the ssq models the brown eq section on the ssl 4000g console it's know to sound very good on rock drums when you're leaning toward a more aggressive drum
As Soundcast said, it is based on the brown knob SSL desk EQ. For those who do not know what that is, it was the very first iteration of the SSL EQ low end. First was brown, then black on the E-Channel, then it remained as black on the G-channel. Waves never incorporated the brown variation until recently with the release of the new SSL EV2 strip.
@@whatskraken3886 His analyzer isn't displaying all the way up to 48k, which is fine because nobody can hear that high, but shelves clearly do cramp because you can see it happening there. Like, that's not a proper shelf curve if it's going down starting at 18k, right? Whether it actually sounds worse is a different discussion, but Analog Obsession is definitely modeling the gear more accurately if there's no cramping at all in the audible range.
@@Ruido777big mixers use Waves and Pro Tools for one simple reason: when they started, that's what's been available and they know the interface and sound, etc. Most of them even use older versions of Pro Tools, just because as you upgrade to a newer one from these older versions, your projects are deleted and these guys are constantly working with bands and can't just leave two weeks to learn new functions and stuff. Plus they also work on consoles and hardware, barely touching plugins. And yes, Pro Tools sounds different, just because it automatically dithers the master and you can't turn it off. If you use another DAW, just click 'dither master'.
I'm usually leery of "color" from plugins but that ssq color is beautiful. I just wonder if you can push into it for that analog saturation like you can on the waves SSL
I can't speak on the SSQ or the Waves SSL-E as I don't have either plugins. BUT!!! In my experience, the Analog Obsession BusterSE is definitely better than the Waves SSL G-Master, albeit a bit glitchy on MacBook M1
@@SoundcastStudios I missed it, anyhow, I think this might be matched better with the Brainworx SSL E set to brown knob. Still a good video, and they were surprisingly close.
any opinion on the dead duck channel? it’s clearly going after the SSL design as well and the cpu usage is nowhere near analog obsession but i wonder if it’s any better or worse being another free option bc i’ve heard people complain that the SSQ can be a bit noisy when making bold EQ moves
why are people comparing these to waves all the time. waves don't do good analog models. I mean look their eq has cramping. I Don't think AO is doing much modlling either, rather just tweaking the same algorithms behind different skins. would be better to try vs an actual modelling company next time. like UA or slate.
What does "actual modelling company" mean? Analog Obsession is just Tunca doing his thing, so that would imply he is no "actual modelling company", right? Is IK Multimedia one, then
@@DerSilvano Bad wording on my part. I mean companies that were built around that research. Waves were entirely formed around efficient linear DSP, especially that which could run on low power 24bit sharc chips, and it seems they just never really adapted well when virtual analog became popular. Conversely UAD (plugin division) was entirely formed around David Berners' analog circuit modelling algorithms, initially those of the hardware they made themselves. Slate similarly were formed around Fabrice Gabriel's genius in that field. I've since found out how Tunca works so fast I think I owe an apology to that guy , I just presumed he was copy pasting modules as I didn't like the sound and they all his plugins suffered from the same traits, combined with how fast he was churning them out I assumed the worst. He is modelling, he's a hardware engineer , but on the software side he's converting Csound Circuits into C Code kinda, I just don't think they sound good or convincing. As for IK, I can't comment on the recent attempts, but again they weren't founded as an analog modelling company
for those who dont know , SSl consoles when they came out they where the cleanest kid on the block compared to API and NEVE. Thats why you dont see too much harmonic distortion generated.
@@SoundcastStudios Yes! Very great for mixing. I prefer more API for the simplistic way of equing things since it have already frequency points selected it makes things quicker for me. I tend to get way too much OCD when see too much options.
@@AudioReplica2023 I am glad I'm not alone hehe. I like the limitations on API 560 and other fixed frequency EQs so I can make quick decisions, you want warmth add 125Hz, remove mud attenuate 250Hz, wanna bring it forward add 2K, you wanna reduce or add edge think 4K, is it too sibilant attenuate 8K, want air add 16K, fat bottoms add 63HZ, so simple. Go to anything with full parametric bands, you'll start fiddling and hunting for an hour then end up not liking the cuts you made when you listen to the song later. Btw, whoever said cut first before you boost wasn't exactly teaching us well, boost the nice things into a compressor or limiter and do it generously without fear. Then you may just end up not needing to cut anything, of course except low pass your non bass instruments.
Funny how analog has striven for decades to achieve transparency, then when we have it with DSP, there's a push in the other direction, adding THD, noise and random variance. Analog Obsession's big thing is... adding the analog. I guess the SSL is trying to emulate SSL hardware, but also be relatively transparent.
Thats because narrow filters sound less natural. They are great for fixing problems with individual instruments but for actual coloring broad boosts/cuts are the way to go.
I'm sorry but if you want to review plug-ins first learn about audio a bit more. You're comparing the EQ curves but your waves plugin has the filters on and they aren't on on the other plug-in. Also you are not gain staging your inputs, plug-ins natively accept signal at 0vu/-18dbfs. No point in comparing something if you don't know how it works.
@@nolecheporfavor1581 if you are going to offer a criticism, offer a solution or alternative. life 101. i checked your channel, you have zero content. i would have enjoyed your response in the form of an instructional video. take your own sarcastic advice/comment to heart: "you will go far with that attitude."
Did you find out if it was modelled on the g channel?
“Based on 611 eq with brown low end”
That’s what AO told me
the ssq models the brown eq section on the ssl 4000g console it's know to sound very good on rock drums when you're leaning toward a more aggressive drum
@@aviatedviewssound4798 Thanks, good to know!
As Soundcast said, it is based on the brown knob SSL desk EQ. For those who do not know what that is, it was the very first iteration of the SSL EQ low end. First was brown, then black on the E-Channel, then it remained as black on the G-channel. Waves never incorporated the brown variation until recently with the release of the new SSL EV2 strip.
@@dannyday125 Thanks!
The fact that the analog obsession is more narrow...makes it more percise....its actually a good thing
i just recently discovered Analog Obsession software.
impressive work!
thanks for creating these comparison videos!
The weird thing with the Waves high shelf is called "cramping". Dan Worral has a few nice videos about this stuff and EQs.
Thank you for the additional info!
I don't think shelves cramp, and it's also not dropping to unity gain near nyquist, so no.
@@whatskraken3886 His analyzer isn't displaying all the way up to 48k, which is fine because nobody can hear that high, but shelves clearly do cramp because you can see it happening there. Like, that's not a proper shelf curve if it's going down starting at 18k, right? Whether it actually sounds worse is a different discussion, but Analog Obsession is definitely modeling the gear more accurately if there's no cramping at all in the audible range.
@@forestcochran4196 For his analyzer to display up to 48k, he has to have the project at 96k.
@@BrunodeSouzaLino that part of my comment is irrelevant. Thanks for the pointing that out though.
Analog Obession stunned waves...
analog obsession bullying waves for free
I've got hardware now and trust me analog obsession sounds great with Hardware
If you have the hardware EQ then why do you need either of them?
@@listentoty because he’s probably using a 500 series hardware, you can’t tell the difference between hardware and software so it doesn’t matter
There are the types of videos Waves don’t want you to see. Good content 👌
But which big mixers use analog obsession?
Does it matter if it sounds good? Think for yourself.
@@Ruido777 the "pro" mixers are a bunch boomers who gatekeep entry into the industry
@@Ruido777big mixers use Waves and Pro Tools for one simple reason: when they started, that's what's been available and they know the interface and sound, etc. Most of them even use older versions of Pro Tools, just because as you upgrade to a newer one from these older versions, your projects are deleted and these guys are constantly working with bands and can't just leave two weeks to learn new functions and stuff. Plus they also work on consoles and hardware, barely touching plugins.
And yes, Pro Tools sounds different, just because it automatically dithers the master and you can't turn it off. If you use another DAW, just click 'dither master'.
Did you check how the SSQ changes in sound when you clic on the Analog Obsession logo? It turns red and it activates 4x Oversampling.
Not for this video
In the mixing video I did with it all instances of the plugin were running at 4x oversampling
I'm usually leery of "color" from plugins but that ssq color is beautiful. I just wonder if you can push into it for that analog saturation like you can on the waves SSL
honestly check out my video on the hardware ssl eq. I was surprised by the results.
Love the in depth, much appreciated
I can't speak on the SSQ or the Waves SSL-E as I don't have either plugins. BUT!!! In my experience, the Analog Obsession BusterSE is definitely better than the Waves SSL G-Master, albeit a bit glitchy on MacBook M1
And Analog Obsession Specomp is better than BusterSE ;)
@@HollerAtcherBoi oh yeah, far better. I've learned a lot since i made that original comment lol. Love ur pfp btw
I put the SSQ on a kick drum one time and it automattically sounded right, i didin't even do anything lol
Analog Obsession is the GOAT
great comparison thanks. I was wondering about all this
could you compare the ssl v2 and the ssq oversapled? if not it is ok ty so much
Man, this video is awesome!!!
Thank you!
This is hands down
Best EQ plugin online
Brown knob EQ vs Black knob EQ. They are going to be a bit different.
Which I did state 👍
@@SoundcastStudios I missed it, anyhow, I think this might be matched better with the Brainworx SSL E set to brown knob. Still a good video, and they were surprisingly close.
any opinion on the dead duck channel? it’s clearly going after the SSL design as well and the cpu usage is nowhere near analog obsession but i wonder if it’s any better or worse being another free option bc i’ve heard people complain that the SSQ can be a bit noisy when making bold EQ moves
Analog Obsession SSQ is a brown channel the waves is black channel it looks like..
I do think you are correct
Thanks for this comparison, well done
Thank you!
Analog obsession 4ever
why are people comparing these to waves all the time. waves don't do good analog models. I mean look their eq has cramping. I Don't think AO is doing much modlling either, rather just tweaking the same algorithms behind different skins. would be better to try vs an actual modelling company next time. like UA or slate.
What does "actual modelling company" mean? Analog Obsession is just Tunca doing his thing, so that would imply he is no "actual modelling company", right? Is IK Multimedia one, then
@@DerSilvano Bad wording on my part. I mean companies that were built around that research. Waves were entirely formed around efficient linear DSP, especially that which could run on low power 24bit sharc chips, and it seems they just never really adapted well when virtual analog became popular.
Conversely UAD (plugin division) was entirely formed around David Berners' analog circuit modelling algorithms, initially those of the hardware they made themselves.
Slate similarly were formed around Fabrice Gabriel's genius in that field.
I've since found out how Tunca works so fast I think I owe an apology to that guy , I just presumed he was copy pasting modules as I didn't like the sound and they all his plugins suffered from the same traits, combined with how fast he was churning them out I assumed the worst.
He is modelling, he's a hardware engineer , but on the software side he's converting Csound Circuits into C Code kinda, I just don't think they sound good or convincing.
As for IK, I can't comment on the recent attempts, but again they weren't founded as an analog modelling company
for those who dont know , SSl consoles when they came out they where the cleanest kid on the block compared to API and NEVE. Thats why you dont see too much harmonic distortion generated.
Correct!
It’s why I don’t really like their preamps. Too clean for me.
BUT mixing with an SSL eq is honestly the best. So much control.
@@SoundcastStudios Yes! Very great for mixing. I prefer more API for the simplistic way of equing things since it have already frequency points selected it makes things quicker for me. I tend to get way too much OCD when see too much options.
@@AudioReplica2023 I totally understand that. I feel the same way too. It's why i like the lindell 50 a lot.
@@AudioReplica2023 I am glad I'm not alone hehe. I like the limitations on API 560 and other fixed frequency EQs so I can make quick decisions, you want warmth add 125Hz, remove mud attenuate 250Hz, wanna bring it forward add 2K, you wanna reduce or add edge think 4K, is it too sibilant attenuate 8K, want air add 16K, fat bottoms add 63HZ, so simple. Go to anything with full parametric bands, you'll start fiddling and hunting for an hour then end up not liking the cuts you made when you listen to the song later.
Btw, whoever said cut first before you boost wasn't exactly teaching us well, boost the nice things into a compressor or limiter and do it generously without fear. Then you may just end up not needing to cut anything, of course except low pass your non bass instruments.
Funny how analog has striven for decades to achieve transparency, then when we have it with DSP, there's a push in the other direction, adding THD, noise and random variance. Analog Obsession's big thing is... adding the analog. I guess the SSL is trying to emulate SSL hardware, but also be relatively transparent.
it's very funny. We don't know what we want lol
Would the analog switch in the Waves make a difference, harmonics wise?
It does not, I tested it and it just adds noise.
I should have mentioned that in the video, thanks for bringing it up.
Everyone knows that switch on all analog plugins only makes noise, well everyone but you
@@Gang-25j amogus
only one oversample and thats the one i want.
wow.. interesting. wat graph analyser r u using?
Bertom EQ Analyzer
@@SoundcastStudios thanx...is it free
@@daddydanny5588 yup! bertom.gumroad.com/l/eq-curve-analyzer
@@SoundcastStudios Thank u ... ive learnt a lot from yr channel ...
which big mixers use analog obsession?
What big mixers do on tutorials is different in their secret rooms take note
I do and I am quite big
I don't need any plugins, I prefer natural analog sound: tube amps, magnetic tape etc.
No waves for me.
めっちゃ参考になった！ありがとー！;)
They are different, you are not comparing apples to apples
The analog obsession just sounds more musical...
Thats because narrow filters sound less natural. They are great for fixing problems with individual instruments but for actual coloring broad boosts/cuts are the way to go.
Wow
Analog gear, even from the same brand, is not 1 to 1 the same.
I'm sorry but if you want to review plug-ins first learn about audio a bit more. You're comparing the EQ curves but your waves plugin has the filters on and they aren't on on the other plug-in. Also you are not gain staging your inputs, plug-ins natively accept signal at 0vu/-18dbfs. No point in comparing something if you don't know how it works.
if you think I'm doing a bad job you can always make your own video and do a better job.
@@SoundcastStudios 😂 you will go far with that attitude. 👌🏽
@@nolecheporfavor1581 Nobody wants to hear your negative bullshit
@@nolecheporfavor1581 if you are going to offer a criticism, offer a solution or alternative.
life 101.
i checked your channel, you have zero content. i would have enjoyed your response in the form of an instructional video.
take your own sarcastic advice/comment to heart: "you will go far with that attitude."
Gain staging? He was just showing the difference in the curve who cares if he’s at 0vu.
wow waves sounds like sht compared to analog obsession