AlexB V2 comp

Officially Licensed 3rd Party Developer Libraries
Free 3rd Party Programs
kindafishy
Vip Member
Vip Member
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 2:08 pm

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Post by kindafishy » Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:52 pm

TranscendingMusic wrote:obviously I'm not alex but consider this general truth: any time you can avoid conversion, you are getting the best fidelity. Plain and simple. Conversion is another process after all. In fairness, the Nebula conversion, comparatively speaking, is indeed really good. The sentiment there is "no difference" is always a bit loaded versus native rate. But it is based on the implicit fact that yes there is a difference with any additional process involved however it is a comparative idea that does involve understanding the quality you get in the compromise of conversion . So all things being equal, no conversion means removing just another process.
This isn't about which rate is better, so consider this as well: working at 44.1 is better to use 44.1. Conversely at 96, it's better at 96...etc
Unfortunately for me, I like to work at 48, but the only libraries I have that are natively at that rate are Tim P's.

So, should it be the case that Nebula "forces" me to work at 44.1 to get the best benefit from all of my libraries?

TranscendingMusic
Expert
Expert
Posts: 1247
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 7:01 am
Location: USA

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Post by TranscendingMusic » Wed Dec 31, 2014 7:24 pm

kindafishy wrote:
TranscendingMusic wrote:obviously I'm not alex but consider this general truth: any time you can avoid conversion, you are getting the best fidelity. Plain and simple. Conversion is another process after all. In fairness, the Nebula conversion, comparatively speaking, is indeed really good. The sentiment there is "no difference" is always a bit loaded versus native rate. But it is based on the implicit fact that yes there is a difference with any additional process involved however it is a comparative idea that does involve understanding the quality you get in the compromise of conversion . So all things being equal, no conversion means removing just another process.
This isn't about which rate is better, so consider this as well: working at 44.1 is better to use 44.1. Conversely at 96, it's better at 96...etc
Unfortunately for me, I like to work at 48, but the only libraries I have that are natively at that rate are Tim P's.

So, should it be the case that Nebula "forces" me to work at 44.1 to get the best benefit from all of my libraries?
You ask this question first: what native rate do I like or must work at? Ok, so you have answered that already, 48K. Next question is, weighing out the pros and cons of audio processing which includes SR conversion, do I do better forgoing Nebula and its conversion and using something else with its pitfalls, down-sides, and cons? OR does the benefit of using Nebula processing outweigh the small price of its conversion - which again, is quite good any way - versus using those more conventional plugins. You will find in most cases, going with Nebula, since you chose to work with to begin with for a reason, and compromising with its conversion still yields mind-blowing, amazing results.

In essence, Alex's news means this: you now cover may be that 1 - 5% if you work in either 44.1 or 96 of the down-side of conversion by using Nebula along with native rates. You get your cake and you get to eat it too.

Would I, have I, and will I worry if I have to work with Nebula conversion? 100% NO. That is a scruple compared to what you get in the end.
Cubase Pro 10.0.50 x64
Ryzen 2700x | Win 10 x64

kindafishy
Vip Member
Vip Member
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 2:08 pm

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Post by kindafishy » Wed Dec 31, 2014 8:18 pm

TranscendingMusic wrote:You ask this question first: what native rate do I like or must work at? Ok, so you have answered that already, 48K. Next question is, weighing out the pros and cons of audio processing which includes SR conversion, do I do better forgoing Nebula and its conversion and using something else with its pitfalls, down-sides, and cons? OR does the benefit of using Nebula processing outweigh the small price of its conversion - which again, is quite good any way - versus using those more conventional plugins. You will find in most cases, going with Nebula, since you chose to work with to begin with for a reason, and compromising with its conversion still yields mind-blowing, amazing results.

In essence, Alex's news means this: you now cover may be that 1 - 5% if you work in either 44.1 or 96 of the down-side of conversion by using Nebula along with native rates. You get your cake and you get to eat it too.

Would I, have I, and will I worry if I have to work with Nebula conversion? 100% NO. That is a scruple compared to what you get in the end.
Thank you! Much food for thought (expect the part about foregoing Nebula/Acqua... that part is non-negotiable ;)).

TranscendingMusic
Expert
Expert
Posts: 1247
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 7:01 am
Location: USA

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Post by TranscendingMusic » Wed Dec 31, 2014 8:23 pm

kindafishy wrote:
TranscendingMusic wrote:You ask this question first: what native rate do I like or must work at? Ok, so you have answered that already, 48K. Next question is, weighing out the pros and cons of audio processing which includes SR conversion, do I do better forgoing Nebula and its conversion and using something else with its pitfalls, down-sides, and cons? OR does the benefit of using Nebula processing outweigh the small price of its conversion - which again, is quite good any way - versus using those more conventional plugins. You will find in most cases, going with Nebula, since you chose to work with to begin with for a reason, and compromising with its conversion still yields mind-blowing, amazing results.

In essence, Alex's news means this: you now cover may be that 1 - 5% if you work in either 44.1 or 96 of the down-side of conversion by using Nebula along with native rates. You get your cake and you get to eat it too.

Would I, have I, and will I worry if I have to work with Nebula conversion? 100% NO. That is a scruple compared to what you get in the end.
Thank you! Much food for thought (expect the part about foregoing Nebula/Acqua... that part is non-negotiable ;)).
Haha exactly! You have essentially just answered the crucial question :)
Any time man!
Cubase Pro 10.0.50 x64
Ryzen 2700x | Win 10 x64

RJHollins
Expert
Expert
Posts: 3980
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 5:53 pm

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Post by RJHollins » Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:47 pm

I too agree with TM's assessment. As a mastering engineer, I often have to balance client request and job requirements.

I will state outright that I've not like SR conversion ... particularly when the final output has to return to a lower [44.1] rate.

A consideration that may be kept in mind. Only the engineer with both 'sources' can compare/evaluate between the 2 rates. With only the 'final down sampled' file, the lack of direct A/B becomes a non-issue.

Although I have and do use algo & Nebula combinations as needed/required ... I have full confidence that Nebula will be in the chain ... and preferably as THE final process, as every algo tends to flatten [dimensionally] the audio. And that is what I usually avoid [base on material and client needs].

Bottom line [from my perspective] ... I avoid unnecessary conversions as general guide. I will NOT hesitate to use Nebula and whatever library [at it's given SR]. i.e.: many libraries are 96k only ... they are used in any/all 44.1k project.

The ONLY issue I don't like is the TIME it takes to convert the library.

Back to on topic :o The v2 libraries from AlexB are phenomenal ... they were really good before ... and they are even better !!! BTW ... the new v2 Tube console is gorgeous :mrgreen: The M**G filter I've used in mastering sessions is incredible [who would have thought].

Definitely waiting on every v2 release.
i7-5820k, MSI X99A Plus, 16 GIG Ram, Noctua NH-D14, Win-7 Pro [64-bit], Reaper-64

NVC [Nebula Virtual Controllers]

User avatar
ianc
User Level X
User Level X
Posts: 107
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:17 pm
Location: UK

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Post by ianc » Tue Jan 06, 2015 3:39 am

I'd have thought it best to work at the highest sample rate you can, As I'd be more worried by the aliases in algo plugins than any SRC in nebula, thats just what I've learned so far and it may be that I have a lot more to learn on that subject
One thing I have noticed and why Tim's librarys are so useful is that if you can use a matching samplerate to your project nebula quite logically uses less cpu
Sorry if thats already been mentioned but we can't all read everything, though I wish I could when it comes to nebula and it's always useful to someone to get more than one chance to pick up little bits (in this case a atom) of info if it has a useful relevence to the user.
I wish I could drum half as well with two hands as one of Terry Bozzio's feet

kindafishy
Vip Member
Vip Member
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 2:08 pm

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Post by kindafishy » Tue Jan 06, 2015 4:54 am

ianc wrote:[...]One thing I have noticed and why Tim's librarys are so useful is that if you can use a matching samplerate to your project nebula quite logically uses less cpu[...]
Are you certain of this? I was under the impression that Nebula performs SRC when the library loads, not on the fly while it is processing audio. If you have seen this first hand, I believe it, but it just strikes me as odd and unexpected.

richie43
Expert
Expert
Posts: 5049
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:47 pm
Location: Minnesota, USA
Contact:

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Post by richie43 » Tue Jan 06, 2015 8:16 am

kindafishy wrote:
ianc wrote:[...]One thing I have noticed and why Tim's librarys are so useful is that if you can use a matching samplerate to your project nebula quite logically uses less cpu[...]
Are you certain of this? I was under the impression that Nebula performs SRC when the library loads, not on the fly while it is processing audio. If you have seen this first hand, I believe it, but it just strikes me as odd and unexpected.
You are correct, mostly. It will take up more resources to do the SRC, but as soon as it's done, it should not use any more CPU than any other library at any sample rate.
The Sounds of the Hear and Now
http://soundyaudio.com/

User avatar
ianc
User Level X
User Level X
Posts: 107
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:17 pm
Location: UK

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Post by ianc » Tue Jan 06, 2015 2:12 pm

The cpu usage in nebula's telling me this , I wasn't testing this just noticed it the other day, so I will test it properly later and see if this is what's consistently the case, could of been my end of things, if this isn't what is supposed to happen
I wish I could drum half as well with two hands as one of Terry Bozzio's feet

User avatar
ngarjuna
Expert
Expert
Posts: 782
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 5:04 pm
Location: Miami

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Post by ngarjuna » Wed Jan 07, 2015 9:37 pm

Personally, I will buy a 2.0 version of any and every Alex library I own, which consists of:
5 consoles
6 EQs
5 comps
2 other
But not a single one of them has been updated yet. So for me, that's why I haven't bought any 2.0s yet.

dacaveprods
Member
Member
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:36 pm

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Post by dacaveprods » Wed Jan 07, 2015 9:51 pm

ngarjuna wrote:Personally, I will buy a 2.0 version of any and every Alex library I own, which consists of:
5 consoles
6 EQs
5 comps
2 other
But not a single one of them has been updated yet. So for me, that's why I haven't bought any 2.0s yet.

About the same... EXACTLY!!!

User avatar
ianc
User Level X
User Level X
Posts: 107
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:17 pm
Location: UK

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Post by ianc » Thu Jan 08, 2015 2:30 am

The cpu usage just fries my brain, so I'll take Tim's word about whats really happening, I've got a project open in 44k and the 44k presets usage is slightly more than the 96k of the same preset. :o Other presets are the other way round, so I'll just put this down to differences in the presets settings as a possibility, there's not such a large enough distance between the 2 to get a headache about
Last edited by ianc on Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
I wish I could drum half as well with two hands as one of Terry Bozzio's feet

User avatar
Tim Petherick
Expert
Expert
Posts: 1772
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 4:07 pm
Location: Bath , Uk

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Post by Tim Petherick » Thu Jan 08, 2015 9:05 pm

ianc wrote:The cpu usage just fries my brain, so I'll take Tim's word about whats really happening, I've got a project open in 44k and the 44k presets usage is slightly more than the 96k of the same preset. :o Other presets are the other way round, so I'll just put this down to differences in the presets settings as a possibility, there's not should a large enough distance between the 2 to get a headache about
The only reasons I can think of cpu being different is because maybe the total amount of samples may of been 1 or 2 less between versions and maybe a slight difference in kern length. I have never really compared cpu's of converted and native, so I'm not sure where this was seen, may of been a misunderstanding.

russianpolecat
User Level XI
User Level XI
Posts: 171
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2011 10:16 pm

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Post by russianpolecat » Mon Jan 19, 2015 12:26 am

AlexB wrote:
hwasser wrote: Btw, the v2 versions are also in 44.1 kHz. Does 44.1 use less ram and cpu usage than 99.6 version when used in a 44.1 project?
The new releases, new libraries and v2.0 upgrades, are sampled at 44.1kHz and 96kHz. The 44.1kHz sounds a lot better than any Nebula internal resample process or the library resampled by SRC. Native 44.1kHz preset uses less Ram and CPU load also.

The improvement in sound quality of the new A*I and N**e libraries will leave you with open mouth.
Alex, do you have an ETA on these updated libraries? I want to give you my money!! (esp for the N**e :))

tyrrell
User Level VI
User Level VI
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 1:26 am

Re: AlexB V2 comp

Post by tyrrell » Mon Jan 19, 2015 4:47 am

I have a mix waiting for the MBC v2.

Post Reply