MFC vs. Lime

Officially Licensed 3rd Party Developer Libraries
Free 3rd Party Programs
boldlove
User Level IV
User Level IV
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 7:50 pm

Re: MFC vs. Lime

Post by boldlove » Mon Jan 30, 2017 11:00 pm

This is some serious news, Andrums. What about DSPBUFFER sizes higher than 2084 or lower than 1024? I usually mix at 8192 (even though no DAW I know matches that, I find it significantly increases how many instances I can have running, especially with Neb reverbs in the fray).

I remember reading a while ago that Nebula sounds its best when both the DAW's buffer size and Nebula's DSPBUFFER are set to 128—practical really only for final mixdown. Is that still true with N4, does anyone happen to know? How would 128 affect AlexB libs?

User avatar
Shibata
User Level XI
User Level XI
Posts: 185
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 8:06 pm

Re: MFC vs. Lime

Post by Shibata » Mon Jan 30, 2017 11:45 pm

markgalup
If you want nice true stereo, look at the Alex VMeQ ver.2
http://www.alessandroboschi.eu/html/ale ... ter_eq.htm

Its a mastering eq - Teldec MPE30 with all bands in true stereo, which enhance stereo without a touch of a gain, just use double the track and split signal for mid side and place all bands of Teldec to the side, in order to avoid smearing of low frequencies. The stereo is more noticeable than in MFC or Lime.
Also is a great eq for mastering)

boldlove
Its very complex thing about dsp buffer, rte, timed, freqd, prog rate - they are correlated and sampling frequency affected.
I'm tired already of arguing about it with developers.
Just don't use 8192 buffer - this is the worstest thing you can do with nebula)

EDIT: I guess the question is, is Lime A or B Line in true stereo?
VST Analayser shows that only Line B true stereo, Line A - mono.

Andrums
Vip Member
Vip Member
Posts: 393
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 8:03 am

Re: MFC vs. Lime

Post by Andrums » Tue Jan 31, 2017 12:01 am

128 is bad for consoles but good for EQs programs

Andrums
Vip Member
Vip Member
Posts: 393
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 8:03 am

Re: MFC vs. Lime

Post by Andrums » Tue Jan 31, 2017 12:06 am

MFC,
DAW's buffer size and Nebula's DSPBUFFER are set to 128,
awful aliasing
Attachments
Screen Shot 2017-01-31 at 00.52.04.png

Andrums
Vip Member
Vip Member
Posts: 393
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 8:03 am

Re: MFC vs. Lime

Post by Andrums » Tue Jan 31, 2017 12:11 am

Using Lime Pre no matter what buffer size is set,everything is good.
LIME CRAZY88 PRE rel F.
Attachments
9.jpg
9.jpg (12.04 KiB) Viewed 2817 times

User avatar
Shibata
User Level XI
User Level XI
Posts: 185
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 8:06 pm

Re: MFC vs. Lime

Post by Shibata » Tue Jan 31, 2017 12:50 am

Andrums
aliasing on consoles not due to the buffer, its just increased RTE and mixes with the original signal and you see decrease the aliasing. But its a dilemma or reduce the alias or worse resolution render. Problem within a library.

Andrums
Vip Member
Vip Member
Posts: 393
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 8:03 am

Re: MFC vs. Lime

Post by Andrums » Tue Jan 31, 2017 1:08 am

Shibata wrote: But its a dilemma or reduce the alias or worse resolution render. Problem within a library.
That is why I use Lime Pre rev F for console emulation,it has high resolution at any buffer size and zero aliasing

boldlove
User Level IV
User Level IV
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 7:50 pm

Re: MFC vs. Lime

Post by boldlove » Tue Jan 31, 2017 2:35 am

Man, I have so many questions now...

I only use 8192 buffer when I'm mixing in real-time as it allows me to run more instances, I switch it whenever I print something. But now I'm not so sure what to switch it to...

What is RTE? I know I've seen it atop the Mast page but haven't really considered what it's referring to...

So what is best practice then? Is 2048, all things considered, the best trade-off DSPBUFFER setting for printing? (With N4 and no Nebula Setups currently, it's much trickier assigning individual presets different buffer sizes...)

2084 for MFC, but is 128 optimal for all EQ libs, or is it developer dependent? Are these issues inherent to Nebula or rather dependent on a given developer's sampling technique?

So does the DAW's buffer size have anything to do with sound quality when printing, or is that just an urban legend?

Also, more generally, what is your workflow when you guys transition from real-time mixing to freezing or printing tracks, do you edit Nebula's XML file, changing perhaps the DSPBUFFER and QUALITY settings before mixing down?

Thanks for the knowledge!

User avatar
markgalup
Expert
Expert
Posts: 569
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 6:15 am
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Re: MFC vs. Lime

Post by markgalup » Tue Jan 31, 2017 6:23 am

I would just like to add that if Andrums is able to get aliasing reduced to that minimal amount by simply adjusting the buffer, then for most intents and purposes, the typical user can adjust the DSP buffer and move on with mixing. This is all just my humble opinion, and only meant to clarify some potential anxiety this discussion could cause other users - not to tell anyone what to do in any way :)

boldlove, if it were me (this is in fact what I will do), I'd adjust the DSP buffer and move on with mixing. If your ears tell you stuff is whack, then investigate. Otherwise, make hay while the sun shines :D

MG
Mark Galup
Producer/Mixer/MFiT-Approved Mastering Engineer
MarkGalup.com
ReelRecording.com
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

Acustica Audio Dealer for the USA -> Contact me for US Discounts

RainbowSix
User Level IX
User Level IX
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 5:15 pm

Re: MFC vs. Lime

Post by RainbowSix » Tue Jan 31, 2017 7:29 pm

Surely buffer range is going to have no effect on the sound of a rendered project? It makes sense to me that it's just the buffer range of the CPU for 'live' processing of audio through the software.

Also, regarding the level of aliasing on the MFC (which I own and use), I have no way to surpass 1024 in Logic Pro X (that I know of), so surely that completely prevents me from achieving a level of quality with the library, if buffer size has any effect on the final rendered audio file.

User avatar
markgalup
Expert
Expert
Posts: 569
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 6:15 am
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Re: MFC vs. Lime

Post by markgalup » Tue Jan 31, 2017 8:23 pm

RainbowSix wrote:Surely buffer range is going to have no effect on the sound of a rendered project? It makes sense to me that it's just the buffer range of the CPU for 'live' processing of audio through the software.

Also, regarding the level of aliasing on the MFC (which I own and use), I have no way to surpass 1024 in Logic Pro X (that I know of), so surely that completely prevents me from achieving a level of quality with the library, if buffer size has any effect on the final rendered audio file.
I believe the fix is relating to adjusting the DSP buffer in the MAST page of a Nebula instance, which you should be able to do no problem.
Mark Galup
Producer/Mixer/MFiT-Approved Mastering Engineer
MarkGalup.com
ReelRecording.com
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

Acustica Audio Dealer for the USA -> Contact me for US Discounts

RainbowSix
User Level IX
User Level IX
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 5:15 pm

Re: MFC vs. Lime

Post by RainbowSix » Tue Jan 31, 2017 8:37 pm

Ohhhhh, that makes more sense. Ok, 2048 is a good middle ground to go for then?

User avatar
markgalup
Expert
Expert
Posts: 569
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 6:15 am
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Re: MFC vs. Lime

Post by markgalup » Tue Jan 31, 2017 9:30 pm

Referencing what Andrums and Shibata said, I would say yes :)
Mark Galup
Producer/Mixer/MFiT-Approved Mastering Engineer
MarkGalup.com
ReelRecording.com
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

Acustica Audio Dealer for the USA -> Contact me for US Discounts

User avatar
markgalup
Expert
Expert
Posts: 569
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 6:15 am
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Re: MFC vs. Lime

Post by markgalup » Tue Jan 31, 2017 9:31 pm

Shibata wrote:markgalup
If you want nice true stereo, look at the Alex VMeQ ver.2
http://www.alessandroboschi.eu/html/ale ... ter_eq.htm

Its a mastering eq - Teldec MPE30 with all bands in true stereo, which enhance stereo without a touch of a gain, just use double the track and split signal for mid side and place all bands of Teldec to the side, in order to avoid smearing of low frequencies. The stereo is more noticeable than in MFC or Lime.
Also is a great eq for mastering)
Thanks for this, Shibata - I have looked into it but had not heard of this exact experience. I'll have to go and purchase this lib now, darn it :D

MG
Mark Galup
Producer/Mixer/MFiT-Approved Mastering Engineer
MarkGalup.com
ReelRecording.com
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

Acustica Audio Dealer for the USA -> Contact me for US Discounts

RainbowSix
User Level IX
User Level IX
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 5:15 pm

Re: MFC vs. Lime

Post by RainbowSix » Tue Jan 31, 2017 9:35 pm

Cool, I reckon I'll do tests with the DSPBuffer on all of my favourite presets/libraries, as I was just working on a snare and I had 2 EQs on it. I bounced it out with Buffer set at default on both, which is 512, and then I bounced it out with buffer set to 128. There was a noticable fullness and definition to the second bounce in comparison to the first.

Luckily it saves the Buffer setting per preset so I can simply check it out each time I open them from now on.

Post Reply