Sometimes I wish I could use "Winner", "Like" and "Agree" simultaneously.

 

AFAIC, I'm sorry, I didn't see that part about the IRs.

I presume you know that the Dirac delta function ( "distribution ", in fact ) and the Nyquist–Shannon sampling theorem can exclusively characterize linear system, right ?

 

Last edited: Jul 26, 2022

Eventide H3000, and some of their reverb/FX boxes Blackhole etc...

 

I think the Softube Weiss stuff is 1:1. The Arturia Synclavier is. Also I think the UAD AMS/RMX reverb is 1:1 too.

 

I guess one could argue that there is no 1:1 copy of one hardware unit to the other either. Yes, you can create sample accurate copies of a digital signal, but that is not really the point as audio is not digital. So even if you manage to create a digital audio stream that is exactly the same as the one produced and then recorded by a hardware device, the audio is not audible at that point, so it is rather useless to compare it at that point. If you record the audio of two units, i dont think the results will be exactly the same. The differences might be really small, maybe even inaudible, but it will not be exactly the same. So if you record them and the result is identical, you just didnt record enough data to be able to tell the differences

 

It's hard to have plugins to sound 1:1 the same as hardware because let's say, all real LA2A hardware does not sound the same so...

 

"It's hard to have plugins to sound 1:1 the same as hardware because let's say, all real LA2A hardware does not sound the same so..."

That is an extremely good and valid point.....especially when talking about vintage gear.
The tolerances of component values were VERY loose back in the day. It was a well known fact that cats like Hendrix would go through a hundred or so of the same model of fuzz pedal before he found "the one". And that's not the only consideration. Component values tend to change or "drift" over the years. This can can turn an average unit into either the holy grail or a dog turd. Considering the prices of vintage gear this makes investing in it a real crapshoot. That is the one distinct advantage of VST emulations. You're buying code. Every copy is and will remain identical.

BUT....the whole point of this thread is the question.....can VST's perfectly emulate the sound of hardware. IMHO the answer is NO. The code might be exactly the same. The resulting sound might be VERY close. BUT then there is the question of hardware components. Does my laptop have the same AD/DA converters that say a Yamaha TX81Z does?.....no it does not. There are MANY variables in this equation.

I'm just glad that we now have so many options. This was not always the case.

 

Last edited: Jul 27, 2022

I can tell you the Overloud Gem Mod plugin they gave away for free on Black Friday gives my Boss DC-2w dimension a run for it's money.

I wouldn't want a replica of hardware to be honest. I think both software and hardware should compliment and innovate, not imitate.

 

Maybe the OPs question is "wrong" as a 1:1 copy is not the real goal that you want to achieve. A better question might be if there are plugins that sound as good as their hardware counterpart, or at least if there will be plugins in the future that sound as good. For the future part, i am pretty sure that it will be possible with AI and the processing power going up and up and up.

 

The OP question was if there are any plugins that run the same code as their hardware counterpart (and thus sound the same minus the converters, but in truth those differences are minimal and also if needed it is easy to replicate old bad converters with vst effects)
I am not sure if they are mentioned yet, the whole Korg (digital) line, including their latest hardware synths, opsix and wavestate (and triton wavestation prophecy etc). Opsix uses quit a bit of cpu which does not change when playing notes, which seems to indicate it is also a dsp emulator running original code, like the virus on dsp emu.

 

As others have mentioned there really is no 1:1 copy when it comes to plugins vs hardware as theres entirely too many variables in the analog domain. The closest would be direct ports of digital hardware pieces such as the Weiss stuff. Impulses can sometimes come pretty close with set EQ settings but they're static captures of a dynamic environment

The thing is the same model of hardware can sound surprising different in different environments.

Things like power source, patchbays, cable types, general interference, etc result in varying levels of noise floor across different parts of the frequency spectrum. Often this noise floor isnt static either.
Different parts used in different production runs also may result in variance amongst certain units. It only gets deeper as you get into tube gear. Factors like tube type play a huge role and can result in 2 of the same unit sounding very different. Tube make, model, match % for stereo units, even temperature in the room all contribute. Getting into vintage hardware only gets crazier. If you were to stumble upon 2 vintage 670s lets say, theyd sound surprisingly different. Converters also play a role in the sound albeit subtle, some have transformers and add increased color.

Either way, my long winded point being.... Just look for what sounds good to you. Plugins are getting better by the day but id argue a good room / pair of monitors will do far more for you here.

 

I find it strange that most of the people that answering here not aware such thing exist.

I read it somewhere (maybe will post source later) that the original code for the 480L is lost (or kept in a dungeon somewhere protected by dragons, real dragons!) and no one has access to it, even the Relab did a really good job emulating the device they did re-rewritten everything back from the ground up themselves.

 

Last edited: Jul 27, 2022

Yes, you are correct about the code.
Same for the TC 2290 => TC2290-DT in fact, by the new / younger TC devs, isn't it ?

 

GForce synth vsts, such as OB-E, I was like wow, now we're talking and in 1:1 territory.

Also u-he synths like Diva, Repro, but they will never sound 100% like a real Moog or a Prophet for example because of, for instance in the case of a SUB 37 or Mood Mini vs. Diva, the Moog's filter/ladder shapped matched transistor array used in their circuit design which, to my knowledge, no software can reproduce still as of today. Semi-modular Bazille also sounds fantastic, not sure what synth it sounds like but it's pure analog sh*t.

Arturia Mini ain't bad but nothing like the actual one.

When it comes to Modular I've been impressed by the sound of CV-1, despite being a basic modular plugin, it sounds fantastic and little CPU use.

 

bruh...

 

No it's not "wrong". The question is crystal clear. We're not interested in the future and whatever AI non-sense, tomorrow we'll be all dead, we're asking as of today (obviously) since we're making music today not tomorrow nor yesterday. For the sake of usefulness, let's stick to an exhaustive list of what actual plugins sound like or are very close to 1:1.

 

There are a lot of plugins that are close, but none of them are 100% there. Not even Weiss. Weiss is probably as close as it gets right now, but there are technical limitations. Even with digital to digital ports.
When we talk about analog to digital emulation, the biggest limitation right now is not even the number of possible variables in the analog processing that needs to be emulated and the processing power itself, but the fact that we are bound to bits and sample rate. In fact, I'm pretty sure it's already possible to emulate analog hardware 1:1, but not in real time. And at least according to my technical understanding, this will not change in the near future. Because physics! After all, it's not just about how fast the processor can process and precalculate a certain amount of data, but how precise it is in doing so. And precision becomes the limiting factor here.
But there are some (a lot) of people out there who are much more intelligent than I would ever dare to claim. So, maybe they prove me wrong.

 

Last edited: Jul 27, 2022

The problem is - there aren't many hardware DSP plugins. From what I gathered I think all of them have been mentioned so far, or pretty much all.

I *think* some Waldorf synths like PPG Wave 3V [PPG Wave 2.3+Waveterm], Largo [Blofeld] are also hardware DSP based.

 

Pro audio gear use high level components (an example: Carnhill/Sowter as in/out transformer), you have to be very optimistic if you hope to have the same emulated sound when you have recorded your guitar performance through a mickey mouse interface.
There are plugins that claim to be faithful to an SSL 4000: now someone explain to me how it is possible to emulate the behavior of an SSL channel strip when you are recording the microphone through the interface above.
We have been talking about emulation of sound behavior, which, however close it may be, will never be the original one, but I would like to add that there is a second difference between working on a physical instrument and its virtual emulation, and it is the workflow. The physicality of an instrument, layout of the gear, with all its limitations, impose a specific workflow: all this is also reflected in its final output. Anyone who plays with gear knows that programming a TR808 with your hands or instead doing it on the screen with its emulation will lead to very different results.
Another example is the Theremin: as easy as it is to virtually emulate its sound, the difference between a performance played by a vst and another played with the real stuff will be very evident.

The point is: stop being obsessed by virtual emulation of the historical gear, also because the computer on the other side, can do much better: for example, no keyboard can get to the complexity of what Serum VST can do, or we can quote Melodyne: there's no gear that can give that result.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Jul 27, 2022