Search found 11 matches


Re: Printed Cubase 7.5 Manual

I am one of those who still thinks we should get a proper, printed manual.
Here's why.
These are not only expensive programs, but also very complex and a user manual is a must have thing - a PDF does not cut it for me as I cannot take a PDF away from a computer. This is a complete killer for me.
I refuse to buy a bloody iPad - period.
I do not like PDF manuals, as it means using a second computer to utilize the buggers as both my monitors get taken up with application windows, and there is no room for PDF and it can cause issues switching application focus, and it utterly ruins my concentration. Reading from a computer screen has damaged my eyes considerably (my problem, I know, but still a problem) as reading off high contrast LCD screens is vastly different to printed pages.

Arguments against - paper/trees? Pur-Leeze, less of the dippy hippy green nonsense as paper is made from fast growing, specially planted trees that would not BE planted in the first place if they were not going to be pulped for paper, and as nobody uses mahogany/oak etc for books this is a non-argument.
Paper ties up carbon (not that CO2 has anything to do with the matter as it is not now & never has been a pollutant but is instead a naturally occurring gas) whereas bloody great server farms are not at all "green" - they use fantastic amounts of electricity not to mention all the rare earths in the servers & the "environmental cost" of building them - and replacing them/disposing of the old ones every other year so the green tosh is simply nonsense.
It is simply a way of Yamaha cutting corners (oops, "costs") - the prices have not gone down with the absence of a manual.
by neilwilkes
Sun Jan 05, 2014 6:00 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Creating a CD


New to Cubase 7 and have just finished ten songs.

Just wanted some advice on if it's user friendly etc to master the tracks myself but more importantly, how to do I go about assembling the 10 songs in order to create a finshed cd album. There would be some cross fades etc as one song runs into another to.

Any help would be great.

Thanks in advance.


Firstly, if it were me I would have them properly mastered - even though I mix and master myself, I find I cannot master my own mixes as I am too close to the project & tend to revert back to multitracks & redo the mix rather than simply let it go & get on with it. Maybe it is just me but I honestly cannot find the objectivity to deal with my own work.

As far as it goes though you have a few choices.
1 - Master it in Cubase (why not?) and set your crossfades there. Add markers at the right track points & export as a CSV file (or else write down the timings) and make the CD in a standalone app like WaveLab or similar.
2 - Again, Master in Cubase & use the HOFA DDP plugin (or the standalone) for the CD creation
It's got a learning curve but will get you there.
by neilwilkes
Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:04 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Creating a CD

As hard as this is to do, it's good advice that I myself should take whenever the time comes.
... I always run my own tracks through someone else for the final touch. Simply because that person can still listen to the track objectively and fresh...
... Firstly, if it were me I would have them properly mastered - even though I mix and master myself, I find I cannot master my own mixes as I am too close to the project & tend to revert back to multitracks & redo the mix rather than simply let it go & get on with it. Maybe it is just me but I honestly cannot find the objectivity to deal with my own work ...
The reason I say it's hard, is because I'm involved in all aspects of the recording - from the initial song writing to arranging it, playing all the instruments and laying down the vocals.
Them trying and deciding on which VSTs to use, if any etc.

Finally mixing the whole thing down, only to hand it over to someone else.

Because by then, it's 'my baby' and yet it's like I'm handing it over to Family [Social] Services who supposedly will do better for it than I will. :roll:

And yet sometimes it just must be done.

What a great analogy there with Social Services.
Here's a compromise though - attend the mastering session so you can over-rule if needs be.
by neilwilkes
Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:31 am
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Steven Slate FG-X


thx for your answer. The limiter is really great. I played a little bit with the FGX and i must say the limiting is exact what i´m looking for. And it´s a very cool feature to work with the Transients. That can do a lot to the final mix. And the ITP Slider together with the Dynamic Perception Knob is fantastic, so what i can say after two days of testing. The only thing that i don´t know what he is doing, is the "Constant Gain Button". I know what you mean by saying "Louder seems better", but it´s a Trap. But how this exact in FGX is working and how to use i must find out. What i find out for me is, the compressor in FGX is good, but for the final mixdown i will go on using the IK Bus Compressor or Waves H-Compressor. I need Colorizing in the Mix, and for this the FGX Compressor is not the right one. But these are my personal feelings and not neutral. So, the FGX is a really really great tool. And i´m totaly happy with that, like i´m happy with the VCC from Slate.


The "constant gain" button prevents the illusion of making you think that what you are doing is better when in reality it is only louder. With this activated, the leveller effectively reduces the input to match the output - in short, it keeps your perceived volume the same. Normally limiting down by 2dB will boost the apparent (or perceived) volume by almost a third (an increase in gain of 6dB is effectively doubling the level) and the result will always appear to sound better at first simply because it is louder.
With this button active the trap is avoided as the plugin will compensate your increase in output level by reducing the input - it is the same thing as a constant gain EQ (112dB's Redline equalizer is a good example of this). I really recommend reading the manual - not only is this explained in detail, but there are some good tips to help get started with it.

FG-X is a mastering tool not a mixdown buss compressor so designed to deliberately not add "colour" in the way you mean, as that is not what mastering is about. Mastering is the process of preparing a completed, approved mix for it's intended release media and not part of the mix process - mastering tools are generally designed for transparency & accuracy, not colour.
by neilwilkes
Mon Feb 17, 2014 4:53 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Best sample rate conversion for 48 --> 88.2?

Hey guys, I'm doing a project that's at 88.2k, and the vocals that were sent to me are 48k (both are 24 bit). What would you recommend as the best way to assure the best possible quality conversion? Use Nuendo to convert the actual files in the Pool? Or another way? I've done 88.2 -- 44.1 and vice-versa before, but am wondering if there are different considerations since 88.2 and 48 are not multiples of each other. Thanks!

The conversions can be done in whole numbers - it just takes 2 processes instead of one is all (details below).
How to approach depends on the projects & assets - if the whole project is at 48 and there are 88.2 assets to import, I would first back up project to a new folder, then swap sample rates & convert when asked - going up, we are padding existing files with zeroes so no harm, no foul. Incidentally we did this for fun last year after completing a 5.1 album mix supplied at 24/48. We created new copies of each project by backup to new folder, and then reset SR to 96KHz and allowed Nuendo to SRC up and simply re-ran the exports using exactly the same plugins, automation & mix - identical except we upsampled this one. We all heard a definite difference in the results very similar to the difference between 15IPS tape & 30IPS tape but not quite the same. The 48K versions had a slightly fatter & warmer low end whereas the 96K had better detail and superior imaging across the soundfield. This was unexpected - we thought we would hear a difference, but for it to be so pronounced was very interesting (although it must be said the mix was from stems (8 to 16 per track) that had been heavily processed (which is why we used them so as to keep the same sound as the stereo mix) before we got to them so we used very little in the way of effects apart from a few reverbs/delays and some sculpting/shaping EQ. But I digress.....

As posted above, R8Brain is superb and it's big brother is even better.
Both only use whole numbers to convert by means of the GCD (Greatest Common Denominator) as follows:
48000/300 = 160
88200/300 = 294
48000*294 = 14112000/160 = 88200
(The denominators always created by dividing the sample rates by 300. This gives you the factors needed for the conversion. Then take the first value & multiply by the second denominator and divide the result by the first one.
I think most of the decent SRC work this way these days but this website is always revealing, I find - I wonder if the built-in SRC have got any better since v6/7 releases?)

Hope this helps
by neilwilkes
Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:05 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Mastering - What's your approach?

This is a very interesting subject for me as we do both mixing & mastering, but I have to say right off that I find it almost impossible to master my mixes - I suspect this is because I am simply too close to the whole thing and if I run across any issues I tend to go back to the multis & rework the actual mix. Additionally, when I have done the mix I find it more productive to get another set of ears on it for the mastering stage.

That all said.....
Forget all about trying to win loudness wars - this is very akin to the medieval frontal assault and the casualty rate is about as high too. Mastering (or so I was taught) should be all about preparing a presumably approved mix for it's intended release media, and not - repeat again in bold type not the last place to completely alter the sonics & dynamics of a mix, and I think that more tracks have been ruined by bad mastering than have been helped by good mastering so the trick really becomes all about finding an ME who will do what is right for the track and not one who will simply make your ears bleed with excessive limiting for additional volume by shaving every transient & squashing the song until it screams "uncle". They do exist - Bob Katz & Simon Heyworth immediately come to mind as ME who will do what is right as opposed to crushing it to death.
(BTW, have you ever seen this video clip?
It's absolutely hilarious, but at the same time cuts very close to the bone as well. I have long thought that a track done properly will get better when you up the levels, but a crushed one will merely make you want to turn it all off.....and for reference as to how NOT to do it, take a look at the attached file below.
The top line is the vinyl needledrop, the second line is the original CD and the bottom line is the modern "remastered" version & it sounds as bad as it looks.
A good rule of thumb is that you get what you pay for and like all things if it seems too good to be true then it probably is - when selecting an ME, always make certain you get samples of their work before & after.
by neilwilkes
Thu May 29, 2014 10:01 am
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Mastering

Easy - they are all dreadful things that should be recalled & broken up for scrap. :lol:
If you want it louder, turn up the amplifier - it is why they were invented.
by neilwilkes
Thu May 29, 2014 10:12 am
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Waves NLS vs. Slate VCC

I've got them both & use them both according to what the project seems to sound better on.
It's like a lot of the analogue emulations - what works on project A is not necessarily going tpo work properly on the next one & so on. The API in the VCC is so good on drums it's not funny and I also really like the trident.
Personal favourite is the Neve, and on the VCC it's an 8048 whereas on the NLS it's a 5116 so different sounding console.

However, if you really want colour & console style control, give the Sknote "strip/Buss" combo.
Awesome fun.
by neilwilkes
Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:38 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: SurroundPanner V6 impoverished, Anymix not accessible

Hmmm, nobody else is having any issue with SurroundPanner or Anymix?

Nope. None at all - and we spend 95% of our lives in surround.
What I would do at this point (are you on Mac or PC) is completely trash prefs & rebuild them.
Firstly, take a backup just in case and on a PC it goes something like this:
Go to Users/<username>/AppData/Roaming/Steinberg and copy the folders for Nuendo 5, 5.5 and Nuendo 6 into a "BACKUPS" folder in the same location.
Then delete the contents of all the files from within these folders. You may even be okay to delete the whole folder (I never tried so don't know for sure) but get rid of the entire contents of them all.

Now launch Nuendo 6 again, and it will start afresh with a brand-new set of preferences. It will need setting up again, and you will need to be sure any plugin paths you need for VST2 plugins are correctly pointed in the Plugin Information window under Devices.

Then reinitialize the other versions in descending order, so no version can ever "collect" possibly corrupted prefs from an earlier version by mistake. This is most likely the cause of the problem - a corrupted prefs file somewhere.

If you do not want to trash all the prefs, just open each folder & delete the following:
Defaults.xml (will force a VST3 rescan)
VST2xPluginfo.XML (for Nuendo 5.x)
VSTpluginfo v2.XML (for Nuendo 6.x)
VST2xPlugins Nuendo.XML
VST2Blacklist Nuendo.XML
This will force a rescan of all plugins & require VST2 plugin paths to be reset but will leave ther bulk of your prefs alone
by neilwilkes
Thu Jul 10, 2014 5:38 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Waves NLS vs. Slate VCC

Understood completely.
The Slate VCC and the Waves NLS (I cannot speak for Stetson as I do not own it) are designed for ease of use and fast results whereas Strip/Bus is for those who want to get into the depths as well as get up & running quickly.
Also potentially misleading is the use of words like "distortion" as although this is exactly correct (what we like from analogue desks turns out to be the distortions (and odd/even harmonics) & nonlinearities that get added to an audio signal as it passes through discrete electronic components like valves, FET's etc and the EQ distortions added by the classic Neve 1073 etc but it is all pleasing noise unlike digital distortion which is anything but.
Watching crosstalk when bypassing also makes sense too, although neither VCC or NLS actually have inter-channel crosstalk at all - never mind an adjustable one and it is there for those who really want to mess around - I would leave it off unless the interaction is wanted for some reason.

Don't let that put you off though, as this is all customizable & can be turned off if not wanted.
by neilwilkes
Tue Sep 16, 2014 3:27 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Sends before Inserts?

Sadly not - all the prefade sends are post insert.
It might make a nice FR to have the sends switchable to pre insert & EQ as well as pre-fader.
by neilwilkes
Wed Mar 21, 2012 1:28 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic