DO ANALOG EQ’S SOUND BETTER!?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 ก.พ. 2025
- Check the blind test here: • Blind Test: Is an anal...
Check the behind the scenes here: • BTS: Is An Analog EQ B...
Stam Audio MEQP-1AS+: bit.ly/4aCshpk (direct)
Plugins used:
Universal Audio Pultec EQ: bit.ly/3CsCDLO (affiliate)
Acustica Audio Purple3: bit.ly/4jy0bPY (direct)
KiiveAudio Warmy EP1A: bit.ly/42y8SUl (affiliate, but free plugin)
Slate SD-PE1 from the Virtual Mix Rack: bit.ly/42vlpIa (direct)
► Hire me for your music: whiteseastudio...
►Thomann affiliate: whiteseastudio...
►Sweetwater affiliate: whiteseastudio...
►Plugin Boutique Affiliate: whiteseastudio...
►Become a member: / @whiteseastudio
INDEX:
00:00:00 Intro
00:01:08 The analog EQ
00:02:14 The Plugins
00:02:54 Matching method
00:04:51 The Plugins (again)
00:06:58 Comparison
00:09:50 Conclusion
00:12:43 Support the channel!
you should compare them with the same short loop, otherwise we’re distracted by the differences in the performance which is not ideal
AGREEED
it can ONLY work like this
What he said.
Also, good thing Access Analog exists. When I compared my own material using analog EQs, there were no shenanigans going on. I can safely say that more than enough api 550b equalizer plugins are close enough to the api 5500 hardware.
EXACTLY. And in addition it would be even more useful if the cuts are not "on beat".
wasn't paying that close of attending and reading comments and I didnt really notice when the change happened. When I was looking, changes were subtle. nice comparison. ty
without a visual cue it's very hard, because now you're more uncertain when the change happens. Also, given 5 examples it will be borderline impossible to make out that it's exactly 5 different units that are being compared and when they play. I wouldn't be able to do that and I can hear clear differences that I can name (in the "blind"-test).
Warmy sounds amazing and it’s free, would love to see a comparison between Warmy, Analog Obsession, and even throw the Waves one over there for educational purposes
Plugins sounded closed in, the air on the hardware was incredible, an open living breathing sound. It’s these minimal things that build up in an entire mix and seem small when comparing individually. A good review 🙏
Goddamn, sounds like the STAM is adding an extra dimension.
u are imagining things ;)!
It does.
And vitality.
There's something to be said for how different circuits affect a signal especially at high voltage, varying impedance and gain.
It sounds like it's doing stereo widening, which is weird because it's a stereo unit but none of the controls are stereo.
listen with your eyes closed
I felt that the Stam EQ gave a center fresh feeling, like more present sensation… the warmy sound it similar 😎
Grateful for the video comparison. But really would have loved to see the Apogee EQP-1A, the Analog Obsession Poortec, the Waves PuigTec EQ, the NoiseAsh EQ1A, and the IK Multimedia EQP-1A. Maybe U can do a part two video and add these along with the current ones. The best sounding ones in the current video to my ears are the UAD Pultec and the Kive Warmy EP1A. The mixes sounded closer to the hardware and the clarity was more profound and the overall mix sounded less muddy.
IMO the Stam hardware really bought that nice neo soul to life. The Warmy surprisingly was a close 2nd
Yeah, the warmy wasn’t as open as the hardware, but it had a vibe that I really enjoyed. Was shocked at how much I didn’t enjoy the slate or acustica!
Not a lot in it through the YT compression. Slate has more of the same dimension and open-ness of the hardware for me, but they all sound great in the grand scheme of things. Purple seemed to duck the dynamics somewhat, or maybe it was spiker on the peak saturation and so the average was lower. UAD was 'safe', Warmy was less dynamic but more consistent saturation (same thing) giving it a presence but also an annoyance also.
Thank you for making this. I quite enjoy the comparisons. I've used all these, as well as the real thing and multiple hardware clones, and I would echo the sentiment that they are all useful depending on the sound you are going for. I like the Kiive on aggressive electric guitar for instance and some synths and often the Acustica on vocals, strings, acoustic guitars. Personally, though I will always enjoy the hardware, I often choose plugins because I like to mix every song choosing each plugin to perfectly suit the personality of the track, then use the 2 bus and mastering to unite multiple tracks if the release is an album, ep, etc. The last thing I would say, and it is something that Wytse has mentioned before I think, I have used several actual hardware units and none of them sounded much more alike than what we are hearing with these plugins.
Hallelujah, a review/comparison with really good music! I didn't think I would see this on TH-cam ever ❤
def my favorite version of Sandstorm so far
The stam is a beast
Kiive nailed it ❤
Nailed the lows certainly
Great comparison - When looking at the video, I thought the Slate one sounded the worst... But when I was looking elsewhere I, I glanced back expecting it to be the hardware sounding the best, and it was the Slate - Very interesting how the visual experience modifies the audible one. Thanks for the awesome video
If you went to such lengths to compare the curves, it would be great if you've added just plain stock daw EQ plugin with close, as possible, curves.
Or/and when there are tube emulations present - just also add daw tube/warmth stock plugin
Stock DAW plugins are a totally different thing though, they’re purposely transparent. There’s no harmonic distortion being added on purpose as in these analog models. I’m not sure what that test would tell anybody except for ‘analog modeled EQ doesn’t sound transparent.’ Which we already know.
@@sub-jec-tiv first it may allow to evaluate difference between daw and modeled plugins and to what extent.
Second there are stock harmonic distortion/tube warmth plugins in the daw. Itis possible to add them to stock eq. And again, see what the difference actually are.
your forgetting about phase.
Great Video! I would love to see a 1073 comparison…Analog vs plugins.
WOA Kive is absolute beautiful
Stam definitely the king.
Hardware as always - sounds like it brings the elements alive and within a 3D realm.
To create the perception of 3 dimensions in this circumstance, you would need the perception of movement within those dimensions, and distortion of certain frequencies and variances responding to the input helps to create that perception. And of course, great designers tune their gear to have some kind of final character, whether that be musical or rhythmic or lush or polished etc.
spot on. microdynamics and shifts is the difference in how to circuit reacts to the input, which is causing that 3d depth
@@vandpiben I think so. Digital is 'perfect' reproduction and no variance. Also if i pick a sample point in the majority of software, it will always be the same whereas hardware is constantly changing.
I'm a software developer by day and audio engineering hobbyist by night. I've been diving pretty deep into exploring the digital/analog stuff lately. Decided to finally go all in on implementing my own tube amplifier VST. It's fascinating when diving into the nitty gritty and I keep wondering how design goals from plug-in makers influence the final product. Especially when it comes to performance requirements. And even then, when they sit down to plan their next plugin, where do their ambitions go, is it "we'll just match all the curves and measurements of the real unit and then we're finished"? - Starts to feel like it when most plugins have saturation that is just simple waveshaping.
There are several pitfalls in the process of developing audio hardware and software - there is no steady solid reference point. Hardware units all can sound very different within a batch, you'd be surprised if you actually measured the difference between your drivers in your speakers. And then the speakers on which you judge while prototyping are also a bias. But that is exactly where the "magic" is happening in analog. Your LR channels are driven through separate DC-coupled paths and are prone to crosstalk and mutual capacitance. If you're listening on headphones it's most obvious, but on speakers the "3D" image illusion actually just comes from very minute phase distortion and IMD between the channels. So to develop real sounding plugins you'd have to model a lot of electric "errors", stuff which engineers were always trying to mitigate until we reached digital. It's kind of pointless, and i say that owning a lot of hardware, but mixing almost 100% ITB.
@crystaldive_tv9475 I get where you're coming from. But in terms of tube amps especially, power supply sag, bias drift, simulating the tube cathode, grid, anode, plate voltage and resistances, not to mention the output transformer, those little electrical "errors" constitute basically the whole tube amp vibe that the engineers were certainly not trying to avoid. But I don't want to go into semantics.
If you want a clean digital filter that gets the job done that slaps a simple waveshaper on the end for a bit of character, it gets the job done and I get the utulity in that. What I don't really get is that they slap a coat of Pultec paint on it and market it as such.
You are virtuoso-soooo good. Appreciate the help figuring audio out.
Nice, thanks ! Yes, Massive Passive please.
For me is very clear that are some free movement on the harmonics created for the hardware unit. Is clear best sounding for me. I think is about the precision of the digital processing vs the imprevisibility of electrical circuits.
Nice vid, great comparison format. Love the Slate sd-pe1, sounds most open from the plugins to me, Warmy not so much, Acustica most bearlike. That is, representing impactful bass.
Funny that I come on youtube and see this video.. just lastnight I put the ignite pultec on a mix and used it subtlety and thought it sounded amazing.. clean up the low-mids just nicely.
Thanks for the heads up on the Warmy, it vibes nicely and gets the lows right. The highs aren’t quite as nice- more precise and slightly less yum-factor than the analog. The Acustica gets the highs and lows right but it doesn’t sound as alive as the analog. I use the Acustica one for individual tracks and i’m about to start using this Warmy.
Yes please, these comparisons are great.
I appreciate this so much! I’d love to see this done with other EQs nd compressors
1. Thanks for this comparative video, and yes - would like other such formatted videos please.
2. Another difference between analog and software is you can always resell the analog ouboard.
3. In fairness to software, as I and several other musicians who lost their studios in the L.A. fires know, software doesn't burn down.
Lastly, to my ears the UAD Pultec sounded the best, but it could've been my Sennheiser earphones. Will check again with other cans.
My new monitors and room correction gear arrived yesterday. So the only gear left on my studio gear wish list are some analogue EQ
Top 3 on my list:
Zahl EQ1
Rupert Neve Master Bus Transformer
Cranborne Audio Carnaby HE2
I didn't expect that. The UAD plug sounded better than the Stam. My fav so far.
I have to say, the Stam just takes it the extra 5% into magic territory. Beautiful. The Kiive is close with the vibe, but the top end seems not as open or smooth. I use the UAD often. I could see in individual tracks getting away with either but on the 2 bus, that's worth the hardware price.
I feel like the sound of the room is going to have a more noticeable impact than the EQs
I definitely know which one was the most fun to use.
DAW controllers... if you know what you're doing and create handy macros etc. plugins are more fun than analog units. Still not as pretty, but definitely more fun and a lot quicker.
@akagerhard Many people who know what they're doing still find real knobs, buttons, and dials to be more fun than those on plugins. 👍🏻
@akagerhard NOT THE ANSWER I WAS LOOKING FOR.
@akagerhard but you are right about macros et al. I had an absolute blast for about 2 weeks programming CSI controllers for Reaper. I disagree about the “quicker” part though, for a lot of the basic things like levels, eq, and compression.
@@stevedoesnt how? with a controller all you do is insert the plugin and turn the knobs. you can even set up templates and thus you won't need to insert the plugins. You don't need to reach, you don't need to turn around. All controllable from one controller.
Each has it's own Tone
What i have noticed :
Stam : Bright tone
Warmy : Punchy tone
UAD : Clean tone
Acustica : Vintage tone
Slate : Closest tone to the Hardware unit but less bright
weirdly I like the nice warm bottom end on the UA, great test 🙂
Very interesting 👍
A test between the Stam and the gain lab could be cool🤘
Yess!!
Yeah, I'd love to see that too. I think I'm going to prefer the Empress, but I could be proved wrong!
@@dans5529 the empress has unique amorphous core transformers that are less colored (in a good way) in my opinion. It makes it better suited to some bottom heavy modern music, as there isnt so much overt transformer coloration. Certainly not saying its “better” as that is overly simplistic, but I feel it may be more versatile. A lot of people buy solid state pultecs for this very reason, but I feel that the empress with its more neural transformers, can cover this ground well
@ Interesting, thanks for the explanation. I'm not very technical when it comes to these things, but I've always been really impressed by the sound of the Empress whenever I've heard it. The tube boost feature on it sounds great too.
The Stam vs Gainlab vs Manley Massive Passive and Stereo Pultec is what I'm hoping for. The HCL Oz would be another good inclusion. Wes Audio gear often sounds good within a sweet spot but then too modern/stiff/filtered when pushed to my ear - all that digital control is not without some drawbacks.
Very curious how Bettermaker's Passive Equializer stacks up. They have a hardware version and the plugin, which can be controlled with the hardware.
Such a big difference :) my old ears hunted white tinitus made out some(mostly how load or dirty) difference by the bass section, mid range was close (the tone from the Lady was more consistent), on the high i can't say much because of standard peep tone.
But i learned how important my own PC soundcard setting, that made a huge difference to amplify part of the sound regions...if i can tell white my broken english what i mean. Swiching of the equaleser made more flat the tone what i thinked, would change sound.
Good job! Maybe as a soft "feedback" - Personally I am more interested the higher in freq you boost in the top-end, would be fun if you boosted 16khz air, that is not an easy freq to just add in digital in my experience, the most sensitive to aliasing etc.
The song is beautiful.
More of these Wytse please.
Appreciate the comparison! They all sound good except for the Slate in my opinion. The hardware has that little bit of extra magical fairy dust, like always. It would have been nice to see the Gainlab Empress in this video somewhere too!
AnalogEQs ITB that are underestimated:
1) Crysonic ANUNA
2) Kiive Audio Mastering EQ
3) Tone Projects-Hendyamps Michelangelo
4) Plugin Alliance-Tomo Audiolabs LISA
5) Plugin Alliance-Black Box Analog HG-Q (built before the hardware version!)
6) The EQ on Kiive Audio-Mixland 3348
7) The EQ on TEAC-6100 MK II
Saturation plugins are BETTER than Analog EQs:
1) JMG Darkfire (United Plugins)
2) JAM/JAM 2 and Pumpkin PRO (Acustica Audio)
3) MIA Laboratories Pi & Phi vII & vIII
4) W.A Production RedClip
I love hardware EQs more so than plugins. Unfortunately, they are expensive and you’re limited on channels. So it’s a give and take. Plugins definitely have a leg up here and can easily be recalled.
Listen to the snare on the Stam analog unit versus the plugins and that tells most of the story. Surprising amount of difference between the plugins, agreed that it's not straightforward to just say one is better than another, although the Slate one sounded least good out of all of them to my ears.
If I owned Lewitt I’d be real happy with this demo. I Noticed how the mic sounded good so far away from source & then googled the name on the shirt.
Someone needs to make one of these videos where one version of a mix is done entirely on hardware, and another version done entirely with that same hardware's plugin counterparts. So EQs, compressors, transient designers and all the rest. I think being able to hear an entire mix demonstrating multiple pieces of hardware (or the equivocal plugin) in full context would really "settle" the analog vs digital/plugin vs hardware discussion - at least at the mixing level.
Wytse I have an idea, can you record a mono signal thought the unit and then isolate the side signal, everyone is hearing a width change and I want to show them why
Hi Beat Lick!
Email me and I can make that happen...
Can you re-do this on the same 8 bar loop? As the track is becoming more wide and narrow as different elements come into it, so it makes it harder to tell what the difference is. Although there certainly seems to be someting going on.
Like a part of the track where backing vocals (wide) and main vocals (centered) are both in at same time, or one after the other quickly within the 8 bars or so. As well as the shakers and hats
Great video! I always like comparisons like this between the actual hardware But you missed my fav one which should not be slept on!
TimP Dual Tech V2 - this is a 3rd party lib for Acustica Nebula. Nebula is kind like its own thing and lives of 3rd party devs
The biggest difference by far would be the price, right? The Analog costs nearly 3000$, the UAD Pultec for example you can get most of the time for 40$. This should be mentioned and also taken into consideration.
Excellent Video. Would love to see more like these.
I have a Pultec Clone from Warm Audio, but also use Pultec-Plugins. All comes down to use case. I use the hardware unit mostly on the master bus or for re-recording.
thank you for the comparison. You confirmed me AA Purple is way above the average hardware you can buy now. What Purple does to the low end is outstanding, it provides a soft compression different for each portion of the spectrum; that not only creates glue and roundness but can make, for the song you used, kick and bass working perfectly together.
There wasn't a single plugin, or the hardware too, I didn't like. Each of those got its own character but for me AA stands above.
The hardware is more open in the stereo width. Overall sounds nicer.
Always nice to get shout at when starting one of your videos. I have a "value statement" The Slate sounds anaemic
Nice Shootout, Should we be switching off TH-cam Stable Volume & Ambient Mode in settings to get the best from this type of comparison 🤔
There is a nice dimension in analog, and bass is much more smooth without "plastic". Overall looking on plugins - Kiive sounds the closer to the analog. But you used ovrsplng x8
The hardware def sounds best to me but the UAD Pultec and Warmy sound pretty darn good too. I'd say if you have the budget go hardware!
Please do more this kind of analog vs. plugin comparisons ! For me 1. Stam, 2. Kiive.. Thanks man !
on the plugin side, the kiive one came out on top, followed by acustica, then uad...slate to my ear narrowed the stereo image a bit and made in sound a bit thinner... and yes, Stam makes amazing gear, but you do need patience
Feels like you kind of want a little of the dry mixed back in with a lot of those plugins. In parallel, it can be easier to lose that last little bit of plug-in veiling.
Imo, the analogue is better. Something about how it opens the mids, more 3d space. Kiive isn't too shabby. I found a secret weapon, an old 70s mixer with high and low shelf, I can max the high shelf and it still sounds completely natural. Never heard anything like it. No plugin comes even close, and I have tried many!
Wow. Purple is insane and alive. How was the cpu usage?
Omg you did it! Thank you!
i just got the analogue obsession version of this and I really like it. More than the UAD version..
the Warmy sounds real. Dang it man.
Great vid, they all did a different cool thing. Hardware/Software both sound good when in the hands of a great engineer like WHITE SEA..
I don't know why, but the Slate version sounds flat and horrible.
It sounded really harsh to me. I really didn’t like it!
Same here ,,,,
Yeah it's trash
That’s because it is 😅
Yeah, I didn't like it either. The Kiive Audio one though, I really liked that one.
Nice mix!
I liked the warmy plugin, but the analog still, more depth and a sort of relaxation.
the hardware is clearly the winner to me. Then Slate Digital. Followed by Kiive, UA and last acoustica
There wasn’t much of a personal opinion in this video..
I listened through a mid priced Bluetooth speaker - you know - like most people in the real world do 😅 and it was hard to distinguish (significantly!) between them (except for the rubbish Slate). The Warm sounds real good vs the hardware, so gone are the days when hardware is like 'Wow! What a difference'. Then again, I guess it’s the small percentages adding up in a professional recording.
Here’s a question for you: for a home studio with ambition - if you were to invest in ONE hardware EQ or combined EQ/compression (like e.g. an SPL) what would you get? Would you be happy recording only using plugins?
One thing that ALWAYS gives away the hardware unit are the changes in the stereo image. Acustica does a little bit of that effect too.
Of the plugins, I liked the Warmy best. I think it sounded much better than the rest; crisp, punchy and with a nice warm distortion - and I think It was the one which came closest to the analog. That being said, the MEQP-1AS+ sounded amazing compared to the plugins - even through TH-cam.
I did the same with my Nightpro EQ3D and the UAD Maag EQ4. The only difference was that the knob values weren't exactly the same. Tweaking the values a little offset from each other everything zeroed out.
I’d like you to include if and how much each plugin aliases.
from 7:38 the plug vs the hardware : the sound of the hardware in the high seems more defined and the overall more balanced, less muddy. I have 2x 4 way monitors adam s4x-h, coupled with a 10 inches bass sound system. Maybe i'm wrong, but if i would have to spend money now, it will be on the hardware and unfortunately for the moment i spent all my money on monitors..lol
Very nice, it would be great if you could leave the test files (including the unprocessed audio) so I could really appreciate the quality, you know, TH-cam compression...
Do digital farts smell worse
I think my Bettermaker EQ502P is the best Pultec emulation, it sounds amazing
Is the difference in sound worth the difference in price? I do think what you said about input gain was interesting btw, going to test that with my pultec plugs.
Warmy just sounded like a clean eq I didn't really get a Pultec vibe from it. The acustica disappointed me, it sounded to scooped in the mids and kinda softened the sound a little. Surprisingly the slate digital held up quite nicely against the Stam. Uad is good as expected
The hardware unit made the low end more cohesive, balanced. But I felt the voice just got back in the mix.
Did the blind comparison and my least favorite, consistently, turned out to be the hardware. Do the blind shootout. Don't cheat. You might find out you don't need to spend that thousand dollars (x2 for stereo).
I was really surprised how much more "open" or whatever you might call it the Stam Hardware sounded. I thought I wouldnt notice much of a difference between any of them.
When switching back to UAD, it felt like a blanket was put on top. (excagerating)
However it felt as if the Stam had a tid different curve in the mid than the others? less "sweet" and more forward at 5k or so? so maybe that is what makes me feel its more open? I dunno..
Then ofc, the Stam is new, and perhaps all the plugins models vintage ones with each own character.
Very interesting in any case.
Thank you for your comparison!
STAM sounded like a stereo widener working. Like some sort of mid/side thing. That's not what it says on the faceplate but maybe the circuit does it inherently?
IMO the Stam hardware sounded significantly better - it was instantly and consistently noticeable: big and fat - yet also open. Plugins often sound small, pinched and/or "flat" to me when directly compared to a good piece of analog gear. I have the hardware Manley Stereo Pultec and midrange EQs - they sound way better than plugins and just seem to help elements/program material instantly sit in the mix. That being said I still use the UA, Kiive and Acustica plugins at times for convenience. Plugins have definitely come a long way.
I would be really great if you could include more Pultec emulations like the Need, Nomad, Waves etc.
During the comparison, I would have liked to hear the audio switch between active and bypassed states before moving onto the next device.
You should really try and compare it to the Apogee Pultec plugin, it's officially endorsed and licensed by Pultec. I have heard it in action and I have got to say it's insanely good
I have the Softube, (as well as about 8 others but the Softube is most convincing for me) - anyway I believe it's very similar to the UAD
Love Sandstorm by Darude! The hardware unit sounds a bit more silky in the mid highs, better vocal tone.
I like the Stam the best. The low end feels more 'in-focus' - better clarity. The plugins lost that focus to varying degrees. I thought the UAD was the best of the plugins.
Ultimately, the ability to apply multiple instances of plugins - and the potential for software updates to improve the plugin - and the cost - beats out analog for practicality.
STAM sounds wider, which is weird because as far as I can tell it's not doing any widening, unless there is a subtle widening baked into the circuit. All the plugs sounded like they were doing EQ, STAM sounded like EQ and widening.
I think that is simply saturation as if you add a tiny boost in the highs - overtones or sneaky eq - things immediately feel warmer, deeper, wider...
I also think that noise or any subtle movement does that - try modulating an EQ ;-)
Due to component tolerances, the left and right channels don't perfectly match in analog. Those differences generates 'side channel' content.
@@sparella Yeah that too as it gets older :-)
@@sparella this is the analog secret sauce that's baked by default in all stereo analog gear.
@@sparella This way of putting it really clicked for me. Also I realized after that this is a stereo unit despite not having any stereo controls, so it really is processing L/R separately.
Would be nice if the new bettermaker pultec plugin was in the comparison cause it sounds amazing
Could you please include Logic Pro's Pultec Emulations, please? Even if they're not good, it will be nice to hear the difference from a real Pultec
I think anything with buttons and knobs sounds great. Why do you think Hotdogs taste so delicious?
All nice, but the plugins have more 'mush' to the sound. The Analogue is cleaner/clearer, but it will depend on your use case.
Thank you for this my friend