Nectar 4 Advanced

[mak_anil]

I recently started using Nectar 4 Advanced, but I haven't been able to achieve the kind of results shown in the advertisements and demos. I'm wondering if it's just my lack of experience with the plugin, or if others have had a similar experience.

For those who use Nectar 4, do you find it lives up to the hype, or do you still rely heavily on manual processing and other plugins to get professional-sounding vocals?

[WiredSaint]

I've spent quite a bit of time with the prior releases, Nectar 2 and 3, and found them to be pretty decent. Are you working from presets or dialing things in yourself with the underlying modules?

The presets can be a good starting point, but it helps a lot to tweak them to your needs. Also, the features of Nectar won't make up for proper recording/editing of vocals, adding harmonies, etc.

[mak_anil]

I tried that audio analyzing feature and it did not meet my expectations. Since I am a beginner, I was more interested in the AI-integrated feature.

[simon.a.billington]

I recently started using Nectar 4 Advanced, but I haven't been able to achieve the kind of results shown in the advertisements and demos. I'm wondering if it's just my lack of experience with the plugin, or if others have had a similar experience.

For those who use Nectar 4, do you find it lives up to the hype, or do you still rely heavily on manual processing and other plugins to get professional-sounding vocals?

Alot of that has tp dp with the quality of the material to begin with. I track performed by skilled artist and recorded expertly in a fully professional environment will "scrub up" better than something half or a quarter of the quality.

Not that I'm accusing anyone of bad production practices, just pointing out the difference between something working "as advertised" and what the rest of us end up with.

[jens]

Imo Izotope = meh

For some reason I spent far too much money on them (despite of always making use of deep discounts), kind of in hope that the next update will finally live up to its promise, but nah - NEVER use them - the only exception is Insight, which I quite like.

[fisherKing]

i love ozone (12 advanced), and have used nectar4 a lot (and sometimes vocalsynth). RX sometimes too, when needed. the reverbs, not so much...

[jens]

I recently started using Nectar 4 Advanced, but I haven't been able to achieve the kind of results shown in the advertisements and demos. I'm wondering if it's just my lack of experience with the plugin, or if others have had a similar experience.

For those who use Nectar 4, do you find it lives up to the hype, or do you still rely heavily on manual processing and other plugins to get professional-sounding vocals?

Alot of that has tp dp with the quality of the material to begin with. I track performed by skilled artist and recorded expertly in a fully professional environment will "scrub up" better than something half or a quarter of the quality.

Not that I'm accusing anyone of bad production practices, just pointing out the difference between something working "as advertised" and what the rest of us end up with.

Naaah...

my vocal recordings are as bad as it gets and yet I have no problem to get them sound good with bog standard tools -having sais that I never got anything useable out of Nectar. (Mind you, I bet I could, but I just couldn't summon the required patience with that thing. Why fumble around with such a messy assortment of mediocre algorithms when there's dedicated processors available which work exactly as advertised?)

If Nectar unlike all the competition only works on professional studio recordings, they should advertise it as such.

[fisherKing]

If Nectar unlike all the competition only works on professional studio recordings, they should advertise it as such.

that makes no sense. nectar4, like any other effect plugin, just does what it does. how you use it makes a difference.

[simon.a.billington]

I recently started using Nectar 4 Advanced, but I haven't been able to achieve the kind of results shown in the advertisements and demos. I'm wondering if it's just my lack of experience with the plugin, or if others have had a similar experience.

For those who use Nectar 4, do you find it lives up to the hype, or do you still rely heavily on manual processing and other plugins to get professional-sounding vocals?

Alot of that has tp dp with the quality of the material to begin with. I track performed by skilled artist and recorded expertly in a fully professional environment will "scrub up" better than something half or a quarter of the quality.

Not that I'm accusing anyone of bad production practices, just pointing out the difference between something working "as advertised" and what the rest of us end up with.

Naaah...

my vocal recordings are as bad as it gets and yet I have no problem to get them sound good with bog standard tools -having sais that I never got anything useable out of Nectar. (Mind you, I bet I could, but I just couldn't summon the required patience with that thing. Why fumble around with such a messy assortment of mediocre algorithms when there's dedicated processors available which work exactly as advertised?)

If Nectar unlike all the competition only works on professional studio recordings, they should advertise it as such.

I wouldn't say it only works on studio quality recordings, I was more more or less just paraphrasing the "garbage in, garbage out" adage, which really applies to music production in general. It was perceivable, depending on what the OP's expectations were, that the quality of their source material may have had a part to play.

It was just a thought. How you use it would also definitely play a large part as well.