Should plug-in companies stop making emulations of analogue hardware simply because they don't sound exactly like the real thing? In my opinion, absolutely not.
I recently received a comment on one of my hardware versus plug-in comparison videos, which I believe was about the IGS A25. The suggestion was that companies should stop producing hardware emulations. I couldn't disagree more.
I've spent years building a studio around high-quality analogue equipment, but that doesn't mean I believe everyone needs to buy the hardware. Plug-in emulations have an important place in modern music production, even when they aren't a perfect recreation of the original equipment.
For me, the conversation should be about making better, more interesting plug-ins, not abandoning emulations altogether.
My view on plug-in emulations:
Watch: Should Companies Stop Making Hardware Plug-In Emulations?
Not Every Plug-In Emulation Is Created Equal
Let's be clear: some emulations are excellent, some are disappointing, and some seem to be little more than a familiar-looking interface over fairly basic processing. I'm not suggesting we should pretend they're all equally good.
But there are plug-ins that genuinely capture the character of the original hardware. The newer Elysia Alpha Compressor emulation is a good example. To my ears, it sounds remarkably close in certain respects. Does it sound and react exactly like the physical compressor? No. But it captures enough of what makes that processor special to be genuinely useful.
That's why I don't understand the argument that an emulation has no value unless it's indistinguishable from the original.
It's Not Just About Affording Hardware — It's About Justifying It
I might spend £5,500 on an analogue EQ because I use equipment like that professionally, day in and day out. That makes it a justifiable business investment for me. But it would be ridiculous to assume that everyone making music needs to spend the same amount.
Think about someone who works in the building trade. They might quite reasonably spend thousands of pounds on professional tools. I've got tools at home too, but I couldn't justify buying the same equipment they use every day. My profession is audio engineering, not building.
It's exactly the same with analogue studio equipment. A producer making music at home may love the sound of a particular compressor or EQ without having any commercial reason to own the hardware. If a plug-in gets them close to that sound at a sensible price, why would that be a bad thing?
“Just because I can justify spending thousands of pounds on an EQ doesn't mean everyone else can — or should have to.”
Why Plug-In Emulations Still Matter
Accessibility
They give producers and engineers access to the character of expensive and sometimes impractical studio equipment without the same financial commitment.
Workflow
Plug-ins open with the session, are simple to automate and can be recalled instantly without resetting every control on a physical unit.
Creative Choice
Different emulations provide different tonal options. Even when they aren't perfect copies, they can still be very good tools in their own right.
The Ampex ATR-102 Is A Perfect Example
One emulation I still use all the time is the Ampex ATR-102 tape machine plug-in. I love it. It's a brilliant plug-in, and I have no desire to replace it with a physical tape machine.
Even if I had an Ampex machine sitting at the back of the studio, I wouldn't necessarily want to run every project through it. There's the tape, the maintenance, the setup and the additional work. The plug-in gives me a sound I enjoy without all that inconvenience.
Sometimes convenience is not a compromise you reluctantly accept. It's a genuine advantage.
Why Instant Recall Matters To Me
One of the reasons I've invested so heavily in digitally recallable analogue hardware at Audio Animals is that I don't want to spend my working day manually recalling equipment. I want to open a session and have everything return to exactly where I left it.
I still want the sound and feel of analogue processors in my mixes and masters, but I also want the speed and flexibility people associate with working in the box.
Plug-ins offer those workflow advantages naturally. That is a very good reason to keep developing them, regardless of whether someone can hear a difference between the emulation and the original hardware.
“I want the sound of analogue equipment, but I also want to open a session and have everything recall instantly.”
Plug-Ins Can Actually Bring Clients To Hardware Studios
There's another benefit to emulations that I see from the commercial side of Audio Animals. A client might already use a Fairchild, Shadow Hills or Elysia Alpha plug-in in their own setup. Then they discover that we have the corresponding type of hardware here in Studio A.
That gives them a reason to be curious. They know the processor's character from using the plug-in and want to hear what running their music through the hardware is like. I've encountered that reaction plenty of times.
In other words, the emulation isn't necessarily replacing the hardware. Sometimes it's introducing an entirely new group of engineers and producers to it.
What Hardware Would I Love To See Emulated?
WesAudio EQ
I'd happily use a high-quality emulation of a great WesAudio EQ, even if it were only very close to the original rather than identical.
Cranborne Audio Harmonic Processing
I'd love to see more of the interesting harmonic processing available from companies like Cranborne Audio recreated in software.
IGS Springtime
An emulation of the IGS Springtime is exactly the sort of more unusual processor that would catch my attention.
Do We Really Need Another 1176 Or CL 1B?
Where I do agree that the market could improve is in the choice of hardware being emulated. We don't need endless versions of the same few famous compressors.
I'd much rather developers looked at great, distinctive processors that haven't already been recreated dozens of times. There is fascinating analogue equipment out there, and plenty of it deserves more attention.
In my opinion, a more selective approach would make new releases considerably more exciting.
Make The Plug-In Better Than A Straight Copy
And here's something else: why does an emulation have to stop at replicating the controls of the original unit?
If you're developing a digital version of an analogue EQ or compressor, take advantage of what software can do. Build in mid-side processing. Add an FFT display or a useful analyser. Give users extra routing and flexibility that the original hardware simply couldn't offer.
Keep the sound and personality that people love, but don't be afraid to improve the experience. Being faithful to the hardware shouldn't mean deliberately restricting the plug-in.
Built-In Mid-Side
Give users mid-side options without requiring additional routing or another plug-in.
Visual Analysis
Add spectrum analysis and feedback that would be difficult or impossible to include on the original hardware.
Extra Flexibility
Use the digital format to expand the creative possibilities while retaining the original processor's character.
So, Should Companies Stop Making Plug-In Emulations?
Absolutely not. I love analogue hardware, and I'm fortunate to use a lot of it every day, but that doesn't make plug-in emulations pointless. They allow more people to experiment with sounds inspired by equipment they may never be able to own or justify purchasing.
Not every emulation sounds the same as the real thing, and that's fine. If it sounds good, works well and helps somebody make better music, then it has a place.
My advice to developers would be simple: keep making them, but be more adventurous. Choose interesting, underrepresented hardware, make great-sounding emulations and use software features to take the idea further.
We don't need to stop making analogue emulations. We just need more interesting ones.