CSR - pants down

[cthmusic]

Alright, here's another shot of the long verb using a different reverb that hasn't been mentioned here yet.

http://204.202.2.238/mp3/ReverbLong3.mp3

hey, that came closest up to now (imo)
way longer tail though (what, 15sec or so?) i used 7 sec or so ...
its a bit long, your tail ... it washes out the harmonic content of the file, musically i mean.
could you provide the same with 7 sec's?
also, the initial delay (pre delay or early reflections) are too obvious (all imo, plse notice).
but sounds nice and wide ...
lemme know what that reverb unit is ...

Yeah, no problem. I'm using Space Master 2 in Reaktor 5.1

It doesn't give a sec readout for the length, so I tried to get it fairly close to your original length with this new file.

http://204.202.2.238/mp3/ReverbLong4.mp3

Here's a pic of the settings ....

[spuddle]

See now I believe the only reason that ReverbLong3 sounds big and lush is because of the long tail/decay if you shorten it, it will sound a little weaker and dull. I had this problem with the RV7000.

The AAR was really nice for providing lushness even with a shorter decay which is the answer to why it sounds nice imo.

== Edit ==

Your version with the shorter tail is quite nice but the overtones of the main body of the verb still doesn't compare to my ears.

[cthmusic]

Also, some things that can affect perception of reverb is your monitoring system, room ascoustics and D/A converters.

The cheaper the monitors/da converters, the harder it is to get an accurate image of the reverb tail. If your room is full of reflections, then the reverb coming out of your monitors gets washed out really easy and is hard to discern. On cheap speakers, a really expensive reverb can sound slightly better when compared to other reverbs that are cheap and low quality.

[spuddle]

Also, some things that can affect perception of reverb is your monitoring system, room ascoustics and D/A converters.

The cheaper the monitors/da converters, the harder it is to get an accurate image of the reverb tail. If your room is full of reflections, then the reverb coming out of your monitors gets washed out really easy and is hard to discern. On cheap speakers, a really expensive reverb can sound slightly better when compared to other reverbs that are cheap and low quality.

Hurrah for headphones

[cthmusic]

On ReverbLong3 I think I had the "Revibration" setting on 85. I also added just subtley more lows and dampend just subtley the highs on ReberbLong4. For whats it worth.

[friteuse]

Wow, this thread quiet exploded!

Indeed, I had some elematry problems, too, when trying to recreate the reverb... but somehow, I found it very interesting to do an approach with different verbs without knowing anything about the original thing.

Hypothetical situation #1: I knew the Reverb Time was 7.9s and HiCut on 2.5 kHz. What would be the first step, approaching on another reverb: set these values.

Hypothetical situation #2: I didn't know any settings. I would experiment with all parameters to approach the desired sound as close as possible.

Problem for #1 is, reverbs really sound very different, when setting same values. Values are just imaginary, depending on the internal structures (filter types etc.). So I would have missed some possible settings, just because I would think: "impossible to set the decay to 6.5s, because HE used 7.9s"

Porblem for #2 is, if I am not experienced with tweaking reverbs, I could miss some tricks. Knowing the original settings could have lead me to ideas that I wouldn't have had for myself.

I think brok did it in a right way, maybe not suitable for everyone, but it wasn't unfair, it was just ONE way to go.

Now, as we all know the reverb he used and what settings he did, it's up to us to do some further approaches!

We should keep in mind, too, that reverb is a very difficult thing and used in very different situations. The used style of music is just a little segment of what music can be (though a very very nice one!!), and AAR fits this perfectly, better, than any other reverb I know.

But there may be other segments, other styles, that need other reverbs. Like the CSR...

Impossible to say, which one is generally better, but most likely possible to say, which one would fit which situation better. So best thing is to have the choice, isn't it?

[brok landers]

hey friteuse:
good roared, lion!
now didn't you want to post some files you did with the original?
how about them?
i am very curious to hear how expensive hardware compares ...

[bmanic]

Here are the CSR examples that I did during the demo session. It's not much but it does demonstrate the possibilities in several situations. No vocals unfortunately. All the original dry sounds are very dry. Especially the synth sounds have no ambience or delay or anything like that at all. NOTE: These are 16bit 44,1kHz WAV files so they are rather large!

Fruity default dance kick trough CSR. It's a brutal reverb tester. Get the dry original sound here.
Next up we have synth chords ala oberheim in some hallish space. CSR owners can get the preset here.
Then we have a pad sound from fabfilter twin in a huge space suitable for pad sounds. CSR owners can get the preset here.
Tarnce cliché, the same example that I posted earlier. CSR owners can get the preset here.
Big bass sound in tight ambience. This was the CSR room algo. CSR owners can get the preset here.

Finally we have 3 variations on the Inverse reverb algorithm,
Short, Medium and Long.
Unfortunately I forgot to save the short and medium presets so CSR users have to be content with the long preset.

I'll post the PCM 90 examples ASAP. If anybody wants the dry, original sounds of any of the examples then just give me a PM.

Cheers!
bManic

[friteuse]

Ok, so far from here, I did some testing with System 6000 Reverbs (VSS4/VSS3/Reverb3/Reverb2) and ProTools (D-Verb).

D-Verb comes closest, then VSS3, but still there's a big difference. Damn, wtf are you using, brok?

When I look on your equipment list, I see only the big lexis that I couldn't test. So, 224???

The CSR version above sounds good, indeed. But far less musical, in a way and imho.

hey, friteuse, lemme hear the hardware results!
can you post them here?
btw, i used the artsacoustic reverb ...
when i was on protools back in the days i allways loved the d-verb, allthough it was a bit of a one trick pony ... but for long, deeply modulated reverbs i allways used only d-verb ... nothing to do with a real room though ...
i think the artsacoustic reverb pretty much combined both musical and realistic approaches to a very professional degree ...

Yo mate, sure!

First of all, congratulations, you initiated a very great thread!

I can provide some comparsions to the mentioned units tomorrow. Just give me a little more time, as I have to sleep now and do a few jobs before I can do that.

Btw, I never uploaded a file anywhere - would you mind to upload them for me on your server?

Ah, and of course, I cannot promise to be able tweaking the units as good as you could do...

Cheers and good nite!

friteuse

[brok landers]

hey friteuse, shoot'em over, i'll host'em for you ...
pm me for email adress ...

[Kingston]

and now for something completely different,

just kidding,

here's broks example gone thru CSR hall,

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

and here's the CSR plate from earlier today

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

sounds good to me, especially the plate (lush^2).

[living sounds]

Wow, I never expected it to be the AA reverb... never liked it although I had tested it several times. Really makes you think... now I'd like to hear the 224.

Here's the 300 file - though, as I said, it doesn't come close:

www.scherer.de/Download/Lex_Piano.rar

I don't usually use 7 second reverbs with the highs EQed out to test a reverb, but in this case, the AA is surely superior.

brok, I'll put it through the 300. Can you tell me the settings you've used? I'm quite convinced it's the 224, I instantly recognized that lush, warm, heavenly sound from the old Vangelis records.

i am the biggest vangelis fan on the planet (allthough alexander is bullshit imo, i love the analog stuff of vangelis way more) ...
check upper posts, i posted the preset ...
and please, let me hear the l300 in action on my file, i also posted the .wav ...
up to now there were some nice files posted, but they did not convince me ... i still like the aar more ...
also, please, try your best with your non convolution vst reverbs ...
i'd really like to hear all different approaches ...

[brok landers]

Here are the CSR examples that I did during the demo session. It's not much but it does demonstrate the possibilities in several situations. No vocals unfortunately. All the original dry sounds are very dry. Especially the synth sounds have no ambience or delay or anything like that at all. NOTE: These are 16bit 44,1kHz WAV files so they are rather large!

Fruity default dance kick trough CSR. It's a brutal reverb tester. Get the dry original sound here.
Next up we have synth chords ala oberheim in some hallish space. CSR owners can get the preset here.
Then we have a pad sound from fabfilter twin in a huge space suitable for pad sounds. CSR owners can get the preset here.
Tarnce cliché, the same example that I posted earlier. CSR owners can get the preset here.
Big bass sound in tight ambience. This was the CSR room algo. CSR owners can get the preset here.

Finally we have 3 variations on the Inverse reverb algorithm,
Short, Medium and Long.
Unfortunately I forgot to save the short and medium presets so CSR users have to be content with the long preset.

I'll post the PCM 90 examples ASAP. If anybody wants the dry, original sounds of any of the examples then just give me a PM.

Cheers!
bManic

hey bmanic, thanks for the contribution, i'll do some further testing with your files ...
but coud you please try to match up or top my file with a csr reverbed one?
i'd be cery interrested!

[sounddesigner]

a highly skilled engineer can do much more with the right information than somebody unskilled.

1. There's the original file.

2. You can listen to it.

3. Now match it, or make it better.

How much more info can you possibly need?

It REALLY doesn't matter what reverbs or specific settings were used, if you know your plugs/hardware and how they perform.

The user should not be part of the equation at all if it's the reverb that's being judged. If you don't understand that, you don't understand the nature of the problem. It's not about what anybody here can do with CSR, it's what CSR can do. If anybody's skill matters, it's brok's since it's his reverb setting that's used as a control variable.

Hypothetical situation 1 - Say I have CSR, and I have no clue how to program it, I only have a very basic understanding of the operation. Daddy died and left me a trust fund so I've got money to blow, whatever. I want to contribute to the topic, and help brok to see how close CSR gets to his reverb (AAR in this case). I have no information on how to do so, but I try to record a demo anyway. I am unable to create anything close because my programming is poor. Anybody judging based on that would probably conclude that CSR is very poor at recreating the "control" reverb.

Hypothetical situation 2 - I have CSR, and I am an expert programmer - I listen to the demo, and I am immediately able to intuit the precise value of every parameter (unrealistic, but you seem to think it's QED so we'll go with that). I create a perfect recreation of brok's control. Anybody judging based on my recording would conclude that CSR is excellent at recreating the type of reverb brok has demonstrated.

You can see that without any background information, the user's skill becomes a very important factor, but it shouldn't be. CSR is what's being tested, not the programmer - the parameters matter to those who cannot intuit the precise settings (my personal opinion is that's pretty much everybody here including you, or for that matter me).

Also to add to this, in order for a competition to truly be fair one of the competitors can't make the rules and supply the material because the competition is then skewd to his advantage and strenghths of his tool.I can easily go get uad's dreamverb wich is a rich reverb and say to all "match this thickness", and give them a file in wich the material used sounds well with dreamverb.We all know that one reverb is'nt good for all projects. i'd like to atleast see 3 different files used and let one be a slow singing female voice.Let someone who's not competing supply the material, and make rules that all agree on.
Most who own CSR have been using it for under 20 days while brok have been using aar for 20 years.If Brok brought his tweaking ability to csr and thoroughly learned it i'm sure he'll produce many great results with it.And yes uvacom if everyone would have had brok's settings they could've produced better results then they did, even those who used aar like brok did'nt get as good results as brok.

[cthmusic]

I'm definitely sold on AAR. I was thinking about doing the crossgrade for CSR, but I've got second thoughts now. Plus, the only dongle I'm willing to live with is the one for Logic!

Brok, your right about AAS's natural musical feel. It really makes it feel like an acoustic instrument.