What do people use VST wise for reverb? I use Fruity's built in one quite a lot, it's quite good. Tried Waves, thought it sounded a bit artificial. They never seem to sound as good as the hardware units, or am I imagining it?
For vst reverbs i just use the stock cubase one. Most of the time i use the ones that come with the Scope xite-1. Sorry to mention it but thats what i use.
ORIGINAL: silkworm ... They never seem to sound as good as the hardware units, or am I imagining it?
no, i agree. even the DJM600 reverb sounds a hundred times nicer than most software algorithms. I don't know why but the way digital audio works (1's/0's) - reverb never seems to my ears to sound warm. (I've never used any expensive software reverbs, mind. ...But it probably wouldn't be worth the CPU load, when even a crap unit like the DJM600 has much better results in practice. It really is astoundingly different. Maybe it's just me).
That said, for hobbyists, software reverbs just have to do. FLstudio reverb is not too bad. A bit "cold", maybe. But that's how it is with most. I think it's because of the headroom. Reverbs deal with miniscule tails. The detail just gets lost in the crispy, serated waveform and reduced, artificial digital headroom. which weak signal you then re-amplify with compression, or wotnot. So what you end up with is a blown-up bunch of 1s and zeros. This effect is still present but is merely reduced when inserting an outboard reverb. The tails don't suffer as much and appear more solid / stable. Not as "cold".
But I don't know the technical scientific terminology. Just what my ears tell me. I've made only one or two songs with outboard reverbs; and once I had put it back in and compressed it, the difference blew me away. its like the difference between lego blocks and plasticine.
a difference between dedicated circuitry, and artificial emulation. i'm sure with expensive enough software algorythms you can emulate / match the warmth of the simplest outboard / analog reverb. but is it worth it? but there's pros and cons: with the software you can tweak on the fly - even up till the time of pressing. but with outbard, you might only get one go to get it right, and then it's written / recorded, and bounced in.
I'd definitely suggest people check out that spinaudio roomverb m2, not sure the manufacturer is even still going so it might be a dead plugin. But it's really clean sounding to me compared to many others I've used and the amount of control over the verb is colossal.
a difference between dedicated circuitry, and artificial emulation. i'm sure with expensive enough software algorythms you can emulate / match the warmth of the simplest outboard / analog reverb. but is it worth it? but there's pros and cons: with the software you can tweak on the fly - even up till the time of pressing. but with outbard, you might only get one go to get it right, and then it's written / recorded, and bounced in.
and outboard is just not practical.
Sorry dude but most hardware reverbs are still digital, not analogue. Analogue reverbs are things like spring verbs and plates, made from actual springs and huge metal plates... And real rooms with mics in of course.
The DJM600 you mentioned has a digital fx unit in it so is essentially still a software algorithm it's just run by a dedicated cpu rather than a multi-purpose PC.
Convolution reverbs that use IRs from real spaces are the most natural verbs for obvious reasons. I tend to use waves ir1 for this but there are freeware convolutions about and you can find IRs online if you search about.
I also use voxengo old school verb, waves truverb, logic platinum verb and occasionally a kaos pad. They all do different things better than others so i'll quite often use them all in one project with different settings on auxes, then send whatever needs a certain type of verb to the neccesary aux.
For natural sounding effects it's also a good idea to use verbs and delays together. Mix a delay in really quitely in parallel to the verb and really helps, especially with vocals.
Taking acoustic principles into account helps if you want natural verb too. For example, high freqs die quicker than low freqs over time so using a lp filter on any feedback loops is going to be more natural. Also a 6dB/oct lp on all verbs can make them sound more realistic.
This is all assuming you want your verb to sound natural of course!
New Era is correct, however I've yet to hear a plugin that sounds quite like an AMS RMX16. It's a digital unit from the 80s and sounds incredible on Dub.
Never found a plug that quite does it.
@Dibibibibibibibiidididididid
I'm not entirely sure about the 'outboard isn't practical thing', it's a different workflow.
You should always get things right first time anyway.
New Era is correct, however I've yet to hear a plugin that sounds quite like an AMS RMX16. It's a digital unit from the 80s and sounds incredible on Dub.
Never found a plug that quite does it.
@Dibibibibibibibiidididididid
I'm not entirely sure about the 'outboard isn't practical thing', it's a different workflow.
You should always get things right first time anyway.
However, it's would easier for me to go down the road and ask to run a stem through a real one than to buy a whole Scope system even though, as Hans Zimmer says "The Scope Xite-1 truly is a versatile system".
Just downloaded that Valhalla Room demo, yeah definitly one of the best I've heard. Really warm and no artifacts, even with long delays. Will definitly be using this one.
ORIGINAL: New Era Sorry dude but most hardware reverbs are still digital, not analogue. Analogue reverbs are things like spring verbs and plates, made from actual springs and huge metal plates... And real rooms with mics in of course.
The DJM600 you mentioned has a digital fx unit in it so is essentially still a software algorithm it's just run by a dedicated cpu rather than a multi-purpose PC. ...
Yes that's my whole point. You've not read my post. so no, you don't understand what I'm saying; and no, you're not sorry.
When I use an outboard reverb, the only process going on in my computer is input/record(when i bounce). the computer is passive. the reverb is not being generated by the computer with algorithms. the only process is an input: a passive record mode. The reverb being "pushed in" - is not originating inside the headroom of the computer. It is an alien source. the strain is taken off the computer. The input is different a kettle of fish.
yes of course it is digital. All reverb is digital. The only reverb that is not digital, strictly speaking, is real echo in a room. Yes, the DJM600 is DSP. But my point was that, in the computer - using questionable software algorithms - there's only so much headroom and only so much potential for an internal software algorithm to artificially emulate real echo, and "push out" the sort of signals which a standalone, dedicated unit is more apt to do (better headroom). My PC is not custom-made to produce reverb. It does internet, photoshop, etc. The reverb software is really an add-on to my PC. I'm not going to spend £1500 on professional, CPU-heavy algorithm. Reverb is the one process which really does push the limits of digital emulation to the maximum.
OK, the difference between the two things is not major. The main thing being the computer is not a dedicated reverb unit. Think about how complex the programming must be for reverb units. It's not like there is a man inside the computer. it's all a bunch of equations. arguably a dedicated unit is not only going to do it better; but is also going to benefit from the added headroom of the 24/96 audio inputs etc.
It's splitting hairs. But you're not taking into account my headroom arguments - so go eat shit and die. suk my dik, bitcch. Just go try a fucking DJM600 reverb on one of your instruments, bitch. And fuck off, cunt. ------------
the two things differ in one crucial regard: different sections of the CPU are being employed in the writing of the WAV. outboard reverb is generated in a alien "analogue environment" of "beyond my PC". The difference is in who and what is writing or generating the WAV. With outboard, the only thing the CPU is doing is a dedicated input recording. It does it very well.
Arguably the dedicated recording inputs are going to do a better job capturing an alien reverb, than the inner, non-dedicated CPU is going to do at pushing out a reverb via shitty artificial, CPU-draining algorithms. so F-OFF.
< Message edited by dibidibbidibi -- 15/7/2012 11:51:47 AM >
even the DJM600 reverb sounds a hundred times nicer than most software algorithms.
For this statement alone, slap yourself in the face. The reverb on that mixer is APPALLING. I wouldn't even use it on my own vocals in a live setting, let alone anything remotely musical... You'd be hard pushed to find a plugin made in the last three years that ISN'T better than that ringy lo-fi POS; of all the ITB options that exist I personally feel greater advances have been made in recent times with reverb than any other effect.
Valhalla Room is my workhorse. Once I eventually buy 2C Audio's Aether I'll be able to make every sound I'll ever need...
Just downloaded that Valhalla Room demo, yeah definitly one of the best I've heard. Really warm and no artifacts, even with long delays. Will definitly be using this one.
Yeah it totally blew me away at first, still does amazing quality
< Message edited by djdave*b -- 15/7/2012 1:37:55 PM >
Printable Version
Reverb plug ins - 
%2fGood4Nothing+Recordings+Re+Release+Vol+4%2fArtworkResize_Good4Nothing+Recordings+Re+Release+Vol+4_Dj+Guv_artwork.jpg)
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread