haha, neat trick at the end there! I remember the video you did a few months back with the maselec up against other hardware EQ units, and as much as I liked all of them I really thought the masalec was in a league of its own. Since then its been on my bucket list of items to buy...... I reeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaally hanker after it :). In terms of plugins (assuming you didn't do that trick throughout, hehe) I thought both, whilst nowhere near the beauty of the hardware, were pretty good as plugins, even if the stereo field narrowed with them. But, all in all, I lean towards the Acustica a little more. Like Acustica's other plugins I find it a little grittier than the Relab, but also a little more lively. But the Relab isn't bad either. Thanks again for sharing, Paul
Thanks for quality content! Opening my mixing mastering studio in kyoto japan next year and now working out the investment direction and your channel helps a lot! When you posted this video I directly downloaded the demo version and to be honest I was so exited to try it out…. I was expecting the same feeling I had first time I tried the Metrics Halo / Make believe SONTEC 432 :: that plugin is a marvel and made me think that we are so lucky nowadays because the software emulation are getting so incredibly close and really elevated my works- so couldn’t resist comparing this Relab Maselec to the Sontec by Metrics Halo…. Well the SONTEC add clarity, tightness and the transient are crystal clear - A/B to the Maselec Relab gives clouded low mids, almost hissing highs and it kills the transient clarity Is it because I’m probably more a SONTEC fan or there is something to improve on the Relab Maselec side? Had weird panning and clipping happening while switching through your presets, wrote a mail to Relab, rapid and polite answer from them that they are working already on a fix Thanks for your feedback;)
Coincidently opening my mixing master studio in Tokyo next year and now working on the same things... I own a Metric Halo ULN8 MK4, it comes with Sontec emulation plugin on its DSP, and I own Acustica Audio scarlet 4 (the emulation of sontec) too. I choose MH one since AA's traditional preamps function issues and CPU cost. Plus, MH did a really great job on this. honestly you can't compare Maselec with Sontec IMO, but the Relab one is not even that close to the hardware compared with Acustica's Ivory 5. It's cloudy at low mids and make tracks a little bit "blurry". So, as the answer to your question: it's probably you are a Sontec fan, but mainly Relab didn't make a good enough plugin.
they are close and the acustica version i prefered how it sound .....i don't know but on my monitors sounds kind more fuller in the low mid frequencies. area...thank you to bring this comporation video ....overall the analog sounds wider giving more dimension
Thanks for the video. For me,with a quality headphone listen, wins Relab, in the third dance track there is an evident increase in the low range, which sounds very good but here we are talking about those who are more faithful to the original.
Great video! I think the main difference is in the transients. Software seems just to get it not exactly right, always a bit irritating, while hardware (also my much cheaper hardware eq's) sounds always relaxed here. That phenomena effects the 3d-ness and depth perception. Relab (like all Algo's I know) more on the 'plastic' side, AA more on the 'blury' side. But AA seem to put a lot of effort in this topic and their 'Cherry' eq takes a good step forward here. But this very well made video shows also how close software is at present. Fascinating times!
Great comparison thanks! Amazingly I actually preferred the software over the hardware. Sometimes Acoustica sometimes Relab. Both of them had a little more punch and low end depth than the hardware did. That was a surprise!
Very interesting test. I preferred different ones depending on the song. I was going to say the Relab one sounded closer to the MEA-2, but then on the electronic song, it didn't. Only on that song I preferred the hardware over both plugins. The HW has some nice depth though that the plugins didn't match.
Needed this comparison video so thank you! Just one issue though: you have to turn on the "Pre" on all the AA stuff for it to sound better and also try adjusting the input trim.
Pre is there to try and emulate nonlinear behavior - at least with regard to the box tone of the unit. Often times, especially on pre-hyper AA products, it really dampens transients and in my experience, can make it compare even more unfavorably to its hardware counterpart, especially when we are talking EQ at the mastering level. This unit is almost perfectly linear within its normal operating parameters, a "pre" here wont add anything
When changing from analog to A then analog to B, i then later always found out that i preferred Ivory., just because it always sounded closer to the HW. And i was always right! Relab did a great job too!
Thanks for doing this, been looking forward to it since I saw you comment you were. Relab was instantly recognisable as seems to enhance the transients in a digital way. Yes, the Ivory does smear them slightly more than the hardware but generally sounds more like the HW to me due to, I suspect in both cases, it essentally being a static IR. I could go for either happy in the knowledge they are both pretty close, though personally Ivory takes it for me with maybe a bit of a blend to add back a bit of those transients. Once it is ported to the new Hyper tech I imagine it will be considerably closer, as well as address the resource issues. That last one threw me, I was really baffled as to why the differences had gone and even took a break incase it was my ears 😂 Rendered it a "no idea" in the end. At least I know I'm not just imagining what I'm hearing which is a positive.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio I assumed as much and think it's a great idea to include in future comparisons too. I always use Gain Match, BlindTest and recently Nugen AB Assist 2 when I'm comparing anything and I wish more plugins would contain the Auto on/off like the SPL's do too which make blind switching really simple to do. I'm not in an optimum room, etc. so have dedicated a hell of a lot of time to just ear training in order to work around it - You can only work with what you can hear. It is interesting that instead of going with "they are the same" I went with "I'm not good enough to hear it" though. I admit I was relieved by the reveal.
The analog sounds a bit better than A (Ivory) and I found Ivory to be a bit better than the Relab. We're splitting hears at the moment, especially in the mix. Both plugins sound good enough for their price. I will try to use Ivory and Scarlet as a passthrough to the Relab, to see if the combo makes sense. But I will be buying the Relab. The M/S per band option is very useful. Thanks for the comparison, mate:)
Yeah I think they are pretty close. For me the fact the relab looks more like my maselec and feels more like it. Less clunky too and better on CPU in it. Not much in it.
nice video :) It looks like you weren't engaging the pre on the Acustica, which is a shame because thats where all the non-linearities and harmonic content happens. I have the Ivory suite and the pre sounds lovely.
funny, in all but the 1st track I preferred the plugins over the hardware. The hardware has better stereo/spatial depth of field but you there are so many fantastic spatial immersive plugins that can easily be fixed or even improved on with digital.
in these tests for me the hardware wins every time, and the relab is closer to it. all of them are very very good, there's considerable differences in the soundstage / stereo image & possibly this is in part due to phase differences between the 3 units' filters. it might be good to hear a filters out comparison & a filters in but no gain comparison where possible. if i had the maselec i'd reach for that over either of the emulations, and if i had relab i'd probably reach for that in the box... this is coming from an ivory user of several years - and i've been very happy with ivory no complaints. i'd say on a scale of 0-100 we're talking about 4-5% with maselec on top and the other units under it. that's a small enough difference for many to not hear at all, and others to pick either way, and could very well be indistinguishable on many consumer grade systems / speakers. however, in mastering we're going for just that 2-5% on each unit / treatment where we can - and the results ADD UP. well done video. in fact, brilliant and thanks to you!
the best thing is a half way to me, ivory boxtone is exagerated (cold be cool to have more flexibility lowering the pre), but it does some glue feeling that is missed the relab version, so it could be graeat the relab version (that sounds wider) with a little bit of that boxtone...i'll try relab with ivory pre ...
B, Relab has a much smoother bass in the first example. Very audible. And also it's more faithful with the hardware to my ears. The Relab is very, very close in all examples. The AA isn't bad though, but it has a more pronounced separate bass "bump", it doesn't "flow" under the surface as the other two. And this could vause that the bass takes over too much at higher volumes I think.
I thought the Acustica Ivory 5 had slightly more clarity and openness, but that changed the sound slightly, and it felt a little less present and maybe even a bit "empty" compared to the analog hardware and the Relab Development plugin.
You are fast!!! Not gonna go into my results. Sometimes I had a feeling you were fooling us actually by still switching things around during the reveal
Thanks for making this comparison. If an average person (a consumer) hears this, they will say that they sound the same. To me the Plugins sound great but they are still frisky and sterile if you compare them with hardware, the hardware sounds deeper, with a bigger sound image and in general more musical, silky and vivid. but this is a definition very close to the limits of similarities. plugin and hardware are very very very close.
It's incredible how much difference there is on the reverb tails, and the three dimentionality. Both plugins sounded 2D and the tails we're kind of ugly longer, while on the hardware I felt you could dive inside the sound. The sllight saturation on plugins sounded totally fake in comparison with the hardware. Kind of like if you added harmonic saturation with Saturn with a Pro Q3, there wasn't any organic blend between these two elements.
relab have no saturation added, ivory a lot but maybe he wasn't using the pre in this demo so in this case even ivory no saturation, try them at home, the openess and depth are very different
@@rameron9 I bought Ivory two years ago and I haven't finished a mix or a master that I have ended up using it. I prefer Kirchoff and then use my analog equipment. I don't own a Maselec, but I wish I could. I will disagree on the depth concerning the plugins. Neither of these plugins touches the depth of field of the analog unit. They have a stressed sound, while the analog unit has such a relaxed reaction. I have come to the same conclusion when hearing Streaky's video comparing Ivory to the original analog unit.
@@IliasPanteliasGR oh i did't meant plugins sounds as the hardware, i just wanted to say what i said. I never heard a maselec in front of me, and i don't have any hardware yet, i would love one day. So for me, for now, these pieces (some and sometimes) gives me something that even equilibrium can't. Btw, I noticed how much better this new maselec sounds than the Ivory in my testing, especially the depth, openness and transients, and this overall sound is much more like the hardware than the Ivory. I'm pretty sure there's something more special about the machine, otherwise a lot fewer pieces would be sold. it would be cool if someone, like streaky also, could put the wav file as he did for some test, i listened his maselec with ivory with wav files, and the differences was there, sound more open, more deepness in the subs and more air in the highs, more relaxed separation, and more natural mids, subtle but not so subtle in the end.
ITs really easy to identify the plugins and AA is closer to the HW. Hardware is dual mono, apaprently the AA plugin is also dual mono (separate IRs for each channel) - when you switch to Relab the stereo field collapses a tiny bit as its true stereo - the tiny differences between the LR channels creates a bit of a haas effect. A better test would probably be to use relab in dual mono mode ( if possible - studio one lets you go dual mono or MS or multiband with any plugin)
ivory collapse a bit the openess, ivory has no differences on left and right, but has 2 slopes for every band added, i think this is the reason why it narrows the stereo a bit. relab is more wide, and smoothe the transients more like the hardware, maybe a little too much on the mids
the hardware has a lot more sustain throughout the whole frequency range. I can feel it becomes shorter on both plugins. It makes tons of energy lost, feels like they aren't on the same settings ie. truly matched too, the analogue feels louder 0.5-1db but of course I believe you properly matched them. Also the Relab doesnt sound pleasant to me, not sweet, I don't like it, probably because no harmonic is generated, sound thinner somehow.
It’s really fun to read the comments and understand how differently we perceive music. The hardware is clearly deeper, and the extension of the bass frequencies is much more extensive compared to the two plug-ins. In the Ivoy plug-in, the bass is glued to the kick, , in a bad way for my taste, but someone probably perceives it as pleasant. The Realab plug-in works better in this regard, but it’s still inferior to the hardware. Of course IMO !!! I’m listening through Sony WT-1000XM4, which are the headphones I use for critical listening when I’m not in the studio. And for me, they are the minimum for critical listening. maybe others have speaker/headphones that don’t highlight these differences? And if the average listening environment of professionals or amateurs can’t translate these details, what’s the sense of such a big investment for an hardware eq? Perhaps we’ve reached the point where the average listening level is so low that it no longer makes sense to invest money in achieving a sound that almost no one can perceive anymore. Always in my opinion :)
One thing I will say on this. Even though the average listener may not be able to hear a difference. I always feel subconsciously they feel a difference. Something that is more pleasing to the ear is more likely to be listened to a second time.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio Now im listening in studio with atc scm25 and audio jl F112 sub... on the hardware also the transient are much better. Both plug ins sound like they are "compressing" everything. Dynamic, stereo image, frequency extension (the hardware has more air on top and you can hear more sustain on the lower frequencies).
Any chance you could like to where you found the demo music? I have some tests I'd like to run with some new gear and I like your selections @@AudioAnimalsStudio
This is why I wanted to the blind test. I think they both sound good. The relab to me sounds better. Less cpu usage too and reacts more actually to the hardware. Feels more like a maselec.
With my 5€ headphones I can listen big differences. Analog is much more clear and open and it have the Maselec sign... sounds like transparent expensive. Maselec plugin is pretty far, and the Acustica sounds good but totally different.
@highlandbrothersutd nope, i didscovered just recently that with pre off is more close to the hardware, with the pre on there is lot of coloro going on that is nothing similar to the maselec sound, is cool, ore fat bass and more compressed sound, but not a maselec sound, maselec have no harmonics. Oh and ivory with pre on close the image even more than what it already does
The first example: Hardware: It has both a huge soundstage and presence in the low/mids. Relab: Has a rather big soundstage but completely loses the presence in low/mids. Ivory: Has presence in low/mids but completely loses the big soundstage. Most people in these comments say they prefer the Ivory but can you people not hear how the soundstage just shrinks and becomes "boxed in"?
Totally boxed in … nasty to my ears. The Relab is more musical but lacking the warmth of the analogue. Just a little “ fake” but I’m sure with some subtle addition of a saturation plug it could get much closer to the original.
yes, realb is lot close but, i think is about something they did for the smooth sound, is similar on bass transients and on highs but in the mids maybe is too much
Wow. Spoiler alert. I was convinced A sounded better than B in the last "comparison." The differences between sections of the song are much more significant than the differences between the HW and plugins of course, but my ears were fooling me. I liked the Relab more in the earlier comparisons, and having mid/side per band is amazing. I have Ivory and like it, however. Will be buying the Relab plugin too for the extra functionality. Thought I detected more low end in the Ivory earlier...but not sure after failing the last "test."
Completely different plugins. AA may sound closer to hardware, but Relab has one advantage. Mid side into separate bands. This is where the magic begins.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio Today I tested them on the master. On AA I could not achieve the same result as on Relab. In the end, if you want 3D, you can install a preamp after the equalizer. AA has a lot of them and in the libraries under the nebula. AlexB has a lot of interesting things
@@AudioAnimalsStudio for sure - might even add that little human something 😃I'm sure part of the "charm" of older high end analog EQs are that the values don't match 100%.
Thanks for doing this. I picked the Relab every time. The hardware has the punchy transients that I love about the Maselec. The Relabs transients were 98% there which is disappointing and also quite amazing for a plugin. The Acustica smeared the transients compared which was really surprising, because I generally rate Acustica EQs. Not sure if this is because you hadn’t engaged the pre in the Ivory or not, but I will definitely wait for a sale and grab the Relab.
I think when it comes to an emulation, you can't get better than the official version. I feel it's the most accurate of the two and feels like a maselec in its behaviour. Also as the plugin develops it may get closer and closer to the hardware with updates.
For me, I've yet to hear an algo eq that has convincing highs like hardware. The Acustica technology seems to be more convincing with regards to eq, but as lots have said here, the soundstage is not there with either of the emulations.
Ivory is far better and far closer to the hardware... Its low end is much more precise. Paul, the funky song is not good for this kind of test. Too many variations all the time.
The Acustica one had the preamp turned off. You can hear it has less harmonics than the other two. Great demo!
haha, neat trick at the end there! I remember the video you did a few months back with the maselec up against other hardware EQ units, and as much as I liked all of them I really thought the masalec was in a league of its own. Since then its been on my bucket list of items to buy...... I reeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaally hanker after it :). In terms of plugins (assuming you didn't do that trick throughout, hehe) I thought both, whilst nowhere near the beauty of the hardware, were pretty good as plugins, even if the stereo field narrowed with them. But, all in all, I lean towards the Acustica a little more. Like Acustica's other plugins I find it a little grittier than the Relab, but also a little more lively. But the Relab isn't bad either. Thanks again for sharing, Paul
Thanks for quality content! Opening my mixing mastering studio in kyoto japan next year and now working out the investment direction and your channel helps a lot!
When you posted this video I directly downloaded the demo version and to be honest I was so exited to try it out…. I was expecting the same feeling I had first time I tried the Metrics Halo / Make believe SONTEC 432 :: that plugin is a marvel and made me think that we are so lucky nowadays because the software emulation are getting so incredibly close and really elevated my works- so couldn’t resist comparing this Relab Maselec to the Sontec by Metrics Halo…. Well the SONTEC add clarity, tightness and the transient are crystal clear - A/B to the Maselec Relab gives clouded low mids, almost hissing highs and it kills the transient clarity
Is it because I’m probably more a SONTEC fan or there is something to improve on the Relab Maselec side?
Had weird panning and clipping happening while switching through your presets, wrote a mail to Relab, rapid and polite answer from them that they are working already on a fix
Thanks for your feedback;)
Coincidently opening my mixing master studio in Tokyo next year and now working on the same things...
I own a Metric Halo ULN8 MK4, it comes with Sontec emulation plugin on its DSP, and I own Acustica Audio scarlet 4 (the emulation of sontec) too. I choose MH one since AA's traditional preamps function issues and CPU cost. Plus, MH did a really great job on this.
honestly you can't compare Maselec with Sontec IMO, but the Relab one is not even that close to the hardware compared with Acustica's Ivory 5. It's cloudy at low mids and make tracks a little bit "blurry". So, as the answer to your question: it's probably you are a Sontec fan, but mainly Relab didn't make a good enough plugin.
Super close to me but for some weird reason Acustica had something a little nicer to me even over the hardware 😮. Might have to listen again lol
they are close and the acustica version i prefered how it sound .....i don't know but on my monitors sounds kind more fuller in the low mid frequencies. area...thank you to bring this comporation video ....overall the analog sounds wider giving more dimension
Thanks for the video.
For me,with a quality headphone listen, wins Relab, in the third dance track there is an evident increase in the low range, which sounds very good but here we are talking about those who are more faithful to the original.
Very handy comparison thank you
I have Ivory and it's a killer...the Relab though is the pleasant surprise of the week for me !! Good job
Just sold me the ivory 5 going to install the 30 day demo, I preferred the tight controlled lows on the plug-in version
Thanks again ! All these comparisons just show that the emulations are extremely close to the HW and there is no loss of quality
Oh wow am on my tv with souround and sub and the ivory 5 is killing it for me, more controlled lows and matches the highs of the analogue to me.
Great video! I think the main difference is in the transients. Software seems just to get it not exactly right, always a bit irritating, while hardware (also my much cheaper hardware eq's) sounds always relaxed here. That phenomena effects the 3d-ness and depth perception. Relab (like all Algo's I know) more on the 'plastic' side, AA more on the 'blury' side. But AA seem to put a lot of effort in this topic and their 'Cherry' eq takes a good step forward here. But this very well made video shows also how close software is at present. Fascinating times!
completely agreed. great insight
Great comparison thanks! Amazingly I actually preferred the software over the hardware. Sometimes Acoustica sometimes Relab. Both of them had a little more punch and low end depth than the hardware did. That was a surprise!
Very interesting test. I preferred different ones depending on the song. I was going to say the Relab one sounded closer to the MEA-2, but then on the electronic song, it didn't. Only on that song I preferred the hardware over both plugins. The HW has some nice depth though that the plugins didn't match.
Needed this comparison video so thank you! Just one issue though: you have to turn on the "Pre" on all the AA stuff for it to sound better and also try adjusting the input trim.
Brother - you have to have the "Pre" in on the AA stuff and then you have to adjust the input trim.
Pre is there to try and emulate nonlinear behavior - at least with regard to the box tone of the unit. Often times, especially on pre-hyper AA products, it really dampens transients and in my experience, can make it compare even more unfavorably to its hardware counterpart, especially when we are talking EQ at the mastering level. This unit is almost perfectly linear within its normal operating parameters, a "pre" here wont add anything
When changing from analog to A then analog to B, i then later always found out that i preferred Ivory., just because it always sounded closer to the HW. And i was always right! Relab did a great job too!
I think it's a 50/50 split. All comes down to preference. Why these sorts of comparisons are interesting and important.
Thanks for doing this, been looking forward to it since I saw you comment you were. Relab was instantly recognisable as seems to enhance the transients in a digital way. Yes, the Ivory does smear them slightly more than the hardware but generally sounds more like the HW to me due to, I suspect in both cases, it essentally being a static IR. I could go for either happy in the knowledge they are both pretty close, though personally Ivory takes it for me with maybe a bit of a blend to add back a bit of those transients. Once it is ported to the new Hyper tech I imagine it will be considerably closer, as well as address the resource issues. That last one threw me, I was really baffled as to why the differences had gone and even took a break incase it was my ears 😂 Rendered it a "no idea" in the end. At least I know I'm not just imagining what I'm hearing which is a positive.
I wanted to see if just by visuals switching if people would still think there was a change. Your brain can sometimes play tricks on you.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio I assumed as much and think it's a great idea to include in future comparisons too. I always use Gain Match, BlindTest and recently Nugen AB Assist 2 when I'm comparing anything and I wish more plugins would contain the Auto on/off like the SPL's do too which make blind switching really simple to do. I'm not in an optimum room, etc. so have dedicated a hell of a lot of time to just ear training in order to work around it - You can only work with what you can hear. It is interesting that instead of going with "they are the same" I went with "I'm not good enough to hear it" though. I admit I was relieved by the reveal.
excellent 💯✌✌ thank you very much🤝
Great comparison! Ivory like it more
Very little differences between the three options, but by the price difference, software version is (both) a real winner! Thaks!
The analog sounds a bit better than A (Ivory) and I found Ivory to be a bit better than the Relab. We're splitting hears at the moment, especially in the mix. Both plugins sound good enough for their price. I will try to use Ivory and Scarlet as a passthrough to the Relab, to see if the combo makes sense. But I will be buying the Relab. The M/S per band option is very useful. Thanks for the comparison, mate:)
Yeah I think they are pretty close. For me the fact the relab looks more like my maselec and feels more like it. Less clunky too and better on CPU in it. Not much in it.
*hairs
nice video :) It looks like you weren't engaging the pre on the Acustica, which is a shame because thats where all the non-linearities and harmonic content happens. I have the Ivory suite and the pre sounds lovely.
funny, in all but the 1st track I preferred the plugins over the hardware. The hardware has better stereo/spatial depth of field but you there are so many fantastic spatial immersive plugins that can easily be fixed or even improved on with digital.
in these tests for me the hardware wins every time, and the relab is closer to it. all of them are very very good, there's considerable differences in the soundstage / stereo image & possibly this is in part due to phase differences between the 3 units' filters. it might be good to hear a filters out comparison & a filters in but no gain comparison where possible.
if i had the maselec i'd reach for that over either of the emulations, and if i had relab i'd probably reach for that in the box... this is coming from an ivory user of several years - and i've been very happy with ivory no complaints. i'd say on a scale of 0-100 we're talking about 4-5% with maselec on top and the other units under it. that's a small enough difference for many to not hear at all, and others to pick either way, and could very well be indistinguishable on many consumer grade systems / speakers. however, in mastering we're going for just that 2-5% on each unit / treatment where we can - and the results ADD UP.
well done video. in fact, brilliant and thanks to you!
Firstly, than you for doing this so well. Secondly, Acustica beats the Relab. And the hardware is definitely distinguishable to the software.
the best thing is a half way to me, ivory boxtone is exagerated (cold be cool to have more flexibility lowering the pre), but it does some glue feeling that is missed the relab version, so it could be graeat the relab version (that sounds wider) with a little bit of that boxtone...i'll try relab with ivory pre ...
B, Relab has a much smoother bass in the first example. Very audible. And also it's more faithful with the hardware to my ears. The Relab is very, very close in all examples. The AA isn't bad though, but it has a more pronounced separate bass "bump", it doesn't "flow" under the surface as the other two. And this could vause that the bass takes over too much at higher volumes I think.
Very impressed with the Relab. Its dense as the hardware.
Thanks for the great content! Acustica Audio sounded better
On the final piece i thought wow they finally matched mids close enough )))
Haha, there's me hoping people would still hear a difference. Maybe some did they just didn't comment.
wow IVORY sounds very nice! the relab sounded a bit less sparkly and direct, less 3d to me.
I thought the Acustica Ivory 5 had slightly more clarity and openness, but that changed the sound slightly, and it felt a little less present and maybe even a bit "empty" compared to the analog hardware and the Relab Development plugin.
You are fast!!! Not gonna go into my results. Sometimes I had a feeling you were fooling us actually by still switching things around during the reveal
Thanks for making this comparison. If an average person (a consumer) hears this, they will say that they sound the same. To me the Plugins sound great but they are still frisky and sterile if you compare them with hardware, the hardware sounds deeper, with a bigger sound image and in general more musical, silky and vivid. but this is a definition very close to the limits of similarities. plugin and hardware are very very very close.
Prefered the Ivory in some or even most cases.
It's incredible how much difference there is on the reverb tails, and the three dimentionality. Both plugins sounded 2D and the tails we're kind of ugly longer, while on the hardware I felt you could dive inside the sound. The sllight saturation on plugins sounded totally fake in comparison with the hardware. Kind of like if you added harmonic saturation with Saturn with a Pro Q3, there wasn't any organic blend between these two elements.
Great analysis
relab have no saturation added, ivory a lot but maybe he wasn't using the pre in this demo so in this case even ivory no saturation, try them at home, the openess and depth are very different
@@rameron9 I bought Ivory two years ago and I haven't finished a mix or a master that I have ended up using it. I prefer Kirchoff and then use my analog equipment. I don't own a Maselec, but I wish I could. I will disagree on the depth concerning the plugins. Neither of these plugins touches the depth of field of the analog unit. They have a stressed sound, while the analog unit has such a relaxed reaction. I have come to the same conclusion when hearing Streaky's video comparing Ivory to the original analog unit.
@@IliasPanteliasGR oh i did't meant plugins sounds as the hardware, i just wanted to say what i said. I never heard a maselec in front of me, and i don't have any hardware yet, i would love one day. So for me, for now, these pieces (some and sometimes) gives me something that even equilibrium can't. Btw, I noticed how much better this new maselec sounds than the Ivory in my testing, especially the depth, openness and transients, and this overall sound is much more like the hardware than the Ivory. I'm pretty sure there's something more special about the machine, otherwise a lot fewer pieces would be sold.
it would be cool if someone, like streaky also, could put the wav file as he did for some test, i listened his maselec with ivory with wav files, and the differences was there, sound more open, more deepness in the subs and more air in the highs, more relaxed separation, and more natural mids, subtle but not so subtle in the end.
@@rameron9 ah! Sorry for the misunderstanding. I agree so much with what you wrote in your last message
Very nice on both. I have the Ivory, not as many features as the Relab, but does a nice job.
ITs really easy to identify the plugins and AA is closer to the HW.
Hardware is dual mono, apaprently the AA plugin is also dual mono (separate IRs for each channel) - when you switch to Relab the stereo field collapses a tiny bit as its true stereo - the tiny differences between the LR channels creates a bit of a haas effect.
A better test would probably be to use relab in dual mono mode ( if possible - studio one lets you go dual mono or MS or multiband with any plugin)
ivory collapse a bit the openess, ivory has no differences on left and right, but has 2 slopes for every band added, i think this is the reason why it narrows the stereo a bit. relab is more wide, and smoothe the transients more like the hardware, maybe a little too much on the mids
the hardware has a lot more sustain throughout the whole frequency range. I can feel it becomes shorter on both plugins. It makes tons of energy lost, feels like they aren't on the same settings ie. truly matched too, the analogue feels louder 0.5-1db but of course I believe you properly matched them. Also the Relab doesnt sound pleasant to me, not sweet, I don't like it, probably because no harmonic is generated, sound thinner somehow.
Hardware, then Ivory, then Relab for me
Are you comparing ivory version 5 the latest one or is this an older one?
Latest version
Relab is closer.
The real one I noticed the reverb finding its own space more.
Relab did that much more than the Acustica
interesting results the hardware has a little more beef and the listening experience seem wider
The hardware sounds better in every aspect. ( much more stereo detail in the high frequencies, 3D separation ).
It’s really fun to read the comments and understand how differently we perceive music. The hardware is clearly deeper, and the extension of the bass frequencies is much more extensive compared to the two plug-ins. In the Ivoy plug-in, the bass is glued to the kick, , in a bad way for my taste, but someone probably perceives it as pleasant. The Realab plug-in works better in this regard, but it’s still inferior to the hardware.
Of course IMO !!!
I’m listening through Sony WT-1000XM4, which are the headphones I use for critical listening when I’m not in the studio. And for me, they are the minimum for critical listening.
maybe others have speaker/headphones that don’t highlight these differences? And if the average listening environment of professionals or amateurs can’t translate these details, what’s the sense of such a big investment for an hardware eq?
Perhaps we’ve reached the point where the average listening level is so low that it no longer makes sense to invest money in achieving a sound that almost no one can perceive anymore.
Always in my opinion :)
One thing I will say on this. Even though the average listener may not be able to hear a difference. I always feel subconsciously they feel a difference. Something that is more pleasing to the ear is more likely to be listened to a second time.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio Now im listening in studio with atc scm25 and audio jl F112 sub... on the hardware also the transient are much better. Both plug ins sound like they are "compressing" everything. Dynamic, stereo image, frequency extension (the hardware has more air on top and you can hear more sustain on the lower frequencies).
Try out a lav or close mic. I guarantee it will help your video watch times and channel!
Yeah. You are right. It's something I've been contemplating getting.
Acustica sounds hyper close to the HW, wow.
Its like you can read my mind with your videos lol
Great minds think alike
Any chance you could like to where you found the demo music? I have some tests I'd like to run with some new gear and I like your selections @@AudioAnimalsStudio
@@Rhuggins I subscribe to Motion Array. They have a selection of different songs.
I preferred the Relab over Acoustica
so subtle
Paul, to me they are real close. Maybe it is just me but the Relab one seems to have a bit more depth?
This is why I wanted to the blind test. I think they both sound good. The relab to me sounds better. Less cpu usage too and reacts more actually to the hardware. Feels more like a maselec.
The hardware sounds really good...so wide, punchy lows and open highs...AA Ivory comes close...Relab sounds weak to me in the lows...
With my 5€ headphones I can listen big differences. Analog is much more clear and open and it have the Maselec sign... sounds like transparent expensive. Maselec plugin is pretty far, and the Acustica sounds good but totally different.
Is preamp off in ivory?
@highlandbrothersutd nope, i didscovered just recently that with pre off is more close to the hardware, with the pre on there is lot of coloro going on that is nothing similar to the maselec sound, is cool, ore fat bass and more compressed sound, but not a maselec sound, maselec have no harmonics. Oh and ivory with pre on close the image even more than what it already does
Ah, thats why its 9000€ it makes music sound alive. Not flat.
The first example:
Hardware: It has both a huge soundstage and presence in the low/mids.
Relab: Has a rather big soundstage but completely loses the presence in low/mids.
Ivory: Has presence in low/mids but completely loses the big soundstage.
Most people in these comments say they prefer the Ivory but can you people not hear how the soundstage just shrinks and becomes "boxed in"?
That’s what I was thinking.
Totally boxed in … nasty to my ears. The Relab is more musical but lacking the warmth of the analogue. Just a little “ fake” but I’m sure with some subtle addition of a saturation plug it could get much closer to the original.
yes, realb is lot close but, i think is about something they did for the smooth sound, is similar on bass transients and on highs but in the mids maybe is too much
Wow. Spoiler alert. I was convinced A sounded better than B in the last "comparison." The differences between sections of the song are much more significant than the differences between the HW and plugins of course, but my ears were fooling me. I liked the Relab more in the earlier comparisons, and having mid/side per band is amazing. I have Ivory and like it, however. Will be buying the Relab plugin too for the extra functionality. Thought I detected more low end in the Ivory earlier...but not sure after failing the last "test."
It's mad how our brain can trick us by visually seeing a change.
Completely different plugins. AA may sound closer to hardware, but Relab has one advantage. Mid side into separate bands. This is where the magic begins.
Yeah I agree. For that reason as well as the CPU usage being better is why I'm reaching for the relab over the AA
@@AudioAnimalsStudio Today I tested them on the master. On AA I could not achieve the same result as on Relab. In the end, if you want 3D, you can install a preamp after the equalizer. AA has a lot of them and in the libraries under the nebula. AlexB has a lot of interesting things
There is a crispness and detail with the hardware that is lost with both plugins. Both plugins lose detail and sound muffled by comparison.
Plugin always sound cold but do the same job
Anyone notice that on the hardware the low shelf on the right is set to 364 and not 305 like the left and the plugins? :)
You can look at the settings a million times, and human error will always be a factor. That's what makes us human.
@@AudioAnimalsStudio for sure - might even add that little human something 😃I'm sure part of the "charm" of older high end analog EQs are that the values don't match 100%.
@DanielNayberg 100% they say the plugin is more similar to the unit used to emulate it, than two of the same hardware units are similar.
B is more closer tò my ears
Relab is way closer, Ivory has more low-end than analog and relab version, thanks for the comparison.
touché!! those who say there is a huge difference must be from outer space or totally schizophrenic
Acustica's EQs all have phase issues. Those who have used trinnov should understand the feeling that the phase has not been repaired.
like every eq does)
Thanks for doing this. I picked the Relab every time. The hardware has the punchy transients that I love about the Maselec. The Relabs transients were 98% there which is disappointing and also quite amazing for a plugin. The Acustica smeared the transients compared which was really surprising, because I generally rate Acustica EQs. Not sure if this is because you hadn’t engaged the pre in the Ivory or not, but I will definitely wait for a sale and grab the Relab.
I think when it comes to an emulation, you can't get better than the official version. I feel it's the most accurate of the two and feels like a maselec in its behaviour. Also as the plugin develops it may get closer and closer to the hardware with updates.
£124 at the moment
@@Yourweakminds it'll be on sale for half that in 6-12 months time, I'll wait 😉
Totally agree! And the separate mid/side bands is a HUGE party trick@@AudioAnimalsStudio
For me, I've yet to hear an algo eq that has convincing highs like hardware.
The Acustica technology seems to be more convincing with regards to eq, but as lots have said here, the soundstage is not there with either of the emulations.
Ivory is the closest one to hardware. No difference imo
Great comparison but I think you should pick the same sections of the song to A/B
Yeah good shout. Will do that for future tracks. I'll do a 8 bar loop.
Ivory is far better and far closer to the hardware... Its low end is much more precise. Paul, the funky song is not good for this kind of test. Too many variations all the time.
Acoustica Audio is completely overrated. Only the plug-in nerds of Gearspace feed them.