Login

Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Officially Licensed 3rd Party Developer Libraries
Free 3rd Party Programs

Re: Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Postby SWAN » Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:40 am

timp wrote:Most preamps in nebula can not be run properly because of timing/artifact issues(this is like running a limiter fast you get distortions),this is part of the reason I have not focused to much on doing many sample pres etc. ....


Hi Tim - can you elaborate on this. I have to be honest - I have not always been 100% confident about the effect on transients with Nebula as I make electronic music sometimes with big bass heavy transients...and due to artifacts heard in the past, and also a sense that Nebula can decrease the transient impact...one of the reasons why I dont bother with consoles if they are very subtle...
Mac Mini i7 quad 2.6

Logic X
Live 9
Reaper
SWAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:16 pm

Re: Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Postby gurth » Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:47 am

Stn sampled some synths from input to output, even the demo makes a vst instruments sound more realistic!
User avatar
gurth
User Level X
User Level X
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 10:48 am
Location: Holland

Re: Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Postby Tim Petherick » Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:51 am

It's to do with the speed nebula has to run in order to change with the dynamics... A preamp is going to be very very fast. Tape would be slightly slower and a compressor slower again. Although it depends on what's happening dynamically too in terms compression and distortion.

Most pre's you will notice have the atttack and release faders set to centre in order to slow things down enough to stop artifacts. From my experience you can get faster within reason depending how you sample it and how drastic the changes are between samples.
Last edited by Tim Petherick on Tue Oct 22, 2013 11:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Tim Petherick
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 1351
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 4:07 pm
Location: Bath , Uk

Re: Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Postby CoolColJ » Tue Oct 22, 2013 11:01 am

Swan -

you can hear the difference between my Jupiter 8 going through the Speck Xtramix then into Lynx Hilo, vs direct to Hilo here

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-sho ... -hilo.html

Quite a difference, even more so with stereo sounds.
Personally it seems to "enhance" the sound better than the Waves and Cakewalk N**e channels....
CoolColJ
User Level IX
User Level IX
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:05 pm

Re: Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Postby yr » Tue Oct 22, 2013 12:22 pm

CoolColJ wrote:Swan -

you can hear the difference between my Jupiter 8 going through the Speck Xtramix then into Lynx Hilo, vs direct to Hilo here

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-sho ... -hilo.html

Quite a difference, even more so with stereo sounds.
Personally it seems to "enhance" the sound better than the Waves and Cakewalk N**e channels....


@CoolColJ- there is something else going on (other then the expected sonic differences), there is a lot of noise on your Hilo sample, which looks like RFI interference.
Reuven | post-production & sound-design | scenography |
website | nebula presets
User avatar
yr
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 438
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:04 am
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Postby CoolColJ » Tue Oct 22, 2013 12:30 pm

yr wrote:
CoolColJ wrote:Swan -

you can hear the difference between my Jupiter 8 going through the Speck Xtramix then into Lynx Hilo, vs direct to Hilo here

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-sho ... -hilo.html

Quite a difference, even more so with stereo sounds.
Personally it seems to "enhance" the sound better than the Waves and Cakewalk N**e channels....


@CoolColJ- there is something else going on (other then the expected sonic differences), there is a lot of noise on your Hilo samples, which looks like RFI interference.


Might be happening in the Jupiter 8 (analog synth) itself or in the cable going from the JP8 to Hilo. Because both clips go to the Hilo anyway, but follow a different physical route in the room :)
CoolColJ
User Level IX
User Level IX
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:05 pm

Re: Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Postby yr » Tue Oct 22, 2013 12:35 pm

ferrite beads are your friend:)- I use them for all my mic cables.

About the thickener- it's subtle, but I often just use Doc-Fear with -2 or -4@10kHz to take the edge of things.
Reuven | post-production & sound-design | scenography |
website | nebula presets
User avatar
yr
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 438
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:04 am
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Postby SWAN » Tue Oct 22, 2013 2:06 pm

CoolColJ wrote:Swan -

you can hear the difference between my Jupiter 8 going through the Speck Xtramix then into Lynx Hilo, vs direct to Hilo here

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-sho ... -hilo.html

Quite a difference, even more so with stereo sounds.
Personally it seems to "enhance" the sound better than the Waves and Cakewalk N**e channels....


...I mean - technically the speck is a clean line mixer so I cant see how it should make that much difference...def think there is something up with the hilo only sample...noise and a lower level...
Mac Mini i7 quad 2.6

Logic X
Live 9
Reaper
SWAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:16 pm

Re: Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Postby harmonik » Tue Oct 22, 2013 5:57 pm

timp wrote:It's to do with the speed nebula has to run in order to change with the dynamics... A preamp is going to be very very fast. Tape would be slightly slower and a compressor slower again. Although it depends on what's happening dynamically too in terms compression and distortion.


I thought Nebula compressor programs have a faster prograte than preamp programs, and that the "transient" issue is relevant with compressors because even with a relatively faster prograte for the compressor program template (than the preamp or reverb templates), the prograte would actually have to be ever faster still (from very CPU heavy to impractical) for ever more accurate transient behavior in a Nebula compressor program. Since real preamps on the other hand are not designed to have huge differences in behavior at different dynamics, a slower prograte can still give close to real results in Nebula.
harmonik
User Level V
User Level V
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 11:06 pm

Re: Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Postby Tim Petherick » Tue Oct 22, 2013 6:42 pm

Yes you are right in terms of getting most of the way there but if you are trying to add saturation/compression it's more difficult ,it depends on what's going on with the source material too. I'm talking about how fast nebula can go in order to change samples relative to the hardware's response without artifacts mainly here. I'm talking about EVF's mostly not the program rate. although both change the final out come. SCS was a preamp to attempt to get Slight tube compression with overdrive.....Scs is running as fast as nebula can go in terms of evf

Don't get me wrong you can use preamps and they will sound mostly like the hardware as long as your not trying to push it like hardware.

Program can be set by the developer....as long as it's in timed mode. freqd player is governed by the dsp buffer.

I would say that compressor programs are working quite well as they have a slow EVF to represent the hardware.

If you can't hear it, use it! my comments are in theory. Like you said huge differences in dynamic behaviour would be more audible as I kinda said in the previous post.
User avatar
Tim Petherick
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 1351
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 4:07 pm
Location: Bath , Uk

PreviousNext

Return to 3rd party libraries

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests