This might be some of the best and most realistic ideas I have seen for making a better workflow to the Nebula platform. I do not have Massive / Passive libraries, but my stock of libs are increasing bigger and bigger.
That being said, I am a dedicated Nebulaholic with great interest to see this through. As I owner of Nebula Pro and server, I also have a test bed for running Nebula on remote computers over LAN. Could be come handy in a project where a large number of Nebula instances are activated and controlled by Midi.
Let me know if you need my assistanse in beta testing
Well, its' been encouraging the many PM's I've received in regards to this project and concept. To those that have replied, thank-you. It IS important for me to know what platform[s] you have access to AND the DAW or DAW[s] too.
I do have a question to ask of the Mac members. This will blatantly show my ignorance of your platform [apologies] ... the question is this ... can Mac's load and run VST plugins ?? If you can ... is it native? ... or must a type of wrapper be used? Thanks for any clarification of this!
To those responding or reading from the sidelines...
I won't want to force anyone to make library purchases, such as the Massive/Passive ... the Controllers I've assembled each had particular 'characteristics' that required a certain way to figure out a 'logic' strategy.
The 'Klarity-AIR' posed a challenge on several fronts. The switching logic that routes the 2 engines was something that I wanted to match [in functional use] to the Nebula library. With the library patches captured as 'snap shots', I could NOT see loading in 8 separate Nebula's ... just for one of the engines.
My Controllers' design uses 2 NEBULA instances. Through MIDI's 'PRG CHNG' command, we are able to cycle through the libraries patches. Whether this alpha version stays [as is] is yet to be determined.
Even though Klarity is not first up on the beta testing block, it was the library that fueled the need for a MIDI solution.
The M/P Controller brought about a much more efficient design. It allowed for cleaner, easier programing/configuration. It does more with less circuitry
So, the MP contains elements I need certainty they work flawlessly. Which they have on my XP.
If testing goes well, the web site and business stuff can be done, the registering process [and management thereof - it a way that won't be a PITA, and the interest and support enough to maintain all this ...
It could for see many other releases. Maybe we'd put up something of a 'request poll' for priority. That is wide open.
The only thing I do know ... unless I only need a single Nebula for some processing, that could be the exception. The idea I have in mind is placing the NEBULA plugins into the hidden engine. The Controller interface is the command center. [BTW ... I really think we need a cool name for this thing ... don't we ??? NEBULA COMMAND CENTER ... 'NCC' ... hmmm wasn't that used in Star Trek ? .... hmmm, maybe a naming contest ?!?
Hey, we can have some fun with this.
Buying libraries... particularly the 3 I've selected ? That is a personal decision. I'm very happy with those purchases. I also have quite the collection amassed of the past years. There have been those that made me question why I bought Well, the Developers are the life-blood of Nebula.
Without their efforts, we'd only have potential. They are the ones driving this technology. Look what's happened to things like compressors, the refinements and upgrades to Preamps, Tapes. Not to mention Reverbs. So my little purchase was a token way to say Thanks. and PLEASE continue to release more great stuff at an affordable price !!!!
Then one session, I pull out that 'hmmm' purchase and found it purfect for that track.
So yes, the mentioned 3 ... great tools. Use them everyday ... maybe ... maybe not. Because there are others.
Having a seamless, interactive, flexible, and accessible Controller Interface that allows me to focus more on the music is what I envision ...
I just need to see if it plays nice with others
Wow ... another one of those wordy posts. Apologies ... just returning from playing a fun jazz gig with some great players
Oh ... much thanks to all the PM's, emails and comments of excitement and encouragement. It is very much appreciated. I'm trying to get this happening as quickly as I can. Thank-you again.
Mac uses a vst but it is different from a PC .dll file.
Im very interested in this project - and would love an A*I variant such as APE EQ or ALex B Black Master EQ...
The Massive Passive is sweet tho...but Im wondering a couple of things.
These big loads - surely the latency is massive? Or are they using the non-reverb Nebula?
What MIDI controllers are you trying?
If you use a hardware controller configured to the wrapper - can you use it on a per channel basis in the DAW? Im confused about mapping...or you just switch track and the MIDI interface controls the Nebulae in that track....
Very cool tho...dreaming of using these nebula EQ easily with a hardware controller...
Hi Swan, Thanks for the clarification regarding MAC's VST .dll ... This is disappointing to read for our Mac friends ... and me. Oh well. I had a hoping thought that a possible wrapper was available at the least.
On the brighter side ... ah the APE & the BMeQ. Another great pair of equalizers. There'd be no reason NOT to have these covered. I have the MWeQ already sketched out.
Basically, it comes down to this. Full control that parallels the hardware operation.
The M/P does deviate from this, though. Some of the beta decisions also had to include how much can a computer system take. Prior to this point, I can't recall loading in 13 Nebuli on a single track, with every preset [proper] all active at once. My 4 year old Quad-core [32 bit XP] handled it. So I kept the layout [at least for the time being. To better understand, the M/P has separate cut and boost presets. The hardware uses switches to select which mode. The current Controller is not limited to only cut or boost ... we have both available. Should I restrict it, and mirror the hardware exact. This can certainly be done. The Klarity model helped me develope the switching logic.
Latency. There is no difference whether the Controller is involved or not. Though it is intentionally blurred in the pixes ... I'm only showing a few of the 'modules' contained within the entire Controller. Each of those modules has a 'kill' switch [ByPass]. This takes 'that' specific NEBULA out of the signal path. This allows several possibilities for the engineer. One is making real-time changes straight from the Controller.
Other than modifying the internal Nebula engine, there should be NO need to ever look at the NEBULA chain itself. Except .... gain structure. There is another 'virtual' concept that I'm testing. It is an idea that seems very possible, and goes beyond just working with NEBULA.... [I also peeved that someone else hasn't already done it ... so, that's that.
I'm trying to answer you questions as best I can ...
Nebula_reverb. This is the main one I most always use. The Controller doesn't care which flavor you might prefer. I have customized Neb's that are stock, TimeD altered, various 'meters'. It don't matter.
Tying in external hardware controllers.
I've not yet had time to delve into this part. The 'MIDI LEARN' function is available. Whether 'AUTOMAP' from Novation needs anything in particular, I don't know [at this moment]. I do know that it handle a single Nebula ... even before I had CC's available. Lets just say, if it at first can't ... I'd want that feature too
Your last question ... and I understand the slight confusion. Maybe this will help ...
The Controller is pure VST that speaks MIDI. The layout and nomenclature is tailored to address a particular Nebula library. Each [sub] module has 1 of 16 MIDI channels that can be assigned. There are 8 faders/knobs on NEBULA [proper] that are accessed via ContinuousControllers [CC]. So for a typical EQ, with freq, gain, and Q. Each [sub]module has those matching faders.
For EQ's that have 'stepped' values, the Controller knobs are identically stepped and will SNAP into the exact frequency ... and displays it's exact numerical value locked to Nebula. There is no guessing, or fumbling to get there.
Dealing with continuously variable parameters ... the ones that at 'interpolated'. This includes gain.
As it currently stands, I have the 'gain' parameter in a 'stepped' mode. The resolution is either a 1/4 or 1/2 dB steps. I'm still evaluating this type of response. I don't mind 'some' built in restriction. I find using a mouse to make 'fine' adjustments to be very distracting ... do I want 1/32 of a dB ... or does 1/64 do it Sometimes too much control can be non-productive. Of course, the way a library actually responds is the best determinant. Heck, it may be possible to have an 'override' function. Don't know yet.
OK ... keep the cards and letters coming. Thanks for all the positive PM/Emails.
All ideas, comments, suggestions are also welcomed