Universal Audios LUNA Summing Modules - API vs NEVE

In this video for Production Expert, Brent March compares two legendary summing modules available in Universal Audios LUNA Recording System. In this video, you'll see me use the API and Neve modules across several busses and the main output, and I'll show you what's going on and what's different between these two summing units.

[@steveg219]

Excellent comparison!

[@nj1255]

The Neve is much warmer and has some kind of high end boost/resonance. The high-hat becomes almost to sharp and noticeable.

[@gdrmusichi]

This is not a complete comparison as the Lo Q on the Neve Summing was not tested or heard here. You would have more depth, punch and lower frequency shine withe the Neve. A feature that is not on the API summing. A big difference missing here between the two.

[@15bleach51]

All this summing system is, basically, saturation plugins on buses? Can I replicate this in any DAW?

[@alexeytereshonok]

Basically, yes. There's a little more to it considering LUNA takes into consideration your fader positions on busses etc, but it's basically just adds more or less saturation when you move your faders... So, yeah, you pretty much can replicate this in any DAW with transformer saturation plugins. It may sound worse or it may sound even better, depends on the plugin you're going to use and your personal taste of course. Also a lot of the channel strip plugins have their summing built-in and you can adjust it on individual channels (BX channel strips, some of the Waves etc.)

[@Anders01]

I found that there is also summing done in LUNA on what they call the Main track: "can be applied on bus tracks and on the Main track." I sent a question to UAD about that. In an ordinary DAW the final summing is always digital no matter what plugins are used. LUNA may actually emulate the analog summing of all the separate tracks on the master track, but it's unclear to me if that is how it's done in LUNA or if the Main track emulation is just some saturation emulation after the digital summing (which basically is like having a plugin for that on the master track in an ordinary DAW).

[@alexeytereshonok]

@@Anders01 It's just saturation - analog summing is no different to digital summing apart from analog saturation, there's no magic "summing phase response" differences you might hear about - for that kind of thing you need digital tools like Soundradix Pi, but to my ears it starts to sound even more digital when you use it. I mean, you might hear slight high-end or low-end rolloff when using analog summing, but it's no different to regular EQ - it's not some magic summing thing you can't recreate.

[@Anders01]

@@alexeytereshonok I don't know the details of the implementation in LUNA, but full analog summing emulation to me includes adding all the tracks together with analog emulation. That's something that can't be done in an ordinary DAW since then all the tracks are summed with basic linear addition before entering the mastering chain.

[@alexeytereshonok]

@@Anders01 Any saturation is non-linear by definition, Dan Worrall made a video about it not too long ago (and Dan definitely can be trusted), so these nonlinearities you hear about is just saturation. Analog summing gives some saturation to busses & master and that's it. It doesn't change phase response in some unique way or anything. So you CAN replicate this process in any DAW by using some saturation plugins on busses & master. What's different about LUNA's summing is that it's integrated into the workflow & your fader positions also affect saturation amount, and also the fact that UAD's saturation algorithms are wonderful and sound just right.

[@soundfx68]

My ears must be fucked, think you need to push more for difference.