Arturia releases LEXICON LX-24

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

I don't use the Arturia plugins I own all the time so maybe I just need to apply some updates. How recently did you notice the improvement in load times?

I was experiencing issues as recently as last week then I saw an update in the Arturia Service Center yesterday and went ahead and updated everything. Once I applied that update, the load times improved dramatically.

Update to the latest and see if that helps.

[Teksonik]

I don't use the Arturia plugins I own all the time so maybe I just need to apply some updates. How recently did you notice the improvement in load times?

I was experiencing issues as recently as last week then I saw an update in the Arturia Service Center yesterday and went ahead and updated everything. Once I applied that update, the load times improved dramatically.

Update to the latest and see if that helps.

Ahhh ok thanks, will do.

EDIT: Hmmm on my studio system only the Jun Chorus and Plate verb had updates available. SQ80V and Jup 8 are both up to date and none of the other FX showed updates. ASC and ASC agent last received updates on Feb 23rd.

I'll check first load time tomorrow morning and see if there are any load time improvements but I would tend to think the issue will persist.

Oh and there's an update available for the LX24 reverb even for the demo:

"Decay optimization values have been updated on several factory presets to lower the amount of emulated digital defects".

EDIT Next Day: Ok I updated everything and the SQ80V still took between 20 and 25 seconds on first load this morning. Not a huge deal as I only use it once in a while for a play and rarely if ever in a project.

But still for whatever reason, Arturia's plugins are the slowest loading of any I own.

[beely]

So, I had a quick play with this tonight on a few things, and it does indeed sound really good to me. The interface and feature set is nice, and I can't say the load times or CPU bothered me in the slightest. It's another nice flavour, and there's something I've always liked on long/infinite tails letting that gritty quantisation noise distort. I'll probably do a bit of casual comparisons to other reverbs I use for similar things to try to put it into some context, but haven't got that far yet...

[sergiofrias]

Uad and arturia comparison




So i think the arturia is a decent emulation, its very close to the UAD, its incredible how the algorithms were reversed enginered as accurate as the UAD it have a few more options like the ability to widen the stereo image,and even to extend the frequency range,this last one is the feature i most wanted to see implemented in the uad version. I still prefer the gui authenticy from UAD ,altough the arturia is more HD, i found some glitches in the last program chorus ,but i have to make more tests . Overral its a great reverb ,authentic 224 sound,expandable to a modern sound .

[jamcat]

In your video, the UAD is brighter and has more phasing. Arturia is thicker and warmer.

However, the tests were not very good. You seem to use only variations of slow attack synth sounds, and you keep cutting off the tails before they decay. Of all the sounds you could test, those are among the least revealing, and without the full decay it's hard to learn much of anything about the reverbs. You really need percussive examples, particularly snares, and natural sounds, such as voice and acoustic guitar.

That said, this is the first video I've seen comparing Arturia LX-24 to the UAD 224, so something is still better than nothing. Also, thank you for not talking. Most YouTubers won't shutup.

[jamcat]

So I don't like this: (from the LX-24 user manual)

page 4:

Decay (slider): Sets the reverberation decay time of Bass and Mid. On the original this feature was split between 2 faders, one each for Bass & Mid.

Bass Offset (slider): Sets the reverberation time of frequencies below the crossover cutoff, relative to the mid slider.


page 13:

• DECAY: This fader sets the overall reverberation time or decay of the reverb. This control affects the time of Bass and Mid, while you had to adjust 'MID' and 'BASS' separately on the original 224. It can be set anywhere between 600 ms and 70 seconds.

• BASS OFFSET: This fader sets the reverberation time of frequencies below the crossover frequency. When increasing / decreasing BASS OFFSET the overall decay time is also effected. Choose a value +/- 100 to adjust bass time in your reverb.


Can anyone make sense of this?
First it says, "Sets the reverberation time of frequencies below the crossover cutoff,
relative to the mid slider." But then it says, "When increasing / decreasing BASS OFFSET the overall decay time is also effected." So the Bass Offset ALSO affects the "overall decay time"?

Either way, it means if you want to adjust just the Mid decay time, you have to compensate with an opposite Bass Offset adjustment. But you may also have to adjust the Decay time to compensate for Bass Offset adjustments?

It also means it's not possible to simply set the LX-24 sliders the same as a 224 remote and get the same sound. And since Bass Offset is some meaningless value between -100 and +100, it seems impossible to know what your bass decay time actually is.

Here is the straightforward 224 remote, where you just set the BASS and the MID in seconds, independently, and that's that:



Here's the original Lexicon 224 user manual (up through version 3 software)
https://www.studiomanuals.com/docs/lexi ... manual.pdf

[Niowiad]

Can anyone make sense of this?
First it says, "Sets the reverberation time of frequencies below the crossover cutoff,
relative to the mid slider." But then it says, "When increasing / decreasing BASS OFFSET the overall decay time is also effected." So the Bass Offset ALSO affects the "overall decay time"?

"Overall decay time" is not referred to the DECAY parameter, it's referred to the whole and actual reverberation sound.
If the mid/upper frequencies are set to DECAY in 5 seconds, and the lower frequencies end up taking 10 seconds because of the BASS OFFSET, then the overall decay time is clearly being affected by the longer time taken by the lower frequencies.

Either way, it means if you want to adjust just the Mid decay time, you have to compensate with an opposite Bass Offset adjustment. But you may also have to adjust the Decay time to compensate for Bass Offset adjustments?

The need to constantly compensate one or the other is what happens with the original design of the two independent decay times.
The way Arturia did it (which is more similar to the 480L design) allows you to set the "overall mood" and relation between upper and lower frequencies decay, then allowing you to deal with a single and more practical "master decay" parameter.

It also means it's not possible to simply set the LX-24 sliders the same as a 224 remote and get the same sound. And since Bass Offset is some meaningless value between -100 and +100, it seems impossible to know what your bass decay time actually is.

This is true. Workflow is different and it's going to be harder to match parameters to the hardware or other emulations following the original design.
On the other hand, as an owner of RC24, I find the original design painful to work with.
It's fun for the first 5 minutes, then, having to adjust 2 sliders everytime is plain awful.

No wonder they moved from independent LOW/MID parameters of the 224, to a simpler single MID decay (+multipliers) of the 480L. Which is basically what every modern reverb does.

[Scotty]

The Arturia main page gui makes horrendous use of space, brutal in fact. I have the Universal Audio versions both Native and DSP. The advanced panel in the Arturia gives it an edge if you are looking to push your sound design. It’s $29 for me but I’m still going to pass. The Native Instruments RC 24 (and RC 48) are stripped down feature wise but have similar character to the UA Lexicon versions. Contrary to popular opinion it is possible to have too many reverbs, at least for me,

[martiu]

hi, can you use it on drones and is it mushy sounding on long decay settings over 4 sec?
thanks

[Niowiad]

The Arturia main page gui makes horrendous use of space, brutal in fact. I have the Universal Audio versions both Native and DSP. The advanced panel in the Arturia gives it an edge if you are looking to push your sound design. It’s $29 for me but I’m still going to pass. The Native Instruments RC 24 (and RC 48) are stripped down feature wise but have similar character to the UA Lexicon versions. Contrary to popular opinion it is possible to have too many reverbs, at least for me,

If I already had the UAD version, unless I had to replace UAD plugins for some reason, I wouldn't get the Arturia. If they both sound as good as people seem to be unanimously saying, to me personally it would be an unnecessary redundance of tools. One subjectively sounding slightly better/worse than the other isn't really what's making or breaking a piece of music.

The first thing I tried with LX-24 was to compare the 3 related algorithms with the RC24.
I was glad and also a bit suprised by how much they shared a very common character and behaviour in the early and late reflections, alongside with the behaviour of the DEPTH parameter (called DISTANCE in the Arturia's). They really sounded like they were trying to replicate the same thing, and very distinct from any other non-224 reverb I tried to compared them with.
If you're saying the RC24 shares a similar character to the UAD, that also tells something about the quality of the 3 emulations.

I've been loving the RC24 for years but always wished it included more of the original algorithms (or at least a plate), that would be a reason for me to get the Arturia's.
One more thing that I really like about RC24 is the zero latency. Something which I value very much and is getting harder and harder to find on many of the latest high-quality FX emulations.
LX-24 causes 142 samples of latency in the vintage modes, which gets rounded-up to 192 or 256 depending on which buffer size... those are 4-6 milliseconds of extra latency which I would gladly avoid, and where the UAD DSP version has an edge over Arturia, at least as I see it.
But I don't have UAD hardware.

[Krakatau]

In your video, the UAD is brighter and has more phasing. Arturia is thicker and warmer.

i agree about the Arturia's, ...sounds somehow deeper

[pamier242]

This one is really nice.

I just tested Large Concert Hall B (Helix -> LX-24 -> RME Fireface UFX+) against a Lexicon PCM80 Concert Hall (Helix -> RME -> desk) and the VST is remarkably accurate. They are different machines, but I am under the impression that the PCM80 shares the 224's Hall algorithm.

I also tested against a PCM91, but I think that's a different algorithm (480?). Way different.

[martiu]

i just tested it, damn is hungry but it sounds nice, a lot of control on the advanced page if you need it but otherwise presets sound delicious

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

I just wish you could default to the Advanced page. Would just make that the default view if possible.

[mholloway]

Can anyone make sense of this?
First it says, "Sets the reverberation time of frequencies below the crossover cutoff,
relative to the mid slider." But then it says, "When increasing / decreasing BASS OFFSET the overall decay time is also effected." So the Bass Offset ALSO affects the "overall decay time"?

The bass offset changes the decay time of the bass frequencies, which surely you grasp. If you move it up, you make them longer than the decay time setting. That means the bass frequencies will have a longer decay than others-- So, yes, the 'overall' time is changing, because the bass frequencies are now decaying longer than the rest. You're kind of overthinking it, I'd say. On the original, if you set bass decay to 8 and Mid decay to 4, the bass is longer, right? So the 'overall' time has been effected. No different on the Arturia. Set decay to 4. Push the bass offset way up -- now you're offsetting that 4 to a much higher value, extending bass decay. Overall times have changed.

But I'm repeating myself, sorry. The point is: yes, "overall decay time" is effected by multiple sliders, both on the original and on the Arturia, because there are two sliders that effect the decay times, not one. Arturia changed the implementation a bit (offset, not time) but it's still a two-slider approach to timing, as on the original.