This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.

Welcome to Our Community

Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.

AE's Nebula thread (samples, tests, etc)

Discussion in 'Backline' started by AeternusEternus, Jan 12, 2009.

  1. Acusticaudio.net

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    I cannot understand why you are saying this, i tried all the last CPU intensive programs, also compared to the impulses that you have created and i think that there is no comparison.

    The programs sound amazing compared to those poor impulses, i found guitars more dynamic, more present, more alive.

    But if you think that our approach is too boring and the audio quality is not so good or that a cabinet sounds like a compressor?? it's better for you to use traditional impulse responses.
     
  2. Ermz

    Ermz ¯\(°_o)/¯

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2002
    Messages:
    20,382
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    I'm sure everyone here is more than open to Nebula and its approach. We wouldn't have bought the software otherwise. The problem is that there are so many uncertainties at the moment and no structured, rigid way of how to tackle them. We're in a sort of confused state, and the way I personally see it is that:

    -The very first thing that needs to be identified is exactly what settings the cabinet sampling folk should be using to create their programs. As noted above, Metaltastic is still unsure, and I'm sure AE also has his doubts.

    -The second thing that needs to be identified is what you did to 'optimize' them, so that we can all do it ourselves, without you needing to come in and hold our hands every time, so to speak.

    -And finally the third thing that needs to be done after we've taken care of everything on Nebula's end is to compare the programs directly to the real cab.

    When I say that I'm getting better results with impulses, it's not out of spite, or to insult you or Nebula. I'm just honest and extremely picky. Most people here can attest to that. I personally hate impulses and how flat and 2 dimensional they sound. I agree that Nebula does sound more dynamic and lively, but at the same time the frequency balance of all the Nebula programs I've tried so far seems skewed in contrast to the impulses. The impulses consistently seem to sound more subdued, dark and somewhat more pleasant. Now once again I don't know whether that's due to how the two different 'sampling' technologies work, or whether it's error on the cab sampling person's part, but it's been thoroughly consistent in all my fooling around and testing.

    Perhaps after the cab sampling people get the correct instructions on how to sample the cabs in the best way possible, they can start creating more and more different programs and we can iron out all the kinks ourselves over time. We just need to be told what to do in order to get us started.
     
  3. Acusticaudio.net

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6

    Ok, but you are the first high level community that is going to sample cabinets with Nat/Nebula, so some little experiments have to be done to get amazing results as in the other categories like Tapes, Equalisers or Peamps.

    I'm very happy to find so many people interested in cabinets because you are pioneers in the Nebula cabinet emulations and many people maybe in the future will be happy with your experimets.

    So now the point is:

    1. I will help you to get the best result providing 1 or 2 Nat templates so as to sample your cabinets in the best way, but it takes time so i can't provide them soon. I have to prepare them accurately.

    2. After this templates i will let you know how to change parameters inside Nebula so as to achieve the best emulation possible, but don't be afraid, they are really a few operations to do.

    3. It's better not to compare Nebula to impulses, but Nebula to impulses and to cabinet, because if you can't listen to how a real cabinet sounds you can't be sure if the frequency response is right or not.

    In any case i wanna thank you for all your interest and your good work.
     
  4. Ermz

    Ermz ¯\(°_o)/¯

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2002
    Messages:
    20,382
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Thank you, Francesco. Once again your support in this is amazing.

    I understand that this is the first community giving Nebula a real work-out in regards to cabinet emulation. Some experimentation and debugging on our part is necessary, and that's fine. I think what we require above all is a rigid way to approach the situation, to avoid confusion on our part.

    We appreciate you taking so much time to help us out with experimenting and optimizing settings/programs on your end. I also agree that we should be comparing Nebula more to the actual cab rather than impulses by themselves. Hopefully after the next wave of programs are done, we can do some of that.

    Whilst I can't sample cabs myself, I'm happy to keep working at doing various shoot-outs with amps here on my end, shooting for something closer to a high-level guitar tone that one might attain at a studio. Once we get a few more solid, and good-sounding Nebula programs out, using the proper sampling techniques, I'll bring in some amps and start really experimenting and comparing.
     
  5. noarin

    noarin Producer / Engineer

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2006
    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    yes,
    Thanks a lot Francesco, I believe that Nebula still has a ton of possibilities regarding cabinet emulation. I'll keep watching this thread and chiming in whenever I have something to say :p!
     
  6. blackbird

    blackbird Toltec

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2005
    Messages:
    445
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    I think the Nebula sounds close to real Speaker Cab. The impulses for me always sounded like the old POD's, too processed. With artificial highs.
     
  7. Metaltastic

    Metaltastic Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    19,931
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    I'll try to make another sample today and compare it to the mic'ed cab - but in the meanwhile Francesco, here's a zip file with two clips; one is the mic'ed cab, one is a Nebula sample of it with the mic in the same position and all the same settings (I used the first clean cabinet template you posted). I think you'll agree they still sound pretty different.

    EDIT: Shit, I realized I'm not using the updated program in this, I'll fix that now.

    EDIT: Fixed! Link now is Nebula with Francesco's "best high-CPU" program as one of the wav files...I really can't tell a difference, though :erk: (and yes, I deleted the XML file in the temp folder)
     
  8. grywolf627

    grywolf627 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,816
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Marcus, thanks for all your work on this too. I jumped on this wagon a little late, but better late than never. I was encouraged by the early testing. But like Ermin, I'm getting a little discouraged with Nebula. If nothing else, it's not exactly a user friendly program. And so far, it's still not beating my old reliable EnglV30 Higher Pres impulse that has become my staple. But, I'm hoping we can all get the problems worked out with Nebula and utilize its potential.
     
  9. Metaltastic

    Metaltastic Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    19,931
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Well I agree the UI is laughably unintuitive, but Francesco has graciously given all the instruction I've needed to get a handle on it :) However, the main kicker is the harshness/fizz that seems omnipresent in all the Neb samples...
     
  10. Acusticaudio.net

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    In the last programs i made there is no fizz. I can't hear it anymore. Maybe you are using the wrong version? I downloaded the clips, could you post me the unprocessed guitar please?
     
  11. Metaltastic

    Metaltastic Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    19,931
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Sure, here ya go!

    Preamp files

    EDIT: And the tempo is 185 bpm, and the R guitar file should be placed lined up with the grid starting at bar 7, beat 4
     
  12. Acusticaudio.net

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Thank you, i'm downloading it right now.
     
  13. Metaltastic

    Metaltastic Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    19,931
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Coolness! And the particular sample to use is "Org Clean," by the way, cuz that's the one I also mic'ed up the cab for
     
  14. Acusticaudio.net

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Can i ask you if you had checked the offset of your system in a right way before sampling? How you checked it?


    And are you puttnig the mic very very close to the cab? I think maybe it's better.
     
  15. Metaltastic

    Metaltastic Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    19,931
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Yup, I checked the offset the way you suggested on our facebook chat conversation, and the mic was about 5 mm away from the grille cloth, so VERY close indeed (though I don't quite see what difference that makes, since it was the same mic position as in the recorded test I posted above)
     
  16. Ermz

    Ermz ¯\(°_o)/¯

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2002
    Messages:
    20,382
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Thanks for going through some more trouble here, Marcus. I'm grabbing the last shoot-out you posted right now. It's 5am but I figure what better time to compare in the Aussie summer.

    EDIT: Listening now. A is Nebula and there is definitely fizz still present. These are the same differences I was getting between impulse and Nebula. Nebula seems to have less low-mid and 'thickness' and more fizz in general. This has been consistent across all clips I've heard so far.
     
  17. grywolf627

    grywolf627 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,816
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    ^^Agreed. The nebula samples do have a certain "live" quality to it that I like...more than impulses. But, they seem to be consistently thin and at times harsh sounding compared to the real cabinet or impulses. But because of the intangible quality in the nebula samples, I'm still holding out hope that the samples can get better.
     
  18. Metaltastic

    Metaltastic Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    19,931
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Yeah, I've always found impulses to be a very accurate simulation of the frequency balance of a power amp/cab - dynamic and 3D, no, but definitely accurate.
     
  19. Acusticaudio.net

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Metal i checked the impulse you have created of the Org Clean and it has the same fuzz compared to the real cabinet........ if you want i can post you an example but i'm listening to it right now.
     
  20. Ermz

    Ermz ¯\(°_o)/¯

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2002
    Messages:
    20,382
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Please do!
     

Share This Page