. I have the UAD system, but not the Studer plugin. I have ended up preferring the UAD version over all of the others. Thank you for making this video!
The UAD won comfortably in the poll as well 🤓
I liked A the best. Something about that bass guitar in particular sounded really satisfying on that one.
🤓🤓
"Heeeellllo!" v. "I hope you're doing marvelously well!" 😄
First all of dude you are the real MVP!! From the last test I could definitely tell which one was the dry and much preferred the other two. When it came to UAD vs the real Studer I think the difference wasn't night and day. Perhaps there'd be a bigger difference if you really pushed them hard into clipping but in this context I think UAD really came through, though there's definitely a bit extra special sauce from the real Studer, like in the low mids and width, but definitely not the kind of difference that would make the price of admission and maintenance worth it in my opinion. Would be really interested in hearing how UAD vs the real Studer compare in more heavy handed scenarios like driving the heck out of some drums or really distorting a vocal track, that's kinda thing! Also we need to get one of these two companies to add some analog tape or tape-esque emulation (fatso, mas, rnd 542, etc) to their roster!
I agree. The differences between the 2 are so subjective that owning and recording your tracks through tape is just a hassle and waste of money in my book.
Plus dealing with the noise as well. However I may do another test at the end of the session comparing puting a mix through an ampex compared to plugins to see how a mastering setup would compare 🤓
The AX102 N4 library from Cupwise is amazing.
Yeah, it lives on my mix bus.
I'm thinking about a part 2 so may get in touch with Tim and see if he wants to include it 🤓
Nice discussion! Thanks Paul!!
🤓🤓
GREAT stuff Paul keep goin love all your videos! The snake oil impression had me on the ground laughing ahahaha
Eet iz sheet.. Eet iz sheet 😂😂
@@PaulThird i watch some of his vids and like the guy but the premise there seems to be that if something can't be almost instantly satisfying to dial in having only taken a perfunctory glance at the manual then it's not worth bothering with. that seems to slide too easily into the general attitude these days. oh no i'm turning into a fully paid up member of the Back In My Day Brigade. it's over.
Totally I have to sit with many plugins for a while to vibe with them. A lot have learning curves
You can hit red with a tape machine and it will compress your tracks but if your going in clean make sure you where hitting it15 ips. 30 is too clean and doesn’t sound like tape but it also doesn’t sound digital.
All tapes were at 15 ips 🤓
I wish I hadn't picked B. There still seems to be a gap between real tape and plugins. May I add: I watched that video on TV with its built-in speakers.
The UAD studer won in the poll by a landslide 🤓 was really interesting to watch it unfold
have you tried timp's j37? thanks for all these vids they're great and i appreciate your anti-sales-mania view. cheers
Yeah a long time ago
@@PaulThird do you prefer uad's tape to timp's?
I didn't properly shoot it out as all the instances needed for Tim's annoyed me. You couldn't do a full mix with Tim's cpu wise
@@PaulThird aaah good to know thanks. I may stick with using the MixAnalog's tape machines.
@@PaulThird But I'm inspired by your vid and the comments to do a proper A/B with UAD's vs. the real machiens to see which suits my material better.
What I really need is mixing Sunday to Saturdays. 😄
Just me in your attic making shootouts 😂
The real Studer tape sounded like it had a slight bump in the low mids. The UAD was by far the best sounding all-around. I actually use it all the time in LUNA. Very interesting comparison, thanks.
🤓🤓
i preferred dry in almost all cases 🤔 i guess i don’t like tape as much as i thought i did
🤓
Hi Paul, big respect for explaining the effect each tape emulation plugin are doing to the input source. I have a 16track tascam at home for tracking and Softube Tape on my MBuss. Works a treat. Great vids keep up the good work bro.
🤜🤛
I think the magic of taupe is all the possible tape choices.
i picked B, for more energy in base.. i guessed A was uad and C was dry during test.. I have UAD studer and tried mix analog's studer, prefer mix analog.. don't know why.. i want to rather use plugins..
I use the softube religiously for faking univibe sounds with the pitch stability and crosstalk. When you threw in the actual Studer it sounded like someone went in and switched the whole input list to ribbon mics, such a pleasant darkness to it. I have all the uad tape's and I've tried acustica/slate etc, but (don't laugh) I actually found the Aberrant sketch cassette plug is the only thing that does the high freq thing right, although it can be over the top. Would love to see you do something with the UAD Oceanway plug, that thing has alot of .... stealthy capabilities.
LOL, I did the same with the Slate, Sounded to muddy and dirty. Stopped using it about 6 years ago, Just Bought Taupe cause the Summer sale is on. It has its uses and combined with the Eq and Comp. Its a nice tool set. You really have to know where all these curves are. I wish they organized them from transparent to creative.
I've got taupe but yeah it's just too much choice haha I should really give it a proper go and try out different varients but the studer sound did put me off a bit. That's why I use reelight pro from tone empire. Good amount of options but not too much. Oversampling as well
@@PaulThird D8 and D9 is the most transparent and closest to that UAD studder. But still exploring. The HPF is really great for creative applications
Crazy, I picked B, A, C last. Sucks cause I'm never going to record to actual tape 🥲
In the final test, I liked A&B most, C least. C sounded heavier in the low mids than the other two to me, and I usually prefer clarity over weight in such styles as this. Strangely, perhaps, in the first three tests, I preferred 1. Slate 2. UAD 3. Dry. These inconsistencies undoubtedly disqualify me. I'm listening on Sonarworks IDReference corrected Dynaudio Core 59s.
And check out Tape Face....blows the three or 4 of those away....Tape Face v3...new level
UAD it's pretty awesome, second place Taupe from AA, softube it's a bit flat to my ears, now I need to find some great nebula tape emulation 📼📼
I'm seeing the cupwise being mentioned now
I straight up cannot hear the difference between a lot of these. They all sound great...so it would ultimately come down to price and I can get the Softube Tape for $50 USD which is a bargain compared some of these.
🤓🤓🤓
I can’t go for days on this comment but I have the Luxury to choose between tape and emulation on a daily basis and I always choose to print mix stems through actual tape. The main thing to remember is to set and Match the tape inputs and Source inputs to catch the VU sweet spot. That is the true way of getting “that sound”. It’s entirely different on every song since the mix bus can either be In the box Hybrid or 80/20 Analogue/Box, thus needing adjustments verses a template. 25+years in studio (6 years on Producers Engineers Wing Board of The Recording Academy, Grammy, Platinum Plaques, Gold, Tele Award, 75+ Billboards.
I’m not trying to say your wrong but if I really truly wanted to I could find a session where the final sounded identical to tape but over all after all the years of artists, producers, Tv and Movie sessions Tape wins every time.
This is very informative and I’ll be doing some more experiments and comparisons of my own, I’ve seen how you total obliterate anyone who doesn’t put their money where there mouth is but, I feel confident with all my Accolades I have a good handle on what gear does and doesn’t do.
Keep up the good work. These videos are very very well put together.
It's been a very interesting one for me. The poll is so in favour of the UAD which I didn't expect. I thought it would be way closer. Also the dry and the studer being so close to many who thought either was the other. Thats what surprised me the most but really it shouldn't that much as when I spoke to Tim Petherick about when he sampled the modded j37 he had he told me that good tape machines are actually quite clean if you set them up right and maintain them. The studer actually reminded him of the J37.
The UAD to me just compliments this specific track more in my opinion but was a great experience for me none the less 🤓
However, it's one track and one tape machine.
I could take mix analogs telefunken tape machine and run it through a metal mix and loads of people prefer that over the plugs.
I just see them all as tools now. No one right answer or one rules all. Just whatever works best for the source
Santa baby... Hurry down the chimney tonight 😉
Blind C was my favorite (wasn't trying to guess which was which, just which I preferred). Maybe I don't need my tape plugins after all!
Yeah it is pretty subtle. I only use tape on Acoustic guitars now
C sounded the most clear and natural
After further sound shoot outs....seems like...IK Media hands down are the best Tapes..they sound the most natural and open on the mix......you want some saturation glue...but you DONT WANT...your tape...changing the coloring added from level mixing, eqing and Compression...that sets the tone of the mix....you dont want the tape coming behind that and giving it a new town...AA Tape emulation is to blaring....it takes over your current color of the mix.....open and transparent saturation sounds better...matter of fact...IK Media...PA Karater and Analog Black box...hands down smoke the rest......
just thought I should mention, that Slate defaults with a preset calibration...especially the low end, so that's most likely what you were hearing with the increase in level, so you need to go into the settings first and zero it out in order to get a fairer comparison.
But then it wouldn't sound like what it's meant to sound like. Thats the intended sound of the VTM
@@PaulThird"it wouldn't sound like what it's meant to sound like"? So in other words, those switches, dials and bias settings aren't supposed to be used? That's just strange logic. It would be the same as saying that every reverb, delay, eq or any ofther effect plugin's "intended" sound is the default it opens with? So Slate's VCC plugin should just be left on the SSL 4k setting? Because that's what it defaults to...so I guess that must be it's "intended sound" ummmmm okey dokey....
No what I mean is that the bass calibration is in a hidden menu. It's an optional tweakable extra if you are not liking the modelled sound of the studer. But as slate uses it, it's more to reduce the bass bump. It's not a by default thing.
If I touched the hidden calibration menu I would have created the variable that it was my fault that the slate sounds the way it does in that video.
Either way I watched that section back and I said I felt that the slate lacked weight.
Which is funny though as it comes with an inheritant big bass bump. So I wouldn't have reduced any low end. The low end calibration wouldn't have brought back any transients or made the mix sound any bigger which was my biggest issue with the slate
@@PaulThird ah, ok...I understand what you're meaning now 🙂...one characteristic of tape though, is that if you're hitting it with more low end (like the bass bump) it will saturate sooner and reveal more compression artifacts, which may be what is smearing the transients somewhat...I'll try some tests here myself and check it out....but just to be clear...I actually liked the hardware best as well...(I started my recording career on tape 25yrs ago) and so I appreciate seeing videos showing the advantages of tape. Not just from a transient and warmth perspective, but also from an imaging perspective (pun intended)
I chose A, because of the horns I think
🤓
I preferred the dry at the end hahaha... interestingly enough.
Quite a few have 🤓
Crazy how I preferred the dry to the real studer tape... I got my UAD v the other day after several years for £32 hahah worth the wait for that kinda bargain.
🤓🤓
Thanks mate...great stuff
Also Honrable mention to BeatSkillz Reelight PRO...sounds just as good as these wayy...more dsp freindly and open sounding
More transient technically is inaccurate. Tape actually reduces/compresses the transient which makes you hear more of the body of the sound.
I graded the same 1.UAD, 2dry, 3TAUPE. I think it's because, like with Pultec, the UADs sound has the most weigh. It just sounds massive like adding a bit of the Decapitator on parallel ch. But is it the most accurate emulation? I don't know I've never listened to an actual Pultec outside the of hi end studio with a lot of preamps and sound going trough an SSL E and what have you. I would have to bring it home and even then if I use different sounding amps it will perform differently in terms of nuances we are trying to distinguish here. For example - Is the electrical grounding in your house or a building done like it's done in professional music studios?? Tape should round up and smooth outh al the Hi Fq and Lo Dist. transients made by analogue gear make the whole track a bit more raw but more natural like.. You can only feel it, I can't explain it especially to these generations that had never listened to a tape cassettes. Some nicely produced and mastered album on some high quality gear, like they used to be, with components in a row: record player, preamp with eq, amp, cassette player and later also cd. Even on tape cassettes with 45db dynamic span you could hear the depth and the clearness of a sound even with hf tape noise underneath. They improved it later with Dolby and different iron emulsions for tape. So my opinion Is go with what feels the best to you, more accurate emulation can sound worst than some other emulation in your particular situation. It even rhymes.
There's so many variables. Even when you consider the studer is going through the burl converters that makes a difference. All we can do is compare differences in our setup and see how close the plugins get 🤓 I've no doubt that passing electrical currents through different systems will cause different sounds compared to chaining plugins. If I think about it too much though it gives me a sore head 😂
@@PaulThird not to mention that every peace of, especially old, analogue gear sounds a tiny little bit different from another unit of the same brand and model. No two transformers have the identical output...and so on...🤯
I have the Slate VTM and I love it!
🤓🤓
@@PaulThird That's really interesting, I didn't do the test until this morning when I could run it through my Kali In-5's and my honest opinion was that only two stood out to me, I didn't like the Softube, sounded a bit dead to me and amazingly the one I liked most was the Slate, the opposite to you! To me it just had more character, but it maybe that I'm just used to the sound it makes. Thanks for the test though, excellent. Just got the SSL Channel Strip 2 and I really like it especially as it comes free with the 360 console software which to me is a game changer for speeding up workflow, now I'm dreading the moment when you post a video showing how it totally messes up my mixes! 😜
A sounds most compressed and warm. B sounds a bit fresher and C is most dynamic and alive. I was between B and C, liking the glue of B but also liking the dynamics of C. So I bet it depends on the taste and vibe in the end whether I choose one or another tape plugin or not at all. Tape on individual instruments is nice tho. UAD is indeed very nice. Which setting did you use? And also which one on Taupe did you use? nice video!
A is UAD, B is Studer and C is unprocessed 🤓
The UAD was all default bar the tape which was the GP9 if I'm right. I didn't tweak the internal settings which surprised me how good it sounded just straight out the vox.
Taupe was the stereo studer A820 setting (C1) im pretty sure
@@PaulThird C1 on taupe is not good for mastering, takes too much tops off. Best options are C7-C9. Also UAD can be tweaked more. So of course different settings give different results. Cant judge plugin on initial setting only:)
Get what your saying but it was about trying to manage the variables where possible. As it's a studer tape I made it a studer style shootout with only studer plugins. That's why softube is in (B) and that's the only 15 ips stereo studer in taupe and I didn't want to add in eq variables in the UAD that the others didn't have.
Plugin devs can be funny in shootouts and have a tendency to blame any variables. It's worse enough they aren't modelling the exact same studer but I just treated it as close as I could to the tape which was go into it with peaks at -6 and hit the tape hard without going into the red.
In youtube as soon as you add in other variables the excuses start coming in. If I was to use the UAD in a mix I would tweak every seperate instance and if using taupe I'd pick a flatter response but even when I did my own tests with taupe in different settings I still didn't get the same feel as I got from UAD.
In the end the tape thing is all still very subtle and very very subjective
Great video! Thanks for taking the time to test all this out! I’ve had various tape plugins over the years and my favourite so far is magnetite by black rooster audio, would love know how close it sounds to the real deal tho.
Im kind of a bit wary to do a part 2 as after hearing slate and taupe, I have a suspicion that most other tape plugins will follow suit and ill end up disappointing lots of people haha
@@PaulThird yeah I get you, although I can honestly say the same, I had slate VTM and softube tape for a month and really wasn’t impressed but then I got the black rooster bundle on a wim because it was on sale and discovered that I really love their tape!
From the looks of the comments I probably will have to do a part 2 haha 😅
@@PaulThird yeah haha, I would be very interested in that if you did do it because I haven’t seen black rooster in many plug-in comparisons maybe as they are a smaller company but I think they’re making amazing plugins!
The UAD is so good ! :) Thanks for the video !
🤓🤓
what is the UAD? the studer or AMPEX?
Studer
nothing really touches the UAD tape plugins in terms of 'feel' as you say. The Studer plugin itself can sound very different with different tape stock / speed and calibration too. The UAD Ampex 102 is absolutely magic on busses and mixes, nothing does what it does IMO. The only other tape plugin I really use (and I have most) is the IK multimedia 'Tape Machine' series, they are very good, they use a combination of sampling and algorithms. As much of an Acustica fan as I am, I never got into Taupe, it doesn’t do it right, can be an interesting lofi effect though. Part of that volume increase with the Slate VTM is the amount of low end it adds, you can can fix this a little by lowering the “bass aligntment” setting, regardless the Slate can make things mushy… it’s funny because in their original marketing of VTM they took a swing at the UAD tape plugins… not a good look.
Hahaha.. Yeah definitely not the best plugin developer to target!
Little bit late to this video, enjoyed nevertheless! I picked B in the final shootout, whilst listening in BD 770 pros 250ohm.
After you pointed out the guitar & cymbals width and clarity, it seemed B had the best stereo spread, whilst balancing depth and warmth in the low end. Tape just seems to make things more ‘natural’ sounding, which is kind of bizarre.
A) was definitely more balanced sounding than C, but had to listen a couple of times to make sure.
Thank you for the video, very insightful.
Cheers 🍻
🤓🤓
B, A, C… that was my priority order in the final test. My personal test result: I have no hearing loss. :))
I thought A was Dry. B was sudder and C was UAD. But Sudder is adding saturation a lot wasn’t it supposed to be subtle?
Well it is subtle cause you thought the UAD was the dry and studer was picked the least in the poll
Paul please compare new t-racks tascam tape collection !
Sorry I'm officially retired from reviewing tape plugins haha
Wow, that was crazy. Honestly? I immediately leaned into B, but then heard C and thought, "Okay, B is 2% better than C, but A is right out." So puzzling how finnicky that can be. Feel like I'm willing to bet I'm the only B > C > A lol.
The results from the poll have shown A>B>C 🤓
Mix:Analog is the best of the bunch... for obvious reasons... but it's also expensive and often has issues which make it even more expensive... lol... but it's the only one that ACTUALLY gets that tape sound IMO.
I know. The bouncing thing kills me. 15 minute session and you have a 5 minute bounce. 10 mins to ensure you've got the right setting. Constant sweating hoping the bounce doesn't lapse the session time 😅 haha
@@PaulThird one word: "Rewinding"
😂 😂
I just push finished mixes through at 3 or 4 different gain settings then volume match and choose my fave. Such an incredible sound.
Between that and the FREE 1176 I'm on M:A nonstop. Amazing idea... But lol... You don't need to rewind a compressor. 😂
I know. I had tons of stuff to record and rewinding was killing me 🤣
@@PaulThird I'm used to paying for it in studios... But not for paying for non-tape machines to 'Rewind' - which I assume is just a bug.
But saying all of this... It's still worth the hassle. One of the best kept secrets in music production land.
Worked on the real thing, still prefer the UAD A800.
🤓🤓
Spoiler Alert********
I just shot out
IK Media's Tape 99, 440, 24 and 80 and Black Rooster's Mag set on Blue Tape with +3 Bias at 15ips...and guess what.....Acustica Audio....sounds the same as the other two...I...matter of fact they are a DSP nightmare...but....IK Media actually has the best sounding tapes.....they seem to be the masters at satuarion......smh....your better off using your favorite regular plugins you like on a good mix...that you prefer...and then use 3-4 acustica audio plugins...to put analog polish on your sound and mix you colored the way you want it......seems like only certain Acustica Audio plugins sound good on master bus...and I can tell you, in some ways....as far as sounding natural...IK media sounds better than acustica audio or UAD.....
I chose C but I thought A was the real tape hahaha
🤓🤓
Oh my God I liked the UAD plugin the best. I thought it would be the studer and would be easy
🤓🤓
i really like the slate VTM, it does compress a bit, but i don't think it makes stuff feel small at all i use it on the master bus most of the time. i used it once in every channel with the console emulation on every channel and didnt like it, i might have over done it.
Are you properly level matching? Just asking out of pure curiosity as I remember some of the tape plugs really just making things louder
@@PaulThird kind of, VTM gives you a low mid bump and some high mid stuff.. plus the low bump, that level bump i cant get with other plugin combos easily, VTM just does that very easy, thats why i use it on the master bus only, just gotta keep an eye on the needle to steer away from over compressing
Cdsoundmaster nebula library kills all these I have it and man my mix shines and sound so full 3d fat and rich
Sketch Cassette 2 + Cdsoundmaster nebula library
I use USD’s LUNA DAW, they have a Studer extension that’s not a plug-in but integrated into the mixer, I think I’m going to buy it based what your saying👍 love your vids! Keep It Up! I don’t have access to my head phones right now so I can’t make fair comparison.
Luna sounds cooler the more it advances 🤓
I picked the dry signal every time.
🤓🤓
UAD interface + BM15A's + BeyerDynamic 797.
Honestly, couldn't tell the difference in ANY of those tests. They just sounded like standard loops of the same sample.
I would have blamed the RUclips compression if people weren't commenting they could easily tell the difference.
Could it be my age (46)? Still, last time I had my ears checked, I was above the average (of my age of course).
Being unable to hear any difference at all is kind of worrying me.
I've got the Studer and use it a lot! For my 2 buss though I use the Ampex more! Try that one if you don't have it! It's excellent! The UAD tape plugins are the ONLY reason I bought into their ecosystem! I could not get that TAPE sound from anything else. I only bought a Solo card as well for $200 back in the day. Still have it. I just use it for those few plugins. Although I do have a few more plugs that it came with, and some I've gotten over the years. So I should update to a larger one, but the prices are too ridiculous for me to do that! The Quad has not changed since it came out with the 2nd iteration sometime before 2008ish. It was $499 and that was a lot for me back then. Now it's $800. That's just crazy when the only thing that's changed is the brand new one's outer shell, and the Thunderbolt 3 input/output port. I've never been a Mac user so I use the PCIE cards which are the fastest and best way IMO, as it plugs right into the motherboard! It's very sad that we've gotten away from that and all interfaces nowadays use external things like ub2 and ub3 for Windows(which is inferior to Thunderbolt) and Thunderbolt for Mac. Sadly Windows-those people who make it are all communist asshats just like Apple which sucks, will not update their drivers/software for professional use so it's always a pain in the ass to use it for audio or video work over Apple! But you can get way better hardware for 1/4 of the price. For instance the $10,000 Apple computer for Video editing will cost you just over $2500 to build it yourself on Windows. Or it used to until this past year or so with Covid and the prices now are from the companies gouging us and blaming it on Covid which is false btw! Especially MSI...those guys are crooks to the 10th degree!
actually, everything has changed many times since you got in. From Quad to Quad MK2 to Quad X and now the X4...dynamic range is at 130db, netter interfaces with TB3. Also Apple will not update their BLABL For professional use is just uneducated talk, sounding like a 90 year old. They have everything built in, and it works, No pro would ever use a PC, they are based on 1990ies Kernels. Nothing you can build on windows can come close to even a 1000 dollar M! silicon MacBook Air running 200 tracks. You're delusional if you think you can talk down Apple. It;s like a Prius driver from 2008 yelling at Tesla ...hey I will race you, I am angry, I am better I have more money than you, damn you Tesla....
It's really subtle. I picked A and B as better. Didn't have a huge pref between those two, maybe A by a hair. I was thinking about getting Taupe so this was helpful for me to not get it, as I already own UAD Studer, Softube Tape, and VTM (from subscription).
Your description with your hands is actually probably the best one I've seen for tracking tape lol. Now that I hear it, it's almost like the transients are extended a bit longer so they have the space to hit harder, even though overall level is probably down. It's a specific kind of compression that emphasizes the transient by extending it. At least that's how it sounds.
Mastering tape I feel is more obvious. UAD's Ampex ATR just makes every track knock harder. It's one of the few plugins on master bus that I consider "auto-better".
Yeah no way id be choosing to record everything to tape haha too much hassle, time and money for not enough return.
BTW I'm glad somebody understood my hand thing. Sometimes I think it's just me when I say what I hear 😂
@@PaulThird Oh yeah absolutely. So much hassle with analog tape, especially since it's a "every track cumulative" thing. Between Softube and UAD, I'm well covered in this department.
Re: hands, you never know what analogy will click with someone! Multitrack tape has always been something I struggled to really pick out and hear, found it hard to conceptualize what I was hearing.
Yes, the Ampex is amazing. I love it.
I wanna Plus 1 on the hand gestures.
I often use physical gestures to express between say: something Bumping vs Pounding vs Banging vs Bouncing vs Popping vs Snapping.
The words convey something, but the physical movement conveys feeling.
🤓🤓
Do you have any experience with U-he Satin? That's another one I'd love to hear in this kind of shootout.
I had a trial of it but ended up going nowhere
UAD FTW again! You've got great ears, Paul. And I'm not just saying that because we usually pick the same thing 😆 Great content. Have you tried UAD's Ampex ATR-102 master tape?
Tried it but didn't like it as much as the studer 🤓
"B" from the first listening. It has so obvious open sound, you can't mismatch it with something else. It just sounds live.
Interesting thing is. In the poll the UAD won by a landslide. It went uad 63%, Studer 22% & dry 15% haha
I was very surprised that so many people thought the dry was the studer
@@PaulThird yeah, after reading the comments I was surprised too. Looks like the majority prefers UAD. Which is also quite good, no doubt about that.