Cytomic "The Scream" stomp box distortion plugin

[bmanic]

everybody writes that..
but PAlliance didn't write bad about Cytomic-Scream..(as far as i know)

Neither did Cytomic write anything bad about PA either. YOU are the one who interpreted it as "bad". YOU are the one who chose to see Andy's words "in my testing I found the Plugin Alliance bx_greenscreamer sounded the least like an analog TS808 tube screamer of almost all products I tested" as bad.

He stated his opinion, then he showed clear audio clips of his own product demonstrating just how close it is to his own Tube Screamer. YOU make the decision if this means the PA offering is "bad". Don't go shoving words in other people's mouths, okay?

[Compyfox]

Now if only Cubase would realize that THE SCREAM can have 0 latency as well (stupid plugin manager!)

You can have zero latency, just switch both the realtime and render oversample rates to x1 (off). Their plugin manager may only bother checking at startup what the latency is, so perhaps try setting both realtime and render to x1 (off), then choose "Save Settings As Default", then re-scan the plugin.

Worth a try - if I wouldn't be on the demo still (funds and all)...

[andy-cytomic]

everybody writes that..
but PAlliance didn't write bad about Cytomic-Scream..(as far as i know)

Neither did Cytomic write anything bad about PA either. YOU are the one who interpreted it as "bad". YOU are the one who chose to see Andy's words "in my testing I found the Plugin Alliance bx_greenscreamer sounded the least like an analog TS808 tube screamer of almost all products I tested" as bad.

He stated his opinion, then he showed clear audio clips of his own product demonstrating just how close it is to his own Tube Screamer. YOU make the decision if this means the PA offering is "bad". Don't go shoving words in other people's mouths, okay?

Thanks bmanic! Quite right, I never made a value judgement on anyones plugins, I just said it didn't match the analog TS808 very closely. The analog modelling could well be top notch, I would never dare comment on that, I just stick in test signals and look at the output and see how close it is to the analog circuit. I've tested with multiple TS808 and TS9 analog stomp boxes, they are all pretty similar. The TS9 doesn't clip as quickly at the output BJT buffer, but otherwise there are only pretty minor differences in the tone due to slight differences in opamps and clipping diodes and component variation, but no major changes in the overall tone.

Here is the "hard case", a loud square wave that clips the output buffer, this pretty much tells the whole story in one picture, you can see that the dc blocking isn't included in the greenscreamer, and there is no modelling of the buffers in the TSC (which stands for Tube Screamer Core - so I'm assuming "core" means not the full circuit ie no buffers):



Here are some more pictures to show what is going on, for reference I calibrated all plugins to the analog with 50% drive, full tone and level (edit: made top image the right one, not a repeat of the previous one):






So based on the evidence I have the opinion that the TSC more closely matches the analog TS808 I have, and all others I've listened to, than the bx_greenscreamer.

[kmonkey]

everybody writes that..
but PAlliance didn't write bad about Cytomic-Scream..(as far as i know)

Stop being a child and making a Drama out of it. I am sure Andy isn't monster and PA dudes aren't gremlins as well. We love both of them. Both companies have unique products.

If one developer find difference between products you are making it like it's not a right thing to say in the public. Like it's a taboo. Well it's not - it's called evolution and progress.

Move on let's talk about plugin which is AMAZING

[incubus]

Hey man, I just want to say, I said what I said. I don't like the "greenscream" because it's the closest emu to the original. I like it because it does a great job of giving me that boosted signal w/o any rude cpu hit. There are things I like about the ts-999, there are things I like about the greenscreem, in my time of trying the cytomic, it didn't do anything that made me say "wow this is so much better" and made the cpu go to 11

Honestly, it's simply honest evaluation, not to slag on Andy.

[andy-cytomic]

Hey man, I just want to say, I said what I said. I don't like the "greenscream" because it's the closest emu to the original. I like it because it does a great job of giving me that boosted signal w/o any rude cpu hit. There are things I like about the ts-999, there are things I like about the greenscreem, in my time of trying the cytomic, it didn't do anything that made me say "wow this is so much better" and made the cpu go to 11

Honestly, it's simply honest evaluation, not to slag on Andy.

I'm totally with you I will never comment on someones personal decision, if the tone of the bx_greenscreemer and its cpu usage is a better fit for you, then that is the case.

I will only ever make comments on the accuracy of analog models based on the comparisons with the same test signal to actual analog units, never on which is "good" or "bad" in terms of tone, only which matches more closely to an actual circuit. My goal with The Scream was to not scrimp on CPU, and to offer the most accurate and configurable TS808 emulation possible - but this doesn't make it the "best" plugin for anyone, only individuals can make that call based on what is best for them

[incubus]

You're a good guy, again, I wish you nothing but the best!

[andy-cytomic]

You wrote Bx-Greenthingy is not very close to the hardware. (edit: ..least close to hardware from the products you tested)

I wonder: Are there are alot differences from pedal to pedal? There are so many types/re-issues.

Pl-Alliance states: "Faithful re-creation" + "bx_greenscreamer Overdrive is an exacting plugin emulation of the classic Ibanez TS808 Tube Screamer" + "component level emulation of this classic pedal, capturing all.."

And you wrote it was the least close to hardware from the products you tested.
So what difference did you discover? (i wonder.. whats was so different/why should yours be so much better)

There were worse (edit: in terms of accuracy to analog!), but only in amp sim packages where the individual pedals aren't the focus.

I would prefer not to comment on marketing blurb, I like real world tests I can back up with test signals I can share so anyone can repeat exactly the results I get.

The bx_greenscreamer has quite a few differences from all hardware TS808 / TS9 units I've tried:
1) the hardware has more symmetrical clipping, most of the second order harmonics only get added by the BJT buffers and the BJT input stages to the opamps - some people mod their TS808s to add an extra diode to make them more symmetric, but this is not "stock" behaviour
2) the hardware has multiple stages of dc blocking throughout the circuit
3) the hardware has input and output BJT buffers which clip the bottom off loud signals
4) the hardware has opamps which clip if you push the input level up high, which will clip the top and bottom off loud signals
5) the hardware, when you "disable" the stomp box by clicking the silver button still has multiple stages of dc blocking and the signal passes through the input and output BJT buffers, which adds some subtle distortion and is useful as a "warming" drive
6) the hardware adds more high frequency harmonics when the drive knob is at full
7) when you switch between active / not active you get a tiny little "chirp" of self oscillation feedback caused by the output signal being sent back to the input of the drive section through the JFET switching circuit.

You can see most of these points demonstrated in the plots I've posted. None of these are value judgements, just pointed out where things different, not if the differences sound better or not, only individuals can make that call based on their personal tastes!

[GrabtharsHammer]

3) the hardware has input and output BJT buffers which clip the bottom off loud signals
4) the hardware has opamps which clip if you push the input level up high, which will clip the top and bottom off loud signals

That brings us to input level. At what level do you recommend to use The Scream? I normally track my guitar DIs with 0 dB peak (just below clipping occurs). Mercuriall for example recommend to feed their plugins with DIs that are -6 dB peak. What input level do you recommend for The Scream to achieve a realistic bevaviour of the plugin?

[andy-cytomic]

3) the hardware has input and output BJT buffers which clip the bottom off loud signals
4) the hardware has opamps which clip if you push the input level up high, which will clip the top and bottom off loud signals

That brings us to input level. At what level do you recommend to use The Scream? I normally track my guitar DIs with 0 dB peak (just below clipping occurs). Mercuriall for example recommend to feed their plugins with DIs that are -6 dB peak. What input level do you recommend for The Scream to achieve a realistic bevaviour of the plugin?

From this source: http://www.springer.com/cda/content/doc ... 353-c1.pdf

"As a general rule of thumb, the initial peak amplitude of a typical single-coil pickup will usually be in the range of 200–500 mV, while a humbucker will probably range from 400 to 800 mV or more."

The Scream maps 0dBFS to 1V, so if you should have your guitar signal peaking at around 6*Log[2, 200mV] = -14 dBFS but can be up to around 0 dBFS for very loud pickup and playing.

[GrabtharsHammer]

The Scream maps 0dBFS to 1V, so if you should have your guitar signal peaking at around 6*Log[2, 200mV] = -14 dBFS but can be up to around 0 dBFS for very loud pickup and playing.

Thanks for the informative reply! Sadly, again I fail at technical and mathematical knowledge. Do I understand it right that with a single coil pickup (200 mV) the signal should normally peak around -14 dBFS, but with a humbucker with 800 mV (in my case: SD Custom Trembucker with 784 mV output) an input level up to 0 dbFS is a realistic value?

[andy-cytomic]

Yep, but it depends on how hard you play, and the exact pickup. 784 mV will map to -2.1 dBFS.

[GrabtharsHammer]

3) the hardware has input and output BJT buffers which clip the bottom off loud signals
5) the hardware, when you "disable" the stomp box by clicking the silver button still has multiple stages of dc blocking and the signal passes through the input and output BJT buffers, which adds some subtle distortion and is useful as a "warming" drive

3) "output buffers which clip the bottom off"... does this mean that the level knob not only increases the output level in a "clean" way but also adds some sort of compression?
5) That's really interesting! I definitely wouldn't have found that out on my own. So when I click on the foot switch on the plugin's GUI it is not completely bypassed but still adds a subtle effect?

[kmonkey]

784 mV will map to -2.1 dBFS.

Very nerdy...touche Andy...touche

[izonin]

This plug-in is amazing!



Works properly in both Reaper and Ableton Live x64 / Win7.

Compared it to TSE808 and Mercurial TSC... no contest.