actually its true, the v-verb has a great tail, so the late reflection engine is top notch... I think absolutly in the same ballpark as higher end units.
But I have to say that its early reflection model is not as perfect as it could be.
For the price its a gift. No competitor in this price range, and not even one for three times as much as it cost.
V-Verb Pro - more examples
-
- KVRian
- 1144 posts since 26 Sep, 2005 from Germany
-
- KVRer
- 21 posts since 8 Jun, 2007
Actually,
I did sign up to post this message.
I happened to find this message link when I was doing a google search.
Since it was relevant to my recent purchase, I thought I'd add my thoughts.
Why do you ask?
If you think it was for sales....please, this is a $150 unit...LOL and
no mention of selling anything....
I did sign up to post this message.
I happened to find this message link when I was doing a google search.
Since it was relevant to my recent purchase, I thought I'd add my thoughts.
Why do you ask?
If you think it was for sales....please, this is a $150 unit...LOL and
no mention of selling anything....
-
- KVRian
- 1144 posts since 26 Sep, 2005 from Germany
pro audio,
don't let you get down by the rude attacks over here at kvr.
It's somewhat normal.
In the meantime there are some other famous producers that put their name below the V-Verb on their homepage.
http://www.behringer.com/REV2496/index.cfm?lang=ger
its not just a good bang for buck, but just good bang.
don't let you get down by the rude attacks over here at kvr.
It's somewhat normal.
In the meantime there are some other famous producers that put their name below the V-Verb on their homepage.
http://www.behringer.com/REV2496/index.cfm?lang=ger
its not just a good bang for buck, but just good bang.
-
- KVRer
- 21 posts since 8 Jun, 2007
Thanks...
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
To tell you the truth, I was expecting the V-VERB to sound like crap.
I only bought it after reading that sound-on-sound article.
I figured 150 bucks, what the heck, give it a try.
I'm actually very surprised. the V-VERB algorithm is really good.
If you run both A and B stereo engines both loaded with the V-VERB, it
sounds extremely dense and smooth right to the end of the tails.
With it set up like this, you can make slight differences between the two
engines that add a real nice dimension to the overall sound. Acutally,
using only one stereo engine it's very dense. With both on, it's extremely lush.
I can't imagine someone could not find some setting they did not like.
It's very diverse.
Will I give up my PCMs ... no way.
I have clients that ask for the Lexicon, especially for vocals.
The PCM91 sounds great!
Hmmm... I'll have to give them a blindfold listening while they are
in the studio away rom the control room. I bet they will be surprised.
And at the same time, I bet they still want to use the Lexicon for their main
vocal parts. LOL
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
To tell you the truth, I was expecting the V-VERB to sound like crap.
I only bought it after reading that sound-on-sound article.
I figured 150 bucks, what the heck, give it a try.
I'm actually very surprised. the V-VERB algorithm is really good.
If you run both A and B stereo engines both loaded with the V-VERB, it
sounds extremely dense and smooth right to the end of the tails.
With it set up like this, you can make slight differences between the two
engines that add a real nice dimension to the overall sound. Acutally,
using only one stereo engine it's very dense. With both on, it's extremely lush.
I can't imagine someone could not find some setting they did not like.
It's very diverse.
Will I give up my PCMs ... no way.
I have clients that ask for the Lexicon, especially for vocals.
The PCM91 sounds great!
Hmmm... I'll have to give them a blindfold listening while they are
in the studio away rom the control room. I bet they will be surprised.
And at the same time, I bet they still want to use the Lexicon for their main
vocal parts. LOL
-
- KVRer
- 21 posts since 8 Jun, 2007
Speaking of PCM91.
If anyone trys one with their console using a single AUX out of the mixer and returning in stereo, there's something you need to know:
You're only getting half of the algorithm.
Using the analog inputs, there's no menu option to have for instance the left input feed both left and right processors in the PCM91.
I found this out the hard way. years ago I called Lexicon and found out about this issue.
Well, maybe not really an issue, it's more of an awareness.
To get it to work correctly as mentioned in this configuration, you need to use a Y cable out of your
mixers AUX out. This will split the AUX signal so you can plug into both analog inputs on the PCM91.
BTW, if your mixer has balanced out AUXes (probably TRS), use a balance Y cable.
What a f*ckin difference this made. It sounded twice as dense.
BTW, I do not believe this is an issue using the digital connections.
If you're not doing this, you're in for one heck of a pleasant surprise!
Of course, if you're sending two aux outs to the lexicon, there's no issue.
Also, the same goes for the PCM90.
If anyone trys one with their console using a single AUX out of the mixer and returning in stereo, there's something you need to know:
You're only getting half of the algorithm.
Using the analog inputs, there's no menu option to have for instance the left input feed both left and right processors in the PCM91.
I found this out the hard way. years ago I called Lexicon and found out about this issue.
Well, maybe not really an issue, it's more of an awareness.
To get it to work correctly as mentioned in this configuration, you need to use a Y cable out of your
mixers AUX out. This will split the AUX signal so you can plug into both analog inputs on the PCM91.
BTW, if your mixer has balanced out AUXes (probably TRS), use a balance Y cable.
What a f*ckin difference this made. It sounded twice as dense.
BTW, I do not believe this is an issue using the digital connections.
If you're not doing this, you're in for one heck of a pleasant surprise!
Of course, if you're sending two aux outs to the lexicon, there's no issue.
Also, the same goes for the PCM90.
Last edited by proaudio4 on Sat Jun 09, 2007 5:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRian
- 1144 posts since 26 Sep, 2005 from Germany
if you have two and now x versions of Behringer V-Verb, you could spend me one of your Lexiocn PCMs...
surley I also think that the Lexicon is a bit ahead the V-Verb, especially in the ER pattern. have a special listen on that.
surley I also think that the Lexicon is a bit ahead the V-Verb, especially in the ER pattern. have a special listen on that.
-
- KVRer
- 21 posts since 8 Jun, 2007
I can't say I will be parting with the PCMs, but I'm happy to say the V-VERB is of the same caliber.
I'll take a close listen to the early reflection stuff, although I feel the V-VERB is decent.
It really works well creating actual spaces.
I'll take a close listen to the early reflection stuff, although I feel the V-VERB is decent.
It really works well creating actual spaces.
-
- KVRian
- 1144 posts since 26 Sep, 2005 from Germany
I did even try to replicate the Qunatec Yardstick with tweaking some of the V-Verb presets and especially with the large halls, where the tail is important, I came very close.
But actually for mixing tracks the ER stuff becomes more important.
But I aggree with you that the level of the Behringer is in the league of the biger size TC and Lex units... at that quality stage its more a matter of taste. No question.
But actually for mixing tracks the ER stuff becomes more important.
But I aggree with you that the level of the Behringer is in the league of the biger size TC and Lex units... at that quality stage its more a matter of taste. No question.
-
- KVRian
- 1214 posts since 10 Aug, 2005
-
- KVRian
- 1214 posts since 10 Aug, 2005
-
- KVRer
- 21 posts since 8 Jun, 2007
To tell you the truth.
I'm not big fan of sofware based reverbs, not because of their sound, but because of their convience.
I'm old school. I enjoy the simplicity of dedicated hardware, not to mention live production work.
Though, I do own Waves IR1.
I'm not big fan of sofware based reverbs, not because of their sound, but because of their convience.
I'm old school. I enjoy the simplicity of dedicated hardware, not to mention live production work.
Though, I do own Waves IR1.
-
- KVRAF
- 11363 posts since 3 Feb, 2003 from Finland, Espoo
My comment was not meant as an attack, just a genuine poke of a question as behringer is known to do "advertising" like that all over the planet (heck, I'm sure they are not the only ones, not even close). 
Glad to hear that you like the reverb as one can never have too many flavors of that.
Cheers!
bManic
Glad to hear that you like the reverb as one can never have too many flavors of that.
Cheers!
bManic
"Wisdom is wisdom, regardless of the idiot who said it." -an idiot
"They don't ban hate speech; they ban speech they hate." -an oracle
"They don't ban hate speech; they ban speech they hate." -an oracle
-
- KVRian
- 1144 posts since 26 Sep, 2005 from Germany
concerning the raw reverb engine, I would set the V-Verb above the AAR, as it has the cleaner tails. ( less ressonaces )spuddle wrote:How does it compare to my beautiful ArtsAcoustic Reverb VST?
The AAR in contradiction has wonderful and magic modulation on the reverb tails, that works for some instruments, for others not.
The ER part is something I don't like on both.