You might be surprised to know that "psychoacoustics" works differently when there's analog flavour involved. The hardware unit is not made to behave every milisecond the same as a digital plugin would. There's subtle variations in the behavior of the analog units's components which makes the sound more organic and more 3D-ish, because it feels like you're looking at a mountain scape with your own eyes right in front of it, but with digital processing it feels like you're looking at a mountain scape through a window's glass.

Of course, this effect is not so drastic, but it does play a role in the "listener's brain" when it comes to listening for a longer period of time, that's why i was mentioning psychoacoustics. Since we were kids, most of the songs we grew up listening to were analog mixed&mastered which means the human brain still unconsciously prefers that flavour more than digital.

Digital Processors/plugins when used to enhance something (like EQ boosting) they feel soul-less and not that big sounding if you stack them against analog EQs. Of course they're great for cleaning up stuff & surgical tweaks but just that.
Go ahead and take a Neve 1081 or Avalon AD2055 analog EQ unit and boost some lows on that particular track. The lows feel more heavy and impressive in a pleasent way even under the same amount of gain. You name these differences "subtle", but when the song is cranked up in the car or live on the stage the difference will be obvious.

If you're going to have a concert on a stage where right before you other artists performed a song greatly mixed and mastered, once your song kicks in, the difference will be obvious in the real world scenario. People don't just listen to laptop's speakers, they also listen on headphones and headphones are even more revealing "the difference" due to the noise isolation and keeping the listener more focused on the sound.

Still i'm not saying you can't get a great sound out of digital tools, but at the end of the day you still need some "extra seasonings" in order to make it ready for mainstream consumption.

I also met lots of other producers who can really mix and master greatly by themselves and they were complaining about the loudness war, that they cranked the limiter as much as they could without inducing distortion and still, their music sounded not as loud as the official records even at the same RMS levels and they were going nuts. I must admit some of their songs were really impressive sounding and i really wouldn't complain about the loudness but still they couldn't understand what made these records so loud without distortion. If they had to match their songs (loudness-wise) with the reference official records by cranking the limiter even more, then at the same amount of reduced DR their songs would've get distorted. I'm sure most of you who tried to compare loudness against a loud record cranking the limiter some more, couldn't get it as loud without introducing distortion.

Speaking of Gearslutz, check this picture/thread out:


(thread link: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/gea...-acustica-green-magenta-amber-equalizers.html )

 

A hybrid studio, that is, where one records onto disk with a DAW through analogue outboard is truly living in the best of both worlds. Even if the synths we use as tools are of the soft variety, running them through analogue gear imparts that "mojo" that our brains cherish, and the emulations are just that, emulations, and that by the very definition cannot be absolutely true to their counterparts. But of course without outboard, so very much can be accomplished. Bricasti reverb impulse responses are fucking great, but the real thing is insane perfection. Would you rather eat a carrot or a carrot that was an emulation if you were given the choice? Yes, software has a significant cost advantage over hardware and not everybody in the current paradigm will be granted the opportunity to utilize these important tools, however this aside, hardware, until the foreseeable future, will reign in quality over it's software counterparts. Working in the box has given millions the ability to produce for themselves and not be as slaves to the record companies for the privilege and outright joy of recording high quality audio, but there are still levels of quality that we must admit to and not be in denial about. Good enough is great but is still a compromise, and if one is blessed with the funds to enable purchase and use of outboard gear, fantastic for them, but the rest of us can still do great work. I admit that at times I feel jealous towards those able to afford expensive outboard gear and have had to compromise by buying things that I can afford, but don't the extreme vast majority? I would love to use API preamps and a vintage U47 mic but must make due with a Warm Audio Tonebeast and a Blue Bluebird. My pairing sound very good, but this duo literally pale in comparison to the other pair.

Yesterday I came across something called Silver Bullet while monkeying around at another audio forum that I haunt who's main focus is on analogue gear. It's purpose and philosophy makes so very much sense to me. It is rather relatively expensive, coming in right now at 1995 American dollars, but might just be the trick to bring it on home and open up "that sound" for many, many people. It is a collaboration between a very cool company nicely named Louder Than Liftoff and a fellow named drBill. The audio signal passes through two different analogue stages that can be cascaded and mixed to taste, one a British board topography and the other an American, both used in mixing boards from the 70's, then on to high and low Baxandall high and low filters plus the ability to be used as a mic pre. Check this out.

• Tone-Amp™ analog Mix and Tracking processing modes with dedicated I/O
• "A" and "N" cascading MOJO-Amp circuit topologies inspired by classic American and British consoles from the 70's
• Mix and Tracking Modes allows both Mix processing and Overdub / Tracking processing without any re-patching of cables or need for patch bays
  • Mix: process the 2-bus, bounce digitally recorded tracks and stems, combine with a DAW controlled summing system, or use with a passive summing in Folcrom™ mode.
  • Track: connect after your mic preamp, synth, sampler, etc.
• Mic Modes allow Silver Bullet to function as a fully featured stereo microphone preamplifier with Polarity Reverse and 48V phantom power
• Stereo signal path throughout with single set of easily recallable detented controls
• Visually stunning 20-segment stereo high resolution output meter
• Mojo LEDs provide visual feedback of signal level intensity
• Tone shaping EQ suite designed specifically for mix sweetening and broad stroke tone sculpting of individual tracks
  • Tight: 12 dB/oct, 20 Hz high pass filter with slight resonance at 40 Hz for tightening bottom end and increasing low frequency headroom
  • Baxandall Tone EQ, +/-9 dB boost/cut
    • LF: Pultec-inspired Subsonic (30 Hz) and Bass (60 Hz) frequencies
    • HF: Presence and Air frequencies
  • Vintage: softens high frequency response to emulate vintage British consoles
• Transformers by Ed Anderson and Cinemag
• ROGUE FIVE discrete op amps designed by Louder Than Liftoff, conforming to standard 2520 footprint
• Class-A biased op amps
• All circuit components chosen by ear for maximum MOJO
• Includes robust external universal (100-240 VAC, 50/60 Hz) power supply and IEC power cord (14 AWG)

Of course, garbage in, garbage out, but, mmmmmmmm, the garbage would taste...delectable!

One day Neo awoke to find that the world was not the same as it was when he was dreaming, maybe the same applies to our world of sound fidelity? Even if most people cannot appreciate the superior tone due to their wearing shitty earbuds and listening on PC speakers, it doesn't mean that better isn't still better, and if we can, why not aim towards to the horizon and dream a better dream?

 

I here the difference, but have no idea which is which

I suspect, only who owns the real thing and knows how it sounds, can answer that question

 

After listening to the tracks supplied, the Neve came in 1st with depth and impact followed by Ozone 2nd, Slate then Harminix. I was wearing ATH M50 cans. The difference between Neve and the others was obvious to me. I didn't test for equal loudness, but the Neve stood out to me as the satisfying one of the bunch.

 

@Kwissbeats, which emulated chain would you put up against the gear at Abby Road Studios that would yield close to the same result using any microphone under 500 bucks?

 

Marketing spread around the album was indeed of top-notch quality, but it was definitely not case for the mastering.
I myself was so close to believe in this gigantic scam, that after listening to the MP3 (320 kbps, CBR), I thought "God, after all these congratulations coming from major actors of the recording industry, there must be a serious issue with my shitty MP3".
So I downloaded the 24bit/88,2kHz FLAC Studio Master Edition. Guess what?... There was absolutely no issue at all, Master Edition sounded just as poorly as the MP3: over compression/saturation ruined the mix (which was no so bad, btw).

If you want to listen to top-notch mix/mastering in the old fashioned disco-funky style, I suggest you to look after:

Anita Ward - Ring My Bell (da kick hurt so bad )
Bee Gees - Stayin' Alive
Supermax - Love Machine
Al Hudson & The Partners - You Can Do It
Ray Parker & Raydio - Until The Morning Comes/It's Time To Party Now
Chaka Khan - Ain't Nobody
Mtume - Juicy Fruit
Diana Ross - Muscles
Cameo - She's Strange

and, in a more "pop-rock-progressive" style: Alan Parson's Project - Eye in the Sky (from which the frenchies have drawn their "Instant Crush").

I'm sorry for having to tell you that Random Access Memories sounds nowhere near to those references. Grammy's are nothing more than self-congratulations (same bullshit as Oscars) and "old hi-fi heads" are just... a bit too old.

 

....which would imply that nothing much happened over the past 3 years in R&D and hardly any progress is made in improving software, as a matter of a fact evolution itself has stopped and there is no need in posting any topic ever again because it more or less has all been said previously? excuse me for my sorry attempt in trolling you

 

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/rap...st-albums-2013-engineering-view.html?langid=3

As "Ohsnap" says in this topic about Random Acces Memoies by Daft Punk:
"Some call it boring engineering but I love it.
For once I don't have to turn the volume way down in order te be able to sit through an entire album.
No ear fatique."

So how do you explain your opinion: "over compression/saturation ruined the mix" ?
Also, another point is: Does these records references you mentioned, are they also electronic producers/artists as well(which implies different sonic styles and mix elements)? You just can't compare apples with oranges. Another thing is... from all the other artists (much famous than Daft Punk), couldn't they get the award through "marketing" instead of Daft Punk?
Some of your statements just doesn't link well at all.

In the "If you want to listen to top-notch mix/mastering..." you forgot to include "for me personally".
We can agree & disagree endlessly on such of topics, but i don't think it matters who's right and who's wrong as long as music was always subjective. But when you mention "conspiracy facts" about how scammy the grammy awards are, you should take in consideration that not all the engineers(whoever they are) are happy that Daft Punk and their team won , and if the "scam" would've really been true then you would've seen complains and rage from the other great sound engineers. If i would've been a legendary sound engineer and expected my latest album i've worked on to win the Grammy Awards and see Daft Punk winning instead, i would've checked their album to see how is that any better and if i would've had the same opinion as yours (trashy, overly compressed, etc.) then i would've went nuts and get together with the rest of competition to publicly complain about how does a shitty album like that won and ours wich is much "top-notch" didn't? See? If that would've been the case i bet you that it would've went viral.

 

Fuel for the fire.

• Room treatment = BS Myth
• Analog is Better than Digital = BS Myth
• Quality Monitors = Truth, and Behringers will do. Most of the inexpensive brands are top notch now.
• Expensive Microphone = BS Myth
• Expensive Preamp = BS Myth
• Expensive interface = BS Myth
• Mix and Master in bedroom = Yes, no problem.
• Mad skills necessary = Yes, and it don't matter where you are, as long as you're comfortable.
• Excuses = I don't really know what the fuck I'm doing.

 

Music is very subjective thing, but audio is science. Hard-core audiophiles tend to merge both into subjective camp, which ultimately doesn't work.

 

Just kidding.

 

Please buy my piece of shit Bricasti. It's the best thing in the world. Bite Me. How about this Neumann Mic and priceless preamp, aren't you drooling? No, not really. Look at this vintage Guitar and amp, nothing in the world sounds like it. Keep your old used shitty equipment, we don't want it. We know the truth. We don't believe them.
- WE BELiEVE US -

 

You Jesus, are the man!

 

Sorry, but Daft Punk themselves screamed everywhere that R.A.M is a tribute to disco-funky classics, reason why they used almost exclusively real instruments and analog equipment. This statement, of course, was a major part of the marketing scam and strongly influenced all your so-called music industry's big players who were so fast to celebrate their genius and cover them with glory. So my references are perfectly valid. Apples with apples.

You get a point. But I'm not alone to see Alan Parson as one of the ultimate references in mixing and mastering...

Over compression doesn't implies hard leveling. You can reach a supportable max volume (by soft leveling), and fail in the same time because of a reduced dynamic range (due to over compression). This lack of dynamic range is what I was referring to.
Over saturation has nothing to do with global output level. It's just that stupid "tape effect" pushed too far in order to give at those young audio nerds this "extraordinary feeling" of listening to... an old crappy compact cassette.

But rage and complains are here, precisely, just in front of you!
They're mine and you don't wanna stop to argue with them, FFS!!!
More seriously, these awards are complete bullshit and the ceremonies stinks like nursing home's bingo parties.

You're the winner with that shit? No problem, next year it will be my turn. We're both nominated this year, so cunts will buy our shits anyway. We're all winners at the end of the day. Same applies to literature. When you know the pressure carried on jury's members by major editors (and secret agreements taken between them), you understand better why a so so-so writer as Houellebecq has won the Goncourt 2010...

Absolutely not. We believe in all those engineer who, for so many years, worked hard to reduce as low as possible all that shit you pay now a fortune to recreate : saturation, noise, wow and flutter, harmonic distortion, etc.

Final step, a perfect simulation for vintage lovers:

"Our plug-ins algorithms grow old at the exact same rate as the internal components of their hardware counterparts. But no worries: an optional maintenance program ($90,95 per year per plugin) will restore the algos each year via automated updates (you can always choose to bypass auto-updates for a very long period of time to reach "that sound" and decide to update manually afterwards or as soon as the sound becomes too... em... severe?)."

I'm sure you will jump on this wagon.

 

Last edited: Jan 7, 2016

Here's a very interesting and thorough blog post for you to read regarding human perception of differences in audio gear. This guy's entire blog is a treasure trove. Unfortunately he has vanished from the face of the earth.

http://nwavguy.blogspot.ca/2012/04/what-we-hear.html

 

I don't wanna take this any further, i'll keep my opinion, people will keep theirs, you will keep yours. But we're still friends here.

I'll end up saying that plugins vs analog hardware it's like: White sugar vs Brown sugar. (you know the differences)

I must admit the "perfect simulation for vintage lovers" was funny tho'.

 

You can take your...

...and shove it up your Arse.