Re-opening the Nebula for cabs discussion
- Thread starter Ermz
- Start date
ParsonsMatt
Alas, Tyranny
AeternusEternus
Member
- Oct 8, 2008
- 601
- 0
- 16
You are legendary
Hahaha. I'm a legendary inspiration, but that's about it. Really, I didn't do shit. Someone just had to devote a little time to adjust the sampling process to NAT and Nebula, and I guess that guy was me. The true legends are Giancarlo and everyone at Acustica because it's their technology, all I did was use it. Just wait until the real engineers step in and make samples. THOSE guys will be the legendary ones.
There's still a TON of unanswered questions and possibilities concerning Nebula. For instance, the stepping. Nebula will use several test tones in the same session, and they'll all be at different volumes, starting at 0db and working down to whatever. Is it better to step in increments of 1db or 2db? Or, more or less? How many steps is too many? Or too few? Should there be any repeat tests done? I'm hoping that I'm able to answer as many of THOSE types of questions as possible. That's my real purpose here.
---
Actually, whenever you guys record bands, you should record the test tone sine sweep so I (or you!) can deconvolve it, and then we can have, for instance, Nevermore's exact cabinet/mic situation
That's fantastic news.
On a side-note, have you been employing kernels to model harmonic distortion from the cab AE, or only dynamics so far?
On a side-note, have you been employing kernels to model harmonic distortion from the cab AE, or only dynamics so far?
Wouldn't they need NAT to deconvolve said sweep after they've run it through their own gear though? This whole thing is reliant on people paying for Nebula
aeternuseternus owns a special version able to generate libraries for nebula3 free. Particular libraries could be released for free.
Nebula3 free is shipped with a light version of nat.
Great! That's a really good way of getting this whole thing to move forward.
So essentially we can get just about anyone in here to start capturing their cabs, sending the test tones back to AE, get them deconvolved and then we can all have some trial runs with Nebula3 Free. I've got a full version of Nebula 2 so it doesn't bother me so much, but it's great news for everyone being able to get involved, without needing to make a financial commitment early on.
I hope Marcus, Ryan and GH get onto this soon!
So essentially we can get just about anyone in here to start capturing their cabs, sending the test tones back to AE, get them deconvolved and then we can all have some trial runs with Nebula3 Free. I've got a full version of Nebula 2 so it doesn't bother me so much, but it's great news for everyone being able to get involved, without needing to make a financial commitment early on.
I hope Marcus, Ryan and GH get onto this soon!
abyssofdreams
knows what you think.
AeternusEternus
Member
- Oct 8, 2008
- 601
- 0
- 16
I do have the ability to make programs for Nebula 3 Free, so if I can get Catharsis or someone who's really good at doing these to do a solid one, then I'll make it available to everyone and you can all play on it and see how powerful it feels.
Ermz, if I understand the what Giancarlo has taught me, I'm using a template that can use all 10, but am only currently using 5.
Ermz, if I understand the what Giancarlo has taught me, I'm using a template that can use all 10, but am only currently using 5.
AeternusEternus
Member
- Oct 8, 2008
- 601
- 0
- 16
FANTASTIC NEWS!!
the new programs are really great! i would imagine they are only a demo of what is possible
it is very easy to hear the difference between the static impulse and the dynamic one by moving the liquidity slider from one side to the other while listening to a pre-recorded riff looping. once you do this and listen carefully you will wonder how you have been using normal static impulses for so long... they just sound dead and flat/2d in comparison
AeternusEternus - maybe you could compile all the info needed for people to get the results you have into a little pdf or something? (open office makes these very easily) its quite a slog to read all these posts to get the info. you could stick it in with the test tones
Giancarlo - could you provide the missing info AeternusEternus has requested?
maybe andy sneap could do some... or that might be dreaming
the new programs are really great! i would imagine they are only a demo of what is possible
it is very easy to hear the difference between the static impulse and the dynamic one by moving the liquidity slider from one side to the other while listening to a pre-recorded riff looping. once you do this and listen carefully you will wonder how you have been using normal static impulses for so long... they just sound dead and flat/2d in comparison
AeternusEternus - maybe you could compile all the info needed for people to get the results you have into a little pdf or something? (open office makes these very easily) its quite a slog to read all these posts to get the info. you could stick it in with the test tones
Giancarlo - could you provide the missing info AeternusEternus has requested?
maybe andy sneap could do some... or that might be dreaming
grywolf627
Member
YES. I was just going to ask you if you'd get around to doing some programs with the 421 on your friend's Marshall v30 cab.
You're the MAN! 
Fifth_Horseman
Watch out, it's sharp!
Man I'm practically shitting bricks over here. If someone gets this done properly I'd be happy to drop all my paid work for a few days just to cover an entire song and mix it to full-quality using these programs... I need to feel the love... the idea of not having to mic a cab for professional products... my lord...
abyssofdreams
knows what you think.
Given the quality of Ryan's IRs, if we can give those a new dimension with these programs then it might just be a case to ditch cabs altogether... I mean, what's there not to be optimistic about!?? Sure, there is still a difference between the real cab and the programs, but it's one step closer and that's the important thing. A lot of this is still up for experimentation and the major bottleneck is modern day hardware. As we get more juice to play with, we'll be able to do more accurate captures, so there are good things ahead.
abyssofdreams
knows what you think.
I'm all with you man, though I'm not sure if we can ditch cabs altogether unless we have plenty mic positions etc to choose from
Btw, your logo I'm doing is driving me bonkers
Btw, your logo I'm doing is driving me bonkers
AeternusEternus
Member
- Oct 8, 2008
- 601
- 0
- 16
Dude, isn't the FEELING just fantastic? You play on it and you just think, holy shit, it's a real cab. It's amazing.FANTASTIC NEWS!!
the new programs are really great! i would imagine they are only a demo of what is possible
it is very easy to hear the difference between the static impulse and the dynamic one by moving the liquidity slider from one side to the other while listening to a pre-recorded riff looping. once you do this and listen carefully you will wonder how you have been using normal static impulses for so long... they just sound dead and flat/2d in comparison
AeternusEternus - maybe you could compile all the info needed for people to get the results you have into a little pdf or something? (open office makes these very easily) its quite a slog to read all these posts to get the info. you could stick it in with the test tones
I'll probably make a small text file or section on my website to lay out what I know. It's very easy, though.
-Using Cab Session 2, I've been able to get the most accurate results. It may be true that sampling with more repeats or with more steps or with more/less volume stepping could give more accurate results, but I am unable to tell right now. So, use Cab Session 2 and try modifying the repeat/step category if you feel brave.
-You want the best signal/noise ratio possible. Nebula can't do tube saturation yet, but the speakers pushing hard WILL affect tone. So a Hot Plate won't help, but loud volume could. If the microphone is picking up a lot of hum, it's going to affect the low frequencies (as evidenced by my previous tests) of the program. But, I've NEVER been able to get Nebula to reproduce hum at all. It just leaves it out somehow. So I prefer to keep the hum out of the signal to ensure I get a very close result.
-CHECK YOUR OFFSET! Your offset needs to be accurate. It's done in the NAT Audio Settings menu, and your sound won't be good at all if your offset is incorrect. You'll know if you need to re-do it.
Apart from that, it's just go at this point. Creating Cab Session 2 seemed to be the big thing, which wasn't even that hard when you really get down to it. It's just that we were feeling around in the dark until we found a hand rail.
AE, sorry if I missed it, but did you post a link to the sweep file? And if not, could you do so? If bandwidth is an issue, may I suggest the awesome www.getdropbox.com - and while I have NAT2, perhaps the problems with my sampling were interface-related, so better to just send the pre-generated sweep through, record it, and send it to you to deconvolve I should think!
