Login

AlexB V2 comp

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

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Postby kindafishy » Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:52 pm

TranscendingMusic wrote:obviously I'm not alex but consider this general truth: any time you can avoid conversion, you are getting the best fidelity. Plain and simple. Conversion is another process after all. In fairness, the Nebula conversion, comparatively speaking, is indeed really good. The sentiment there is "no difference" is always a bit loaded versus native rate. But it is based on the implicit fact that yes there is a difference with any additional process involved however it is a comparative idea that does involve understanding the quality you get in the compromise of conversion . So all things being equal, no conversion means removing just another process.
This isn't about which rate is better, so consider this as well: working at 44.1 is better to use 44.1. Conversely at 96, it's better at 96...etc

Unfortunately for me, I like to work at 48, but the only libraries I have that are natively at that rate are Tim P's.

So, should it be the case that Nebula "forces" me to work at 44.1 to get the best benefit from all of my libraries?
kindafishy
Vip Member
Vip Member
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 2:08 pm

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Postby TranscendingMusic » Wed Dec 31, 2014 7:24 pm

kindafishy wrote:
TranscendingMusic wrote:obviously I'm not alex but consider this general truth: any time you can avoid conversion, you are getting the best fidelity. Plain and simple. Conversion is another process after all. In fairness, the Nebula conversion, comparatively speaking, is indeed really good. The sentiment there is "no difference" is always a bit loaded versus native rate. But it is based on the implicit fact that yes there is a difference with any additional process involved however it is a comparative idea that does involve understanding the quality you get in the compromise of conversion . So all things being equal, no conversion means removing just another process.
This isn't about which rate is better, so consider this as well: working at 44.1 is better to use 44.1. Conversely at 96, it's better at 96...etc

Unfortunately for me, I like to work at 48, but the only libraries I have that are natively at that rate are Tim P's.

So, should it be the case that Nebula "forces" me to work at 44.1 to get the best benefit from all of my libraries?


You ask this question first: what native rate do I like or must work at? Ok, so you have answered that already, 48K. Next question is, weighing out the pros and cons of audio processing which includes SR conversion, do I do better forgoing Nebula and its conversion and using something else with its pitfalls, down-sides, and cons? OR does the benefit of using Nebula processing outweigh the small price of its conversion - which again, is quite good any way - versus using those more conventional plugins. You will find in most cases, going with Nebula, since you chose to work with to begin with for a reason, and compromising with its conversion still yields mind-blowing, amazing results.

In essence, Alex's news means this: you now cover may be that 1 - 5% if you work in either 44.1 or 96 of the down-side of conversion by using Nebula along with native rates. You get your cake and you get to eat it too.

Would I, have I, and will I worry if I have to work with Nebula conversion? 100% NO. That is a scruple compared to what you get in the end.
mixing | mastering
Win 10 x64 | Sonar Platinum x64 | 3930K(OC)
User avatar
TranscendingMusic
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 1132
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 7:01 am
Location: USA

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Postby kindafishy » Wed Dec 31, 2014 8:18 pm

TranscendingMusic wrote:You ask this question first: what native rate do I like or must work at? Ok, so you have answered that already, 48K. Next question is, weighing out the pros and cons of audio processing which includes SR conversion, do I do better forgoing Nebula and its conversion and using something else with its pitfalls, down-sides, and cons? OR does the benefit of using Nebula processing outweigh the small price of its conversion - which again, is quite good any way - versus using those more conventional plugins. You will find in most cases, going with Nebula, since you chose to work with to begin with for a reason, and compromising with its conversion still yields mind-blowing, amazing results.

In essence, Alex's news means this: you now cover may be that 1 - 5% if you work in either 44.1 or 96 of the down-side of conversion by using Nebula along with native rates. You get your cake and you get to eat it too.

Would I, have I, and will I worry if I have to work with Nebula conversion? 100% NO. That is a scruple compared to what you get in the end.

Thank you! Much food for thought (expect the part about foregoing Nebula/Acqua... that part is non-negotiable ;)).
kindafishy
Vip Member
Vip Member
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 2:08 pm

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Postby TranscendingMusic » Wed Dec 31, 2014 8:23 pm

kindafishy wrote:
TranscendingMusic wrote:You ask this question first: what native rate do I like or must work at? Ok, so you have answered that already, 48K. Next question is, weighing out the pros and cons of audio processing which includes SR conversion, do I do better forgoing Nebula and its conversion and using something else with its pitfalls, down-sides, and cons? OR does the benefit of using Nebula processing outweigh the small price of its conversion - which again, is quite good any way - versus using those more conventional plugins. You will find in most cases, going with Nebula, since you chose to work with to begin with for a reason, and compromising with its conversion still yields mind-blowing, amazing results.

In essence, Alex's news means this: you now cover may be that 1 - 5% if you work in either 44.1 or 96 of the down-side of conversion by using Nebula along with native rates. You get your cake and you get to eat it too.

Would I, have I, and will I worry if I have to work with Nebula conversion? 100% NO. That is a scruple compared to what you get in the end.

Thank you! Much food for thought (expect the part about foregoing Nebula/Acqua... that part is non-negotiable ;)).


Haha exactly! You have essentially just answered the crucial question :)
Any time man!
mixing | mastering
Win 10 x64 | Sonar Platinum x64 | 3930K(OC)
User avatar
TranscendingMusic
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 1132
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 7:01 am
Location: USA

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Postby RJHollins » Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:47 pm

I too agree with TM's assessment. As a mastering engineer, I often have to balance client request and job requirements.

I will state outright that I've not like SR conversion ... particularly when the final output has to return to a lower [44.1] rate.

A consideration that may be kept in mind. Only the engineer with both 'sources' can compare/evaluate between the 2 rates. With only the 'final down sampled' file, the lack of direct A/B becomes a non-issue.

Although I have and do use algo & Nebula combinations as needed/required ... I have full confidence that Nebula will be in the chain ... and preferably as THE final process, as every algo tends to flatten [dimensionally] the audio. And that is what I usually avoid [base on material and client needs].

Bottom line [from my perspective] ... I avoid unnecessary conversions as general guide. I will NOT hesitate to use Nebula and whatever library [at it's given SR]. i.e.: many libraries are 96k only ... they are used in any/all 44.1k project.

The ONLY issue I don't like is the TIME it takes to convert the library.

Back to on topic :o The v2 libraries from AlexB are phenomenal ... they were really good before ... and they are even better !!! BTW ... the new v2 Tube console is gorgeous :mrgreen: The M**G filter I've used in mastering sessions is incredible [who would have thought].

Definitely waiting on every v2 release.
i7-5820k, MSI X99A Plus, 16 GIG Ram, Noctua NH-D14, Win-7 Pro [64-bit], Reaper-64

NVC [Nebula Virtual Controllers]
RJHollins
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 2626
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 5:53 pm

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Postby ianc » Tue Jan 06, 2015 3:39 am

I'd have thought it best to work at the highest sample rate you can, As I'd be more worried by the aliases in algo plugins than any SRC in nebula, thats just what I've learned so far and it may be that I have a lot more to learn on that subject
One thing I have noticed and why Tim's librarys are so useful is that if you can use a matching samplerate to your project nebula quite logically uses less cpu
Sorry if thats already been mentioned but we can't all read everything, though I wish I could when it comes to nebula and it's always useful to someone to get more than one chance to pick up little bits (in this case a atom) of info if it has a useful relevence to the user.
I wish I could drum half as well with two hands as one of Terry Bozzio's feet
User avatar
ianc
User Level X
User Level X
 
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:17 pm
Location: UK

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Postby kindafishy » Tue Jan 06, 2015 4:54 am

ianc wrote:[...]One thing I have noticed and why Tim's librarys are so useful is that if you can use a matching samplerate to your project nebula quite logically uses less cpu[...]

Are you certain of this? I was under the impression that Nebula performs SRC when the library loads, not on the fly while it is processing audio. If you have seen this first hand, I believe it, but it just strikes me as odd and unexpected.
kindafishy
Vip Member
Vip Member
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 2:08 pm

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Postby richie43 » Tue Jan 06, 2015 8:16 am

kindafishy wrote:
ianc wrote:[...]One thing I have noticed and why Tim's librarys are so useful is that if you can use a matching samplerate to your project nebula quite logically uses less cpu[...]

Are you certain of this? I was under the impression that Nebula performs SRC when the library loads, not on the fly while it is processing audio. If you have seen this first hand, I believe it, but it just strikes me as odd and unexpected.

You are correct, mostly. It will take up more resources to do the SRC, but as soon as it's done, it should not use any more CPU than any other library at any sample rate.
The Sounds of the Hear and Now
http://soundyaudio.com/
richie43
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 4852
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:47 pm
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Postby ianc » Tue Jan 06, 2015 2:12 pm

The cpu usage in nebula's telling me this , I wasn't testing this just noticed it the other day, so I will test it properly later and see if this is what's consistently the case, could of been my end of things, if this isn't what is supposed to happen
I wish I could drum half as well with two hands as one of Terry Bozzio's feet
User avatar
ianc
User Level X
User Level X
 
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:17 pm
Location: UK

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Postby ngarjuna » Wed Jan 07, 2015 9:37 pm

Personally, I will buy a 2.0 version of any and every Alex library I own, which consists of:
5 consoles
6 EQs
5 comps
2 other
But not a single one of them has been updated yet. So for me, that's why I haven't bought any 2.0s yet.
User avatar
ngarjuna
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 778
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 5:04 pm
Location: Miami

PreviousNext

Return to 3rd party libraries

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests