Changing XML file for high quality sound and rendering?

Tips & tricks, working results, technical support
User avatar
Tim Petherick
Expert
Expert
Posts: 1731
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 4:07 pm
Location: Bath , Uk

Re: Changing XML file for high quality sound and rendering?

Post by Tim Petherick » Wed Sep 04, 2013 10:53 pm

@Cupwise

I captured a eq dynamically last year with only three dynamic steps and three bands....its not that hard on cpu.Though Admittedly it does not have huge amount of samples But I was creating 200-300 combination eq's before I started releasing anything, but I did not release them because of cpu. I could of reduced the quality to release them but I didn't think people would want it.


It was done this way because the transformer slightly saturates on peaks... I have only done this for one of my releases well actually the original elc24 and the new version.

Every hardware is different And took this approach for this eq. In actual fact most 1073's get a lump on the low end when you push them because of the transformer.

A lot of High end eq's would not need this unless you wanted that pushed sound. However eq's with a lot of ringing would probably need this anyway to get the true sound, they have a kind of stop start characteristic at low levels.

fradoca
User Level 0
User Level 0
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 8:59 pm

Re: Changing XML file for high quality sound and rendering?

Post by fradoca » Fri Sep 06, 2013 10:32 am

if you are using a console (like the german mastering console stereo bus out library at 10k) or a tape program like the dte 30 ips library it means that they are dynamic libraries because they do affect transients and dynamic range.I don't know if i'm plain wrong or crazy but using nebula for mastering at 96 khz( 2 or 3 instance maximum) i always use TIMED (the 3 little arrows in the kern page point toward timed) with all the timed values at the maximum(73 ms or even 100 ms).Ltimed value is set 100000.
I also turn RATE S to on and put its value to 200 ms.
Apart from tweaking the original preset am i doing something wrong?? All i can hear is that i get much better sound even using PEAK detection instead of rms17 or evf or evf17 in the efvs page.RATE CNV is set to 9000 and ahead time to 6.000 ms(also in the glob page).
I want to say that i use 2 or 3 libraries for mastering(gmc,dte or anm) just to ad some flavour and punch to clients tracks.And yes i like to tweak my libraries a litte ;-)

Cupwise
Expert
Expert
Posts: 982
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2010 2:03 am

Re: Changing XML file for high quality sound and rendering?

Post by Cupwise » Fri Sep 06, 2013 11:08 am

well yeah, tapes and consoles are dynamic.

but if you are setting the prog rate to 200ms, they aren't going to be 'affecting transients'. not in any way resembling the hardware. so i would say, yes you are doing something wrong there. imo you should just switch the h1 and either even or odd kerns to timed, and not mess with the program rate. switching all three can cause artifacts and so unless you are willing to test and make sure it isn't, i don't think you should do it that way.

lowering the prog rate faster gives more accurate (like the hardware) behavior, with the exception that it can cause artifacts. raising the prog rate is going in the opposite direction and nebula is completely and utterly missing your transients, not processing them with the 'proper' samples and instead processing them with the quietest captured impulses rather than louder ones like it should be. i've already demonstrated that it even does that at 20ms but like i said, unless you feel like testing for artifacts yourself you should just leave well enough alone, and switch h1 and either even or odd kerns to timed, for render. again that's just my opinion about what the easiest, relatively risk free way for you to get a possibly higher quality sounding render would be.

fradoca
User Level 0
User Level 0
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 8:59 pm

Re: Changing XML file for high quality sound and rendering?

Post by fradoca » Fri Sep 06, 2013 11:37 am

Hi Cupwise,
thanks for the tips.Yeah just keeping the original rate of the library and turning rate s to on makes thins more pleasent sonically speaking.At 200 it seems there's no processing like the original hardware.
A question that has always intrigued me : would it make sense keeping attack and release values at the minimum values possible? (1ms).Just to have a "faster" reaction from the library? Wrong or not?
thanks!

Cupwise
Expert
Expert
Posts: 982
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2010 2:03 am

Re: Changing XML file for high quality sound and rendering?

Post by Cupwise » Fri Sep 06, 2013 2:04 pm

changing rate s to on does nothing by itself. it just allows you to adjust the program rate. if you don't adjust the program rate, setting rate s to on does nothing.

theoretically, lowering the attack and release would give you results a little closer to the hardware but
a) it could cause artifacts (prob more likely with tape stuff than with preamp stuff) and
b) with a prog rate of 20ms it probably doesn't make too much of a difference

but i usually think it seems to sound better with the attack around 6-7ms and release at 1, but i could be imagining that.

fradoca
User Level 0
User Level 0
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 8:59 pm

Re: Changing XML file for high quality sound and rendering?

Post by fradoca » Fri Sep 06, 2013 3:24 pm

yeah it seems that keeping attack at around 7 ms and relaese at 1 ms gives you some better results.
I keep the program rate at 40 ms in the mast page and rate s on in the glob page.I do all of my mastering at 96 khz.Should i increase the program rate with high sample rates? I can hear a difference on low frequency articulation when rate is on or off.With rates on the sound is slightly better.

brp
User Level IX
User Level IX
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 1:02 pm

Re: Changing XML file for high quality sound and rendering?

Post by brp » Fri Sep 06, 2013 11:43 pm

yayh, i love gmc for mastering as well. but i haven't tried tweaking it yet, so i can't give you approved advice on this. but cupwise gave you quite good advice in my eyes. my advice would just be turning everything to timed, kernel size to the max, as you allready have. then take the shortest prograte you can get and depending on how short this is, it's better to turn off smooth or turn it on. i'd say if it's shorter than 7ms definitely try to turn it off. for longer interwalls, as you allready found out, smooth can improve things. evf i'd turn to evf17. peak sometimes can fool you to think it sounds better, because it tend to choose a louder kernel than it actually should. this wouldn't be bad allone, but the bad thing is, it would not choose a louder kernel while quite passages, meaning the kernel selection becomes kind of unpredictable and it would not sound as good as just driven hotter with evf17.

an other trick i found out for alexb mwd, is to reconfigure it as feedback compressor. i just tried it with this by now, but others will follow. at least in this case the sound become much much more 3d!! but you'll need to search the sweetspot with the feedback delay.

as preamps are quite similar to comps, i see the chance to get a similar effect there. i'll try this as soon as i get some time. but logic tells me that i should be pessimistic about this, because it's most likely only the delayed gainreduction which is responsible for that effect.

Post Reply