I've recently gone back to some of my old mixes, grouped everything into 4/5 busses (i.e. drums, synths, vocals, guitars, bass) then added NLS buss on each buss channel. I've been generally sticking to the same console emu, and driving each instance pretty hard (not into the red but not far off)....
Then on my 2 buss I've used Kramer MPX (clean and open mastering preset, backed off a bit)....
Prior to these mixes I didn't really rate MPX, but have found it works brilliantly, and I haven't been using NLS on the 2buss...
And I've been REALLY happy with overall results, big, warm, lots of character, ....especially adds a sense of 'realness' when using drum plugs like Abbey Road drums and Superior Drummer.....
Anyone else using NLS in this way or similar?
If you do the same with any other plugin you'll end up probably
getting the same "effect", perception-wise
If you open an old mix and you tweak stuff, any change will
most likely give you the feeling/impression your mix sounds better
Sorry I didn't have the chance to read the whole thread, but anyways, did anybody notice visually what the Nevo mode does on the stereo bus NLS ?
Just instantiated it with all parameters left at their default value, and compared to the other two the Nevo squashes the whole dynamic range like hell... is it supposed to behave this way ?
but if other emulation don't do it , it shouldn't .....
I put it on my final stereo aux going to my final audio "mix print" stereo track, so in all modes the plugin is hit the same way, but only with the Nevo mode I have a "squashing" effect (even visually extremely evident)
I just inserted the plugin on the stereo bus without changing anything other than the mode. I am attaching 3 pictures of the resulting files. Regardless of the audio file name, the first two are Spike and Mike mode, while the third one is Nevo.
I just demoed NLS on a couple of old mixes of mine and on one of them it worked like a charm. Although I slapped it on every track after I made the mix (but haven't been quite happy with the overall balances) it really glued everything nicely together and eased the balancing task. The stereo image cleared up and widened the whole mix.
Even that MIC distortion worked nicely on an effect track (distorted adlib vocals). The distortion just sounded "right" in the mix.
I found NLS very predictable even after a short time of working with it, which is good.
I also liked how it can go from subtle to over-the-top if you want it to do so.
Most of the time, I ended up using the Spike or Nevo setting.
CPU hit hasn't been an issue at all on my i5-750 Pro Tools 9 rig. I guess it up'ed the overall CPU consumption by 10-15% on a full blown mix (around 30 NLS instances).
Can only get better when I mix into them from the start.
__________________ Too many options kill creativity.
I just inserted the plugin on the stereo bus without changing anything other than the mode. I am attaching 3 pictures of the resulting files. Regardless of the audio file name, the first two are Spike and Mike mode, while the third one is Nevo.
The nls is standard in every one of my chains now. What the guy above said about the neve and it compressing the signal is correct, it brighten nicely but I use it sparingly. I wouldn't have said it at first but since getting used to the plug, I prefer the spike emu. I barely drive anything but it greatly improves my mixes in a summing sort of way. It's easy to ruin your mixes with it. Using templates and gradually tweaking has paid off.
After playing with NLS for last month and being VCC owner from it just came out as testing version i can tell that Waves impressed me with theese plugs. I have to tell that I was using their Platinum bundle for several years, but then I found better options came from UAD and others (Slate Digital and Voxengo for ex.) and being not using Waves at all for about 5 ears. But now I realized that I`m going to use NLS))). Well done Waves! So I found that there`s no crosstalk in Buss plugin (did not checked channel for that but I will today), I really love TG on drums and especially what dual mono doing to them (but for overheads it`s important to find right channels because there could be a very big difference between them and because of hi frequency content, I found that ch5 and ch6 are pretty similar for that purpose). I love also what TG doing to Vocals, stereo ch 1 in dual mono mode with drive all the way up really helps to set vocal to the mix.
There's a Cranesong Phoenix with a mild intervention (-8) before the NLS and a Massey L2007 after it. The Massey is left at its default mode (just to eliminate possible peaks). Of course it's the same chain for all 3 NLS modes.
There's a Cranesong Phoenix with a mild intervention (-8) before the NLS and a Massey L2007 after it. The Massey is left at its default mode (just to eliminate possible peaks). Of course it's the same chain for all 3 NLS modes.
at what level you hit it ? what's your gain staging before ? -18db ?
at what level you hit it ? what's your gain staging before ? -18db ?
No, it is much higher, and yes, I noticed that lowering the hitting level the Nevo's performance changes substantially, it resembles the other two (in terms of not squashing the dynamics), so thank you for the hint.
Steve check my video on VCC and gain staging ...NLS have been calibrated at -18 db like a lot of waves plugin i think ...
Neve is kinda like the tube on vcc emu's ....(no sonically but on dynamic) sat tolerance
Question: would there be any reason not to insert NLS on aux busses vs. individual channels?
For example - would there be a downside to creating a submixer of auxes in my Logic Pro template, and then feeding those on to my submasters & end chain? E.g., let's say my template included a "virtual summing mixer" of 32 aux inputs with the NLS channel plug pre-inserted on every aux. Those auxes would then be further routed to my submasters (I usually have 5 or 6 stereo submasters for drums, insts, vocals etc) and then on to the mastering chain.
My reason for doing this is the fact that I have 100's of channel presets already set up in Logic, and I don't want to have to go back and re-instantiate the NLS every time I change a channel strip setting.
Thoughts??? Does this seem needlessly kludgey? Any downside from a latency comp and/or sound quality standpoint?
Steve check my video on VCC and gain staging ...NLS have been calibrated at -18 db like a lot of waves plugin i think ...
Neve is kinda like the tube on vcc emu's ....(no sonically but on dynamic) sat tolerance
0VU on Console`s VU meter is Analog +4dBu and Digital -16dBFS
Question: would there be any reason not to insert NLS on aux busses vs. individual channels?
For example - would there be a downside to creating a submixer of auxes in my Logic Pro template, and then feeding those on to my submasters & end chain? E.g., let's say my template included a "virtual summing mixer" of 32 aux inputs with the NLS channel plug pre-inserted on every aux. Those auxes would then be further routed to my submasters (I usually have 5 or 6 stereo submasters for drums, insts, vocals etc) and then on to the mastering chain.
My reason for doing this is the fact that I have 100's of channel presets already set up in Logic, and I don't want to have to go back and re-instantiate the NLS every time I change a channel strip setting.
Thoughts??? Does this seem needlessly kludgey? Any downside from a latency comp and/or sound quality standpoint?
Thx all!
The difference I see here is just that you feed an EQ'd and compressed (or however processed) track INTO the NLS, where "usually" NLS is one of the first plugins in the chain. Not saying it's better or worse. But you kinda miss the Channel thing and you end up just using the Bus-Plugins.
Transferred to the "real world", you'll end up using NLS as a replacement for a summing mixer and not as a replacement for a console (or the individual channels) AND a summing mixer (or busses of the console).
I just noticed that the NLS metering is in dBFS and not dbVU . WTF are they thinking? If there's one pluging where dbVU metering would make sense, it's this one...
Hopefully I am missing something here.
I just noticed that the NLS metering is in dBFS and not dbVU . WTF are they thinking? If there's one pluging where dbVU metering would make sense, it's this one...
Hopefully I am missing something here.
What is the issue with the metering being dBFS? The operating level is published, no?
What is the issue with the metering being dBFS? The operating level is published, no?
The optimum level for NLS is around -18 dBFS which is on the far left of it's meters. So I need ANOTHER VU meter and trim plugin BEFORE NLS for proper gain staging. If NLS had a Trim and a VU meter, I'd safe 1-2 plugins per tracks.
The optimum level for NLS is around -18 dBFS which is on the far left of it's meters. So I need ANOTHER VU meter and trim plugin BEFORE NLS for proper gain staging. If NLS had a Trim and a VU meter, I'd safe 1-2 plugins per tracks.
You don't need a VU meter for gain staging though. Definitely use your DAW's peak meters and of course ears to get the staging right. The trim, if your DAW does not contain a pre-fader trim then yea you'll need that before NLS.
A DAW peak meter is usually not RMS which is what a VU meter is closer to. A VU meter hovering around 0dbVU (-18dbFS) can peak far above -18dbFS. A VU meter makes gain staging in the DAW MUCH easier imo. Using the DAW peak meter and aiming for-18dbFS peaks and all will yield a much lower signal level than true 0dbVU.
A DAW peak meter is usually not RMS which is what a VU meter is closer to. A VU meter hovering around 0dbVU (-18dbFS) can peak far above -18dbFS. A VU meter makes gain staging in the DAW MUCH easier imo. Using the DAW peak meter and aiming for-18dbFS peaks and all will yield a much lower signal level than true 0dbVU.
I use Klanghelm's VUMT plugin for this purpose.
The likeness or lack thereof of the peak meter to a VU meter is not really in question here. Gain staging is the focus and it's becoming a common misconception that VU or RMS meters are better for gain staging than peak meters. VU meters are inaccurate. They are too slow to be measuring what is actually going on especially with a digital signal within a DAW. VU meters are the atavism of audio these days. I think the adherence to a VU meter is because they are part of the antiquity of recording. However, it should be noted that this was because it was the only recourse; it was the first implemented measuring device for audio adopted from telephone companies. For audio gain staging you are better off with using peak meters. Aside from the stride in technology regarding peak meters, logic also dictates that within a system where distortion and clipping are not progressive but linear dictated by an absolute ceiling the peak meter gives you the leading part of a signal so as to know you aren't straining any part of the signal chain and certainly not crossing this absolute ceiling. The VU meter won't do that. Knowing each piece of equipments' specs for gain staging + peak meters + listening gives you the best results.
Saying "VU Meters are (always) good" or "VU Meters are (always) bad" is nonsensical, nothing is always anything. Wanting VU Meters to be used alongside NLS which *emulates classic hardware and workflows by adding progress/nonlinear distortion* makes a bit of sense to me at least, and the suggestion to ALSO use your DAW's metering (especially for level setting pre-NLS) makes sense too. There are actually a few Waves plugins that seem to show clipping in overages in their analog line (flat topped clipping) and there's at least 1 plugin that isn't floating point as well.
So having metering that applies both to the current situation (dBFS, dBU etc) and to the goal the mixing engineer is after (VU for gauging RMS which is tuned closer to 'what you hear' musically, dBF PPM/digital metering with peak hold for watching overs) makes perfect sense to me. I see no reason to turn this into an either/or situation. In fact I think we're getting to the point where more fully featured & adjustable metering is something that will become expected in most DAWs and larger plugins both, as we're certainly hitting the point where there's system overhead to support the calculation & display of more metering per 'tool' (where it will actually help hopefully, not just for the sake of 'perty grafix').
Saying "VU Meters are (always) good" or "VU Meters are (always) bad" is nonsensical, nothing is always anything. Wanting VU Meters to be used alongside NLS which *emulates classic hardware and workflows by adding progress/nonlinear distortion* makes a bit of sense to me at least, and the suggestion to ALSO use your DAW's metering (especially for level setting pre-NLS) makes sense too. There are actually a few Waves plugins that seem to show clipping in overages in their analog line (flat topped clipping) and there's at least 1 plugin that isn't floating point as well.
So having metering that applies both to the current situation (dBFS, dBU etc) and to the goal the mixing engineer is after (VU for gauging RMS which is tuned closer to 'what you hear' musically, dBF PPM/digital metering with peak hold for watching overs) makes perfect sense to me. I see no reason to turn this into an either/or situation. In fact I think we're getting to the point where more fully featured & adjustable metering is something that will become expected in most DAWs and larger plugins both, as we're certainly hitting the point where there's system overhead to support the calculation & display of more metering per 'tool' (where it will actually help hopefully, not just for the sake of 'perty grafix').
Yes, and good thing I didn't say "always"
I am only referring to gain staging and for that I can safely say with knowing your gear/plugin specs, using DAW peak meters, and using your ears you don't need a VU meter for the task. In this case, NLS is said to be used at an operating level of -18dBFS. All signals vary, occasions vary, set up varies, in turn peaks will vary at different recording sessions. If I set my gain staging according to what dictates my highest point - which is not the average of the signal - then referring to the VU for all intensive gain staging purposes doesn't really add anything. The average follows the peak.
All you need is an average level readout for these NLS plugs. A VU Meter gives you that. If you have something that has a sudden peak that is a whopping 18dbFS then that is something WILDY dynamic. In 90% of all cases (number pulled out of my butt,) a VU meter is better suited to the job of getting a signal to 0dbVU, which is what the NLS plugs want. Watch your peak meters for peaks above 0dbFS, but trying to get to an AVERAGE of -18dbFS from the DAW peak meters is gonna take more visual effort than just pulling up a VU Meter and shooting for 0dbVU. Analog gear prefers signal at around 0dbVU, and these analog emulation plugs from Waves want the same thing. A VU meter is perfect for the job, hence the "VU" at the end of dbVU. It's not about precision. It is about average level.
Please note that my comments are concerning just the subject of setting up for NLS or other plugs that want 0dbVU input, not gain staging as a whole.
First, in no way was I suggesting TranscendingM said "always" obviously, but it's good to clarify for the sake of all levels of experience present in the conversation. And yes it's good also to point out to people who may not know that VU meters won't aid in avoiding digital overs, but that's more of a concern during the recording stage (or when truncating output) than it is during mixing, at least with floating point DAWs. So turning the discussion in the direction of 'gain staging' is correct, and it's unfortunate that not all DAWs have an input trim (Logic for instance).
Honestly there are other meters that have RMS/peak displays (like RME's Totalmix and several plugin based & native full metering packages) and I like knowing how much I'm 'squashing' something at times too.
I look forward to trying NLS, I have the other 3 players in this market right now (VCC, Satson, sknote's stuff) and don't even mind mixing & matching for tonal qualities during a single project, even if it does eliminate some of the crosstalk emulation by going outside of a single model/product. NLS (since it has none anyway) would be a great addition and I look forward to owning it so I can partake a bit more in this thread.
Still I don't get why Waves did not add an input-trim control and a switchable meter (e.g. by clicking on the meter to switch it from dBFS to VU) to NLS for a one-stop solution that would make everybody happy.
I've never seen Waves plugins getting updated with more functionality, but these changes would be fully backwards-compatible, so maybe they think about it.
Still I don't get why Waves did not add an input-trim control and a switchable meter (e.g. by clicking on the meter to switch it from dBFS to VU) to NLS for a one-stop solution that would make everybody happy.
I've never seen Waves plugins getting updated with more functionality, but these changes would be fully backwards-compatible, so maybe they think about it.
I am now using the Klanghelm VUMT before NLS.
I agree this would be a great addition and have wondered the same thing.
New Reply 
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
. WTF are they thinking? If there's one pluging where dbVU metering would make sense, it's this one...
