CA-2A : should I...?

I agree, it's a wonderful little beastie.  I suppose it's because they did a wonderful job of modelling the original device which used only valve-fed optical devices to control the signal, so there was no circuit-electronics in the signal path (sort of ..). Also it is a really simple unit to use.  With compression there are so many options that you could set on all-singing-all-dancing compressors, that its so easy to completely mess the audio payload. CA-2A doesn't have this plethora of options and so (in theory) it is a lot easier to get good compression results with just a couple of settings. And yet - it is clever enough to do this adaptively across the frequency range.  It gives a great neutral-creamy compressed output with no nasties (unless you really crunch it hard).

It's one of the better compressors that CW puts out. I like the sound of the plug.

I use it a good deal.

I use it on all my vocals, with a Concrete Limiter before it to trap peaks before they get to the CA-2A. But I'm like many of the others here - I can't quite put my finger on why I like it so much, except that it just works and sounds great.

If you're going to be near Indiana next weekend, I'll be doing a workshop called "Everything you want to know about dynamics" at Sweetwater GearFest. It's free to attend.

The CA-2A represents one of the classic topologies of compression - optical.  The LA-2A is the classic in that category and the 2A is a clue in Cake's comp.  They hit a home run on it in software.  Another classic is the 1176 - you have that available in the ProChannel.  Those two soft comps cover a lot of ground and are worth having.
 
@

I agree with Ken. Buy it, don't worry, be happy.
 
I am not an expert in dynamics processing by any stretch, rather I fall into the category of musician/composers who are 'experienced hacks' in the studio and use a kind of combination of habit and intuition to choose processors... but this is very often the first thing I reach for, and just about as often the last (meaning, ok, yes, you've arrived, look no further). It has this tendency to sound good, with very little effort, on a wide range of sources. It is one of the relatively small category of things I have bought that I have never once had a shred of regret or second thoughts about. It's simple, time-saving, and almost invariably satisfying. Everyone should have it.

Don't forget you can use more than one type of compressor on a track, and that's sometime exactly what you need. You might insert an 1176 type compressor (PC76) first to get the transients, then follow it with some gentle LA2A type compression (CA2A) to smooth the overall level. And this way, no one compressor is working too hard. Division of labor!

I very much like the CW CA2A. I also like the Concrete Limiter. Both get used a lot here.

Note: I have not read the rest of the thread. I am not affiliated with Cakewalk in any way and although my "fanbois" status may be disputed I assure you I am not. I just likes what I likes.
 

Eggster
CA2A... should I?

Yes. Yes you should. I was encouraged to get it by many here and it was one of the best and most cost effective purchases I made (PC2A at the time and it was on sale).
 

Eggster
I don't know why i liked it,

 
Exactly. I understand compressors a little better now than when I started out with Sonar and a little better since I took the advice of other and bought the PC2A (I got it when it was PC only... before it became a full on VST... which I also now own). The CA2A does not seem to have any apparent logic as to why it sounds good. It just does. I have actually asked before to see the nitty gritty of EXACTLY what is going on when you fiddle with those two simple dials (and the optical screw) such as the ratios, attack/release times, etc but I don't think that would really be helpful in any way. Really it's just meant to emulate the old hardware LA2A and that's that. Never used a hardware version so I don't know if it's accurate and I don't care because for me it works... very well.
 
There are other software versions of the LA2A and I'm sure some of them may even be "better" sounding emulations BUT probably for more cost and won't slide right into the ProChannel or be totally problem free within Sonar like the CA2A does/is.
 
I literally have to AVOID using it because otherwise the darn thing would be on every single one of my tracks and busses and all times... and that's just lazy and probably not the best plan unless I'm trying to output some ultra hipster sounding moldy oldie compressed style song.
 
So what I find works for what I ACTUALLY do is use it as the second stage compressor of a "lightly compress to even out signal > EQ to sweeten signal > lightly compress to smooth out eq'd signal".
 
It works great for that last smoothing step. Makes it all warm and sparkly. Trying to use it as the first stage... well then it sounds like an old 60's style ultra analog compressed mess (which is cool if that's what you want but I'm not Eric Burden... even though that would be awesome).
 
Anyhoo... for me it was my dum dum compressor of choice that made everything sound better even if it didn't exactly sound better the way I intended. Now that I'm only a semi dum dum it is a really nice thing to inject some analog type warmth and meat after doing the boring clinical crap with other more precise compressors. Still kind of lazy I guess but really... am I here to make songs or endlessly tweak insanely complex plugins to duplicate sounds I could get by just  twisting a couple simple dials?
 
And seriously... use that little screw control to fine tune things after you get the CA2A set up how you like. I don't abotu anybody else but that just gets it EXACTLY into the sweet zone for me. It really responds well on the high freqs of complex signals like hyper distorted middy guits, snares and sometimes cymbals. I think it does something for the beater attack of a kick drum as well. Just something weird and undefined going on there that I like.
 
Cheers.

I recently bought the UAD Teletronix LA-2 collection, but the CA-2 is still my goto if for no other reason than that it doesn't boost the overall track level by 6 dB when first engaging the plug. I'm not one to obsess about sonic authenticity or non-linearity characteristics, both of which the UAD will presumably excel at. But IMO the CA-2A just works, while the UAD is a little more quirky!
 
The PC-76 I don't like that much. It seems give a harsh, clicky attack to guitars and drums no matter how the attack time is set. The UAD versions (both the 1176 collection and the legacy) don't do this!

Zargg71
... If they only made a LA-3A PC as well

+1 on the LA-3A!!  ... or would that be CA-3A?!
That would be FANTASTIC if the same attention to detail was utilized as the CA-2A.
 
'Not sure about the Concrete Limiter others have mentioned - it depends on the material.
 
A while back I had it on the Master Bus during a piano (Yamaha CLP-F01 Clavinova) project and when I removed it from the bus, it was like taking a blanket off the speakers.
 
I'll drop it in to stop transients from hitting the monitor speakers during tracking, but then compare it to other limiters during the mix and pick the most transparent...
 
MG

drummaman
Not sure about the Concrete Limiter others have mentioned - it depends on the material.

Definitely, it's not multiband so I would not recommend using it for complex program material. For drums it's fantastic, especially if you want to bring up natural room sound a bit. I also find it excellent with bass for a consistent sound that doesn't have compression artifacts, and for voice, trapping transients prior to the CA-2A.