software emulations are good for ...

[haze]

real world education.

admittedly, i might never get my hands on a real SSL, or a neve, or an LA2A, or a 1176, at least not at the same time, especially not on a Fairchild or Pultec.

where im from there are no schools for audio engineering. and the closest one can get to familiarize herself with all these world-class intruments are software emulations. im glad UA does the job very well, as most of you attest

if i ever cough up the extra moolah for a neve 1073, it's value to me would be far greater than just the alleged wonderful sound it offers. it gives me the chance to familiarize myself with a neve 1073's controls, response and behavior. true, these are not exact copies, but from where im coming, things can only get better ... imagine my fascination when i finally get my hands on the real deal

these software emulations give me the chance to actually hear and practice all the educational material available out there. when i read about how great the LA2A is, i actually never understood what that meant ... (but took their word for it nonetheless) ... until i got my UAD-1. it's nice to actually hear what one reads about, and be able to have concrete audio examples of written concepts.

 

[van Overhalen]

Yes that's how I feel about it, too.

Though there seem to be A LOT of UA-haters around, among them well known and respected pros who bash UA's hardware reissues as well as their plugs.

It is really puzzling when one guy says that the Fairchild plug is very similar to the hardware while another guy states that it absolutely doesn't do what a real Fairchild does...

Most of us will never know who is right...

 

[Arys Chien]

This is so true. I've used the LA2A plug-in before I got my hands on a real one. I felt that I was already very familiar with how the LA2A react to different level and dynamic change.

Most UAD-1 plug-ins, IMHO, still don't do what their hardware counterparts do. That's not bashing, just a conclusion after comparisons. I still love my UAD-1 plug-ins, while knowing their limit.

 

[cAPSLOCK]

With my limited use of various versions of the hardware the software is emulating I have found that the emulations only really start to show their differences when the settings are extreme. For example the 1176 sounds an aweful lot like the hardware. But when I really slam it it closes up a little more than the real ones I have used.

In a way I think of the plugins in the same class as the XXX 'inspired' versions of the hardware. Pehaps a little different, but in the same zone more or less.

I have never used a Fairchild though, and have no idea how close it is. I can say it sounds really great for the things I choose to use it on.

As to getting a feel for expensive or exotic hardware via the plugins... I agree entirely. I wouldn't be afraid of the Fairchild if I ever got my hands on one.

Now maintaining the Fairchild??? There is a huge advantage with the software version.

cAPS

 

[svs95]

Most UAD-1 plug-ins, IMHO, still don't do what their hardware counterparts do. That's not bashing, just a conclusion after comparisons. I still love my UAD-1 plug-ins, while knowing their limit.

Respect! Arys, have you used enough specimens of the hardware to know that the difference between the UAD-1 and the original(s) you heard is greater than between various vintages and specimens of the original? I'd be very interested in your opinion on this, as UA considers it their primary objective to be within that tolerance range! From what I've heard, they are, but how do you feel about that? Close? Not even close?

I think it's also important to be working mostly with 24-bit, 48kHz or 96kHz material to make the most valid comparisons.

Also, I'm very interested in the value of (mild) driven (input) distortion and circuit noise in the total sound package of analog gear. UA does not (yet) model these two aspects of vintage gear. A lot of people consider that an advantage of the plug-ins, but at usual levels, I don't think there is anything bad about those two things, and in fact I think they contribute subliminally to a certain euphonic experience in the analog devices.

Keep in mind that doing this would add massively to dsp cpu consumption.

As for the original topic, I hadn't thought much about that, but it's a very valid point! Cheers for sharing that!