Not the Same! Comparing Neural DSP X and Legacy Plug-ins
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 ก.ค. 2024
- #neuraldsp #plugins #guitar #amp #gojira #fortin #highgain #tone
Today I look at the Neural DSP Fortin Nameless and Gojira legacy and X plugins. compare them both and see if they have any audible and measurable differences.
0:00 Intro
3:19 Gojira A/B Test
5:16 Gojira Frequency Graph
9:56 Nameless A/B Test
11:26 Nameless Frequency Graph - เพลง
For clarification: the graphics used during the A/B test are just the ones from the NDSP website. They don’t represent any actual settings used.
Yeah you were fucking me up with input mode and everything else lol.
i would describe it like this: x version is , regular version with one instance of saturation (saturn , heat, etc). enhancing (not harsh) the high end end , and one instance of tape emu (slate, waves , etc ) enhancing the low end.
I'm so obsessed into neural dsp comparisons. Loved this one
Technically, they do indeed mess with the code of the Nameless one. Also Plini. The Gojira one was already coded with their ATI algorithm. The only thing they did was mess with the volume structure of the plugin to be suited for the QC. The clarity of the nameless one is probably due to better oversampling in their new algo.
My brain described the difference between Gojira/Gojira X in opposite terms - my first thought was "X has more high end." Not hearing much difference in Nameless/X.
For me Namless sounds different.But I don't like it any more.And this is first difference I have found out.
Yeah its a high end thing. I love the Fortin.
They started using a new Neural Network at around the Gojira or Petrucci plugin, and they use that for the old X like Plini, Nameless, etc. They also recorded new IR's for the Nameless. Seems like they made some changes to the Gojira, and the kinds that it needed: voiced better for the mix etc. Better highs and tighter under 500. They do tend to be the IR's for those changes but imo for this instance it's from the amp, just having experience with the differences ir to amp. The best way to tell would be a clear, plain IR like GGD and swap then. Gain structure is another part and it does result in some visible freq spectrum difference. And IMO the Nameless original vs X is very very different. Visible FS is just one part, but the overall character of the amp is the difference of 4 years of refining the NN they use, and it not only has a different structure of lows mids highs and gain structure but different places the tone gets taken with each control, and the interrelation between the controls (real thing in actual amps especially baxandall, but most (multi-gain stage) amps have some amount, iirc). Sorry for the ramble
All good info! The more I dig around, the more I learn where they are going with this. It is becoming more obvious that these X versions are completely different. Trying to run null test between the versions using the same settings, even without the cab sections on, yields very poor phase cancellation. They just have different processing, gain and harmonics occurring. And even though they sound very similar to the ear, the amps aren’t behaving the same. They are also much more stable and use way less CPU. We will see what happens when stuff get ported to the QC, might actually look into getting one!
What's with the input gain in the first test? Preset A it's boosted 20db, preset B is at unity.
Pay no attention to the graphics. They are just the default pictures for the plug-ins ripped from the neural webpage. All inputs and outputs are matched in the DAW.
i'm in a full blown studio and can hear more high end
Hello! What the sound system (monitors) you use?
Currently I have a pair of presonus 4.5” monitors and a set of Philips X2HR open back headphones. All calibrated using Sonarworks Sound ID reference software.
@@BaritoneGoatStudio thanks, man✌️
Did you try comparing the two using an external IR? That should in theory confirm/dismiss your thought that the IR is where the difference is happening. Unless it’s an overall shift in the IR loading, the interpretation of all IRs internal and external…
I ended up running some null tests between the amps with and without the cab sections on. Between the two versions I got very little phase cancellation suggesting they are not really similar at all. Whereas the same tests between the same plug-in was nearly fully phased out.
Hey. Let me ask you this as I had the same issue that you are talking about. Is your current version of the Gojira X at 1.0.0 or 1.0.1? Not sure when they put out the 1.0.1 version but I saw another YTer mention it and I was caught off guard. I updated mine yesterday and HOLY SH**T.....I may never turn on an amp again because it is THICK and everything I thought it should be with the original update to the X version
I did check my X version before I updated it. I checked it in my DAW and it was 1.0.0.
Well damn, now I have to go check! Ha ha. I may have to rerun my graphs if it is just the 1.0.0.
Did you check it? @@BaritoneGoatStudio
@@chrisstrong3748 yeah. I had 1.0.0. Just updated it today. I am currently tuning null tests and finding that the X and legacy versions do not phase cancel alot of the frequencies… So it seems like the differences might go beyond just the IRs.
@@BaritoneGoatStudio interesting
It's really hard to tell what they've changed but there is definitely more top end clarity that was lacking before.
The nameless for sure has more clarity with the update. I only speculate that it might be the cab section since it would seem to be the simplest thing to do.
could u share the preset u made for this
For the nameless?
@@BaritoneGoatStudio the gorjia
@@rudycastillo6369 ah. It is a stock preset. Under artist presets: Greg Kubacki - Car Bomb: A-V
Gojira you have one as stereo in, nameless you have the doubler on in the new plugin. Also, check how your DAW is loading them, I know logic likes to load the new one as stereo and the old ones as mono.
The DI is a two track stereo DI and both plug-ins are running stereo input on their respective busses. No doubler was used in any instance. The pictures in the audio demo are just the stock graphics from Neural DSP website. They aren’t the actual settings used in the demo.
@@BaritoneGoatStudio ah okay then. They sounded different to me when I loaded them up but, i figured I was just tripping again.
Bro i ve made an aliasing test on the plugins. All the X versions has almost no aliasing compared to previous versions. This means that the plugins now have less digital noise and are closer and closer to the analog counterpart.
Also there is a 20% Cpu usage improvement which is really surprising
I think they are better for sure. CPU usuage is much better for me as I can run multiple instances and still keep my buffer size low. I am getting a lot of frequencies coming through running practical null tests with processed waveforms between the X and the legacy amps. It seem like they have tweaked their algorithm and improved things overall to the point that they really aren’t the same plug-in. Even with the cab section omitted, the two amps do not phase cancel eachother using the same settings.
Damn that's good to know, and just good in general
@@BaritoneGoatStudio thats why i love audio tech
I saw a bunny XD.
Yep. He is the bunbun… ruiner of cords and cables!
The input and output levels were different in the comparison.
Don’t pay attention to the graphics during the test. Those are just stock graphics from the NDSP website, not what settings I was using. Inputs and outputs were matched in the plug-in and measured in the daw.
@@BaritoneGoatStudio good to know thank you for the comparison!
Through Slate VSX headphones and TH-cam compression I hear no difference.
I Like the old Vision, ITS better dynamics!
I think I might agree for the Gojira. I do like the nameless top end a little better on the X version.
a simple nulltest would clarify if there is a difference without any gueswork! :)
Should have included that to demonstrate the concept. Now that I am thinking of it, doing it with the cab section off would be a quick and easy way to hear what frequencies are not being phased out.
@@BaritoneGoatStudio Null test is the gold standard, and *very* clear as to where the differences lie.I wasn't thinking of cab section off, but that certainly goes one step further.
@@yikelu I have been playing with the plug-ins again today and flipping the phase. Even with the cabs off, the X and legacy plug-ins have a lot of sound poking through. I am going to try and do a short follow up.
Some people like to hear if the differences would even make a practical (audible) impact to the tone, so I wanted to do the A/B audio, but the null test along with the frequency graph would have probably been best overall. I am actually surprised by how much noise there still is in the null test even with the cab sections off.
@@BaritoneGoatStudio for sure, A/B can still help. It's not either/or
Maybe Gojira legacy have more low-end? (I write before you say that... sorry)
Yeah I'm listening inside my car and cannot at all hear a slight difference.
Hi end and clarify in two amps simps
Gojira and Plini were subtly different, Nameless X is WAAAY different
I agree that nameless had the most shift in tone. Mainly it just was way more clear. I slays like the pluging but felt it needed a little more top end somehow. And now I feel it has it on tap.
Default is only one sound I like in this plugin.
First impression: Gojira has some terrible guitar tones.
The X versions do sound better.
The Gojira presets seem dark on their own. But they are surprisingly suited for a mix… well, a lot of them are. I would be curious to see how they dial them in for the plug-in.
listen to magma again