Quantcast
Native Instruments Premium Tube Series - Page 10 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Native Instruments Premium Tube Series
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #271
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattyc ➡️
The first FLYINGJAY A/B didn't appear till page 3. His second was on Page 7.
krheatmans was on the page before this.

maybe thats why ?
Nah. It was after the sound files. Thats why I said "or so".
Old 16th September 2012
  #272
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by K-Slash ➡️
The UAD version sounds better to me, more balanced while the NI sounds brighter and subtlely thinner.

But that's because of this, the range of the knobs are different because of the Mastering version of the UAD Massive Passive.

So the test is FLAWED !

The values look like that (almost) :
Yea I took that into consideration on my second test files.

Instead of position like 3 o'clock or 11:27(lol),I tried percentages,like 70% or 50%.

I'm happy with the NI bundle,but the uad mp did sound better while tweaking.

The uad mp really make that snare drum snap,it gets your head bobbing to the beat.

I see it as 2 of best digital eq's,and you don't need need a uad quad to enjoy the mp.I only have 2 solos,but I'm able mix and throw the mp without a problem.

But I'm half native anyway,so I many run the ampex 102 and a few other.I guess they run from the other solo card.

Ok you guys got me in cubase on my day off

Sent from my PC36100
Old 16th September 2012
  #273
Lives for gear
 
krheatman's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retinal ➡️
SPL PassEq is really something, in my book is one of the top3
sw eq. Best top end and subs on the market, unfortunately
there's something I don't like with the mid bands (the only
reason because I don't actually own it), but is crazy
how good that thing is to add both weight and air
I don't like the mid bands on the hardware MP either.But that was the regular version also.

Sent from my PC36100
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #274
Lives for gear
 
dasoundjunkie's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by krheatman ➡️
I don't like the mid bands on the hardware MP either.But that was the regular version also.

Sent from my PC36100
And that's part of why everyone has adifferent perspective on this. Personally I always felt that the MPs mid bands were what he did best, go figure
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #275
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dappolito ➡️
The NI does not boost 20 db at all just because it says so. You are one of those ... who scream "omg I just raised 5k by 120 db and it still sounds great!!!" when the EQ in reality just raised 0.5 db.
Reading even a short manual like the Passive EQ manual is an overcomplicated and long process...

For your convinience short version here: 20 = 20 db (boost/cut)

Long version here: http://images-l3.native-instruments....al_English.zip

Old 16th September 2012
  #276
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
deleted
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #277
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYINGJAY ➡️
Help please!question has anyone noticed the q wide adjustment is reversed on the 2 Plugins?

Get a nice kick drum set the freq to 68Hz,then go full RIGHT on NI passive,but go full left on the uad mp!

The full wide q setting is totally opposite!Damn!

I sitting here thinking the uad mp is killing the NI passive,again not matching setting but getting them in the same ball park visually.

Now they are much closer than I thought!

Sorry if someone mentioned that the Q knob values are reversed.but I didn't see anyone mention this fact.

WAIT ACCORDING TO THE LABEL,they suppose to be the same,but they are not.can someone look into the q wide position for me.

Because I can only match by reversing the knob position!
Sent from my PC36100

Vst analyzer shows the q knob of the NI/Softube is working as expected.
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #278
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dappolito ➡️
Nah. It was after the sound files. Thats why I said "or so".
Judging off one example or so is hardly making an informed decision is it ?
I suspect from your earlier post that you were hardly listening objectively anyway
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #279
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by bishop666 ➡️
Vst analyzer shows the q knob of the NI/Softube is working as expected.
yea i clicked the self switch on uad mp!thankz
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #280
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
they are really close!!!!!

the non-mastering uad mp only take 30% from my dsp system.im doing mixes and adding mp!
Attached Files

shinning like A.mp3 (2.83 MB, 536 views)

shinning like B.mp3 (2.83 MB, 552 views)

shinning like dry.mp3 (2.83 MB, 483 views)

Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #281
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYINGJAY ➡️
they are really close!!!!!

the non-mastering uad mp only take 30% from my dsp system.im doing mixes and adding mp!
I am preferring B this time.
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #282
Gear Addict
 
🎧 5 years
They are very close. Somehow A sounds slightly more flat and B has more 3D. I like them both tho. The highs are slightly more clear in B. Maybe it is my favourite.
Old 16th September 2012
  #283
Lives for gear
 
PitchSlap's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
In this particular instance I prefer version A, but don't really like to draw too many conclusions from listening tests like these when there are often secondary factors that influence my decision apart from the quality of the plugin.

B seems to be bringing certain things out more (perhaps its slightly louder), but I think it's bringing out things I don't like, like a 'washiness' in drums. At end end of the day I think either could be used to reach the desired artistic aesthetic.
Old 16th September 2012
  #284
Lives for gear
 
Aiyn Zahav's Avatar
 
11 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
I prefer B. Simply because A sounds like it's adding some high end hype which is just a bit too much.
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #285
Lives for gear
 
scruffydog's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
B sounds best on my mono Tivoli Audio speaker!
Rounder voice...and more like a proper record than the others...
Old 16th September 2012
  #286
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
I didn't match settings to a t,so maybe I just used to much boost in the mid range.

But the bass was set to 68hz wide q full boost on both eq's.

Softubes have made a fine eq!

I think I can get the high mids closer.thankz guys.

I think b had a slightly tighter sound.im wondering if the input knob is playing a factor in how these eq react?

I noticed some plugin input can overload easier that others.

If I do another test ill set the input knob dead center(I hope dead center is actually dead center),and adjust the compressor output toatch db.

BTW I used the Vari on all examples,its amazing!

Also the enhance eq work really well along side the passive eq,but I excluded it from all test.

I haven't tried the enhance eq on guitars,but it didn't top the pultec pro imo.

Sent from my PC36100
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #287
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYINGJAY ➡️
they are really close!!!!!

the non-mastering uad mp only take 30% from my dsp system.im doing mixes and adding mp!
I prefer B. It has a deeper bottom and does not bring the vocal and synth line too upfront.

The A version emphasis the vocal and synth. But it may be because it's more on the brighter side and clearly lacks that fat bottom compared to A.
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #288
Lives for gear
 
scruffydog's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
so i think we have..
-if you have an already bright sound that needs body..use the NI/Softube
-if you have a fuller sound that needs edge or top curve focus....use the Massive lightly.


it may be subtle but we have seen here some evidence..
AND of course...for 64 bit use the NI..!!!!!
Old 16th September 2012
  #289
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by scruffydog ➡️
so i think we have..
-if you have an already bright sound that needs body..use the NI/Softube
-if you have a fuller sound that needs edge or top curve focus....use the Massive...
That a good analogy!

But consider a none a/b comparison or actually mixing?

Could actual dial in what's needed,instead matching eq's.

Both of these eq's add so much to ITB mixing.

I think the small things people don't like about a certain file,is an easy fix.

Sent from my PC36100
Old 16th September 2012
  #290
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Any love for the premium tube compressor? I have enough EQs.
Old 16th September 2012
  #291
Lives for gear
 
dotl's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Oh how i wanted to have Massive-Passive and Vari MU emulations from Softube but with nice, realistic GUI as they know to make them... :(

They should have released this plugs as a proper Softube. They've released their own version of Trident A-Range after UAD, right? ...and it became more popular one.
Maybe Manley didn't wanted another 'official' emulator to jump around the net. If so that's too bad and Softube should respond with emulations of the Phoenix and Avalon EQs or something like that.

The problem here is that somehow I doubt they made this plug-ins as best they could when they're released like this...Cause this is not Brilliance Pack, there's a lot more going on here. Yes, their name is clearly listed but it's not really, REALLY Softube...and I don't think they invested as much time and effort as UAD did in emulating MP. Why would they? Month or 2 is enough for a semi-Softube release. It's elfishly to think like that, I know, I know...they're professionals and all but that thought just itching my brain. Can't help myself!

IM-crazy-O.
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #292
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Logan ➡️
Any love for the premium tube compressor? I have enough EQs.
Plenty of love for it !

It's a little CPU hungry (15% with a Core i7 950), but its sounds does it justice.

Lot of character !
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #293
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by dotl ➡️
The problem here is that somehow I doubt they made this plug-ins as best they could when they're released like this...Cause this is not Brilliance Pack, there's a lot more going on here. Yes, their name is clearly listed but it's not really, REALLY Softube...and I don't think they invested as much time and effort as UAD did in emulating MP. Why would they? Month or 2 is enough for a semi-Softube release. It's elfishly to think like that, I know, I know...they're professionals and all but that thought just itching my brain. Can't help myself!

IM-crazy-O.
As you say, I think you're being crazy .

According to how great the PASSIVE EQ sounds, it seems that they modeled it with the same quality as their other stuff.

It's not because it's contract work for NI with a kinda plastic GUI that it's "semi-Softube".
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #294
Lives for gear
 
krheatman's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
I ran the UAD regular version against the NI MP with the settings of the UAD the same as the NI Master Rock setting and the UAD came out w/too much top end.So you can't check them that way is all.Like I said way back there somewhere,you just have to get it and see if it works for you.But I still can't get the NI to sound as good as the UAD Mastering version,maybe after playing with it for a few days I could,but I won't be doing that.But I might try the Mastering version of the hardware after hearing the difference.
Old 16th September 2012
  #295
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Logan ➡️
Any love for the premium tube compressor? I have enough EQs.
I used it on all my tracks now!

Sent from my PC36100
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #296
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by dotl ➡️
Passive EQ could be handy (mid/side, parallel) and it sounds pretty good but it adds too much of harmonic content... I know that it models Massive-passive with 7 million tubes but for most occasions -40 dB of it as a minimum?! Hmmm...too much!
It depends A LOT on how hard you hit the plugin. Bring down the level to -24dB RMS or more before hitting it and you get completely different harmonic content compared to blasting it with -8dBFS RMS.
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #297
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by krheatman ➡️
Truth be told,if these two could be matched,people wouldn't be buying the UAD plugin.The Vari plugin sounds and works great though.I don't know why the UAD sounds better on the top end,but it could be what most people like about all their plugs in the first place.They don't have a Vari-mu yet,I thought they were doing the Thermionic Phoenix,but this one will work just fine.The Gluefication preset is great.
Like I said above, the difference in how they sound may very well be depending on how the programmers have internally calibrated it for nominal levels. Is it -18dBFS like with many nebula programs? Is it -20dBFS? or even -24dBFS?

Perhaps the UAD is more modern in that it allows for -12dBFS levels or even -6dBFS.. after all, the chips in the UAD do floating point math so there is really no upper limit.

A lot depends on the calibration really.. and then of course also the actual unit they modeled and then all the digital nasties like aliasing and such (no idea how much the Softube version oversamples or how it does it).

Cheers!
bManic
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #298
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
deleted
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #299
Lives for gear
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasoundjunkie ➡️
I'm really not trying to start a debate but has anyone other than me actually owned the hardware? I used the original every day for almost 5 years, the UAD has nailed the sound of the original, otherwise I would have scraped the money together and bought it again. This was my favorite piece of gear every day that I owned it and if I hadn't hit a rough patch I would probably still have it. When I first tried out the UAD I did extensive comparisons with mine (sold it to a friend so I still have acces to it) and the only barely discernible difference I could hear was that the plug sounded slightly tighter in the low end. With all due respect, unless you have first hand experience with the unit vs the plug then this statement (in this particular case mind you) is just not true
it is just my opinion, i have compared the real hardware to software and hardware sounded brighter and clearer while software was more flat. but anyway i think hardware is better
Old 16th September 2012 | Show parent
  #300
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmanic ➡️
Like I said above, the difference in how they sound may very well be depending on how the programmers have internally calibrated it for nominal levels. Is it -18dBFS like with many nebula programs? Is it -20dBFS? or even -24dBFS?

Perhaps the UAD is more modern in that it allows for -12dBFS levels or even -6dBFS.. after all, the chips in the UAD do floating point math so there is really no upper limit.

A lot depends on the calibration really.. and then of course also the actual unit they modeled and then all the digital nasties like aliasing and such (no idea how much the Softube version oversamples or how it does it).

Cheers!
bManic
Is the difference obvious ?

I mean, have you tried it, hitting with different level, and what did you prefer, and how to check the harmonic content, it must be really subtle isn't it ?

By the way, if think it should be standard that the developers indicated in the manual the calibration of the plugin.
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 57 views: 14772
Avatar for Alécio Costa
Alécio Costa 5th September 2008
replies: 66 views: 7521
Avatar for bewareofdogs
bewareofdogs 24th January 2009
replies: 575 views: 71418
Avatar for NuSkoolTone
NuSkoolTone 12th June 2011
replies: 186 views: 29059
Avatar for _Mark
_Mark 12th March 2015
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump