Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Officially Licensed 3rd Party Developer Libraries
Free 3rd Party Programs
CoolColJ
User Level IX
User Level IX
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:05 pm

Re: Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Post by CoolColJ » Tue Oct 22, 2013 12:30 pm

yr wrote:
CoolColJ wrote:Swan -

you can hear the difference between my Jupiter 8 going through the Speck Xtramix then into Lynx Hilo, vs direct to Hilo here

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-sho ... -hilo.html

Quite a difference, even more so with stereo sounds.
Personally it seems to "enhance" the sound better than the Waves and Cakewalk N**e channels....
@CoolColJ- there is something else going on (other then the expected sonic differences), there is a lot of noise on your Hilo samples, which looks like RFI interference.
Might be happening in the Jupiter 8 (analog synth) itself or in the cable going from the JP8 to Hilo. Because both clips go to the Hilo anyway, but follow a different physical route in the room :)

User avatar
yr
Vip Member
Vip Member
Posts: 438
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:04 am
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Post by yr » Tue Oct 22, 2013 12:35 pm

ferrite beads are your friend:)- I use them for all my mic cables.

About the thickener- it's subtle, but I often just use Doc-Fear with -2 or [email protected] to take the edge of things.
Reuven | post-production & sound-design | scenography |
website | nebula presets

SWAN
Expert
Expert
Posts: 775
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:16 pm

Re: Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Post by SWAN » Tue Oct 22, 2013 2:06 pm

CoolColJ wrote:Swan -

you can hear the difference between my Jupiter 8 going through the Speck Xtramix then into Lynx Hilo, vs direct to Hilo here

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-sho ... -hilo.html

Quite a difference, even more so with stereo sounds.
Personally it seems to "enhance" the sound better than the Waves and Cakewalk N**e channels....
...I mean - technically the speck is a clean line mixer so I cant see how it should make that much difference...def think there is something up with the hilo only sample...noise and a lower level...
Mac Mini i7 quad 2.6

Logic X
Live 9
Reaper

harmonik
User Level V
User Level V
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 11:06 pm

Re: Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Post by harmonik » Tue Oct 22, 2013 5:57 pm

timp wrote:It's to do with the speed nebula has to run in order to change with the dynamics... A preamp is going to be very very fast. Tape would be slightly slower and a compressor slower again. Although it depends on what's happening dynamically too in terms compression and distortion.
I thought Nebula compressor programs have a faster prograte than preamp programs, and that the "transient" issue is relevant with compressors because even with a relatively faster prograte for the compressor program template (than the preamp or reverb templates), the prograte would actually have to be ever faster still (from very CPU heavy to impractical) for ever more accurate transient behavior in a Nebula compressor program. Since real preamps on the other hand are not designed to have huge differences in behavior at different dynamics, a slower prograte can still give close to real results in Nebula.

User avatar
Tim Petherick
Expert
Expert
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 4:07 pm
Location: Bath , Uk

Re: Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Post by Tim Petherick » Tue Oct 22, 2013 6:42 pm

Yes you are right in terms of getting most of the way there but if you are trying to add saturation/compression it's more difficult ,it depends on what's going on with the source material too. I'm talking about how fast nebula can go in order to change samples relative to the hardware's response without artifacts mainly here. I'm talking about EVF's mostly not the program rate. although both change the final out come. SCS was a preamp to attempt to get Slight tube compression with overdrive.....Scs is running as fast as nebula can go in terms of evf

Don't get me wrong you can use preamps and they will sound mostly like the hardware as long as your not trying to push it like hardware.

Program can be set by the developer....as long as it's in timed mode. freqd player is governed by the dsp buffer.

I would say that compressor programs are working quite well as they have a slow EVF to represent the hardware.

If you can't hear it, use it! my comments are in theory. Like you said huge differences in dynamic behaviour would be more audible as I kinda said in the previous post.

CoolColJ
User Level IX
User Level IX
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:05 pm

Re: Favorite Nebula 'analogue thickener'...

Post by CoolColJ » Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:58 pm

SWAN wrote:
CoolColJ wrote:Swan -

you can hear the difference between my Jupiter 8 going through the Speck Xtramix then into Lynx Hilo, vs direct to Hilo here

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-sho ... -hilo.html

Quite a difference, even more so with stereo sounds.
Personally it seems to "enhance" the sound better than the Waves and Cakewalk N**e channels....
...I mean - technically the speck is a clean line mixer so I cant see how it should make that much difference...def think there is something up with the hilo only sample...noise and a lower level...
It is what it is - no transformers, no tubes or anything, but it certainly changes the sound.
I've had it open before and it just has off the shelf opamps and simple discrete boards for each set of channels

The level difference is due to signal path, since the Xtramix has level pots :)
And noise like I said is due to different cables being used and signal path - oh yeah cables do effect sound too, but some people don't believe so :P

edit - a few more here
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/8373378-post183.html

So if a simple line mixer can alter the sound that much, I expect a vintage console, with tubes or transformers, with lots more iron and wire in the signal path with EQ and so on to be way more coloured...

Back when I had an Allen and Heath console in the early 90s, Yamaha Pro mix digital mixer and a Mackie SR24-4, the difference in sound was huge!
The A&H had a beefy and thick and warm "British" sound. Pro Mix had a clean sheen and the Mackie a thinner more shiny American sound.

I don't seem to hear as much of a difference between all these console emulators
I hear more colouration difference between the digital out and DAC/analog outs of my synths, and between my various audio interfaces TBH....!

Post Reply