Hardware Compressor vs. Software Compressor

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bob's Mods
  • Start date Start date

Which do you like better, hardware or software Compressors

  • Total voters
    141
smuffjules said:
I usually record through those into my Nuendo prog with a little compression, just a little, and then hopefully I won't need more on mixdown because I've already got enough, but if I do, I'll use the software. I mainly record acoustic instruments which I try to use as little as possible on as I really like to hear the dynamics of the performance, but sometimes you just need it, especially on double bass.
I'm like you, I only use a small amount. The demo I did with the 160a really gave me the character that I was listening for but could never achieve with software plugs. I feel it sounds better balanced than no compression at all, which is full dynamics. A small amount did make the tracks more pleasant to listen to.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I'm like you, I only use a small amount. The demo I did with the 160a really gave me the character that I was listening for but could never achieve with software plugs. I feel it sounds better balanced than no compression at all, which is full dynamics. A small amount did make the tracks more pleasant to listen to.[/QUOTE]

Yes, I don't like to hear that squashed sound . I just don't want the instrument popping out at certain moments, so I'll use comp. to get rid of that, so hopefully what comes out is a performance that made the artist sound like they were playng more evenly than they actually were without losing the puchiness of the performance.
 
Bob's Mods said:
I would like software to help me simulate those vintage recordings. Thats what I'm after. I'm part way there.
Click to expand...

If you’re looking for a particular vintage sound, analog hardware compressors can’t be beat. I’ve seen a lot of emulators come and go over the years, but they just haven’t impressed me yet.

It’s a difficult concept for this generation, but not everything can be emulated or even approximated with a microprocessor. I wish it could be… life in the studio would be much easier.

I have an RNC and really like it.

:)
 
Bob's Mods said:
Is the dbx 166 every bit as good as the RNC? Anyone know?
Click to expand...

The DBX 166 and 266 are both good comps. What they offer over the rnc aren't necessarily better sound, but more options.

I own both brands. They both do their job well!

The Dbx 166 has a limiter and a noise gate, The 266 is basically the 166 without the limiter. You also have LED displays for gain reduction, compression threshold, and gate threshold. You can also run both models in dual mono which maximizes functionality for using different settings while multitracking.

The RNC is a simple stereo or single mono compressor, no frills. Stereo mode works well on overheads for drums, or for your hardware sequencer/beat box.
It works just as well in mono for vocals/bass/guitar etc.

Overall they are all good compressors. It all depends what you need.
I suggest buying a 266 if you don't need the limiter, and want to run in dual mono. I bought the rnc first, then when I started recording drums realized I needed more compressors with more versatility.

I use them both on the inserts of my mixer on the way into the box.

They help clipping issues, as well as round off your sound especially for drums and vocals. You can use them on anything though such as guitar, bass, and keyboard. I am a hybrid hardware/computer home recorder. I use compression both in and out of the box.

Best of both worlds!
 
I like knobs and l.e.d.s', not gobbs of latency.
Click to expand...

yeah that about sums it up for me as well.nothing can beat that hard comp sound direct and live so you can adjust in real time.
 
chessrock said:
Software compressors for ease, convenience and transparency.

Hardware for the sound quality and uniqueness/color.

.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I would have chosen a both category. There are a lot of advantages to software compressors, but hardware tends to be more unique sounding (each unit is slightly different from the next). Where software compressors all sound exactly the same. If you have a sound file go through a plugin it will do the same thing to the sound over and over. So at least they're consistent.

I've had great results with both, so I can't complain.
 
HEY! where is the "both" option, I love them BOTH! Hardware on the way in, and software once you are in. They both rawk! (unless it's like a behringer or something, then I would rather just watch the damn meters and do my best to make it sound good lol)
 
I picked the software choice in the poll, only because I can't afford the hardware compressors that I would like to have. I am now a UAD-1 user, and really this stuff doesn't sound bad at all. I don't own the fairchild plugin for it yet, but from my understanding its a great plugin, my question to those who have tried it, do you think its a better compressor then a RNC or simularly priced hardware compressors? I paid $450 used for my UAD-1, it came with the LA-2A, both versions of the 1176, cambridge EQ, dreamverb, and the rest of the plugins from the standard card. For the price of RNC and a cheap hardware EQ, I got so much more IMHO. Yes, plugins will in most cases be 2nd rate, but yes they are getting better, yes they are cheaper, and yes I would love to own a real LA-2A, and a 1176 and a pultec and a fairchild and a neve EQ, but for now I settle for the UAD-1 and what it brings to the table.

This whole thread could be repeated with do you like hardware EQs or plugins...
 
dbx 160a Compressor/Limiter

Being this poll still has life I will add an update to my compressor wonderings.

After having used the dbx 160a for a little bit, yes I did find it an improvement over the plugin compressors that I was using but there is something else about this unit I have discoverd and like more than its compressor function....and thats the limiter function.

After having done a number of demo tracks, I find I much more prefer limiting than compression. The metering on this thing is super accurate so its easy to zero in the peak. I find the tracks maintain their natural sound yet fit better into a mix. When limiting is done right, the natural life is maintained while the overall track volume has been pleasantly brought up a bit. Even though this is a good grade studio compressor, I'm just not so beholden to compression for giving my recorded tracks some punch. Compression seems to me to suck some life out of the tracks. Limiting done right does not have this problem at all. Using the over easy function (soft knee) is cool too. Using hard knee on bass and vocals helps them to stand out better where using the soft knee on other instruments keeps them from stepping on the vocal and bass tracks yet still sound full and alive.

For all the praise quality compression gets (and compression in general), I find its only ok. Playing with the limiting is doing what I like hearing sonic wise. I'm surprised not more home rec'rs have discovered this gem. Compression gets way too much credit for being the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow and limiting merely the forgotten step child. For those who have not explored this option, its worth a listen....but you need a good one with good metering to zoom in on the peak area.

Bob the Mod Guy
 
cool Bob, I've been thingking about the 160a. I do have a RNC and PRO VLA.
Does it have a color at all?

T
 
I haven't noticed any coloration with this unit. Its sounds really good without the need for coloration though. Coloration is really the domain of very expensive harware compressors near as I can tell. The 160a doesn't color but for the priced used on ebay, its easy on the wallet.

Bob
 
dbx 160a Limiter demo

For those of you who might be interested I have a demo ditty I recorded using only the dbx 160a limiter function. You can hear the liveliness of it. If over done, it does kill it whoever so you must be careful when setting it up. You must locate the sweet spot which is pretty easy once you do it a few times. This was done in my spare bedroom with only a loop drum track I made.

http://www.lightningmp3.com/live/file.php?fid=3952


:o Bob the Mod Guy
 
it's quite funny that after testing all the native comps i decided to keep only 4. and 3 of them are free!

1. digitalfishphones - blockfish
2. digitalfishpnones - endorphin
3. kjaerhus audio - classic compressor
4. kjaerhus audio - golden peak pressor (saved my life so many times) have to buy it now. enough testing.

oh, and of course Voxengo Polysquasher. Brilliant comp. VERY transparent and it really adds some freshness to the sound. It opens the sound up in a way.
but i won't use it as i'm just about to install a DIY g-ssl clone for buss work.
otherwise it is superb.
i now also use Toft ATC-2 comp. section for parallel bus compression. Yeah, it beats all the above sw comps. especiall for snare, phew!

peace.
 
Bob's Mods said:
For those of you who might be interested I have a demo ditty I recorded using only the dbx 160a limiter function. You can hear the liveliness of it. If over done, it does kill it whoever so you must be careful when setting it up. You must locate the sweet spot which is pretty easy once you do it a few times. This was done in my spare bedroom with only a loop drum track I made.

http://www.lightningmp3.com/live/file.php?fid=3952


:o Bob the Mod Guy
Click to expand...
how about a before and after... just the after is basically useless...
 
Hardware

Nothing sounds like the real thing. I use RNC, avalon, manley, and t.c. electronics mostly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top