View Single Post
Old 05-15-2012, 08:40 AM   #80
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,663

Originally Posted by Banned View Post
I want to be creative with all my plugins. That's what I have them for.

I think we probably use classifications/labels like "eq", "filter", "saturation" and "distortion" much the same way in day-to-day use, and I think I get your point, but still, for the sake of argument, isn't an eq basically the same as a (set of) filter(s), and isn't "distortion" much the same as "saturation"? (i.e., we want to use musically pleasing types of distortion, which is typically a matter of saturation and harmonic enrichment.) Wouldn't you agree that the major difference between such classifications is in the way we use them, and that basically they are different user interfaces to the same underlying technical processes? (Much like "reverb", "delay", "chorus", "flanger" etc. are all delay-based effects on a more general level, from a technical point of view)

Then to me it seems that if one filter can not handle abrupt dynamic changes, while the other can, the first is simply not better than the second, but worse. Labeling it as "filter" or "eq" doesn't change that as far as I can see. And the same goes for saturation/distortion/overdrive: if it is only usable at subtle settings, but breaks down on dynamic changes, it is simply inferior. I *can* see that there are use cases where you don't need any creative tweaking, nor the ability to handle different types of source material, so that such limitations aren't a practical problem. But that doesn't make it a better tool, only one much more specific for certain types of use.

Hey, almost a year since that announcement! We can almost start calling it "vaporware".

More seriously, I'm confident that Andy will not let us down, and I expect it to be comparable to u-he's Diva filters. The aspect that apparently explains the great sonic qualities of these filters is the use of zero-delay feedback algorithms. Which is exactly what that UAD Moog filter uses as well, and that was released 3 years before Diva. Which is why it seems to be a very good frame of reference for filters and saturation/distortion/overdrive.

So I'm still wondering whether Nebula can stand up to (or even surpass) that level of sonic quality, even regardless of any other concerns such as realtime tweaking or CPU usage. Your answer makes me doubt it, I must say. But of course I should not judge it until hearing it for myself. Which makes me even more curious.
Because of how Nebula works, which is easier for you to read about than for me to explain, the concept of distortion is not just one thing. Low level distortion, or true saturation, is done very very well in Nebula. Things like tube emulation, tape emulation, preamps, eq's, transformers, console ins and outs) these all are handled with amazing realism in Nebula because of the nature of how it processes the audio. But can Nebula simulate a Ratt pedal, or an overdriven Mesa guitar amp? No, THAT type of distortion is not possible yet. And fast transient taming like from a true 1176? Not quite, but close. But a good Opto compression? Absolutely. Just try the free version. The workflow is intimidating, but just readjust your brain and use your ears.
The Sounds of the Hear and Now.
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote