He posted a video on YT. That debate will surely end well on YT.
From my tests, just my personal opinion, Acustica is a step above algo plugins, i do notice a difference in the video, though to untrained ears it might sound the same.
Also, its a shitty loop to compare to anyway , also its always about the final result, the final mix, where you can really see the power of Acustica.

 

I did not hear any difference on my mobile phone and tv speakers. And only a subtle difference on my studio monitors.
The Acustica sounds smooth but the Slate sounds ballsy. The funny thing is I like the Slate version more.

 

Slate is very good as well, not meant to diss his plugins at all. I like his stuff.

 

To be honest this video sucks. Why do people so often choose a drum loop to comapre EQs. Lazy Joes .
I think the transients of a Drum loop make it hard to really hear the difference.
If they would use different sources they would be able to hear a bigger difference. In my expirience Acustica EQs make a more 3d/ depth and smoother sound. It is not a huge difference but clearly noticable comapred to algos.

If I use the EQs shown in the video on a guitar or keys, for example the "3d effect" is way more noticable. I love slate, but i still think AA is a little bit ahead. If that little bit makes the differnce thats what you have to decide for yurself.

 

Last edited by a moderator: May 11, 2017

Of course it will sound different. The hardware modeled will not be the same of course.

Just like different hardwares sound different even in the same batch of production, analog modeled plugins should also be taken as another hardware unit.

And what sounds better will be subjective as many preferred the sound of Puigchild plugin above the original hardware in a blind test and vice versa. I think Manny also said something about that when he mixed John Mayer's record.

Well, it is just a different mode of programing and it does't matter if you use C++ or C#. Fabrice has also said it many times. It is just a type of programing and many don't know what is under the hood.

To me, as a fellow Computer Science and Engineer student, it is like the comparison between LED light bulb and Fluorescent light bulb. If you are happy when ever an LED bulb shines on you.. well, I can't argue with that. Its all possible.

For me, it is good as long as it shines. Not how it shines.

 

[IMHO] Slate shouldn't do this, this is a very wrong marketing strategy from a dev himself. It's like he's saying look we have it long time ago while AA did it just now so no point paying extra for the same. In fact for the first time I saw such video, see the number of dislikes. It is ok if you or me doing this comparison but not ok if say spitfire comparing their products with vsl. Both are top and in different leagues just like AA and Slate, however Slate has the skills of making average as top notched [IMHO].

Like others, don't hear any difference on laptop but will do so in a while. I bet AA would have more body to it as no algo coding comes close to the tech AA uses.

 

There's a more comprehensive test here, which also adds the UAD 1073 plugin to the comparison.

 

I also find it rather juvenile from him to do that. Just leave em alone, they are a small Italian team, as if we have to chose sides here.
Both companies can exist and one can easily use both plugins in his production.

 

Funny thing here is that the SlateD. made a really good PR for AA.

 

yeah buddy ! Now >>> Slate >>>take a full mix of stems and apply one of these to every track and on the buss and let us here it then lol... im gona have to do one for him i guess lol Then will see how Tone, depth, and phase holds up lol

 

Thanks for posting this brother ! it was a good laugh for me ive not been on here much this week lol if somone else would have posted this i would have disliked it lol i agree with you tho Von slate does make pretty good plugs but this was just a cheap stab at AA lmao!

 

Oh that drum loop is just too much, let's put the eqs on some white noise to see which will sound better.
/s

 

I agree, and there's more. AA plugins are based on Nebula technology and they can "sample" hardware effects with almost perfect accuracy (in theory) as long as they don't introduce high distortion. They use a sophisticated technology which can be considered as a very enhanced convolution (Volterra convolutional kernels). Of course the drawback is the CPU usage.

The great success of AA programmers (Fabrice?) is to implement this complex mathematical technology into real world usable plugins. The optimizations, refinements,... a truly engineering milestone. You can even use GPUs to accelerate AA plugins. These guys sure know how to code. As a side note, the Volterra mathematical theory was developed by an italian mathematician (guess the name: Volterra) so AA plugins are 100% italian from the scratch ;)

That doesn't mean algo plugins are bad at all.

On the marketing side, it's highly unfair to compare this two technologies. Not to talk about two different analog hardware modelled as has been said before. In theory, you can't beat AA plugins quality wise when it comes to hardware effects modelling. But there is probably a (very?) small trade-off in quality or the CPU usage would be astronomic. Or not. Only AA guys know...

Brilliant, sir.
What do we need the most, the best sounding plugin or the best sounding analog modelled plugin?

 

Last edited: May 11, 2017

Haven't heard the comparison yet, however i know how this will end up.
Slate either buys AA or they Collaborate when their platform (AA) is mature enough.

 

I've used the Slate Bus in the past. But there's just something special to the Acustica offering. A certain non-tangible shininess if you will. I think the depth is better on the 2 bus. Just my opinion. It does seem pretty scumbag-ish (hey, a new word!) to me to do this with a competitor's product. Leave that to a 3rd party unbiased reviewer and it would carry more weight, I think.

 

Anyone who respects himself and his VST's will replicate this test.
I tend to trust noone,even more when money involved, in 2017.

 

Not really. That is just a lame excuse aimed exactly at people who don't know what's under the hood. Different approaches will lead to the very different results in terms of how close you can get to the ideal hardware emulation. Comparison with the programming languages is invalid.

 

Last edited: May 11, 2017

Im just a messenger man
When i first saw the title of the video i thought it was some unofficial channel, then i saw it is his channel.
Dick of the week.

 

The idea of a comparaison is good imo, thanks for the vid @Von_Steyr , although I had seen it on AA forum. Here , besides the awfull eq decisions, and the fact that there isn't enought materials, he should have included a pre in the AA track, where just the eq doesn't cut it since I'm guessing the Pre is also emulated in the slate eq. That would make a big difference. But still kudos to Slate and Fabrice for getting results with an algo tech.

 

I agree about everything.
Its just the way he went for it, like a lil shark, lol.