This is because the plugins are very difficult to match. In the all-button mode, attack, release and ratio work strongly program-dependent. So you can have matched everything with test tones beforehand - if that was possible at all - but as soon as another signal is applied, the efforts are in vain. This may sound strange, but in my opinion, this mode is particularly well suited for comparison. Especially if you are familiar with the behavior of the different hardware revisions.
Even with a selected ratio of 12:1, the candidates react very differently. While e.g. IK, Softube and TimP, depending on the input level, show a ratio of 9:1 to 16:1 and a knee of 2-3db (and already deliver very different results regarding thresh, knee and ratio), Arturia shows a ratio of about 55:1 to 69:1 with a knee of 0-1db. Similar behavior applies to all other ratios.
So what I did was to match the compressors in such a way that the treshold and ratio are as close to each other as possible and the level reduction is as comparable as possible. I normalized the subsequently rendered flies to -23 lufs and then lowered them by 2.3db.

Edit: And I'm not saying that the other emulations are bad, but TimP just produces the results that are closest to my urei. Results that I expect when I think of an 1176. Problematic with all plugin representatives is the attack parameter. Here TimP and Arturia are ahead through the Lookahead function, but still both do not reach the response times of the hardware.

 

Last edited: Jan 20, 2021

My only issue with AA is that they are cpu hogs and the second reason is that they bloat up some releases with too much of everything.
Just make a plugin with max two versions, no need for five different sampled hardware units. too many choices.

Algos have come very far lately, nebula/aa is kind of stuck sadly, but the sound of some of their plugins is very, very good, less digital with more of the good old analog "juice" that is missing from the algos, would use them more if they were not so cpu unfriendly.

 

The curves are 90% of an EQs sound. The rest is phase behaviour and overtones (aka saturation / soft-clipping / analog grit), both which can be emulated algorithmially pretty spot on.

And then there is the user interface, choice of parameters and parameter ranges. A carefully selected set of parameters as in analog EQs and hardware emulations, can have a huge impact on how the person doing the mix will interact with the raw material.

Too many options can cause decision fatigue, so sometimes its preferable to use an analog style 3 or 4 bands EQ on channels for immediate mixing and then go surgical using workhose visual EQs on the final 2-buss.

 

Again, you did not prove Nebula EQ's have the same quality as algo EQ's. You know what you proved? You proved that you, Blu, can replicate an EQ curve from AA Baxter on DMG EQuilibrium. That is what you proved. If you'd be less full of yourself you'd understand what I mean by that.

 

EQs are definitely the easiest to match, that's true. However, I have to say that no algo emulation of a passive EQ has ever convinced me, and I was not able to match a friend's Gyratec G14S even at great expense without hearing a clear difference in a blind test.

 

Maybe the differences can be explained by the hardware's less than optimal phase behaviour (compared to digitally behaved phase) and left-right channel crosstalk? Those are actually artefacts, but they can imprint a distinctively analog sound, which is likable. Similar to oldschool tape machines or even cassette tape, which had lots of room for improvement, but a sound highly sought after now that production tools are digitally perfect (aka sterile).

 

You beat me to it. As a guitarist, if I listen to the Nebula cabs and compare to regular cab IR's such as most digital guitar packages (eg. Amplitube, etc.) you can hear that the IR's are "flatter" and not as lively and engaging. Still, I will always go with a mic'd amp unless I'm after a certain amp sound that I don't have access to (eg. Roland JC-120).

@Pipotron3000, the AeternusEternus cabs are pretty good as well if you can find them.

As for CPU hit, my issues with that went away when I upgraded my PC. Of course, I'm not running more than 20 tracks usually. I think it's primarily a workflow issue. I don't work with more than a few track at a time anyways.

I understand that some people just don't like Acustica, and that's fine. In my progression of using different algo plugins, I went from Waves to Black Rooster, etc., etc., and when I landed on Nebula and later Acustica, it seriously cut the amount of time it took to achieve a sound that was pleasing and exciting.

Not saying you can't do that with other in the box tools, but for me, the path was much easier using these tools.

 

The Zen Go Synergy Core is not TB3 but UBSC

 

Hardware is definitely not obsolete. WTF are you smokin?

 

Changed "TB3" to "USB-C and TB3". Original point is still developers reacting to the void in the market for affordable audio interfaces with excellent features. More to come? The year is young but, let's hope so.

Happy tracking!

 

Last edited: Jan 21, 2021

Your manners are completely out of context, please stop. Did you LISTEN TO audio files ( about Ultramarine 4 too)?
Blind tests for you mean nothing (I mean any blind test)?
I'm not selfish or anything, Nebula EQs are not some magic fairy dust.
What I wrote is ON TOPIC. This whole thread started from a conversation in another thread where we were talking in relax about this.
It can be discussed, even proved wrong, I'm here to learn and not to teach, as YOU are doing. Your assumptions about me are WAY OFF topic and plain WRONG.
What should I understand by not being so full of myself? You are seriously trying to teach me that what I did is just EQ curves matching, like it's only a visual kind of thing and completely omitting that I provided AUDIO files and invited people to try to guess
which is which?
Even if I'm missing something you are certainly not contributing in any way and it seems that you're very much biased and only here to try to bash me personally. Don't take that too much confidence with me, it's not appreciated.

 

Finally! I can sell my studio monitors.

 

Stop mistaking your personal experiences for general consensus, if you actually want to be a learner. And don't worry, once my workprojects are finished, you'll get your full mix with Nebula vs algo counterparts plugins. And I won't be claiming that I proved anything like you do, just contributing material for discussion.

 

Yes, Sand, Pink, Purple come to my mind. They start well and then they start adding bloat.
Make it lighter on the cpu, i can take a cpu hit but this is going nowhere really since several cores back.

 

I'm not mistaking anything. Please read again from the start of this thread and the other where people claimed
"If you ever tried pushing 100hz on the aquamarine eq youd see their eqs sound nothing like the algo competition, its different kind of EQs, tracks come to life, they push energy in a different way, unexpected, non linear, a bit chaotic, like the real gear."

Once I read this on the other thread and then seen this thread where OP said that he was doing his comparison "to settle the question once and for all (hopefully)", I decided to make a comparison with ultramarine 4 (because I didn't find aquamarine trial) to join the discussion and to question the claims like "sound nothing like the algo competition, tracks come to life" etc... at least, for now, in regard to EQ.

It is without question that for the two comparisons I made this is simply not true.

Just listen for yourself, it's not personal experience: it's a fact and no, I'm not saying it's a fact because I'm a selfish person but because it's clear like crystal water that these comparisons that ANYONE can make PROVE that pushing Nebula and algos, at least for these 2 that I compared here (ultramarine 4 is the newest product from AA so it should be top notch quality and baxter was brought by No Avenger so I didn't choose it)results in pretty much the same sound (I'm saying pretty much because they obviously don't perfectly null) and they sound indistinguishable and even if they were distinguishable if knowing what to listen (or to look) for in a obsessive forensical kind of listening it certainly PROVE that certain claims, albeit in good faith, are simply not true.
ATM no one did it but given that I didn't carefull matched in the sub bass region it could theoretically be done.
For no one i mean also people outside this forum (pro audio people and casual listeners).

Why shouldn't be true for other Nebula EQ programs (not harmonically saturated, we are talking EQ anyway, not saturation)?

It's very funny that you didn't accuse others that made such (legitimate) claims in the same way as me. Please read my words in the context of the overall discussion.

"Don't worry....you'll get your full mix...": I'm not worried and it will not be "my" full mix.

Lastly, I sincerely ask you to don't try to teach me about how to be a learner nor other things, you are not in the position to take this kind of overconfidence with me.

This is the last time that I will spend so much words answering to you for these kind of matters. I could have ignored you but I always try to communicate with people for trying to solve problems and misunderstandings but I stop if I understand that it's wasted time.

 

Could it be that the all tube design plus A/D conversion (I don't know gain staging or which A/D you used) introduced harmonic saturation that wasn't taken into account or not matched accurately? Hazen considerations about phase etc... have been taken into account?
It's a genuine question, please take it for what it is

I suggest you to try DMG Trackcomp 2 1176 rev D, stay in between the red lines (they are real unit min/max settings)in attack/release settings and adjust q bias if needed. I was very impressed by what I heard. It's very good in all the other emulations too, a real gem! I'm not affiliated in any way with DMG Audio anyway ahahahah

 

Last edited: Jan 21, 2021

Stop looking in the wrong places for becomming "better". Focus on music making not comparing DSP techniques instead. Or do you think Dr. Dre, Kanye West or DJ Premier or Madlib care about this? Ya'll getting sidetracked by marketing bs.

 

I'm not smart or patient enough to install the free nebula stuff they were offering for years so algo it is.