AE's New Nebula Thread
- Thread starter AeternusEternus
- Start date
Ermz
¯\(°_o)/¯
Well it's a bit more complicated than that. Changing any number of parameters in NAT will coax a different sounding Cab program. The problem is that none of them seem to approximate the input sources we run into them (ie. guitars) ideally. It's obvious that whatever happens during the process, seems to coax too many upper harmonics out, so the tone loses 'meat' and we gain 'fizz'.
What about applying a eq curve of a di guitar signal to the sweep or some high cut?maybe it will be 10 times worst or maybe im insane ,probably....but its just a thought, and excuse me if i'm being silly 
jesus69lol
Senior Member
- Apr 13, 2007
- 210
- 0
- 16
I just want to point out, with no disrepect intended, that these are just your opinions. You do not KNOW that during the process the grainy fizz is introduced. And you do not know that the root of the problem is that the input source is not a close enough approximation of a guitar signal.
Again, I don't mean to start shit, but I've been using these nebula programs since they started coming out and there have been tremendous improvements, with poidaobi's new program being the best yet, imo (although Marcus's is pretty good too.) And while the digital fizz has been evident to greater or lesser degrees I definitely think these newest ones have it tamed the best so far. Also, I do not offer up a better theory as to where the fizz is originating from, I am only asserting that you don't know either.
So, you are saying that a test tone going into NAT is not good, b/c it has frequencies of higher harmonics that we do not have normally from a guitar. Well, the test tone is a tricky part. In papers there are 2 types: sine and step. The step one has more energy in lower frequencies than the sine. So, may be another test tone step like will work better. I kind of know how it should look like, but not sure how to make wav file other then draw it by hand in cubase
ok lets get fucking scientific(im drunk).what we need is to get sine seep go through the pickup so we have little better picture of the cab (so that it sounds like its played by guitar (frequency wise),ok : pickup is capturing vibrations or other magnetic field,so we let the sine sweep through line out of the interface and connect it to some line in (doesnt matter) so we have a current in the cable,then we put that cable over pickup so it picks up the magnetic field created by the current created by the sine.the field changes as the current running through the cable changes.if that field isnt strong enough,then we can either make another coil from the cable (the pickup needs to be out of the guitar so we can warp the cable around it so the magnetic field gets stronger) or put the cable of the headphones over the pickup which we can amplify so the field is stronger.that way the sine sweep will go through guitar pickup in to the amp so the sine will be more like guitar (Frequency wise).what do you think? is this idea worth of testing?
I don't think the guitar limits the frequencies, because look at it this way: you record the guitar into your DAW as a DI track. That same track is what the guitar amplifier would "see" if you were playing directly into the guitar amplifier. There is a certain thing that might come into play, which is impedance loading but I don't think that has an effect on the frequencies that much. Anyway, the amplifier in a guitar amp can usually cover a wide range of frequencies depending on volume and so can the cab. I think the thing that affects the sound output the most would be the pre-amp which is usually bypassed when using NAT for gathering impulses. If someone were to use a guitar re-amping device to capture the cab impulse then maybe we would have more accurate samples. Or you could limit the sine sweep of NAT to a certain high frequency that is more representable of a real amp.
Just bought the Nebula 3 and played around with all of the available cabs and it's just f'n awesome. Many many thanks to all the brilliant people who are involved in this!!! I just wish I had the equipment to contribute to it. Concerning the harshness: I usually make some narrow cuts around 3k, 6k and 8k. I don't feel that the harshness or presence is really a problem though.
I'd rather have some small problems that can be fixed with an EQ than the dullness that comes with impulses you can't do anything about.
I'd rather have some small problems that can be fixed with an EQ than the dullness that comes with impulses you can't do anything about.
- Oct 8, 2008
- 601
- 0
- 16
Updating this to say that thanks to some small donations here and there, they've accumulated enough to really help me buy a Mesa Oversize 4x12. It'll be shipping Monday the 17th, and hopefully arriving before Friday, and I'm trying to make the time to sample it on Sunday. No promises yet, except that the cab is definitely on its way and WILL be sampled.
jesus69lol
Senior Member
- Apr 13, 2007
- 210
- 0
- 16
This is great news. I have been using the poi nebula files since they came out and I absolutely love them. We should do something like a tone competition to really get some hype about this stuff, because the small results we've gotten already are very promising.
Also, for those of you who have nebula, I bought the doc eq from analoginthebox and it is really phenomenal, my favorite eq. Nebula is 100% the shit.
Djabthrash
Member
Sickan
¯\(°_o)/¯
That's great AE!
I'm hoping for some nice slightly off-axis programs with many kernels
- Oct 8, 2008
- 601
- 0
- 16
That's great AE!
I'm hoping for some nice slightly off-axis programs with many kernels
Well, since I will have lifetime access to the cabinet now, I'll be trying lots of different things with it. My JCM800 cab is a rock monster, but I've been trying to create metal tones. So this is the new heat. As much as I've experimented with the Marshall (1,000 LA610 impulses, the AEmpulses collection, near 100 Nebula programs..), expect as much with the Boogie cab.
One thing I HAVE noticed, though, is that using more kernels merely increases filesize and doesn't seem to increase the sound quality or dynamics in any capacity. I don't have much proof, but the 5-kernel template I've used this whole time sounds the same as when I upped the kernel capacity to 10. All it did was double the filesize.
Also, I have a tracking number for the cab. UPS will likely update overnight, so I'll know in the morning when it'll be here.
- Oct 8, 2008
- 601
- 0
- 16
Double-posting to outline a future plan:
1) I want to make the site more readable and fluid. I adore Wordpress, especially the fact that I can journalistically update the site with goings-on, but I've never been able to come up with a clean method of displaying new content. I'll have to figure it out somehow. But I want to make it a little more intuitive and fill it up with as much theory/brainstorm as I possibly can.
2) I love the Audix I5. I have two of them, and it beats the holy hell out of the SM57 in my opinion. But, I know that a lot of people here like the 57. It has its merits for that very reason at bare minimum. So, I want to buy one or two. I want to Fredman with the I5s, but Fredman 57s have been proven to sound awesome, and Petrucci uses a 57 in conjunction with a 421 to get his tone in the studio. I've got the cab and the 421, so now I THINK need a 57 or two. Thoughts?
3) I don't know if I've noticed much of a sound improvement using an LA610 over just using my Firestudio inputs. Honestly, using an LA610 has proven to be more of a hindrance because it's only one channel, and when you're doing 978 impulses or a bunch of different Nebula tests, it's pretty annoying to have to do one at a time, when I could plug in like six microphones at once to the Firestudio and rock out. Not only this, but it doesn't belong to me. So I think I'm going to use the Firestudio for a while and see where that takes me. Does anyone have any recommendations for other preamps? The XMAX preamps in the Firestudio are kinda flat, but I guess I can never be too sure if there's something easier and better.
4) If anyone has any advanced cab mic technique videos, websites, photos, documents, ANYTHING, post them here. I'm REALLY interested. There's no reason I can't have world-class samples to work with, except that I'm a bedroom-dweller and have never recorded anything worth more than $50. I got to learn me some stuff!
1) I want to make the site more readable and fluid. I adore Wordpress, especially the fact that I can journalistically update the site with goings-on, but I've never been able to come up with a clean method of displaying new content. I'll have to figure it out somehow. But I want to make it a little more intuitive and fill it up with as much theory/brainstorm as I possibly can.
2) I love the Audix I5. I have two of them, and it beats the holy hell out of the SM57 in my opinion. But, I know that a lot of people here like the 57. It has its merits for that very reason at bare minimum. So, I want to buy one or two. I want to Fredman with the I5s, but Fredman 57s have been proven to sound awesome, and Petrucci uses a 57 in conjunction with a 421 to get his tone in the studio. I've got the cab and the 421, so now I THINK need a 57 or two. Thoughts?
3) I don't know if I've noticed much of a sound improvement using an LA610 over just using my Firestudio inputs. Honestly, using an LA610 has proven to be more of a hindrance because it's only one channel, and when you're doing 978 impulses or a bunch of different Nebula tests, it's pretty annoying to have to do one at a time, when I could plug in like six microphones at once to the Firestudio and rock out. Not only this, but it doesn't belong to me. So I think I'm going to use the Firestudio for a while and see where that takes me. Does anyone have any recommendations for other preamps? The XMAX preamps in the Firestudio are kinda flat, but I guess I can never be too sure if there's something easier and better.
4) If anyone has any advanced cab mic technique videos, websites, photos, documents, ANYTHING, post them here. I'm REALLY interested. There's no reason I can't have world-class samples to work with, except that I'm a bedroom-dweller and have never recorded anything worth more than $50. I got to learn me some stuff!
jesus69lol
Senior Member
- Apr 13, 2007
- 210
- 0
- 16
Sickan
¯\(°_o)/¯
I like your plans, AE!
I don't think you NEED two SM57's. I would rather like to blend different mic positions (like Fredman) by myself, but I don't know if would be more of a struggle for you, to make the programs in phase.
As a personal request I would like some programs which are further away from the cab, like discussed in this thread.
Love your work and dedication, highly appreciated!
I don't think you NEED two SM57's. I would rather like to blend different mic positions (like Fredman) by myself, but I don't know if would be more of a struggle for you, to make the programs in phase.
As a personal request I would like some programs which are further away from the cab, like discussed in this thread.
Love your work and dedication, highly appreciated!
Ermz
¯\(°_o)/¯
The reason the LA610 doesn't benefit you much is because it really isn't that great of a preamp. It tends to make stuff sound 2d and distorts rather easily.
One thing that would most probably improve your cab programs is some acoustic treatment for your live space/bedroom. I recommend this as crucial for anyone that does anything music-related, because proper treatment works wonders.
As far as mic positions go, just find the 'sweet spot' of your new cab. Try all 4 speakers in all their major zones, compare. Zero in on the best speaker. Mic the shit out of it until you find 'THE' spot. Only then move onto Fredman (keep in mind the way Ryan did Fredman wasn't actually 'correct').
Apart from that, best luck with your plans. I'm really glad to see that you're still doing your thing.
One thing that would most probably improve your cab programs is some acoustic treatment for your live space/bedroom. I recommend this as crucial for anyone that does anything music-related, because proper treatment works wonders.
As far as mic positions go, just find the 'sweet spot' of your new cab. Try all 4 speakers in all their major zones, compare. Zero in on the best speaker. Mic the shit out of it until you find 'THE' spot. Only then move onto Fredman (keep in mind the way Ryan did Fredman wasn't actually 'correct').
Apart from that, best luck with your plans. I'm really glad to see that you're still doing your thing.
- Oct 8, 2008
- 601
- 0
- 16
I treated my old bedroom, but the treatment never came off. I'll have to find a way to do a temporary treatment thing for this apartment or something.
I'll be looking for that sweet spot on Sunday. I'm drawing up a couple plans for Sunday so I can make the most of the time I have.
I'll be looking for that sweet spot on Sunday. I'm drawing up a couple plans for Sunday so I can make the most of the time I have.
- Oct 8, 2008
- 601
- 0
- 16
August 23, 2009 - Mount Crushmore - Nebula program collections named in honor of presidential badassery. Introducing Crushmore with two installments, Roosevelt and Lincoln, using my oversize Mesa cab. There will be more later, with what gear is anyone's guess.
Roosevelt - Peavey 5150, Mesa Oversized 4×12, and many microphones to choose from. 28 programs total. Teddy Roosevelt was a workhorse and a mans man. Like the 5150, his wisdom, work ethic and power will probably never be outdated. You find me someone else who can get shot on a podium and still finish the speech.
Lincoln - Engl Invader 150, Mesa Oversized 4×12, and a handful of microphones. 8 programs total. Lincolns a badass on account of he saved the Union. Appropriately named Lincoln because the amp died during sampling, so I couldn't sample as fully as I did with Roosevelt.
I did some 6" back like some people wanted to hear. As for the results, I think they're a little too bassy sometimes, I don't know how good they are. They were done LOUD. I had access to an open area for 3 hours alone, so I blared cranked it and threw in some heavy-duty earplugs. Also, on a side note, I've got the raw wav files so I can try to mix and match later. I'm interested to see how the 57 + 421 sounds with this setup, and I used a lot of kick mics so I could blend in the same way.
Microphones and microphone positioning for Roosevelt and Lincoln - Here
Download Links - Roosevelt (61 MB) - Lincoln (16 MB)
Roosevelt - Peavey 5150, Mesa Oversized 4×12, and many microphones to choose from. 28 programs total. Teddy Roosevelt was a workhorse and a mans man. Like the 5150, his wisdom, work ethic and power will probably never be outdated. You find me someone else who can get shot on a podium and still finish the speech.
Lincoln - Engl Invader 150, Mesa Oversized 4×12, and a handful of microphones. 8 programs total. Lincolns a badass on account of he saved the Union. Appropriately named Lincoln because the amp died during sampling, so I couldn't sample as fully as I did with Roosevelt.
I did some 6" back like some people wanted to hear. As for the results, I think they're a little too bassy sometimes, I don't know how good they are. They were done LOUD. I had access to an open area for 3 hours alone, so I blared cranked it and threw in some heavy-duty earplugs. Also, on a side note, I've got the raw wav files so I can try to mix and match later. I'm interested to see how the 57 + 421 sounds with this setup, and I used a lot of kick mics so I could blend in the same way.
Microphones and microphone positioning for Roosevelt and Lincoln - Here
Download Links - Roosevelt (61 MB) - Lincoln (16 MB)
Similar threads
