Hi there, I'm doing right now some blind tests with Nebula and Nebula Reverb, using the R2R and Tb library. I've noticied some sonic differences between Nebula and the Reverb one. Now I'm a bit confused and I really need your help: with these library is better (better=closer simulation to the real tape machine) use Nebula or Reverb? And in the master page have you any suggestion on particular settings? Thank you in advance!
Giancarlo has said to use the reverb plug for everything. I think the other is included so old projects that contain an older version of Nebula (before the reverb plug) won't break. But what sonic differences do you hear? If one sounds better to your ears, than it is better. Right? I have tested also and have decided that the audio is awesome with the reverb plug and since it is so much better at using resources, the choice is obvious for my needs.
Hi Richie, thanks for the reply, have you changed some settings in the master page? the difference that I hear are in the high freq: the reverb one seems to sound more open (more high frequencies) compared to the original, while the Nebula (regular) is more balanced compared to the original. But the reverb have more impact. It's hard to say who wins! And I'm wondering how master settings influence the sound of Nebula...
Yes I have made many changes to my MAST page, but they have more to do with performance and resource usage than audio quality. And as I said, I prefer the reverb plug by far. I don't know (or really care too much) about accuracy as much as if I like what I hear or not. And with the lighter resource usage with the reverb plug, I am able to get more done and feel better about the audio that I am working on. When I compared the 2 Nebulas, I heard differences, but not in range of quality. Just small differences. As far as changes to the MAST page, I upped the RATE CNV to max (9000) and move the DSPBUFFER to 2048 or 4096. This just gives me more solid performance for my particular set-up.
Absolutely no problem! I have received some amazing help from this forum and I'm just at the point of understanding Nebula where I can actually help others. It's amazing technology and I am so excited to be using it at this stage of it's development and at this era of digital audio. Giancarlo is a wealth of info too if you can catch up with him. Michael Angel of CDSoundmasters is also an incredible resource (and an amazing Nebula/Aqua software writer) that has been very generous with his time and knowledge to help me understand some of the finer nuances of this brave new world of Nebula style audio processing. Check out his stuff, it's good. Alex B and Eric at Rhythminmind as well. Cheers and happy music to you. Feel free to ask for help anytime!
It has been a while but my recollection is that any kernels which exceed the maximum kernel length of the regular "Nebula" instances should be run in "Nebula Reverb" instances for higher fidelity. Since most of us don't really know the individual kernel lengths of every program in our library (I don't even really keep track of the programs I use a lot), it's much easier to use the Reverb instance and know that the kernel length is supported.
I believe the "Nebula" instance is for lowest possible latency. It's a trade-off, though, I don't think you get full quality at those settings.
Wow, really? So for something like CDSM or AlexB equalizers or consoles we need to use Neb Reverb to get full quality? That could be true but it seems unlikely for something without the long decay times that reverbs have...
Giancarlo, if you have a minute, could you clear this up? Is there any advantage to using Reverb beyond just the high default RATE CNV and buffer settings?
You should rely to some extent on the individual developer to tell you which version to use, but as far as I know most do all their library creation, fine-tuning and final audio auditioning with Nebula Reverb, which is:
a) higher latency than the standard Nebula but b) uses less CPU c) offers a flatter frequency response with less ripples at the bottom end in particular, which might be the difference you're hearing, although it's likely to be subtle.
Giancarlo has cleared this up. he has said on more than one post to use the Nebula Reverb for everything. Latency shouldn't be considered an issue really. Nebula is not intended to be used while tracking, it's more sensible to use it after tracking when you don't need real time zero latency anyway.