KVR Audio

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:49 pm

Mikem wrote:no one has claimed CSR or any other native reverb can match expensive hardware yet.

Well, CSR pretty much *is* a carbon copy of lexicon PCM90. We confirmed this in loose A/B testing. But then again PCM90 isn't really considered high end. It's just a great swiss knife of a reverb, as brok landers would probably tell you, too.

bmanic · Post by **bmanic** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:57 pm

Hmm.. it does mimic the PCM 90 pretty well but does not sound identical and it is missing some pretty damn vital options too like the chorus, the huge range of the "size" parameter and last but not least, the "link" feature that connects room/plate size to the decay. This is VITAL to create some of those crazy long and lush reverbs and unfortunately CSR cripples this by keeping the "link" switch on all the time. There is no way to make size react separate from reverb decay.

Also, the density and "musicality" of the algorithm of CSR is not exactly on par with the pcm 90. It's close, very close but there is a difference in the favour of the lexicon.

I'm editing the PCM 90 examples right now so soon you can decide for yourself. I might have to create some more sensible examples later but for now you'll just have to make do with these crazy ones.

Cheers!
bManic

cthmusic · Post by **cthmusic** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:03 pm

Here's my attempt at the long reverb:

http://204.202.2.238/mp3/ReverbLong2.mp3

About 45 minutes of tweaking. I could probably dial in more sweetness with more time.

cthmusic · Post by **cthmusic** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:10 pm

And no I'm not using CSR

sounddesigner · Post by **sounddesigner** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:14 pm

Mikem wrote:The more I think about this thread, the more I think it's BS. If he really wanted to test CSR, he'd be talking about specific settings he used to give people at least a ballpark idea of what he'd like us to match. I know each piece of software/hardware is different, but he could be talking about cutoff frequencies, hi or lo pass filter settings, modulation, etc.

If you want to see if something can be "matched", then post some settings, not just an audio example that we have to unravel.

And if it's software, he should have started with posting the preset or something. Like I said before, enough games. Sorry to spoil anyone's guessing game fun.

But if it's a $2k or more hardware unit, then it's all pretty pointless, since no one has claimed CSR or any other native reverb can match expensive hardware yet.

I agree, it is'nt a fair competition until people know what their up against.It's unfair for him to not reveal what he is using.He may not be using software at all, and if he is using software he may be a better tweaker then those using csr so revealing settings is needed. plus settings and name of reverb need to be revealed so we can verify he's using software if he claims he is.
I believe a good tweaker can make bad reverbs sound good at times, and a great reverb in their hands will yield even greater results, so great tools are needed with great skill.
Most (including myself) are still learning CSR, its not a reverb that you can master overnight,it is'nt a 3 knob reverb it has MANY parameters and 4 different reverb units.I've demo'd arts acoustics before and yes it has some clarity and depth but it had a slightly harsh dry digital charactaristic to it so if he's using this verb maybe he figured out a way to smoothen it out threw lots of practice but it still does'nt mean its better then CSR, it just means CSR users who posted their files need more practice.

seamoss · Post by **seamoss** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:15 pm

cthmusic wrote:And no I'm not using CSR

what did you use?

Boulotaur2024 · Post by **Boulotaur2024** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:15 pm

cthmusic wrote:And no I'm not using CSR

... Nice one, what are you using ?

This is the closest so far, somehow brok lander's is a tiny bit 'subtler', maybe...

Anyway it's interesting how a good reverb can transform a dull synth sound into some sort of siren whispers

Mikem · Post by **Mikem** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:19 pm

cthmusic wrote:And no I'm not using CSR

Nice job. So please tell us what it is and post a preset link!

Boulotaur2024 · Post by **Boulotaur2024** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:20 pm

He won't

I hate that thread.

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:21 pm

sounddesigner wrote:I agree, it is'nt a fair competition until people know what their up against.It's unfair for him to not reveal what he is using.

Eh? How's it going to help you to know what reverb he is using? He laid out the task quite simple: give him reverb that does a better "roomy" sound.

That's ALL you need to know.

cthmusic · Post by **cthmusic** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:23 pm

Boulotaur2024 wrote:
cthmusic wrote:And no I'm not using CSR
... Nice one, what are you using ?

This is the closest so far, somehow brok lander's is a tiny bit 'subtler', maybe...

Yeah, his has got a richer and more transparent tail.

Im using MasterVerb 5. I put some eq before and after the reverb, but I also pitch shifted it up by 11 cents!

I just demoed AAR real quick and I can definitely see how brok could have used that verb to get that lush tail, I'm thinking about buying it now!

Mikem · Post by **Mikem** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:24 pm

Kingston wrote:
sounddesigner wrote:I agree, it is'nt a fair competition until people know what their up against.It's unfair for him to not reveal what he is using.
Eh? How's it going to help you to know what reverb he is using? He laid out the task quite simple: give him reverb that does a better "roomy" sound.

That's ALL you need to know.

Well, if that's what this is all about, then the answer would be NO.

If it's about the community demonstrating how to achieve better sound with native tools, then I'm all ears. If it's about comparing "lengths", then find someone else with a ruler.

brok landers · Post by **brok landers** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:25 pm

oops ... i was just 5 hours away???? what happened here????
did i drop a bomb or what???
ok, i thought it was clear (i was allways praising the aar, so i thought you know allready

) ...

yes, it's the artsacoustic reverb ...

to me (we have a lot of hardware here that i had the chance to compare it to) this comes closest to
our hardware reverbs, in some cases the aar (IMO) is even better ...
i only posted the files here to really check out if someone with a different thinking/approach
could top my needs ...
so, here is the original wave for you guys to go in depth ...
please, don't take it as another "aar rules" thing, i am very curious if other vst reverbs (no convolution) can top that ...
lemme hear your files!!!

seamoss · Post by **seamoss** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:26 pm

all this reverb has made me want to listen to some Julee Cruise

brok landers · Post by **brok landers** » Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:27 pm

cthmusic wrote:And no I'm not using CSR

what is it then??

CSR - pants down