The Stam is based of the very old design with the original DBX cans in them. Those VCA’s distort much easier and hence make the character sound a little more grittier. The SSL on the other hand is a more modern design with a much higher headroom hence the open and airy sound it delivers. Both sound awesome and it comes down to preference. I have the Stam and it lives on my master bus.
I agreed with you the ssl is more transparent and balanced, but i prefer stam for the exciting and color that print, thats what you want for analog gear anyways. Great video, i love my stam SA4000-5. For 500$ i dont think have a competitor.
Great video and thank you. I needed that. Original stays original. I just bought the SSL G-Comp 3 days ago and i now understand what that word “ GLUE” really means.
It’s 100% the definition of the word Glue. Subtle and musical. I found the SSL crumbled under pressure earlier than the Stam but it’s very open sounding until then.
Unfortunately, the Stam has the same problem that all Gyraf-based SSL clones have: a knee that is too soft. If you want the hard knee sound, the only options are the SSL G-Comp, the X-Logic version, and the Smart Research C1/C1LA/C2. Maybe the new TK BC501 with the "Grab" hard knee setting might be close to the original compressor action. I think Stam's price is right. A compressor of this kind shouldn't cost a thousand. I hope Stam can recreate this hard knee someday.
Thanks for the comparison, Ed! Honestly, in this example the SSL was hands down the better performing compressor to my ears. I’m actually a little disappointed with how the Stam sounded here.
@@EdThorne it was my perception of “polish” to the sound, which I guess is due to the more coloured nature of the Stam. In actual practice, where I’d be using this kind of compressor gently on the mix bus, I don’t think I’d be unhappy with the results from the Stam, but the SSL just seemed to hold together better at higher db reduction than the Stam did - subjectively speaking 🤷🏻♂️
I like the channel, but this video is absolutely brutal. I sat here shouting at the screen for 15 minutes, waiting for you to compare these two bus compressors, using ACTUAL BUS COMPRESSION settings like a slow attack and fast release. Who in the world is dialing in 12 dB of gain reduction at .1ms attack time on a mix bus? If you have both units in your possession still and can do a proper comparison that would be lovely!
I was actually shocked that I did not like the Stam as much as I had hoped. To my ears the SSL had more air, lift and body somewhat more lively while the Stam had more crunch and color. While I am all for colouration I think by the time I am at my mixbus less is more although I want it to glue instead of colour. For half the price though Stam makes a strong case as maybe dial it back so it does not crunch my entire mix. For some reason I am not convinced it has useful for everything but like you said, it's good for certain instruments.
I have that Stam sa-5000 mk2 , I wonder what the difference in sound you can get with the tube version. Is 2 tubes in the output stage. It would be worth to have both ????
The Stam sounds way more like the OG 384. The low end gets a butt lift and the toms and guitars get girth. As for the airy-ness you all are missing, that’s what a pair of pultecs on the back end are for.
This isn't a good comparison as the SSL circuitry is always in the signal path (the SSL doesn't have hard wire/relay bypass) don't know about the Stam but nonetheless the SSL circuitry is always in the loop - the "IN" button when out only disengages the sidechain.
@@EdThorne But it's not passively as the entire circuitry for each compressor is permanently in the loop and acting on the signal - it's just that you can't hear actually what each unit truly sounds like (box tone) - I think this is important because the basic sound of the unit's signal path without any compression going on obviously really matters - when the signal path of both units are in play at the same time you can't really judge the sound of one of them on their own, it's a mash up of both but I agree you can judge the compression action just not the true sound of each compressor.
@@doradoradoramen with my SSL-ish VCA compressor, the chameleon labs 7721, i can't tell the difference between the boxtone of the unit in bypass and a true bypass in a blind test. so i would disagree that it's important. once it starts compressing, there is a certain tonality to the unit, but not before. in my experience. which i'm sure is worthless to you since you can write it off as "this guy just can't hear subtleties"
SSL has more authority retaining air and transparency, it sounds effortless, more space around sounds, You can get the same tone with Stam but it sounds more 2 dimensional compared to SSL, but £1k difference in price? is it worth it? why not stick with with software... ? you decide..
you should look what's inside the Stam It's an old SSL 4K console 1:1 sounding replica. For a cleaner sound I am sure the SSL will be more appealing but SSL sells that, we are trying to build units no longer available with all the vintage Mojo
What stood out the most for you?
Watch more 500 Series videos HERE: ua-cam.com/play/PLPGp5cq-hMjxzPf7BJ4fKSMEKCHkC0RGW.html
The Stam is based of the very old design with the original DBX cans in them. Those VCA’s distort much easier and hence make the character sound a little more grittier. The SSL on the other hand is a more modern design with a much higher headroom hence the open and airy sound it delivers. Both sound awesome and it comes down to preference. I have the Stam and it lives on my master bus.
Spot on 👌
I agreed with you the ssl is more transparent and balanced, but i prefer stam for the exciting and color that print, thats what you want for analog gear anyways.
Great video, i love my stam SA4000-5.
For 500$ i dont think have a competitor.
Great video and thank you.
I needed that.
Original stays original.
I just bought the SSL G-Comp 3 days ago and i now understand what that word “ GLUE” really means.
It’s 100% the definition of the word Glue. Subtle and musical. I found the SSL crumbled under pressure earlier than the Stam but it’s very open sounding until then.
The irony is that the Stam has the original parts of the old SSL consoles while the SSL has been modified from the original ❤
Both are great units ! thanks for the video
Unfortunately, the Stam has the same problem that all Gyraf-based SSL clones have: a knee that is too soft. If you want the hard knee sound, the only options are the SSL G-Comp, the X-Logic version, and the Smart Research C1/C1LA/C2. Maybe the new TK BC501 with the "Grab" hard knee setting might be close to the original compressor action. I think Stam's price is right. A compressor of this kind shouldn't cost a thousand. I hope Stam can recreate this hard knee someday.
Where is the proof for your statement?
@@RockmannMusic I’ve measured GSSLs against a G-Comp, and in my case found no knee difference.
@@craigmorris74 Thanks for the info Craig. Good to let the public know.
The Stam uses the same SSL 4K shematic. There is no knee difference.
Thanks for the comparison, Ed!
Honestly, in this example the SSL was hands down the better performing compressor to my ears. I’m actually a little disappointed with how the Stam sounded here.
Interesting. What didn’t you like about it? It’s definitely more coloured where there’s SSL is more spacious.
@@EdThorne it was my perception of “polish” to the sound, which I guess is due to the more coloured nature of the Stam. In actual practice, where I’d be using this kind of compressor gently on the mix bus, I don’t think I’d be unhappy with the results from the Stam, but the SSL just seemed to hold together better at higher db reduction than the Stam did - subjectively speaking 🤷🏻♂️
Was hoping to hear these with the classic settings that are _the_ G comp sound (slowest attack, fastest release, 4:1), great video nonetheless!
Yeh, sorry I was kind of improvising from the lowest ratio to heaviest in the shortest time possible.
@@EdThorne no apologies needed Ed!
There seems to be a clarity to the ssl.
STAM Audio are a good company. There isn't much between them but they have their own character. If someone owns both of them I think it's worth it.
I like the channel, but this video is absolutely brutal. I sat here shouting at the screen for 15 minutes, waiting for you to compare these two bus compressors, using ACTUAL BUS COMPRESSION settings like a slow attack and fast release. Who in the world is dialing in 12 dB of gain reduction at .1ms attack time on a mix bus? If you have both units in your possession still and can do a proper comparison that would be lovely!
Fair comment. Can't do another video though.
I was actually shocked that I did not like the Stam as much as I had hoped. To my ears the SSL had more air, lift and body somewhat more lively while the Stam had more crunch and color. While I am all for colouration I think by the time I am at my mixbus less is more although I want it to glue instead of colour. For half the price though Stam makes a strong case as maybe dial it back so it does not crunch my entire mix. For some reason I am not convinced it has useful for everything but like you said, it's good for certain instruments.
We can make one with less THD up to each client. It's up to each client!
thanks!
I have that Stam sa-5000 mk2 , I wonder what the difference in sound you can get with the tube version. Is 2 tubes in the output stage. It would be worth to have both ????
I haven’t tried the tube version.
ah, but its not the Stam tube version!
The Stam sounds way more like the OG 384. The low end gets a butt lift and the toms and guitars get girth. As for the airy-ness you all are missing, that’s what a pair of pultecs on the back end are for.
This isn't a good comparison as the SSL circuitry is always in the signal path (the SSL doesn't have hard wire/relay bypass) don't know about the Stam but nonetheless the SSL circuitry is always in the loop - the "IN" button when out only disengages the sidechain.
Technically they’re both always in the loop so what you’re hearing is both devices passively and the compression from each separately.
@@EdThorne But it's not passively as the entire circuitry for each compressor is permanently in the loop and acting on the signal - it's just that you can't hear actually what each unit truly sounds like (box tone) - I think this is important because the basic sound of the unit's signal path without any compression going on obviously really matters - when the signal path of both units are in play at the same time you can't really judge the sound of one of them on their own, it's a mash up of both but I agree you can judge the compression action just not the true sound of each compressor.
@@doradoradoramen with my SSL-ish VCA compressor, the chameleon labs 7721, i can't tell the difference between the boxtone of the unit in bypass and a true bypass in a blind test. so i would disagree that it's important. once it starts compressing, there is a certain tonality to the unit, but not before. in my experience. which i'm sure is worthless to you since you can write it off as "this guy just can't hear subtleties"
I prefer the raw track without either compressor turned on
SSL has more authority retaining air and transparency, it sounds effortless, more space around sounds, You can get the same tone with Stam but it sounds more 2 dimensional compared to SSL, but £1k difference in price? is it worth it? why not stick with with software... ? you decide..
Plugins are definitely a force to be reckoned with today... no complaints from my mix clients... all ITB for 20 years
What ssl plugin do you recommend?
@@leroytakahashi SSL’s own plugin of their Bus compressor was the best ime. UA was good. IK Multimedia G Comp also had a good tone
The SSL ran out of head room at -16db GR ... anyone else hear that ugly distortion?
Stam... you can continue trying....😢
you should look what's inside the Stam It's an old SSL 4K console 1:1 sounding replica. For a cleaner sound I am sure the SSL will be more appealing but SSL sells that, we are trying to build units no longer available with all the vintage Mojo