Quick shootout between the Warm Audio 76 and a 1930's RCA 86

I own the WA76. Its killer value for money..and sound great.


That RCA 86A-2 though...

which of my organs do you want (non smoker, non drinker , vegetarian only used my kidneys on sunday...)

8)

its fantastic

cheers

Wiz

The Warm sounds really good, but daaaamn that RCA...

Great vocals too, let us know when this is released.

the warm sounds nice, a little hard to my ears, but nice, the rca was a bit softer on the edges, but much heavier handed, were the GR values set the same on both units?

both sounded good, i'd pick the warm as an "in general" without knowing anything about the track.

great singer btw 8)

Great post Randge, thanks. The WA76 has a sound, kinda like flexing muscles, sounds get a little pumped up, but in a very good way. I use it on vocals and acoustic guitars all the time now. To me, the RCA allowed for a more natural sound. I'd sure want them both if I could have both. The WA76 isn't crazy money, so maybe you can get them both?

Randge being a guru and all, whats your feeling on the la3a for acoustic guitars? i'm over the top for those suckers, i have 4 channels of Serpent SA3A (La3a clones), i'm a big fan of those on bass, vox as well.

I listened and made my impressions before reading the posts of others. I clearly don't have the ears you guys have because my thoughts don't seem to align, but here goes..

The RCA sounds tighter and perhaps edgier on top ..and thinner on the bottom. They may be level matched by the meter, but the WA seems hotter in general, yet my sense is that the compression feels heavier handed on the RCA, which is surprising because I would think that if they were level matched the more compressed track would seem hotter. Also the RCA attack was noticeably slower - too slow for my tastes. Anyway, and qualifying my opinion by reminding you all that I'm just a hack; I'm not a professional engineer and may very well have clubs for ears. I have absolutely no idea how 'coveted' or expensive an 86 is.

Given these tracks, there were one or two moments where I preferred the RCA, but the WA would easily be my choice.

EDIT: just reread the original post and noticed that they were level matched by ear.  Maybe it's that the WA sounds bigger on the bottom..

Tony,

I have only used LA-3a's a few times.  For application on acoustic guitars, they are a little bit sluggish for my personal tastes if you are really digging in and using them.  I can see them working well if you are just barely making the meters move or for a little more intensity on a finger picked part, but for hard driving bluegrass rhythm from a prewar Martin and the likes, slowing them down is the kiss of death of a track.  All of the drive and punch disappears. The attack and release of a compressor need to be pretty fast or I immediately hear smearing (when really getting into -3 or more compression) on most acoustic instruments and so do most grassers with an ear for engineering or those very tuned into what their instrument sounds like. I usually don't compress acoustic guitar that much (or often) unless its a very dense country mix and I want it to step forward. There are many applications that I really love to hear them on, however.  Drum overheads sound so smooth but don't seem to get dulled down too much.  Horns and bright guitars really will sweeten well, glossing without becoming chesty or honky sounding.  LA3a's are certainly a studio staple and an old friend when you want to use one. I have really fallen for the Great River PWM 501's for compressing acoustic instruments.  They are quite fast, can grab peaks and not be noticeable all while staying so musical. My $.02.

R

Yes! They are great for tracking and mixing vocals. They are the most versatile comps I own. If you want to pair it with another compressor to do the 1176-La2a thing, it can kind of go there for either one due to the feed forward/feedback knob. One of my favorites.

R