Playing Around With Reverb

[rick-slo]

Some of your reverb tails are a bit harsh.
I added some reverb to your raw file I thought you might like to hear.

First an Aether chamber at 38% wet (more that I would normally use)
http://dcoombsguitar.com/Misc/AetherChamber38.wav

Second Aether chamber at 20% wet
http://dcoombsguitar.com/Misc/AetherChamber20.wav

Third a Lexicon chamber at 20%
http://dcoombsguitar.com/Misc/LexiconChamber20.wav

[Bob Womack]

My choices would be the EMT250 or the Lexicon 224 "Lush Piano" presets. Might pull back the room size a little and run them lower. The Large Hall was a bit round for me.

Odd, having worked on quite a few Lexicon 224s, I don't remember any sounding that good. Of course, they were first generation digital reverb technology. The 480 was better... In fact, my first studio was a "first adopter" of the 224, meaning we bought serial number 00001 from the factory.


Here I am at one of our Neve 8058 consoles in 1982. Those are a pair of UREI parametrics stacked up next to my right hand and the Lexicon 224 remote is on top of them. Ampex ATR102 behind. I still own one of the parametrics and the watch I'm wearing here. Memories.

We've moved on to the Bricasti M7 and plug-ins these days.

Bob

[bagpipe]

After listening to your samples I think I need to spend some dollars for a decent VST reverb. I'm a bit of a cheapskate when it comes to recording and have so far been using free VTSs. One of two of them sound good for a "bathed in reverb/recording in a canyon" type effects, but I've been unable to find one which is good for a "touch of reverb" subtle effect.

[Doug Young]

Hey Bob, cool photo. I've never heard a real 224, but the UAD sounds good to me. One nice thing the UAD guys do, as you probably know, is add some options to improve the sound, by letting you switch off things like "noise". That "Lush Piano" preset is pretty outrageous - 12 second decay on mids!

Here's a crack at a couple of more realistic mixes - like I say, sometimes it takes me a while to zero in on the right levels, so don't know if this is it yet, either :-)

Bricasti M7 Long Hall, a lighter hand on the reverb mix:



The UAD 224 reverb, but pulling decay times back to 4 second on mids, 2 on bass, and mixed in lighter:

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by bagpipe

After listening to your samples I think I need to spend some dollars for a decent VST reverb. I'm a bit of a cheapskate when it comes to recording and have so far been using free VTSs. One of two of them sound good for a "bathed in reverb/recording in a canyon" type effects, but I've been unable to find one which is good for a "touch of reverb" subtle effect.

Yes, I think the difference in a good reverb is pretty substantial. You don't have to go the hardware route. The Lexicon Native stuff is really good, and there are others. You can also get free convolution impulses that work with various plugins that can be quite good.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

Some of your reverb tails are a bit harsh.
I added some reverb to your raw file I thought you might like to hear.

Those sound good, Rick. I always thought the Aether reverb seemed nice.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by runamuck

Hi Doug, and thanks for this thread.

Do you hear a quality difference between the Bricasti and the UAD Lexicon?

Jim McCarthy

Maybe you can decide for yourself with these, but I think they're reasonably equivalent in quality for my purpose. The Bricasti is really impressive, and maybe more versatile. I usually find I can add more reverb with it before I "hear" it. The UAD reverbs are more focused on Plate/classic reverb emulations, and aren't as natural, I guess, but they also sound really good to me. It all depends on what sound you want. I also have the Lexicon Native reverbs, which are very good.

[Monk of Funk]

I find that reverb is one of those things that work nicely with a lot of subtlety, and it's the sort of thing that I find works really nicely when you don't easily notice it standing out.

I don't have my rig here with me, but I'll show you what I mean with a basic reaper project, using Reaverb. I also used ReaQ to scoop out some mids. I put the reverb on a send and scooped out mids of the reaverb itself as well. I find that helps me get a cleaner tone out of the guitar, so I hear it more, without reaverb clouding it on top. Listen to the file all the way through for a Wet/Dry comparison. I couldn't embed because it is set as a private track I think.

https://soundcloud.com/terence-deche...b-test/s-YvzXK

The first pass almost sounds dry when you listen to it. Very natural sounding, but nice enough. Quite subtle sounding, until you hear the dry version, and then you notice that there is actually a big difference. In many cases, I find reverb works well with that quality, but in many cases it sounds great with a heavier reverb also. Depends on the situation, as always.

A nice hall can sound great on a solo guitar. I wanted to use a more hallish reverb, but I don't use Reaverb ever so I don't really know it, and I just slapped on the first thing that made sense, and worked the parameters to make it the most hallish I could, which wasn't that hallish as it turns out.

[Doug Young]

Sounds good, nice to hear people's different approaches! Hope to hear more.

[rick-slo]

Reverb can be more than just the tails. Depending on the reverb used and the delay used the first reflections can add body the notes (fatten them up a little). You can't even tell reverb is involved at all. Sometimes I try that if things sound a bit thin. On most music I use just a few percent wet versus dry signal.

[Joseph Hanna]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

Yes, I think the difference in a good reverb is pretty substantial. You don't have to go the hardware route. The Lexicon Native stuff is really good, and there are others. You can also get free convolution impulses that work with various plugins that can be quite good.

I've been in love with great reverbs since the early Lexicon machines. I think we went through a period of time where reverb was somewhat redefined by the early days of utterly miserable software verbs. I get younger folks all the time who's sole experience with reverb is D-Verb.

I love the new Lex software stuff but to this day nothing can touch and or replace good hardware. Every time I hear a sample of a Bricasti it takes me back to the early and magical days of hearing a great reverb box. I have an M2000 and 3000 and I've recently heard the newer 4000 and where they're great if I was recording more these days i'd invest in the Bricasti in a heart beat.

As to your samples I'm probably one of the sole guys here that lean towards heavier reverb tracks. They're all stunning but I'd probably lean towards the lush piano.

[sdelsolray]

Nice verbs.

[Monk of Funk]

Originally Posted by Joseph Hanna

I've been in love with great reverbs since the early Lexicon machines. I think we went through a period of time where reverb was somewhat redefined by the early days of utterly miserable software verbs. I get younger folks all the time who's sole experience with reverb is D-Verb.

I love the new Lex software stuff but to this day nothing can touch and or replace good hardware. Every time I hear a sample of a Bricasti it takes me back to the early and magical days of hearing a great reverb box. I have an M2000 and 3000 and I've recently heard the newer 4000 and where they're great if I was recording more these days i'd invest in the Bricasti in a heart beat.

As to your samples I'm probably one of the sole guys here that lean towards heavier reverb tracks. They're all stunning but I'd probably lean towards the lush piano.

I find some soft verbs really great, like sonnox oxford. Convolution reverbs are also a great technology and perfect replicas of real room environments or plate verbs or spring verbs.

For me all treatments have their place. A solo guitar can be great with a bigger verb, but I find that is generally less desirable in a mix.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by Joseph Hanna

I've been in love with great reverbs since the early Lexicon machines. I think we went through a period of time where reverb was somewhat redefined by the early days of utterly miserable software verbs. I get younger folks all the time who's sole experience with reverb is D-Verb.

I love the new Lex software stuff but to this day nothing can touch and or replace good hardware. Every time I hear a sample of a Bricasti it takes me back to the early and magical days of hearing a great reverb box. I have an M2000 and 3000 and I've recently heard the newer 4000 and where they're great if I was recording more these days i'd invest in the Bricasti in a heart beat.

As to your samples I'm probably one of the sole guys here that lean towards heavier reverb tracks. They're all stunning but I'd probably lean towards the lush piano.

Yeah, Joseph, I love the Bricasti - one of my better investments, and also the UAD hardware verbs in their own way. I have a Reverb 4000 that I used to use for live performance (overkill), and it's really good as well. I should actually add that to my recording rack as an option - I lost my VSS3 TC reverb plugin when they obsoleted PowerCore, tho with the Bricasti, I probably wouldn't use it much. I've always been looking for the ultimate reverb :-) Bricasti has some upgrade coming that's supposed to make another leap, too.

Glad you like the samples, I've used that 224 Piano patch on a few real tracks in the past, usually mixed lower, but just enough that you can still hear the effect.

[ukejon]

Amazing thread, Doug. Thanks for posting.