CSR - pants down

[md69]

Hi,

This thread is really interesting ... but its sad you missed Warp69 (page 13) as he is the designer of CSR!

[friteuse]

hey, friteuse,
yeah ... i'm really interrested it getting the csr (though i hate the dongleshit), it might compliment the aar, it's just very different, and the fact having 2 very high end, but completely different roomcharacters in a mix could do wonder ...
btw, what about your harware/software reverb contributions? didn't you want to post some files?

ah, it was not mentioned to the csr from ik - I thought more to do some presets for the aar called "classic studio reverbs"... if you want, say "placebo classic studio reverbs"

I have done a few files with some of my h/w gear, now, could you host them for me? Thx in advance and good nite,
friteuse.

[brok landers]

that might be because its simply sounding horrible on drums ...
like i said, different tasks, different reverbs ...

I'm not buying this. If you can't present a good mix done with the AAR, i'll have no reason to think it's anywhere near as good as the hardware it's being compared with. That it sounds lush on it's own proves absolutely nothing. They key to being a good reverb is working in the mix. I have the AAR so i don't really need to argue here, but i have still not hear the AAR put to good use, and as long as that doesn't happen i'm not going to waste my time reading another line about how good it is for different things etc. Present some finished mixes. I've already lost interest and i'm not going to follow this thread any further.


/J

you quoted a statement of mine regarding the d-verb, so you just missed the point here.
however, i don't have a problem with the fact you won't buy my opinion at all, you just have yours, thats ok ...
as for the fact that a good reverb has to be prooven in a mix i can't agree more to that, no doubt. imo the aar does it's job good on many tasks, though of course not on all ... there is allways wholes to fill, but then just use something else for that ...
i'd post tracks, but the record companiy will sue me hard, i suppose ...
but i'll maybe find an unreleased, not sold track where the aar is used to post as an example ...
nevertheless, as far i can see there are a lot of pro-users that have the aar and use it constantly (just head over to the aar forum and read the opinions of satified users there).
having said that all, i am not here to do advertising for artsacoustic, i think i was prooving that in my general interrest of the csr or other vst reverbs in general ...
if you don't like the aar, why did you buy it? the demoversion can be checked out in depth, so it's your fault ...
better check the demo in depht when buying new soft gear ...
peace

[brok landers]

hey, friteuse,
yeah ... i'm really interrested it getting the csr (though i hate the dongleshit), it might compliment the aar, it's just very different, and the fact having 2 very high end, but completely different roomcharacters in a mix could do wonder ...
btw, what about your harware/software reverb contributions? didn't you want to post some files?

ah, it was not mentioned to the csr from ik - I thought more to do some presets for the aar called "classic studio reverbs"... if you want, say "placebo classic studio reverbs"

I have done a few files with some of my h/w gear, now, could you host them for me? Thx in advance and good nite,
friteuse.

sure, pm me for mail adress, if the files are not too big i'd be glad to host them, so you can post them here!

[spuddle]

rickschwar, it seems you are the only one who is not fooled by placebo fx ...
sorry all, i just couldn't resist ...
also my second contribution that i declared to be the 224 was just the artsacoustic reverb ...
please, guys, don't hate me ... i did this only to show, that you just have to use your ears ... if it sounds good it is good ...
the funny thing is, that most of the listeners instantly believed that it is not only the 224, but also sounding way more "pro" or hardware-like ...
that clearly shows to a certain degree, what one is implying by gui, name branding and such ...
even users of the 224 were fooled ... that shows how near some of the software reverbs are to hardware ...

Ah you played a trick! Hehe

I don't actually have any experience of using Lexicons so i'm just going by what my ears tell me, and that is that the second verb was nice but in a different way to the first. So of course it's just matter of twiddling a few knobs and you can have either or. Awesome, thusly AAR is still on my wish list, thanks for all the samples Brok.

[brok landers]

Hi,

I haven't read all the pages, so if someone already made a CSR test, then Im sorry.

I have tried to use the same settings as Brok - but there're differences, like size (I use 40m), attack (Buildup at 50%), spread (Disperse at 25%) and so on - I haven't fine tuned yet since I dont have the time right now.

CSR Test - www.relab.dk/Test.wav

Cheers

hey, sorry ..
did not know you're the dev of csr!
tried to d/l your file but its gone now ...
maybe post it again?
sorry for missing it!

[friteuse]

Here we are with some comparisons... brok was so kind, to host them for me - tanks a lot.

With ervery unit/algorithm, I tried to reach brok's first long_reverb sample, rather than to top it, as I think this wouldn't lead to a comparable result.

However, I don't give a garantee that someone could have reached it better than me, it's just my humble approach to come as close as possible to brok's reverb.


TC System 6000 Algorithms

VSS4
VSS3
Reverb3
Reverb2 and DVR2 sounded so different to me that I found no way to make them sound even a bit like the original.


Lexicon PCM91 Algorithms

Plate
Random Hall


ProTools HD

D-Verb


Now, my result is that D-Verb comes closest. The other ones just have a lack of rich modulation capability. But it's up to you all, to comment...

I'm now off for a few hours to sleep...

[Kingston]

Them VSS algo's are far too static for this sound, although easily the most dense of all these examples. I preferred the Lexi plate (similarly like I preferred my CSR plate example which was almost the same). Easily the best image spread and interesting modulations.

Reverb3 had some nice random modulation, while the lexi random hall had too much of it.

D-verb wasn't nearly as dense as the others, but otherwise usable sound.

Thanks for these. Very useful addition to the growing list.

[sounddesigner]

feel free to use this one in the meantime: http://www.colourofmusic.com/Jenny.wav

I used your jenny vocal clip for some reverb samples (good sounding clip). I also used brok's original. The reverbs i used where- CSR room,Dreamverb, and Plate 140. My listening enviroment has been somewhat compromised for the moment and i think i may have slightly over tweaked Dreamverb on one file because when i listened later it seemed a bit bright but i guess it's still alright to show the reverbs primary nature.Dreamverb is one of my favorite reverbs as well.

download link- http://s40.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=3LI4 ... B7MEQTNCAN

[cyber_echo]

AUTO-ADMIN: Non-MP3, WAV, OGG, SoundCloud, YouTube, Vimeo, Twitter and Facebook links in this post have been protected automatically. Once the member reaches 5 posts the links will function as normal.

How about this ?

Code: Select all (#)

http://rapidshare.de/files/17872230/1.mp3.html

Sorry for using rapidshare

I like how bright this reverb sample sounds. If you dont like it this bright i can do another one.

[cyber_echo]

AUTO-ADMIN: Non-MP3, WAV, OGG, SoundCloud, YouTube, Vimeo, Twitter and Facebook links in this post have been protected automatically. Once the member reaches 5 posts the links will function as normal.

Heres another one.. i combined two reverbs to get this. ( panned )

Code: Select all (#)

http://rapidshare.de/files/17872557/2.mp3.html

Gimme ur oppinion.

[AVBunyan]

I use Trueverb to try to duplicate that nice "long Verb" and I admit I can come close but cannot duplicate it - In a mix one may not be able to tell the difference.

Probably two reasons I cannot duplicate:

1. AAR may just be better - and it could very well be - no big deal - it is a nice verb.

2. I haven't learned to use Trueverb well enough yet.

My point - It just shows that if one has a good verb and knows it well then he can get good sounds. There are a lot of good verbs out there these days and in the right hands all can do a nice job.


God bless

[bmanic]

Hi,

I haven't read all the pages, so if someone already made a CSR test, then Im sorry.

I have tried to use the same settings as Brok - but there're differences, like size (I use 40m), attack (Buildup at 50%), spread (Disperse at 25%) and so on - I haven't fine tuned yet since I dont have the time right now.

CSR Test - www.relab.dk/Test.wav

Cheers

Unfortunately your file doesn't work. Link is dead.

Somebody mentioned that you are the designer of CSR. Is this true? If so, then I have a few questions:

Why did you opt to not include the link on/off mode of the PCM 90? It is vital in designing flexible spaces (small room with very long decay). As it is now, CSR is severely crippled. Also, why don't you let CSR do exagurated huge spaces like the Lexicon? The PCM series lets you dial in a room size in excess of 100m where they start sounding very delayish and grainy but it is NICE on a lot of material. Why limit it to 40m? Same goes for the modulation (swirl in lexicon speak) why not let it be as exagurated as on the lexi? There you can dial in settings that make the reverb go completely "out of tune". Why not on CRS? Again limiting the range cripples the effect a bit.

The feeling I got from all this is that the user is underestimated. You put in limited ranges to keep the user from "screwing up". For instance, on the lexicon pcm 90 you can get it into an endles reverb loob with link off that overloads the outputs and the unit goes into a silent (crashes?) mode for several seconds until the user dials the decay back. This might be risky for speakers and demands that the user is a bit careful with certain settings but it does make the creative pallette much larger. If these things would be fixed in CSR I'd buy it immediately.

Cheers!
bManic

[bmanic]

Here we are with some comparisons... brok was so kind, to host them for me - tanks a lot.

With ervery unit/algorithm, I tried to reach brok's first long_reverb sample, rather than to top it, as I think this wouldn't lead to a comparable result.

However, I don't give a garantee that someone could have reached it better than me, it's just my humble approach to come as close as possible to brok's reverb.


TC System 6000 Algorithms

VSS4
VSS3
Reverb3
Reverb2 and DVR2 sounded so different to me that I found no way to make them sound even a bit like the original.


Lexicon PCM91 Algorithms

Plate
Random Hall


ProTools HD

D-Verb


Now, my result is that D-Verb comes closest. The other ones just have a lack of rich modulation capability. But it's up to you all, to comment...

I'm now off for a few hours to sleep...

I by far prefer the Lexicon Plate here. I think it surpasses Broks own original. It lives the synth much more "original space" and the reverb nicely fills the background with modulating lusheness. Lovely!

Kingston, the problem with your example was that you left far too much highs on it. That is, you should have set the crossover differently and shortened the highs decay from about 5kHz. Then it would sound much less "cold".

Cheers!
bManic

[Kingston]

Kingston, the problem with your example was that you left far too much highs on it. That is, you should have set the crossover differently and shortened the highs decay from about 5kHz. Then it would sound much less "cold".

Thing is, I actually played with the plate quite a bit and that's *exactly* how I liked it best. I suppose I should've turned it up louder though. I already explained I didn't try to emulate brok, but just made it sound nice to me. I tried emulation with the hall example but that one sounds sucky IMO and I consider my attempt a failure.


But yeah, I could copy that lexi plate example just about 100% if the need arises, by doing just what you said.