Reaktor: W295b EQ-Preview

[poshook]

hi poshook,

First, let me remind you that I didn't say Q-clone would be bad. I said I think Waves is overrated. That may be provocative to some I admit, so let me put in other words: I think many independent plugin devs are highly underrated.
It was you telling us that you weren't satisfied with Q-clone's results. I just made the suggestion to try out MMultibandconvolution. Must be one of the most powerful convo-plugins I've ever tried. Really. Give it a try. Not because it does some special magic. Its options are the special aspect about it.

Now something to think about: Do you believe Nebula would null the sampled hardware? (btw, I'm a fan of Nebulas concept!) Or to go even further: Do you think one hardware module completely nulls the module in the very next channel? If not, do you believe one is worse than the other? Hmm. Do you know the reason why the SMPTE time code used to live on the very last channel of a console? If you can answer that question you should know why the whole null-thing couldn't be more uninteresting.

I don't make plugins to null another plugin off. For such tasks I use the CUT-button of the regarding channel. (a lot easier and saves one track/insert) To me it couldn't be less important if it nulls Nebula. That has never been my intention; I never tried to COPY Nebula. (That's pretty pointless, isn't it?) Instead, my intention was to create an algorithmic W295b that would sound familiar to me. (Yes, I know the REAL one, but as I said before, I cannot tug the studio console into my living room. That's why I chose Nebula as my reference which is pretty much of a salute to Nebula). And as long as you can't tell me which sound processor is here or there active in my blindtest I'd say the funny null game is not that important as you thought it would be.

PEACE my friend

Ok, once more
I do not care Nebula or Waves, the sound is what I am talking about. And when we talk about sound ITB there is no algorithmic EQ plugin on the market which is able to reach (not reproduce) the character and depth of voyetra technology. They all sound like plugin. Nebula does not.
BTW When do we get the demo or beta?

[mansardian]

Okay, that's an opinion I respect.
Although, from your point of view I have no chance, have I?
Anyway, I'm yet working on it. Unfortunately I don't do that for a living. So I have to do it in my spare time, in any free minute when my daughter or my wife doesn't need me.

If you want a visual teaser...here you go (the right channel is empty yet)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eNf-t54lf ... e=youtu.be

[zenvoxpop]

Unfortunately I don't do that for a living. So I have to do it in my spare time

Don't we all?

It does sound/look rather nice.Thumbs up!
The compressor also seems interesting.

[mansardian]

It does sound/look rather nice.Thumbs up!
The compressor also seems interesting.

Oh, you mean the black one? the one I compared with The Glue?

[Synthetic Wav]

Ok, once more
I do not care Nebula or Waves, the sound is what I am talking about. And when we talk about sound ITB there is no algorithmic EQ plugin on the market which is able to reach (not reproduce) the character and depth of voyetra technology. They all sound like plugin. Nebula does not.
BTW When do we get the demo or beta?

there is lot of placebo going on, have you tried to math a algo eq to nebula? you might need a good saturator on top but you can get really close. some people say some nebula eq boost the low end better for example, one of the reason can be than 1 db boost can boost a lot more compared to a algo eq where 1db is 1 db , same for cuts.
for example with sdrr and slate neve the sound is just as good if not better than my nebula neve and it s way more flexible and not a pain to use like nebula.
many enjoy more the algo plugins cause they don't smear the transients too ,for some modern needs it might be more suited.
i enjoy nebula eqs sound but i think sometimes it don't make much difference anymore ,it s possible to get great result with algo plugins too.

[zeep]

It does sound/look rather nice.Thumbs up!
The compressor also seems interesting.

Oh, you mean the black one? the one I compared with The Glue?

I second that. That compressor sounds very nice indeed. Compared to the Glue it loses some snappiness in the low punch, but i like that it pushes the tail a bit more.

Is it also your creation?

[mansardian]

Yes, that was another ensemble I made a while ago, however it's not completely my creation (while the Siemens is). I altered the detector sensitivity to make the compressing a bit more even. That resulted in a very decent sound. The basic structure however is NI. And they did a great job. It just needed a little tweaking And then I thought, well, now that I'm altering that one why not making it visually more appealing?
I hardly found a signal that compressor couldn't handle.
If you like it I can upload it to the user library but then I want to remove the auto-makeup gain feature first. That's always too hot so you have to turn it down..if that doesn't annoy you I can do that tomorrow. Left my laptop in the studio

[mansardian]

there is lot of placebo going on, have you tried to math a algo eq to nebula? you might need a good saturator on top but you can get really close. some people say some nebula eq boost the low end better for example, one of the reason can be than 1 db boost can boost a lot more compared to a algo eq where 1db is 1 db , same for cuts.
for example with sdrr and slate neve the sound is just as good if not better than my nebula neve and it s way more flexible and not a pain to use like nebula.
many enjoy more the algo plugins cause they don't smear the transients too ,for some modern needs it might be more suited.
i enjoy nebula eqs sound but i think sometimes it don't make much difference anymore ,it s possible to get great result with algo plugins too.

I totally agree. I mean there must be a good reason why people like Dave Pensado or Warren Huart use plugins. Some of them I do own myself. And SDRR really is a cool plugin!
Nonetheless, of course I respect different opinions. Even though the placebo effect is a strong argument. I heard badly recorded tracks with high end plugins and the result was third class. I heard wonderfully recorded tracks running through a stock DAW EQ and it was stunning.

[poshook]

Okay, that's an opinion I respect.
Although, from your point of view I have no chance, have I?
Anyway, I'm yet working on it. Unfortunately I don't do that for a living. So I have to do it in my spare time, in any free minute when my daughter or my wife doesn't need me.

If you want a visual teaser...here you go (the right channel is empty yet)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eNf-t54lf ... e=youtu.be

yes you have a chance of course

[poshook]

Ok, once more
I do not care Nebula or Waves, the sound is what I am talking about. And when we talk about sound ITB there is no algorithmic EQ plugin on the market which is able to reach (not reproduce) the character and depth of voyetra technology. They all sound like plugin. Nebula does not.
BTW When do we get the demo or beta?

there is lot of placebo going on, have you tried to math a algo eq to nebula? you might need a good saturator on top but you can get really close. some people say some nebula eq boost the low end better for example, one of the reason can be than 1 db boost can boost a lot more compared to a algo eq where 1db is 1 db , same for cuts.
for example with sdrr and slate neve the sound is just as good if not better than my nebula neve and it s way more flexible and not a pain to use like nebula.
many enjoy more the algo plugins cause they don't smear the transients too ,for some modern needs it might be more suited.
i enjoy nebula eqs sound but i think sometimes it don't make much difference anymore ,it s possible to get great result with algo plugins too.

Transients smearing is one of the main issue of algorithmic EQ (minimum phase design). Try extreme boosting trebles with minimum phase algo EQ (like mentioned Slate FG-N). The more you gain the less resolution you get.
sdrr + FG-N can not sound as good as e.g. AA Navy EQ. Nebula sounds better even with no saturation

[zenvoxpop]

Ok, we get it, nebula sounds good (to you).

I don't know, maybe I'm just weird but sometimes a dacade old synthedit plugin sounds perfectly fine to me. I don't have any resevations using synthedit, Reaktor or any other plugins, as long as developers have good ears and know what they're doing.

We don't need all of us to use Valhalla as a reverb, Mjuc as a compressor, Satin as tape plugin or any other Slate or Uad plugins for that matter, where is the fun in that?

And remember, La2a and Fairchild were build with (at that time) stock and off-the-shelf components. It's not the technology, it's the sound of final products that matters.

Can't we just support new dev on the market

[Synthetic Wav]

Transients smearing is one of the main issue of algorithmic EQ (minimum phase design). Try extreme boosting trebles with minimum phase algo EQ (like mentioned Slate FG-N). The more you gain the less resolution you get.
sdrr + FG-N can not sound as good as e.g. AA Navy EQ. Nebula sounds better even with no saturation

maybe we don t mean the same thing with transients smearing, it's one of the main issu of hardware with transformers, not plugins, plugins transients tend to stay very sharp , that why itb tend to sound more 2d cause it s very in front sound , it doesn t give the impression of depth.

[poshook]

Transients smearing is one of the main issue of algorithmic EQ (minimum phase design). Try extreme boosting trebles with minimum phase algo EQ (like mentioned Slate FG-N). The more you gain the less resolution you get.
sdrr + FG-N can not sound as good as e.g. AA Navy EQ. Nebula sounds better even with no saturation

maybe we don t mean the same thing with transients smearing, it's one of the main issu of hardware with transformers, not plugins, plugins transients tend to stay very sharp , that why itb tend to sound more 2d cause it s very in front sound , it doesn t give the impression of depth.

That "DEPTH" is primarly related to transient response. From my experience, Nebula based EQs really makes things smoother and warmer but the source material including transients stays compact and focused even with extreme boosts. Algo EQs with extreme boosts totaly destroy the source in very unmusical way. Standard algo EQ makes things sound 2D because of smearing everything - the more you boost the less resolution you get. This is the reason why people use so many plugins on every track. Each plugin corrects the side effects of the previous plugin. Another issue with algo EQs is their digital static sound (just static curves) which is in oposite to musicality of the HW.

I would really like to help the new developer Do you need beta tester (Reaktor 5, Mac 10.11.6)

[Timp_Nebula]

I have to post something I just realized...

As I wrote before, my reference for constructing is Nebula's W295b. Just when I thought I was done I compared it with Nebula and got pretty confused: The curves didn't match anymore!!
I scratched my head and started to search for the mistake in my construction but couldn't find any. And then I found the only thing about Nebula that does.not.work. like the real hardware. In the tech specs of Siemens they say the W295b has a roll off from 15kHz upwards, as well as from 40Hz downwards. Alright. Now, if you want to have the full emulation of that EQ in your insert you need to load at least two instances of Nebula (Tim Petherick), or even three (Germanos EQ AITB).

Do you know what happens if you stack low pass filters? I guess you do. the roll off gets steeper and steeper. That has a major influence on the curves. And that is a real problem. From that point of view even the harmonics (call it color) are much too "present". It's like stacking three EQ modules just to process only one band with each of them. No matter how great Nebula sounds, this is something where my EQ will be more authentic. The signal passes through the process only once.


That downside of Nebula is not an opinion of mine. I can see it on my analyzer. That doesn't mean Nebula cannot be used to wonderfully emulate hardware EQs. It means those hardware EQs must have a linear frequency response. Or you use only one instance per track.
Even the harmonics aren't authentic anymore if you need more than two.

The latest version of silk in nebula was band isolated as best, so you avoid repeating the same overall responce. The conversion filter was also changed in this version to allow for a much lower ringing on the impulses, so it will look a tiny bit different and may also reveal better bass definition. The harmonics/pre are also seperated from overall response.

[Ichad.c]

Wonder how it stacks up against the other Germans...

http://www.soundtoys.com/product/sie-q/

http://analogobsession.com/product/germanbros/