Why compare methodically
Mixing means comparing constantly: before and after a process, two versions of a mix, your master and a reference. The problem is well known: a louder version always seems better, and knowing what you're hearing influences your judgement. Comparison tools exist to correct these biases, but they don't all do the same thing.
The main families of tools
Hardware monitor controllers
Monitor controllers let you switch between several sources and several pairs of speakers. Very handy in the studio, but level matching between two versions still has to be done by hand, and blind listening isn't built in.
Reference plugins
They load commercial tracks to compare with your mix, along with analysis tools. Excellent for seeing where you stand, less designed for blind-testing your own processing.
Blind-testing tools
They match levels and hide labels so you know whether a difference is really audible. This is Diffonic's category.
Diffonic
- Automatic LUFS matching between A and B: no more volume difference.
- A six-step blind test, A and B swapped after each answer, with an accuracy score.
- Uses: processing, plugins, exports, mix vs reference, master vs mix.
- Plugin in VST3, AU and AAX for Windows and macOS.
Diffonic
Find out if a change really sounds better: level-matched A/B and blind test.
$29 $58 -50%
VST3 · AU · AAX · Windows & macOS
See DiffonicDiffonic vs ADPTR Metric AB
Metric AB is a very complete reference plugin: several references loaded at once, with spectrum, dynamics, stereo and loudness analysis.
- Metric AB wins for detailed analysis against commercial tracks.
- Diffonic wins for knowing, blind, whether your decisions really change the sound.
- Watch out: the wealth of graphs in Metric AB can push you to mix with your eyes.
Diffonic vs Mastering The Mix REFERENCE
REFERENCE compares your mix with references, with level matching and hints about frequency and dynamic differences. Simple and educational.
- REFERENCE wins for steering a mix towards a reference's sound.
- Diffonic wins for blind-testing your own processing.
Where Diffonic helps most
- On the mix bus: does that compressor or saturation really improve the mix, or just make it louder?
- Plugin shoot-outs: does your new plugin beat the one you already have?
- Between mix versions: is v3 better than v2?
- Parallel processing: does parallel compression add anything at matched level?
Summary
| Tool | Level matching | Blind test | Visual analysis | Ideal for |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diffonic | Automatic (LUFS) | Yes, with a score | Minimal | Validating your decisions |
| Metric AB | Yes | No | Very complete | Analysis against references |
| REFERENCE | Yes | No | Guided | Getting closer to a reference |
| Hardware controller | Manual | No | No | Switching sources and speakers |
Which one to choose?
- You want to know whether your decisions really improve the sound: Diffonic.
- You want to analyse your mix against commercial productions: Metric AB.
- You want guidance towards a reference's sound: REFERENCE.
These tools complement each other: many engineers use a reference plugin to see where they stand and Diffonic to make the call.
In short
Each tool answers a different question. For the most important one ("is it really better?"), Diffonic is our first choice for 2027. See also our best audio comparison tools and the comparison of A/B plugins for 2027.