Nectar. I've joined the dark side.

VST, AU, etc. plug-in Virtual Effects discussion
jochicago
KVRian
600 posts since 26 Feb, 2018

Post Wed Sep 11, 2019 10:19 am

BONES wrote:
Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:22 am
Yes, small things add up but when they do, they become apparent and you fix them.
Maybe this is easy for me because I come from the design field. In photography we use cameras that produce 4000x more color information than the format we'll use for distribution. We do this because the images will be edited before delivery. Having 4000x more detail in the editing room means we can manipulate images with so much more precision and push them much harder.

It makes a world of sense to me that the person working in the editing room should be working with tons more detail than a consumer. The DAW is operating at 64 bits for a reason, we are editing higher definition files than the export format will be, and we should be using fine hearing tools to edit. All in the name of being able to manipulate things with fine precision during the edit process.

IMO, anyone engaging in a fine precision activity deliberately using low-end tools is aiming the gun at their feet.

v1o
KVRAF
1823 posts since 2 Oct, 2004

Re: Nectar. I've joined the dark side.

Post Wed Sep 11, 2019 10:45 am

I'm quite new to Izotope. Nectar and Neutron seem like they are nearly the same only that one is tuned for vocals. The assistant is maybe useful as a starting point, I don't always agree with what it does.
Orion Platinum, Muzys 2

User avatar
BONES
GRRRRRRR!
8658 posts since 14 Jun, 2001 from Somewhere else, on principle

Re: Nectar. I've joined the dark side.

Post Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:53 pm

jochicago wrote:
Wed Sep 11, 2019 10:19 am
Maybe this is easy for me because I come from the design field. In photography we use cameras that produce 4000x more color information than the format we'll use for distribution. We do this because the images will be edited before delivery. Having 4000x more detail in the editing room means we can manipulate images with so much more precision and push them much harder.
Another excellent analogy. When editing your photographs, do you use a 10 bit monitor at 4000 times the resolution of the monitors/printers that will display the final product for your viewers? Because in this scenario it is your computer monitor that is the equivalent of your headphones, not the source material. That's comparable to your sampling rate and bit depth choices in rendering your audio and I think we all understand the benefits of calculating in 64 bit and rendering with more bit depth that you need for your final output.
It makes a world of sense to me that the person working in the editing room should be working with tons more detail than a consumer.
Then you need to be working on a 10 bit monitor with a resolution of 8k. But you don't and I'm sure your photos turn out perfectly well.
The DAW is operating at 64 bits for a reason, we are editing higher definition files than the export format will be, and we should be using fine hearing tools to edit.
No, that's not the reason. The main reason is that it sells more computers and software. My 32 bit host was working at 64 bits internally for years before anyone even thought of 64 bit hosts.
[/quote]IMO, anyone engaging in a fine precision activity deliberately using low-end tools is aiming the gun at their feet.[/quote]
Sure but only up to a point. Beyond that you are just wasting money and I can assure you the point at which that occurs is way, way lower than you think it is.
NOVAkILL 4.0 : Dell G7 17 (Core i7, 8GB RAM, Win10), Zoom U24, Cubase, DUNE, Hive, Thorn, TRK-01, Equator, Substance, Arcsyn, Synthmaster One, Aparillo, Trueno, Analog Keys, MicroMonsta, Uno, Skulpt, Craft 2

jochicago
KVRian
600 posts since 26 Feb, 2018

Re: Nectar. I've joined the dark side.

Post Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:39 pm

RE: monitor
We do use color-calibrated monitors so that we can confirm we are seeing the right colors down to the print chain. But that's not the point I was making about resolution.

You are missing a couple of important parts. I do work with a huge monitor. I was on 22" when people were on 14". I've been on 28" since most people moved to 17". Also, part of having a huge raw file is that I regularly zoom in to make somebody's hand 28" in front of me so I can do edits. With audio I can't zoom in to a frequency to better understand it and make decisions. But most importantly, there's no "frequency masking" in design. Any difficulty in seeing is fixed with huge res files and large monitors. I'm never confused about what I'm seeing, all I have to do is zoom in, enabled by the precision files and the large screen. Audio is a lot harder because you can't "zoom in" to the singer's performance. Even with great hearing tools, I wish I felt in mixing a third of the control I feel when editing high res pictures.

Return to “Effects”