Wow.... that looks awesome!!! I like the piano

Chris Perra, post: 418931, member: 48232 wrote: Wow.... that looks awesome!!! I like the piano

Indeed, that caught my attention right away.

transient editing like that... wow. who needs anything more. I'm all over this one.

I tied the Fabfilter plugs for a trial period of thirty days, and I have to admit that out of many other 3rd party plug trials that I didn't care for, I really liked the Fabfilter stuff....I just couldn't afford to keep them.

The Pro L is my go-to limiter for my Mastering Bus. FabFilter is excellent coding.

ive been enjoying the simplon as a go to filter for some time now.

phase response analog like simulation ??? it's nice for a plug.

Chris are you headed to itb?

Kurt Foster, post: 418974, member: 7836 wrote: phase response analog like simulation ??? it's nice for a plug.

Chris are you headed to itb?

I hope it sounds as good as it looks.

Kurt Foster, post: 418974, member: 7836 wrote:
Chris are you headed to itb?

Good question. Do you want the longer answer or the short?

short ?

hehe, no. :ROFLMAO: I want the long

Okay.. I'm not sure yet. I've managed to land a few great paying jobs, got through my insane setback. In the process, the core of my rig has been bypassed while I am doing serious critical testing 100% ITB for over a month.
Whats interesting, and I've read others say this but didn't fully appreciate that until I lived through knowing and understanding what great analog gear sounds like, and what it was designed to do, has now changed the way I work now which leads me to the next phase. How much can I emulate my hybrid process?

Sequoia is even more amazing than I thought.
I've managed to emulate a big part of my analog MS matrix, better in ways that I never thought possible. But there is still something special happening on the capture that I haven't been able to get as sweet on one DAW. So, thats where I'm stalled, or lacking the ability to improve yet. I have a feeling this is where the rubber really meets the pavement. i've always thought that anyway, but I'm really grinding this one out.

So, I'm comparing like I've never done before. If I can duplicate it ITB, I will.

How's that?

here is the longer, :cool:

Where I'm finding ITB void , are outboard effects like Bricasti and Eventide Blackhole. So, I may end up using my console just for the effect sends. They sound better on the stem, OTB.

Look at this Pro Q 2. If that isn't the writing on the wall! Sequoia 13 is coming. It only gets better.

I've been sitting around 90% ITB already. I use my hybrid rig to bridge and take the stress off the ITB 2-bus. Processing OTB, using Bricasti ( which is an entire computer per Bricasti M7) is the bomb for spacial emulation, it still sounds better to me. But, ITB is so close so I don't no...

Spectral Editing is what I'm excited about. Being able to surgically go in and destroy, edit, of improve a colour that is connected to a transient, then route that colour to a midi source or just simply tune it in better! WOW! That's where I am 100% locked on this next decade.
Being able to find problematic acoustic smear is where I see my business growing and where I see the DAW really taking an new journey into audio.
There are 1000's of people recording in home studios with less than ideal rooms. Getting closer in and cleaning up the smear, fixing phase, bad reverberation is all done ITB.
For me, analog's magic during mixing is about the added difference that helps personalize tracks you want to stand out as sounding special. 100% analog is mud compared. Knowing when to use the mojo is still on my radar but getting less and less worth the investment.

spectral.
what is that?

in layman terms,

Audio data changed into colour. Each colour is a freq or sound within. Example, a finger squeak or cough etc, could be the colour purple. Select the colour purple in the spectrum, delete and the cough is removed without effecting the rest of the track. In theory , maybe in the future, , you maybe able to surgically remove or route the colour to trigger something.
Surgically remove sss, reverberation of bad rooms and so on. The future of this is mind boggling.
You can remove everything but the suspect which might be useful in Forensic audio. Spectral Restoration is of great interest to me.

See this:

[[url=http://[/URL]="

[/]

or this
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/may13/articles/samplitude-0513.htm

Hey Chris, they may be far from [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.bricasti…"]Bricasti[/]="http://www.bricasti…"]Bricasti[/] and Eventide but if you didn't test them, give a try to Valhallaroom and ValhallaVintageVerb.
Let me know what you think of them. I too am researching for a better reverb and those are the one I use now.

Valhalla is a pretty good sounding Reverb VST. I've had the opportunity to try it (the trial version of the Vintage Reverb plug), and it is very "warm" and "rich" sounding.

(I've enjoyed working with their Room sounds).

Although, as with many different types of effects, I think these almost always sound better - and are far more effective - when not used through an FX insert on the track level, but instead, are used through an Auggie send - from which there's far better control on the Aux Return over parameters like imaging, amount, level, balance, and tone.

In Samplitude ( and even back when I used to work in Sonar and PT ), I generally reserve track or bus-level FX Inserts for EQ and GR processing only. (That's my personal preference, anyway).

Of course, I wouldn't put the Valhalla in the same fidelity class as reverbs like Bricasti, Lexicon, Eventide or TC Electronics, (which are all known for having fantastic sounding verbs and delays).
Having used many of these real rack mount models over the years, there's just something about them that I like better. For the most part, I would describe them as having more warmth, shimmer, silk, richness... and accuracy.

But ... as VST Reverbs go, Valhalla is a lot better sounding than many of the other popular, "go-to" reverb VST's that are out there right now.

Personally, I think Valhalla blows the doors off of both Waves and Sonitus Reverb VST's - in terms of overall fidelity, warmth and richness... at least from what I've heard thus far.

Generally, I find both of those other VST's I mentioned above to be sterile, cold, brittle and "fake" sounding. I don't know if it's in the coding, or the platform(s), or if maybe it's simply just me - because we all pretty much base our opinions from a point of view that is style-dependent, and within the context of what we are doing individually, and what we happen to be working on at the time... and, what each of us personally expects or likes to hear from a reverb or delay.

Some will think that all reverb VST's sound the same. Some will have a preference for one over another, some will always choose the rack-mount OTB models, and some will cling to the now half-century old Plate process. These opinions will be formed based mostly on personal preference, habit, ease of work flow and overall sound - and in some cases, perhaps even a little nostalgia - but regardless, these will certainly differ greatly from style to style... and from user to user.

Like anything else, YMMV ;)

d/

I personnaly like Valhallaroom and ValhallaVintageVerb but I still need to dig up all the settings and get it right

pcrecord, post: 419011, member: 46460 wrote: I personnaly like Valhallaroom and ValhallaVintageVerb but I still need to dig up all the settings and get it right

I think that's pretty much par for the course with any verb, Marco. Even the rack-mounted gear only ever gets you into the " ballpark" of what you want; it's up to us to tweak things like Diffusion, Time, Size, Pre-Delay, EQ, Width, etc., to really custom-tailor a particular reverb to what we want for what we are working on at the time... I can't speak for anyone else of course, but I've never randomly dialed up "just any" reverb preset and used it as-is. Besides choosing which type I wanted (Plate, Hall, Chamber, Room) I've always done what you do ... I dig into the preset, and adjust the details as to how I want it.

When I use a convolution algorithm, I usually dig even deeper than when using a standard verb preset, because when I decide to use a convolution type, it's because usually I am after something very specific, so, I do quite a bit more tweaking in that situation. There are a lot of engineers who simply call up any old preset and then simply adjust the amount of level and dry to wet. I've alwats been quite a bit more particular than that.

Now.... here's a question for you guys...

Recently, I've noticed some reverb VST's that have a "modulation" setting. I first noticed this in Samplitude's stock reverb, (Essential FX) and honestly, I didn't know what the function did.
So, I looked it up on their inter-program help menu, and it is described as this:

" For several critical signals, the reverberation may produce disturbing resonance. This can be scattered by temporal modulation of the delay signal used in an algorithm. Excessive application may create an effect similar to chorus in tonal signals. The liveliness of the reverberations will be emphasized with lower values. In this case, the modulation applies a random pattern, the intensity of which may be visualized via the "MOD" display."

"and the rama-frazz fluxes the doo-wacker's shmega-protons to the semi-angular sub-switching oscillator" .... yada yada yada. ( See? I can talk like that, too. LOL ;) )

Yes, you could say I'm more than slightly puzzled by this definition ... I guess that the root of my confusion lies with the question that I haven't yet figured out why I - or anyone - would want to modulate a reverb signal, especially to the extent of a "chorus" result ?? What am I missing here?

LOL...I'm still trying to figure out what "scattering the temporal modulation" even means. Is this just fancy terminology for "diffusion"? By the definition given, it kinda sounds like it.

I thought that perhaps this particular parameter was indigenous to Samplitude's Essential FX library alone, but then lo-and-behold, and Saints be praised, ... I've also noticed this same function on Valhalla's Vintage Verb as well.

For the life of me, I cannot recall seeing this function on any past reverb plugs I've used, or for that matter, in any rack-mount verbs I used over the years, either.

This might be a function that the Bricasti's have - I've never worked with one first hand so Chris would have to chime in and let us know if it has this particular parameter - as well as what it actually does. ;)

Thoughts? Theories?

d/

maybe a sample is in order?
standy...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/n6b55rep0lr6cga/sample.wav?dl=0

so that was the UAD EMT 140 on some dry kick samples I have been carrrying around for years that come from a super mega kick something...lol. no predelay, width at 75%, mostly wet, 1 second, plate B, hpf engaged at 90, reverb. i automated the MOD RATE from 1 down to 0.01 then back to 1 over the course of the sample.

sounds awful.
I would hesitate to compare that to an LFO though.
ugliest predelay ever?

DonnyThompson, post: 419012, member: 46114 wrote: I think that's pretty much par for the course with any verb, Marco. Even the rack-mounted gear only ever gets you into the " ballpark" of what you want; it's up to us to tweak things like Diffusion, Time, Size, Pre-Delay, EQ, Width, etc., to really custom-tailor a particular reverb to what we want for what we are working on at the time... I can't speak for anyone else of course, but I've never randomly dialed up "just any" reverb preset and used it as-is. Besides choosing which type I wanted (Plate, Hall, Chamber, Room) I've always done what you do ... I dig into the preset, and adjust the details as to how I want it.

When I use a convolution algorithm, I usually dig even deeper than when using a standard verb preset, because when I decide to use a convolution type, it's because usually I am after something very specific, so, I do quite a bit more tweaking in that situation. There are a lot of engineers who simply call up any old preset and then simply adjust the amount of level and dry to wet. I've alwats been quite a bit more particular than that.

Now.... here's a question for you guys...

Recently, I've noticed some reverb VST's that have a "modulation" setting. I first noticed this in Samplitude's stock reverb, (Essential FX) and honestly, I didn't know what the function did.
So, I looked it up on their inter-program help menu, and it is described as this:

" For several critical signals, the reverberation may produce disturbing resonance. This can be scattered by temporal modulation of the delay signal used in an algorithm. Excessive application may create an effect similar to chorus in tonal signals. The liveliness of the reverberations will be emphasized with lower values. In this case, the modulation applies a random pattern, the intensity of which may be visualized via the "MOD" display."

"and the rama-frazz fluxes the doo-wacker's shmega-protons to the semi-angular sub-switching oscillator" .... yada yada yada. ( See? I can talk like that, too. LOL ;) )

Yes, you could say I'm more than slightly puzzled by this definition ... I guess that the root of my confusion lies with the question that I haven't yet figured out why I - or anyone - would want to modulate a reverb signal, especially to the extent of a "chorus" result ?? What am I missing here?

LOL...I'm still trying to figure out what "scattering the temporal modulation" even means. Is this just fancy terminology for "diffusion"? By the definition given, it kinda sounds like it.

I thought that perhaps this particular parameter was indigenous to Samplitude's Essential FX library alone, but then lo-and-behold, and Saints be praised, ... I've also noticed this same function on Valhalla's Vintage Verb as well.

For the life of me, I cannot recall seeing this function on any past reverb plugs I've used, or for that matter, in any rack-mount verbs I used over the years, either.

This might be a function that the Bricasti's have - I've never worked with one first hand so Chris would have to chime in and let us know if it has this particular parameter - as well as what it actually does. ;)

Thoughts? Theories?

d/

Donny,

I think what it's saying is that certain types of signals cause the verb to resonate, which causes presumably unwanted humps in frequency. It sounds like the modulation setting is meant to smooth these out. Probably using a flux capacitor.

Uhmmm.. I thought that this is where diffusion comes into play...

Since we are on a reverb tangent, anyone heard the ocean ways room for UAD?. And no, I don't have it :P.

Bricasti's are the bomb. Nothing compares but more importantly, I get the space and mix best I can before verb. Less is more all the time. The better the mix, the less I overuse everything so as the mix improves, my verb level usually goes down.

I mix and check in mono, and always check what reverb sounds like in mono, grouped with others, which is usually pretty weak because verb is a stereo effect in my head. Bricastis are true stereo. Whatever Bricasti does to keep the phase in tack, is why they are so awesome and expensive I guess.
Reverb can get swirly so if I hear that, I run.. I tend to use a pretty generic settings of 3 kinds and I don't get to busy with all the extras. My DAW has stock verbs tested to work so I don't trust third party plugs if i don't have to. I'd rather have a cheaper reverb ITB over a third party that wasn't coded for my DAW. I'm seriously anal when it comes to adding third party reverb plugs. They tend to consume a lot of DSP which can steal from something else?
Pro Tools HD as an example has bus issues, as most DAW's I guess. I've heard first hand bleed hanging like a ghost in mastering shootouts. Reverbs hanging on a bus, just on one side after its been removed. Is that because of UAD conflicts or PT code itself? Another reason why I don't use PT or DAW's that don't make plugs for their DAW, well.

No matter if its ITB or something high end like the M7, I repeat the same way I work.
I don't compound reflections like having 4 difference rooms in one mix. I will often create 3 of the same with one having the wall reflection, depth and height. Each one is to support the building or valley its emulating to be in.
I love the Blackhole as a finishing reverb. I use it for mass distance. I bought the hardware just for that one effect. I bought 2 Bricasti's for one effect each. One is for vocals, the other is for the room and the Blackhole is for deep space. Now that I've used these OTB, I am trying to emulate my same process ITB using one stock reverb that comes with Sequoia.

I am going to be interested to see how my Lexicon stacks up again, once my studio is up again and I plug it in. I'll check back with you on feedback of how it sounds at that point. Bricasti's are not happening :).

Well, I sold both my Bricasti's. I miss them but, Sequoia is getting it done for free :D .

Makzimia, post: 419019, member: 48344 wrote: I am going to be interested to see how my Lexicon stacks up again, once my studio is up again and I plug it in. I'll check back with you on feedback of how it sounds at that point. Bricasti's are not happening :).

Love Lexicons for decades. :love: