Valhalla FutureVerb

[aMUSEd]

The fact that it mostly holds up to CP in terms of sound though is interesting, and it sounds a lot more flexible, which is no surprise as it is entirely algorithmic, whereas CP is IR/Algo hybrid. I'll probably buy this on payday.

Huh? CRP is entirely algorithmic.

I thought so too for a long time until someone here pointed out this article which says it has 'some convolution elements' although it doesn't specify what exactly - maybe they are wrong?

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/li ... atic-rooms

This says the same:

https://www.production-expert.com/produ ... rb-plugins

What's more flexible about FV?

Cinematic Rooms is lovely but more focused on rooms, which it does really well. Valhalla Futureverb may have less knobs, but a wider variety of reverb types and also the addition of the echo section so I think it probably can do a much wider range of reverb types and go beyond just rooms.

[foosnark]

What I don't like is the default Echo>Rev mode which is super confusing. It immediately adds a pre-delay that I could not dial down (All Echo parameters at zero) .

With Delay at 0 ms, as long as you don't use Detune, Reverse, Sparkle, or Swarm mode for Echo, you should have no predelay. The granular ones will impose an unavoidable predelay (but it's pretty short for Detune). (This is assuming no modulation -- modulation also affects delay time.)

In fact I kind of like using Echo->Rev at 0ms and 100% level, with Mix turned up all the way. That way your "dry" unreverbed signal can have tape drive etc.

The MIX button can already be by-passed so why not also add it to the 'Level' text window for both modules?

That's not a bypass for the Mix button, that's a "don't change the current Mix setting when I load a preset" button. (That said, I agree that bypass buttons for each side would be useful.)

[himalaya]

The MIX button can already be by-passed so why not also add it to the 'Level' text window for both modules?

That's not a bypass for the Mix button, that's a "don't change the current Mix setting when I load a preset" button. (That said, I agree that bypass buttons for each side would be useful.)

Yes, you are quite right. When I wrote this, my mind was fixated on the on/off options and I bundled the Mix dial with my desire to see on/off for Echo/Reverb. But it's a lock, which I use all the time in VVV. The underlying sentiment though is that this functionality (of having the text line behaving like a switch/button) is implemented in Valhalla plug-ins, so on/off shouldn't be difficult to implement.

[sottovocedsp]

As a plugin developer, I think the UI looks cool

[News From The Sky]

Lame.

If Valhalla actually wanted to make a "transparent and realistic" reverb, it would have 3D metric room dimensions that calculate reflections through ray-tracing, instead of simple delays derived from a percentage based size.

Just what the hell is a 50% sized room, anyways? 50% of what?

Calling a plugin unrealistic because it doesn’t simulate the exact dimensions of an imaginary room is like complaining your synthesizer isn’t a real 12-foot cathedral organ. Reverbs aren’t IKEA furniture. You don’t assemble them with a tape measure. But I suppose nothing will ever live up to the reverb inside your head.

You didn’t even load the demo. You just reflex-reacted the moment it wasn’t from your personal temple, as you always do. If you realized how much you’re exposing yourself here, you wouldn’t have hit submit.

Amen. Logged in just to block this useless threadcrapper.

[aMUSEd]

As a plugin developer, I think the UI looks cool

I love Valhalla GUI design standards

[comfortablynick]

I thought so too for a long time until someone here pointed out this article which says it has 'some convolution elements' although it doesn't specify what exactly - maybe they are wrong?

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/li ... atic-rooms

This says the same:

https://www.production-expert.com/produ ... rb-plugins

The SOS article says "With Liquidsonics' latest product, the process has almost reached its logical conclusion, because Cinematic Rooms is very much an algorithmic reverb, albeit one that still incorporates some convolution elements." CRP is purely algorithmic. I assume the writer was trying to say that it has some of the qualities that many like about convolution.

The Production Expert article is just incorrect. I assume they confused CRP with Illusion, which does use convolution on synthesized IRs for the early reflections paired with an algorithmic tail.

I agree VFV is great but it's not more flexible than CRP since it has few parameters. You have much more control over the early and late sections with CRP. I'm not sure it would matter in the final product, though. It would be fun to see if there's a sound in CRP that can't be replicated in VFV. I own both, so maybe I'll play with that.

[pchase]

I thought so too for a long time until someone here pointed out this article which says it has 'some convolution elements' although it doesn't specify what exactly - maybe they are wrong?

Here from Matt: https://www.liquidsonics.com/2020/06/16 ... b-in-2020/

The Cinematic Rooms algorithm does not use samples or Fusion-IR as in many other LiquidSonics reverbs, but I am pleased to say that using a novel algorithm I have achieved the goal I set for myself.

Personally so far, I find VFV is not really comparable to CRP - I don't think I could get close to recreating most presets from CRP in VFV. To me CRP sounds much more 'realistic' in that it makes the source sound like it is being placed in various real spaces that feel very different and convincing. VFV doesn't really sound like a particularly convincing 'real' space to me, it's too smooth with none of the characterful resonances you'd get in a real space. It's still great though (I bought it) as a very modern, clean, smooth reverb, maybe for suitable electronic music more than eg classical or scoring.

Maybe this is related to section (3) in the article I linked above - CRP seems to have very convincing and varied tonality to the different spaces it models, and it sounds like it was carefully designed that way.

[andivax]

"Width" state is not recalling when switching presets.
Reaper 7 x64 Win 11 vst3.
Can you check on your systems, guys?

[whassup]

"Width" state is not recalling when switching presets.
Reaper 7 x64 Win 11 vst3.
Can you check on your systems, guys?

Confirmed.

[mi-os]

'some convolution elements'

It could also be used as a way to save CPU power and is still algorithmic. Some elements may not need to be rendered in real time.

[cryophonik]

"Width" state is not recalling when switching presets.
Reaper 7 x64 Win 11 vst3.
Can you check on your systems, guys?

Hey Andi, long time no see!

Yes, also confirmed in Logic 11.2.2

[andivax]

thank you guys!
Ticket Submitted.
I hope for quick fix. Want to release my presets ASAP )

[aMUSEd]

I thought so too for a long time until someone here pointed out this article which says it has 'some convolution elements' although it doesn't specify what exactly - maybe they are wrong?

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/li ... atic-rooms

This says the same:

https://www.production-expert.com/produ ... rb-plugins

The SOS article says "With Liquidsonics' latest product, the process has almost reached its logical conclusion, because Cinematic Rooms is very much an algorithmic reverb, albeit one that still incorporates some convolution elements." CRP is purely algorithmic. I assume the writer was trying to say that it has some of the qualities that many like about convolution.

The Production Expert article is just incorrect. I assume they confused CRP with Illusion, which does use convolution on synthesized IRs for the early reflections paired with an algorithmic tail.

I agree VFV is great but it's not more flexible than CRP since it has few parameters. You have much more control over the early and late sections with CRP. I'm not sure it would matter in the final product, though. It would be fun to see if there's a sound in CRP that can't be replicated in VFV. I own both, so maybe I'll play with that.

Yeah I think you are right about the 'convolution elements' thing - like I said my original understanding had been that it was algorithmic but someone here 'corrected' me on that, but it looks like the evidence for it involving any sort of convolution is not consistent and rather ambiguous.

I don't think the number of params necessarily equates to more flexible but just more detailed with respect to its specialist focus - which is rooms. I have it myself and it makes incredible sounding spaces, but I do not expect it to be able to to a wide range of reverb types and it certainly does not include several echo algos as well. That's what I mean by VFV 'potentially' ( I haven't tried it yet tbh) being more flexible - it's not about the detail it's about the range.

[Fannon]

Btw. it's so nice to demo FutureVerb. There are no limitations. Instead of annoying white noise buzzing from time to time, the plugin just switches into 100% dry from time to time - which helps you even a little bit to better judge what it brings to the table.

So far I like it, not sure I really need it. But Valhalla is a dev worth supporting and I'm sure FutureVerb will get more updates over the years if it is treated like the other plugins.