USE THE SUPER THANKS IF YOU LIKED THIS VIDEO! 👆👆👆 🔥 YOU GOTTA WATCH THIS! ➡️ ruclips.net/video/YuRVDyGL0VY/видео.html 🔥 GET SSL PLUGINS: bit.ly/3tTe6YS HITSEND: hitsend.io/ 🔥Join the Channel to Access All The Premium Courses: bit.ly/2SNX8bx + Mix Consultations 🔥Bella Kelly's Single/Video Throat: bit.ly/3dxeJOf #mastering #producer #audiomixing
Hi David, I’m just here really quick to say that I am a highly professional mixing and mastering engineer for around 20 years already and am subscribed to a bunch of mixing/mastering RUclipsrs and there really is no one who can still teach/inspire me with new stuff except you. Thank you so much 🙏
Nice to see people in the industry be humble and honest about how they're still learning. Puts me at ease knowing that if it's normal for a pro to be constantly learning, even after years, then it'll definitely be normal for an amateur hobbyist such as myself.
Thanks for a great test. I just purchased SSL Fusion, and though i watched many videos just needed to justify my purchase :P ... I've just rewatched this video with my headphones on and indeed I must say plugins still aren't equal to hardware but this test just proves that again. I am now really happy with my purchase :D
2 года назад+7
As a final test I think it would be interesting to test using all the 4 modules of fusion at the same time, on plugin vs hardware, with the same settings each. The individual differences may be small, but when those small differences add up I believe they create an enormous difference. That is the true value of hardware. (I'm very happy to own fusion hardware by the way!)
In the past couple of weeks I’ve been buying all the SSL Fusion plugins in discount. I already knew them from your videos (thank you, BTW). On their own, they’re very subtle, but once I grouped them in the Mix Bus with the same signal flow of the hardware (using the Mix Bus Mojo settings from the Fusion hardware manual as a starting point), my jaw dropped. My conclusion is that on their own, they’re very subtle, but together, they’re extremely powerful. Just waiting for the final one, the Fusion Stereo Image, to go on discount. Your videos are very important, specially when you try to match the settings, which is very helpful for real-life use in the plugin. Thank you.
Excellent review. I was sweating a bit because I own the hardware! I appreciate that you ran them through several different types and genres. Thanks for your time and effort as well as explanation. Very informative.
I just bought one but not installed yet .... I can say i was kinda sweating too, needing to justify my recent purchase, but indeed, not seen a video like this showing how much difference is still there between hardware and software. I must say that even with not a very great mix you can get away easily with good hardware gear, while with software, every mistake is unforgivable
I'm only about 6:25 into this video, but I had to pause because there is a recurring theme I keep hearing in videos like this where plugs are compared to hardware. For reference, I'm in a well treated home studio, which I know well, through A/B'ing through 2 sets of great monitors. One thing that plugins just can't seem to pull off, are the lows and low mids. The plugin, like a lot of them, sounds "top heavy" like an inverted pyramid. The plugin also doesn't have the "polished" feel of the hardware, or even the (even though it's cliché at this point) depth of the hardware. However, once the settings were pushed, I actually feel like it had the opposite effect. The plugin sounded fuller, and the hardware seemed to lose the low end punch it had and become top heavy.
The plugin has more detail but the hardware rounds everything off and is denser. Also i definitely hear what you do on the vocals. Almost like the Fusion melts or glues the vocals into the mix rather than leaving elements separated and sitting one on top of each other in a narrow field. Glue glue glue.
really sounds like there's some m/s processing going on with the plugin. That change in freq that sounds like it's separating out the center channel in that range...strange. Thought that was supposed to be dedicated to the Stereo Image module...great comparison, thanks for this helpful bit.
There is a definite difference. The vocals pop more with the hw. The bass pops with the grunt (great description). Ballsy is the perfect term. That plugin in pretty damn sweet though, especially when you can’t have 6 hw Fusions. Thanks!
The briefest sum-up of what the plugin sounds like to me versus the hardware is that the software is more "mid-forward". The vocals felt like they were pushed closer to me in every track. And I agree something about the stereo field is changing as well, I have my own theories about why that is, because I almost always prefer the stereo field I get out of analogue gear versus digital (I think it has to do with having two physical different circuits processing 2 audio channels versus 1 CPU processing a single stereo audio stream and passing that to a DAC).
The CPU is not actually "processing" the audio, it's just running mathematical calculations. But you are not too far off. A coded, digital plugin tends to process the two sides of a stereo channel in the exact same manner, unlike the programmer has made a deliberate attempt to introduce slight variances to L and R. Plugin Alliance do this with their TMT approach and the dual-mono versions of Tokyo Dawn Labs plugins have something similar going on under the hood. The difference between generic digital and genuine analog will always remain one of high precision but lack of character vs lower precision but character introduced by the properties of real life physique.
there are small differences between the left and the right channel - also there are "non-linearities". These differences and changes over time and input will make you perceive it wider and more "interesting" or "deep". That being said you can emulate that with plugins too.
I hadn't thought that it's possibly component tolerance and differences in non-linearities between the channels adding up. That makes sense. The sensation I get going from digital stereo to analog stereo is very difficult to describe, it's not really wider or deeper (in my space at least), it's more of an increased ability to localize individual sounds inside the soundstage, like everything has finer degrees of separation.
@@jamespingel8730 Yes, the cause is the same. Like our eyes, our ears react different to movement/change. If something moves in space you have an easier time locating and perceiving it (catches your attention) - for instance exactly how far away it is and the same is true for your ears. Think about it like a 2 D picture (because you only have stereo). The dimensions and thus the separation is different once something moves and it creates the illusion of being 3D. You can sculpt the illusion of a room with reverb and carefully choosing how loud (close), quiet (far), left, right, down (low) or up (high) you make certain instruments. But as long as there is no movement, you'll have a harder time perceiving it "seperated" and in "relation to each other". But let me repeat, that you can make a "3D" mix in the box - no problem.
I would say I have a preference for the hardware, the bass (low bass guitar notes and bass drum) sound much nicer on the hardware for whatever reason, it's almost as if the bass and low end is being entirely re-synthesized on the hardware, the hardware has a slower "attack" and doesn't seem to push up that 1-3khz range, they seem to both offer a flavour though, thanks for posting this as it's nice to hear the hardware and software side by side
The depth and imaging of the hardware is just ridiculous. The plugin seems to fold in a bit comparatively, but that can possibly be useful on individual tracks and groups for more focus and density in a mix. At the end of the day it's just another color to paint with, and this video really shows that off well. Really great demonstration David!
In have both, I prefere using the hardware on the mix, on the other hand I prefere the plugin while I'm mixing on single tracks or bus, in order to limitate conversions
The 'brighter is better' effect is pretty rough on this. At the start I thought the plugin sounded cleaner but by the middle of the video it starts to feel unnatural. The Peakock & Madsin track just sounds insane with the hardware.
David, please make a video on both the SSL Native channel strips and buscompressors (V1 and V2). I think they're some of the best plugins around and would love to hear your insight on them. Thank you!
One point. Since your mixes sound great, if I only heard the plugin version, I feel the mixes still sound just as good if not better than many mixes you hear on the radio
I definitely feel that warmth from the analog vs the plugin. I have the plugin, but I don't have the hardware, might have to invest in one. Thanks David for the awesome comparison 🤘🏼👊🏼
One thing I normally hear when hardware is compared to a plugin is not there. The depth of wideness. Usually plugins move the depth inwards towards the center stage, while the hardware maintains the soundstage presence. This plugin does not appear to suffer from that problem
great video. Thank you very much. I also have the plug in and think it's very good. but here in this test it doesn't stand a chance against the analogue. analog somehow closes the sound in the right places and it gets punchier in a super balanced balance - it takes you right away. wow...I didn't think the difference would be that big.
Great series, looking forward to all the modules. Thank you for doing an actual direct comparison without confounding some other obvious factor that could spuriously drive an apparent difference. I'm so tired of seeing people make such comparisons without being exacting about this. If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times: You think a lot like a scientist, and your craft shows it.
15:40 I see what you mean about the vocals,with the hard ware , it's like the Rapper takes about 3 or 4 steps closer to the mic, or at least, it feels like that, hardware is more focused.
9:49 The Hardware sounds much fuller, more solid in the low end...the bass feels "supported" , if that makes sense, by the hardware, the plugin has more top end, but feels more flappy in the low end and less punchy
Awesome testing -- I love shootouts like this: thanks! The two absolutely sounded different in your examples, no question: I'm hearing the hardware almost acting like an upward expander on transients, adding grit and widening the mids nicely, while the plugin kind of tightens the mid-side aural balance, increases high end and perhaps adds a bit of satin on the upper frequencies. I've tried auditioning the Drive plugin on my master bus, but I think its best use is as a preamp for boosting gain in the effect chain, maybe after a retro-sounding analogue plug or for tightening sources that often sound 'loose' with too much ambiance, like drum overheads.
Hey David, thanks for putting the plugin and the real box head on in comparison! I wonder how do you mitigate the noise generated by the drive on the real unit? I find it especially audible when processing soft passages.
Yeah that last one you can really hear the quality of separation and punch in the low mid to bottom. The mid highs do sort of come apart on the plug in.
I have the fusion and the ssl plugins. I like the fact I can lay a few transformers in the mix. Which is pretty cool. Yet another good tool to use. I like the sound of the SSL plugins as well. A good budget friendly tool to use for those who can't afford the real deal. Won't be the same but it will be a few steps closer than not having it. 🙏🙏🙏
I can afford it - but spend that money on other hardware :) Also all these plugins combined are hundreds of hundreds of dollars. SSL did the trick separating each function into a separate plugin, and charges people one at a time....Smart for them - but dang - it's getting close to the 2K of the hardware. MAkes no sense.
I heard exactly what you heard David. What i'm hearing so oviously from the hardware is clarity and definition in absolutely everything in the mix. Everything sounds so crisp and balanced, it sounds like a record. I can also hear the typical cramming of elements into a narrower phantom centre with the plugin and that high end shift. You heard the 'dissipation' of definition with the vocal, but it's on all audio through the plugin. This isn't just SSL plugins, this is what i've been hearing for years with the majority of plugins. So fed up that they can't progress past this. Why on earth do plugins smear audio ?
@@whawha9016 Not sure how aliasing causes that. Phase response.. maybe. I know very little about dsp. All i know is, digital can capture audio almost perfectly. Convolution techniques can present a static snapshot of a post-process and emulate hardware for that frame at least. So, when it comes to realtime movement, algorithims and realtime cpu processing are 'not keeping up' or something, whatever causes this loss of definition. I keep saying - we need FPGA circuit emulation and the best programmers.
@@bontempo1271 I don’t see aliasing causing the imaging discrepancies either, that manifests as inharmonic noise in the high frequencies. But I’ve wondered about phase relationships A LOT. I’m a fan of Acustica plugins but don’t usually recommend them. Cuz they are extremely demanding in terms of CPU and latency. But there’s something about the sound of them I don’t get in most algorithmic plugins and the only thing I can really pinpoint as being more pleasing to my ears is in the imaging. That “3D” thing people talk about with hardware. Depth, etc. And phase can radically alter the perceived image. You can time delay just the low frequencies of a full mix and the entire stereo image will change, even the higher frequencies. Simply due to that phase shift. TDR Slick EQ has a button for this that is fun to experiment with.
@@mrnelsonius5631 oh nice shout on the the TDR, gonna experiment with that, while checking what happens in mono. Because with hardware you get that wider imaging, but it doesn't affect the mono mix - which is what could happen when you use delay to widen. I have Acustica Nebula, i've never checked the imaging !
@@bontempo1271 Nebula is my favorite plugin platform, hands down. I’ve never tried to measure the imaging or phase response. Just go by my ears but I’m convinced something is up with it. The EQs in that convolution tech in particular. There’s a sound to it. And it reminds me of the hardware EQs and pres. And I’m not one of those “hardware is always better” folks. Depends on the tool and the emulation :)
Incredible difference. It's interesting, I had been working with the plugins for a while and the more I used it the less I liked the vintage drive plugin because it just has no depth and separation. I was eyeing the real one for long time now and this video definitely confirmed it for me. The real one sounds more open, wider, and better separation. However the plugin seems to be more brighter which is something I didn't know before. It just.. I don't know comparing the two here the plugin sounds very mid-focused, like the highs in the mids gets pushed and saturated while the rest kind of lacks behind. On the hardware unit it's more subtle, more low mids and the width seems 'bigger'. I'll soon have the hardware as well and hopefully can do some A/B tests myself on my clients' mixes :) Great video anyway
Its almost like youre hardware has an extra transformer that the plugins dont have. I wonder if running your session at 192hz would make it sound closer.
My thinking was that oversampling on plugins make them have more detail on the top and low end. Wouldn't all your plugins be over sampled if you are running at 192? I heard Rupert Neve said that plugins would need around 300+ to get close to sounding like hardware.
No the same thing as oversampling plugins but in any case, why do you think oversampling will give more detail? Especially in the low end that's not true. Oversampling is more to solve certain, potential, problems such as aliasing, which depending on several things, it might not even be a problem. But the point is on ONE plugin, you will probably have very hard time hearing the difference
@@mixbustv Thanks for the reply. I forget what plugin it was. But some of them say to use the oversampling to improve the quality. On Saturn 2 i noticed without using x2 or x4. It sounds like it has less detail. Or maybe its just getting darker. I really noticed it alot on the SSL Bus comp, x4. I thought i could hear abit more low end as well when over sampling. I heard somewhere that having a higher hz project essentially over samples all your plugins. So it dont? Good to know. Thanks
Great Vid.. Love the fact your prepared to really compare.. Many won't go into this much detail, because sometimes , It can bring up the question as to why spend the money,.,, However, Like hardware, like plug ins,.,.,. mics, Convertors... etc,.,.,. There's so many variables to anyone wanting to. write , record , mix, produce, master... But here, The simplicity of a mix comparison,. is invaluable to those considering the back end of the final product., Good Stuff.. Yes.. I can hear the difference, but I still don't need either, I guess because im not dealing with different artists, Just my own stuff, so know what works for me, Pio where near Pro, but hey, its all about the music., Keep em coming., And BTW.. Autogain issues I find in a lot of plugs... The best ive experienced is the Tokyo Dawn Labs plugs, but for a plug that does soooo much , but Auto gain is SPOT ON is Newfangled Elevate.. Its voodoo
I Use acustica audio celestial/ceil on a daily basis wich its based on the fussion too and it sound way different than both (hard and ssl soft) will be cool if you can compare it too. The celestial mastering version its preety different than the mix edition too but cpu killer (i use the high eq as an audiosuitte sometimes) will be great if u check them out
Acustica Audio? Are you kidding, they just sell fancy GUI with huge cpu usage to make you think it must be dome quality LOL They are too far away as to quality and usabilty compared to established devs imo
Ha ha AcusticaAudio, their quality level is a lot lower than most other devs, they are not even able to create a decent compressor not to mention saturation. There is no analog in the plugin world anyway! AA are not plugins for profs, it's plugins for people who love visual pleasure
AcAudio keeps on releasing plugin after plugin and it is always the same mess. Cpu, latency, comps are useless. AcAudio is just a visual thing, you can use their plugins as a screensaver, if u love the look of analog gear. I consider AcAudio a designer of plugin g u i s, never took their stuff seriously audiowise, cuz they repeat doing the same instead of optimizing. An analog gui and high cpu doesn't give you automatically something close to analog, but their marketing seems to affect some people, they hear something they call analog or 3D, in most cases there is nothing or just some mud, stereo widener, hidden eq, crackles or hiss, well... You hear what you wanna hear or what they want you to hear
Awesome Vid David! Thanks. I am Waiting for weeks now for my Fusion to arrive. I did a/b tests between plugins and through acces analog online and to me the hardware sounded way better in my environment and with my monitoring and Room Acoustics. To me the drive plugin sounds bit phasey while the focus on the hardware is great! Cheers
As usual the hardware is better, but, as usual these days the software is close enough that it’s worth having for in the box work and definitely for individual track in the box work… if your just in the box then they are worth it, just maybe, I’m my opinion not a confident choice for mix bus or mastering. Also the ad you had at the start, top notch thing to advertise, will definitely be using this 👍👍
Thanks friend; What do you recommend?: i want to buy just 1 piece of equipment (Compressor/Limiter or Tube Preamp, both 2 channels) to send my digital mix to a final analog process. So it would be: 1. Send my mix to an analog limiter or 2: Send it to the tube preamp and finish limiting it digitally. I appreciate your response.
David sir I'm gonna be honest Althouth I love analogue gear and respect I use it also but weird thing the tools sounds better I love the brightness and brightness the low end of the hardware I don't knw why it sounds a little.hazzy
I feel like when comparing plugins to hardware, the hardware feels more "beefier" probably because of subharmonics and it separates the instruments more from each other then the plugins. Feels like you dive deeper into the mix. Highs and mids feels more rounder and pleasant to listen too. Both of course sounds great !
Let's clarify: subharmonics are not created here. Only very specific and special processing (dedicated) create subharmonics, which, as the word implies, would generate harmonics BELOW the lower fundamental. That's not a saturator, any saturator. You need something like lo-air, a special processing that synthesizes a sub harmonic. Which is also very different from something like MaxxBass (which people also confuse with). I say this because there is already a lot of confusion on well, everything, so yeah. The drive doesn't create that, not the hw, not the plug-in
Even through a phone speaker i definitely hear more clarity, juice, transients and life through a hardware. Software plugin sounds flatter and muddier.
There is definitely a difference between the plugin and the hardware, but the difference is maybe not so obvious. It's a little bit like digital vs analog synths...... on an analog synth you can listen to the same chord or arpeggio four an hour without getting physically exhausted of the sound(maybe because the waveform is always changing due to it's analog nature), but with the digital emulation, there is just something going on which I cannot put my finger on....., it's like the frequency response and the smack are the just the same as the hardware, but there is an "irritating" element in the sound, when listening to the digital emulation (almost as there there is some sort of aliasing going on)....its strange. End of story: Hardware just sound more relaxing and pleasant to me....At least in this example
I hear the difference alot more on the more "subtle" setting examples.. to me it was more like the more you drive it the more equal they became.. however the bass especially the lower it gets so the more you go into the subbass region.. the bigger the difference is.. especially on that last example it was extreme.. but it was also the one with deepest and prominent subbass I think.. Also the impact of the transients in the sub region lost punch, which to me is an indication for a HPF .. then I realized the hardware has a HPF knob turned to off. The plugin doesn't seem to have one? Or is it hidden somewhere? Does it have a HPF hardwired(or hardcoded? :D ) in there? That would automatically disqualify it from the masterchannel chain for me, could put it only on channels/groups where I don't care about bass phase shifts. That might also be the reason for the change of balance to the highs and also why the plugin seems a bit lower in peaklevel, which ofcourse is a obvious result of less bass. Can only say what I hear, but for me it sounds like a HPF is somewhere in the plugin version. Maybe they put the 30hz hpf of the analog version in there. Would be a strange design choice I think, almost like they defaulted it to a frequency and forgot to put the control for it on the UI
In my experience the plugins high end shift isn't as prominent with autogain enabled, which is a bit odd, but perhaps if you printed the plugin to the tracks with autogain enabled and then adjusted volume after the fact it could give a better comparison? Just an idea.
Thanks for doing this video!! You answered a lot of questions I had of the hardware. I do like the plugins, but I'm a Hybrid guy myself. How do you deal with the noise floor factor of the gear...any solution to remedy that?
Yes grab a knob and turn it down while printing if there's a quiet passage, have another 30 pieces of gear if the noise is a problem, use something else
I'm listening on ath headphones, the hardware seems to saturate more at higher settings and has slightly wider stereo separation almost like dual mono option gives on plugins. They sound slightly different but both good different, just preference from here I guess. I thought plugin sounded punchier at higher settings too in the first part but then later the hardware really stood out with nicer bass and overall definition but is that what you want, so not sure which one I'd go for, both ideally.
we call the fusion the confusion, because we were all was confused if it was doing anything, hell even made a tc electronic finalizer sound better then Chinese confusion
Thanks for the informative video. Yes the plugin seems to have a tilt eq. favoring highs. However at 12:40, after you've discovered that the auto gain button somehow prevented the shift to top end, you have never touched it again onwards. I thought that you would test it with and without auto gain. Maybe you would get relatively closer scores with auto gain engaged. Could you do that off the camera and share your findings in the comments sometime please? Thanks in advance
I like the plugin for mild saturation on the 2 bus right before the bus compressor. Autogain always on. For additional saturation (if I want it), I will put a tape machine after the compressor. Loving IK Tape Machine 440 right now.
Great video, noticed you had the transformer in the whole time, that's probably why you had such a big low end difference. Should of had the transformer off or used the transformer plugin in conjunction with the drive.
Yes, just like driving a Prius is the same small difference than driving a Lamborghini 😄 you still get to point A to point B. If that's small for you I'm not sure audio is your field
Great video ! For sure, difference is pretty audible, but can you make a short test, measure loopback of your converter ? Say, using Room Eq Wizard. Just curious.
@@mixbustv Sure, it is not to figure out the test. I'm discovering freq curve of different converters, may show you RME Fireface, MOTU 24 IO, if you want to ;)
Hey Mike, this was just a really great comparison! The best one I saw on your channel. It makes a hughes difference if you take your time to level match and I would love to see more comparisons like that. It was extremely helpful. Great job! And yes I would like to hear the SSL Bus Comp and the Fusion Stereo Image Plug-in as well! Thanks man! Cheers
In my opinion the hardware has more punch, focus and more precise in the low mids, while the plugin seems to be more airy and like it adds some space, on that tracks you played i actually prefered the sound of the plug in
I´m getting the Fusion in the next month, or so. I want to go Hybrid, and the Fusion seems to be the hardware piece to get. I have pretty much all the best plugins you can buy, and the sound is great. I just want to add that slight difference of depth that hardware can make. One mastering engineer on RUclips praised the Fusion, but said the Vintage Drive is useless for mastering, because it creates too much noise. Any thoughts on that?
@@flipnap2112 I dpn´t like subscriptions. I have the WAVES Horizon Bundle, and several other WAVES plugins. I also have over 30+ of the best Plugin Alliance plugins that I bought in the last 2 x years. Some, like the AMEK 200 sound just like analog. My productions sound great, but there are some clients that want to see some analog in the studio. Even though they don´t hear a difference, they like seeing SSL, etc., hardware. :)
@@DICARLOPRODUCTIONS well, theyre not actually subscription and its amazing what im hearing. plus theyre gearing up for a mastering rig with analog summing. should be interesting..As far as clients? I do film shoots sometimes. I bought a Blackmagic pocket PRO6K. shoots AMAZING footage but looks like a regular DSLR. Clients literally get upset about it, like "youre going to shoot this with a photo camera?" So, I 3D printed a Large rig, installed some blinking LED meters, put a cheap audio spectrum analyzer in the case and ran a bunch of dummy cables out to a few dead Vmount batteries. now im the BEST cinematographer they ever saw ha ha!! Clients are predictable
The hardware is better, it's not always entirely obvious given the source, but overall the hardware excels. The mid-range harmonic content becomes richer without changes the balance and top end. Definitely getting the hardware is the right choice overall.
I Watch a lot of comparison videos. My ears Are not that trained but the hardware seems to win every single time. Also so much more satisfying in use than plugins. I use some plugins for practical reasons but I try not to use them too much
The top end of the plugin was a bit harsh with that trap/whatever genre "Same downvibes" song was. With other songs I noticed that the kick just sounded like it was at a different place with the plugin than with the hardware. At least that is what I heard from my phone. And I think what you hear with the vocals might actually be caused by the aliasing.
Aliasing? Come on now.. 😂 aliasing is nowhere near that obvious no matter the context. And flipping the phase against a piece of hardware tells you very little, it's hardware, it doesn't sound the exact same for a split second
hi ... the hardw ... take back all mid range and we percive less atack ..... so we heard more mid low range and low punch the VST ... ADD soft atack in all mid range .... we percive more volume and soft lees low end this changes is minimal in hardw and vst but have radical result for master finish this 2 tools have valid aproach service we heard from 3 diference monitors and in AURATONE we percive perfect diference for this example ... is a pleasure David bye PD> if put before SSL vst one tool like a MB fabfilter so in linear mode and just in mid range we take back all mid range we can recreate a hardware situation just a opinion .
Once again, another great plugin vs hardware comparison. Call me crazy but I feel the plugin is clearer and brighter than the hardware. The hardware has this resonance/harmonic thing going on where it doesn't seem to be gluing everything together. Seems like there is more separation going on with the hardware. I think the master engineer would just glue compress that out on the final master anyways. But honestly at the extreme levels I couldn't tell the difference. 🤷🏾♀️
USE THE SUPER THANKS IF YOU LIKED THIS VIDEO! 👆👆👆
🔥 YOU GOTTA WATCH THIS! ➡️ ruclips.net/video/YuRVDyGL0VY/видео.html 🔥
GET SSL PLUGINS: bit.ly/3tTe6YS
HITSEND: hitsend.io/
🔥Join the Channel to Access All The Premium Courses:
bit.ly/2SNX8bx + Mix Consultations
🔥Bella Kelly's Single/Video Throat: bit.ly/3dxeJOf
#mastering #producer #audiomixing
Hi David, I’m just here really quick to say that I am a highly professional mixing and mastering engineer for around 20 years already and am subscribed to a bunch of mixing/mastering RUclipsrs and there really is no one who can still teach/inspire me with new stuff except you. Thank you so much 🙏
Thank you 🙏🙏
Cool
Agree 💯
Nice to see people in the industry be humble and honest about how they're still learning. Puts me at ease knowing that if it's normal for a pro to be constantly learning, even after years, then it'll definitely be normal for an amateur hobbyist such as myself.
The man is simply awesome and frank! I love that!
Thanks for a great test. I just purchased SSL Fusion, and though i watched many videos just needed to justify my purchase :P ... I've just rewatched this video with my headphones on and indeed I must say plugins still aren't equal to hardware but this test just proves that again. I am now really happy with my purchase :D
As a final test I think it would be interesting to test using all the 4 modules of fusion at the same time, on plugin vs hardware, with the same settings each. The individual differences may be small, but when those small differences add up I believe they create an enormous difference. That is the true value of hardware. (I'm very happy to own fusion hardware by the way!)
In the past couple of weeks I’ve been buying all the SSL Fusion plugins in discount. I already knew them from your videos (thank you, BTW). On their own, they’re very subtle, but once I grouped them in the Mix Bus with the same signal flow of the hardware (using the Mix Bus Mojo settings from the Fusion hardware manual as a starting point), my jaw dropped. My conclusion is that on their own, they’re very subtle, but together, they’re extremely powerful. Just waiting for the final one, the Fusion Stereo Image, to go on discount. Your videos are very important, specially when you try to match the settings, which is very helpful for real-life use in the plugin. Thank you.
Excellent review. I was sweating a bit because I own the hardware! I appreciate that you ran them through several different types and genres. Thanks for your time and effort as well as explanation. Very informative.
I just bought one but not installed yet .... I can say i was kinda sweating too, needing to justify my recent purchase, but indeed, not seen a video like this showing how much difference is still there between hardware and software. I must say that even with not a very great mix you can get away easily with good hardware gear, while with software, every mistake is unforgivable
@@MariooDisco "Every mistake is unforgivable" you can say that again ...
I'm only about 6:25 into this video, but I had to pause because there is a recurring theme I keep hearing in videos like this where plugs are compared to hardware. For reference, I'm in a well treated home studio, which I know well, through A/B'ing through 2 sets of great monitors. One thing that plugins just can't seem to pull off, are the lows and low mids. The plugin, like a lot of them, sounds "top heavy" like an inverted pyramid. The plugin also doesn't have the "polished" feel of the hardware, or even the (even though it's cliché at this point) depth of the hardware. However, once the settings were pushed, I actually feel like it had the opposite effect. The plugin sounded fuller, and the hardware seemed to lose the low end punch it had and become top heavy.
The plugin has more detail but the hardware rounds everything off and is denser. Also i definitely hear what you do on the vocals. Almost like the Fusion melts or glues the vocals into the mix rather than leaving elements separated and sitting one on top of each other in a narrow field. Glue glue glue.
really sounds like there's some m/s processing going on with the plugin. That change in freq that sounds like it's separating out the center channel in that range...strange. Thought that was supposed to be dedicated to the Stereo Image module...great comparison, thanks for this helpful bit.
AFAIK the plugin only saturate the Mid channel, not sure if that's true or not but sure it doesn't sound like the hw
the hardware definitely sounds more clear and warm. great vid as usual
There is a definite difference. The vocals pop more with the hw. The bass pops with the grunt (great description). Ballsy is the perfect term.
That plugin in pretty damn sweet though, especially when you can’t have 6 hw Fusions. Thanks!
The briefest sum-up of what the plugin sounds like to me versus the hardware is that the software is more "mid-forward". The vocals felt like they were pushed closer to me in every track. And I agree something about the stereo field is changing as well, I have my own theories about why that is, because I almost always prefer the stereo field I get out of analogue gear versus digital (I think it has to do with having two physical different circuits processing 2 audio channels versus 1 CPU processing a single stereo audio stream and passing that to a DAC).
The CPU is not actually "processing" the audio, it's just running mathematical calculations. But you are not too far off. A coded, digital plugin tends to process the two sides of a stereo channel in the exact same manner, unlike the programmer has made a deliberate attempt to introduce slight variances to L and R. Plugin Alliance do this with their TMT approach and the dual-mono versions of Tokyo Dawn Labs plugins have something similar going on under the hood. The difference between generic digital and genuine analog will always remain one of high precision but lack of character vs lower precision but character introduced by the properties of real life physique.
there are small differences between the left and the right channel - also there are "non-linearities". These differences and changes over time and input will make you perceive it wider and more "interesting" or "deep". That being said you can emulate that with plugins too.
I hadn't thought that it's possibly component tolerance and differences in non-linearities between the channels adding up. That makes sense. The sensation I get going from digital stereo to analog stereo is very difficult to describe, it's not really wider or deeper (in my space at least), it's more of an increased ability to localize individual sounds inside the soundstage, like everything has finer degrees of separation.
@@jamespingel8730 Yes, the cause is the same. Like our eyes, our ears react different to movement/change. If something moves in space you have an easier time locating and perceiving it (catches your attention) - for instance exactly how far away it is and the same is true for your ears. Think about it like a 2 D picture (because you only have stereo). The dimensions and thus the separation is different once something moves and it creates the illusion of being 3D.
You can sculpt the illusion of a room with reverb and carefully choosing how loud (close), quiet (far), left, right, down (low) or up (high) you make certain instruments. But as long as there is no movement, you'll have a harder time perceiving it "seperated" and in "relation to each other". But let me repeat, that you can make a "3D" mix in the box - no problem.
imagine a chameleon. You see it better when it moves.
I would say I have a preference for the hardware, the bass (low bass guitar notes and bass drum) sound much nicer on the hardware for whatever reason, it's almost as if the bass and low end is being entirely re-synthesized on the hardware, the hardware has a slower "attack" and doesn't seem to push up that 1-3khz range, they seem to both offer a flavour though, thanks for posting this as it's nice to hear the hardware and software side by side
The depth and imaging of the hardware is just ridiculous.
The plugin seems to fold in a bit comparatively, but that can possibly be useful on individual tracks and groups for more focus and density in a mix.
At the end of the day it's just another color to paint with, and this video really shows that off well.
Really great demonstration David!
In have both, I prefere using the hardware on the mix, on the other hand I prefere the plugin while I'm mixing on single tracks or bus, in order to limitate conversions
Yes, we would definitely want to see all plugins together Vs Hardware video! Thanks in advance, David!
Yes you read my mind I always wanted to hear these results thank you for making this video and please do all the fusion series against the real deal!
The 'brighter is better' effect is pretty rough on this. At the start I thought the plugin sounded cleaner but by the middle of the video it starts to feel unnatural. The Peakock & Madsin track just sounds insane with the hardware.
David, please make a video on both the SSL Native channel strips and buscompressors (V1 and V2). I think they're some of the best plugins around and would love to hear your insight on them. Thank you!
One point. Since your mixes sound great, if I only heard the plugin version, I feel the mixes still sound just as good if not better than many mixes you hear on the radio
Thank you!
I definitely feel that warmth from the analog vs the plugin. I have the plugin, but I don't have the hardware, might have to invest in one. Thanks David for the awesome comparison 🤘🏼👊🏼
WOW the difference is crazy! I wasn't expecting that.
One thing I normally hear when hardware is compared to a plugin is not there. The depth of wideness. Usually plugins move the depth inwards towards the center stage, while the hardware maintains the soundstage presence. This plugin does not appear to suffer from that problem
That’s exactly what i hear. That openess almost like a wav vs mp3
Please David make more videos on SSL plugins, we absolutely need your amazing analysis on these!
I got the hardware thanks to you. And I’m loving every bit of it. The plugins are useful. But I prefer the hardware.
great video. Thank you very much.
I also have the plug in and think it's very good.
but here in this test it doesn't stand a chance against the analogue. analog somehow closes the sound in the right places and it gets punchier in a super balanced balance - it takes you right away.
wow...I didn't think the difference would be that big.
Great series, looking forward to all the modules. Thank you for doing an actual direct comparison without confounding some other obvious factor that could spuriously drive an apparent difference. I'm so tired of seeing people make such comparisons without being exacting about this. If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times: You think a lot like a scientist, and your craft shows it.
🙏🙏🤘
I subbed because of this video. No nonsense analysis. Thanks!
15:40 I see what you mean about the vocals,with the hard ware , it's like the Rapper takes about 3 or 4 steps closer to the mic, or at least, it feels like that, hardware is more focused.
Nice that most of these plugins have been on sale for ~34.99. Probably a good deal to be had on Black Friday too.
9:49 The Hardware sounds much fuller, more solid in the low end...the bass feels "supported" , if that makes sense, by the hardware, the plugin has more top end, but feels more flappy in the low end and less punchy
Awesome testing -- I love shootouts like this: thanks! The two absolutely sounded different in your examples, no question: I'm hearing the hardware almost acting like an upward expander on transients, adding grit and widening the mids nicely, while the plugin kind of tightens the mid-side aural balance, increases high end and perhaps adds a bit of satin on the upper frequencies. I've tried auditioning the Drive plugin on my master bus, but I think its best use is as a preamp for boosting gain in the effect chain, maybe after a retro-sounding analogue plug or for tightening sources that often sound 'loose' with too much ambiance, like drum overheads.
Hey David, thanks for putting the plugin and the real box head on in comparison! I wonder how do you mitigate the noise generated by the drive on the real unit? I find it especially audible when processing soft passages.
hi, Great Comparison, I See like the plugin Dirts a bit the Highs, And It Seems like Autogain is included in the Hardware Function.
Yeah that last one you can really hear the quality of separation and punch in the low mid to bottom. The mid highs do sort of come apart on the plug in.
I have the fusion and the ssl plugins. I like the fact I can lay a few transformers in the mix. Which is pretty cool. Yet another good tool to use. I like the sound of the SSL plugins as well. A good budget friendly tool to use for those who can't afford the real deal. Won't be the same but it will be a few steps closer than not having it. 🙏🙏🙏
I can afford it - but spend that money on other hardware :) Also all these plugins combined are hundreds of hundreds of dollars. SSL did the trick separating each function into a separate plugin, and charges people one at a time....Smart for them - but dang - it's getting close to the 2K of the hardware. MAkes no sense.
@@massivebeatzz it’s called GREED and SHAMEFUL ON SOLID STATE LOGIC!
Unreal! Thanks for this comparison, the analog really makes it pop out the speaker and the plugin seems more flat.
Who’s the guy singing the reggae song? I like it and wanna check it out
I heard exactly what you heard David. What i'm hearing so oviously from the hardware is clarity and definition in absolutely everything in the mix. Everything sounds so crisp and balanced, it sounds like a record. I can also hear the typical cramming of elements into a narrower phantom centre with the plugin and that high end shift. You heard the 'dissipation' of definition with the vocal, but it's on all audio through the plugin.
This isn't just SSL plugins, this is what i've been hearing for years with the majority of plugins. So fed up that they can't progress past this.
Why on earth do plugins smear audio ?
It could be the phase response. Could be aliasing.
@@whawha9016 Not sure how aliasing causes that. Phase response.. maybe. I know very little about dsp. All i know is, digital can capture audio almost perfectly. Convolution techniques can present a static snapshot of a post-process and emulate hardware for that frame at least. So, when it comes to realtime movement, algorithims and realtime cpu processing are 'not keeping up' or something, whatever causes this loss of definition. I keep saying - we need FPGA circuit emulation and the best programmers.
@@bontempo1271 I don’t see aliasing causing the imaging discrepancies either, that manifests as inharmonic noise in the high frequencies. But I’ve wondered about phase relationships A LOT. I’m a fan of Acustica plugins but don’t usually recommend them. Cuz they are extremely demanding in terms of CPU and latency. But there’s something about the sound of them I don’t get in most algorithmic plugins and the only thing I can really pinpoint as being more pleasing to my ears is in the imaging. That “3D” thing people talk about with hardware. Depth, etc. And phase can radically alter the perceived image. You can time delay just the low frequencies of a full mix and the entire stereo image will change, even the higher frequencies. Simply due to that phase shift. TDR Slick EQ has a button for this that is fun to experiment with.
@@mrnelsonius5631 oh nice shout on the the TDR, gonna experiment with that, while checking what happens in mono. Because with hardware you get that wider imaging, but it doesn't affect the mono mix - which is what could happen when you use delay to widen. I have Acustica Nebula, i've never checked the imaging !
@@bontempo1271 Nebula is my favorite plugin platform, hands down. I’ve never tried to measure the imaging or phase response. Just go by my ears but I’m convinced something is up with it. The EQs in that convolution tech in particular. There’s a sound to it. And it reminds me of the hardware EQs and pres. And I’m not one of those “hardware is always better” folks. Depends on the tool and the emulation :)
Incredible difference. It's interesting, I had been working with the plugins for a while and the more I used it the less I liked the vintage drive plugin because it just has no depth and separation. I was eyeing the real one for long time now and this video definitely confirmed it for me. The real one sounds more open, wider, and better separation. However the plugin seems to be more brighter which is something I didn't know before. It just.. I don't know comparing the two here the plugin sounds very mid-focused, like the highs in the mids gets pushed and saturated while the rest kind of lacks behind. On the hardware unit it's more subtle, more low mids and the width seems 'bigger'. I'll soon have the hardware as well and hopefully can do some A/B tests myself on my clients' mixes :) Great video anyway
They both sound awesome. I got rid of my fusion - and right about now I wish I didn't. Awesome video
Its almost like youre hardware has an extra transformer that the plugins dont have. I wonder if running your session at 192hz would make it sound closer.
Lol higher SR will make the hw sound even better 😂 guys come on, that's basics. Also who mixes at 192?
My thinking was that oversampling on plugins make them have more detail on the top and low end. Wouldn't all your plugins be over sampled if you are running at 192? I heard Rupert Neve said that plugins would need around 300+ to get close to sounding like hardware.
No the same thing as oversampling plugins but in any case, why do you think oversampling will give more detail? Especially in the low end that's not true. Oversampling is more to solve certain, potential, problems such as aliasing, which depending on several things, it might not even be a problem. But the point is on ONE plugin, you will probably have very hard time hearing the difference
@@mixbustv Thanks for the reply. I forget what plugin it was. But some of them say to use the oversampling to improve the quality. On Saturn 2 i noticed without using x2 or x4. It sounds like it has less detail. Or maybe its just getting darker. I really noticed it alot on the SSL Bus comp, x4. I thought i could hear abit more low end as well when over sampling. I heard somewhere that having a higher hz project essentially over samples all your plugins. So it dont? Good to know. Thanks
Great Vid.. Love the fact your prepared to really compare.. Many won't go into this much detail, because sometimes , It can bring up the question as to why spend the money,.,,
However, Like hardware, like plug ins,.,.,. mics, Convertors... etc,.,.,. There's so many variables to anyone wanting to. write , record , mix, produce, master...
But here, The simplicity of a mix comparison,. is invaluable to those considering the back end of the final product.,
Good Stuff..
Yes.. I can hear the difference, but I still don't need either, I guess because im not dealing with different artists,
Just my own stuff, so know what works for me, Pio where near Pro, but hey, its all about the music.,
Keep em coming.,
And BTW.. Autogain issues I find in a lot of plugs... The best ive experienced is the Tokyo Dawn Labs plugs, but for a plug that does soooo much , but Auto gain is SPOT ON is Newfangled Elevate.. Its voodoo
Thanks for the video ! Hardware add a lot of depth of what I can hear through your video
I liked the sound of the plugin with pushed settings while on subtle tweaks I preferred the sound of hardware unit.
I’ve always wondered If you were to make a plug-in what would it be?
You may or may not gonna find out soon.. 🤫
@@mixbustv Going to go out on a limb here and say that saturation will be a major feature, if and when he decides to.
@@mixbustv 😳😳😳😳😳😳
I Use acustica audio celestial/ceil on a daily basis wich its based on the fussion too and it sound way different than both (hard and ssl soft) will be cool if you can compare it too. The celestial mastering version its preety different than the mix edition too but cpu killer (i use the high eq as an audiosuitte sometimes) will be great if u check them out
Acustica Audio? Are you kidding, they just sell fancy GUI with huge cpu usage to make you think it must be dome quality LOL They are too far away as to quality and usabilty compared to established devs imo
Ha ha AcusticaAudio, their quality level is a lot lower than most other devs, they are not even able to create a decent compressor not to mention saturation. There is no analog in the plugin world anyway!
AA are not plugins for profs, it's plugins for people who love visual pleasure
AcAudio keeps on releasing plugin after plugin and it is always the same mess. Cpu, latency, comps are useless. AcAudio is just a visual thing, you can use their plugins as a screensaver, if u love the look of analog gear. I consider AcAudio a designer of plugin g u i s, never took their stuff seriously audiowise, cuz they repeat doing the same instead of optimizing.
An analog gui and high cpu doesn't give you automatically something close to analog, but their marketing seems to affect some people, they hear something they call analog or 3D, in most cases there is nothing or just some mud, stereo widener, hidden eq, crackles or hiss, well... You hear what you wanna hear or what they want you to hear
@@gianocastello7706 screensaver?
I really like the hi band on the celestial. Give a shit what youtube haters say. Dont like it? Dont use it. I likes what i like.
Awesome Vid David! Thanks. I am
Waiting for weeks now for my Fusion to arrive. I did a/b tests between plugins and through acces analog online and to me the hardware sounded way better in my environment and with my monitoring and Room Acoustics. To me the drive plugin sounds bit phasey while the focus on the hardware is great! Cheers
9:05 During this comparrison, I noticed the hardware giving around a 350hz boost, while the plugin was giving a 1k boost. Anyone else hear this?
Low-End is also totally different. Thanks for the comparison
wow the plugin sounds so flat ! I use fusion plugins all the time but you opened my eyes concerning the quality of the hardware version, thanks !!
As usual the hardware is better, but, as usual these days the software is close enough that it’s worth having for in the box work and definitely for individual track in the box work… if your just in the box then they are worth it, just maybe, I’m my opinion not a confident choice for mix bus or mastering.
Also the ad you had at the start, top notch thing to advertise, will definitely be using this 👍👍
theres a 3d density bloom seperation and focus with hardware always
How is this song called at time-index 14:00? Peacock feat. Madsin. I like it very much.
Adrenaliens
@@mixbustv Thanks a lot. And great Video. It was really helpful.
Thanks friend; What do you recommend?: i want to buy just 1 piece of equipment (Compressor/Limiter or Tube Preamp, both 2 channels) to send my digital mix to a final analog process. So it would be: 1. Send my mix to an analog limiter or 2: Send it to the tube preamp and finish limiting it digitally. I appreciate your response.
David sir I'm gonna be honest Althouth I love analogue gear and respect I use it also but weird thing the tools sounds better I love the brightness and brightness the low end of the hardware I don't knw why it sounds a little.hazzy
hardware makes the vocal rounder & 'fixed'
I feel like when comparing plugins to hardware, the hardware feels more "beefier" probably because of subharmonics and it separates the instruments more from each other then the plugins. Feels like you dive deeper into the mix. Highs and mids feels more rounder and pleasant to listen too. Both of course sounds great !
Let's clarify: subharmonics are not created here. Only very specific and special processing (dedicated) create subharmonics, which, as the word implies, would generate harmonics BELOW the lower fundamental. That's not a saturator, any saturator. You need something like lo-air, a special processing that synthesizes a sub harmonic. Which is also very different from something like MaxxBass (which people also confuse with). I say this because there is already a lot of confusion on well, everything, so yeah. The drive doesn't create that, not the hw, not the plug-in
Even through a phone speaker i definitely hear more clarity, juice, transients and life through a hardware. Software plugin sounds flatter and muddier.
There is definitely a difference between the plugin and the hardware, but the difference is maybe not so obvious. It's a little bit like digital vs analog synths...... on an analog synth you can listen to the same chord or arpeggio four an hour without getting physically exhausted of the sound(maybe because the waveform is always changing due to it's analog nature), but with the digital emulation, there is just something going on which I cannot put my finger on....., it's like the frequency response and the smack are the just the same as the hardware, but there is an "irritating" element in the sound, when listening to the digital emulation (almost as there there is some sort of aliasing going on)....its strange. End of story: Hardware just sound more relaxing and pleasant to me....At least in this example
I hear the difference alot more on the more "subtle" setting examples.. to me it was more like the more you drive it the more equal they became.. however the bass especially the lower it gets so the more you go into the subbass region.. the bigger the difference is.. especially on that last example it was extreme.. but it was also the one with deepest and prominent subbass I think.. Also the impact of the transients in the sub region lost punch, which to me is an indication for a HPF .. then I realized the hardware has a HPF knob turned to off. The plugin doesn't seem to have one? Or is it hidden somewhere? Does it have a HPF hardwired(or hardcoded? :D ) in there? That would automatically disqualify it from the masterchannel chain for me, could put it only on channels/groups where I don't care about bass phase shifts.
That might also be the reason for the change of balance to the highs and also why the plugin seems a bit lower in peaklevel, which ofcourse is a obvious result of less bass.
Can only say what I hear, but for me it sounds like a HPF is somewhere in the plugin version. Maybe they put the 30hz hpf of the analog version in there. Would be a strange design choice I think, almost like they defaulted it to a frequency and forgot to put the control for it on the UI
Thank you, great Video, have the SSL Fusion my self, but in some situations i think the Plugins also are better tools instead of the hardware.
In my experience the plugins high end shift isn't as prominent with autogain enabled, which is a bit odd, but perhaps if you printed the plugin to the tracks with autogain enabled and then adjusted volume after the fact it could give a better comparison? Just an idea.
Have you considered flipping the phase and hear the difference that way?
Yeah, I got the channel strip and bus comp recently and would like to hear a compare to the real thing w those
Thanks for doing this video!! You answered a lot of questions I had of the hardware. I do like the plugins, but I'm a Hybrid guy myself. How do you deal with the noise floor factor of the gear...any solution to remedy that?
Yes grab a knob and turn it down while printing if there's a quiet passage, have another 30 pieces of gear if the noise is a problem, use something else
As almost always with hardware vs analog shootouts, the plugin sounds congested when the mix gets dense.
The difference is quite big, the separation is on a different league on the hardware.
thanks for your great work!!! you are doing the right thing!
ECO mode: low-latency tracking through transformer circuit. Oversampling or optimized (lower processing quality) code?
Amazing video as usual 🤘
I'm listening on ath headphones, the hardware seems to saturate more at higher settings and has slightly wider stereo separation almost like dual mono option gives on plugins. They sound slightly different but both good different, just preference from here I guess. I thought plugin sounded punchier at higher settings too in the first part but then later the hardware really stood out with nicer bass and overall definition but is that what you want, so not sure which one I'd go for, both ideally.
Hi David, this is perfect comparison !!!
we call the fusion the confusion, because we were all was confused if it was doing anything, hell even made a tc electronic finalizer sound better then Chinese confusion
Your fusion was broken if you couldn't tell if it was doing anything
Thanks for the informative video. Yes the plugin seems to have a tilt eq. favoring highs. However at 12:40, after you've discovered that the auto gain button somehow prevented the shift to top end, you have never touched it again onwards. I thought that you would test it with and without auto gain. Maybe you would get relatively closer scores with auto gain engaged. Could you do that off the camera and share your findings in the comments sometime please? Thanks in advance
Thanks for the testing.
Must say I wasn't impressed, it's not that it was bad, but expected more.
And…what about “Acustica Audio” plugins? 🙂🙂🙂
I absolutely love the Vintage Drive VST, but I'm definitely going to have to wait for it to go on sale again. $29.99 vs $199.99. I'd better wait.
What’s the second song you played? That sounded awesome!
The hardware opens up the mix, gives more clarity, and gives it more depth in my ears.
I like the plugin for mild saturation on the 2 bus right before the bus compressor. Autogain always on. For additional saturation (if I want it), I will put a tape machine after the compressor. Loving IK Tape Machine 440 right now.
Great video, noticed you had the transformer in the whole time, that's probably why you had such a big low end difference. Should of had the transformer off or used the transformer plugin in conjunction with the drive.
😄 what? At no point the transformer was on, like ever. And also if you have the hardware you know the transformer is barely noticeable.
It’s for me a slight difference that doesn’t change the listening experience.
Yes, just like driving a Prius is the same small difference than driving a Lamborghini 😄 you still get to point A to point B. If that's small for you I'm not sure audio is your field
I don't see a video on the Neve MBP Portico II. That would be an awesome video!
I'm not a fan of it
Great video ! For sure, difference is pretty audible, but can you make a short test, measure loopback of your converter ? Say, using Room Eq Wizard. Just curious.
Mine is a mastering grade converter, it's as flat as is gets
@@mixbustv Sure, it is not to figure out the test. I'm discovering freq curve of different converters, may show you RME Fireface, MOTU 24 IO, if you want to ;)
Hey Mike, this was just a really great comparison! The best one I saw on your channel. It makes a hughes difference if you take your time to level match and I would love to see more comparisons like that. It was extremely helpful. Great job! And yes I would like to hear the SSL Bus Comp and the Fusion Stereo Image Plug-in as well! Thanks man! Cheers
Who TF is Mike? 😂😂
@@mixbustv 😂😂😂 Oh man sorry David. Too hot in switzerland at the moment :) MikeBusTV😂
@@mixbustv btw my middle name is also David :) But somehow i saved you as Mike 😂
Probably confused him with Michael White. 😂
“Mixing with Mike”
He’s dope af too!
@@MerajTypeBeat Yes that could be possible :) but somehow David looks more like a Mike 😂😂😂
Do more ssl fusion comparison videos
In my opinion the hardware has more punch, focus and more precise in the low mids, while the plugin seems to be more airy and like it adds some space, on that tracks you played i actually prefered the sound of the plug in
The hardware is a bit scooped, and the plygin sound a little bit mid focused, instead.
@2:41 Great Idea 👍
Hey David, would like to see the Space and width function! 🙏
later
I´m getting the Fusion in the next month, or so. I want to go Hybrid, and the Fusion seems to be the hardware piece to get. I have pretty much all the best plugins you can buy, and the sound is great. I just want to add that slight difference of depth that hardware can make. One mastering engineer on RUclips praised the Fusion, but said the Vintage Drive is useless for mastering, because it creates too much noise. Any thoughts on that?
go with "access analog" and use the x tra cash for a weekend getaway
@@flipnap2112 I dpn´t like subscriptions. I have the WAVES Horizon Bundle, and several other WAVES plugins. I also have over 30+ of the best Plugin Alliance plugins that I bought in the last 2 x years. Some, like the AMEK 200 sound just like analog. My productions sound great, but there are some clients that want to see some analog in the studio. Even though they don´t hear a difference, they like seeing SSL, etc., hardware. :)
@@DICARLOPRODUCTIONS well, theyre not actually subscription and its amazing what im hearing. plus theyre gearing up for a mastering rig with analog summing. should be interesting..As far as clients? I do film shoots sometimes. I bought a Blackmagic pocket PRO6K. shoots AMAZING footage but looks like a regular DSLR. Clients literally get upset about it, like "youre going to shoot this with a photo camera?" So, I 3D printed a Large rig, installed some blinking LED meters, put a cheap audio spectrum analyzer in the case and ran a bunch of dummy cables out to a few dead Vmount batteries. now im the BEST cinematographer they ever saw ha ha!! Clients are predictable
@@flipnap2112 That´s hilarious!!!! :) Hey, but I know that Black Magic camera, and it´s great. Maybe next on my list!!! :)
My SSL Fusion is not noisy. Maybe the first series was.
Plugin is nice, but the hardware sounds better. Good video!
so comprehensive. thank you.
The hardware is better, it's not always entirely obvious given the source, but overall the hardware excels. The mid-range harmonic content becomes richer without changes the balance and top end. Definitely getting the hardware is the right choice overall.
I Watch a lot of comparison videos. My ears Are not that trained but the hardware seems to win every single time. Also so much more satisfying in use than plugins. I use some plugins for practical reasons but I try not to use them too much
Low-end is so huge on the HW !
The top end of the plugin was a bit harsh with that trap/whatever genre "Same downvibes" song was. With other songs I noticed that the kick just sounded like it was at a different place with the plugin than with the hardware. At least that is what I heard from my phone.
And I think what you hear with the vocals might actually be caused by the aliasing.
Aliasing? Come on now.. 😂 aliasing is nowhere near that obvious no matter the context. And flipping the phase against a piece of hardware tells you very little, it's hardware, it doesn't sound the exact same for a split second
hi ...
the hardw ... take back all mid range and we percive less atack ..... so we heard more mid low range and low punch
the VST ... ADD soft atack in all mid range .... we percive more volume and soft lees low end
this changes is minimal in hardw and vst but have radical result for master finish
this 2 tools have valid aproach service
we heard from 3 diference monitors and in AURATONE we percive perfect diference for this example ...
is a pleasure David bye
PD>
if put before SSL vst one tool like a MB fabfilter so in linear mode and just in mid range
we take back all mid range we can recreate a hardware situation
just a opinion .
Once again, another great plugin vs hardware comparison. Call me crazy but I feel the plugin is clearer and brighter than the hardware. The hardware has this resonance/harmonic thing going on where it doesn't seem to be gluing everything together. Seems like there is more separation going on with the hardware. I think the master engineer would just glue compress that out on the final master anyways. But honestly at the extreme levels I couldn't tell the difference. 🤷🏾♀️