That NASAL Sound of the UAD-Neve 1073/1081 Plug-in...?

[Arys Chien]

Someone mentionted it in another thread, but I didn't want to hi-jack that thread, so I started a new one here.

When I first got the UAD-Neve 1073/1081 plug-ins, I loved them. Then I noticed that there is something I didn't like about them SOMETIMES. Only SOMETIMES.

Then a friend talked about an A/B test he did, and he mentioned that the UAD-Neve 1073/1081 plug-in could sound too \"nasal\" sometimes. That moment I realized that he had found the right word for me: too NASAL.

I have compared it with the hardware (well, mine was a Brent Averill 1073, so it's not a vintage Neve 1073 anyway) and noticed that the Neve hardwares also have a nasal sound, only not that obvious as the plug-ins.

Anyone notice that too?

 

[Macc]

Yep... With the 1073 I'd put it down to the available frequency selection in the midrange, but I'm not sure if that applies to the 1081 :?

Either way, I notice it most on certain types of ride cymbals in drum breaks. Real deep warm 'jazz' rides often show it. Still love those plugs though...

 

[imdrecordings]

Hmm..

definitions, definitions, definitions. Nasal?


I can't say I hear what you are talking about.

The 1073 doesn't work on everything, but damn near close to it.

I have to say :roll: that the URS N CHannel's 60hz bump is far more usable, IMO, than the UAD's. sorry off topic

 

[TheHopiWay]

I'm not sure if I'm hearing what you mean by nasal but I will say that when using the 1073 on vox (hardware or plugin) I generally cut the upper mids a hair especially when boosting the Hi shelf.

The 1073 is not a neutral EQ and what you're calling \"nasal\" may be what I love about it;
A focused in your face midrange vox sound with crisp Hi end and the ability to tune or tame warmth to taste.

It's sound works well on many, but not all, vocalists/styles.

 

[NuSkoolTone]

Interesting observation!

I did an entire mix recently using mainly the 1073/1081 and there were aspects that had a fairly \"Nasal\" quality to it. I ended up replacing EQ on those tracks mainly with Waves SSL or Pultec. Part of this was to free DSP, but I liked the end result.

Just goes to show it's still all about the right tool for the job. Still really like the plugs though!

 

[Arys Chien]

What I heard was pretty much like what NuSkoolTone said. So it's still pretty vague for people that don't feel that way I guess....

I'm talking about both the 1073 AND the 1081 plug-in.

And as much as I think the 1073 plug-in is very close to its hardware version, the hardware doesn't have that much nasal sound. At least not that much as to cause a problem for me to replace it with something else.

One theory I got here (so far, not final conclusion yet):

Most plug-ins impart a nasal sound in nature. Therefore, since the Neve hardware is a bit nasal already, a Neve plug-in sounds \"double nasal\".

Hmm, I'm not really pulling my hair about this issue, since I can always replace it with something else when that nasal character becomes a problem. I just think that it's an interesting issue, and would like to see how you guys think about it.

 

[Cabbage]

What does iron sound like? Nasal?

Petter

 

[imdrecordings]

Hey Arys,
Just to be sure.
By Nasal, you mean the sound of speaking while holding your nose.
Right? :?

 

[Macc]

I have to say :roll: that the URS N CHannel's 60hz bump is far more usable, IMO, than the UAD's. sorry off topic

How so? The UAD one just sounds so much better (at the bottom as well as the top IMO) :?

 

[imdrecordings]

I have to say :roll: that the URS N CHannel's 60hz bump is far more usable, IMO, than the UAD's. sorry off topic

How so? The UAD one just sounds so much better (at the bottom as well as the top IMO) :?

Sorry for being so vague..
If I bump a bass guitar at 60hz with the UAD, the bass suddenly interferes with the kick. Using the 60hz bump with the URS does not. IME 8)
I still like the over all tone, I can get with the UA1073. It's just that one thing.
If you have the URS Neve Channel, give it a try.

 

[mangel1234]

If the 'nasal' description is about an almost megaphone-like sound, then I know what you are talking about. I would consider it a sign of a good emu of just the eq section of the 1000 series Neves. Since they modelled a flat, middle of the road sound for the full signal chain of just having the unit on, only that is being added to the full emu of the eq circuitry.
It seems to me the real units respond almost identically in the upper mids, where they tend to warm up and round out anything that goes through the low mids. The difference being that if you are using these eq settings with a real unit when tracking, you are using the input setting to compensate analog volume for transients, so sometimes you will be hitting the circuits with more info than other times, and UAd is not attempting to model this additive/subtractive interconnection of the preamp and extra op-amp stage, but just a static generalization that works across all sound sources of input.
If using a real unit on a send for something already recorded, your gain stage still passes through the front end of the unit with real time changes to transients in comparison to the UAD. In some ways, it makes the UAD more useable across the gamut bc it is more predictible and will not fluctuate constantly according to its input.
Also, the nasally upper mid can be really subtle when tracking, because it sounds good enough to keep adding. Only when comparing to a dry signal, or a second flat mic, do you realize just how much eq there is.
And one other thought, you get a lot of change with very few decibels. Most low-cpu vst's make a pretty linear change to frequencies, but most revered high end tube and op-amp gear sounds so nice bc it effects things with so few decibels. Nothing drastic is required to pop a snare in front of a mix, or to pull the mud out of a floor tom.
If the nasal thing is bothering you, or affecting your mixes in any way, you can put a more flat, transparent eq ahead of the UAD1073/1081, and do a 2-3 db wide-Q cut from as low as 800Hz up to 2-3 kHz, and add it back in with the Neve, and see if you like the result better.

 

[Eric Dahlberg]

Agreed on the nasal, megaphone-like sound as Michael has defined it. The \"megaphony\" sound of a real Neve console does not result in objectionable midrange build-up, though, so it doesn't really concern me too much in the plug-in, especially when boosting the low and high shelves offsets it well enough.

 

[neil wilkes]

Nasal?
Never.
Unless of course the audio was badly recorded using the wrong mic for the job. No EQ plug or hardware can do much with a bad recording.....

 

[Arys Chien]

Looks like it's useless that I emphasized \"SOMETIMES\" to avoid my thread into Neve-bashing.

I can assure you what I'm talking about is not due to bad recording. I don't know why I have to be accused with that....

It sounds like mangel1234 (Michael?) said, but I'm not sure if it's due to the reasons you listed. It's just that sometimes when I did a rough mix with the Neve plug-ins, take a five-minute break and come back and realize that I got a nasal mix there. SOMETIMES.

Maybe I should post something here so that we'll all know better what I'm talking about. I wish I have the time......

 

[kleinholgi]

I used a Neve EQ for emulating some NASA sounds...


.... but nasal ?


But may it be that way ... take the Helios for such situations, it will give you the opposite sound idea.

 

[1176]

I think what you are describing is the fairly tight Q of the midband filter when boosted. Especially at extreme settings, it can sound quite 'nasal'. good description. The 1073 is a limited EQ, but when it works on a source, it works beautifully. The 1081 also has fairly tight Qs.

 

[Paul Woodlock]

I think what you are describing is the fairly tight Q of the midband filter when boosted. Especially at extreme settings, it can sound quite 'nasal'. good description. The 1073 is a limited EQ, but when it works on a source, it works beautifully. The 1081 also has fairly tight Qs.

Out of interest I just did a rough measurement of the Q of the 1073 and 1081 midrange boost at 1.6kHz using white noise and cambrifge as a reference and IXL spctrum analyser as a measuring device.

I found the Q of the 1073 to be 2 nd the Q of the 1081 to be 1 ( 2 in HI-Q mode ). These are rough figures.

I suppose it's subjective whether one would call them fairly tight Q or not.

personally it's extemely rare for me to boost those sort of midrange freqs. I normally cut, so I can't say Iv'e noticed any nasal quality.

 

[Dan Duskin]

Nasal usually means \"more mids\" & \"lack of air and/or low-end\". This is because, when you hold your nose closed while speaking or singing, that is exactly what happens.

You describe the 1073 & 1081 as \"Nasal\" because they are both more mid-range focused... esspecially the 1073! For example, the high shelf of the 1073 boosts a lot of mid-highs, and all the midrange frequencies are very tight (narrow \"Q\") and extremely sensative.

 

[mangel1234]

Another thing to consider is that I think the 1000 series 'Q' stay pretty fixed even at higher input volumes?
It is pretty common for newer plugins (even some that are supposed to model analog warmth) to narrow the peak \"Q\" width the higher the volume. I don't think the Neve circuits are known for doing this? That is to say, not an adjustable \"Q\" from the interface, but the filter itself narrowing the higher the setting at the eq circuit. I don't believe the 1073.1081/or1084 do this.
That would definitely accentuate a complex curve when boosting the uppers mids.
The best I can relate to the nasal description is close micing and room micing acoustic guitar. 1073 sounds so nice eq'ing that I use a separate mic as reference for flat because it is easy to add too much eq, and the nasal effect is really prominent when A/B'ing from another source pre amp set flat.

 

[Plec]

Arys:
If it's the nasal I mentioned in another thread that you're refering to, I know what you mean and agree with you on that. Nasal in a \"vintage\" way.

The Neve 88RS and sound more open in comparision, so do the Pultec and bla bla... Try doing some heavy EQ:ing on a track with the 88RS and then try to duplicate as close as possible with the 1081. What you will notice is that the 1081 version sounds \"megaphony\" and a bit nasal in comparison.