2CAudio B2: Full Body. Maximum Attitude.

[jobinho]

Can someone tell me how to change the preset folder location so I can relocate to my cloud?

The manual says it's possible but without clear instruction, thanks!

On Windows? Generally it is possible upon installation to make this decision/selection. Changing it after installation requires a small edit to the registry. Are you OK using regedit?

On OSX, it is not currently possible.

Thanks for your answer. If it would be possible to add a custom preset folder destination option on OSX, it'd be really helpful. I work on 2 computers, so having to transfer files constantly for presets is less than ideal with the kind of sound design work I do.

I tried adding an alias folder from my cloud to the preset folder, but it doesn't read inside the browser.

Any way to improve this limitation would be so helpful. Thanks

yes, we can probably do something like we did for KS where we have a custom folder location defined on the INFO page of the GUI... thinking out loud here, so that's a not a promise, but it seems to me it should be possible...

Thanks Andrew, great to hear it's a possibility (awaiting with measured anticipation )

[Cinebient]

After i know that it´s NOT needed to use 4x oversampling in Kaleidoscope i ask me if the same is with B2.
I tryed different settings and i can hear a different between 1X and 2X oversampling. On some patches it is a huge improvement. But with 4X oversampling there seems to be not really a noticable effect for further improvement.
Maybe i´m stupid or it is a placebo effect but since i asked the same for Kaleidoscope (and Aether)....do i ever need or have an effect to using 4X oversampling in B2?
I mostly used 4X oversampling offline but now i ask me if i waste resources and it takes really long to render.
I also ask me because i have a bunch of patches and going to create more to share in near future (mostly for surreal experimental, sound design stuff) and not sure what would be the best settings for the crowd.
But one thing is clear.....B2 is just the most f..... awesome sounding thing.
I mean i can use 5 or more in a channel and it still sounds clear and transparent. Also the general depth of this reverb sound is just incredible.

[Andrew Souter]

After i know that it´s NOT needed to use 4x oversampling in Kaleidoscope i ask me if the same is with B2.
I tryed different settings and i can hear a different between 1X and 2X oversampling. On some patches it is a huge improvement. But with 4X oversampling there seems to be not really a noticable effect for further improvement.
Maybe i´m stupid or it is a placebo effect but since i asked the same for Kaleidoscope (and Aether)....do i ever need or have an effect to using 4X oversampling in B2?
I mostly used 4X oversampling offline but now i ask me if i waste resources and it takes really long to render.
I also ask me because i have a bunch of patches and going to create more to share in near future (mostly for surreal experimental, sound design stuff) and not sure what would be the best settings for the crowd.
But one thing is clear.....B2 is just the most f..... awesome sounding thing.
I mean i can use 5 or more in a channel and it still sounds clear and transparent. Also the general depth of this reverb sound is just incredible.

The difference between 2x and 4x is much smaller than the difference between 1x and 2x. 2x is enough to get very very close to perfection. It might just loose a little extra high frequencies, but usually most presets have significant HF loss by design anyway as this generally happens naturally in real spaces. (Some vopular 3rd varty vlugins even run at 1/2 sample rate, which is 25% of 2x already and do not have any energy at all above 11,025! -- thus demonstrating how some people feel about the importance of high freqs in verb. I don't quite agree with this extreme stance, but safe to say 4x OS is leaning towards overkill in the opposite direction, yes.)

My suggestion is to NEVER use 4x for real-time use. It simply uses too much CPU/cache. Consider it only for bounces. If render time is not an issue, use it for offline renders/bounces, only if you have a preset setting that you want to retain as much HF energy as absolutely possible... otherwise, 2x is already just about perfect.

[Cinebient]

After i know that it´s NOT needed to use 4x oversampling in Kaleidoscope i ask me if the same is with B2.
I tryed different settings and i can hear a different between 1X and 2X oversampling. On some patches it is a huge improvement. But with 4X oversampling there seems to be not really a noticable effect for further improvement.
Maybe i´m stupid or it is a placebo effect but since i asked the same for Kaleidoscope (and Aether)....do i ever need or have an effect to using 4X oversampling in B2?
I mostly used 4X oversampling offline but now i ask me if i waste resources and it takes really long to render.
I also ask me because i have a bunch of patches and going to create more to share in near future (mostly for surreal experimental, sound design stuff) and not sure what would be the best settings for the crowd.
But one thing is clear.....B2 is just the most f..... awesome sounding thing.
I mean i can use 5 or more in a channel and it still sounds clear and transparent. Also the general depth of this reverb sound is just incredible.

The difference between 2x and 4x is much smaller than the difference between 1x and 2x. 2x is enough to get very very close to perfection. It might just loose a little extra high frequencies, but usually most presets have significant HF loss by design anyway as this generally happens naturally in real spaces. (Some vopular 3rd varty vlugins even run at 1/2 sample rate, which is 25% of 2x already and do not have any energy at all above 11,025! -- thus demonstrating how some people feel about the importance of high freqs in verb. I don't quite agree with this extreme stance, but safe to say 4x OS is leaning towards overkill in the opposite direction, yes.)

My suggestion is to NEVER use 4x for real-time use. It simply uses too much CPU/cache. Consider it only for bounces. If render time is not an issue, use it for offline renders/bounces, only if you have a preset setting that you want to retain as much HF energy as absolutely possible... otherwise, 2x is already just about perfect.

Indeed there are a few patches where i heard a bit more in the high frequencies when using 4X in real time (which is indeed too much for my little i7 quadcore ).
2X seems to be my friend then! Thank you!

[Andrew Souter]

... i probably should be polite...

oh well...

[Sampleconstruct]

Err, what?

[Andrew Souter]

Err, what?

I was basically wondering why adding dynamics and distortion to verb constitutes "reinvention" in 2016, since we did it in B2 in 2012 for example...

and then I said novel things like "Adaptiverb" that actually have some real new ideas seem a lot more exciting comparatively IMHO... I think that is a cool new product with new ideas.

I was trying to figure out what exactly is "reinvented" in this other just announced thing... but maybe I am missing something, and I have not heard/tried it yet, and since I'm a developer I should probably keep my personal opinions to myself... so I deleted the original post.

[Robert Randolph]

Err, what?

I was basically wondering why adding dynamics and distortion to verb constitutes "reinvention" in 2016, since we did it in B2 in 2012 for example...

and then I said novel things like "Adaptiverb" that actually have some real new ideas seem a lot more exciting IMHO... I think that is a cool new product with new ideas.

I was trying to figure out what exactly is "reinvented" in this other just announced thing... but maybe I am missing something, and I have not heard/tried it yet, and since I'm a developer I should probably keep my personal opinions to myself...

What are you talking about?!

Nimbus?

[Sampleconstruct]

Err, what?

I was basically wondering why adding dynamics and distortion to verb constitutes "reinvention" in 2016, since we did it in B2 in 2012 for example...

and then I said novel things like "Adaptiverb" that actually have some real new ideas seem a lot more exciting comparatively IMHO... I think that is a cool new product with new ideas.

I was trying to figure out what exactly is "reinvented" in this other just announced thing... but maybe I am missing something, and I have not heard/tried it yet, and since I'm a developer I should probably keep my personal opinions to myself... so I deleted the original post.

Oh I see

[Den*]

Some presets with the latest new design for B2 reverb.
For sharing with all users!

[Andrew Souter]

My son was having trouble sleeping, so I made him quick lullaby:

https://soundcloud.com/andrew_souter/wa ... he-craddle

One KS into one B2...

Also seasonal for the opposite side of B2:

https://soundcloud.com/andrew_souter/an ... aiting-for

Tiss the season for verbs again it seems... Lotsa new ones lately. Quite hard to beat B2 though IMHO in terms of pure sound quality... which ultimately is all the audience/listener is going to experience.

Seems AMD is going to make competitive CPUs again, so we should see some progress on computing hardware this year also if all goes well...

[e@rs]

Why the 1.3ms latency? For the limiter?

The .pdf manual still at version 0.2?

[Andrew Souter]

Why the 1.3ms latency? For the limiter?

I don't quite remember to be perfectly honest. I think for the dynamics section.

oh, I remember now... bc all our verbs have latency, as do almost all other verbs. But since verb is delay-based and there is almost always pre-delay, we (and everyone else) cheats and does not declare this latency. And then if pre-delay (and or delays in general) are >latency, you simply subtract the latency from whatever pre-delay you really want, and and as long as desired pre-delay is not under the imposed latency (only 64 samples!) which basically it never is, this "cheat" is 100% the equivalent. Nothing is lost.

however since B2 can disable all delays for distortion only effects, we must declare the latency and compensate it so that we don't get comb filtering when potentially mixing the wet and dry signal.

there you go. happy now?

The .pdf manual still at version 0.2?

Ya, I got lazy with that at some point, and never filled in the couple remaining topics. In general I find it (and our other manuals) much more extensive/detailed/academic/pedantic than the norm to begin with, so I felt it was comparatively "complete enough", and we had been wanting to adjust a few things that would have effected what was in the manual, so I wanted to document the new (unimplemented) features/methods instead of the ones that I thought would change soon-ish...

...but then we got lost for years in Kaleidoscope land. ...which has been my non-stop obsession to make perfect.... so it hasn't happened yet. best laid plans of mice and men...

what were you looking up that you wanted to know that you could not find?

[Den*]

what were you looking up that you wanted to know that you could not find?

That is a million $ question right now...

I'll give a hint: Little blue dots on "Width", and "Cross" parameters...?
I know what is it, but there is no explanation in the manual.

[e@rs]

^ . Exactly! Except I don't know what they are...