Re-opening the Nebula for cabs discussion

Metaltastic said:
Haha, my pleasure, but no way am I gonna buy something totally useless to me (hardware 'verb) for the sake of this, so I yield the "dedication" title to AE! :loco: I will try to make a sample of my cab and compare it to a re-amped signal though!
Click to expand...

Hey man, a good Lexicon is never useless! You can use it as part of your guitar rig as well as studio equipment :D
 
Well guys, here's the plan. The NAT session posted on the first page by Giancarlo is first on my list. I'm going to use it to create basically an impulse-type Nebula program with NAT, which will also produce a matching impulse response.

I believe the two will sound the same.

I WANT to create a SECOND impulse response with Cubase/Deconvolver, but I don't know if I'm going to. NAT uses the same deconvolution algorithm as Deconvolver.
 
Also, if I'm going to get some phat results here, and anyone lives in or near Kansas, you're going to have to let me borrow your cabs to sample. I only have my 1960A. I need V30s.
 
Unfortunately it's not quite as easy as setting everything up and hitting 'go' in this case, Ryan. There's a lot of trial and error still to be done before we find a standardized way of sampling cabs with NAT. After a lengthy discussion today, AE and I think there might be some leads to go and follow, but it will need the input of giancarlo and some more testing on AE's part. Though it is nice to finally have direction with this again.
 
Even whenever it gets to a point of establishing the most solid, standardized way of sampling cabs with NAT, it still won't be an easy thing to do. The most scary thing for me is the ultimate goal, which is sampling a cab with thirty decently-long test tones. I'll be evicted before I get the best result I can get for you guys, hahaha.

Which, that's another thing. This sampling is important, but my apartment is more important. I talked to them today, and we're on the understanding that I can sample during the day, but I'll cease the very second I get a complaint about my nose. I'm a good neighbor to my recording community, but I'm a better neighbor to this little apartment complex.
 
Dude, if you get evicted, you should totally do some outdoor impulses :D

J/K, I really appreciate the effort :wave:
 
So far, I've tested..

1) My bypass. No high end harshness, so it's NOT my hardware.
2) An MX300 reverb. No high end harshness, so I know how to sample something other than cabs properly, so there's no error there.
3) NAT-created impulses versus NAT-created non-dynamic Nebula programs. They match.
4) NAT-generated test tones versus Voxengo-generated test tones deconvolved in Voxengo Deconvolver. The test tones sound different, but when deconvolved in Voxengo, they create impulses that sound the same. It's not the test tone that's the problem, and it's not the deconvolving aspect.
5) NAT impulses versus Voxengo impulses versus Nebula non-dynamic programs. Back to back to back, they all sound the exactly the same. It's not the file format.

So, at this point, everything checks out. So why did Nebula dynamic programs sound harsh? It's probably just something simple like a bad session or something.

Still working on it. This is a fuckton of work, though.

Any ideas guys?
 
Have you had a chance to test NAT and Voxengo with the same test tone, deconvolved by one and then the other? It's strange that none of this is revealing the problems we had.

Perhaps this is the point where we get back to actually creating some proper real amp/impulse/nebula shootouts? All things being equal, there should be no harshness.
 
Hm

Is it possible that it's my GEAR that's giving me the problem?

I mean, think about it. Here's a for-instance: Tubes. Maybe the tube distortion, completely subtle, is picked up by Nebula and not by regular impulses. That could explain a little high end from the previous samples. Or, hell, what about the presence knob. A presence knob WILL affect the tone of the signal, right? Is it possible that Nebula will pick up on the affect in a stronger way than a regular impulse will? Not because it's coloring the sound, but because the impulse just kind of sucks? That would explain why the impulses turn out the same. Maybe I just need to try this with the presence knob completely off or something? I AM using a Marshall power amp with a 1960A cab. Isn't the high end going to be a little grating on the eardrum anyway?

Aren't ALL of my impulses a little grating? Well, except for the 1960AV and the Mesa 412FB impulses. Those were deeper.

Maybe I DO just need to go back to the old shootouts. But then why do the real cab recordings sound less crispy? Man, I dunno.
 
AeternusEternus said:
Hm

Is it possible that it's my GEAR that's giving me the problem?

I mean, think about it. Here's a for-instance: Tubes. Maybe the tube distortion, completely subtle, is picked up by Nebula and not by regular impulses. That could explain a little high end from the previous samples. Or, hell, what about the presence knob. A presence knob WILL affect the tone of the signal, right? Is it possible that Nebula will pick up on the affect in a stronger way than a regular impulse will? Not because it's coloring the sound, but because the impulse just kind of sucks? That would explain why the impulses turn out the same. Maybe I just need to try this with the presence knob completely off or something? I AM using a Marshall power amp with a 1960A cab. Isn't the high end going to be a little grating on the eardrum anyway?

Aren't ALL of my impulses a little grating? Well, except for the 1960AV and the Mesa 412FB impulses. Those were deeper.

Maybe I DO just need to go back to the old shootouts. But then why do the real cab recordings sound less crispy? Man, I dunno.
Click to expand...

Hi, in other thread you wrote "Honestly bro, I had it loud as shit and I'm in an apartment building. The secret? Earplugs. I plugged the damn out of my ears and just read a book after I was sure of no clipping". So it could be your GEAR. I once tried to make (too loud) impulses with my Marshall 1960AV cab and it rattled quite badly at certain levels/test tone freqs. It helped when I sat on the cab though, hehe, but perhaps you should try again with lower levels. Guitar cabs with V30 speakers have not used to take "loud as shit"-low end signals anyway. Also when making impulses, did you check "no clipping" situation during the whole (many minutes long) test signal? If I remember right the loudest part of the (dynamic) test signals comes at the end.

Greets, Mikko

Ps. I have NAT2 too, so maybe I'll jump on testing group later too.
 
Third step.
Now you could change session and deconvolve your previous work increasing the number of kernels (harmonics). In general there is a trouble with S/N. It means that suddenly if you use an high number of harmonics you could get a completely wrong result (exactly what you are describing, an high-frequencies boost). This happens frequently if you try to sample noisy gear. Infact high order harmonics damage heavily your resulting session, because they are multiplied for a big factor (their value is multiplyed even for 1000).
So I suggest to go carefully, increasing the number carefully. You start from 1, than 3, than 5, analyzing the resulting value in your analyzer (nat has a built in analyzer). When you get a completely different frequency response you stop.
Click to expand...

afraid i forgot the details of your previous nebula programs, but have you tried to make nebula programs WITHOUT the harmonic distortion kernals? maybe these are causing the problems mentioned in this quote. best just contact giancarlo with your new test information, i'm sure he has all the answers!
 
Man this is all confusing the living fuck out of me, but it's good that this is finally really moving somewhere.

Can't wait til we get us some Neb 3 Catharsis Fredman impulses
oh yeaaaaah
 
@AeternusEternus and the other guys who are helping: as other people said, thanks for the effort, and personally i got no problem to make donations to help you, or paying the stuff if you create something cool and you're gonna sell it like a Recabinet product...
 
AeternusEternus is doing an awesome job, testing and testing our tools and comparing. If he will find bugs we'll fix them.
 
Well, here's what's up, guys. I've been talking with ol' Ermie, and I showed him a very quick shootout I did yesterday. It was done at a very low volume with the mic preamp turned up. I had one impulse, one real cab recording, and one dynamic Nebula program created. Ermie listened, and you can hear the results for yourself. I used Guitar -> TS9 -> 8505. My settings are everything to 11 except for Gain which is at about 4 or 5, and volume which is at 1. The volume is on 1 for the impulse and Nebula, and for the real cab, I turned it up to 8:

http://www.myspoonistoobig.net/wk1.wav <- Voxengo
http://www.myspoonistoobig.net/wk2.wav <- Real Cab
http://www.myspoonistoobig.net/wk3.wav <- Nebula

For the Nebula sample, disregard the swirling sound. It's been explained to me and is actually desired for testing purposes.

So, anyway, I believe that impulses are:

Lame.

Inconsistent. Untrue. Static. You can get a good sound in SIR, but when you load the same impulse in another convolver, you have to tweak. It's just not the answer, and I don't even want it to be part of the equation in finding the right answer. My mission here is not to make impulses dynamic, but to emulate cabinets.

The clips above? The reason I think there's missing low end (which isn't even bad!) and seemingly a little extra in the hi frequencies is because of VOLUME. Nebula samples cabs with a signal that pushes out at 0db. But at what volume am I reamplifying my guitar signal? How can I tell? Can I be sure I'm pushing the cab EXACTLY as hard as Nebula did?

If I can't be sure, then exactly how can I be sure that Nebula's coloring the signal? I don't think it is. I think it's a stellar program, and I think I just can't reamp for shit.

---

So, several things to consider:

One, Nebula's programs can be done at 32bits or 64bits. I've never used a 64bit impulse except recently with SIR. That can VERY well affect high frequencies, if the frequencies are even affected.

And three, or whatever number we're on, ARE the frequencies really affected, or could it simply be a volume issue? The high harshnesses.. when I did previous shootouts, have the samples not been analyzed before? Didn't they show the same responses as the impulses and the real cab recordings?

Can someone analyze the three clips up above and tell me what they look like? Perhaps with some screenshots and such? I'm pretty sure that I just pushed the 8505 signal through the cab too hard, and that's why the speakers hit harder, and that's why it's got a fuller and deeper sound. I got no way to prove it though.

theRev said:
@AeternusEternus and the other guys who are helping: as other people said, thanks for the effort, and personally i got no problem to make donations to help you, or paying the stuff if you create something cool and you're gonna sell it like a Recabinet product...
Click to expand...

Noted, good sir. What I really need is a Mesa oversized 4x12, though. Those are a little too expensive for the money donation thing, haha.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
My Nebula vs. Mic shootout
Replies
27
Views
2K
Andy Sneap
Metaltastic
M
X
Guitar cabs for Nebula 3
Replies
0
Views
721
Backline
xphen0m
X
M
First Nebula Test!!!
Replies
133
Views
14K
Andy Sneap
Acusticaudio.net
A
AeternusEternus
Nebula 3 Core II
Replies
1
Views
841
Andy Sneap
Ermz
E
Skaldir
IRs and Nebula programs of guitar cabs - Kalthallen Cabs released
Replies
151
Views
28K
Backline
Antiphase
A
Top Bottom
Back