I understand some of the argument here, but I see a definitive flaw. Max has never used the real stuff so in no way should be making such statements. I have no problem with a lot of the current plugin sets but to rule out the hardware is just silly. Not only that, but in the context of this thread it is also unfounded. I have a bunch of plugin comps and a bunch of vintage hardware comps. There are definate sonic differences that almost always sound better on the hardware comps. The same goes with EQ's. My console EQ still sounds better to me and all of my clients than any of the software ones including the URS, UAD and the Waves SSL ones. All three of those sets have some good stuff in them, but they are very different. Software compressors for instance just don't come close to reproducing that thickness and saturation and pumping sound that a good hardware comp does. Software also does not seem to do extreme gain reduction as transparently as a lot of the nice hardware comps go. Personally, Maxes arguments seem extremely uneducated and are 100% based on a lack of actual experience. Outboard equipment isn't going anywhere. I understand that many studios have augented their systems with plenty of digital alternatives, but most capable studios also have racks full of outboard equipment as well. Not just racks full, but racks that are continually expanding. Outboard hardware has never been so redily available as it is currently and most of those companies are seeing increased sales and not decreased ones.
As an engineer I take pride in my work. The general public may not care what comp or EQ you used, but any professional with any pride and care in the work does pay attention to some of those details. From experience I can tell you that many musicians and engineers have certain hardware combinations that they like and prefer. From mics to preamps to compressors to EQ's people have preferences and combinations that they like. I get clients like that all the time. I have NEVER had a client or even dealt with other engineers and producers and musicians that do not care about the outboard and have a software only combination that floats their boat, at least not when compared to having solid outboard combinations available.
I do understand that what is "better" is certainly subjective. I also know that many albums are done on DAWS these days. Look at the majority of the great recordings released though and you will find one thing in common. Diversity. The ability to use the best tools for the job is what contributes to those great albums. The ability to decide when to use the software available and when to use the hardware available. It is also to remember that just because Pro Tools was used to do an album that does not mean that there weren't racks full of outboard gear used in the project as well. Max seems to be making some pretty broad assumptions about things he knows nothing about. As far as noone asking what gear was used, as an engineer I get questions like that all the time. When people who care hear something they like they are often interested. When you work professionally in this industry you get those questions all the time.
Subjective or not, I know many people who almost always find that the hardware just plain old sounds better. None of this is meant to belittle software, but I choose to call something what it is. Software is a tool to be used. Hardware is a tool to be used. In my experience a solid hardware stock just sounds better most of the time. That does not mean the software does not get used, but the hardware almost always finds its way into a project as often as possible.
Maybe you shouldn't think as much about whether or not people will ask you what comp or EQ etc... you used. Maybe you should just focus making good music. I don't really want people asking me what EQ I used. What I prefer is when someone comes up and says "Wow, how did you get the huge drum sound". Most recordings that inspire this kind of question were done with care and proper decisions (although sometimes you do just get lucky". Most of the people getting those responses try to use the best tools available to them and use them correctly. I would imagine that most all succesful working engineers prefer the "hardware" sound. Even the ones that don't have the hardware. If they have used it before they will probably tell you how much better it sounds. Most people that I know that try and just blindly write off quality equipment are just trying to cover up their own equipment shortcomings and justify not having to put any money into their setup.
