Ferric TDS vs Nebula StuderA800 (R2R) vs UAD

[penguinfromdeep]

Yeah! +1 .. I like the word mushinator though Are you gonna spill the beans today alteregoxxx btw?

[Kingston]

if you say UAD reacts like the real thing then you have said automatically that Nebula doesn't do...because the two react extremely different...right?

Indeed.

I don't quite know what is the point of a tape library sampled in excruciating detail that doesn't budge into a complete fart-out. It would seem to me a such thing does not capture the essence of tape, but something else around it.

UAD seems to have succeeded better. But I also understand why they decided to model A800 first. Of the popular modern tape machines it has very few parasitic effects and as such it was the "easy" target. It probably saved a tremendous amount of work needed for modeling. It's damn close to really good modern digital recorders and you don't really hear it on a record. If you do, the engineer didn't do his job correctly. He was supposed to just skim near the surface, not puncture it and ruin the take.

To be honest, things would have been much more exciting if they had modeled a Studer B67, or something even older, slower and much worse. That one is insta-mash with turkey and gravy like your grandma used to make.

[kmonkey]

if you say UAD reacts like the real thing then you have said automatically that Nebula doesn't do...because the two react extremely different...right?

Indeed.

I don't quite know what is the point of a tape library sampled in excruciating detail that doesn't budge into a complete fart-out. It would seem to me a such thing does not capture the essence of tape, but something else around it.

Ehm..So basically by your logic complete fart-out is essence of a Tape
And if plugin (or whatever) refuse to do it - it is considered as not good

Congratulations for making my day. I totally respect your work, experience and your opinion (i've learned a lot from your contribution here) but you just pissed on yourself regarding this whole tape thing IMHO.


edit: i would never ever (and i didn't) use tape to generate something as fart out in my mixes. I guess we are all different. What i do like is subtle(we can argue about that) nature of tape (and my Teac). Which is what both product can accomplish in very good way. I guess i will be beaten to death by saying that i like Nebula example more then UAD one..

[alteregoxxx]

if you say UAD reacts like the real thing then you have said automatically that Nebula doesn't do...because the two react extremely different...right?

Indeed.

I don't quite know what is the point of a tape library sampled in excruciating detail that doesn't budge into a complete fart-out. It would seem to me a such thing does not capture the essence of tape, but something else around it.

UAD seems to have succeeded better. But I also understand why they decided to model A800 first. Of the popular modern tape machines it has very few parasitic effects and as such it was the "easy" target. It probably saved a tremendous amount of work needed for modeling. It's damn close to really good modern digital recorders and you don't really hear it on a record. If you do, the engineer didn't do his job correctly. He was supposed to just skim near the surface, not puncture it and ruin the take.

To be honest, things would have been much more exciting if they had modeled a Studer B67, or something even older, slower and much worse. That one is insta-mash with turkey and gravy like your grandma used to make.

What do you think of Ferox Kingston?

[kmonkey]

What do you think of Ferox Kingston?

Not Kingston here but...Nice plugin with included noise and basic waveshaping(to my ear). Most of the Host applications are already shipping with the tools with which you can do the same thing. But it's free (Ferox is free isn't it?) so it can't hurt.

[Kingston]

Ehm..So basically by your logic complete fart-out is essence of a Tape
And if plugin (or whatever) refuse to do it - it is considered as not good

Congratulations for making my day. I totally respect your work, experience and your opinion (i've learned a lot from your contribution here) but you just pissed on yourself IMHO.

While I won't comment on pissing myself, or enlarged prostate problems in general, the rest of it I did not imply.

Since the previous logic was perhaps difficult to follow and required digesting the content,

1. Tape machine will budge into a complete fart-out when pushed. Regardless of settings, tape width or personal preferences, it will simply run out of headroom. And it will sound bad. You're not supposed to use it this way obviously, unless for a deliberate effect.

2. A tape emulation that does not do this is a failure. It does not correctly capture the actual behaviour of tape.

3. That Nebula library clearly does not minge-fart your sound. That doesn't mean it's bad or that it's forbidden to like it. It's just not tape.

[kmonkey]

Ehm..So basically by your logic complete fart-out is essence of a Tape
And if plugin (or whatever) refuse to do it - it is considered as not good

Congratulations for making my day. I totally respect your work, experience and your opinion (i've learned a lot from your contribution here) but you just pissed on yourself IMHO.

While I won't comment on pissing myself, or enlarged prostate problems in general, the rest of it I did not imply.

Since the previous logic was perhaps difficult to follow and required digesting the content,

1. Tape machine will budge into a complete fart-out when pushed. Regardless of settings, tape width or personal preferences, it will simply run out of headroom. And it will sound bad. You're not supposed to use it this way obviously, unless for a deliberate effect.

2. A tape emulation that does not do this is a failure. It does not correctly capture the actual behaviour of tape.

3. That Nebula library clearly does not minge-fart your sound. That doesn't mean it's bad or that it's forbidden to like it. It's just not tape.

I will going to recall your thought you said i think 6 years ago (and this way i'll also prove how i totally respect your work and opinion)

I think that you've said once something like: Why would anyone want to have grainy sound of Lexicon 480L reverb? I think you have been shocked to why people ask for this since we live in modern age and we can produce vastly better and more realistic reverbs.

Yes it was something like that. Simply you are trying to point out that people should avoid drawbacks of old technology and focus on future and better things.

If you look deep in your KVR history i am sure you'll find this(correct me if i am wrong).

And i think it is only possible way to evolve in to something better.

But why not apply that same logic in this Tape thing?

So could i ask you what benefit you have from complete fart out of a tape in a mix? It seems very odd to me.

What if you can sample even that fart thing with Nebula (but again i am not seeing any use of that)?

What if CDsoundmaster is driven by the same logic as you are? Why even bothering with old drawback when you have only the best and most usable thing?

Which is i am 100% sure: people are not using tape to make fart in their mixes.

People use tape for coloring, specific kinda subtle distortion(not fart), compression and EQ curve.

[alteregoxxx]

What do you think of Ferox Kingston?

Not Kingston here but...Nice plugin with included noise and basic waveshaping(to my ear). Most of the Host applications are already shipping with the tools with which you can do the same thing. But it's free (Ferox is free isn't it?) so it can't hurt.

..uhmm...with a curriculum on DSP like that of Jeroen Breebart i very much doubt Ferox is basic waveshaper...on the other hand try to analyze it with VSTplugin analyzer and judge for yourself...play with the saturation, tape speed and histeresys knobs and look what happen to the frequency response, harmonic distortion etc...it doesn't react at all like a basic waveshaper...

..on the other hand it's for sure is not a "static thing"...i'll try to explain...make an "hot" Ferox preset (saturation and histeresys on 40%, rec level on +6 for example) and analyzle it in VSTpluginAnalyzer....
you'll understand quickly that what you "see" in the analyzer doesn't match with what you "hear" if you apply the preset itself on a musical signal...this is because the stimulatory signal from the VST Plugin Analyzer is STATIC while a music signal is DYNAMIC...and the fact that Ferox reacts depending on the nature of signal shows that it isn't a simple waveshaper for sure, maybe it's not a perfect emulation of a tape recorder, but for sure not a static and simple waveshaper....so, i renew my question: real tape recorder experts what do you think of Ferox?

[Kingston]

I will going to recall your thought you said i think 6 years ago (and this way i'll also prove how i totally respect your work and opinion)

I think that you've said once something like: Why would anyone want to have grainy sound of Lexicon 480L reverb? I think you have been shocked to why people ask for this since we live in modern age and we can produce vastly better and more realistic reverbs.

While I think digging stuff that I said 6 years a go shows real dedication, it's funny you should pick Lexicon 480L as an example, since people grow and opinions mature but on the other hand nothing has changed regarding the 480L. It's still the grand-daddy of grain. I remember when I first bumped to it in a studio and gave it a name "ultra-grain". Didn't like it one bit. It's that immediately recognizable eighties hollow air, like bottled Bob Clearmountain. It's finally doable in native environments and I perfectly understand why people want it: it's used in all their favourite records and now they can have that too, for cheap! Awesome! It's used in many of my favourites as well. Doesn't mean I have to like the effect. There are better ones for me.

People use tape for coloring, specific kinda subtle distortion(not fart), compression and EQ curve.

They also use it to record audio. In fact that's what it was invented for. I'm an engineer of many fronts, and by profession alone I try to find faults. The fart-out is simply an easy way to test if an emulation works, if it will topple the algorithm into the wrong direction. I'm very familiar how a real tape sounds when abused, so that's just a fast way to get to the essence. Then dial down to taste.

Simply you are trying to point out that people should avoid drawbacks of old technology and focus on future and better things.

If I was of that opinion, I probably would not be designing, building and drawing circuit boards for tube amps and instruments designed for heavy distortion and ballistic-smash-burn.

[kmonkey]

They also use it to record audio. In fact that's what it was invented for.

I was merely trying to sum it up. I forgot to mention recording because i know for what people use it these days. Mostly for things i said in the first place.

If I was of that opinion, I probably would not be designing, building and drawing circuit boards for tube amps and instruments designed for heavy distortion and ballistic-smash-burn.

Hahaha i get you. You really really like Tape fart don't you? Regarding your job - note that there is still a chance that you are being misguided by yourself by becoming older and older

[Kingston]

You really really like Tape fart don't you?

YES

[jazztard]

You really really like Tape fart don't you?

YES

I love it when top geeks converse about science!

[alteregoxxx]

so...the answer is...

A= Ferric fx chain (Ferric+ reaeq)
B= Nebula

[penguinfromdeep]

Interesting!

[audiovet]

DELETED