|
|
Post by niklas1073 on Jan 19, 2024 4:45:46 GMT -6
As a huge LA2a lover in apparently contradiction to many others š¤£ I still agree with many of the dislikers comments.
The problem with the 2a today is that in pretty much every tutorial, review, comparisonā¦ is that it is promoted as an easy, just two knobs, anyone can get hold of it compressor. The reality is slightly different iād say. The hidden 3rd knob never mentioned is the output knob of your pre, which plays I think one of the most significant roles in the usage, besides of understanding the delayed set off and feed back schematics. I use a 2a clone on almost all my vocal trackings and it works, Iāve found the sweet spot for the unit. My reduction knob hardly changes position. The input and make up gain changes. I am able to easily do 5-7db gr with it during tracking and getting a sweet steady vocal track. Usually I tend to go for 3-5db gr.
Would I get a kt? Surely not. Personally every piece of hardware I invest in should be one that exceeds what plugins can offer me, and have the same commitment and emotional value for me as an instrument I buy. Something my son can inherit from me and his son after that. From what Iāve listen to and felt kt products, I prefer quality plugs.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2024 6:42:21 GMT -6
I'm thinking that I dislike the darkening effect, which can make the lyrics get buried. My (Audioscape) LA3A is just as slow as an LA2A, but I rarely find it unusable. Maybe the UA reissue I tried most recently just sucks. The sound coming out of the box always sounded more dynamic than what came in. I wouldn't go by a UA reissue, there's even far better 1176's out there from the likes of Serpent. The Stam 2A I have sounds near enough the same as the original (which I also had), one has to account for age but it was close. I've measured this multiple times and on non percussive instruments I've never had overshoot, or any issues really. I'm the same as Nikolas, set it to around 5 - 7dB GR, have the output hitting -18dB and just forget about it.
2A's are a staple of the industry used on more tracks than one could ever find out about probably and the whole point of it is the darkening effect plus pinning (professional vocalists use this to great effect when singing high / powerful parts). Most of us don't track to tape anymore and certain very popular mic's can come off as bright or pinchy. One way around this is to use a de-esser (not as a de-esser) to smooth things plus a bit of chorus or something, however the 2A does keep a mic in check. The good clones never get unintelligible unless you are really slamming it, however I have come across some opto clones and quite a few "2A" plugs that just go to mush even at reasonable levels of GR.
The only thing that makes me think twice about a 2A is something like an SSL VCA, that sort of compressor can smooth out mic's as well but they're far more flexible and capable. The IAA single knob VCA does a similar thing as well, it's pretty cool. Also I must admit I'm sorta preferring the IAA / Chandler Opto with certain mic combinations, there's a sense of smooth high fidelity clarity to the entire thing and in more modern productions it's pretty sweet.
|
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Jan 19, 2024 9:41:10 GMT -6
I'm thinking that I dislike the darkening effect, which can make the lyrics get buried. My (Audioscape) LA3A is just as slow as an LA2A, but I rarely find it unusable. Maybe the UA reissue I tried most recently just sucks. The sound coming out of the box always sounded more dynamic than what came in. I wouldn't go by a UA reissue, there's even far better 1176's out there from the likes of Serpent. The Stam 2A I have sounds near enough the same as the original (which I also had), one has to account for age but it was close. I've measured this multiple times and on non percussive instruments I've never had overshoot, or any issues really. I'm the same as Nikolas, set it to around 5 - 7dB GR, have the output hitting -18dB and just forget about it.
2A's are a staple of the industry used on more tracks than one could ever find out about probably and the whole point of it is the darkening effect plus pinning (professional vocalists use this to great effect when singing high / powerful parts). Most of us don't track to tape anymore and certain very popular mic's can come off as bright or pinchy. One way around this is to use a de-esser (not as a de-esser) to smooth things plus a bit of chorus or something, however the 2A does keep a mic in check. The good clones never get unintelligible unless you are really slamming it, however I have come across some opto clones and quite a few "2A" plugs that just go to mush even at reasonable levels of GR.
The only thing that makes me think twice about a 2A is something like an SSL VCA, that sort of compressor can smooth out mic's as well but they're far more flexible and capable. The IAA single knob VCA does a similar thing as well, it's pretty cool. Also I must admit I'm sorta preferring the IAA / Chandler Opto with certain mic combinations, there's a sense of smooth high fidelity clarity to the entire thing and in more modern productions it's pretty sweet.
I way prefer vari-mu compressors for tracking vocals. The Retro STA is very forgiving - it's just a colour box with an automated fader :-) The only issue one has to be very careful about is .... if you're not careful you can knock of 20dB GR without even noticing you're doing it .... it can be dangerously transparent. But the box tone of the Retro - makes me sound like a star - all that extra girth in the low mids and a certain charismatic presence. My wife calls it the Rod box! |
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,098 
|
Post by ericn on Jan 19, 2024 11:27:45 GMT -6
Here the thing (beside the obvious that you need to choose the right sources to use it on), the intended buyer, 1 - likely can't hear that yet 2 - wouldn't know how to fix if if they had the extra control to do so. 3 - might understand 30% of what you just wrote. It's probably been a long time since you didn't know what 10ms sounded like. However, you have to remember, much of the intended market for this box are just learning to really hear compression. They're better off with fewer knobs, and learning to really hear it... or not compressing at all. But if they don't compress at all, how do they learn? Sure they could use plugins, but then they aren't learning about the other things that go with using actual hardware (signal flow, gain staging, Delay Compensation, etc)...Ā So I stand by, this is a good box to learn on. Once they know what they're doing they will realize this isn't the tool for every job, and they can acquire something else. But... they'll still have everything they learned from it, along with a useful box still in the rack waiting for the right source. I don't think that's a bad way to spend a few hundred bucks. I really don't agree - I think an LA2A is a terrible compressor to learn compression on imho. It was originally designed (like the STA Level) as an A.M radio broadcast limiter - only to be re-imagined as a studio comp/limiter. It has a very limited sweet post because of the tube and trafo saturation - and it has a funky attack and release very much programme material based. It's two knob control makes it harder to use imho as the other elements of control fall to factors outside the units controllable parameters. I think if a "newbie" wants to learn about tracking compression a simple VCA with dedicated attack, release, threshold and GMU will let them see how these parameters interact and the lack of saturation will let them understand the source/compression relationship better,Ā as the 2A's tube and trafo saturation act to a small degree as a non time based form of compressionĀ - so that's another layer of compressionĀ not accounted for in the traditional parameters of a solid state compressor (for example) It's true when you get a 2A into's sweet spot they can be glorious - but they can be quite ugly with just a small twist in the wrong direction or hitting them too hard with an uneven broadband signal. ObviouslyĀ - you don't agree - but that's cool, I can respect that  Iām going to disagree with a part of this having sold as many compressors as just about anyone out there, a newbie may want all the control they can get, but for learning purposes and to keep their frustration level low for most the single space DBX 160ās are the best babyās first comp. You have to understand there is this tendency to ā if there is a knob I must turn itā with compressors this gets many in trouble and frustration rules. The metering on the 160ās is so intuitively laid out that people actually understand what itās doing ! The exception to this was the Presonus Bluemax, it wasnāt great sounding, had attack and release, but what made it special was the presets that could get a end user out of trouble, besides being a very blah VCA comp the issues with it were: First you had to keep the manual handy because there was no feedback as to what the preset settings were on the front panel so you couldnāt just move the attack a bit from the preset. Second they made the mistake of labeling presets with specific purposes. It was a bit of a stretch to explain the drum setting might be better for a particular voice than one of the voice settings. How good are these as teaching tools? I have about a dozen old recording educator clients who will snatch up used ones if I come across them. |
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Jan 22, 2024 12:20:58 GMT -6
[quote author=" thehightenor" My wife calls it the Rod box! [/quote] As long as it's not curtains. Then we have to somehow pull ourselves together. Chris |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Jan 31, 2024 14:10:25 GMT -6
So I got both the 76-KT and the 2A-KT and thought I'd share my very brief observations. First, what is up with their naming convention? Seems like they have it backwards. Why wouldn't you call it KT-2A and KT-76?
Moving on...
I actually found the 2A-KT a little bit "blah". Not bad at all, but it didn't really impart much tube flavor in the way that my AudioScape does. That said, it behaved just like I expect from an Opto and was really easy to get it where I want it. I have plenty of other ways to dirty things up, happy with this purchase and will keep an eye out for another one if I can get another great deal.
76-KT surprised me. I wasn't expecting much based on the reviews, just a functioning 1176 style in the analog realm. But I thought it sounded pretty darn good. The overdriven sound was great when I tested it on vocals and guitar on fast settings and cranked. I didn't AB it against my UAD versions or anything, but it sounded pretty darn good to me.
I've got the 76-KT sitting in my mixing rack specfically for extreme parallel compression settings that I feel work better in analog realm. It's gonna be perfect for that.
(NOTE: I also got a Distressor in this package. Wow. It's awesome. I get the hype.)
|
|
|
|
Post by doubledog on Jan 31, 2024 18:54:11 GMT -6
Why wouldn't you call it KT-2A and KT-76? --- I actually found the 2A-KT a little bit "blah". oh but they did! They did it both ways (lawyers must have gotten involved). Inside they appear to be the same. Yeah, it is blah, especially stock, but if you decide to keep it, you might try upgrading the opto module (I got the Kenetek, but the BLA is in the same price range). its better, but I have a LiN2A too and I think it has a bit more "vibe" to it. I've since replaced a few tubes in the 2A-KT, but it still hasn't knocked me out yet. I might find that track that it just works on though someday. |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Feb 1, 2024 10:30:47 GMT -6
Here's a clip where I'm running the Distressor, the KT-2A, and the clean vocal in parallel here for anyone interested. That's all the compression that's on this track. I couldn't see the board but I'm pretty sure the breakup you hear on the microphone is a bit from the pre-amp on the console and a bit more from the distortion on the Distressor.
Both units are averaging about 4db reduction and peaking around 10db. Distressor set on 6:1 and all knobs at 12 o'clock. KT-2A just twisted knobs until it got the GR I wanted.
Anyway, other than those two units this is not a very processed track. Goodhertz Tilt on vocal and piano tracks, chamber and delay on vocals, and a bit of Silver Bullet plugin on the bus.
|
|
|
|
Post by dok on Feb 16, 2024 12:27:00 GMT -6
I bought both a KT-76 and KT-2A and hooked them up last night. Did some comparisons with the UAD plugin versions on vocals and found that I can dial both of them in to sound rather identical to the plugin versions, at least as far as I can hear, at a few dB of gain reduction each. That was the main application I purchased them for and that makes them good enough for me, and just as importantly, super fun to have the chain set up and turn some knobs. I may try a Kenetek T4B at some point but it doesn't feel strictly necessary - my main goal here is just to add some polish/finish when tracking.
Next up, comparison at 2-3 dB gain reduction between the 76 and my Aphex 651. How close can they get? The 76 takes up valuable rack space!
|
|
|
|
Post by Shadowk on Feb 16, 2024 13:44:13 GMT -6
I'm sure I saw another purple site classic where everyone preferred the KT-2A to a UA 2A, also the GR vs. Art was a fun one.
|
|
|
|
Post by robo on Feb 16, 2024 17:08:56 GMT -6
The problem with this type of gear isnāt that it sucks, as it usually is totally useable, but that there is a clear upgrade path implied in the purchase. If you keep at it, eventually youāll want a more refined version, or youāll upgrade all the components until you might as well haveā¦ Itās the old ābuy cheap, buy twiceā thing, which Iāve found to be very true. Itās expensive, because cheap or modded gear is rarely worth much on the resale market. Higher tier stuff holds its value well.
That said, I listen back to recordings Iāve made with cheap gear and am glad I worked with what I had access to. Enjoy regardless.
|
|
|
|
Post by jacobamerritt on Feb 16, 2024 18:52:40 GMT -6
The problem with this type of gear isnāt that it sucks, as it usually is totally useable, but that there is a clear upgrade path implied in the purchase. If you keep at it, eventually youāll want a more refined version, or youāll upgrade all the components until you might as well haveā¦ Itās the old ābuy cheap, buy twiceā thing, which Iāve found to be very true. Itās expensive, because cheap or modded gear is rarely worth much on the resale market. Higher tier stuff holds its value well. That said, I listen back to recordings Iāve made with cheap gear and am glad I worked with what I had access to. Enjoy regardless. I would argue there is a clear upgrade in the signal path with a decent hardware compressor. Which to me, the KT-2A totally is. I had a client fawning over his vocal sound this weekend. Only compressor in the chain was a KT-2A reducing about 3-5db. The bang for the buck is certainly there at $380. Sure an AudioScape or Summit etc is better, but is also much more investment. Tangent- but not all expensive stuff holds its value. Very brand contingent. My experience is that the expensive boutique stuff has caused me far more headaches than the less 'gear geeky' mass market stuff. The scenario many seem to forget- Have one channel of Audioscape, Stan, Summit etc LA-2A flavor... AND a couple KT-2As for not much money that do a serviceable job. Oh yeah, and to answer the thread question. Yes the KT-2A is good. For $380. |
|
|
|
Post by Shadowk on Feb 17, 2024 5:30:11 GMT -6
Would I get a kt? Surely not. Personally every piece of hardware I invest in should be one that exceeds what plugins can offer me, and have the same commitment and emotional value for me as an instrument I buy. Something my son can inherit from me and his son after that. From what Iāve listen to and felt kt products, I prefer quality plugs. Well, I guess that's the million dollar question. Are they better than the top of the line emulation plugs ? Reason I got rid of the Warm-2A was not because it was necessarily a bad compressor I just had plugins that were more along the lines of an LA-2A and at the time that's what I was looking for. Although for the cost of one of my more expensive compressors I could buy 10 Klark Teknik's.
They cost the same here as some decent plugins, although the downside to hardware is always recall, repairs, electric costs, patching, converters etc. and if I were to add another Carbon for example to my setup that's another 3 grand on top. HW IMV can't be just as good as plugs, or even slightly better to justify it. Said HW has to offer something different and be amazing at it or if one is looking for an exact clone then it should be bang on the original, no compromises.
|
|
|
|
Post by niklas1073 on Feb 17, 2024 5:51:30 GMT -6
Would I get a kt? Surely not. Personally every piece of hardware I invest in should be one that exceeds what plugins can offer me, and have the same commitment and emotional value for me as an instrument I buy. Something my son can inherit from me and his son after that. From what Iāve listen to and felt kt products, I prefer quality plugs. Well, I guess that's the million dollar question. Are they better than the top of the line emulation plugs ? Reason I got rid of the Warm-2A was not because it was necessarily a bad compressor I just had plugins that were more along the lines of an LA-2A and at the time that's what I was looking for. Although for the cost of one of my more expensive compressors I could buy 10 Klark Teknik's.
They cost the same here as some decent plugins, although the downside to hardware is always recall, repairs, electric costs, patching, converters etc. and if I were to add another Carbon for example to my setup that's another 3 grand on top. HW IMV can't be just as good as plugs, or even slightly better to justify it. Said HW has to offer something different and be amazing at it or if one is looking for an exact clone then it should be bang on the original, no compromises.
Yeah I use only hardware on tracking and in the rear end on my mixbus, so I track and print thru hw, but all the mixing is itb. So I sure am a believer that plugins can do a great job. I have been able to compare my tracking comps to tracking with UAD unison and that way have a pretty much identical chain of hw vs plugins in the tracking stage. I do prefer my hw anyday there. Same I can do very close by on mixbus and also there I opted for the hw in the end. Within the mix I will likely never go hybrid. There the quantity of units, requirements and investments goes beyond my recourses. Iāve found my sweet spot here š. But I did use the unison for tracking at the time when I didnāt have the resources to buy the gear that I felt would top the plugins. When the time came to upgrade, it was a big thing, and I went in with a lot of thought and research in it. And it was production gear wise the best decisions Ive made. |
|
|
|
Post by dok on Feb 17, 2024 10:44:40 GMT -6
Said HW has to offer something different and be amazing at it or if one is looking for an exact clone then it should be bang on the original, no compromises.
There are a lot of people who claim that these are bang on the originals, and some others who will tell you that they're no different than all the many variances between the old originals, much like anyone will tell you that no two vintage 1073s or U87s are exactly alike. I'm not one of those people, as I've never used an original, but it's worth pointing out that there's no small contingent of users of these with that perspective. And some interesting GroupDIY threads in which these are measured and quantitatively evaluated. Like I said for me it's enough that it's doing something fun and useful to my vocal tracking and not degrading things, as far as I can tell. And perhaps using one or two fewer plugins per track is germane to the aliasing discussion currently being had elsewhere at the moment? Time will tell. |
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Feb 17, 2024 11:23:33 GMT -6
I think there's something to be said for tracking through hardware in that you are monitoring the actual sound that will end up in the recording, and that can be inspirational as well as informative to your performance. You can of course do the same through a plug-in, but then there's lag, right? Regardless, just knowing it's printing that way creates a different mind-set that I'm speculating works for some, but not others.
|
|
|
|
Post by notneeson on Feb 17, 2024 15:10:29 GMT -6
I donāt think the UAD LA2A is all that great to start with.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shadowk on Feb 18, 2024 3:58:01 GMT -6
There are a lot of people who claim that these are bang on the originals, and some others who will tell you that they're no different than all the many variances between the old originals, much like anyone will tell you that no two vintage 1073s or U87s are exactly alike. I'm not one of those people, as I've never used an original, but it's worth pointing out that there's no small contingent of users of these with that perspective. And some interesting GroupDIY threads in which these are measured and quantitatively evaluated. Like I said for me it's enough that it's doing something fun and useful to my vocal tracking and not degrading things, as far as I can tell. And perhaps using one or two fewer plugins per track is germane to the aliasing discussion currently being had elsewhere at the moment? Time will tell. I bought two original Tele 2A's in 2003 and anything within 1 - 10dB compression is fine but after that they do turn everything into dark mush. I mean the three factors any 2A has to get right is HF frequency limiting, pinning when louder sources are continuously introduced and the expansion it induces before hitting the compression ceiling before it all goes bleh.. I've not tried a massive amount of 2A clones or plugins but the one's I did besides the Stam missed the mark or should I say the point of an LA-2A.
Talking about the Stam, from the vid Wiz posted mine sounds exactly the same as their's. The Stam's sounded near enough exactly the same as my Tele's and after I'd serviced them properly the Tele's were also practically the same. I shrugged my shoulders and put them up on ebay the next day.. It's piqued my interest at least, although I'm usually similar to thehightenor , I save up, get the best for that practical purpose and never really question it. Then again on occasion like with the Stam's I will swap out stuff if there's no real difference and I can save some $$$'s.
|
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Feb 18, 2024 6:52:24 GMT -6
There are a lot of people who claim that these are bang on the originals, and some others who will tell you that they're no different than all the many variances between the old originals, much like anyone will tell you that no two vintage 1073s or U87s are exactly alike. I'm not one of those people, as I've never used an original, but it's worth pointing out that there's no small contingent of users of these with that perspective. And some interesting GroupDIY threads in which these are measured and quantitatively evaluated. Like I said for me it's enough that it's doing something fun and useful to my vocal tracking and not degrading things, as far as I can tell. And perhaps using one or two fewer plugins per track is germane to the aliasing discussion currently being had elsewhere at the moment? Time will tell. I bought two original Tele 2A's in 2003 and anything within 1 - 10dB compression is fine but after that they do turn everything into dark mush. I mean the three factors any 2A has to get right is HF frequency limiting, pinning when louder sources are continuously introduced and the expansion it induces before hitting the compression ceiling before it all goes bleh.. I've not tried a massive amount of 2A clones or plugins but the one's I did besides the Stam missed the mark or should I say the point of an LA-2A.
Talking about the Stam, from the vid Wiz posted mine sounds exactly the same as their's. The Stam's sounded near enough exactly the same as my Tele's and after I'd serviced them properly the Tele's were also practically the same. I shrugged my shoulders and put them up on ebay the next day.. It's piqued my interest at least, although I'm usually similar to thehightenor , I save up, get the best for that practical purpose and never really question it. Then again on occasion like with the Stam's I will swap out stuff if there's no real difference and I can save some $$$'s.
I've only ever heard video clips of the Stam and it sounded really good but just a touch too bright for my applications - had the right action though. I ended up with the Audioscape Opto comp and I've been very impressed with the tone and action - sounds like I would imagine a brand new 68 Tele 2A might of sounded. |
|
|
|
Post by audiospecific on Feb 18, 2024 7:12:50 GMT -6
There are a lot of people who claim that these are bang on the originals, and some others who will tell you that they're no different than all the many variances between the old originals, much like anyone will tell you that no two vintage 1073s or U87s are exactly alike. I'm not one of those people, as I've never used an original, but it's worth pointing out that there's no small contingent of users of these with that perspective. And some interesting GroupDIY threads in which these are measured and quantitatively evaluated. Like I said for me it's enough that it's doing something fun and useful to my vocal tracking and not degrading things, as far as I can tell. And perhaps using one or two fewer plugins per track is germane to the aliasing discussion currently being had elsewhere at the moment? Time will tell. I bought two original Tele 2A's in 2003 and anything within 1 - 10dB compression is fine but after that they do turn everything into dark mush. I mean the three factors any 2A has to get right is HF frequency limiting, pinning when louder sources are continuously introduced and the expansion it induces before hitting the compression ceiling before it all goes bleh.. I've not tried a massive amount of 2A clones or plugins but the one's I did besides the Stam missed the mark or should I say the point of an LA-2A.
The LA-2A and the Fairchild, I normally use lightly, and never really got aggressive with it with the exception of a few bass tracks. In the older days of digital recording when there was forced pre-emphasis, the LA-2A was useful undoing what happened during tracking with its 15K boost filter. Which I think is what kept its popularity. |
|
|
|
Post by earlevel on Feb 19, 2024 20:36:20 GMT -6
Would I get a kt? Surely not. Personally every piece of hardware I invest in should be one that exceeds what plugins can offer me, and have the same commitment and emotional value for me as an instrument I buy. Something my son can inherit from me and his son after that. From what Iāve listen to and felt kt products, I prefer quality plugs. I had never used any hardware '2A, just plugins. I didn't see what the big deal was. I got more into the singing side, mics, and stuff, and bought the KT trioātook over a year for the 2A-KT to arrive (had lived with the 76-KT and EQP-KT for some time). I couldn't believe what it did to my voice. I never got that from plugins. Now, I may not have "the" '2A plugin, but I've had a number of them from various vendors. While I have some of the newer '76 flavors on UA, I just have the "UAD Teletronix LA-2A Legacy plugin for my UAD-2. I just now made a new project and recorded a vocal for a song, to verify. Recorded in straight (Soyuz 017 FET, Great River ME-1NV), then bused the vocal track to an aux with the UA '2A, and also back out to the KT-2A and back in. It's not close, the KT-2A sounds so much better, it adds "dimension", for a lack of a good term, which the plugins do not. Believe me, I'd vastly prefer that plugins gave me the same satisfaction with the sound. I'm just adding my thoughts to the discussion. If I were certain I needed a '2A in the first place, I'd probably have gone for the AudioScape, I've listened to it at the trade shows multiple times over the years. But in this case, I wanted to try out the vintage-style gear, it was during COVID, I could get the trio for $850 and tax. I wasn't about to plunk down thousands to see if I needed one or all, and the AudioScape was backordered anyway. Really happy with the 2A-KT, and I think the 76-KT is good too, just not quite as essential for my useāI was pretty used to singing without a compressor. (I never had a desire for an outboard EQ, but at $250 the EQP was worth checking out.) |
|
|
|
Post by earlevel on Feb 20, 2024 1:24:18 GMT -6
OK, that made me curious about trying to get the same sound with The Klark Teknik pieces and UAD plugins. Possibly it just seems like a no-brainer with the hardware, because you pretty much arrive at the proper gain staging naturally, so I wanted to see how it would work out if I tried to get the same settings. My source is Soyuz 017 though Great River ME-1NV. I'm not a pro at singing and recording vocals, this is newer experimentation for me (a keyboardist). I just did one unedited pass through a karaoke song, chosen for starting in my resting vocal range, not going a lot higherāwas looking for texture. I recorded that directly, then for one path, piped it back out to 76-KT, through 2A-KT, back in to a track. The other path was through UAD UA 1176LN Legacy and UAD Teletronix LA-2A Legacy. Just working with what I have here. I grabbed a middle stretch with verse and chorus: Attachment DeletedAttachment DeletedI normally record through the 2A-KT only, lately, 5-7 dB max gain reduction. For the '76, the compression was light, like 3 dB reduction on most, maybe it hit some more on loud parts, wasn't really watching. It was more about going through the gear than doing a lot of compression. I tried to match the levels as closely as I could, added some reverb because it seemed to make the tone stand out better. Let me know if you think one sounds better than the other. Take a guess at which is which, if you would. |
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Feb 20, 2024 2:36:39 GMT -6
The problem with this type of gear isnāt that it sucks, as it usually is totally useable, but that there is a clear upgrade path implied in the purchase. If you keep at it, eventually youāll want a more refined version, or youāll upgrade all the components until you might as well haveā¦ Itās the old ābuy cheap, buy twiceā thing, which Iāve found to be very true. Itās expensive, because cheap or modded gear is rarely worth much on the resale market. Higher tier stuff holds its value well. That said, I listen back to recordings Iāve made with cheap gear and am glad I worked with what I had access to. Enjoy regardless. Ā I would argue there is a clear upgrade in the signal path with a decent hardware compressor. Which to me, the KT-2A totally is. I had a client fawning over his vocal sound this weekend. Only compressor in the chain was a KT-2A reducing about 3-5db. The bang for the buck is certainly there at $380. Sure an AudioScape or Summit etc is better, but is also much more investment.Ā Tangent- but not all expensive stuff holds its value. Very brand contingent. My experience is that the expensive boutique stuff has caused me far more headaches than the less 'gear geeky' mass market stuff. The scenario many seem to forget- Have one channel of Audioscape, Stan, Summit etc LA-2A flavor... AND a couple KT-2As for not much money that do a serviceable job. Ā Oh yeah, and to answer the thread question. Yes the KT-2A is good. For $380.Ā For under $400 and useable, thatās very good value. |
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Feb 20, 2024 2:41:21 GMT -6
I think there's something to be said for tracking through hardware in that you are monitoring the actual sound that will end up in the recording, and that can be inspirational as well as informative to your performance. You can of course do the same through a plug-in, but then there's lag, right? Regardless, just knowing it's printing that way creates a different mind-set that I'm speculating works for some, but not others. Tracking through Ob is visceral and engaging, plug ins : blah. |
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Feb 20, 2024 2:47:33 GMT -6
āIt's not close, the KT-2A sounds so much better, it adds "dimension", for a lack of a good term, which the plugins do not. ā I think thatās the OB magic and once you hear and experience it real time, tracking and mixing, hard to go back: I just donāt find that plug ins do that , just sound good but flat and less dimensional. And there is the fun factor of tweaking real gear, rather than clicking a mouse! |
|
