How I fixed a cheap Tascam 388! --> kzfaq.info/get/bejne/nOBpdNp7qJa9dJc.html

I’m REALLY digging your channel. I’ve never wanted to take notes just so I could comment on specific parts and questions. Please keep this stuff going, and thank you!

I love these tape related videos, keep up the good work!

Fascinating, thanks for making and sharing this! Even on cheap speakers I swear I can hear the difference between the real 388 and the plug-ins, there's a very subtle wow/fluttery thing in that distinct 70s thump on the drum tracks on the tape recordings that adds a third dimension that the plug-ins can't quite get.

Another great video, great song, great performance, thanks Travis!

I agree with you, when the distortion is subtle its subtle. - why the hell pay for something when you can get it for free?? But by god that analog 388 is just sooooo tasty. Be well my friend!

I like the real 388 at the end. Tone was similar but I prefer the way the 388 schmushed it all together. Would like to have heard the DAW tracks dry too. Maybe next time.

Since I discovered most humans like a 'base sound' like hiss I actually add one track with hiss or other background noise to anything I make on purpose. Hiss, guitar hum, background sounds of a public space, traffic. Smeared out, rolled of in the deep of the mix, unpredictable and fader rides when needed. Love these video's, keep it up. It's all the gear I dreamed of when I first started. Could afford it now but don't have the time to actually source it, fix it and keep it running let alone make music on it.

hi Travis! super comparison content love it

Was looking at this, glad you made a video about it.

Oh this is so great! I had a 388 several years ago that was on loan from a friend who moved out of town for a year. Sadly I had to return it after that year was up, and I haven’t been able to afford to get another one. Pretty excited to hear about this plugin!!

Thank you thank you thank you ! Great video and series !

Loving your videos!

The mix of the REAL 388 is why tape is sought after IMO . Real tape compression/saturation is hard to mimic with digital . Especially a whole mix . Real tape , everything sits well . Digital , some instruments sound separated . Tape rounds the edges while digital has had edge , hence their waveforms .

not one Vid I saw addressed the "input record" feature all they wanted to do was hear the sound of pre recorded stuff ...I'm like is this thing A TAPE RECORDER or what ? and you Sir in seconds answered that TY [ subscribed ]

Cool shoot out Travis! The difference is much more subtle than I expected on most settings but I think the real 388 is the winner when pushed.

Thank you for your perspective !

The hats and drums sounded very crisp on the hardware

Good video. I agree, it's often very hard to tell the difference between plugins particularly in a mix. I will say though that I really like the elysia karacter plugin, it sounds and works a bit different than most saturation plugins.

wow. 4:23 plugin vs 5:00 real. I'm very pleased that the plugin sounds good, like a modern record, i'd take it over the real tape, but whats its doing to the low end is horrible, where the real tape undoubtedly and typically sounds like a wonderful round and soft pillow. I'd like to hear the mix without any of them to hear exactly what each is doing to the mix. Thanks for uploading this, these hardware vs software comparisons are so helpful to me. I have big decisions to make ! Edit : after adjusting for volume difference, the high end comes back on the tape example, it sounds much better, but the plugin still has that modern upfront and tight sound. The real tape definitely massages out the sounds nice and smooth. I'm still very pleased that a plugin is good enough !

To me the sound quality does not matter it’s the work flow of recording to tape that makes the difference

Great video. Also great tunes and great playing! Maybe I'm wrong, but the hardware sounds a tiny bit more compressed on the high end, warmer, slightly more glued etc etc etc. All in a good way. I often use IK's Tape Machine 440 on my master bus. I like the color it brings and the way it seems to make the mix feel roomier while also somehow more glued. Anyway, that 338 of yours is pretty. Take care.

Man, thanks, you've got great videos on this old stuff. Listened to A-B on KRK se via RME Babyface - the difference is huge IMHO. Actually after this thinking about getting a TEAC 244 4 track recorder for digging into "vintage low-fi" world

I love the honesty of this review/comparison, and also the lack of hype from someone that actually owns that magnificent monster! Some of the value of IK's Tascam 388 plugin is in the EQ settings, which I assume are based on the real unit. That adds to the feel of using it. I just wish the plugin wasn't so CPU intensive, and it also has a lot of PDC latency. It's not something you can really use during composition unfortunately.

Thank's for this comparaison. I'm using TASCAM 388 as final mixing devis in an hybrid analog/digital/analog home studio setup. Personally I do that because of the preamp of the Studio8 which give very efficient parametric correction, and high headroom. Also the analog mixing is incomparable than digital for Rock and Pop vintage results. All my instrument are able to cross through the mixe without messing the other one. I have also noticed difference from channels of the equalizer performance. Track 7 and Track 8 are amazing because each bell does creat 2 or 3 harmonic more.

I dream about having a Tascam 388 some day. Beautiful

388 over the plugins any day for me. Yeah plugs can get fairly close, but that overall richness shines through when you "plug it in". Great options though, if you didn't have the real thing. Keep em coming.

Thanks for posting

The kick definitely was punching more with the 388 plugin and the snare was thicker sounding during the separated tests. I was using my Apple Max headphones. All I know is that it makes a better difference on my kicks, snares and mix buss. I couldn’t tell the plugin to plugin difference. I could tell the distortion difference during those crank tests. I instantly could tell the difference when using the plugins without adjusting parameters on my beats vs. no plugins while listening through Beyerdynamics DT 1990 Pros and Sonarworks calibration. Enjoy it all either way!

Another one bites the dust by Queen. that's A good reference tune.

I loved your studio

I used the 3340 back when I first started recording in Brixton, London. We were a demo studio with occasional masters and how I used the machine was to fill the four tracks then mix down onto a Revox, take the whole tape back onto the 3340 and delete two quieter channels, making it a six track effectively. We also had a connection to Pete Townsend who leant me his 8 track Tascam before we took the plunge when the 16 track one inch came out. The first test I would do on this software might be to see how it plays back a drum machine bass drum, because none of the original tape recorders could handle the sharp snap of the transient and always replayed dull, like mud. Easy enough to re-EQ but this software should also recreate that to be accurate!!!

This is very interesting, Travis. I owned a 388 in the 1980s, it was the centre of my studio. I always knew it was a very capable and versatile machine. I haven't heard one for many years now. It's good to see yours and hear it. I can tell differences In all of your comparisons, I prefer the sound of the 388. DAWs and plugins are amazingly capable, but.... Analogue rocks!

Valuable vid. Thanks

I used to own a 388 and regretfully had to sell it due to financial stuff. God I miss that machine!!

388 is one of the greatest creative tools ever. No joke!

Good and practical video!! I had 2 Portastudios and really should have gotten that 388, back in the day. :) I like the sound of the 388 in this video, definitely 'analog'!! If you have room for a 388 and can do/afford the maintenance cost, it's worth it; sounds very good indeed!! These days I have an arsenal of plugins, to tweak sound in ways that extract/refine the artistic 'mojo' I'm searching for. I agree there is no perfect emulation of a purely analog signal path... but with some 'creativity', today's plugins can definitely do the job very well. One can literally think "outside-the-box", and get 96.6% to that goal. Digital is not analog, but it's definitely a set of amazingly potent tools. 🙂

I definitly hear the different when you A/B the song you produced. The plugin have more highs, the real (Reel :D ) 388 have a more warm / darker tone to it. I do like the real deal the best! :)

I think the warmer the sweater the warmer the tone

Totally agree with the digital tape distortion sounds weird. However, using UHE satin on group setting, if u put all the drums on there it squeezes it and can create a really good crunch. Thanks man you just saved me a download. 😉

"There are no bad sounds, only bad songs" -Sun Tzu

They both sound awesome just a different flavors the sonics are good. I like the dirty push on them.

Plugin won all of the blind tests for me. Sounds great. Pushes the mix upfront and gives it a nice tight focus.

My bad was vibing too hard to that beginning groove and forgot to try and listen to the difference hahaha

I think the Logic plug-in has the most transparent sound - it sound the most realistic, with some bollocks on top. The 388 plug-in and the real one have a great sound, but with less clarity. I too come from an age of tape and use a Fostex R-8 and 2 Fostex 280 four tracks ( I started on a Fostex XR-7 in 1998), I have had a wobbly TEAC 80-8 and a Fostex E-16 in the past - but for “tape duties” these are my babies. However, with the amazing clarity and dynamics available in digital today, the plugins for the most part will be indistinguishable from the original in a mix (just like an analogue synth). And with a good mic preamp, I care less and less about signal chain and even mics because with modern dynamic and eq plugins you are able to control harmonics etc. to such a precise degree, it’s more about reigning-in your directionless mind! For me tape (or old digital multitracks for that matter),the beauty lies in the recording process itself - which lends itself to a whole different philosophy, and when (like an analogue synth) you are recording something atmospheric for that very reason. ❤🙏🏼

When you drove things hard the hardware to me always sounded better. Much more open, rich and “real” sounding.

I have a friend who I gig with and play in a cover project with who is all about Kemper, using in-ears live, and having everything in the can so that sound guys can just do everything, it all sounds fine, but not great to me. I love a pushed, real tube/speaker, and I love slightly pushed/distorted analog tape, just nothing like it. But, that said, I've heard amazing sounding final products that people do on laptops with all plugins and a midi controller. I think it comes down to what you like working with, and I like something real, that is going to last. no right or wrong to it. Thanks for the great videos!

Hey Travis, just found your channel and I’m a big fan. This video may have helped me solve a question I had while looking for a vintage tascam mixer of my own. I’ve been eyeing up a tascam m 308 and saw it has two stereo outputs but 4 PGM outputs. I haven’t heard of PGM but I was curious if it would be a way to run more than 2 outputs into my 4 channel interface (probably in a 4 mic drum scenario). Can you run 4 individual channels of audio out of the PGM outputs or can they only run out of the two stereo outputs? Let me know if my ramblings make any sense and any help would be appreciated. Thanks!

hell yeah, dude

The hardware is softer around the edges than the software. But my how far we have come!!!

On the produced track with the girl singing, the tape sounded so much better. The plugin didn't seem to handle the input getting slammed where as the tape did for sure.

I real difference I hear is (its so hard to explain) but the real 388 has a more squeezed together sound, where the high and low frequencies are cohesively put together if you will, and just on any tape it gets pushed backward into the stereo field. It has further back depth to it. If that makes sense. And on the plug in the whole thing just sound more separated a lot closer to your face and a way sharper transient. That's what I hear and love about analog stuff. and yeah UAD stuff is the best and closest I've heard and used. and I invested in an Apollo. So expensive but for me it was worth it. I just love it

This video is a bit old but I'll add a bit into the conversation. A lot of these conversations center around mixing but I don't think many realize the implications of saturation in a tracking/recording environment. The instant ability of analog to get a sound you like is amazing. its sad but true that non-linearities in plugins do cause latency which can hamper an performance because the delay sounds unnatural in the headphones. Its much better now, but can still be a bit of an issue. I hope for a day that plugins do it better btw LOL because it'd be way cheaper. But, the ability to get a song where it needs to be from the tracking stage with analog is great. BUT lets say you can't afford a tascam 388 (its going for 1.5k to 3k USD on reverb from I see) the other idea is to record clean into an interface then mix with the plugins. I know some guys don't like latency in mixing but honestly it doesn't affect your ability to mix. I hate the analog vs digital debate because I think tools are tools and I just laid out how you can do it without spending thousands. NOW there is something to be said that if you are trying to be a commercial studio, project studio, home studio that makes money, etc. that having these pieces can be to your advantage for resale, marketing, and hands on work. I think I'm rambling now so I'll end it there. Great video! definitely subscribing, especially for the home made studio furniture! lol

there are certain parts of the real 388 that I prefer when it comes to imaging. also feel like the real 388 has a low freq boost that occurs lower than the boost of the plugin. you should get your hands on a handsome audio Zulu, ive heard that comes really close to tape.

Lots of pleasing low end on that track you produced with the 388. Hell, I woulda kept that shit in the actual track lol

Okay I agree with this video way more then the other one. Because the question shouldn't be which one to get because obviously if all things equal then go analog but the real question is how close is digital getting to replicating analog. Also agree that at subtle settings they basically all sound the same but at same time they all do have a slightly different profile which is what youre after when mixing down. Also the main thing I usually hear in digital is that is smears the transients more than analog.

Difference is subtle, plug-in seems to have more overall volume and higher eq frequency volume. However compressed youtube audio won’t let us figure the real difference, though by judging for what I hear here is very similar, however I prefer the real deal

Whats the name of the song in the second test? Its beautiful.

Man, you should really check out the Lisciel Franco channel. He is a brazilian guy who built his own studio and his own eletronic equipments by hand. All vintage style, like the good olds days.

In your examples I actually preferred the real thing by a long shot (on every example). Even on more subtler settings. In the Blindtest I liked A better than B, B sounded disproportionate to my ears, which is why I am guessing this is logics overdrive, since it also really changed the drumsound in the first example. Having said that I think.. and that's just me thinking.. that you have more experience how to get a sound with your hardware, than with the plugin. I also think since every hardware-unit is unique there was bound to be differences and I think I probably would have mixed them differently instead of trying to match the plugin to the hardware (making both sound as good as possible on their own instead) - reasoning: if you first tried to get the best sound with the hardware, of course you can't make something that is different sound better in the way that works best for the first thing. If the Plugin was a copy of exactly your individual unit - it would've been more like fair play I guess. When it comes to the distortion thing: Yes in your example the plugin really sounds bad when driving hard, while the hardware doesn't. Now to my ears that's because you didn't drive the hardware anywhere as hard - but I can't judge it. I don't own the hardware, you know best and either we trust this is a fair comparison, or we don't. I think it's not a perfect comparison, but I realize it can't be. You can't be impartial, you have a bias and that will manifest in the way you play and mix. And that's okay and to be expected - we're all human. If I would have repaired something I surely would have another bond to it than to a plugin too! (I don't know the first thing about repairing such things though) Personally I like to use the Tascam collection more for sounddesign than mastering or mixing. For instance I use the Portable to get more of a LOFI-sound. When it comes to tape-emulations for mastering the Tape-Machine-Collection is far better than the Tascam-collection - in my humble opinion. But that's just me. Of course we should all just mix with the stock-plugins that come with the DAW from a price-performance ratio point of view. But we don't. We don't because we are suckers for marketing and we all like to have new toys that sound a little bit different every now and then. And of course some plugins are actually worth purchasing - but you never know until you know. PS: In case this sounds too critical, it's not meant to be. I'm just one honest german and always speaking my mind. I appreciate the effort and I enjoyed the music and the examples! cheers

Tape just sounds better. The hiss is integral to the shape of the transients. It does something to the mix too, making it feel softer and more pillowy, yet more present if that makes any sense. The plugins sound so clinical.

The old Tqscam stuff seems to sound nice and round and the EQ can be interesting when compared to slightly newer gear. I'm from Los Angeles born and raised.... I live in a suburb called Glendale and somebody threw out literally wrapped in plastic and put it on the floor in our downstairs parking a tascam 244. It really does sound different from a studio master that I have that I thought sounded pretty good. It's a nosier mixer releasing its current state but it sounds good I haven't hit the tape yet because the bands and the tape machine are no good and I'm not exactly sure why he threw it away unless there are other transport issues with the machine. You can really hear the analog summing and the punch from the tape, in your examples..... even with a cheap denon 2o track cassette tape deck with a source coming from CD you can hear a signature of tape.....

Hey Travis ! I was just on a Black Friday trek, and i was giving the tape comparison another listen, and this song hit me 4:07 - i understand you produced it but i can't find it in your credits. Who is the artist and title please good sir !? Something in that song is good for my inspiration :)

Hi Travis, in my humble opinion the real 388 sounds way better by far. I guess I'm just too old fashioned. But when you drive the preamps on analogue I find it sounds way sweeter. Thanks for sharing. Kind regards. Paul.

so what's the answer to the blind test? My guess is A is Logic's overdrive and B is the 388 plugin. Is that it?

Love your opinions,...i have used a AKAI MG-614 for some years but now it has gone broken beyond salvation 😧,..and i am so sad for that, I just found a vintage TEAC 3340s 4Ch on my local electronics shop In a original box in mint condition for $600 and got exited,:::But ! the question is should i go for it or should i buy the $250 plugin bundle and record in my PC, I got a contol suface so it has a taktile kinda feel,.....Since the vintage machines break and the parts are hard to find, what´s your opinion, should i go for The real deal or the Plugin ?,....For shure the real deal is much better if one like the suttle drive sound, but there is a free tape sim that is called Cana San Maartin that seems to do it,...so what do you think ? Thank´s a lot for inspiration and much joy Love cheers from Sweden 😃🧡🙏🎸

I've owned 4 x 388s, and have used one as the main multitrack tape machine in my commercial recording studio for 15+ years. Yep, as you said, the differences between the plugin and the real 388 were subtle at low levels of saturation. I could definitely record using the plugin, and none would be the wiser. It higher levels, the real 388 won, in my opinion. But still usable. The Logic distortion added a large amount of boxiness to the snare, which was off-putting and strange. Probably would've sounded fine on 60s guitar for a honking early Kinks sound. $200 seems quite a lot to me (cheapskate..), knowing how cheaply I managed to pick up each of my 388s, but if you can't deal with the hassle of having to learn how to maintain and keep a narrow format analog(ue) tape machine going, it's a pretty good option I reckon.

The plug in is indeed close, but I preferred the actual 388 to it. dbx was a nice analog technology, but quick sounding stuff could make it really excessively breathe or pump. I'm an old school (and older) engineer and I used a competing 8 track, the Fostex A-80, which used Dolby C, which I think had a better tradeoff between hiss and artifacts.

Clearer on the plugin, but not in a bad way.

i listen on adam a7x in not really good room and ears not good ... but difference is huge and clear between real/plugin/overdrive, and i prefer plugin, it have nicer high end. Some of those tape ones are really close, difference there is subtle.

Sketch cassette is a great 20 buck plugin. Does the same thing as Taip & IK MM. Also Analogue Obsession has some great free "warm" plug-ins. (Copies of famous compressors & preamps.)

The overdrive you get from the old tascam preamps is pure magic! Cant live without my 246 portastudio and my mx80. Digital distortion is still a nono in my world, Even though the plugin sounds really impressive on sublte settings. Just discovered the mx4 (late 80s)online , preamp mixer with some interesting features, do anybody know anything about them? Cant find much info on them✌️

What setting did you use on the Logic distortion?

I think they sound pretty close but the actual act of using a 388 or any tape machine is the real magic behind it for me.

Let's say the plugin can achieve more subtle things than the real deal . With the real 388 you have to go "full send" with the sound characteristics it has . I could hear a big difference on a full production , that's where the plugin shined while the real 388 was squashing too much (to my taste) but it can all be because of the machine being not calibrated exactly like the one they used to develop the plugin . Apart all that , both sound very similar with differences that can easily be eq'd. I'd say the plugin is a really great placeholder if someone wants that warmth on a limited budget (and wants to keep a healthy backbone lol) . By the way thanks for the video , I was waiting to hear some honest tests of that plugin .

Are there any plugins that do Tascam tape better at the moment? Seems like if you want to work in the DAW, this is all you got.

Very interesting indeed.. I think the real 388 has more tape hiss than the plugin which I find desireble. I think I want to buy the plugin (not totally sure) but I will never let my 388 go. The plugin is a bit too clean compared to real 388. I can’t hear any difference beteeen the plugins. I also wonder how youtube algorithms affect the sounds?

4:38 the kick drum reminds me of Radioactive by Imagine Dragons

Very interesting video. I am actually using Logic trying to have a sound that can mix together different sources (analog and digital synths, guitars, vintage effects), but I am very attracted to Tascam consolles. They sound really warm and musical.

I prefer the real thing. Have you ever tried the Free Magma Lil Tubes from Waves. Will be good to hear your opinion about this plugin, whether the drive it offers is really good or not.

Sometimes clicking a mouse at my age is just boring and lazy.. I love that I’ve decided to cross over to the analog world.. I can get to the point much faster.. Most engineers have hundreds of plugins and only use 10, sounds like a waste which I was part of that.. Analog world is amazing and I’m sold on a vintage Tascam lol, so thanks!!

It was hard for me to hear the differences, except for the isolated (L) guitar track. But I don't know if I can explain what that difference actually is.

1. Is a matter of taste, pick the one who sound best according to you. 2. The listener doesn’t care what you used and will make no difference

To me, the real 388 sounds more "beefy" than the plugin - thicker/richer in the low mid range of the frequency spectrum. Perhaps more compression (or at least a different kind of compression curve) is going on in that frequency band. The plugin doesn't sound bad, but it is a bit different than the real thing.

I must say I like the "presence" of the plugin a bit more than the real unit - everything feels a little more upfront in my monitors. Overall the sound of the real machine may be the right choice for the sound of the song, but I think the plugin is close enough and not having to deal with the hassle of owning and maintaining the machine is a serious plus

Real tascam is so much nicer when pushed all the way, but I agree using the pluggins to model how you would normally record there's no difference. I've recorded drums to a digital portastudio for years and always disliked how it sounded, no matter what I did. Using a 424 and a 3 mic set up the drums sounded great. Long story short the built in compression on the digital recorder was crappy and any clipping made the take unusable. Basically, a f**king cassette sounded better which is ridiculous thinking about it.

Actual 388 all the way on the full mix around 5:00. The plug in doesn't sound bad though.

whats pgm?

I think when it comes to distortion Saturn is fantastic and amp sims is TH from overloud incredible.

388 hardware sounds more glued and better on the ears. The plug-in gives a more dynamic of frequency ranges but the physical 388 sounds more like what a professional recording would sound like vs home studio. Still a bargain for the digital. I can’t decide if I should get it or not. Been using the slate digital tape machine. Considering this or the waves factory cassette plug-in.

stop confirming my beliefs ahh haha

Man, you're really getting everything one level higher. I think both the Tape plugin as the Overdrive suck. Some strange things are happening, in some cases the punch disappeares and in others the mid response is too emphasized. In the GTR L part, around 404, a plugin adds some tickly annoying afternotes. Just keep using the original units, you have proven to be able to get the best out of it so far, kudos for that. As pure and honest your music is your devices should be. The only thing I can think of that could really add something is using more mics for the drums to allow for more control (and more work).

It’s that kind of world, right? Live by your ears, trust your heart, watch your wallet. The UAD plug-ins are amazing-so much so that you can hear the difference on many totally flat versus bypassed. They changed my game-but they are pricey. As a famous engineer buddy of mine said, “It ain’t the plane, it’s the person flying it.” Best outboard gear ever? Healthy ears! 😃

The plug ins are clever marketing. Once you put the animated GUI in front of your eyes, you begin to imagine what’s not really there. The real 388 has a character that’s more than adding a touch of tape hiss. It’s the sum of its parts. I produce better results with my analog/digital hybrid studio setup than I do with a computer. The reason I believe is that you don’t have the infinite tools and fixes with analog gear. You focus way more on getting a great take instead of fixing a mediocre take in Logic. I know the demands of producing really ambitious music really does benefit from a total software session. But the human essence of those productions done 100% digital are often missing. Myself being a gadget-freak, love the mechanics of traditional tracking. I don’t track to tape, but rather a pair of VSR880’s but I use them as I would a traditional 16 track tape deck. Going direct to “digital tape,” I don’t have the buzzkill of a screen and mouse clicks. Just toying with mic placement and making a ton of test passes to get it right is the rewarding part of the old method. An awful lot of young musicians/producers are buying up four tracks like crazy. They begin to see that like a sturdy chair, if your great songs can’t support themselves in the limited realm of a 4-track then you begin to realize that all the ‘awesome’ songs you produced on your laptop were just over-produced, self indulgent ear worms. Love your vids and playing/production 👍🏼

Where in the f#%* can i get the song used as a demo at 4:58

It's all very subtle stuff...there is a difference for sure...which one is better...who knows

Sadly, I am really surprised. The tascam 388 reel to reel sounds so much better than the plug-in.

Hey, I might be one of those annoying people who is just convinced that analog is better. I've been querying why it is though that a/b-ing is so often completely inconclusive, I regularly choose the wrong thing in such shoot outs, and yet, when I return to real world use of plugins or analog, the differences seem much larger. So what is going on? Firstly, we miss the obvious - when we use good analog gear, we tend to find it forgiving, creative, engaging and far easier to dial in the sound we hear in our heads, in such a/b tests, we regularly chase this sound with the plugin. We are testing the 'result' of an analog process with a plugin, that we strive to make sound the same to this result - and we feel that when it is super close - usually after extended periods of tweaking that this somehow proves something. Yet, this is a completely unrealistic - when we mix, we don't chase the settings of something we are impressed by, we are simply using the equipment to satisfy ourselves sonically. To put another way - how many times do we use a hardware processor to recreate a plugin setting? Basically never, because we percieve the plugin as void of inherent value - its only value is that it might sound like something else. Secondly, I subscribe heavily to the scientific phenomenon that studying something under a microscope, causes the observed thing to behave differently - its not woo woo, its a fascinating subject that I learned via Stephen Hawkings 'Brief History of Time' where light particles behaved differently and in an unpredicted manner if effort was made to capture their movements and prove a theory. Its like - how many times have you been convinced that you know your mix and that you are ready to play it to the world, but then you invite in a friend or a relative to be dazzled by your engineering prowess only to be horrified at all the new things you can hear that suck? Thirdly, analog does sound better - I wouldn't want to do an ab test only to prove my first admission that I can consistently pick out the exact opposite of the analog example, but when we are not 'looking' we can notice that we are attracted more to music that is - musical. Cop out? Ok, more then - when listening to a U47 vs the Warm Audio U47, they sound extremely similar - heck a persons voice tone really doesn't change much between microphones at all, regardless of what the price difference you can be forgiven for not being able to tell the difference between an SM57 and a U47, because our ears are not interested in picking out the circuitry of the microphone, but drawn much harder to the voice itself - that is what we are being bombarded by. The thing to zero in on - is the sense of performance and well known expensive microphones, while sounding barely different to each other make the performance more compelling. When we set ourselves back from the scrutiny used to evaluate equipment, we can be more honest about which performance sounded the best - and that is when you hear the short comings of the cheaper gear or indeed - plugins. Finally, in your a/b tests - I couldn't help feeling that the real 388 had that greater sense of musicality - they sounded sonically indistiguishable - but the 388 plugin was less involving to me. I wanted the 388 version over the plugin version. Yes - to my mind, expensive high end gear is worth the money - if you can afford it, because nothing is more valuable in music that inspiring and capturing an engaging, emotional performance.

I miss my 388’s, but not that much.

To be honest, between plugins and the desk, i prefer the song u produced