Login

Alex: rendering Nebula

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

Re: Alex: rendering Nebula

Postby HIFIDELITY » Thu Sep 09, 2010 1:04 am

greekpeet wrote:Wow, how are you guys getting 50 plus instances of Nebula???

I'm running dual, dual Core Xeon 2.66s in my first generation Mac Pro with 6 GB of ram and I'm barely able to get 6 or 7 instances at a time running at 96khz.

The CDsoundermaster N**e eq and Alex B stuff are cray at 70% per processor core. Luckally ghost mode makes these usable.

Have to work on one channel at a time @ 96khz. 441 I can work on three at a time.

Is my processor THAT slow compared to the new i7s?

What Nebula are you useing? Nebula 3 pro is loads more effeciant than neb 3 and below! its Due to the Core2 engine in the pro version i think! im running a 2.9ghz core2duo imac,4gb ram and i can go into double figures of neb instances without any problems. hope this helps?
HIFIDELITY
User Level VIII
User Level VIII
 
Posts: 89
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 2:10 am

Re: Alex: rendering Nebula

Postby Mimi » Thu Sep 09, 2010 3:17 am

I have a Core2Duo 3.0 and 6megas cache, 4 gigs of ram,and 24/44.100, squeegee 16 nebulas ... and at 96 kHz did the test runs 10 nebulosas.
And it's windows xp32bits, if the win764bits, some more nebulas ...
The problem is memory. that are in 32bit, Can only be used 1.5 gigas in plugin.
At 64bit, free memory and at will.
Mr. For what?
96khz???????????????
Jesus, mary, joseff.
will turn CD ,then mp3 filthy, nobody will notice, this sound infrastructure.
What counts is the music.
I am not against those who enjoy, more for example:
I do no baunce, I have a creamware scope projet , I use it to exit the analog digi003, And enter the analog, in scope projet.
Scope projet in 32 / 96khz, Preparing the entries for non clipping, and do a stereo mix.
Another computer is used as a substitute for my Dat.
Mail-mastered in 32 / 96khz, and ready.
Shipping for mastering, in 32 / 96khz , and ready.
touching the radios, I do my shows, seeing my albums.
For me, the mix at 96 kHz is unreal, There is no solid structure to this,
Unless you use Protools hd with its TDMS, With plugins half pump, Or have a super Nuendo, Sonar, sampltude, on a computer , SS Enterprise .
with eight cores and 14 gigabytes ram, and a 64bit system, What really works right.
Because apple and microsoft are good shit.
Full of bugs and other follies, I have both products.
For these global conditions, do not believe in mixing 96khz.
The day we miss quality, I go to the studio A & R
and record analog, and I mix analog.
But it is a personal matter.
Thanks... :roll: :roll:
User avatar
Mimi
Member
Member
 
Posts: 235
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 11:41 pm
Location: Brazil

Re: Alex: rendering Nebula

Postby vicnestE » Thu Sep 09, 2010 6:33 am

Mixing in 96KHz is a good dream for large projects.
Anyway, rendering/freezing tracks in 96KHz and down-sampled to 44KHz or 48KHz with "quality SRC" could improve some plug-ins.

Mid/High gain guitar amp sim shows the most difference when working in 96KHz compared to 44KHz. Even you record in 44KHz, upsampled the audio and render in 96KHz, and down-sampled to 44KHz, the sound improves a lot then render in 44KHz.

Of course the nebula programs in 96KHz sounds best when rendering in 96KHz.
All you need is a good SRC or all the efforts are defeated by one pass of poor SRC.
User avatar
vicnestE
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 740
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 5:11 am

Re: Alex: rendering Nebula

Postby Mimi » Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:52 pm

For this reason I prefer to write to tape with good amps.
for a job with this requirement I use protools hd, He has a studio here pretty good and cheap,With a Neve-v3, and great pres ...Studer machine, Protools Hd acces ... The problem is finding time free...hahahaha
Until record in 96khz, Most do a conversion to 44.100.
In the end who will hear 96khz of grace and beauty?
Of course it looks great, and there?
No more audiophiles as before, the ears are polluted with digital.
I have vinyl, many.
I came to conclusion that is not worth the effort to 96kHz.
much transparency requires more effects, more masking,
much autotune on vocals, because the audio is explicit like a movie, a * movie.
appears every nuance of the audio, and failures as well.
tape, hiding a lot thing, and it was cool.
all fat and and tenderness was lost.
I am very worried because I only listen to singer autotune now.
and many errors because of the transparency.
so I'm trying to find in digital sound, the sound of vinyl.
It is a choice, I hate the super transparency ...
Whilst everyone is looking for the best sound, best sound that comes from many human flaws noticeable.
cuts, fades, clicks, fingers dirtying the note, Voice same T-Pain in vocal.
so I do not know where everything will stop.
Could we make here a forum for discussions on the subject ... It would be nice.
I admire his wisdom. :roll: :roll:
User avatar
Mimi
Member
Member
 
Posts: 235
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 11:41 pm
Location: Brazil

Re: Alex: rendering Nebula

Postby TranscendingMusic » Thu Sep 09, 2010 5:11 pm

"Transparency" is such a relative term. I don't acknolwedge it as something in and of itself. It doesn't truly exist. With analog, you have circuitry noise and not as good dynamic range but the "dirt" of analog is pleasant. In digital, you have tremendous dynamic range, 1:1 ability but yes there is aliasing. But, as I was pointing out on Gearslutz thread, those limited FFT tests don't tell you much. Some plugins alias but still sound so good and vice versa. The 1 static test tone itself proved nothing as observing with 1 tone demonstrated a completely different result of the same plugin when using more than one tone. So, arbitrary results. The bottom line is, and especially having Nebula, one has enough of what one needs to produce killer mixes both in 44.1 and if one insists, 96 as well. There are no excuses left other than engineers not taking the time to learn, get educated, understand audio better, and practice their craft over time.
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: Alex: rendering Nebula

Postby greekpeet » Thu Sep 09, 2010 11:52 pm

HIFIDELITY wrote:
greekpeet wrote:Wow, how are you guys getting 50 plus instances of Nebula???

I'm running dual, dual Core Xeon 2.66s in my first generation Mac Pro with 6 GB of ram and I'm barely able to get 6 or 7 instances at a time running at 96khz.

The CDsoundermaster N**e eq and Alex B stuff are cray at 70% per processor core. Luckally ghost mode makes these usable.

Have to work on one channel at a time @ 96khz. 441 I can work on three at a time.

Is my processor THAT slow compared to the new i7s?

What Nebula are you useing? Nebula 3 pro is loads more effeciant than neb 3 and below! its Due to the Core2 engine in the pro version i think! im running a 2.9ghz core2duo imac,4gb ram and i can go into double figures of neb instances without any problems. hope this helps?


Running Neb 3 Pro, thought this was the only option on a Mac? Hmmm...

Maybe its because I'm doing full channels of tape, input bus, eq, and neb fx and only manage to process 3 or 4 channels each. Something like Doc Fear is about 5% cpu mode, and the MWC or CDsoundmaster consoles are about 25% proc per core. MAYBE can get 15-20 instances of Nebula running @ 44.1.

So my question was how can people get 50 instances? Would upgrading my proc from the Woodcrest Xeon to a Clovertown be worth it?
greekpeet
User Level XI
User Level XI
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:28 pm

Re: Alex: rendering Nebula

Postby hive » Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:06 pm

Mercado_Negro wrote:Sorry Alex but that's incorrect my friend :)

If plug-ins had a dither in their output imagine the amount of noise we had in our projects. What you're probably hearing here is the lack of oversampling and/or plug-ins' 64-bits signal path that's truncated if your DAW runs with a 32bits engine, like Nuendo.

Try a 64-bits DAW like REAPER or SONAR. This is a whole different story in processing. I'm pretty sure you won't hear the same in these DAWs :)

Cheers.


just wanted to add that I'm emailing back and forth with Paul Frindle about the subject and he wrote something you might find interesting in relation to this...

"All the plug-ins I am using are ones that I have been involved in
designing (I nevr use anyone else's). They all employ dither on their
outputs to suit 24bit precision - because this IS in fact the
precision of both 24bit fixed point - and 32bit float formats."
hive
User Level IV
User Level IV
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 9:08 pm

Re: Alex: rendering Nebula

Postby Mercado_Negro » Sat Sep 11, 2010 12:26 am

hive wrote:just wanted to add that I'm emailing back and forth with Paul Frindle about the subject and he wrote something you might find interesting in relation to this...

"All the plug-ins I am using are ones that I have been involved in
designing (I nevr use anyone else's). They all employ dither on their
outputs to suit 24bit precision - because this IS in fact the
precision of both 24bit fixed point - and 32bit float formats."


Interesting, indeed.

Now, please answer this: how is it possible that you can null all the way down to -inf (or -144dB for 24-bits) 2 signals, 1 copy of that signal with a plug-in at flat controls (this should be a 'transparent' plug-in, no distortion, no emulation, just a regular plug-in like the ones that come built-in with most DAWs), and the original signal? I'm pretty sure we've all done such tests and the result is always 'clean'. If his plug-ins do that I would think twice before purchasing them.

Cheers
i7 3770k :: Asus P8H77-V LE :: 16Gb DDR3 @1600MHz :: Geforce GT 520 :: OCZ-Vertex 128Gb :: WD Black Series 1Tb and Green Series 1Tb :: F*******e Liquid56 :: REAPER 64bit and StudioOne 64bit (both latest versions) :: Win 10 64bit
User avatar
Mercado_Negro
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 1353
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 9:30 am

Re: Alex: rendering Nebula

Postby vicnestE » Sat Sep 11, 2010 3:47 am

vicnestE wrote:
AlexB wrote:Mmmhhh... I hear this degradation by cumulative digital processing due to quantization errors + cumulative VST dithering.. Maybe I'm BatMan :mrgreen:
(oh yes, BatMan was my callsign in the Citizen Band some years ago) :D

Dear Bruce:
If the DAW's signal path is 64bit and the VSTPlugins work in 64bit, theoretically speaking, is the signal path clean until the final mixdown with some bit truncation to 32bit or 24bit?

Thanks for replying.

EDIT: Delete parts about nebula render which does null everytime except sometimes the start portions show differences.

"Dynamic programs introduce sampled randomness" by Giancarlo.
So pure EQ renderings should null, and console/console+EQ renderings might not null everytime.
User avatar
vicnestE
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 740
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 5:11 am

Re: Alex: rendering Nebula

Postby giancarlo » Sat Sep 11, 2010 11:06 am

not all eq. Some of them are dynamic.
User avatar
giancarlo
Founder
Founder
 
Posts: 9210
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:40 pm
Location: Italy

Previous

Return to 3rd party libraries

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests