I seem to remember someone at Empirical labs mentioning that the hardware Distressor and Arousor plugin ratios are not the same, and that you need to go one LED lower on the Arousor to match the Distressor. Something about the Distressor ratios actually being "incorrect" in the hardware.
Just saw a NAMM 2018 video where they mention that the 3:1 ratio on the hardware is actually "incorrect" and the equivalent setting on the Arouser is 4:1. So they "fixed" that in the plugin, and have a reference in the Help page showing the equivalent ratios for the hardware if you're trying to match that.
@@mixbustvI can't hear the 3.300€ in difference, for whatever "reason" though!... In a context of a mix I am pretty sure that you can't find the difference either. Cheers .
That's a World class singing! Amazing voice! Right after first example told myself that hardware sounds fuller, has more body, more organic. Plugin is cleaner, more hi-fi'ish. It's definitely not a bad thing.
I really wasn't into hardware vs digital, but since I have the BLA CLA Bluey hardware, the main difference I notice between hardware and software, is the attack and density. Hardware better handle attack on vocals (it's less jumpy) and the sound seems more dense. It's very obvious en Bass with the distressor. Hardware is less squash but more dense and more leveled
I find them to sound really different tbh, although they share the essence. I find the Distressor, as you said, with a more natural compression and envelope but i find the Arouser cleaner and with a more modern sound.
A hardware version sound better for course to my ears, but a digital version sounds really good. A hardware sounds “thicker” and a digital sounds a bit “thinner”. But they all sound great for sure! Thank you so much David for such a great comparison! Amazing video!
I have never used hardware units. But after thorough shooting out testing on different comps of different types, I can only state, there were no single vca comp to touch Arouser, UAD API 2500, PA elysia mpressor are good, (not tested UAD Distressor as there is no native version yet) but in the field of aggressive, instanteous comping they are a few stairs behind! Regarding the "thinner" narrative, I can surely add weight and "spaciousness" with other tricks in the mix
analog has more harmonic content and it helps smooth out the artifacts from more aggressive compression. the distressor is a modern classic for a reason. its just the best. the plugin sounds great honestly if you are all ITB its a must have but I would always use a Distressor over a plugin. I also love neve comps because of how aggressive they are but man the distressor
The Arouser “thinned out” the sound; the Distressor has a fullness to its sound, a richness in saturation and texture that the plug-in doesn’t have. I don’t think that this makes the Arouser “bad”; with its extended features/settings, it would still be very effective as a compressor. But, if EL was trying to match the sound of the HW, it’s falling short. IMO. 🙏
Hardware is special. Especially on the Bass. I don’t think I would use the software at the moment. (We don’t need another plugin that gives us 50% on a track) More Hardware Saturation & Harmonics. Absolutely excellent review of the two products Dave. 🤙
10% better quality costs 80% more, but the analog Distressor makes every example stand out vs. the digital rest. Sometimes very subtle, but simply ALWAYS. I don't think I will rely on plugins for compression anywhen soon, though that means a lot of more work.
This was so telling I can't always tell the difference between the hardware and plugin modelling of. Listening at a low volume on my mons, the difference was pretty clear.. On the female voc the top end of the Arousor sounded more extended in a digital way. The saturation just doesn't work the same on the Arousor.....it's not bad, just different. With equal settings on bass, the saturation was nicer on the Distressor, smoother and more "natural" as you say. Kicks sound thinner on the Arousor, and the tails of the snare verb sound more natural on the Distressor It's the kind of thing where, if you've never used a real Distressor and only the Arousor, you'd think this sounds great!.....then if you patched in a Distressor the reaction is, wow!....ok I get it ;:-)
I keep coming back to your videos, there is always something extra to see each time as my experience grows. Would you say a Distressor pair is a good first analog stereo compressor? How would you compare it to the Successor? Thanks for the constant valuable reviews and advice
In the instruction of the arousor is written that if you want the characteristics of a ratio (like for example 4:1) you have to select a step above in the arousor (so 6:1 on arousor will. Behave more like 4:1)
Hi David, Thank you for this cool test. @ 5:50 I hear a huge difference in the sound of the stereo delay. With the hardware, it seems to be very "integrated" : no transients hitting hard the virtual surrounding wall created by the delay. With the software, we can hear the words hitting the delay hard, causing a relative harshness in the stereo field. Very subtle, but sure it could make a big difference on several tracks mixed together.
would be much appreciated if you can compare both! (on a video or just an opinion) Right now I'm trying to decide if buying the Fusion or something else to go hybrid. Thank you
Personally, I love the Celestial! It goes on every master I do these days. Havent spent much time on the fusion though. The celestial is almost as good as my Neve MBP though!
@@HondoFelder wow! That's cool to hear. Which parameters on Celestial do you think are done the best? I didn't like that much the stereo width (Eliptical). Can you tell more about Neve MBP vs Celestial? thanks a lot
@@fernandoherrerabastidas I enjoy the Texture and dimension functions the best. The m/s function is also nice, but doesnt sound quite as natural to me for some reason. It my be the saturation tricking my ear, but I prefer the sound of the red silk and MBP MS to the Celestial texture and spread.
More often than not I end up using the celestial because I'm lazy and dont feel like routing the analogue gear lol. Also when the MBP vibe doesnt work, sometimes the Celestial does and vice versa.
Hi, i have the uad. I m hesitating buying the hardware because it s expensive. But for tracking sure the hardware brings the feeling ... i have 2 in demos, it s so pleasant to use....don t know...
ill take a distressor over any comp in the world, I use my distressor over my cl1b hardware on vocals every time, u can get so many flavors out that thing ,I want clean I can get it , I want saturation I can get it ,I want to tames some highs in the process or high pass I can do it , what ever I want ,la 2 a style I can get it, that guy Dave Derr made a master piece with this unit next month my friend is buying my cl1b and I'm going to buy the fatso with that money, I stand but the distressor and it also help me learn quick about how to use compassion. great review by the way, and I do hip hop and r&B and the distressor do that genre excellent . ask Rich Keller who recorded lots of dmx, nas, and many more his go to is the distressor he recorded many hits from there albums and cut to tape with the distressor .
Yeah I wasn’t sure if it was a ratio difference or an input difference, but the software and hardware were pretty clearly not compressing to the same degree, which kind of makes the whole comparison pointless.
The waveforms that come out of them almost seems too good to be true, but it’s for real. Amazing in regards getting a nicely tamed signal that retains the original vibe - so crazy on vocals or anything super dynamic/peaky
You can find on YT comparision Disterssor hardware vs few plugins emulation from Slate, Arousor, SK Note and some other. Funny thing is that Arousor aproved by EL is the worest of all them, we could hear that again in that video how far it is from hardware :) In my opinion Slate and SK Note thoes 2 are the best. David if you can, please compare SK Note and Slate to your hardware unit. Cheers!
Gain reductions for the drums examples aren't matched. The Distressor compressed 2db less than the Arousor settings. Maybe this is why we feel/think that the Distressor sound less chocked. 🤔
MixbusTv Fair man maybe how the routing, mixing side of it via the explorer works? Ive got one it was an upgrade from Focusrite 18i20. Wow what an upgrade 🤣👊 The converters are amazing
the distressor does something with the midrange that it sounds good (hard to explain). i have a pair of el8x. sounds great even with small compression when tracking. I’d like an la2a now, lol!
I feel like with most emulations vocals and “transparency” are the true test. I feel like a lot of emulations have that “knee jerk” effect and it’s easy to hear.
The differences are always there in the software vs hardware sound, it makes sense if someone does not have or can't afford the real gear to buy an emulation plugin, but you already have the gear and you know that it doesn't sound as good as the real thing, then why would you use the plugin ? Is it that you use it for demo projects only ?
This test is like other hardware vs plugin tests for me - the hardware just has an extra something. More natural/open/musical etc etc. I am starting to wonder if matching hardware in the digital domain is really possible in the end because they are different realms...
Been saying it for a while. You can match one static setting if you really spend time on it, and that goes for some units. But one static settings tells you nothing, mixing hybrid is not that, and when you start adding multiple units, everything comes into play. It's still funny to me the "the average listener can't hear the difference" no, because they will never have the chance to A/B, but sure thing they will like or not like how a give song sounds. They are different realms, and it's not just the sound, it's the workflow and all the decision one takes when using one tool or another
The arouser is great but there is clearly a better treatement of the lower mids in the distressor. It would be great if you did this again with the Uad and slate plugs. I felt the slate was slightly weak on the bottom end even though it’s a great plug. The UAD was very close to my distressors to me
I'd be really curious to see if you could pair the arouser with another plugin after in the chain to try and achieve a closer sound when comparing to the original. ie: maybe Arouser followed by maxx bass.... anytime you want to use the distressor sound you just open the arouser and the maxx bass maybe. Idk. Id love to try but I don't own a distressor. someone else do this plz lol.
I mean if you have the money or working professionally, yes the distressor is probably a little bit better. But i really struggle to hear the 3,2k (stereo setup) price difference. Again if i had the money i would probably buy at least 2 Distressors. But for that money i honestly would stick to the plugin and get some other stuff. Let's face it, the average bob won't ever be able to tell if you used the plugin or the hardware. Still great unit
@@mixbustv Yea i guess that's true. Even tho i have to say that also depends on Genre. In the (suprise surprise) Black Metal area that's a little different. I've seen people praise albums with badly programmed drums and mono rythm guitars, while bashing on high quality records. But i guess that's a nieche within a nieche :D
@@WorstViktorEU No you're correct. I guess I didn't choose my words wisely. What I really meant was, lately I've been acquiring a lot of analog gear for my hybrid set-up and I've kinda always looked passed the Distressor cause I'm like "alright I got the Arousor so that should be close enough" and it is a great great plugin and will 100% remain in use in my sessions, but this comparison has me thinking I might have to grab the Distressor one of these days now.
I kinda agree with 2shot. I used to love the CL1B plugin. Since I got the Heritage Audio clone, I find it difficult to go back to the plugin, unless I need a quick fix or stereo. The performance is just not as good. The compression is not as smooth, and the colour can't compare. I wish I didn't feel this way, it's far cheaper in the box, but it is what it is. I guess its why David amd others still have and continues to fill walls of analog gear.
Didnt watch just left it on the comments section to do my own blind test. What I hear is the hardware is Clean, Clear, Defined, tight and Hifi. The plugin is cloudy, dirty, flat, lifeless. I've noticed this with with all my UAD which is considered the best on the planet. People say that its only 5-10% different. I think that's slightly inaccurate due to the additive layering we do in the DAW. This adds up to a big difference at the end in either a positive or negative way. You need hardware at least as your first pass so you can do minimal processing with plugins. Trying to emulate a traditional analog signal path to infuse small amounts of saturation\processing as it goes through a console, all of its stages and then through outboard gear will not sound good ONLY using plugins.
Do you think you could match the Arousor with the Distressor with an EQ plug-in before the Arousor?? I've done similar tests with cables/hardware in my studio and matched tonal qualities by doing minor EQ adjustments. I would be curious to see if you could find an EQ setting before the Arousor that most closely mimics your results from the Distressor; as obviously from your video, does sound better than the Arousor.
Hardware sounds amazing. My big question would be… in order for hardware compression to be truly effective, does it need to be compressed on its way in to daw? Or could I record with no compression and then route out/in to that compressor and still accomplish the same level of quality? Thanks!
Everyone mixing hybrid (like me or many others) run signals from DAW to outboard AFTER the recording, so yeah. Recording is a process and it's different from mixing, if the recording engineer feels like recording with analog it's an artistic choice, so is the use of outboard in mixing (so after) whether or not the original audio has been recorded with analog gear, that goes for everything, comp, eq, etc.. Yes, quality is not compromised, assuming you have good converters, or there would be no reason to use analog in mixing or mastering.
Do Iunderstand right, if you bypass on the rick then the plugin works and if not the rick works and destress? As I hear the hardware is much better, it sounds better "compressed" or make more clear and even in one way ...
Have you tried this sort of test with UA distressor emulation? I was very excited about getting the Arouser until I saw this and realized what a gap there is from the real thing lol. Curious if you could speak on the difference between the UA vs. Empirical Labs emulations.
I swear now that I have been investing in outboard gear I really am starting to say yuck to plugins lololol. I know each has their place but man it's something about analog that hits the soul differently.
It's in my 2bus along with the Neve's and the Wes Mastering compressor. I use it in mastering too but almost never the vintage drive for that, often too much even at minimum. Everything else yes, not necessarily all the time
man plugins are just flat 2d sounding compared to electric circuits just more detail quality, thinking of selling my waves and softube accounts and get a fatso and drawmer eq
its the same effect as an amp sim vs a tube amp, they get the song done for purpose, but man the hardware and tubes and iron are just clearer dense solid and when stacked will make you smile, even just on the backend of your mixbus in daw a hardware eq comp then to cd will make a decent diff but i need a disto now :), used to love your old vids like this years back when i found mixbus tv, the coolest voice and accent, rock it d
There is a reason painters use oil paint and not acrylic. One is the original one is not . Same argument with analogue and digital . Digital is great but analogue is the best .
Wow. Great comparison. I can't say I'm super surprised how much thicker the hardware is, but I am a little surprised.. Some might say the difference is small, but to me it's quite huge.. For some reason I would've expected it to be a closer comparison coming from ELI.
If you had adjusted the plugin's High pass frequency and the detector EQ, might that have brought some of the results closer to each other? (particularly on the bass) ~~~~
@@mixbustv Ya I figured you were matching as best as possible based on the visual the plugin presents, I just thought playing a bit with those settings might have brought the plugin closer to the feel of the hardware in some instances.. I appreciate the comparison presentation you did though. ~~~~
The hardware is just compressing more. Simply changing the ratio or the input on the software would have been a much better test of the character of the two. To me it’s not about “matching settings”, but seeing if the hardware is doing something the software can’t, and vice versa.
Couldnt you just use a separate saturation plugin before or after the distressor plugin to compensate for the ITB distressor plugins' lack of saturation to get the less sterile sound that the hardware distressor imparts? I think it probably wouldnt be the exact same, but you could probably dial it in pretty close I'd imagine?
He’s comparing the hardware to the plugin, not trying everything he can to get them sounding the same. I believe he’s saying if you mess with extra EQ’s, saturation, etc (which takes time) you may be able to get closer. So it does answer the question
I know this is a bit off topic, but it does have to do with the distressor, and I'm ripping my hair out trying to find an answer ...... When plugging the DISTRESSOR into a balanced TRS patchbay ...... should I patch both the XLR IOs and the 1/4 inch IOs ? allowing for both unbalanced and balanced signal patching ? Or should I only plug in one set of IOs ? I'm a total patchbay newbie, thanks. lol
@@mixbustv thanks! I just want to clarify though .... Is it OK to patch (into the rear of the patchbay) BOTH sets of IOs (XLR and 1/4) ? meaning there would be FOUR balanced cables (2x XLR to TRS / 2x TRS to TRS) coming from the rear of the distressor ... to the rear of the patchbay .... (even though during tracking i'd use ONE set of IOs) it's the rear patching (setup) of my patchbay and how the distressor behaves when all IOs are connected (regardless whether signal is passing) , that is my issue lol. thanks. I suppose the easiest way to ask would be, after reading all that lol, do i use 2 balanced cables or 4, to patch the distressor into the BACK of the trs patchbay. thanks so much for takin' the time to answer. much appreciated !
I seem to remember someone at Empirical labs mentioning that the hardware Distressor and Arousor plugin ratios are not the same, and that you need to go one LED lower on the Arousor to match the Distressor. Something about the Distressor ratios actually being "incorrect" in the hardware.
Just saw a NAMM 2018 video where they mention that the 3:1 ratio on the hardware is actually "incorrect" and the equivalent setting on the Arouser is 4:1. So they "fixed" that in the plugin, and have a reference in the Help page showing the equivalent ratios for the hardware if you're trying to match that.
@@grantharlow could you share such help page please? :)
Yes hardware is a little better but we must dont forget that 2 distressors cost 3500€ and the plug in 199€.
And there's a reason for it 😄
@@mixbustvI can't hear the 3.300€ in difference, for whatever "reason" though!...
In a context of a mix I am pretty sure that you can't find the difference either.
Cheers .
That's a World class singing! Amazing voice!
Right after first example told myself that hardware sounds fuller, has more body, more organic. Plugin is cleaner, more hi-fi'ish. It's definitely not a bad thing.
I really wasn't into hardware vs digital, but since I have the BLA CLA Bluey hardware, the main difference I notice between hardware and software, is the attack and density. Hardware better handle attack on vocals (it's less jumpy) and the sound seems more dense. It's very obvious en Bass with the distressor. Hardware is less squash but more dense and more leveled
I find them to sound really different tbh, although they share the essence. I find the Distressor, as you said, with a more natural compression and envelope but i find the Arouser cleaner and with a more modern sound.
A hardware version sound better for course to my ears, but a digital version sounds really good. A hardware sounds “thicker” and a digital sounds a bit “thinner”. But they all sound great for sure! Thank you so much David for such a great comparison! Amazing video!
I have never used hardware units. But after thorough shooting out testing on different comps of different types, I can only state, there were no single vca comp to touch Arouser, UAD API 2500, PA elysia mpressor are good, (not tested UAD Distressor as there is no native version yet) but in the field of aggressive, instanteous comping they are a few stairs behind! Regarding the "thinner" narrative, I can surely add weight and "spaciousness" with other tricks in the mix
analog has more harmonic content and it helps smooth out the artifacts from more aggressive compression. the distressor is a modern classic for a reason. its just the best. the plugin sounds great honestly if you are all ITB its a must have but I would always use a Distressor over a plugin. I also love neve comps because of how aggressive they are but man the distressor
Hardware WINS! IMO, software never sounds like original analog gear!
Attack seems quicker on plugin, and the obvious low mids... and I don't agree with your level matching personally, but great video!
Digital has that bite that hurts but analog is thick & rich.
MikeyPressure 💯❤️
Prob the best comparison I've seen. Thank you!
Solllll stateee
Hardware sounds better no question - next
The Arouser “thinned out” the sound; the Distressor has a fullness to its sound, a richness in saturation and texture that the plug-in doesn’t have.
I don’t think that this makes the Arouser “bad”; with its extended features/settings, it would still be very effective as a compressor. But, if EL was trying to match the sound of the HW, it’s falling short.
IMO.
🙏
Yup, the Hardware sounds much better, digital has that "no back" just front feel, hence why most want Hardware mastering. 👍🏽
The hardware sounds so good 🤤🤓👌
Hardware is special. Especially on the Bass. I don’t think I would use the software at the moment. (We don’t need another plugin that gives us 50% on a track) More Hardware Saturation & Harmonics. Absolutely excellent review of the two products Dave. 🤙
I prefer the plugin on vocals,I like the hardware better on the bass guitar and drums though 🤔
10% better quality costs 80% more, but the analog Distressor makes every example stand out vs. the digital rest. Sometimes very subtle, but simply ALWAYS. I don't think I will rely on plugins for compression anywhen soon, though that means a lot of more work.
This was so telling
I can't always tell the difference between the hardware and plugin modelling of.
Listening at a low volume on my mons, the difference was pretty clear.. On the female voc the top end of the Arousor sounded more extended in a digital way. The saturation just doesn't work the same on the Arousor.....it's not bad, just different. With equal settings on bass, the saturation was nicer on the Distressor, smoother and more "natural" as you say.
Kicks sound thinner on the Arousor, and the tails of the snare verb sound more natural on the Distressor
It's the kind of thing where, if you've never used a real Distressor and only the Arousor, you'd think this sounds great!.....then if you patched in a Distressor the reaction is, wow!....ok I get it ;:-)
And the Fatso!!.... Haven't used one of those in years… such a great Box!!👍
I keep coming back to your videos, there is always something extra to see each time as my experience grows.
Would you say a Distressor pair is a good first analog stereo compressor? How would you compare it to the Successor?
Thanks for the constant valuable reviews and advice
You will NEVER regreat buying distressors. Successor is a good comp, very limited, basically the opposite of a distressor.
In the instruction of the arousor is written that if you want the characteristics of a ratio (like for example 4:1) you have to select a step above in the arousor (so 6:1 on arousor will. Behave more like 4:1)
IFeeeeelGood Exactly what I remembered! ELI said: The UAD is a 1:1 Distressor, the Arousor is what he Wished he could have made the Distressor be.
It’s obvious from the video the ratios don’t match and I’m furious about it, lol.
Hi David,
Thank you for this cool test.
@ 5:50 I hear a huge difference in the sound of the stereo delay. With the hardware, it seems to be very "integrated" : no transients hitting hard the virtual surrounding wall created by the delay. With the software, we can hear the words hitting the delay hard, causing a relative harshness in the stereo field. Very subtle, but sure it could make a big difference on several tracks mixed together.
have you done a versus between SSL Fusion and Acustica Audio Celestial? 👀
would be much appreciated if you can compare both! (on a video or just an opinion)
Right now I'm trying to decide if buying the Fusion or something else to go hybrid. Thank you
Personally, I love the Celestial! It goes on every master I do these days. Havent spent much time on the fusion though. The celestial is almost as good as my Neve MBP though!
@@HondoFelder wow! That's cool to hear. Which parameters on Celestial do you think are done the best? I didn't like that much the stereo width (Eliptical). Can you tell more about Neve MBP vs Celestial? thanks a lot
@@fernandoherrerabastidas I enjoy the Texture and dimension functions the best. The m/s function is also nice, but doesnt sound quite as natural to me for some reason. It my be the saturation tricking my ear, but I prefer the sound of the red silk and MBP MS to the Celestial texture and spread.
More often than not I end up using the celestial because I'm lazy and dont feel like routing the analogue gear lol. Also when the MBP vibe doesnt work, sometimes the Celestial does and vice versa.
I have a hardware Distressor and the UAD actually sounds pretty good. It has close to the vibe.
Software lacks the headroom.
Hi, i have the uad. I m hesitating buying the hardware because it s expensive. But for tracking sure the hardware brings the feeling ... i have 2 in demos, it s so pleasant to use....don t know...
ill take a distressor over any comp in the world, I use my distressor over my cl1b hardware on vocals every time, u can get so many flavors out that thing ,I want clean I can get it , I want saturation I can get it ,I want to tames some highs in the process or high pass I can do it , what ever I want ,la 2 a style I can get it, that guy Dave Derr made a master piece with this unit next month my friend is buying my cl1b and I'm going to buy the fatso with that money, I stand but the distressor and it also help me learn quick about how to use compassion. great review by the way, and I do hip hop and r&B and the distressor do that genre excellent . ask Rich Keller who recorded lots of dmx, nas, and many more his go to is the distressor he recorded many hits from there albums and cut to tape with the distressor .
Yep, that's why 2 of everything EL makes 😄 also you can go back about 20 years to date, 60% of drums and vocals were cut with a Distro and fatso ,
@@mixbustv yes sir I can’t wait to get the fatso to put across my mix bus or mater
GR different in some pairs, and 6:1 of Distressor is 8:1 of Arouser due to manual
Yeah I wasn’t sure if it was a ratio difference or an input difference, but the software and hardware were pretty clearly not compressing to the same degree, which kind of makes the whole comparison pointless.
Studio coming together - Getting my stereo pair soon and a pair of dragons! Also focal Trios! Been a long time coming!
Your Explanation is very good sir
The waveforms that come out of them almost seems too good to be true, but it’s for real. Amazing in regards getting a nicely tamed signal that retains the original vibe - so crazy on vocals or anything super dynamic/peaky
I was literally just hoping for a vid like this!!
Uad version is pretty great
You can find on YT comparision Disterssor hardware vs few plugins emulation from Slate, Arousor, SK Note and some other. Funny thing is that Arousor aproved by EL is the worest of all them, we could hear that again in that video how far it is from hardware :)
In my opinion Slate and SK Note thoes 2 are the best.
David if you can, please compare SK Note and Slate to your hardware unit.
Cheers!
The difference on nuke ratio was insane
Gain reductions for the drums examples aren't matched. The Distressor compressed 2db less than the Arousor settings. Maybe this is why we feel/think that the Distressor sound less chocked. 🤔
Like the meter ballistic are even the same
Hey man, your channel is great. I’d be very interested to see you do a tutorial on the Motu 16A I love it but would love to see your skills on it 👊
I have the video of the installation, I'm not sure what I could show other than, turning it on :D it doesn't really do much other than converting
MixbusTv Fair man maybe how the routing, mixing side of it via the explorer works? Ive got one it was an upgrade from Focusrite 18i20. Wow what an upgrade 🤣👊 The converters are amazing
Also what are your thoughts on the Black Lion Bluey Compressor? I’m thinking about it 🤣
the distressor does something with the midrange that it sounds good (hard to explain). i have a pair of el8x. sounds great even with small compression when tracking. I’d like an la2a now, lol!
Thanks David, great video!
great! thanks!
looking forward to the fatso review - i’ve got the uad version so should be interesting x
night and day difference! analog!!
Shouldn't be a prob, I got two 😄
Please do a studio tour sir.
Love your shit buddy !
I feel like with most emulations vocals and “transparency” are the true test. I feel like a lot of emulations have that “knee jerk” effect and it’s easy to hear.
The differences are always there in the software vs hardware sound, it makes sense if someone does not have or can't afford the real gear to buy an emulation plugin, but you already have the gear and you know that it doesn't sound as good as the real thing, then why would you use the plugin ? Is it that you use it for demo projects only ?
This test is like other hardware vs plugin tests for me - the hardware just has an extra something. More natural/open/musical etc etc. I am starting to wonder if matching hardware in the digital domain is really possible in the end because they are different realms...
Been saying it for a while. You can match one static setting if you really spend time on it, and that goes for some units. But one static settings tells you nothing, mixing hybrid is not that, and when you start adding multiple units, everything comes into play. It's still funny to me the "the average listener can't hear the difference" no, because they will never have the chance to A/B, but sure thing they will like or not like how a give song sounds. They are different realms, and it's not just the sound, it's the workflow and all the decision one takes when using one tool or another
The arouser is great but there is clearly a better treatement of the lower mids in the distressor. It would be great if you did this again with the Uad and slate plugs. I felt the slate was slightly weak on the bottom end even though it’s a great plug. The UAD was very close to my distressors to me
I'd be really curious to see if you could pair the arouser with another plugin after in the chain to try and achieve a closer sound when comparing to the original. ie: maybe Arouser followed by maxx bass.... anytime you want to use the distressor sound you just open the arouser and the maxx bass maybe. Idk. Id love to try but I don't own a distressor. someone else do this plz lol.
I’d like to see hardware distressor vs Steven slate vs arouser
+1
Vote +1
or Gem Dopamine vst
someone already did this, i find the slate to be brighter and more forward in the mids and faster transients
Any thoughts on the new Kiive audio distressor David?
Have you compared the hardware distressor with the UAD plugin version?
I worked with it, I don't have UAD stuff, it's good, not as the hw
I mean if you have the money or working professionally, yes the distressor is probably a little bit better. But i really struggle to hear the 3,2k (stereo setup) price difference. Again if i had the money i would probably buy at least 2 Distressors. But for that money i honestly would stick to the plugin and get some other stuff. Let's face it, the average bob won't ever be able to tell if you used the plugin or the hardware. Still great unit
Oh no, but they will tell a great mix from a not so great one.
@@mixbustv Yea i guess that's true. Even tho i have to say that also depends on Genre. In the (suprise surprise) Black Metal area that's a little different. I've seen people praise albums with badly programmed drums and mono rythm guitars, while bashing on high quality records. But i guess that's a nieche within a nieche :D
@@mindmachinepsy no amount of hw can fix deaf 😄
@@mixbustv Yea some of those people are an acquired taste to say the least lol
Annoyingly I can hear the differences on my phone... I was hoping the software would have been better...
Agreed! I have the software and loved it up until now. Lol now I'm like wtf! 🤣😂
@@2shotDerringer just because of this video? if it doesn't sound like the original hardware that doesn't mean it's bad or not useable :)
@@WorstViktorEU No you're correct. I guess I didn't choose my words wisely. What I really meant was, lately I've been acquiring a lot of analog gear for my hybrid set-up and I've kinda always looked passed the Distressor cause I'm like "alright I got the Arousor so that should be close enough" and it is a great great plugin and will 100% remain in use in my sessions, but this comparison has me thinking I might have to grab the Distressor one of these days now.
I kinda agree with 2shot. I used to love the CL1B plugin. Since I got the Heritage Audio clone, I find it difficult to go back to the plugin, unless I need a quick fix or stereo. The performance is just not as good. The compression is not as smooth, and the colour can't compare. I wish I didn't feel this way, it's far cheaper in the box, but it is what it is. I guess its why David amd others still have and continues to fill walls of analog gear.
The day software successfully models the extreme settings of analog it'll be a very age for software
Where can one get those lamps that react to sound ??
Link in description
Pls review the Arouser vs Sknote disto
Thanks for the video!!
Thinking about picking this up, but I have so many good compressor plugins already. I probably need to just save for the hardware.
what about the universal dsitressor version and the dystro versions David?
Tried, great plug-in, hw is still better, I personally don't use UAD
Hey David, Great channel!!! :) Where did you get your LIGHTS??? Very cool!!! :)
th-cam.com/video/9HtoLMSr0hw/w-d-xo.html
Plugin is cool but the hardware sound has more weight to it...
Thanks David : ) Good & helpful comparison. By my experience, there is no "sweet spot" in a PlugIn . . at all
різниця колосальна! дякую за відео!
GREAT review! Off topic what is the disc shaped vu-type meter light fixture in the corner! Gotta have! :D
Didnt watch just left it on the comments section to do my own blind test. What I hear is the hardware is Clean, Clear, Defined, tight and Hifi. The plugin is cloudy, dirty, flat, lifeless. I've noticed this with with all my UAD which is considered the best on the planet. People say that its only 5-10% different. I think that's slightly inaccurate due to the additive layering we do in the DAW. This adds up to a big difference at the end in either a positive or negative way. You need hardware at least as your first pass so you can do minimal processing with plugins. Trying to emulate a traditional analog signal path to infuse small amounts of saturation\processing as it goes through a console, all of its stages and then through outboard gear will not sound good ONLY using plugins.
Very cool video !
Do you think you could match the Arousor with the Distressor with an EQ plug-in before the Arousor?? I've done similar tests with cables/hardware in my studio and matched tonal qualities by doing minor EQ adjustments. I would be curious to see if you could find an EQ setting before the Arousor that most closely mimics your results from the Distressor; as obviously from your video, does sound better than the Arousor.
No, I tried many times. It's not eq, it's a whole different world
Hardware sounds amazing. My big question would be… in order for hardware compression to be truly effective, does it need to be compressed on its way in to daw? Or could I record with no compression and then route out/in to that compressor and still accomplish the same level of quality?
Thanks!
Everyone mixing hybrid (like me or many others) run signals from DAW to outboard AFTER the recording, so yeah. Recording is a process and it's different from mixing, if the recording engineer feels like recording with analog it's an artistic choice, so is the use of outboard in mixing (so after) whether or not the original audio has been recorded with analog gear, that goes for everything, comp, eq, etc..
Yes, quality is not compromised, assuming you have good converters, or there would be no reason to use analog in mixing or mastering.
@@mixbustv thank you!
Have you tried the UAD distressor ?
Can you do Sidechaining with the Distressor hardware?
As soon as the distressor hits the voice , the breath is gone .
Please also review the ik multimedia comprexxor (distressor clone) . As it's also a good alternative. Your feedback will be really helpful
Ones again hardware by devastating knockout 👍
Do Iunderstand right, if you bypass on the rick then the plugin works and if not the rick works and destress? As I hear the hardware is much better, it sounds better "compressed" or make more clear and even in one way ...
Doesn't matter at all , its all in the context of the mix , who cares ?! Apparently i do since I'm watching 😁 , great job
I put waves LA2A before arousor, no compression just for saturation... good results :D :D :D
good hint! I will test today. it may be a good option to fatten the sound of the plug-in.
Have you tried this sort of test with UA distressor emulation? I was very excited about getting the Arouser until I saw this and realized what a gap there is from the real thing lol. Curious if you could speak on the difference between the UA vs. Empirical Labs emulations.
The hardware sounds fantastic. The plug-in sounds like a plug-in :-)
I swear now that I have been investing in outboard gear I really am starting to say yuck to plugins lololol. I know each has their place but man it's something about analog that hits the soul differently.
yep
Great video as usual. Do you use your SSL Fusion also on busses or only for mastering?
Greetings from Germany
Michael
It's in my 2bus along with the Neve's and the Wes Mastering compressor. I use it in mastering too but almost never the vintage drive for that, often too much even at minimum. Everything else yes, not necessarily all the time
@@mixbustv thanks 👌
Amazing vídeo ❤
Hardware better and more alive
have you tried the lil frEq? just copped 2
Studio Tour Studio Tour!!!! Is that your permanent residence now!?
yes but might not be the only one
Did you test out the Pump 500 series yet? What are your thoughts on it?
I haven't but I would trust what Dave puts out blindly
Pre-ordered it. Thanks for the input. 👍
I fucking love distressor on bass
What is THD exactlty?
i wonder how the UAD stacks up
Explain we’ll David sir
My biggest gripe with the plugin is the way it handles the esses and hard constanants. Horrible resonances that are eaten up by the hardware.
man plugins are just flat 2d sounding compared to electric circuits just more detail quality, thinking of selling my waves and softube accounts and get a fatso and drawmer eq
its the same effect as an amp sim vs a tube amp, they get the song done for purpose, but man the hardware and tubes and iron are just clearer dense solid and when stacked will make you smile, even just on the backend of your mixbus in daw a hardware eq comp then to cd will make a decent diff but i need a disto now :), used to love your old vids like this years back when i found mixbus tv, the coolest voice and accent, rock it d
Fortnum Sound have you used any UAD to compare? I’ve seen someone get pretty much there with different settings of course
1:14 Turned off a Windows bootup sound for Bella already? ))
thank you, a very great test. What is that device flashing in the ( studio ) background ?
link in the description
@@mixbustv Thanks
There is a reason painters use oil
paint and not acrylic.
One is the original one is not .
Same argument with analogue and digital .
Digital is great
but analogue is the best .
Wow. Great comparison. I can't say I'm super surprised how much thicker the hardware is, but I am a little surprised.. Some might say the difference is small, but to me it's quite huge.. For some reason I would've expected it to be a closer comparison coming from ELI.
Its a big difference. And then when you think how much the hardware adds if you track multiple times with it on the same song.
Arouser, Distressors, what next the Jizzanator 😅
Master David, if you can only have one plugin emulation of the famous "Distressor" which one will it be?
Arousor
@@mixbustv Thank you. You definitely treated your subscribers very well: you always reply in a very short period. Thank you.
If you had adjusted the plugin's High pass frequency and the detector EQ, might that have brought some of the results closer to each other? (particularly on the bass) ~~~~
The blue dot is where the distressor has it
@@mixbustv Ya I figured you were matching as best as possible based on the visual the plugin presents, I just thought playing a bit with those settings might have brought the plugin closer to the feel of the hardware in some instances.. I appreciate the comparison presentation you did though. ~~~~
The hardware is just compressing more. Simply changing the ratio or the input on the software would have been a much better test of the character of the two. To me it’s not about “matching settings”, but seeing if the hardware is doing something the software can’t, and vice versa.
Couldnt you just use a separate saturation plugin before or after the distressor plugin to compensate for the ITB distressor plugins' lack of saturation to get the less sterile sound that the hardware distressor imparts? I think it probably wouldnt be the exact same, but you could probably dial it in pretty close I'd imagine?
You can do anything if you got time
@@mixbustv That doesn't make sense. It's not what Brandon was asking you.
He’s comparing the hardware to the plugin, not trying everything he can to get them sounding the same. I believe he’s saying if you mess with extra EQ’s, saturation, etc (which takes time) you may be able to get closer. So it does answer the question
Do u use kush audio plugins ?
Not really
@mixbustv yea I could tell 👌
Damn who sings this song? Is it your wife? This take is dope!
I know this is a bit off topic, but it does have to do with the distressor, and I'm ripping my hair out trying to find an answer ......
When plugging the DISTRESSOR into a balanced TRS patchbay ...... should I patch both the XLR IOs and the 1/4 inch IOs ? allowing for both unbalanced and balanced signal patching ? Or should I only plug in one set of IOs ? I'm a total patchbay newbie, thanks. lol
XLR and 1/4 are both balanced. Use one, not both, it's the same
@@mixbustv thanks! I just want to clarify though .... Is it OK to patch (into the rear of the patchbay) BOTH sets of IOs (XLR and 1/4) ? meaning there would be FOUR balanced cables (2x XLR to TRS / 2x TRS to TRS) coming from the rear of the distressor ... to the rear of the patchbay .... (even though during tracking i'd use ONE set of IOs)
it's the rear patching (setup) of my patchbay and how the distressor behaves when all IOs are connected (regardless whether signal is passing) , that is my issue lol. thanks.
I suppose the easiest way to ask would be, after reading all that lol, do i use 2 balanced cables or 4, to patch the distressor into the BACK of the trs patchbay.
thanks so much for takin' the time to answer. much appreciated !