![]() ![]() ![]() If you are on a serious budget and get a killer deal like I did, then they are fine and you can easily make good records with them, but the UAD versions really opened up my whole world after coming from all Waves. But the UAD LA2A is far and away better, even the mkI. Like the CLA LA3A and UAD LA3A are fairly close. The Fairchild is one of my favorite compressors and I often use it on the mastering buss. Maybe the Waves are closer to the mkI versions of those depending on the usage. Trashed my Waves plugs years ago in favor of UAD and never looked back. I had the Waves CLA versions of the 1176, LA2A, LA3A and those were decent, but not even close to the UAD mkII versions. ![]() The Waves just sounds a little more "mushy" to me, where the UAD is more punchy, which some may like more or less. The Waves SSL buss comp is probably the most respectable, but even that I prefer the UAD version since it has more life to it. Depending on the target i use the FabFilter Limiter or the Sonnox (sometimes with Sonnox inflator and/or transient designer - never tried the powerful. And the mkI SSL channel strips don't even seem to get much love on this board! Does that mean the Waves were terrible? No, but to my ear the UAD versions were better. Within my mastering chain (within Pro Tools or Ozone 6 as platform) i mainly use UAD 2 plugs while only use the Fab Filter Limiter (L) and - for pure () surgical issues - the Q2 in linear mode. UAD just sounded better in every respect. I have never used the real thing, but I will say that in direct comparisons of just these plugins, I thought the UAD versions were more transparent, had less artifacts and overall more dynamic range. the UAD (now mkI) SSL-both the channel strips and the buss comp. When I first moved to UAD from Waves, I did a lot of comparisons on my own tracks using the Waves SSL vs. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |