Soo... After being called a "fraud" and being told that I purposely made an unfair comparison because I recieve money from Acustica Audio (which is tin foil hat stuff) I thought I'd quickly address a few things regarding the pulsar. 1. The thresholds don't match due to the fact that I set the input to match the hardware which in theory if modelled correctly should really yield the same threshold to get the same gain reduction. It doesn't so the threshold is set to achieve the same gain reduction as the hardware. 2. When loading up the access analog manley manley vari mu it automatically sets it default with the input set to around 2 o'clock. I used the threshold control as my gain reduction. So setting the threshold of the Plugin to match the hardware and using the input to control the gain reduction doesn't make any sense as its not how I used the hardware. 2. The input stage has a fixed linear frequency response that changes the more its cranked. So setting the input exact to the hardware seemed quite important to me if I was to achieve the correct tonal balance, especially if it was modelled after the hardware. Whereas the threshold has no effect on the linear frequency response and adapts the ratio. 3. I had the Acustica threshold set different to the hardware. Especially on the drums.. Pulsars threshold was actually a lot closer and still.. Acustica near identical. 4. The pulsar has lookahead, lpf and HPF sidechains and even a bell filter. I used as much as possible to get as close to the hardware as physically possible. So in reality the comparison is completely unfair as I'm using stuff that the hardware doesn't have but the only tools I have to get the pulsar closer. 5. The harmonic and frequency response of magenta and pulsar are completely different to one another so they are always going to sound different. So if the magenta sounds almost identical to the hardware then obviously the pulsar is never going to sound exact to the hardware because its fundamentals are completely different. A threshold ratio isn't going to change that. 6. Loads of people actually prefer the pulsar mu to the 4 grand hardware.. So isn't that a good thing? Lastly, I spend WAY too much time focusing on minute details when doing these comparisons. If settings don't match its because when I matched them it sounded nothing like what it's supposed to be emulating. If it doesn't act like it should then you have to tweak and tweak and tweak until you get as close as it can get. So no I'm not paid and I do everything to ensure I can make the shootouts as close as possible.. And most importantly I use my eyes and my ears! That is all.. Peace 🤓
Stay on target. you do a fantastic job. Ignore the neckbeards. Crikey, I didn't know about AA and always having to use the PRE. Have you ever tried using a PRE from another unit when using an AA compressor? I was also putting the PRE AFTER the comp. I'm going to go down to the shed now for a while to have a little cry. If my wife sees me going to the shed she always knows its to have a little cry; it certainly aint gonna be because I'm making myself useful with a spanner or screwdriver. She doesn't even let me use the steak knives.
I have trial some AA and yes, they sound fantastic, but how is the workflow when mixing with them? I can use max 3 AA plugins in my mix and then my cpu suffers. Do you mix freezing or rendering tracks?
Coming here at 2023. I have all of them three and totally agree your opinion. If you want something really like manley hardware AA is good otherwise this brand won't be accept by market. Pulsar one is more likely a Vari Mu behavior compressor I would say that. UAD one is the compromise between IDENTICAL and CPU consuming since you don't have to use cpu at all.
Hi Paul. I’m François from Pulsar Audio. I think that your shootout is quite unfair for our Mu, let me explain why. COMPARE WHAT IS COMPARABLE On the original hardware, the threshold setting determines the ratio. The higher the threshold is, the higher the ratio will be, and the higher the saturation introduced will be. On your shootout, the three plugins have their threshold set at completely different levels, so we listen to them at different ratios, which is a little bit unfair. YOU SAID « SATURATION »? Analytical tools like Plugin Doctor, which allow measuring objectively the characteristics of a plugin have done a lot of good to the plugin world. However, be careful not to draw the wrong conclusions from what you see on the analyzer! When you present the harmonic profile of the Mu, you do it with the threshold at the maximum, and with 20dB of gain reduction. In this mode, the Mu will obviously introduce a lot of saturation, because of the nature of the operation of gain reduction itself (remember that the gain reduction is done here by a tube! ) Have you tried to use Plugin Doctor to analyze directly the machine? (with Plugin Doctor’s « Use hardware » mode). I think you might be surprised by the results! OUR PHILOSOPHY At Pulsar, we try to be as honest as possible when we propose a model for our customers. We wrote this technical page to explain in detail how our algorithm works and why it respects the analog signal path of the original hardware: pulsar.audio/variable-bias-compression-explained/ There are on our website sound samples of the machine, our plugin, and one of our serious competitors, I invite you to go throw an ear at them! Anyway, bravo for this youtube channel, great work! François from Pulsar.
Hi Francois Firstly thank you so much for taking the time to reply. You are the first manufacturer to do so thus far. So, in terms of plugin doctor I have 2 instances of pulsar mu on plugin doctor. Both showing different levels of gain reduction. From none all the way to a lot (in both) using input and threshold to vary gain reduction so I did fairly show the harmonic diffrences that the input and threshold results in varying gain reductions. The same with the intermodulation distortion, I started with a lot of GR and brought it down. I've not tried the use hardware function of plugin doctor but I'm unsure if it would work with access analog as the analog is streamed over the Internet so I don't know if plugin doctor would recognise that. So even at no gain reduction the harmonics don't come close to the Acustica which I, and many who have watched this video have agreed was a massive factor in the magenta nailing the sound. In terms of the threshold I'm a little confused as the pulsar is recieving the exact same input as the hardware so if modelled correctly then surely the threshold at the exact same settings would result in the same gain reduction? I set the inputs the same as hardware and set the threshold to match the gain reduction. So if I'm getting you right, to make it fair I would have had to set the threshold the same and use the input to match the hardwares gain reduction? Problem I have is if that was the case then the input wouldn't match the hardwares input thus again not matching harmonics.. And would have been another variable that would have been offered to me if I matched threshold. Also as you stated, the Acustica's threshold doesn't match the hardware either but sounds almost identical.. So again I'm a bit perplexed. The last thing that wasn't argued however was the linear frequency response. Regardless of threshold, the linear response is always going to be one of the biggest factors in this plugin not sounding like the hardware. Is there any reason for the HPF, gigantic bass and steep high end boosts? I honestly tried and tried and tried to get the pulsar to get close to the hardware but ultimately it does its own thing. Acustica is near identical and the pulsar cannot recreate the same cleaner harmonics or lessened IMD. The frequency response makes it impossible to match the hardware and it just is what it is. The pulsar is a fantastic sounding plugin. No doubt. Many people already have stated that they prefer the pulsar so that's the main thing I would take from this shootout as a plugin delevoper. Users prefer your representation of a vari mu plugin over 4 grand hardware. That's something to applaud but if we're going to discuss this plugin matching its hardware counterpart then I'm afraid I can't do it. Its a fantastic plugin and I take your points on board regarding the threshold and ratio which I didn't really understand till now so I thank you for your reflection and taking the time to reply to this video IF there any plugins you think I may be able to add in a shootout that would work well then don't hesitate to get in touch and let me know more about how it should be used to achieve your desired sound 🤓👍
Sorry mate but "did on purpose to try to hide the fact" is a bit tin foil hat conspiracy stuff. That's not the way I work. IF you go back to the same section you'll see that the pulsars threshold is actually closer to the threshold of the hardware than Acustica. It would actually be acustica that had the right to come back to me and state that it was unfair BUT the Acustica sounds like the hardware so the threshold thing doesn't really make a difference here. In actual fact the max threshold setting is the lighter compression as it goes from right to left in terms of the threshold actually compressing. Regardless they are all have same gain reduction in every example. The input in the pulsar matches the hardware and I used the threshold to dictate the gain reduction. However there are other factors that affect the gain reduction in the pulsar I.e. Look ahead (which I used to match the 3d character of the hardware) and also the high end compression filter. Pulsar dictates the gain reduction.. Not me. If I set the input the same as the hardware, and its recieving the same input going into the compressor, then the threshhold compression should match the hardware.. It does not. It also lacks the depth of the hardware so you use the look ahead that pulsar added in.. Not me. From there you re-adjust your threshold to get the same gain reduction. Then the highs are too much so you then use the high shelf filter to tame them so it sounds more akin to the hardware.. Again pulsar added this in.. Not me. You then have to re-adjust the threshold again to match the gain reduction. So Pulsar added these features in and I use them to replicate the hardware as close as physically possible. These features affect the threshold.. I can't win. They all affect gain reduction and that's not my fault. I sat for quite a while to get the snare on the pulsar to match the hardware drums (which it does) using the look ahead and ensuring the gain reduction was right so to say I've intentionally made it sound worse is redundant. Attack and release settings are actually closer in the pulsar as magenta gives you less options for attack and release. So if the input, attack and release settings are the same and I'm using the threshold to control the gain reduction (exactly like I did in the hardware) then I'm using both plugins in the exact same way, then I don't understand what difference the threshold is making here as the Acustica never matches the threshold of the hardware either but still sounds almost identical to the hardware. So your point in making me out to be a fraud is completely flawed.
@@PaulThird Now you should do a follow-up video with the same plugins and hardware to shut up any weird conspiracy theorists! LOL Similar test with all of the settings exactly the same this time to prove your point of how/why you did this video with the settings the way you did. Actually, your point will surely be even MORE obvious then. Great videos BTW!
Sorry if I've crossed the line with the tin hat stuff but you are genuinely believing that I'm intentionally making false shootouts. That's a direct false slur. To make it worse You genuinely believe I'm being paid by acustica 🤣🤣 I have just over 1350 subscribers. I'm a tiny UA-camr. That's tin hat stuff man The settings are exact to the hardware .. bar the threshold. I don't understand why I just explained in detail exactly why that is and your response is.. Acustica must be paying you 😂 I'll make this as simple as I can. If you have both plugs set in the same settings the gain reduction will not match. To make it fair you have to match the gain reduction. If you use the input to dial in the compression then the harmonics won't match as you aren't driving the unit the same as the hardware. It's either you choose the threshold or the input to control the gain reduction. You cannot set each plugin exact to the hardware in terms of input and threshold. You can only pick one as the gain reduction will vary. It's impossible to set it exact. That's not my fault. IF there's one thing I pride myself on its honesty so to have somebody say I'm making up false shootouts when I've spent 2-3 hours tweaking to make everything sound as close to the hardware as possible is pretty offensive. And BTW if I really did want to falsify a shootout would I just not set the settings the same and show that instead of the actual settings which can be taken apart?? I don't know if your trolling me or what man but your completely making stuff up which there is no need for. Pulsar themselves have even stated that they like my videos and it was just the threshold thing that they queried but in my opinion I answered that in detail. Believe what you want man but I'd definitely have a look at my detailed reply to you and maybe discuss those further instead of making wild accusations. Just no need man
I would have included the Klanghelm MJUC. And also, I felt like the Pulsar won pretty much everywhere. I do love the fact that the Manley and AA, have a bit more harmonics, but that can always be added, not removed. Just my 2 cents. I love your shootouts though.
I think the smiley curve in the pulsar gives it a big advantage. Definitely a good plugin but 100% not a manley vari mu haha however if you prefer pulsar.. Saving yourself 4 grand 😜 BTW mjuc isn't a manley vari mu so that's why I didn't include it (fairchild, urei 176 and the devs own creation 🤓)
Some of us appreciate your honesty. The Pulsar although not much like the real Manley, still seems like a good master bus compressor as long as you don't boost the gain too much cuz of the smiley face curve in all. Good vid bro, cheers.
The Pulsar always sat on my master bus just gently doing its stuff before I found the AA/Nebula stuff. It does have a certain something compared to it's algo cohorts.
Many thanks for this video. A very sweet test. However, it omits one of the key aspects of the compressor. The ability to glue the mix. Pulsar Mu does it in my opinion really effectively.
See I thought the opposite haha I thought the smiley eq curve in the pulsar was more of an enhancement than glue. Suppose this is why you include the original haha would've helped. no right or wrong answers though 🤓
Just shot out Pulsar against Magenta 5 and......although.....Pulsar sound good...to be "A Digital Plugin" Hands down the "Best Digtial Algorythmic" Based Vari Mu Plugin...because.....the Megenta is Live Sampled from 4 Different Analog Units...it just sound more "Open and Real" So there you go....Although Pulsar's GUI "Looks" Better...Magenta...SMOKES..PULSAR...UAD...AND ANY OTHER "Digital Mu Plugin" there you go....LOL..deal with it....
You've probably picked this up by now but, as I understand it, the SHMOD feature switches between different modifications of the shape of the attack function. Allowing more or less of different parts of the transients through.
yup. just modifying the attack envelope. 0 is look ahead so you can really clamp down on those transients and higher up allows more transients in. middle is the default attack envelopes of the hardware
Very nice review thanks a lot,it always awesome to learn how far our modern technology are going up to the real deal, hardware still be my favorites but acustica sound almost identical!! No average listeners will notice the difference
Yeah I genuinely believe that no average listener is telling the diffrence. No way. Honestly convolution sampling is basically identical in every hardware test I've done so far. It's crazy how far the tech has moved!!
I'm back at work so I'm struggling 😅😅 I dunno. I've not tried it yet. I'm hearing great things but I hear great things after every new acustica release but I'm also hearing what it does can be replicated by other plugs so I'm really unsure. I don't even know what id compare it to. Just a really random release from AA haha
There is a purple blue skin you can get haha but I use the magenta all the time so I'm just used to it haha you definitely know when it's on your screen anyway 🤣
Hey Paul, your channel comes across as a blessing for me. It is as practical as it is thorough. And I agree 100% with your take on comparisons done out of a mixing context. Biases can be huge there, specially taking into consideration one's fluency with each tool. Spot on approach for keeping things evidence based. As each one of us can (and I dare to say must) arrive to a conclusion. Keep up this essential content, mate! Thanks a lot.
@@PaulThird Magenta. By a great margin, actually. 😜 At the critical listening level that we try to dwell, Pulsar sounded hyped in my opinion. That's not a bad thing per se, but as you articulated very well, why would I go for a tube compressor for that? The hardware of Access Analog was a little muffled for my taste from the mids and above. Maybe that is the "real" Manley sound, and I would in reality process sounds with such a profile in mind... But honestly, Magenta presented a better balanced open tone. I preferred it in every single test. I bought it today. Curious to experiment the sweet spot of the pres and the compressor. Sounds fun and challenging. 🤓
I actually love the pulsar mu, i'm yet to try any acustica audio but it's current one of top 5 favourite comps, and i had well over 50 by now. I think you should try the Arturia compressors, they really are the best three algo compressors I've tried. If they made an LA 2A I could finally rest easy, as i find all others to be seriously lacklustre (especially waves)
As plugin comps go it's an awesome comp. Just because it isn't as close to the manley doesn't mean its not useable. Tons of engineers use it so if your getting great results don't bother looking at others. That's my advice 🤓 However as plugin comps go.. Until you've tried TimP comps you can't say you've heard the best 😜
Just shot out Pulsar against Magenta 5 and......although.....Pulsar sound good...to be "A Digital Plugin" Hands down the "Best Digtial Algorythmic" Based Vari Mu Plugin...because.....the Megenta is Live Sampled from 4 Different Analog Units...it just sound more "Open and Real" So there you go....Although Pulsar's GUI "Looks" Better...Magenta...SMOKES..PULSAR...UAD...AND ANY OTHER "Digital Mu Plugin" there you go....LOL..deal with it....
Just shot out Pulsar against Magenta 5 and......although.....Pulsar sound good...to be "A Digital Plugin" Hands down the "Best Digtial Algorythmic" Based Vari Mu Plugin...because.....the Megenta is Live Sampled from 4 Different Analog Units...it just sound more "Open and Real" So there you go....Although Pulsar's GUI "Looks" Better...Magenta...SMOKES..PULSAR...UAD...AND ANY OTHER "Digital Mu Plugin" there you go....LOL..deal with it....
Odd that you didn't get on with the IK, I've been playing around with one today and it sounded pretty good. One reference on KMR said this: Although not explicitly described as such, IK Multimedia Dyna-Mu is fairly clearly modelled on the Manley Vari-Mu valve compressor. What does it sound like? Well... remarkably like a Manley Vari-Mu - and therefore fantastic (believe me, I’m crying inside as I write this!). It really nails the warm musical glue that this processor is so good at - a subtle glow that just makes everything sit better in the mix without messing with track definition. This is part of IK Multimedia’s T-Racks 5 suite that includes a bunch of other great emulations. Well worth checking out… I have seen one comment that suggested you have to push it a bit harder to get some spice so maybe this was the issue. Keep up the great work Paul! 😎
Trust me, I tried everything. It's just not close to a manley vari mu. If it was close I would've went with it and included it but it was just way off to the point where I knew I was wasting my time going any further with it. Only other time that happened was when I did the pye compressor shootout and had to leave out the Acustica viridian
Hey Paul. Thanks for great video. U made it clear about the difference to hardware. I still think Mu sounds good on its own like u mentioned. I noticed dispite the smiley boost the Mu tends to move the sound a tiny bit backwards? With a less focused midrange that's found on the hardware.(maybe how it handles transients). Clearly shows on drums. Snare in particular. But still love Mu. Use it in several sources. You re doing interesting video contents. Subscribed. Keep it up. Cheers
I have the uad manley vari mu and it has Mid Side mode on it but i tried magenta and cant find a mid side switch on it anywhere. Am i missing something?
the difference doesn worth the money but the hardware sounded more like a record we used to, i noticed on drums sound heavy and solid very 90s or from past years i love it
@@PaulThird Still, during a sale they're pretty amazing all things considered, especially for people dipping their toes into the emulation world. A couple friends of mine use them and barely anything else. No Waves, no Softube, no Fabfilter... their records are just fine. They don't have high-end converters, barely any room treatment and a set of Rokits on their bedroom tables. They're perfectly happy, couldn't tell you the difference.
Hello again Paul, Have you tried Tim Ps Ra6 and/or Sum 100A compressor yet? Comparing them in Plugin Doctor.. and the Ra6 seems veeery clean unless I really crank up the limiter to red and also crank up the preamp from a harmonics point of view as well as frequency response.. almost thinking that Ra6 is.. too clean to make any sense?
Forget what I said... it only seems that the Ra6 has almost no harmonics on frequencies below 70 hz but above 400 hz it really picks up and the accelerates. Never mind :P!
Just shot out Pulsar against Magenta 5 and......although.....Pulsar sound good...to be "A Digital Plugin" Hands down the "Best Digtial Algorythmic" Based Vari Mu Plugin...because.....the Megenta is Live Sampled from 4 Different Analog Units...it just sound more "Open and Real" So there you go....Although Pulsar's GUI "Looks" Better...Magenta...SMOKES..PULSAR...UAD...AND ANY OTHER "Digital Mu Plugin" there you go....LOL..deal with it....
Hi Paul, I've been at Pulsar wensite and they do have compare their plugin to the original hardware and to other two plugins which I believe are UAD and Acoustica Magenta. When you hear the samples you would easily tell Pulsar is closest to the hardware. So watching your video made me confused so I'll have to try it myself. What is your take about that? How did they succed to make Magenta sound like crap?
My shootout doesn't have a bias. That's the main difference, plus I tweak by ear, not just match settings, which would make it easy to fail a comparison. Both plugins were painstakingly tweaked on mine. I even managed to do the same thing with magenta on a second video with a viewer who tried his own comparison and couldnt get it as close to his hardware. Sent me the dry and his processed hardware. I did the same method with magenta on this and managed identical results to the hardware. So I've proved it twice with 2 manley vari mu's. You just have to set magenta up right ie Correct gain staging, appropriate saturation, threshold and the right attack and release settings. Tweak magenta right and you'll get the hardware. It's not hard. Be even easier now with plugin doctor if you have the hardware. I mean let's be honest.. If you were trying to sell a plugin on your website, would you make the other plugins sound as close?
@@PaulThird For your last question, I would not compare them, I would just show how good is my plugin. And I do believe Pulsar Mu is a great plugin, but did they need to produce such a weird results from Magenta? Up to now I don't understand how they managed to do it! The audio is harsh you may think it is not Magenta that produced it. I'll make my own investigation because I don't like to believe Pulsar tricked it in order to sell their plugin which would be really bad on their behalf. On their website they say it is an embedded competitor and that is why I believe it is Magenta.
After my investigation I found that Magenta has a clip mode (D2) and as you turn shmod to max and adjusting attack and recovery you may venture in unknown territories. But actually that is a selling point. Pulsar did wrong to make that comparison. They are not honest in my opinion. Which is bad.
Just shot out Pulsar against Magenta 5 and......although.....Pulsar sound good...to be "A Digital Plugin" Hands down the "Best Digtial Algorythmic" Based Vari Mu Plugin...because.....the Megenta is Live Sampled from 4 Different Analog Units...it just sound more "Open and Real" So there you go....Although Pulsar's GUI "Looks" Better...Magenta...SMOKES..PULSAR...UAD...AND ANY OTHER "Digital Mu Plugin" there you go....LOL..deal with it....
If your laptop doesn't have a thunderbolt port (and that depends on what CPU/chipset your laptop has) then no adaptors will work. I made the error of purchasing a laptop with a USB-C port that turned out to be USB 3.1 and not thunderbolt...Got to get a new laptop mate (or get the uad usb versions with the accompanying latency). Good shootout overall, I'd say most should be happy with the pulsar just for the far lower CPU hit compared to Acustica (I have plugins from both companies). Acustica was almost identical to the hardware, their tech is definitely interesting. Cheers.
Hahaha.. Thunderbolt is soooo annoying. Its almost like UAD thought Apple would reign supreme forever. I'm still to own one apple product.. I point blank refuse 😅
@@PaulThird Audio guys largely stuck in their ways since the windows xp days...Apogee is similar in attitude towards windows. To be fair windows was pants in the early 2000s, but it's improved, they should revisit their views.
Just shot out Pulsar against Magenta 5 and......although.....Pulsar sound good...to be "A Digital Plugin" Hands down the "Best Digtial Algorythmic" Based Vari Mu Plugin...because.....the Megenta is Live Sampled from 4 Different Analog Units...it just sound more "Open and Real" So there you go....Although Pulsar's GUI "Looks" Better...Magenta...SMOKES..PULSAR...UAD...AND ANY OTHER "Digital Mu Plugin" there you go....LOL..deal with it....
@@PaulThird you are correct but these new ai sampled effects is dead on to their hardware from analogx ai and pass to future nam genome and proteus captures
You can make this kind of slow talked intro with metronome at like 30bpm, then you'll be able to make some contests for most crazy rhythm pattern for intro speech, just for fun 😂🤣🤪 In terms of usb to thunderbolt adaptor, there is no such thing. Thunderbolt is like PCIe bus extension and USB has a dedicated PCIe controller. So you can plug some usb device via controller to thunderbolt port, but it doesn't wort the other way. But UA is also making usb version of satellites. That's the best solution for you since I've heard there are some issues with UA windows thunderbolt drivers which sometimes have to be first updated via Mac and then start working with windows... In terms of 33609 what about IK? And maybe British C from McDSP's 6030? But I'm not sure if it's 33609 or 2254/2264... And there's also Cupwise S-609A for Nebula And that plugin doctor check is great thing. It would be nice if you will do it with every plugin you test 🙂 Any way, thanks a lot for another great video!
@@PaulThird To be honest I stopped using Acustica plugins after watching Viridian 2 review by White Sea Studio. It looked like Acustica is missing something important... But I didn’t knew that they are sampling real hardware... Now I’m confused a bit... Is there a way of running plugin doctor through analog access gear? To me that may really answer the question how analog distortion should look like
Unfortunately not through analog access. Won't work on plugin doctor. The viridian review should really get taken down as it really affected the brand and was unfair as he never used the PRE which gives you the non linearities and harmonics of the compressor. I'm not perfect but id like to think I do them fair
Just shot out Pulsar against Magenta 5 and......although.....Pulsar sound good...to be "A Digital Plugin" Hands down the "Best Digtial Algorythmic" Based Vari Mu Plugin...because.....the Megenta is Live Sampled from 4 Different Analog Units...it just sound more "Open and Real" So there you go....Although Pulsar's GUI "Looks" Better...Magenta...SMOKES..PULSAR...UAD...AND ANY OTHER "Digital Mu Plugin" there you go....LOL..deal with it....
Hello Paul, imagine this: I just spent the better half of my day comparing the IKMultimedia Dynamu - that you shunned - to the Pulsar Mu on a full (electronic) mix. IK Multimedia won because it packed more punch which translated great to the Drums. The Pulsar Mu does have more depth and a smoother sound - but after going back and forth and back and forth for hours and optimizing the settings of each one again and again and again and getting reasonably close and two still different, yet good results the Dynamu won. Now I was thinking: Meh, maybe just that particular mix and I will try it on a Hip-Hop/RnBish Mix next (yet probably not on the full mix).. but first let's check wether Paul did a comparison. Color me surprised having you diss my winner and not even comparing it! Still I went ahead (of course) and watched the video. And your Pulsar had the same problem like mine - just sounds too weak.. it's lacking punch. While the hardware sounded great and well balanced and the Magenta had too much (sounded rumbly, almost distorted in the lowmids-lows to me). I don't believe just matching the settings will usually work with these kinds of comparisons.. it takes a lot of time to understand what the Plugins are doing and to get the settings right. Yes in an optimal world an emulation of the analogue will allow you to simply match the settings - but you have to keep in mind that one is analogue - the other digital and that implies that the users hit them at different levels (usually) and are used to another workflow/results by turning knobs. I'm gonna go ahead and compare the Pulsar (that is on sale - which is the reason I'm doing my little comparison today) to the IKM on another mix now.. it depends a lot, a lot, a lot on the scource material and how much time you are willing to invest into settings (learning the plugin) what results your endeavors will yield. So I think there are two ways to do this: Either you just set everything like the analogue one and change NOTHING else (no picking and setting pres on the magenta neither) .. that would be testing which one is the best designed copy of the analogue. OR you actually change EVERYTHING and try to a) get them close but more importantly b) get the BEST sound for every unit - which is not necessarily the CLOSEST sound to the hardware. That's what I'm thinking anyway. Still appreciated this video, since it showed me you had the same problems with the Pulsar Mu that I had (in my first shootout). PS: Also Pulsar has changed their curve.. until about 19 db of input it's pretty (not completely) linear now.. only once you go above that the smiley curve starts to really hit. On 23 dB (like your setting) it's not at all as crazy as the curve you are showing. PS 2: and of course the Dynamu saturates.. gotta crank that input.. visible, yet barely in plugin doctor and it's not looking pretty.. but then again music is the opposite of a woman, since I can ignore the looks and listen to it closely.
I used all the options available in both and tweaked both a lot so it's not just as simple as the same settings as the analog. I took quite a lot of time on this and ended up doing another due to a manley user being skeptical as he couldn't get the same results. He just set magenta up in the exact default hardware settings. I tweaked the magenta in this same fashion as this and got near identical results. I don't don't see the point in not tweaking to get the best results as thats how you learn the inner workings of the Plugin. Honestly I tweaked the bajeezus out of both in here. The main reason for tweaking is due the tolerances in analog hardware. Not all sound the same so if a plugin sampled or modelled a certain unit then you'll need to tweak it to get it to closer match another. The ik multimedia just didn't have any of the harmonic characteristics of the hardware. It was so far apart from the rest I didn't see the point in wasting my time any more as I knew no matter what I did I wouldn't get the hardware. Was just night and day. I can't even remember if it had any harmonics in it but it sounded awfully clean when I compared it.
@@PaulThird fair enough. I believe you tried. Yes you need to manhandle the input on the ikmultimedia one to get any harmonics. Had to do that too to get a result I liked (and it's still not much) buut I usually compress for the characteristics of the compressor apart from the harmonics (which I tend to get with tape-emulations, the blackbox, Pre-emulations etc). So maybe that's the big thing here.. I wasn't on a quest for harmonics. Btw. the Pulsar won in the second comparison (which was a lot shorter (guess since I know the Plugin now).. but it won due to the ability to "mix in the compression" with the mix knob. I was able to get the overall sound (on 100%) not identical, but pretty darn close to the ikmultimedia one - I'd bet money most wouldn't tell it apart if the song played back to back. Having said that I think the Dynamu is one of the weaker IKM plugins (they have some weak ones - that's just the reality). I rarely use it - that's why I'm on a lookout for something that does what this one is set out to do. And seeing that the Pulsar is struggling to convincingly beat it I'm not sure it's even worth the 50 bucks it's going for atm. Looking forward to the mixing wednesday video. Have a good one!
ha! so this stuff is cool sounds great is a bit confusing to get going, to work with the TIMP stuff do you have to own a license to nebula commercial ? it seems like it won't work on nebula player is that correct?
Yeah you need full n4 license unfortunately but I picked it up on plugin marketplace for £80. I'm releasing a nebula for beginners video on Wednesday 🤓
Hi Paul, another awesome video as always! I’m really glad you touched on aliasing and intermodulation distortion; I was, in fact, going to ask if you could please kindly always test for this and effect of any inbuilt oversampling in all your plugin reviews moving forward? What sample rate and bit depth do you normally utilise for your shootouts, out of interest? I really enjoyed watching this video by Dan Worrall the other day ua-cam.com/video/-jCwIsT0X8M/v-deo.html All the best and keep up the great work 🙏🏽
Thanks man 🤓 yeah I'm definitely gonna keep doing the plugin doctor stuff as it seems to be a big factor for many. I do 24 bit, 48khz. I could move up to 96k but I want to do shootouts that sit in the middle. Not everyone can get away 96k and 48 is the most common these days so it's a good middle ground especially as AA would have an even bigger advantage as they sample at 96khz.
@@PaulThird Thanks for the reply, Paul! That's good to know. I too work at 24bit 48kHz or 96kHz. Please keep the videos coming, man and ignore the hecklers! You're doing an awesome job and it's obvious you put so much time and effort into these shootouts and do so with honesty and integrity! Take care and all the best 🙏🏽
I think it's convolution sampling in general to be honest. Ive been told its very hard to replicate analog saturation via this type of plugin development
IK multimedia do a 33609 as do Red Rock Sound. I agree with you about plugin developers presuming that the average punter has never used the hardware, let's face it how many have even been to Abbey Road. What you'll also hear "2 of the same unit never sound the same" another cop out for releasing a generic product.
good video, i don't see why people would get upset with your review. Its a good comparison and your comment about the majority of users never having used the hardware is valid. Let's face these ancient tube based devices are from 50 60 years ago and are mostly found in studios which are gradually disappearing. I'd used that Pulsar irrespective of whether it gave me the 'Manley mu' tone or not, as like you say as long as it sounds good then what does it matter. Incidentally any chance you can do a detailed video on how to read the Plugin Doctor output? its a complex beast of which i've only scratched the surface but i'd like to get better at interpreting its output.
@@PaulThird incidentally relating to your statement above. One of the thing I have noticed with some plugins is that when you put them through plugin doctor they automatically are set as 1 or 2db volume instantly making you think that just by having it on it is imparting mojo. Very cheeky
Honestly plugin doctor takes the magic out of plugins haha cause I understand what I see now you kind of know whats behind the hood which instantly turns magic into logic.. Not as fun 😂
@@PaulThird ay, but it helps with understanding what its doing which is good for demystifying any confusion about what the plugin does (or the things it does that you don't like). For a few of the plugins that I use that add a cheeky 2db I have turned the output down 2db down and saved as the default.
Im quite pedantic with gain staging now due to all these videos haha I gain stage at - 18 with MvMeter2 first using the trigger tool and then add another instance to everything after that to check how much dB I need to lower the output on the plugin. Really efficient way of gain staging. Set the plug the way you like it. Trigger to - 18. Tells you how much its lowered the output to then lower the output of the plug to that. Remove MvMeter, add another plugin. Then repeat the process. Pedantic but guarantees quicker gain staging
Soo... After being called a "fraud" and being told that I purposely made an unfair comparison because I recieve money from Acustica Audio (which is tin foil hat stuff) I thought I'd quickly address a few things regarding the pulsar.
1. The thresholds don't match due to the fact that I set the input to match the hardware which in theory if modelled correctly should really yield the same threshold to get the same gain reduction. It doesn't so the threshold is set to achieve the same gain reduction as the hardware.
2. When loading up the access analog manley manley vari mu it automatically sets it default with the input set to around 2 o'clock. I used the threshold control as my gain reduction. So setting the threshold of the Plugin to match the hardware and using the input to control the gain reduction doesn't make any sense as its not how I used the hardware.
2. The input stage has a fixed linear frequency response that changes the more its cranked. So setting the input exact to the hardware seemed quite important to me if I was to achieve the correct tonal balance, especially if it was modelled after the hardware. Whereas the threshold has no effect on the linear frequency response and adapts the ratio.
3. I had the Acustica threshold set different to the hardware. Especially on the drums.. Pulsars threshold was actually a lot closer and still.. Acustica near identical.
4. The pulsar has lookahead, lpf and HPF sidechains and even a bell filter. I used as much as possible to get as close to the hardware as physically possible. So in reality the comparison is completely unfair as I'm using stuff that the hardware doesn't have but the only tools I have to get the pulsar closer.
5. The harmonic and frequency response of magenta and pulsar are completely different to one another so they are always going to sound different. So if the magenta sounds almost identical to the hardware then obviously the pulsar is never going to sound exact to the hardware because its fundamentals are completely different. A threshold ratio isn't going to change that.
6. Loads of people actually prefer the pulsar mu to the 4 grand hardware.. So isn't that a good thing?
Lastly, I spend WAY too much time focusing on minute details when doing these comparisons. If settings don't match its because when I matched them it sounded nothing like what it's supposed to be emulating. If it doesn't act like it should then you have to tweak and tweak and tweak until you get as close as it can get.
So no I'm not paid and I do everything to ensure I can make the shootouts as close as possible.. And most importantly I use my eyes and my ears!
That is all.. Peace 🤓
Stay on target. you do a fantastic job. Ignore the neckbeards. Crikey, I didn't know about AA and always having to use the PRE. Have you ever tried using a PRE from another unit when using an AA compressor? I was also putting the PRE AFTER the comp. I'm going to go down to the shed now for a while to have a little cry. If my wife sees me going to the shed she always knows its to have a little cry; it certainly aint gonna be because I'm making myself useful with a spanner or screwdriver. She doesn't even let me use the steak knives.
I have trial some AA and yes, they sound fantastic, but how is the workflow when mixing with them? I can use max 3 AA plugins in my mix and then my cpu suffers. Do you mix freezing or rendering tracks?
Coming here at 2023. I have all of them three and totally agree your opinion. If you want something really like manley hardware AA is good otherwise this brand won't be accept by market. Pulsar one is more likely a Vari Mu behavior compressor I would say that. UAD one is the compromise between IDENTICAL and CPU consuming since you don't have to use cpu at all.
Another informative video, Paul!! I'm SO glad I have Magenta!! Powerful plugin!!
Hope you/yours stay safe and well. :)
MAGENTAAAAAAA!!!!! 🙌🙌
Hi Paul. I’m François from Pulsar Audio.
I think that your shootout is quite unfair for our Mu, let me explain why.
COMPARE WHAT IS COMPARABLE
On the original hardware, the threshold setting determines the ratio.
The higher the threshold is, the higher the ratio will be, and the higher the saturation introduced will be.
On your shootout, the three plugins have their threshold set at completely different levels, so we listen to them at different ratios, which is a little bit unfair.
YOU SAID « SATURATION »?
Analytical tools like Plugin Doctor, which allow measuring objectively the characteristics of a plugin have done a lot of good to the plugin world. However, be careful not to draw the wrong conclusions from what you see on the analyzer!
When you present the harmonic profile of the Mu, you do it with the threshold at the maximum, and with 20dB of gain reduction.
In this mode, the Mu will obviously introduce a lot of saturation, because of the nature of the operation of gain reduction itself (remember that the gain reduction is done here by a tube! )
Have you tried to use Plugin Doctor to analyze directly the machine? (with Plugin Doctor’s « Use hardware » mode).
I think you might be surprised by the results!
OUR PHILOSOPHY
At Pulsar, we try to be as honest as possible when we propose a model for our customers.
We wrote this technical page to explain in detail how our algorithm works and why it respects the analog signal path of the original hardware:
pulsar.audio/variable-bias-compression-explained/
There are on our website sound samples of the machine, our plugin, and one of our serious competitors, I invite you to go throw an ear at them!
Anyway, bravo for this youtube channel, great work!
François from Pulsar.
Hi Francois
Firstly thank you so much for taking the time to reply. You are the first manufacturer to do so thus far.
So, in terms of plugin doctor I have 2 instances of pulsar mu on plugin doctor. Both showing different levels of gain reduction. From none all the way to a lot (in both) using input and threshold to vary gain reduction so I did fairly show the harmonic diffrences that the input and threshold results in varying gain reductions. The same with the intermodulation distortion, I started with a lot of GR and brought it down. I've not tried the use hardware function of plugin doctor but I'm unsure if it would work with access analog as the analog is streamed over the Internet so I don't know if plugin doctor would recognise that.
So even at no gain reduction the harmonics don't come close to the Acustica which I, and many who have watched this video have agreed was a massive factor in the magenta nailing the sound.
In terms of the threshold I'm a little confused as the pulsar is recieving the exact same input as the hardware so if modelled correctly then surely the threshold at the exact same settings would result in the same gain reduction? I set the inputs the same as hardware and set the threshold to match the gain reduction. So if I'm getting you right, to make it fair I would have had to set the threshold the same and use the input to match the hardwares gain reduction?
Problem I have is if that was the case then the input wouldn't match the hardwares input thus again not matching harmonics.. And would have been another variable that would have been offered to me if I matched threshold.
Also as you stated, the Acustica's threshold doesn't match the hardware either but sounds almost identical.. So again I'm a bit perplexed.
The last thing that wasn't argued however was the linear frequency response. Regardless of threshold, the linear response is always going to be one of the biggest factors in this plugin not sounding like the hardware. Is there any reason for the HPF, gigantic bass and steep high end boosts?
I honestly tried and tried and tried to get the pulsar to get close to the hardware but ultimately it does its own thing. Acustica is near identical and the pulsar cannot recreate the same cleaner harmonics or lessened IMD. The frequency response makes it impossible to match the hardware and it just is what it is.
The pulsar is a fantastic sounding plugin. No doubt. Many people already have stated that they prefer the pulsar so that's the main thing I would take from this shootout as a plugin delevoper. Users prefer your representation of a vari mu plugin over 4 grand hardware. That's something to applaud but if we're going to discuss this plugin matching its hardware counterpart then I'm afraid I can't do it.
Its a fantastic plugin and I take your points on board regarding the threshold and ratio which I didn't really understand till now so I thank you for your reflection and taking the time to reply to this video
IF there any plugins you think I may be able to add in a shootout that would work well then don't hesitate to get in touch and let me know more about how it should be used to achieve your desired sound
🤓👍
@@PaulThird Well said!
Sorry mate but "did on purpose to try to hide the fact" is a bit tin foil hat conspiracy stuff. That's not the way I work.
IF you go back to the same section you'll see that the pulsars threshold is actually closer to the threshold of the hardware than Acustica. It would actually be acustica that had the right to come back to me and state that it was unfair BUT the Acustica sounds like the hardware so the threshold thing doesn't really make a difference here.
In actual fact the max threshold setting is the lighter compression as it goes from right to left in terms of the threshold actually compressing. Regardless they are all have same gain reduction in every example.
The input in the pulsar matches the hardware and I used the threshold to dictate the gain reduction. However there are other factors that affect the gain reduction in the pulsar I.e. Look ahead (which I used to match the 3d character of the hardware) and also the high end compression filter. Pulsar dictates the gain reduction.. Not me. If I set the input the same as the hardware, and its recieving the same input going into the compressor, then the threshhold compression should match the hardware.. It does not. It also lacks the depth of the hardware so you use the look ahead that pulsar added in.. Not me. From there you re-adjust your threshold to get the same gain reduction. Then the highs are too much so you then use the high shelf filter to tame them so it sounds more akin to the hardware.. Again pulsar added this in.. Not me.
You then have to re-adjust the threshold again to match the gain reduction. So Pulsar added these features in and I use them to replicate the hardware as close as physically possible. These features affect the threshold.. I can't win. They all affect gain reduction and that's not my fault.
I sat for quite a while to get the snare on the pulsar to match the hardware drums (which it does) using the look ahead and ensuring the gain reduction was right so to say I've intentionally made it sound worse is redundant.
Attack and release settings are actually closer in the pulsar as magenta gives you less options for attack and release.
So if the input, attack and release settings are the same and I'm using the threshold to control the gain reduction (exactly like I did in the hardware) then I'm using both plugins in the exact same way, then I don't understand what difference the threshold is making here as the Acustica never matches the threshold of the hardware either but still sounds almost identical to the hardware.
So your point in making me out to be a fraud is completely flawed.
@@PaulThird Now you should do a follow-up video with the same plugins and hardware to shut up any weird conspiracy theorists! LOL Similar test with all of the settings exactly the same this time to prove your point of how/why you did this video with the settings the way you did. Actually, your point will surely be even MORE obvious then. Great videos BTW!
Sorry if I've crossed the line with the tin hat stuff but you are genuinely believing that I'm intentionally making false shootouts. That's a direct false slur. To make it worse You genuinely believe I'm being paid by acustica 🤣🤣 I have just over 1350 subscribers. I'm a tiny UA-camr. That's tin hat stuff man
The settings are exact to the hardware .. bar the threshold. I don't understand why I just explained in detail exactly why that is and your response is.. Acustica must be paying you 😂
I'll make this as simple as I can.
If you have both plugs set in the same settings the gain reduction will not match. To make it fair you have to match the gain reduction. If you use the input to dial in the compression then the harmonics won't match as you aren't driving the unit the same as the hardware. It's either you choose the threshold or the input to control the gain reduction. You cannot set each plugin exact to the hardware in terms of input and threshold. You can only pick one as the gain reduction will vary. It's impossible to set it exact. That's not my fault.
IF there's one thing I pride myself on its honesty so to have somebody say I'm making up false shootouts when I've spent 2-3 hours tweaking to make everything sound as close to the hardware as possible is pretty offensive.
And BTW if I really did want to falsify a shootout would I just not set the settings the same and show that instead of the actual settings which can be taken apart??
I don't know if your trolling me or what man but your completely making stuff up which there is no need for. Pulsar themselves have even stated that they like my videos and it was just the threshold thing that they queried but in my opinion I answered that in detail.
Believe what you want man but I'd definitely have a look at my detailed reply to you and maybe discuss those further instead of making wild accusations. Just no need man
What's everybody's thoughts.. Let me know as always 🤓🤓
x2 plz always add the original file for reference
I keep on forgetting haha 🙈 I'll make sure it's in the following shootout 🤓
I would have included the Klanghelm MJUC. And also, I felt like the Pulsar won pretty much everywhere. I do love the fact that the Manley and AA, have a bit more harmonics, but that can always be added, not removed. Just my 2 cents. I love your shootouts though.
I think the smiley curve in the pulsar gives it a big advantage. Definitely a good plugin but 100% not a manley vari mu haha however if you prefer pulsar.. Saving yourself 4 grand 😜
BTW mjuc isn't a manley vari mu so that's why I didn't include it (fairchild, urei 176 and the devs own creation 🤓)
@@PaulThird You're right about the MJUC not being a VariMu per se, I mean it is in topology, but it doesn't emulate the VariMu from Manley.
Thing about the Pulsar though, it's got such a nice UI and the sidechain functionality is essential to me.
Yeah a totally different beast
Some of us appreciate your honesty. The Pulsar although not much like the real Manley, still seems like a good master bus compressor as long as you don't boost the gain too much cuz of the smiley face curve in all. Good vid bro, cheers.
Thsnjs man 🤓
The Pulsar always sat on my master bus just gently doing its stuff before I found the AA/Nebula stuff. It does have a certain something compared to it's algo cohorts.
Many thanks for this video. A very sweet test. However, it omits one of the key aspects of the compressor. The ability to glue the mix. Pulsar Mu does it in my opinion really effectively.
See I thought the opposite haha I thought the smiley eq curve in the pulsar was more of an enhancement than glue. Suppose this is why you include the original haha would've helped. no right or wrong answers though 🤓
Just shot out Pulsar against Magenta 5 and......although.....Pulsar sound good...to be "A Digital Plugin" Hands down the "Best Digtial Algorythmic" Based Vari Mu Plugin...because.....the Megenta is Live Sampled from 4 Different Analog Units...it just sound more "Open and Real" So there you go....Although Pulsar's GUI "Looks" Better...Magenta...SMOKES..PULSAR...UAD...AND ANY OTHER "Digital Mu Plugin" there you go....LOL..deal with it....
You've probably picked this up by now but, as I understand it, the SHMOD feature switches between different modifications of the shape of the attack function. Allowing more or less of different parts of the transients through.
yup. just modifying the attack envelope. 0 is look ahead so you can really clamp down on those transients and higher up allows more transients in. middle is the default attack envelopes of the hardware
Very nice review thanks a lot,it always awesome to learn how far our modern technology are going up to the real deal, hardware still be my favorites but acustica sound almost identical!! No average listeners will notice the difference
Yeah I genuinely believe that no average listener is telling the diffrence. No way. Honestly convolution sampling is basically identical in every hardware test I've done so far. It's crazy how far the tech has moved!!
@@PaulThird for real! What you think about opal high def 55 limited edition from acustica audio? Did I miss a review?😂😅
I'm back at work so I'm struggling 😅😅 I dunno. I've not tried it yet. I'm hearing great things but I hear great things after every new acustica release but I'm also hearing what it does can be replicated by other plugs so I'm really unsure. I don't even know what id compare it to. Just a really random release from AA haha
@@PaulThird hahah Nice man, keep up the awesome works, i still support thought A .d . s. 🔥🤑👌
SHMOD is a modification of the attack time to make it quicker or slower
Thanks for this video! The Magenta 5 is great ... the only downside is the ugly RED GUI (luckily you don't hear the GUI).
There is a purple blue skin you can get haha but I use the magenta all the time so I'm just used to it haha you definitely know when it's on your screen anyway 🤣
Hey Paul, your channel comes across as a blessing for me. It is as practical as it is thorough.
And I agree 100% with your take on comparisons done out of a mixing context. Biases can be huge there, specially taking into consideration one's fluency with each tool. Spot on approach for keeping things evidence based. As each one of us can (and I dare to say must) arrive to a conclusion.
Keep up this essential content, mate! Thanks a lot.
Thanks guilherme 🤓 out of interest what was your preference here?
@@PaulThird Magenta. By a great margin, actually. 😜
At the critical listening level that we try to dwell, Pulsar sounded hyped in my opinion. That's not a bad thing per se, but as you articulated very well, why would I go for a tube compressor for that?
The hardware of Access Analog was a little muffled for my taste from the mids and above. Maybe that is the "real" Manley sound, and I would in reality process sounds with such a profile in mind... But honestly, Magenta presented a better balanced open tone. I preferred it in every single test.
I bought it today. Curious to experiment the sweet spot of the pres and the compressor. Sounds fun and challenging. 🤓
@@gautreaux Magenta is a fantastic suite of plugins!
I actually love the pulsar mu, i'm yet to try any acustica audio but it's current one of top 5 favourite comps, and i had well over 50 by now. I think you should try the Arturia compressors, they really are the best three algo compressors I've tried. If they made an LA 2A I could finally rest easy, as i find all others to be seriously lacklustre (especially waves)
As plugin comps go it's an awesome comp. Just because it isn't as close to the manley doesn't mean its not useable. Tons of engineers use it so if your getting great results don't bother looking at others. That's my advice 🤓
However as plugin comps go.. Until you've tried TimP comps you can't say you've heard the best 😜
Just shot out Pulsar against Magenta 5 and......although.....Pulsar sound good...to be "A Digital Plugin" Hands down the "Best Digtial Algorythmic" Based Vari Mu Plugin...because.....the Megenta is Live Sampled from 4 Different Analog Units...it just sound more "Open and Real" So there you go....Although Pulsar's GUI "Looks" Better...Magenta...SMOKES..PULSAR...UAD...AND ANY OTHER "Digital Mu Plugin" there you go....LOL..deal with it....
Fantastic shootout. Thank you.
No probs 🤓
Thank you! Are running the single magenta pre before or after the compressor? Thanks again for satisfying my Nebula addiction.
Always pre before the comp with AA. Some nebula comps do it differently sometimes but AA I always do pre before comp 🤓
Just shot out Pulsar against Magenta 5 and......although.....Pulsar sound good...to be "A Digital Plugin" Hands down the "Best Digtial Algorythmic" Based Vari Mu Plugin...because.....the Megenta is Live Sampled from 4 Different Analog Units...it just sound more "Open and Real" So there you go....Although Pulsar's GUI "Looks" Better...Magenta...SMOKES..PULSAR...UAD...AND ANY OTHER "Digital Mu Plugin" there you go....LOL..deal with it....
Odd that you didn't get on with the IK, I've been playing around with one today and it sounded pretty good. One reference on KMR said this: Although not explicitly described as such, IK Multimedia Dyna-Mu is fairly clearly modelled on the Manley Vari-Mu valve compressor. What does it sound like? Well... remarkably like a Manley Vari-Mu - and therefore fantastic (believe me, I’m crying inside as I write this!). It really nails the warm musical glue that this processor is so good at - a subtle glow that just makes everything sit better in the mix without messing with track definition. This is part of IK Multimedia’s T-Racks 5 suite that includes a bunch of other great emulations. Well worth checking out…
I have seen one comment that suggested you have to push it a bit harder to get some spice so maybe this was the issue.
Keep up the great work Paul! 😎
Trust me, I tried everything. It's just not close to a manley vari mu. If it was close I would've went with it and included it but it was just way off to the point where I knew I was wasting my time going any further with it. Only other time that happened was when I did the pye compressor shootout and had to leave out the Acustica viridian
@@PaulThird It's a weird one isn't it. Thanks for the reply. 👍😎
Hey Paul. Thanks for great video. U made it clear about the difference to hardware. I still think Mu sounds good on its own like u mentioned. I noticed dispite the smiley boost the Mu tends to move the sound a tiny bit backwards? With a less focused midrange that's found on the hardware.(maybe how it handles transients). Clearly shows on drums. Snare in particular. But still love Mu. Use it in several sources.
You re doing interesting video contents. Subscribed. Keep it up. Cheers
Thanks man, appreciate it 🤓
I have the uad manley vari mu and it has Mid Side mode on it but i tried magenta and cant find a mid side switch on it anywhere. Am i missing something?
the difference doesn worth the money but the hardware sounded more like a record we used to, i noticed on drums sound heavy and solid very 90s or from past years i love it
🤓🤓
where is the Blind test?
I don't think it was needed this week as I wasn't picking which one sounded best
Agreed on the Dyna-Mu, would've been funny though ^^
IK fans bringing pitchforks to my door 🤣
@@PaulThird Still, during a sale they're pretty amazing all things considered, especially for people dipping their toes into the emulation world. A couple friends of mine use them and barely anything else. No Waves, no Softube, no Fabfilter... their records are just fine. They don't have high-end converters, barely any room treatment and a set of Rokits on their bedroom tables. They're perfectly happy, couldn't tell you the difference.
@@theCloneman5 I was using their 33609 for a long time
@@PaulThird same, know any better alternatives? (that aren't Uad)
That's why i asked haha 🤣
Hello again Paul,
Have you tried Tim Ps Ra6 and/or Sum 100A compressor yet? Comparing them in Plugin Doctor.. and the Ra6 seems veeery clean unless I really crank up the limiter to red and also crank up the preamp from a harmonics point of view as well as frequency response.. almost thinking that Ra6 is.. too clean to make any sense?
Forget what I said... it only seems that the Ra6 has almost no harmonics on frequencies below 70 hz but above 400 hz it really picks up and the accelerates. Never mind :P!
When checking harmonics in doctor I always check 50, 100, 500, 1k and 10k. 10k is for aliasing though.
At the start I did what you did though 😂
How does this compare to uad version
Never tried tbh
Just shot out Pulsar against Magenta 5 and......although.....Pulsar sound good...to be "A Digital Plugin" Hands down the "Best Digtial Algorythmic" Based Vari Mu Plugin...because.....the Megenta is Live Sampled from 4 Different Analog Units...it just sound more "Open and Real" So there you go....Although Pulsar's GUI "Looks" Better...Magenta...SMOKES..PULSAR...UAD...AND ANY OTHER "Digital Mu Plugin" there you go....LOL..deal with it....
Good stuff as always!
🤜🤛
what is diff in CPU load?
Dunno man I'd need to double check. Without oversampling pulsar wins easy but would need to compare differences with pulsar at x8 oversampling
Nice video as always bro ! 🙂 👌
Thanks man 🤓
@@PaulThird 🙂🙌
Many thanks!
🤓🤓
@@PaulThird Used magenta with N4, noticed better quality
Thats now the second person that's said that.. Interesting 🤔
N4 got some tweaks for five times quality, i think its oversampling
Hi Paul, I've been at Pulsar wensite and they do have compare their plugin to the original hardware and to other two plugins which I believe are UAD and Acoustica Magenta. When you hear the samples you would easily tell Pulsar is closest to the hardware. So watching your video made me confused so I'll have to try it myself. What is your take about that? How did they succed to make Magenta sound like crap?
My shootout doesn't have a bias. That's the main difference, plus I tweak by ear, not just match settings, which would make it easy to fail a comparison. Both plugins were painstakingly tweaked on mine. I even managed to do the same thing with magenta on a second video with a viewer who tried his own comparison and couldnt get it as close to his hardware. Sent me the dry and his processed hardware. I did the same method with magenta on this and managed identical results to the hardware. So I've proved it twice with 2 manley vari mu's. You just have to set magenta up right ie Correct gain staging, appropriate saturation, threshold and the right attack and release settings. Tweak magenta right and you'll get the hardware. It's not hard. Be even easier now with plugin doctor if you have the hardware.
I mean let's be honest.. If you were trying to sell a plugin on your website, would you make the other plugins sound as close?
@@PaulThird For your last question, I would not compare them, I would just show how good is my plugin. And I do believe Pulsar Mu is a great plugin, but did they need to produce such a weird results from Magenta? Up to now I don't understand how they managed to do it! The audio is harsh you may think it is not Magenta that produced it. I'll make my own investigation because I don't like to believe Pulsar tricked it in order to sell their plugin which would be really bad on their behalf. On their website they say it is an embedded competitor and that is why I believe it is Magenta.
After my investigation I found that Magenta has a clip mode (D2) and as you turn shmod to max and adjusting attack and recovery you may venture in unknown territories. But actually that is a selling point. Pulsar did wrong to make that comparison. They are not honest in my opinion. Which is bad.
Requesting a limiter comparison shoutout! can wait while watching your other videos:)
What were you thinking 🤓
@@PaulThird I don’t know, I’m having hard times choosing a limiter.
@@PaulThird my “final’ limiter in the mastering chain
nice 👍
Thanks man 🤓
I am missing Klanghelm MJUC
I bought Magenta 5 earlier this year but I never really used it
Don't use it. It's useless. Give it to me. :)
@@mikelo303 Lol
🤣🤣🤣
Couldnt be without it
Just shot out Pulsar against Magenta 5 and......although.....Pulsar sound good...to be "A Digital Plugin" Hands down the "Best Digtial Algorythmic" Based Vari Mu Plugin...because.....the Megenta is Live Sampled from 4 Different Analog Units...it just sound more "Open and Real" So there you go....Although Pulsar's GUI "Looks" Better...Magenta...SMOKES..PULSAR...UAD...AND ANY OTHER "Digital Mu Plugin" there you go....LOL..deal with it....
And most people do not have plugin doctor, don't have the time to dig in deep and care like we do.
If your laptop doesn't have a thunderbolt port (and that depends on what CPU/chipset your laptop has) then no adaptors will work. I made the error of purchasing a laptop with a USB-C port that turned out to be USB 3.1 and not thunderbolt...Got to get a new laptop mate (or get the uad usb versions with the accompanying latency).
Good shootout overall, I'd say most should be happy with the pulsar just for the far lower CPU hit compared to Acustica (I have plugins from both companies). Acustica was almost identical to the hardware, their tech is definitely interesting. Cheers.
Thanks for the info man 🤓
I'll just have to buy a USB apollo when I get some money. No other option 😅
@@PaulThird Welcome to the "saving up to one day buy thunderbolt 3 equipped non-macbook computers" club lol
Hahaha.. Thunderbolt is soooo annoying. Its almost like UAD thought Apple would reign supreme forever. I'm still to own one apple product.. I point blank refuse 😅
@@PaulThird Audio guys largely stuck in their ways since the windows xp days...Apogee is similar in attitude towards windows. To be fair windows was pants in the early 2000s, but it's improved, they should revisit their views.
To me the manley hw sound by far the best in all tests, the harmonics are just insanely beautiful, the plugins sound bland.
How can plugins sound bland if magenta can do it?
Just shot out Pulsar against Magenta 5 and......although.....Pulsar sound good...to be "A Digital Plugin" Hands down the "Best Digtial Algorythmic" Based Vari Mu Plugin...because.....the Megenta is Live Sampled from 4 Different Analog Units...it just sound more "Open and Real" So there you go....Although Pulsar's GUI "Looks" Better...Magenta...SMOKES..PULSAR...UAD...AND ANY OTHER "Digital Mu Plugin" there you go....LOL..deal with it....
NI Vari Comp. Fair bit of CPU but quite usable even so.
Hi Paul,
We have a new free channel strip from AA. Named Cerise. Would love to see your take on this freebie. Cheer..
What is it.. Neve?
@@PaulThird I am not sure about that but it says transformer-based and some say RuNevDesign Shelford 5052.
Does look like it
Magenta identical to the Manley even the harmonics is rich just like the hardware
Crazy eh.. That pre is unbelievable
only with the coloration part, the compression part is total garbage, as convolution has always been garbage for compression.
You don't get convolution compression... It has to be manually coded
@@PaulThird you are correct but these new ai sampled effects is dead on to their hardware from analogx ai and pass to future nam genome and proteus captures
MAGENTA GUYS !!!!!!
Magenta!!!!!!!!!
You can make this kind of slow talked intro with metronome at like 30bpm, then you'll be able to make some contests for most crazy rhythm pattern for intro speech, just for fun 😂🤣🤪
In terms of usb to thunderbolt adaptor, there is no such thing. Thunderbolt is like PCIe bus extension and USB has a dedicated PCIe controller. So you can plug some usb device via controller to thunderbolt port, but it doesn't wort the other way. But UA is also making usb version of satellites. That's the best solution for you since I've heard there are some issues with UA windows thunderbolt drivers which sometimes have to be first updated via Mac and then start working with windows...
In terms of 33609 what about IK? And maybe British C from McDSP's 6030? But I'm not sure if it's 33609 or 2254/2264... And there's also Cupwise S-609A for Nebula
And that plugin doctor check is great thing. It would be nice if you will do it with every plugin you test 🙂
Any way, thanks a lot for another great video!
Thanks so much for the info man 👍🙌🤓
@@PaulThird you’re welcome 🙂
And yes.. I'm going to try include plugin doctor in all my videos haha it really does give extra context and answers quite a few questions
@@PaulThird To be honest I stopped using Acustica plugins after watching Viridian 2 review by White Sea Studio. It looked like Acustica is missing something important... But I didn’t knew that they are sampling real hardware... Now I’m confused a bit... Is there a way of running plugin doctor through analog access gear? To me that may really answer the question how analog distortion should look like
Unfortunately not through analog access. Won't work on plugin doctor.
The viridian review should really get taken down as it really affected the brand and was unfair as he never used the PRE which gives you the non linearities and harmonics of the compressor. I'm not perfect but id like to think I do them fair
Just shot out Pulsar against Magenta 5 and......although.....Pulsar sound good...to be "A Digital Plugin" Hands down the "Best Digtial Algorythmic" Based Vari Mu Plugin...because.....the Megenta is Live Sampled from 4 Different Analog Units...it just sound more "Open and Real" So there you go....Although Pulsar's GUI "Looks" Better...Magenta...SMOKES..PULSAR...UAD...AND ANY OTHER "Digital Mu Plugin" there you go....LOL..deal with it....
Hello Paul, imagine this: I just spent the better half of my day comparing the IKMultimedia Dynamu - that you shunned - to the Pulsar Mu on a full (electronic) mix. IK Multimedia won because it packed more punch which translated great to the Drums. The Pulsar Mu does have more depth and a smoother sound - but after going back and forth and back and forth for hours and optimizing the settings of each one again and again and again and getting reasonably close and two still different, yet good results the Dynamu won.
Now I was thinking: Meh, maybe just that particular mix and I will try it on a Hip-Hop/RnBish Mix next (yet probably not on the full mix).. but first let's check wether Paul did a comparison. Color me surprised having you diss my winner and not even comparing it! Still I went ahead (of course) and watched the video. And your Pulsar had the same problem like mine - just sounds too weak.. it's lacking punch. While the hardware sounded great and well balanced and the Magenta had too much (sounded rumbly, almost distorted in the lowmids-lows to me).
I don't believe just matching the settings will usually work with these kinds of comparisons.. it takes a lot of time to understand what the Plugins are doing and to get the settings right. Yes in an optimal world an emulation of the analogue will allow you to simply match the settings - but you have to keep in mind that one is analogue - the other digital and that implies that the users hit them at different levels (usually) and are used to another workflow/results by turning knobs.
I'm gonna go ahead and compare the Pulsar (that is on sale - which is the reason I'm doing my little comparison today) to the IKM on another mix now.. it depends a lot, a lot, a lot on the scource material and how much time you are willing to invest into settings (learning the plugin) what results your endeavors will yield. So I think there are two ways to do this: Either you just set everything like the analogue one and change NOTHING else (no picking and setting pres on the magenta neither) .. that would be testing which one is the best designed copy of the analogue. OR you actually change EVERYTHING and try to a) get them close but more importantly b) get the BEST sound for every unit - which is not necessarily the CLOSEST sound to the hardware. That's what I'm thinking anyway. Still appreciated this video, since it showed me you had the same problems with the Pulsar Mu that I had (in my first shootout).
PS: Also Pulsar has changed their curve.. until about 19 db of input it's pretty (not completely) linear now.. only once you go above that the smiley curve starts to really hit. On 23 dB (like your setting) it's not at all as crazy as the curve you are showing.
PS 2: and of course the Dynamu saturates.. gotta crank that input.. visible, yet barely in plugin doctor and it's not looking pretty.. but then again music is the opposite of a woman, since I can ignore the looks and listen to it closely.
I used all the options available in both and tweaked both a lot so it's not just as simple as the same settings as the analog. I took quite a lot of time on this and ended up doing another due to a manley user being skeptical as he couldn't get the same results. He just set magenta up in the exact default hardware settings. I tweaked the magenta in this same fashion as this and got near identical results. I don't don't see the point in not tweaking to get the best results as thats how you learn the inner workings of the Plugin. Honestly I tweaked the bajeezus out of both in here. The main reason for tweaking is due the tolerances in analog hardware. Not all sound the same so if a plugin sampled or modelled a certain unit then you'll need to tweak it to get it to closer match another.
The ik multimedia just didn't have any of the harmonic characteristics of the hardware. It was so far apart from the rest I didn't see the point in wasting my time any more as I knew no matter what I did I wouldn't get the hardware. Was just night and day. I can't even remember if it had any harmonics in it but it sounded awfully clean when I compared it.
@@PaulThird fair enough. I believe you tried. Yes you need to manhandle the input on the ikmultimedia one to get any harmonics. Had to do that too to get a result I liked (and it's still not much) buut I usually compress for the characteristics of the compressor apart from the harmonics (which I tend to get with tape-emulations, the blackbox, Pre-emulations etc). So maybe that's the big thing here.. I wasn't on a quest for harmonics. Btw. the Pulsar won in the second comparison (which was a lot shorter (guess since I know the Plugin now).. but it won due to the ability to "mix in the compression" with the mix knob. I was able to get the overall sound (on 100%) not identical, but pretty darn close to the ikmultimedia one - I'd bet money most wouldn't tell it apart if the song played back to back.
Having said that I think the Dynamu is one of the weaker IKM plugins (they have some weak ones - that's just the reality). I rarely use it - that's why I'm on a lookout for something that does what this one is set out to do. And seeing that the Pulsar is struggling to convincingly beat it I'm not sure it's even worth the 50 bucks it's going for atm. Looking forward to the mixing wednesday video. Have a good one!
ik dyna mu + airwindows desk4 varimu pre preset = pretty sweet
'Disingenuous' Paul. I trust as a fellow aspie you forgive the pedantry. If you object then I believe my wife is currently running a Support Group :-B
Never heard of acoustica before i saw ur vids. I have to many plugins already... how could you!
I had to share my plugin affliction with others 😂.. We can get through this together bro!!
@@PaulThird super spreader!!
Worse than coronavirus 😂🤣
ha! so this stuff is cool sounds great is a bit confusing to get going, to work with the TIMP stuff do you have to own a license to nebula commercial ? it seems like it won't work on nebula player is that correct?
Yeah you need full n4 license unfortunately but I picked it up on plugin marketplace for £80. I'm releasing a nebula for beginners video on Wednesday 🤓
people just mad that Acustica is that good lmao,
Swear
Hi Paul, another awesome video as always! I’m really glad you touched on aliasing and intermodulation distortion; I was, in fact, going to ask if you could please kindly always test for this and effect of any inbuilt oversampling in all your plugin reviews moving forward? What sample rate and bit depth do you normally utilise for your shootouts, out of interest? I really enjoyed watching this video by Dan Worrall the other day ua-cam.com/video/-jCwIsT0X8M/v-deo.html All the best and keep up the great work 🙏🏽
Thanks man 🤓 yeah I'm definitely gonna keep doing the plugin doctor stuff as it seems to be a big factor for many. I do 24 bit, 48khz. I could move up to 96k but I want to do shootouts that sit in the middle. Not everyone can get away 96k and 48 is the most common these days so it's a good middle ground especially as AA would have an even bigger advantage as they sample at 96khz.
@@PaulThird Thanks for the reply, Paul! That's good to know. I too work at 24bit 48kHz or 96kHz. Please keep the videos coming, man and ignore the hecklers! You're doing an awesome job and it's obvious you put so much time and effort into these shootouts and do so with honesty and integrity! Take care and all the best 🙏🏽
👊👍🙌
Acoustica = bad saturation. This company have big problem with saturation.
I think it's convolution sampling in general to be honest. Ive been told its very hard to replicate analog saturation via this type of plugin development
IK multimedia do a 33609 as do Red Rock Sound. I agree with you about plugin developers presuming that the average punter has never used the hardware, let's face it how many have even been to Abbey Road. What you'll also hear "2 of the same unit never sound the same" another cop out for releasing a generic product.
Cheers man 🤓
good video, i don't see why people would get upset with your review. Its a good comparison and your comment about the majority of users never having used the hardware is valid. Let's face these ancient tube based devices are from 50 60 years ago and are mostly found in studios which are gradually disappearing.
I'd used that Pulsar irrespective of whether it gave me the 'Manley mu' tone or not, as like you say as long as it sounds good then what does it matter.
Incidentally any chance you can do a detailed video on how to read the Plugin Doctor output? its a complex beast of which i've only scratched the surface but i'd like to get better at interpreting its output.
i would have thought ddmf would have done a video on plugin doctor explaining its features.
@@PaulThird incidentally relating to your statement above. One of the thing I have noticed with some plugins is that when you put them through plugin doctor they automatically are set as 1 or 2db volume instantly making you think that just by having it on it is imparting mojo. Very cheeky
Honestly plugin doctor takes the magic out of plugins haha cause I understand what I see now you kind of know whats behind the hood which instantly turns magic into logic.. Not as fun 😂
@@PaulThird ay, but it helps with understanding what its doing which is good for demystifying any confusion about what the plugin does (or the things it does that you don't like). For a few of the plugins that I use that add a cheeky 2db I have turned the output down 2db down and saved as the default.
Im quite pedantic with gain staging now due to all these videos haha I gain stage at - 18 with MvMeter2 first using the trigger tool and then add another instance to everything after that to check how much dB I need to lower the output on the plugin. Really efficient way of gain staging. Set the plug the way you like it. Trigger to - 18. Tells you how much its lowered the output to then lower the output of the plug to that. Remove MvMeter, add another plugin. Then repeat the process. Pedantic but guarantees quicker gain staging