Go Back   Cockos Incorporated Forums > REAPER Forums > Recording Technologies and Techniques

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-26-2012, 12:50 AM   #41
Wolffman
Human being with feelings
 
Wolffman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Down Under
Posts: 2,111
Default

How do you use VCC or Satson or stripbuss ?

There are chanel and buss plugs, so when using them, do you put them first in the fx chain or last or doesn't it matter.

Would you guys / girls who use them regularly share how you get the best results ?

Cheers
__________________
" Serve the song "

https://soundcloud.com/wolffman7
Wolffman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2012, 11:15 PM   #42
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,555
Default

What he said ^^^^
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2012, 11:24 PM   #43
chrisharbin
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 16,031
Default

Oh no......here it comes..........the dreaded..........

+1
chrisharbin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 01:19 AM   #44
Stu
Human being with feelings
 
Stu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Sheffield, UK
Posts: 851
Default

There a few different ways you can use Satson (and no doubt the others too) but I use it as the first effect on every track and buss. I set the gain as though I was using the trim control on a console, aiming for around 0Vu on steady-state material like guitars, vocals, aiming for less on transient rich material. I might push it with a touch more drive to certain channels if I want things more saturated (kick drum, bass guitar, sometimes the drum buss) and then I place all other effects after Satson in the chain. I rarely go back and adjust levels in Satson as I've usually got a pretty good idea of how hard I want to push it before I start mixing.

Edit: to clarify the reasons I use it this way, if Satson is placed at the end of the effect chain of each track, then every change of dynamics or Eq will affect its behaviour. Whilst this is more akin to mixing on a real console, placing it at the start of each chain makes things more predictable and controllable. Having to push the faders up on the drum channels on real desks just to get a particular sound is something I and plenty of other engineers I'm sure, consider a limitation of that technology in many ways.

Last edited by Stu; 04-27-2012 at 01:28 AM.
Stu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 05:10 AM   #45
RSG
Human being with feelings
 
RSG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Deepest South Bucks, UK
Posts: 90
Default

I use Satson just like Stu does in the post above.
Before buying Satson I was using the DAW channel fader as a combination of trim plus mixer - with Satson I can use the channel fader purely for mixing.

I will also use the Satson filter to roll off the very low bass (20 - 40 hz) as I have a budget system so it is a bit of an unknown if I were to leave it in.
RSG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 06:33 AM   #46
pcmusicpro
Human being with feelings
 
pcmusicpro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Cali, Colombia.
Posts: 613
Default

The same here. I use Satson channel in the first slot of every audio track and Satson Bus in every Aux/folder track. I use it as trims to get my incoming signals to -18dBFS for the RMS level or to -6dBFS for the peak levels (mostly on drums and percussion. I use the hi pass filter too when needed and I think it's very handy. In my 2Bus track I put Satson Bus too with Cytomic's The Glue and that's all, I start my mixing without looking back too much to change the settings on Satson and The Glue. Having those plugins placed before the mixing process starts makes me decide my EQ or Dynamics setting through Satson and The Glue and the results are fine to me.
pcmusicpro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 05:34 PM   #47
Wolffman
Human being with feelings
 
Wolffman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Down Under
Posts: 2,111
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu View Post
There a few different ways you can use Satson (and no doubt the others too) but I use it as the first effect on every track and buss. I set the gain as though I was using the trim control on a console, aiming for around 0Vu on steady-state material like guitars, vocals, aiming for less on transient rich material. I might push it with a touch more drive to certain channels if I want things more saturated (kick drum, bass guitar, sometimes the drum buss) and then I place all other effects after Satson in the chain. I rarely go back and adjust levels in Satson as I've usually got a pretty good idea of how hard I want to push it before I start mixing.

Edit: to clarify the reasons I use it this way, if Satson is placed at the end of the effect chain of each track, then every change of dynamics or Eq will affect its behaviour. Whilst this is more akin to mixing on a real console, placing it at the start of each chain makes things more predictable and controllable. Having to push the faders up on the drum channels on real desks just to get a particular sound is something I and plenty of other engineers I'm sure, consider a limitation of that technology in many ways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RSG View Post
I use Satson just like Stu does in the post above.
Before buying Satson I was using the DAW channel fader as a combination of trim plus mixer - with Satson I can use the channel fader purely for mixing.

I will also use the Satson filter to roll off the very low bass (20 - 40 hz) as I have a budget system so it is a bit of an unknown if I were to leave it in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcmusicpro View Post
The same here. I use Satson channel in the first slot of every audio track and Satson Bus in every Aux/folder track. I use it as trims to get my incoming signals to -18dBFS for the RMS level or to -6dBFS for the peak levels (mostly on drums and percussion. I use the hi pass filter too when needed and I think it's very handy. In my 2Bus track I put Satson Bus too with Cytomic's The Glue and that's all, I start my mixing without looking back too much to change the settings on Satson and The Glue. Having those plugins placed before the mixing process starts makes me decide my EQ or Dynamics setting through Satson and The Glue and the results are fine to me.
Thanks for responding, it would apear we have a unanimous opinion on how its used best

Now, for me its a matter of which one to get, Satson $39.00 or Stripbus $29.00, VCC requires ilock which i don't have.

Stripbus seems to have a little more going on, different console types and bus comp and is the cheaper of the two but is it the better value ?

Anyone have both of these, which one do you prefer ?

Thanks again

Cheers
__________________
" Serve the song "

https://soundcloud.com/wolffman7
Wolffman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 05:51 PM   #48
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,555
Default

I own both and love them both differently. Satson is so simple, fewer options sometimes means quicker work. And I use the chanel part for the HP/LP filters on almost all tracks these days, even without any console emulation going on. I have had the Stripbus for a long time, but just recently started really digging into it. It is really good too, with the subtle buss compression and the DUCKING capabilities. That is cool. So either is a great buy, it just depends on what you need most. But to agree with Mercado, if you really want console emulation (and have a great computer or are ready to freeze often...) you can't beat Nebula.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 06:40 PM   #49
lxm
Human being with feelings
 
lxm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,629
Default

link for nebula?
lxm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 06:44 PM   #50
bluzkat
Human being with feelings
 
bluzkat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,919
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lxm View Post
link for nebula?
Here you go... Acustica Audio.


__________________
Peace...
bluzkat
bluzkat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 06:45 PM   #51
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,555
Default

Here is a link. WARNING: Their free version is not the best promo. And the gui is painful, the workflow is even more painful, especially if you need to work quickly. AND.... it will eat most computers up if you try to go for a full emulation signal chain, even for a hearty i7 style DAW. So why do some of us love using Nebula?? Partly because we are crazy and masochistic, I'm sure. Other than that, if you have spent time learning and loving an all analog audio life, then Nebula will get you closest to that sound and feel ITB.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 08:17 PM   #52
Wilkesin
Human being with feelings
 
Wilkesin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 501
Default

It's got to be the first channel or (hopefully) obviously the sound drastically changes because of the gain staging, and yes your whole mix will fall apart if you start with it and then bypass it.

After another full day of working with NLS I stand by my original thought on it (and in general this console emulation thing). It sounds great. It absolutely sucks for workflow.

If you track at what I would call reasonable, and some would call moderate or slight, digital levels then having an instance of console emulation on every single track is nearly transparent. So for all that CPU power and time lost putting it on each track you have a minimal net gain in sound, and then you have to get on with EQ, compression, FX etc., which it seems to need less of now, but this is not to say that you cant throw an instance of the buss plug on the master and get some things happening to at least the really transient material, and then that is only one plug that you have to gain stage.

The thing really starts to show off when you go in and drive and level balance each channel. It definitely pulls things together and you can selectively add some "hair" or keep it clean. I tend to not have a large track counts at all, and I cant imagine people who would want to mix with this on 20, 30...100 track count projects.

You have to be careful putting it on FX send channels too, it will drastically alter what you hear if placed on say a Verb send...

My thinking going forward is to throw one on the master and save the single instances for tracks that are harsh sounding or just need "something" to stand out from the rest.
__________________
ethersheets.bandcamp.com
Intel i5-2500K | MSI Mobo | 12 Gigs RAM | Win 10 Pro x64 | Reaper x64 | Studio One v3.5 x64
Wilkesin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2012, 08:32 PM   #53
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,555
Default

Because I come from analog audio background, and remember what happens to, for example, a guitar track, after it has traveled down a long chain of hardware, I have a different outlook and outcome with all of this console stuff. I use alot of Nebula emulations, and not just console presets. I use preamps, tubes, tapes, consoles, saturation.... OMG, it's a huge job and a terrible work-flow. But I end up with audio that needs much less eq's, compressors, etc. It is not a subtle effect; it is a fat, warm, and very harmonically rich audio file. Yes, it is digital, and yes, it is emulation, but I tried to love all digital audio, I gave it a fair try. But my ears were ready to invest in a room full of hardware and I just don't have the money or space. But this slow as molasses work-flow is not for clients, this is me working on my own music. If a client is near, Nebula stays hidden and they get what I call (not to their face) my second string pro plugins. But in regards to the effects being worth it or not, that is completely dependent on your ears, needs, tolerance, and patience.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2012, 01:51 PM   #54
museumoftechno
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RJHollins View Post
again ... sorry for boring everyone.
No need to apologise, I thought that was a fascinating, great post!
museumoftechno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2012, 01:54 PM   #55
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,555
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by museumoftechno View Post
No need to apologise, I thought that was a fascinating, great post!
Agreed.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2012, 02:26 PM   #56
Mercado_Negro
Moderator
 
Mercado_Negro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Caracas, Venezuela
Posts: 8,261
Default

I use VCC or SatSon Channels as the last plug-in on individual tracks and I put the Bus plug-ins on groups and master in the first slot (well, on vocal groups it is the second plug-in because I always have a HPF before).

I've been tracking with VCC for 2 months or so. That's saving me a lot of CPU because I don't have to put it in my tracks anymore, only buses and master.
__________________
Pressure is what turns coal into diamonds - Michael a.k.a. Runaway
Mercado_Negro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2012, 02:58 PM   #57
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,555
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercado_Negro View Post
That's saving me a lot of CPU
LOL. What is saving CPU....? (Nebula CPU muncher....)
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2012, 03:58 PM   #58
Mercado_Negro
Moderator
 
Mercado_Negro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Caracas, Venezuela
Posts: 8,261
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richie43 View Post
LOL. What is saving CPU....? (Nebula CPU muncher....)
If I could only track with Nebula... *dreams*
__________________
Pressure is what turns coal into diamonds - Michael a.k.a. Runaway
Mercado_Negro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2012, 04:10 PM   #59
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,555
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercado_Negro View Post
If I could only track with Nebula... *dreams*
I can't even mix with Nebula, I do so much render/freeze. I have adapted my Nebula use where I batch render some and then bring in my favorite non-Nebula algo plugs. Not ideal but very close. With the likes of Klanghel, Sknote, Stillwell, and Valhalla, i don't mind algo plugs as much as I did a few years ago.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2012, 05:03 PM   #60
RJHollins
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,376
Default

yea ... I'm starting a multi-trk mix using NEBULA as the main plug. This is sort of a test run, as I primarily was doing mastering [which still required pre-renders. NOW trying to work in a mixing situation ... oh my ... it is a painfully slow process :|

During this time, I KEEP trying to find 'algo' substitutes that 'closely' resemble certain NEB libraries, so that I could 'sketch out' tracks, then go back and sub NEBULA with the algo settings.

There is a free 'Neve-ish' EQ that uses the same freq & Q choices from AlexB's MWeQ. I'm still experimenting, but I NOT so certain that the translation from algo to NEB is anywhere near 1:1. A quick check with VSTAnalyzer shows that NEBULA vs algo are only 'similar'.

Well, its still a developing idea for work flow ... open to ideas/suggestion.
RJHollins is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2012, 11:11 AM   #61
antiClick
Human being with feelings
 
antiClick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Mediterrenean Sea
Posts: 915
Default

Here is what I think could be a fair comparison between Satson and NLS, including audio test files.
http://www.sonimus.com/comunidad/soc...g.html#reply_2

Google English translation:
http://translate.google.com/translat...eply_2&act=url

Last edited by antiClick; 05-11-2012 at 11:24 AM.
antiClick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2012, 12:09 PM   #62
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,555
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RJHollins View Post
yea ... I'm starting a multi-trk mix using NEBULA as the main plug. This is sort of a test run, as I primarily was doing mastering [which still required pre-renders. NOW trying to work in a mixing situation ... oh my ... it is a painfully slow process :|

During this time, I KEEP trying to find 'algo' substitutes that 'closely' resemble certain NEB libraries, so that I could 'sketch out' tracks, then go back and sub NEBULA with the algo settings.

There is a free 'Neve-ish' EQ that uses the same freq & Q choices from AlexB's MWeQ. I'm still experimenting, but I NOT so certain that the translation from algo to NEB is anywhere near 1:1. A quick check with VSTAnalyzer shows that NEBULA vs algo are only 'similar'.

Well, its still a developing idea for work flow ... open to ideas/suggestion.
Hey RJ. As a die-hard Nebula user myself, but always looking for (and failing) to find an algo plugin to even come close to some of the Nebula presets, I am wondering what the free Neve-ish plugin you are referring to.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2012, 01:17 PM   #63
RJHollins
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,376
Default

Hi Richie,

I don't have the link handy ... but the EQ name is: PQ33

But the 'other' name is J1000. ???!?

This is a free plug ... however, according to the author, it started out with a reference to the NEVE EQ [similar to MWEq].

But NOW, he is going his own direction with this.

I have the latest release, but have not done a direct comparison. My HOPE was to have an algo EQ with identical FREQ, Q, & LEVEL, that could be used as a 'scratch' pad ... and then direct transfer values over to NEB.

This is still an on going quest :|

If you find it ... I'd be interested in your feedback. I think we have similar goal.
RJHollins is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2012, 01:40 PM   #64
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,555
Default

LOL. Thanks RJ, I have that eq already! I guess I have been on this quest for a while, I've had each update of that plugin since it was released! In fact, I even have a few paid for Neve-like plugins (Stillwell 1973, DDMF 1063, maybe another). Depending on the mix, I start off intending to transfer settings to a Nebula preset, but invariably end up working with whatever is on the track. Call it lazy or call it productive!
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2012, 01:08 AM   #65
antiClick
Human being with feelings
 
antiClick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Mediterrenean Sea
Posts: 915
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richie43 View Post
Depending on the mix, I start off intending to transfer settings to a Nebula preset, but invariably end up working with whatever is on the track. Call it lazy or call it productive!

Maybe Nebula is the next step in convultion technology, but today it's Not a professional mixing solution if you can't use it in front of clients.
Nebula sounds good, but is unusable if you want to be productive.

Last edited by antiClick; 05-12-2012 at 01:16 AM.
antiClick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2012, 05:45 AM   #66
ngarjuna
Human being with feelings
 
ngarjuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Miami
Posts: 2,298
Default

I use Nebula regularly on every project, with every client. The notion that it can't be used professionally is ridiculous.
__________________
cheers,
@ngarjuna
Gist
ngarjuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2012, 08:42 AM   #67
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,555
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ngarjuna View Post
I use Nebula regularly on every project, with every client. The notion that it can't be used professionally is ridiculous.
Dem be fightin werds......
lol
Bad word choice, let me rephrase.
Nebula is an excellent professional choice, no doubt. Maybe the very best in regards to sound. I use it on every project as well. But if I had someone looking over my shoulder, and they are more accustomed to a more "traditional" work-flow in a digital studio, and they are also paying by the hour instead of by the project, then I myself would probably choose not to start loading up Nebula presets until they are gone (unless I just have to!). I have seen people twitch and get pretty uneasy when they are looking at their pocket-book as each instance is loading.... I would probably opt to use Nebula when they are gone, produce an amazing product at a price that they agree to, but not get my normal "hourly" rate. I eat up the little extar time for the sake of the awesome and yes, professional sound. Is that better? LOL.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2012, 09:03 AM   #68
Mercado_Negro
Moderator
 
Mercado_Negro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Caracas, Venezuela
Posts: 8,261
Default

Nebula is a professional tool because it delivers the best quality available when it comes to equalizers, consoles and tape emulations. The problem is you can't really "mix" with it. There's a difference, at least from my point of view, between "mixing" and "pre-processing". The latter doesn't help to take informed decisions based what you're hearing in your mix. I did a mix yesterday where I used Nebula intensively and though I did it quick I spent like 2 hours "pre-processing"... and it was quick because I know what to use already and when, now imagine someone using it without too much experience with libraries. Equalizers are another matter, you can treat those like hardware, i.e., since there's always one or two pieces of the same unit in studios you have to bounce/render/record instruments/vocals one by one. You can apply the same approach with Nebula EQ's and doesn't feel like "spending too much time".
__________________
Pressure is what turns coal into diamonds - Michael a.k.a. Runaway
Mercado_Negro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2012, 09:09 AM   #69
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,555
Default

Yes, Mercado. You, again, more eloquently said what I, again, so clumsily TRIED to say! Nebula is probably the most professional digital tool I have ever used, so I certainly was not trying to say otherwise. Time to keep my "mouth" shut (keep my fingers away from the keyboard and back on the guitars/basses/keys!!)
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2012, 09:22 AM   #70
Mercado_Negro
Moderator
 
Mercado_Negro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Caracas, Venezuela
Posts: 8,261
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richie43 View Post
Yes, Mercado. You, again, more eloquently said what I, again, so clumsily TRIED to say! Nebula is probably the most professional digital tool I have ever used, so I certainly was not trying to say otherwise. Time to keep my "mouth" shut (keep my fingers away from the keyboard and back on the guitars/basses/keys!!)
It wasn't actually aimed at you, richie It was more like a general comment.

Btw, I got your PM on Nebula forums (read it on my gmail account) but apparently I'm having a problem to access Nebula forums since the last couple of days. I'll take a look at it once I get access again. Thanks!
__________________
Pressure is what turns coal into diamonds - Michael a.k.a. Runaway
Mercado_Negro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2012, 09:56 AM   #71
antiClick
Human being with feelings
 
antiClick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Mediterrenean Sea
Posts: 915
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richie43 View Post
Dem be fightin werds......
lol
Bad word choice, let me rephrase.
Nebula is an excellent professional choice, no doubt. Maybe the very best in regards to sound.

....

I eat up the little extar time for the sake of the awesome and yes, professional sound. Is that better? LOL.

Definetly better. Sorry if it sounded a bit rude... forget about the word 'professional'
Sure I'm biased by the fact I alwys try to earn by hour spent, and that musicians expects my computer to be fast (and sound brutal of course).

I'v been following Nebula since day one. I'v had it installed, forced to use it, keep experimenting over different materials. It's just I think it's not ready for when the musician crosses the door.

Sure it will, but today its time for the algo simulations mentioned in the topic. IMVHO

Last edited by antiClick; 05-12-2012 at 10:15 AM.
antiClick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2012, 10:31 AM   #72
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,555
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by antiClick View Post
Definetly better. Sorry if it sounded a bit rude... forget about the word 'professional'
Sure I'm biased by the fact I alwys try to earn by hour spent, and that musicians expects my computer to be fast (and sound brutal of course).

I'v been following Nebula since day one. I'v had it installed, forced to use it, keep experimenting over different materials. It's just I think it's not ready for when the musician crosses the door.

Sure it will, but today its time for the algo simulations mentioned in the topic. IMVHO
I hear ya. I also expect to be paid for my time, but I guess I use a different model to assess my productivity. I also do some non-musical work for money (not as much, but still) in the gardening world. In that work, I always bid out work based on what kind of time and materials it will require to do a great job. The client then agrees or disagrees. If in agreement, I do the work and give them a kick-butt job. Sometimes I am able to do it in less time, and sometimes I take more time than expected. But the price was agreed on and that's the price they pay (excluding any huge differences, of course). I have found that this model works great in my audio work. It is streamlined, straight forward, and it places the value on what i think is the most important thing; THE AUDIO, not on my minutes. If they love the work, and love the price, and I make money, then there is a long-term mutually rewarding relationship. AND the world gets more awesome music! Anyway, so in regards to the whole Nebula vs time thing, I choose to eat up a few pennies vs time in order to not sacrifice the quality of the end product. If I can pre-process some tracks through Nebula at a little bit of my cost, as opposed to using what my ears feel is second choice, than I am fine with that. AS Mercado mentioned, it isn't much different than a studio using one or two of it's favorite eq's or preamps on multiple tracks... it's just time.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2012, 10:56 AM   #73
Banned
Human being with feelings
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Unwired (probably in the proximity of Amsterdam)
Posts: 4,868
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercado_Negro View Post
Nebula is a professional tool because it delivers the best quality available when it comes to equalizers, consoles and tape emulations. [...]
I'm not interested at all in whether it can be labelled "professional". I'm sure anyone who calls himself a professional can judge that for him/herself just fine.

But I am willing to spend time, money and/or CPU cycles to get great quality. So I'm still very interested to hear an audio example comparing some Nebula preset/patch to any alternatives, where Nebula sounds better (objectively or subjectively). Because I still haven't heard one yet, and I'd rather not have to buy it just to find out if I like it or not. So I'll ask again: can anyone show me an example of Nebula doing the kind of thing that the UAD Moog Multimode Filter does, as well or better? Either the saturation/overdrive part of it, or the resonant filters, I'm interested in both.
__________________
˙lɐd 'ʎɐʍ ƃuoɹʍ ǝɥʇ ǝɔıʌǝp ʇɐɥʇ ƃuıploɥ ǝɹ,noʎ
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2012, 06:54 AM   #74
antiClick
Human being with feelings
 
antiClick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Mediterrenean Sea
Posts: 915
Default

bump this!

Quote:
Originally Posted by antiClick View Post
Here is what I think could be a fair comparison between Satson and NLS, including audio test files.
http://www.sonimus.com/comunidad/soc...g.html#reply_2

Google English translation:
http://translate.google.com/translat...eply_2&act=url
antiClick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2012, 08:06 AM   #75
n0rd
Human being with feelings
 
n0rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Down Under
Posts: 396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned View Post
I'll ask again: can anyone show me an example of Nebula doing the kind of thing...
+1.

I've heard time and time again of how good Nebula is but not prepared to buy it just to find out...

There's no A/B examples on Acustica Audio site.
__________________
Subconscious Inclination...
n0rd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2012, 08:14 AM   #76
matey
Human being with feelings
 
matey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Civitavecchia (Italy)
Posts: 575
Default

dunno, mates....
not so accustomed with big consoles emus here, but I cant really get the point with them, please help.
how do they dramatically improve your mix workflow or sound in a way you couldn't easily do with a bunch of properly chained JS and or VoS or Stilwell plugin, to say a few?
is there that badly emphasized 2-6khz's of digital harshness that make you mad and you cant even tame with an eq?
or is there some sort of nice sounding compression you couldn't get with nowadays plugs?
maybe, is it a sort of out-of-the box presets with these large consoles emulation that make you dreaming with suggestive names?
I do really want to know better, serious...
__________________
"You know what a miracle is. Not what Bakunin said. But another world's intrusion into this one".
Thomas Pynchon, The Crying of Lot 49
matey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2012, 10:18 PM   #77
Mercado_Negro
Moderator
 
Mercado_Negro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Caracas, Venezuela
Posts: 8,261
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned View Post
I'm not interested at all in whether it can be labelled "professional". I'm sure anyone who calls himself a professional can judge that for him/herself just fine.

But I am willing to spend time, money and/or CPU cycles to get great quality. So I'm still very interested to hear an audio example comparing some Nebula preset/patch to any alternatives, where Nebula sounds better (objectively or subjectively). Because I still haven't heard one yet, and I'd rather not have to buy it just to find out if I like it or not. So I'll ask again: can anyone show me an example of Nebula doing the kind of thing that the UAD Moog Multimode Filter does, as well or better? Either the saturation/overdrive part of it, or the resonant filters, I'm interested in both.
Sorry Banned, I can't help you there. I've never heard/used the UAD Moog Multimode Filter. While Nebula does a great job on the saturation and harmonic enrichment department, it doesn't handle distortion too well (nor abrupt dynamic changes). If you're looking for a good equalizer for instruments or vocals, then it's the best you can buy nowadays but if you want to be creative with filters and whatnot, then don't spend your time, look somewhere else. Andrew Simpler will release a filter very soon and it sounds amazing, I'd dare to say it is the best filter I've heard so far (for creative stuff). You can hear some audio demos (or read about it), here: https://cytomic.com/cytomic-announce...-filter-plugin
__________________
Pressure is what turns coal into diamonds - Michael a.k.a. Runaway
Mercado_Negro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2012, 11:10 PM   #78
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,555
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by matey View Post
dunno, mates....
not so accustomed with big consoles emus here, but I cant really get the point with them, please help.
how do they dramatically improve your mix workflow or sound in a way you couldn't easily do with a bunch of properly chained JS and or VoS or Stilwell plugin, to say a few?
is there that badly emphasized 2-6khz's of digital harshness that make you mad and you cant even tame with an eq?
or is there some sort of nice sounding compression you couldn't get with nowadays plugs?
maybe, is it a sort of out-of-the box presets with these large consoles emulation that make you dreaming with suggestive names?
I do really want to know better, serious...
There is a free Nebula, to get the idea with. But what it does to my audio is not a placebo effect. But it is also not dramatic. It is subtle like a long analog signal chain with really nice gear. Try the free version and use it all over a mix, not just here and there. Nebula will eat your CPU up, so be ready to freeze tracks and have a very slow work-flow. But if it sounds good, then the adjustments are just adjustments, not handicaps.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2012, 08:30 AM   #79
Banned
Human being with feelings
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Unwired (probably in the proximity of Amsterdam)
Posts: 4,868
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercado_Negro View Post
Sorry Banned, I can't help you there. I've never heard/used the UAD Moog Multimode Filter. While Nebula does a great job on the saturation and harmonic enrichment department, it doesn't handle distortion too well (nor abrupt dynamic changes). If you're looking for a good equalizer for instruments or vocals, then it's the best you can buy nowadays but if you want to be creative with filters and whatnot, then don't spend your time, look somewhere else.
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercado_Negro View Post
Andrew Simpler will release a filter very soon and it sounds amazing, I'd dare to say it is the best filter I've heard so far (for creative stuff). You can hear some audio demos (or read about it), here: https://cytomic.com/cytomic-announce...-filter-plugin
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.
__________________
˙lɐd 'ʎɐʍ ƃuoɹʍ ǝɥʇ ǝɔıʌǝp ʇɐɥʇ ƃuıploɥ ǝɹ,noʎ
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2012, 08:40 AM   #80
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,555
Default

Quote:
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.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.