So, I just wanted to get it written again.. we need nabula engine update to handle fast and deep compression properly.. (more than 30db peak reduction with sample to sample speed..)
There are some recent attepts to try to make good fast compressors libraries (reffering to Stripe76, GMD, 76D - all trying to emulate less than 1ms attack settings) and while they are succesively raising the bar of nebula compression they can`t quite get it right.. and won`t until nebula isn`t updated.
I`m no expert in nebula engine at all.. I know the settings now are being stretched to best match eqs, preamps OR stretched the other way to get good dynamics behaviour.. so maybe You should make another distinct instance (Nebula Dynamics) to make it set only for those purposes.
Also, there really should be some kind of playback/render function implemented. To make full potential of Timed engine (which sounds much better but eats cpu) not only splith mode. Almost all libraries have zero kernels - clean programs made as well.. why not use these for playback (with freqd engine) and automatically switch for full kernels (and different engine/settings) for render.. This could really improve the instances count in sessions and make a potential for more multi band eqs and all that.. (i know the vectors have to be reloaded during render, but hey.. I can wait! it`s better than freezing/unfreezing tracks all the time)
Ok.. long post.. I know.. most of these issues is well known.. maybe they need to be adressed once and for all!!
Thanks for the link. Interesting read.. a bit sad..
Myth-buster 2: it's not true that tuning something magic in nebula you could fix all compressor issues.
Well.. I think it could be still very usable to have another instance with totally different settings.. and I can`t still believe that it can`t be improoved..
Maybe Nat should sample abrupt volume changes as well.. (not only static tones); or maybe there should be some kind of "dynamic kernels"? or maybe prograte should be far less than milisecond and smooth algorithms improoved... I`m just throwing ideas, I can`t help much cause I don`t know what`s possible and what`s not..
hearing (again) that nebula is designed to be SLOW makes me wonder of its accuracy on tapes, sturation, preamps..all sorts of stuff it should be top notch..
Maybe it`s time for CoreIII ?
Anyway I love all Nebula stuff and I use algo compressors only when I really need squashy/fast compression.
Do you think G has time to do this? I think there are many important things that could be solved first ,not being able to do 1176 and other fast compressors is not as important as say Cuda for more cpu?
Maybe we should ask him what he thinks is more important , i'm sure he is very busy.
Thanks all for chiming in so fast.. I must admit I didn`t read allll the threads on nebula engine.. but I will
Sure, making 76D to work properly shouldn`t be first priority for acustica audio.. so maybe we could make a vote and see results for "what`s the most important changes in nebula" for users.
Mine would be: 1. Render button option to make better settings in render mode only (more kernels, timed engine, oversampling..and so on) 2. Compressors behaviour 3. GUI changes to make many bands of eq, different compressor ratio settings etc accesible from one window.. (-not necessirly one instance only)
lipa wrote:Mine would be: 1. Render button option to make better settings in render mode only (more kernels, timed engine, oversampling..and so on) 2. Compressors behaviour 3. GUI changes to make many bands of eq, different compressor ratio settings etc accesible from one window.. (-not necessirly one instance only)
3. This is not a limitation of the GUI. If you do some reading around here you'll see that the reason EQs are segregated by band is because the number of samples necessary to present multiple bands in a single instance is size/performance prohibitive. Every time you add a variable, say another band, you are massively increasing the number of permutations that have to be sampled and represented in the samples. In the current GUI you could have what you're requesting - but a single instance would bring powerful computers to their knees. So compared to maxing out your CPU on a single program or being able to load multiple programs and accomplish exactly what you need with overhead left over it's clear why one band per instance is superior.
For most this inconvenience is far from being vital or a deal breaker; it takes a small amount of getting used to and then you can setup as many bands (one per program) as you want.
Also, it's worth noting that Acustica Audio is not a democracy. Clearly the developers have a vision (and it's not selling 1 billion copies or they'd be doing things differently than they are now) and no amount of forum pressure is going to deter them from making the product they set out to make. I'm sure that when Giancarlo can implement improvements to compression he will (he has already done so more than once in Nebula's history).