so basially....i understand that compression can actually make a somewhat stable mix into a more breathing mix...(weirdly enough it sounds like it has more dynamics with compression on as it breathes more)

i wanted an opinion how does this compare with stock compressor plugins for those who already experimented..is SSL bus compressor much different?

thanks

 

You can do pretty much the same with pro c or dmg compassion. It just takes more time to configure it.

 

In my experience most DAW stock plugins aren't built for the sort of gentle, natural compression that Buss compressors tend to have. They're more utilitarian. There are a lot of things going on "under the hood" in compressors, it's not just a matter of settings.

No, you can't. Compression is much more complicated than that.

 

BX Townhouse?

 

Audioscape GSSL rocks! https://www.audio-scape.com/products/busscomp

 

will check this to compare in a bit..seems good

comments down the vid lean towards SSL i think

 

Last edited by a moderator: Oct 31, 2021

I'm pretty sure you can

 

Any GSSL (Gyraf SSL clone) is worth it, no matter who built it. I have two.
https://www.gyraf.dk/gy_pd/ssl/ssl.htm

 

Last edited: Oct 31, 2021

An analog compressor also have transformers, which will color the sound. Even leaving the compressor in bypass colors the sound enough (some even leave it in bypass just to get the color, on whatever they are recording or mastering).
Sure you can get very close with a plugin emulation like Brainworx Townhouse, Vertigo VSC-2, Cytomic Glue, Waves G-Master, etc. But there's something extra randomness and musicality happening in the analog compressor. The more forward mids in the analog effect is very pleasing.

Regarding the "more dynamics": Yes, that's the great thing - with slow attack and fast release you get increased transients in a way, yet "glue" compression. A great combination and one of the reasons why it's the holy grail of the compressors.

Edit: It's also VERY important to loudness match so that you can do a correct judgement. DrMix is a bit on the loud side of the compressed signal, and we always prefer the louder version (even if we have two identical versions). That's how "unreliable" our hearing is on percieved loudness.

 

Last edited: Oct 31, 2021

I have tried comparing hardware bus compressor ( Gssl ) to ssl bus compressor plugin. I have to say it's like night and day. On the same settings Ratio 4:1 , Attack 30ms , Release fast, sidechain at 160hz, the Gssl stays punchy and simply explodes the drum bus, while the plugin tends to smear the transients, especially the snare.

 

If you own an analogue SSL G Bus and can provide proof that a digital compressor will give the same result, I will consider your opinions.
Also you provide a caveat. "pretty much the same thing"...so, to take your own words literally, you are admitting it cannot do "exactly" the same thing. So you dump on the SSL and then say, it is actually better.
This is a problem that arises here frequently. People make judgements on gear they have never been near, let alone used. But they have a cracked copy of a plugin and in an attempt to justify not having the means to acquire the top notch gear dismiss it with "I can get better results with cheap plugins because I am so good at what I do I have no need of overpriced hardware"

 

They modelled a custom built SSL bus compressor.

 

Last edited: Oct 31, 2021

I agree. However, I can't recommend STAM audio. His business practices are $***.

 

Why do I need to own it if I can hear the result in this video? Isn't the purpose of this video to show people that do not own it how it sounds?

And I can say that I can get the main result in this video with the mentioned plugins. But probably in reality it sounds even more "punchy gritty shiny" due to youtube compression whatever.

People rely too much on side effects like some "pleasing musical esoteric something something" they can not explain adequately.
But everyone can create those side effects as well.

And maybe to add some more controversy: I do not need "gain matching whatever" as well to judge the changes a compressor does to the signal.

 

Last edited: Oct 31, 2021

Awesome, but why? Why cant a digital compressor do the same thing as an analogue compressor? Compressors are not some magical science, so if there's a reason that a digital compressor can't do what an analogue does, please tell me. I will concede that digital and analogue have different sonic characters, which affects the sound, but that just peanut butter banana vs peanut butter jelly... one's personal taste.
There's no reason a digital compressor cannot do what an analogue comp, 99% of the time it's the usage and taste. I own hardware and software compressors, they behave differently compressors behave differently. That's a given, find a usage that works well for them.
On a more personal note, does anyone else find it weird that developers still base most software on ancient analogue designs? I think it a sad day in humanity when something as basic as a compressor cant be improved upon. Imagine if it was said a digital watch cant possibly be better than a hand-wound timepiece, lol

I do like how u specifically point out "cracked copy", like being cracked makes the software less effective?

 

You really think a YouTube video is the same as being is a studio using hardware? If you have spent as much time as myself sitting at an SSL 9000 then we don't need YouTube videos to make judgements for us, we have experience. Do you have that experience? It is not me who has "esoteric something something"...why would you feel the need to devalue my years working with hardware synths to tell me, it's just esoteric nonsense and that your soft synths are the very same thing? Identical in fact and that it is me who is deluded.

Why is a cracked copy of importance. Because it has no value. You didn't save up the thousands of dollars to build a top quality studio.
You again, highlight the viewpoint that people with only one perspective have an equal perspective. You brush my experience with both software and hardware aside because it disrupts the only viewpoint you have. Digital. And why is that your preferred position? Because it's all you have.

 

I take back what I said. I just remembered you. I made the mistake of thinking you made music and that such nuances were important to you, but you're the guy who makes beats while watching TV or playing Fortnite.

 

It is definetely not like using a hardware I never said that but the main results one can get with the mentioned software are still pretty much the same.

I really do not need this experience to judge if my result sounds well enough to get broadcasted.
(This does not imply anything!)

The last I will say regarding this is that again, I can recreate those kind of compressors and further more, I can even set every parameter to any position I want to not that this is really necessary but it could be.

 

Let's leave out the difference between gear and plugins. I think you're interested in the question, what differentiates compressors of the same kind? For instance:

1. the saturation
2. the real times (dialing in 3ms doesn't necessarily mean 3ms)
3. the slope of the attack and release stages

If these vary you have no chance to match two compressors perfectly. The question is, is it necessary?

Even when you match two VCAs as good as possible, their result will be different. Additionally this difference will change on different sources.

 

I have noticed a lot when people speak of breathing and/or transparency they often use compressor in the same sentence. Some people used to put the Aphex compellor into the same category as did I initially and some SSL plugins. There is a difference between levelling and compression and peak limiting as sure as there is a difference between downward and upward compression.
Pretty much what No Avenger said except some plugins serve one purpose and others have multiple purposes. The same but less with some hardware focusing on one goal.
There are more than likely more vst plugins that fit the category of equalling their hardware counterpoints , mostly i.e. However, the only ones I have seen three videos testing one against the other where they came up with the same results were the RND Portico plugins, where they tested against the Neve hardware. Each did the same thing with marginal differences. As I said, there are likely more around that meet the same benchmarks. Without testing the SSL software against the equivocal hardware there is no way I could make any comparison that could possibly do anyone any good. You'd have to do that for yourself and judge for yourself.

In my humble opinion, I think it comes down to whether or not the plugin or hardware does what you want and if it's not broken, don't fix it,

 

Last edited by a moderator: Nov 1, 2021