KVR Audio

ATS · Post by **ATS** » Tue Nov 22, 2016 4:42 am

incubus wrote:Enough!

What is it with kvr and the "beat down the guy who doesn't like it" BS

it's not that he didn't like it, it's why he says he didn't like it. Obscure at best.

jens · Post by **jens** » Tue Nov 22, 2016 7:46 am

I guess that Gearslutz user should have sent a PM to every KVR user in order to ask if they approve of his usage of the term "plasticky" before making that post...

I'm also pretty sure metallic, glassy, warm, phat and so forth are much more accurate and adequate descriptions of sound than plasticky - in fact let's burn at the stakes whoever dares to use that term again in an attempt to put his/her personal perception of sound into words...

Gamma-UT · Post by **Gamma-UT** » Tue Nov 22, 2016 7:59 am

jens wrote:I guess that Gearslutz user should have sent a PM to every KVR user in order to ask if they approve of his usage of the term "plasticky" before making that post...

As the post in question came from a user with the handle "Troll McCartney" I'd say it was Mission Accomplished as far as they were concerned.

The only thing missing from the usual copypasta of "plasticky" and "unwanted layer to the sound" was references to "veiled sound" and how superior Nebula would have been in the same situation.

jens · Post by **jens** » Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:26 am

Ah, so had he chosen a different user-name that same remark about "plasticky" would have been okay?

So are we now judging posts by the nickname of whoever makes them? Really?

Personally I find that name pretty witty b.t.w.

Gamma-UT · Post by **Gamma-UT** » Tue Nov 22, 2016 9:13 am

jens wrote:Ah, so had he chosen a different user-name that same remark about "plasticky" would have been okay?

So are we now judging posts by the nickname of whoever makes them? Really?

Personally I find that name pretty witty b.t.w.

As far as I'm concerned, people can use "plasticky" all day long. It works for me because, as a tired old cliché about sound, it provides a huge clue as to how valuable their opinion is going to be to me.

On the name thing: new user at GS manages to wind up not just one but two forums with just one post. Sometimes hiding in plain sight is the best policy. And witty too, eh?:

SteveWZ · Post by **SteveWZ** » Tue Nov 22, 2016 5:31 pm

A little Shimmer via Pro-R

https://soundcloud.com/synth-presets-co ... lter-pro-r

MogwaiBoy · Post by **MogwaiBoy** » Tue Nov 22, 2016 5:55 pm

*Says all Fabfilter plugins sound plasticky*

*listens to Nicky Romero and David Guetta all day*

mmmmmm so warm and organic!

liquidsound · Post by **liquidsound** » Tue Nov 22, 2016 6:00 pm

As long as it is BPA free it's fine.

incubus · Post by **incubus** » Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:47 pm

I dunno man, there is something different about this verb. Reminds me when I tried the HOFA. It's not like anything else. (except the HOFA, glitches like crazy under some situation, not strength of computer related obviously)

Killed off the drum rooms on an example and replaced it with this and I'm either crazy or it was light-years easier to get a fantastic natural sounding space, and of course easy.

bmanic · Post by **bmanic** » Tue Nov 22, 2016 9:06 pm

It's good. It's real good. No denying it.. and the fact that it truly is different, is it's strength.

Not sure if I said it here or at gearslutz but I truly think we have just witnessed a classic in the making. I suspect that if it becomes "forgotten" somebody will rediscover it in 5 or 6 years and everybody will be asking "how the heck did you get that reverb sound!?".

Robert Randolph · Post by **Robert Randolph** » Tue Nov 22, 2016 9:19 pm

bmanic wrote:It's good. It's real good. No denying it.. and the fact that it truly is different, is it's strength.

Not sure if I said it here or at gearslutz but I truly think we have just witnessed a classic in the making. I suspect that if it becomes "forgotten" somebody will rediscover it in 5 or 6 years and everybody will be asking "how the heck did you get that reverb sound!?".

I think the strength of Pro-R is that it's amazing at creating sounds you don't notice.

So maybe in 10 years people will be asking "How the heck did you not use any reverb on that track!?"

incubus · Post by **incubus** » Wed Nov 23, 2016 4:21 am

ATS wrote:
incubus wrote:Enough!

What is it with kvr and the "beat down the guy who doesn't like it" BS

it's not that he didn't like it, it's why he says he didn't like it. Obscure at best.

I have no idea, I saw the snowball effect happening and couldn't help myself.

SteveWZ · Post by **SteveWZ** » Wed Nov 23, 2016 5:54 am

PRO-R does really well on rooms and acoustic spaces.

EXAMPLE:

https://soundcloud.com/synth-presets-co ... lter-pro-r

ErikH · Post by **ErikH** » Wed Nov 23, 2016 7:56 am

I have carefully listened to your presets Steve and it's clear to me that resistance is futile. I own no reverb that sounds as good as this one. The others are more for experimental stuff. This one will be for acoustic instruments.
At the moment I don't have the means to get FF-Pro R, but I already have your presets. And that's a start.

jens · Post by **jens** » Wed Nov 23, 2016 8:12 am

Gosh, this threads reeks of hyperbole and pathos like no other...

New Fabfilter teaser (Pro-R Reverb)