KVR Audio

bmanic · Post by **bmanic** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:12 pm

brok landers wrote: long reverb

medium reverb

medium ambience

orginal dry

again:
i don't have a dongle, therefore i cannot test csr by myself.
i'd of course be happy if csr is even better than this !

Brook, just listened to these. They sound very good indeed. I doubt CSR can do the exact same sound or "better", just different. I feel that the density might be there but somehow the "meat" of the sound might be slightly missing. I'd run your dry file trough it but Kingstons demo has run out already.

I could run it trough the pcm 90 in school though.

Cheers!
bManic

ObsoleteAcc99 · Post by **ObsoleteAcc99** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:16 pm

[DELETED]

ObsoleteAcc99 · Post by **ObsoleteAcc99** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:18 pm

[DELETED]

grintor · Post by **grintor** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:26 pm

So you're checking out some warez ttoz?

lol

Sascha Franck · Post by **Sascha Franck** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:39 pm

ttoz wrote: Sascha, that proves how invasive and f**ked up syncrosoft really is. No better than Pace. End of story. Stay tuned for some interesting test results of "dongleless" SX3 VS dongled SX3 coming very soon.

I'd like to hear about those results.

Anyways, Syncrosoft replied. Seems as if with their new LCC versions, the licenses of lower numbered versions are combined into one, just displaying the highest numbered program version.
Of course, this still doesn't explain why there's been no licenses displayed at all at first, and why I had to both reboot 2 times and change USB ports for the dongles to get anything back up.

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:52 pm

I'd run your dry file trough it but Kingstons demo has run out already.

still have me a few runs left, and decided to waste one on this.

Here's a little CSR plate snippet, using brok landers' demo file.

http://www.michaelkingston.fi/files/CSRbrok.wav

She a thing of a beaut.

geekboy · Post by **geekboy** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:57 pm

Kingston, it sounds good, but I like Brok's better. With that said, I'm very pleased with my CSR.

martian · Post by **martian** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 1:00 pm

Kingston wrote:
martian wrote:maybe the unpleasant metalic sound many hear (on any algos) is actually a trait of their own room.
it's a possibility. I suspect it has more to do with this:

thanks, i know what a plate is. i said 'on any algos'. was just trying to add some awareness i dont find often mentioned here before people dive in a slate something.

bleh.

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 1:02 pm

I knew you knew, but not many people know.

erm,

I'll get me coat.

martian · Post by **martian** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 1:03 pm

i'll get mine too then.

Sascha Franck · Post by **Sascha Franck** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 1:30 pm

Wow, that plate file sounds amazing, Kingston.

brok landers · Post by **brok landers** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 1:53 pm

sascha, did you compare it to my orginal files? (i like the plate of kingston too, have tocheck it in the studio though)

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 1:59 pm

I did the comparisons of course. your original verb is more midrangey, and has a different "ring" with the chords. CSR is a little wider and better distributed image, and slighly more detailed high end. The chords ring in a lower frequency range compared to your originals.

They both "move" in a very similar way. I wish I would've had time to test it with the room algo as well. I think it would've sounded a lot more similar to the original.

Sascha Franck · Post by **Sascha Franck** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 2:02 pm

brok landers wrote:sascha, did you compare it to my orginal files? (i like the plate of kingston too, have tocheck it in the studio though)

Not yet, but will do right now.

brok landers · Post by **brok landers** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 2:02 pm

geekboy wrote:Kingston, it sounds good, but I like Brok's better. With that said, I'm very pleased with my CSR.

well, after listening again and again, comparing those 2 files, i still think the "roomness" of the csr can't hold it against the original file (which is a mp3 compared to wav, has to be said) ... the original sounds more open, somewhat "bigger"... the wav of kingston represents (to me at least) the problem i allways have with other reverbs: the ammount of reverb is way lower than in my file, thatfore the dry stands out too much, and the result is the reverb is not "surrounding" the dry file, putting the file into a room ... instead, the room is allways seperate, right _behind" the dry signal that stands upfront ... this is of course a personal opinion ... sorry for the esotheric words, dunno how to describe it otherwise ... still, that said, i have to do these comparsions in the studio ...

CSR comments...