KVR Audio

headquest · Post by **headquest** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 12:51 pm

A bit of advice would be useful on this.

I would like a good VST effect that includes great filtering combined with some other stuff to use on loops, etc, in Ableton Live 6.

Top contendors include CamelPhat, which I have been demoing. I know you can also get this bundled with CamelSpace, but that didn't honestly impress me in the same way as CamelPhat. Perhaps I need to give it more time.

Anyway, I have also heard great things about PSP Nitro, which I believe does some similar stuff. Possibly this has a better filter sweep sound? But it costs a lot more I see, and the developer seems to be edging further towards iLok for their products which I wold like to avoid.

So bottom line question is: - is Nitro really a lot better than CamelPhat, and worth the extra cost?

Particularly I would love to hear from people that have (or have at least used quite a bit) both of these for a comparisson.

Thanks in advance (PS, I will not be around until the weekend as I am working on a summer school, so look forward to reading the responses when I get back!).

Hunter · Post by **Hunter** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 12:57 pm

You've guessed what I'm going to say but demo them both on your own material, no one can predict what you are going to like on your own stuff with your own ears.

Obviously I'm biased towards camelphat but I've demo'd Nitro before and it is pretty cool, I couldn't work out quite what was going on re the big knobs but it was just a quick demo sesh. I think Putte speaks very highly of nitro

Beardedone · Post by **Beardedone** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 12:59 pm

I like them both and find they occupy separate niches in how I apply them. Suffice it to say that I am glad I bought both.

headquest · Post by **headquest** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 1:06 pm

Beardedone wrote:I like them both and find they occupy separate niches in how I apply them. Suffice it to say that I am glad I bought both.

Thanks. Can you say more about how they are different?

headquest · Post by **headquest** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 1:08 pm

Hunter wrote:You've guessed what I'm going to say but demo them both on your own material, no one can predict what you are going to like on your own stuff with your own ears.

Obviously I'm biased towards camelphat but I've demo'd Nitro before and it is pretty cool, I couldn't work out quite what was going on re the big knobs but it was just a quick demo sesh. I think Putte speaks very highly of nitro

Hi. Yes, i will demo Nitro too, although I'm fairly sold on CamelPhat. I demoed some PSP stuff (Vintage Warmer, PSP84) on a previous system and never managed to delete the registry entries thy created! So I just wanted to do a bit more homework to see if Nitro really has a lot more to offer before cluttering myu system with it.

Thanks for your advice

Beardedone · Post by **Beardedone** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 1:20 pm

Beardedone wrote:
I like them both and find they occupy separate niches in how I apply them. Suffice it to say that I am glad I bought both.

Thanks. Can you say more about how they are different?

You will have to demo to hear it but the filters are quite different in the results they give. It took me a while to appreciate it but CP3 excels at treating drums whereas Nitro does great job on synth pads and leads. There are distinct approaches in architecture and signal flow. Nitro is primarily a delay-based effect whereas CamelPhat is a filter with some interesting distortion modelling. One significant difference is the ease of automating CamPhat3. Nitro is a bit convoluted to configure.

Demo each and check out the well done manuals which will give a much better idea than I can.

Cheers,
Gordon

Watto · Post by **Watto** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 1:26 pm

Weird - I think they are VERY different plugs. I use Nitro a lot, but Camelphat is great, too. Nitro is much deeper, IMO.

headquest · Post by **headquest** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 1:30 pm

Thanks Gordon

That really has helped.

diverdee · Post by **diverdee** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 1:35 pm

I too think that they are preety different effects.
camelspace is the dogs bollox.
You can get both space & phat for around the same price as Nitro.
They are both very easy on the cpu.
Re: Filtering (if it's mainly filters you are looking at) - have you tried u-he's filterscape?

Rozzer · Post by **Rozzer** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 1:39 pm

I use both, and I'd agree wuth Watto, they're quite different.

I use Camelphat when I need a raw grungy sound (the distortions are great), and I use Nitro when I want to add some interest and sparkle (its great for filtered delays).

M'Snah · Post by **M'Snah** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 1:43 pm

When you're looking for filters, you might want to look at Filterscape, FabFilter Volcano and Frantic as well.

All are partly the same and partly different, and all (incl. Camelphat and Nitro) have a different GUI, which should appeal to you as well (to get a lot of use out of it).

mellotronaut · Post by **mellotronaut** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 1:50 pm

Antares Filter is quite good for moving sounds, too and there is a trial-version (was it 10 days?) without limitations.

Ben [Camel Audio] · Post by **Ben [Camel Audio]** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 1:52 pm

So bottom line question is: - is Nitro really a lot better than CamelPhat, and worth the extra cost?

The two plugins are rather different. I think its more appropriate to compare Nitro with the PhatSpace bundle (CamelPhat and CamelSpace) - they are the same price, and both offer a wide range of effects. When designing CS+CP, ease of use and workflow took precedence over ultimate flexiblity. I can't of course speak for PSP (lovely guys - I met the guy who made Nitro at NAMM) but I suspect that when designing Nitro they gave a little more weight to flexiblity over easy of use.

CamelSpace and CamelPhat have certainly received their fair share of awards, FM Platinum Award, CM Performance Award, Music Tech 5 Star Award ... When Computer Music reviewed PhatSpace, they said the following:

think PSP Audioware's Nitro but without the learning curve and head-scratching

... of course you gain a little extra flexiblity in return, and I certainly think that Nitro is also a great plugin.

CP3 excels at treating drums whereas Nitro does great job on synth pads and leads.

CamelSpace was designed to work well on pads and leads, whereas CamelPhat was more aimed at drums, bass and such like. If you haven't tried CamelSpace on synths, I recommend giving it a try.

I think Putte speaks very highly of nitro

Hes also a big fan of CamelSpace

As others have said, the plugins do different things and there really is no substitute for trying the demos and seeing which suits your way of working and the kinds of sounds you wish to create.

Thanks
Ben

Broken · Post by **Broken** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 2:07 pm

Firebird · Post by **Firebird** » Wed Aug 16, 2006 7:43 pm

Hunter wrote:You've guessed what I'm going to say but demo them both on your own material,

This is great advise.
Both these tools are very good and do some different things.
They would probably both be good to own.

PSP Nitro vs. CamelPhat