# Fabfilter Pro-R (reverb) coming Nov 15th



## Mihkel Zilmer (Nov 5, 2016)

In case you haven't heard: according to their FB page, Fabfilter has a reverb plugin coming out on Nov 15th. 

I think Fabfilter plugins are some of the best out there, I use them on absolutely everything I do. Can't wait to try this one out, seems to have some truly unique features!


----------



## Noam Guterman (Nov 5, 2016)

Pro-Q2 and Pro-L are on 100% of my projects. Can't wait to try out this new baby out.


----------



## sleepy hollow (Nov 5, 2016)

Nice! Something tells me the verb plugin will be just as good as their dynamics and Eq.


----------



## tack (Nov 5, 2016)

I'm not sure what it says about me that I'm more excited about Dan Worrall's Pro-R tutorial than I am about Pro-R itself.


----------



## jamwerks (Nov 5, 2016)

Looks like something maybe more useful for people not using orchestral samples. He talks about adding space, our samples already have that...


----------



## j_kranz (Nov 5, 2016)

Exciting! Love their stuff-


----------



## synthpunk (Nov 5, 2016)

Says, who needs another reverb plugin, listens to video and says wholly shite, I want it! lol


----------



## URL (Nov 5, 2016)

Anyone use Fab C2?


----------



## Greg (Nov 5, 2016)

Sweet, looks really fun to modulate!


----------



## Tysmall (Nov 5, 2016)

oh my god.


----------



## ceemusic (Nov 10, 2016)

Looks great-


----------



## mc_deli (Nov 10, 2016)

Ooh frequency dependent decay time tricks - yes please


----------



## Wibben (Nov 10, 2016)

ceemusic said:


> Looks great-




Aaaah, man! I was just thinking a week or so ago that if they just made a reverb the world would seem a bit less gloomy... and there they go! Love all of their plugs!


----------



## Noam Guterman (Nov 10, 2016)

I need this in my life


----------



## synthpunk (Nov 10, 2016)

I been using something similarly related in Reaktor FX based on ducking and it can be very cool.


----------



## Symfoniq (Nov 10, 2016)

Really excited about Pro-R. Was considering picking up NIMBUS despite being annoyed at the incredibly short introductory pricing period (which I missed), but now I'm going to wait for Pro-R before making a decision.


----------



## jsmithsebasto (Nov 10, 2016)

mc_deli said:


> Ooh frequency dependent decay time tricks - yes please



So hyped for this! FabFilter has yet to disappoint me.


----------



## Rob Elliott (Nov 10, 2016)

Too many verbs now - I AM NEVER BUYING THIS. I MEAN IT.


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 11, 2016)

I just purchased Exponential Audio's NIMBUS Reverb, and now here comes this Reverb from FabFilter ... So many options for Reverb. Which is great, but not for the wallet


----------



## galactic orange (Nov 14, 2016)

Just got an Audiodeluxe e-mail and it shows a retail (before putting in the cart) price of $199 for just FabFilter Pro-R, and the Essentials Bundle (Pro-R, Pro-Q2, and Pro-C2) for $399. Not sure what the price is for those of us who own other FabFilter products as there is nothing posted on their site yet. The bundle is a great deal but I already own everything FabFilter.


----------



## MarcelM (Nov 15, 2016)

you can download this now. iam just playing around with the demo.


----------



## galactic orange (Nov 15, 2016)

Heroix said:


> you can download this now. iam just playing around with the demo.


Thanks for the heads up!


----------



## jonathanwright (Nov 15, 2016)

Playing with it now, I must say it's rather lovely. So easy to use.


----------



## Harry (Nov 15, 2016)

Logged into my account - 40% discount on Pro-R --- I think it depends on how many other FabFilter plugins you have.


----------



## MarcelM (Nov 15, 2016)

iam testing it myself but i would really like to hear how it compares to the reverbs you already have and if youre planning on replacing em with pro-r.

i have VVV and was planning on getting lexicon pcm probably on black friday, but now iam a bit unsure. the control pro-r gives is really very good.


----------



## Musicam (Nov 15, 2016)

Hi Heroix, I would want your opinion about Lexicon for OST. Is better than Quantum Leap Spaces?


----------



## MarcelM (Nov 15, 2016)

Musicam said:


> Hi Heroix, I would want your opinion about Lexicon for OST. Is better than Quantum Leap Spaces?



i dont have lexicon pcm myself but i love the lush sound of it which only the lexicon has. spaces is very good and i used it when i still had composer cloud. if i were to buy a convolution reverb i would buy reverberate 2 (which i have and love with its m7 IR). iam using valhalla vintage verb as algo reverb for now, but was planning to buy lexicon or maybe even pro-r.


----------



## Musicam (Nov 15, 2016)

I have reviews of Valhalla reverb, spefially for the price, but I the price of Lexicon is very high. I watched the videos of Blakus and he wrotes here thata very good reverb is Valhalla.I watched this video and the sound is very great.



The instruments shine. This question is the difference i Think.


----------



## Musicam (Nov 15, 2016)

What do you think about Ozone 7?


----------



## MarcelM (Nov 15, 2016)

Musicam said:


> What do you think about Ozone 7?



i was planning on getting music production bundle 2 aswell which includes ozone. guess you dont need much more then to mix and master a song quite good 

i dont like subscription route, but the slate stuff is also very good.


----------



## tack (Nov 15, 2016)

I own most of Fabfilter's mixing and mastering plugins. YMMV, but based on what I own, my personal upgrade price is $119.40, which is also 40% plus $12 they're calling "absolute discount." Quite tempting.


----------



## Symfoniq (Nov 15, 2016)

Based on the Fabfilter plugins I already own (Mastering Bundle), it would be $139 to purchase Pro-R, which is exactly what it would cost me to purchase NIMBUS. Aside from Pro-R obviously having the nicer GUI, I'd be curious to hear the opinions of anyone who has used both.


----------



## WindcryMusic (Nov 15, 2016)

I'm very interested in comparisons of Pro-R to one or more of the highly-regarded Valhalla reverbs, in terms of their basic reverb quality and appropriateness for orchestral mockups. I like the additional control that Pro-R appears to provide, but the fundamental sound quality is at least as important.

Edit: I just tried comparing the demos of Pro-R and Valhalla Room for myself, attempting to more or less duplicate a somewhat dark, scoring stage type of response, and throwing some Albion One string spiccatos at them. Please keep in mind that I am very inexperienced with both of these plugins, so my initial opinion of the results might well be based upon user error ... but I preferred Pro-R over Valhalla Room. Pro-R seems to have an extra, undefinable richness and movement to it, which might in some part be due to its ability to tailor delay times by frequency. I also threw Logic's Platinum Reverb and my favorite Bricasti Fusion IR from Reverberate 2 into the comparison for fun. Not surprisingly, Platinum Reverb came in last, although after tweaking the settings, it wasn't as far behind Valhalla as I would have expected. The IR was a little different in tone, of course, but as far as being pleasing on the source material, I'd put it slightly above Valhalla but still not as good as Pro-R, which has really impressed me thus far.

The Bricasti IR has been my go-to for orchestral tracks for a while now, even though people around this forum have tended to say a good algorithmic reverb is the way to go. Well, now I'm starting to think they may be right after all.


----------



## Mihkel Zilmer (Nov 15, 2016)

Purchased Pro-R this afternoon and started using it in a new orchestral track. 

First reaction - I'm very impressed. The quality is stunning, it's as smooth as butter and blends with the source very well. GUI is very intuitive (I think FabFilter GUIs are unbeatable..) and it is very very easy to dial the sound you need. The amount of control over the decay and EQ is of course fantastic. The 'distance' knob is a nice touch, too.

It's a bit too early for me to compare it to other reverbs I know and use (PhoenixVerb, 2CAudio B2, Ircam Verb Session V3, VSL Hybrid Reverb, and a few convolution reverbs), but I'll definitely share my thoughts once this track is finished.


----------



## Symfoniq (Nov 15, 2016)

Mihkel Zilmer said:


> It's a bit too early for me to compare it to other reverbs I know and use (PhoenixVerb, 2CAudio B2, Ircam Verb Session V3, VSL Hybrid Reverb, and a few convolution reverbs), but I'll definitely share my thoughts once this track is finished.



Definitely looking forward to it, especially the comparison with PhoenixVerb.


----------



## nordicguy (Nov 15, 2016)

Symfoniq said:


> Definitely looking forward to it, especially the comparison with PhoenixVerb.


Because of the early/tail reverb separate and versatile controls Pro-R offers, may be that Nimbus would be a better candidate for comparaison?
That said, Fabfilter ergonomy is really outstanding.


----------



## Mihkel Zilmer (Nov 15, 2016)

nordicguy said:


> Because of the early/tail reverb separate and versatile controls Pro-R offers, may be that Nimbus would be a better candidate for comparaison?
> That said, Fabfilter ergonomy is really outstanding.



Agreed, NIMBUS would be a much more interesting comparison, as it also offers a considerable amount of control.

Unfortunately I never got around to buying NIMBUS... PhoenixVerb was doing a very fine job, although I was applying additional EQ on the reverb bus.

And I agree, I think that FabFilter deserves some sort of design award for their GUIs. The tactile response that allows me to both see and hear any of the changes I make is incredible.


----------



## galactic orange (Nov 15, 2016)

I was considering Zynaptic's Adaptiverb. I'd like to see a comparison between that and Pro-R. Both offer interesting approaches to reverb.


----------



## nordicguy (Nov 15, 2016)

galactic orange said:


> I was considering Zynaptic's Adaptiverb. I'd like to see a comparison between that and Pro-R. Both offer interesting approaches to reverb.


I'll do my humble best to add sort of a revelent 2 cents.
Those are two completely different unit.
In fact, Adaptiberb is alone in his category, using a technology that no others reverb use.
On the other side, Pro-R really has his own thing offering unic ergonomics and full control over reverb's early and tail section (via EQ) but,
is still part of the algo based reverb category.
Something important to say is that Pro-R CPU load is seriously low (while sounding awesomely good) comparing to Adaptiverb, even after an update brigning a pretty welcome "preview mode" that really improves his performance.
I think they compare as they can both being used for "sound designing" spaces but can also be used as reverbs (while Pro-R is obviously what you would expect from an algo reverb at first sight).


----------



## galactic orange (Nov 15, 2016)

nordicguy said:


> I'll do my humble best to add sort of a revelent 2 cents.
> Those are two completely different unit.
> In fact, Adaptiberb is alone in his category, using a technology that no others reverb use.
> On the other side, Pro-R really has his own thing offering unic ergonomy and full control over reverb's early and tail section (via EQ) but,
> ...



Thanks for your input, nordicguy. The ease of use and lower CPU load of Pro-R are important to me as I'm using an older Macbook Pro when not at my main setup. I'm still going to keep an eye out for Adaptiverb because the sound design possibilities (even when not using the reverb per se) make it so fun. Another reverb is the last thing I thought I would get, but now both of these are contenders. I can't wait until I get both then I'll never need another reverb again!


----------



## nordicguy (Nov 15, 2016)

galactic orange said:


> ...both of these are contenders.


Forgot to say, both offer trial versions too.


----------



## fgimian (Nov 15, 2016)

I spent some time trying it out today against my other reverbs and imho, it's good but doesn't really outclass much of what I already own. Its simplicity also makes it less versatile, some essential controls are missing (like diffusion and room size). The reverb time is also limited.

It reminds me the most of ArtsAcoustic Reverb although AAR is imho in the next league above Pro-R. Then when you compare to Relab's LX480, well all reverbs are outclassed by that imho. Nothing native I have heard to date has the same depth that it has.

I'll definitely try it more though before the demo period is up.


----------



## tack (Nov 15, 2016)

fgimian said:


> some essential controls are missing (like diffusion and room size).


Isn't room size the big button in the middle?


----------



## nordicguy (Nov 16, 2016)

tack said:


> Isn't room size the big button in the middle?


They call it SPACE and it showed as time (S/milliseconds) instead of size.


fgimian said:


> It reminds me the most of ArtsAcoustic Reverb


Don't use ArtsAcoustic Reverb but having a look at the UI let you figure for a totally different approaches.
Could fit or not your workflow expectations.
Don't think they aimed at the same exact thing even being both called reverbs.
Just my own opinion.


----------



## fgimian (Nov 16, 2016)

nordicguy said:


> They call it SPACE and it showed as time (S/milliseconds) instead of size.



Most reverbs offer a room size and reverb time which drastically change the outcome.



nordicguy said:


> Don't use ArtsAcoustic Reverb but having a look at the UI let you figure for a totally different approaches.
> Could fit or not your workflow expectations.
> Don't think they aimed at the same exact thing even being both called reverbs.
> Just my own opinion.



I'm talking purely in terms of sound, side by side, they do sound similar imho.


----------



## nordicguy (Nov 16, 2016)

fgimian said:


> Most reverbs offer a room size and reverb time which drastically change the outcome.


Pro-R call them "space" and "decay rate".
Deliberate choice from Fabfilter to enforce a different reverb fx philosophy?


fgimian said:


> I'm talking purely in terms of sound, side by side, they do sound similar imho.


If it's the case the most important difference would be all about ergonomics.
I'm not trying in any way to proclaim a winner over here, just trying to bring some perspective.


----------



## Thorsten Meyer (Nov 16, 2016)

Fabfilter Pro-R is really nice. Playing with some settings and presets I did run it through Strings, Brass, Orchestra, Vocal, and Marimba 

Beside the results I am getting with Pro-R I really like the interface.


----------



## Thorsten Meyer (Nov 16, 2016)

A new version on a Fabfilter Pro-R quick look.


----------



## Rob Elliott (Nov 17, 2016)

Nice plugin (as we would expect from FF.) A more elegant solution than pre / post verb eq (Abby Road Trick, etc.) IMHO. Wonderful orchestral mock up 'glue' - without the usually mud and fuzz - clear AND warm - hard to do.


----------



## Ashermusic (Nov 17, 2016)

Rob Elliott said:


> Nice plugin (as we would expect from FF.) A more elegant solution than pre / post verb eq (Abby Road Trick, etc.) IMHO. Wonderful orchestral mock up 'glue' - without the usually mud and fuzz - clear AND warm - hard to do.




Rob are you speaking from using it or just what you are hearing in the demos?


----------



## Rob Elliott (Nov 17, 2016)

Ashermusic said:


> Rob are you speaking from using it or just what you are hearing in the demos?


running through the plugin now on a project. they'll sell a 'few' of these.


----------



## rayinstirling (Nov 17, 2016)

Will it be all things to all people? No
Do I like some of the things it does? Yes.
Did I get a good discount as an owner of other fab filter plugins? Yes I did.


----------



## MarcelM (Nov 17, 2016)

what would you choose between this or lexicon pcm?

i tried both demos and really cant decide. somehow this one seems to be a little more wide while the lexicon has a bit more depth. iam really not sure and black friday is coming and i wanted to purchase a reverb then.


----------



## Mihkel Zilmer (Nov 19, 2016)

I've been working with Pro-R for a few days now, so here are some of my impressions.
I've only done minimal side-by-side comparisons and haven't spent time testing every single function of Pro-R - I just wanted to jump right in there and use it in a real-life situation, while writing a piece of music.

- Let's get this out of the way first: I think this will now be my go-to reverb for most of my needs. I do still see myself using a good convolution reverb once in a while (Altiverb or Spaces), but only in very specific scenarios.
- Pro-R is very efficient, I'd say its close to PhoenixVerb in terms of computer resources used.
- I wholeheartedly agree with Rob's comments above: this is a fantastic glue reverb, awesome for blending together an orchestra, but while retaining a stunning amount of clarity.
- Ability to control the decay rates by frequency is another amazing tool for blending orchestral samples. In my experience, frequency buildup in certain ranges is often an issue with samples - here's a fantastic tool for alleviating that problem.
- Blending with source material is another real strength, although I have to admit PhoenixVerb already does a fantastic job at that. Perhaps Pro-R has a slight edge still, because (and I admit my ears might be deceiving me) the room boundaries feel "softer" or "less present" without the sound being more diffused. I guess that'd be the definition of clarity?
- I think Pro-R has quite a lot of sound-design potential too. Definitely more so than most of my other algorithmic reverbs (except B2 which is a sound design monster).

And here's a track to show Pro-R in action. I've used only a single instance of Pro-R here, with varying amounts of sends. I started with the Concert Hall Amsterdam preset, but did end up tweaking it quite a bit.

EDIT: Forgot to add - as I wanted to push Pro-R a bit, I wrote a lot of close harmony in lower registers on instruments more prone to get a bit muddy - low brass, bassoons, low strings.


----------



## jamwerks (Nov 19, 2016)

Mihkel Zilmer said:


> this is a fantastic glue reverb, awesome for blending together an orchestra, but while retaining a stunning amount of clarity.


Nice piece btw! What libraries are you using? There is a nice room sound there! So you like this better than the new Slate Bricasti Reverb?


----------



## Mihkel Zilmer (Nov 19, 2016)

jamwerks said:


> Nice piece btw! What libraries are you using? There is a nice room sound there! So you like this better than the new Slate Bricasti Reverb?



Thank you! Unfortunately I've not had a chance to try the Slate reverb, so I am unable to compare them.

To be honest - I wasn't even looking for a new reverb.
As far as algorithmic reverbs go, I'm very happy with the results PhoenixVerb and B2 give me. But I happen to own and use all of the other FabFilter stuff, so I knew I wouldn't want to miss trying this reverb out. I'm glad I did, I think this will be an improvement in my workflow and I can see it fitting a number of different applications. 

About the libraries used in my piece, I've listed them here:
http://www.vi-control.net/community/threads/through-misty-pines-myths.57399/


----------



## Fleer (Nov 19, 2016)

Reminder: free webinar on Monday: 
https://mixmasterwyatt.com/webinar/fabfilter-pro-r-webinar/


----------



## sprout (Dec 29, 2016)

I use the Fabfilter Bundle, Lexicon PCM Native Bundle and VSL MIR.

Tried the Fabfilter Pro-R demo.

I had to read what the Decay Rate EQ did so my ears could know what to listen for ( see link) but the rest was easy.

With the knobs and node controls on the EQ curves, I quickly got a sense of control and confirmation using the analyzer, a ghosted waterfall graph. If you've never seen one, picture below from FuzzMeasure app.

The Decay Rate EQ is used to "reshape the waterfall graph"; cut/extend levels over time by frequency ( explanation link below). Many presets take full advantage of it with the equally amazing Post EQ, placed after the Decay Rate EQ in the signal chain ( obviously?)

With tempo synced presets and adjustable pre-delay I'm having fun! Typical Fabfilter!

This thing is more straightforward to use than my Lexicon PCM Native which makes sense. The Lexicon has more options. I have to take the time to explore them fully.

Purchased Pro-R. My triad of reverb tools is complete!

Looking forward to hearing comparisons/analyses online to see if I need the Lexicon anymore. I probably do.

http://www.fabfilter.com/help/pro-r/using/decayrateEQ


----------



## Rob Elliott (Dec 29, 2016)

With FF-R - say goodbye to the 'Abbey Road' trick. This is one sweet verb. Yes - typical Fab Filter quality.


----------



## sprout (Dec 29, 2016)

Rob Elliott said:


> With FF-R - say goodbye to the 'Abbey Road' trick.



Everywhere I read about the Abbey Road trick, the HP, bell and LP filter combo is placed before the reverb plugin/unit in the signal path. They all say it sounds better that way. I would imagine the less the Fabfilter Pro-R plugin has to process the better. Am I wrong?


----------



## Rob Elliott (Dec 29, 2016)

sprout said:


> Everywhere I read about the Abbey Road trick, the HP, bell and LP filter combo is placed before the reverb plugin/unit in the signal path. They all say it sounds better that way. I would imagine the less the Fabfilter Pro-R plugin has to process the better. Am I wrong?


While that may be true - I just don't often 'hear' a need for its use once I picked up FF-R. Of course its 'use' is material dependent and I am sure I'll call upon it in the future....sometime.


----------

