Is Studio One's Fat Channel Better Than UAD?!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.ย. 2024
- 🎁Get My FREE Studio One Presets Here!
www.producingi...
In this video, I'm comparing Studio One's emulations with UAD's hardware emulations. I constantly get asked if Studio One's Fat Channel is any good, and in this video, I'll show you!
Timestamps: ⏲
Other Freebies!
Get FREE Slate Digital Presets Here!
www.producingi...
Get The "Mom In The Car Compression Checklist" Here!
www.producingi...
Get "The Ultimate Guide To Recording Vocals At Home" Here!
www.producingi...
Thank you for watching!
Don't forget to click LIKE and Subscribe!
Now as always, GO CREATE!
In solo, the UAD plug-ins sound fuller but in the context of the mix, the fat channel LA-Comp brought the vocal forward a little better.
Definitely agree with you
I agree was thinking the same thing
I prefer the UAD in both situations. I feel it warmer and give me more emotion even in the mix
@@stephenr2434 I could not before some ear training. Now I can.
The gear you use might also be a factor.
I was listening on my iPhone with only one working speaker, but I felt the “context of the mix” was more of a volume indifference than the fat channel bringing the vocals out in the mix. But they both worked, so I might have to try this fat channel
The one that works best is the one that you have…
I totally forgot I owned the fat channel. Thanks for this. Put it right on my mix bus
UAD.. Winner.. Hands Down
Except, also, no.
Great Vid! The UAD stuff is highly overrated IMO - Sold all my UAD rack hardware after being convinced by "experts" that UAD was that best to have - The Truth is that you can now make GREAT Music with even Stock and Inexpensive VSTs plugins these days, and MOST people that listen to the Music will NEVER notice the differences between thousand+ dollar gear and inexpensive plugins.... If you know your Software and have good knowledge of at least basic mixing and sound engineering you can get GREAT results regardless, and its only the gearhead pixel peeping guys like Us that care and get all our panties in a bunch about these microscopic differences ! LOL
In my own experience I don't like the way the fat channel plugins work in this case ( compressors ) I will always use Waves CLA Collection (Compressors) as they work great for me.
Timely topic (as per usual), Brother.
This is hard for me. I use fat channel all the time, thats my go to plugin ever. If the source material es good fat channel do it great, but if not I believe third plugins can achieve better results. Another things is that Fat channel recreates the eq curves and the compression behavior of the analog units...NOT THE HARMONIC DISTORTION, so maybe the comparisson is not fair. I believe that not having the harmonic distortion is a blessing cause its all marketing thing.
I agree. For example, I preferred the Fat Channel LA2A in the context of the mix. It didn’t add much harmonic distortion and pushed it a bit more up front in the mix
Can someone explain to me what a fat channel is? How does it differ from individually placing effects on your channel strip
I’m new at learn how to mix and master and these is still kind of confusing me
Gain on LA-2A has nothing to do with compression, its basically output gain. Pultecs high end attenuation is chosen on the far right knob, not in the high frequency section, it's a bit different compared to how low end works
Not even close to uad. When i use a la2a plugin i always pick the uad one. Why? Because its sound like a real hardware la2a. Fat channel sounds good but it doesn’t have that magic im looking for.
Maybe magic is inside you and your mixing skills. Regards
@@marsrivers you dont understand. The fat channel is a good plugin in studio one, and yes u can mix with it but thats not the point. When im looking to use something that sounds similar to classic analog hardware like a pultec, la2a, 1167 i always go with uad. The fat channel just sounds completely different. If you have trained ears u can hear the difference.
And before i use the fat channel i would rather go with waves or slate digital… 🤣
@@iliravdyli4109 I got it. Best wishes
Exactly
I was about to say - no big difference. Interesting comparison. Thanks for sharing.
With the pullets I like more the UAD version, for some reason I find the Fat channel feel a little behind in terms of texture. even though you can have great results with it.
Thats because it does not recreate harmonic diatortion of vintage hardware, wich is great.
The freaking unholy use of Autotune actually makes it really hard to hear much difference in compression.
That being said, you can mix just anything with the stock plugins in Studio One. And the Fat channel is really good.
Thanks 🙏 very healpphul tutorial
Wrong. The attenuation knob on the right has nothing to do with the boost knob. The attenuation knob works with the atten select on the right. Being said, the second section in the Pultec does not have an attenuator
MAke more of this videos! for example with the 1176 and the vintage eq
If you analize what is happening with harmonics, fat channel does not have harmonics, I mean, it is kind of a linear compressor (with the LA2A attack and release response). So UAD version indeed generate those harmonics as the original hardware.
Fat channel is intended to be linear.
@@marsrivers However, some emulation are not, like the 1176.
@@AlexProgOfficial i know. When i want harmonic distortion i look for it, when i want only the compressor behavior i go for this
UDA for me... cool song too
For me it's just really hard to judge on YT there are sound differences, yeah but... But I like your work!
Great video!!
I'm sorry, but cork sniffing compressors when the track is full of tuning artefacts? Get it right at the source first.
But UAD won big time in this comparison. Much more open and bigger sounding. Dare I say, 3D. Especially with the Pultec.
Lesss goooooo!!!!!!!!
hello can you do a video on the walkthrough of this track?
I did! You can watch it on my channel called “I asked AI to write a song”! I even linked it at the end of this video!
Even though the UAD sounds more open the FAT channel sounds WARMER
ME I use
Nebula Tim P Opto32 and Nebula Varimu and Cupwise FUCTI MU
Tim P U76
And Slate Digital
Modern FG 76
And FG2A
Kiive Audio
VU Comp
Those are pretty much
Blow UAD
76 and 2A Comps away
UAD is not “Always “ the Best 🤣
I agree. UAD seemed to be the most “accurate” to me. But I prefer Slate Digital. The custom opto is my all time favorite!
Why disrespect UAD this way? I’m a studio One user; however, engineering is of areas of discipline rather every area. That said listening over the internet one’s ear is not accurately hearing the difference plus the composition is already nicely mixed. 👎🏾 Studio One continue Kaizen of the DAW in a way it better competes with Pro Tools to become #1.
The high end on the UA Pultec is nicer but otherwise no difference
i liked the presonus silver more and i liked the uad pultec eqp 1a more
UAD sounds more glued, natural and a little aggressive
UAD sounds better but the Fat channel still sounds good.
In the FAT channel it has resonance!!!
The uad version seems to be louder than the fat one.
I own fat channel stuff via StudioLive16R ...the compressors are horrible compared to literally ANY other compressor I've used. I can't vouch for the EQs though since they basically did what they needed for my live band. I have enough ITB eq plugins.
UAD has clear highs pumped up a little
In the Mix Fat is better
UAD may be better in narration or voice over
JUST USE STOCK
The closest thing to hardware is Acustica Audio, though it takes some research to figure out what's going on over there (though they are making it easier to understand). Try some of their demos. AI modeling will take over soon enough I suspect.
UAD sounds way better.
I love studio one but fat channel really ain't it ... I mean it's not even close :D
Uad is much better
Heck no they aren't lol. UAD are industry standard plugins for pro's for a reason.
Exactly
This comment was very accurate 3-5 years ago.
@@austinbridge uad and acustica audio make the best emulations period.
0:21 how would you know if you don't use hardware? Hypocrisy in the first 30 seconds 😂
I’ve used it before! I never said I’ve never used it! I don’t use it now because I realized it was a waste of time and money. I got a chance to sit in the drivers seat of a multiple thousand dollar analog studio and my music still sucked. That’s when I realized it wasn’t the gear, it was me. Ever since then I have only been in the box!