The Fairchild Compressor—A Studio Legend With a Mythic Price Tag
The Fairchild Compressor—A Studio Legend With a Mythic Price Tag
As a mastering engineer obsessed with great sound, I’ve always been fascinated by legendary gear. The Fairchild 660 and 670 compressors, designed by Rein Narma for Les Paul and brought to market in 1959 by Sherman Fairchild, are justifiably called the “holy grail” of analog compression. With prices now topping $30,000, these monsters use up to 20 vacuum tubes and mountains of transformers to create a signature blend of warmth, punch, and musical compression. It’s why you’ll see them on classic recordings by the Beatles, Motown greats, and more.
What Makes the Fairchild So Special?
Unlike most compressors, the Fairchild stands out for both its rich tube sound and its unique controls. The 660 is a mono powerhouse perfect for single sources, while the 670 adds stereo (and even mid-side) magic. Fast attack times and program-dependent release curves make the Fairchild famous for delivering “musical glue,” vocal presence, and an unmistakable vibe to just about any source. The six time constants let you tailor how the compression responds to your track, and AGC modes allow it to act as a channel, stereo, or mid-side processor—especially useful in mastering and vinyl cutting.
UAD vs Undertone Audio: Battle of the Fairchild Plugins
For this test, I loaded up both the Universal Audio Fairchild and Undertone Audio UnFairchild plugins on a real session—a 60s blues revival track built for sync licensing. The UAD version is an ultra-faithful digital twin of the original hardware, with vintage looks and the classic six time constants. The UnFairchild brings the Fairchild into the 21st century, keeping the vintage tone but adding a THD knob (for dialing in coloration), modern attack/release options, and some flexible workflow tweaks.
Hands-On: How Do They Sound on Real Tracks?
Drums
I started with the drum bus. With dry drums, both plugins seemed to bring that legendary glue, but the UnFairchild added a touch more grit, especially when I bumped the THD control. The UAD version, meanwhile, gave me classic punch with almost zero learning curve.
Guitars
On lead guitar, the difference was subtle. Once I matched output levels and settings, both plugins sounded incredibly close, but again, the extra flavor from the UnFairchild made it easier to dial in a hair more bite if I wanted.
Vocals
For mono vocals, I used each plugin’s 660 model. Matched carefully, the sound was very similar—both brought out presence and smoothness. Still, UnFairchild gave me a smidge more intensity on vocal peaks.
Takeaways—Which One Would I Use?
Here’s the truth: Both plugins sound professional and can add the signature Fairchild warmth and punch to a mix. If you want old-school vibe with minimal fuss, the UAD Fairchild is plug-and-play. If you like to tweak the flavor, add grit, or want more modern control over your compression, the UnFairchild stands out, especially for advanced mixing and sound design.
But in the end, it’s all about your track and workflow. There’s no wrong answer—just different flavors of a legendary tool.
Want to Hear the Real Differences?
Check out my full Fairchild plugin A/B shootout video for a detailed breakdown, honest reactions, and direct audio examples across drums, guitar, and vocals. Got a favorite Fairchild plugin or hardware story? Let me know in the comments—or join my channel community for in-depth mastering tips and exclusive sessions.
