comparison FET76 from DP9 and others ?

Discussion of Digital Performer use, optimization, tips and techniques on MacOS.

Moderator: James Steele

Forum rules
This forum is for most discussion related to the use and optimization of Digital Performer [MacOS] and plug-ins as well as tips and techniques. It is NOT for troubleshooting technical issues, complaints, feature requests, or "Comparative DAW 101."
User avatar
Phil O
Posts: 7231
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Scituate, MA

Re: comparison FET76 from DP9 and others ?

Post by Phil O »

Gravity Jim wrote:You know why those old-timers used an 1176? Because it was what they had.

Does it work or not? Does it sound good or not? That's the only question worth asking.
Good point, Jim, but the reason they got it in the first place is because it was/is a great sounding compressor. I don't care if the FET76 sounds like the hardware or not, but I do care if it sounds good. In that respect, I think there's some merit to comparisons. JMHO.

Phil
DP 11.23, 2020 M1 Mac Mini [9,1] (16 Gig RAM), Mac Pro 3GHz 8 core [6,1] (16 Gig RAM), OS 14.3.1/11.6.2, Lynx Aurora (n) 8tb, MOTU 8pre-es, MOTU M6, MOTU 828, Apogee Rosetta 800, UAD-2 Satellite, a truckload of outboard gear and plug-ins, and a partridge in a pear tree.
User avatar
Gravity Jim
Posts: 2005
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 2:55 am
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Santa Rosa, CA

Re: comparison FET76 from DP9 and others ?

Post by Gravity Jim »

Not to put too fine a point on it, but that's still not it.

If it sounds good, it is good. It doesn't have to sound like an 1176 to be good. There is even the possibility (gasp!) that some modern compressors, analog or ITB, sound better than an 1176 for most applications.

So, comparing it to the hardware it supposedly emulates just doesn't make any sense to me. I kind of wish plug makers would stop telling people that this one sounds like this classic analog box and that one sounds like that classic analog box.
Jim Bordner

MacPro 5,1 (3.33Ghz 12-core), 32g RAM, OS X 10.14.6 • MOTU DP 10.11 • Logic Pro X 10.2.5 • Waves Platinum, UAD-2, Slate Digital, Komplete, Omnisphere 2, LASS, CineSamples, Chipsounds, V Collection 5[color]
User avatar
Phil O
Posts: 7231
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Scituate, MA

Re: comparison FET76 from DP9 and others ?

Post by Phil O »

Keep in mind that the OP was not asking for comparisons to the hardware.

Allow me to quote myself from another thread:

"As far as comparison to the original hardware unit - beats me. I don't have an 1176 for comparison, and quite frankly I'm not interested in how close it comes. I just want a great sounding compressor and I think this plugin fits the bill."

So, I think we're on the same page (if not in the same paragraph). 8)

And to this:
Gravity Jim wrote:There is even the possibility (gasp!) that some modern compressors, analog or ITB, sound better than an 1176 for most applications.
I absolutely agree. I wrote an email to someone at UAD a few years back and asked why with all the advanced technology they have, they insist on emulating the vintage noisy problematic hardware. I'd rather purchase a cutting edge sonic wonder that eliminates all the foibles of the hardware units. Some folks will tell you that it's the foibles that gives the vintage gear its great sound. I'm not sure I buy it. As always - JMHO.

Never did get a reply to that email. Hmm.

Phil
DP 11.23, 2020 M1 Mac Mini [9,1] (16 Gig RAM), Mac Pro 3GHz 8 core [6,1] (16 Gig RAM), OS 14.3.1/11.6.2, Lynx Aurora (n) 8tb, MOTU 8pre-es, MOTU M6, MOTU 828, Apogee Rosetta 800, UAD-2 Satellite, a truckload of outboard gear and plug-ins, and a partridge in a pear tree.
Post Reply