# MY DECISION on the Bricast M7 in 2020 - with all the great reverb software, is it really worth it?



## quantum7 (Dec 13, 2019)

*UPDATE ON FINAL DECISION ON POST #230*

I keep getting tempted to buy a Bricasti M7. Anyway, it's nearing 2020 and there are a bunch of fantastic software reverbs available, so is spending $4k these days for a Bricasti really worth it? I would love to hear your thoughts regarding this. Thanks!


----------



## Drumdude2112 (Dec 13, 2019)

I had one a ways back.
Stellar piece Of gear indeed .
Was it worth having 4K in it ?...for ME it wasn’t (LiquidSonics seventh heaven pro was a worthy enough substitute , that’s is one bad ass plug-in )


----------



## Braveheart (Dec 14, 2019)

quantum7 said:


> I keep getting tempted to buy a Bricasti M7. Anyway, it's nearing 2020 and there are a bunch of fantastic software reverbs available, so is spending $4k these days for a Bricasti really worth it? I would love to hear your thoughts regarding this. Thanks!


Definitely not!


----------



## Anders Wall (Dec 14, 2019)

quantum7 said:


> I keep getting tempted to buy a Bricasti M7. Anyway, it's nearing 2020 and there are a bunch of fantastic software reverbs available, so is spending $4k these days for a Bricasti really worth it? I would love to hear your thoughts regarding this. Thanks!


Yes, they are all that.
With software you miss some of the variables that makes out of the box reverbs so great.
My (analog) plate sounds different from day to day. Guess it has to do with interference, humidity and such.
My soft plates sounds the same every time. Guess it has to do with a reliable cpu. 
I use the Bricasti on my master bus as “glue”. Could prob. have used a less expensive reverb for that but there you go.
Is it worth 4k?
I don’t know. Do you have the money sure, but don’t take another mortgage on your house to buy it.
Never crashes, (more or less) instant on. Doesn’t affect your latency (it does take a few ms to I/O can’t remember how many)
Best of luck with your decision
/Anders


----------



## Zero&One (Dec 14, 2019)

I presume you have seen this before. But linking it for others as it's a good video.


----------



## Braveheart (Dec 14, 2019)

With the current level quality of software reverbs, the difference of price is not justified. Nobody will know the difference with your tracks.


----------



## benatural (Dec 14, 2019)

I took the plunge and bought a Bricasti two years ago. I'll say that I used to always be dissatisfied with reverb results having tried a few like Alitiverb, 2C, Pro-R, Waves stuff, Steinberg verbs, and a few others. 

Now I never worry about reverb. Never muddies the mix, super transparent, super lush, very realistic sounding, all with very little effort. You could probably get incredible results with software plugins. It's very subjective. For me, the results make me happy.

If it's possible, you may consider renting one if there is a rental shop local to you.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 14, 2019)

In 2019, I don't think it's worth it. There are stellar ITB reverbs out there. I have quite a few plug-ins, and I'm never left wanting. Really like Fab Filter, TC Electronics VSS3 and Galbanum B2 (B2 is a monster - uses a lot of computer power, though). I've got all the top convolution verbs, too, but don't seem to use them much. 

I think the top reason to not buy an out of the box verb is that it simply does not fit into many workflows. I've had some high end hardware units from TC Electronics in my rack, and I simply never used them. If you're mixing ITB, that external hardware is a PITA. If you buy it, chances are you will not use it often. You won't want to waste time logging settings for recall if you need to revisit a mix. And one of the biggest problems - no more offline bouncing, unless you're going to spend the time to capture the verb in real time and print it to a track. Sorry, but with the amount of content most people need to crank out to make a living these days (and all the calls for last minute changes with deadlines), there's just no time for it.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 14, 2019)

Also, from just a computer power standpoint, the CPU power of most of the boxes out there is stone age compared to what you've got in a powerful, new computer.

Another negative for out of the box stuff -- the hassle of setting sample rates, and the possibility that you're introducing extra jitter.


----------



## jononotbono (Dec 14, 2019)

How many outputs are you running? You will need 3 if you are running 5.1  

They are amazing (use some in the studio I work at) but it depends on money. Personally, I would look towards Exponential Audio (and they do Surround). Basically, Exponential Audio Reverbs are shockingly great!And I think around $1500.


----------



## benatural (Dec 14, 2019)

Hmm, never really encountered those challenges. As for recall, I use this -









Reverb Foundry M7 Link - Bricasti M7 Controller Plug-In


Bricasti M7 Controller Plug-in - Mac/Win AAX, AU, VST 2.4, VST 3




www.sweetwater.com





I control it like a plugin and recall and automation is never an issue. Also, I get back all those CPU cycles used by verb. My template is quite demanding, so that means I can do more with lower latency. I have a very recent and powerful computer and still push it to the max.

Jitter also not an issue for me, but if it's really a concern you can always use it's analog i/o. 

It's integrated into my template and I've dedicated i/o on my interface so I never have to worry about set up. 

The one and only thing that makes it inconvenient is when printing stems, since they have to be done in real time. That can be a real pain. But while working, I have a beautiful and inspiring reverb sound that requires no maintenance for me and keeps me in the creative mood.

So again, it's all about what you value. It enhances my workflow technically and creatively, maybe it will for you, maybe it won't


----------



## jmauz (Dec 14, 2019)

I am a reverb addict. I've tried every plugin I can get my hands on. 

Nothing sounds as good as my M7. And yes, I agree that most others probably won't tell the difference, but *I* will, and this is a concept a lot of people don't understand. 

When I'm making music, the process and the experience is just as important as fulfilling the brief. Moreover, it's a pride of workmanship kind of thing. I want my music to sound as good as I can make it sound. I think only considering how someone else will perceive it is lazy and a cop out. Have some pride in your work.


----------



## R.Cato (Dec 14, 2019)

Is the price difference justified? I would say it depends on what your goal is. Does the hardware unit get you results you are happy with faster and you are saving time by using it, then to me it's worth it. (Of course stemming with a hardware unit also has its drawbacks, but I gladly work with those when it comes to the M7)

I compared the emulations out there and they are not identical to the hardware unit. They share the sound character, but that's not what sets the Bricasti apart from other reverbs in my opinion. @benatural and I seem to have very similar experiences when it comes to the M7. The Bricasti somehow doesn't muddy up your mix as fast as other reverbs, which allows you to use more of it and besides also has the most realistic sounding (and behaving) hall algorithms I found so far. When you send a dry signal through a reverb it often tends to sound like something gets artificially added to the source, while the Bricasti somehow manages to sound like it has always been part of the source. Those are the biggest differences between the Bricasti and other reverbs to me. It's way more than just the sound of the tail, which the emulations are able to reproduce in my opinion.

Therefore what the Bricasti does is giving me one more option while mixing:

If I want my mix to sound like a reverb unit I would use a Lexicon or something with lots of character. If I am after realism and enhancing the sound of the dry signal I would use the Bricasti.

Saying nobody will hear the difference might be correct. But people also couldn't tell the difference between samples and real orchestra 20 years ago and here we are buying new libraries each year fooling ourselves that it will make our music better in some ways. Does that make buying new sample libraries obsolete? I don't think so.


----------



## jononotbono (Dec 14, 2019)

jmauz said:


> I am a reverb addict. I've tried every plugin I can get my hands on.
> 
> Nothing sounds as good as my M7. And yes, I agree that most others probably won't tell the difference, but *I* will, and this is a concept a lot of people don't understand.
> 
> When I'm making music, the process and the experience is just as important as fulfilling the brief. Moreover, it's a pride of workmanship kind of thing. I want my music to sound as good as I can make it sound. I think only considering how someone else will perceive it is lazy and a cop out. Have some pride in your work.



The people I work with are pricing up buying 5 more soon. So every output for all formats are covered. I think there’s 4 outputs on each one.

Talking about having pride in ones work. Here’s a “real” bus compressor. The World’s only 5.1 2500 Bus compressor (modded by Paul Wolff himself). We’re about to add 5 more to make it the only analogue Atmos Bus Compressor.


----------



## jmauz (Dec 14, 2019)

jononotbono said:


> The people I work with are pricing up buying 5 more soon. So every output for all formats are covered. I think there’s 4 outputs on each one.
> 
> Talking about having pride in ones work. Here’s a “real” bus compressor. The World’s only 5.1 2500 Bus compressor (modded by Paul Wolff himself). We’re about to add 5 more to make it the only analogue Atmos Bus Compressor.



Man after my own heart! Next time I'm in the UK we shall hang!


----------



## Braveheart (Dec 14, 2019)

jmauz said:


> I am a reverb addict. I've tried every plugin I can get my hands on.
> 
> Nothing sounds as good as my M7. And yes, I agree that most others probably won't tell the difference, but *I* will, and this is a concept a lot of people don't understand.
> 
> When I'm making music, the process and the experience is just as important as fulfilling the brief. Moreover, it's a pride of workmanship kind of thing. I want my music to sound as good as I can make it sound. I think only considering how someone else will perceive it is lazy and a cop out. Have some pride in your work.


The question is: how many thousands of dollars you need to spend to make you proud. 
From what I read previously from the OP, he already spent a fortune on music making stuff.
This looks more like a reason to burn some thousands more than a real need with all he already own. YMMV


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 14, 2019)

Braveheart said:


> The question is: how many thousands of dollars you need to spend to make you proud.
> From what I read previously from the OP, he already spent a fortune on music making stuff.
> This looks more like a reason to burn some thousands more than a real need with all he already own. YMMV



That's it in a nutshell.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 14, 2019)

R.Cato said:


> I compared the emulations out there and they are not identical to the hardware unit.



If you're comparing a hardware synth verb with a convolution of that unit, of course they're not going to sound exactly the same. 

I would much rather pit a hardware synth verb against a plug-in synth verb. But, if they come from different manufacturers, they won't have any presets that are exactly the same. So, there will be differences, and nothing on which you could make a firm A/B comparison.

Comparing reverbs is a zillion times more complicated than, say, comparing AD/DA units. And even with AD/DA units, you need to be extremely careful and put a huge amount of effort into setting up the test to come to any firm conclusion.


----------



## star.keys (Dec 14, 2019)

quantum7 said:


> I keep getting tempted to buy a Bricasti M7. Anyway, it's nearing 2020 and there are a bunch of fantastic software reverbs available, so is spending $4k these days for a Bricasti really worth it? I would love to hear your thoughts regarding this. Thanks!


Night and day difference. IMO, Bricasti M7 is as good as a reverb could get, especially their room and chamber algorithms. The only reason I sold it is that the movie I was doing got over and I didn’t have any other projects at hand at that time. If you want depth and realism, M7 all the way. Forget software reverb.
Oh and that Spitfire reverb video comparison - I had a loud laugh watching it. That’s pure entertainment, I don’t take them seriously.


----------



## JT (Dec 14, 2019)

Wondering if someone who has an M7, can post a track with the M7 and the same track with a good plugin verb, and let us see if we can hear the difference.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 14, 2019)

BTW, the Bricasti M7 came out in 2007, didn't it? Assuming that a small audio manufacturer needs more lead time (especially with all the coding involved) than a major computer manufacturer, that probably means that the innards of the M7 are a few years older than that. How many people are still using computers from 2005? I'm guessing most computers made in 2005 have already been sent off to recycling.


----------



## Living Fossil (Dec 14, 2019)

Braveheart said:


> The question is: how many thousands of dollars you need to spend to make you proud.



I'd say it's rather a question of how much you make with your music.
From 100k p.a. onwards this unit is quite mandatory.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 14, 2019)

JT said:


> Wondering if someone who has an M7, can post a track with the M7 and the same track with a good plugin verb, and let us see if we can hear the difference.



Way too many variable there for such a test to be meaningful.


----------



## R.Cato (Dec 14, 2019)

Lee Blaske said:


> If you're comparing a hardware synth verb with a convolution of that unit, of course they're not going to sound exactly the same.



I agree, that's why it's more about how the reverb attaches itself to the dry source and other disciplines than just pure sound. Sorry if that didn't come across in my original post. No tweak on an emulation gave me what the real deal did in those areas after two minutes. Are they capable of doing the same thing? Maybe, but not without a decent amount of time put into tweaking virtual knobs.


----------



## purple (Dec 14, 2019)

Sounds like a waste of money unless you're trying to impress some executives or something (which to be fair is a perfectly valid reason to do something, especially in the film industry hehe). Hardly anyone will tell the difference, and there's no guarantee it will even be a "good" difference. I bet (actually I know) there are people out there who blew a few thousand on some hardware and have convinced themselves it sounds better, even though it really wouldn't have if they had done a blind test before spending the money. It comes down to what you really want.

Will it sound different? Yes.
Will it sound better? Maybe sometimes. Maybe all the time. Maybe never. It's a matter of taste.
Will it have workflow issues (like printing, which really adds up when it's a long print...)? Certainly.

I don't know how much $4k sounds to you, but for me there are a million other things I'd rather do with that, both music-related and not, before buying an expensive hardware reverb.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 14, 2019)

R.Cato said:


> I agree, that's why it's more about how the reverb attaches itself to the dry source and other disciplines than just pure sound. Sorry if that didn't come across in my original post. No tweak on an emulation gave me what the real deal did in those areas after two minutes. Are they capable of doing the same thing? Maybe, but not without a decent amount of time put into tweaking virtual knobs.



Out of curiosity, what were you comparing? 

Specifically, I think it would be difficult to compare a synth reverb (that has chorusing built in) with a static convolution IR of that unit (even with some of the chorusing add-on some convo reverb plug-ins have). But, a totally synth reverb with chorusing simply operating on a computer chip core rather than on a CPU in an external box would be a different matter.


----------



## David Kudell (Dec 14, 2019)

For me, I guess I just don't get the fundamental difference between an external hardware unit and internal software plug-in. Are we not dealing with 1's and 0's at the end of the day? Are you telling me that a 16 core Intel processor creating reverb via a plug-in can't do the same thing that a external box with a much slower processor creating reverb can?

Where exactly is this "magic" coming from? Software is software, I don't care where it's running.

It's like saying the calculator app on my Mac is going to be worse than a Casio calculator on my desk. 2+2=4 no matter what.

The only thing I can guess is that sending an audio signal analog through a box's A-D converters is "coloring" the sound.

Anyway, I am very happy with my Exponential Audio reverb plug-ins, and considering that's the guy who invented some of these algorithms, I'd personally save the $4,000. 

But what do I know? I don't claim to be an expert, I'd love to know why external boxes are better.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 14, 2019)

Living Fossil said:


> I'd say it's rather a question of how much you make with your music.
> From 100k p.a. onwards this unit is quite mandatory.



Well, when you're dealing with high-end clients, there are certain accouterments that are expected to signify "quality."But, that client walking in expecting to see a Bricasti might have been told by someone along the line that that's what you should expect. That's more a matter of sales, and trying to find something tangible on which to make a decision. These days, you might do better with extremely comfortable furniture, expensive catered food, and having a masseuse drop by.

The King of Saudi Arabia probably has a much more expensive Rolex than I have (actually, I don't even have a Rolex, I just look at the time on my phone), but that King doesn't have any better idea of the time that I do. 

Besides, I think we're in pretty crazy territory from the standpoint of what people want to hear these days. You want piano? We could argue for days on Boesendorfer vs. Steinway vs. Yamaha, etc. Someone might insist that to get a good piano sound, you need Boesendorfer's most expensive model, mic'ed with a huge array of expensive mics into expensive preamps and AD converters in a pristine acoustic space. But then, Olafur Arnalds comes along, buys a tiny, beaten up spinet piano of unknown manufacture off Craigslist (or whatever they use to advertise stuff up there in Iceland) that has all kinds of pedal clunks, etc., mics it up in his home and records it with an open window that lets in traffic noise and people go nuts for that sound.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 14, 2019)

David Kudell said:


> For me, I guess I just don't get the fundamental difference between an external hardware unit and internal software plug-in. Are we not dealing with 1's and 0's at the end of the day? Are you telling me that a 16 core Intel processor creating reverb via a plug-in can't do the same thing that a external box with a much slower processor creating reverb can?
> 
> Where exactly is this "magic" coming from? Software is software, I don't care where it's running.
> 
> ...



One of the major differences, in some cases, is comparing a static IR of a hardware synth verb with chorusing to the actual unit. An IR can't capture the animation of the chorusing.


----------



## David Kudell (Dec 14, 2019)

Lee Blaske said:


> One of the major differences, in some cases, is comparing a static IR of a hardware synth verb with chorusing to the actual unit. An IR can't capture the animation of the chorusing.


That makes sense, but what about algorithmic reverb running on hardware vs the same algorithm in a plug-in. If you put the same algorithm in both places, is there a difference?


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 14, 2019)

David Kudell said:


> That makes sense, but what about algorithmic reverb running on hardware vs the same algorithm in a plug-in. If you put the same algorithm in both places, is there a difference?



You wouldn't think so, but you'd have to know how similar the code was. Was it possible to port the exact code, or is it in some way an approximation? And, perhaps all the AD/DA circuitry in the original unit (which is probably of pretty old design by now) is adding some additional coloration which may or may not be pleasing.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 14, 2019)

BTW, it's interesting that there's a lot of passion regarding comparing venerable, old reverb hardware with plug-in emulations and ports. Is it possible that we're fascinated with and get hung up on these older units (some of which are still for sale at high prices) because we know the legacy, recognize the names, and remember the huge price tags of these units? Personally, I think that's a big part of it. Much more difficult to construct a new, modern reverb plug-in and have it have the same degree of gravitas out of the gate. 

I do think that's changing, though. We went through a LOT of years of plug-in developers making emulations of hardware, with graphics that conjure up memories of the vintage gear. Waves really did a LOT of that. A number of companies licensed rights to specific pieces of gear. But now, we seem to be in an era where software developers are blasting past what old analog gear could do, and fully taking advantage of what computer technology can do. They might give you the option of some vintage character, but they feel no need to name the plug-in after gear from yesteryear and make the GUI resemble the old hardware. This is what I'm seeing companies like iZotope, Sonible, etc. do, and I think it's the future. No more need to look backwards. 

I expect to see this with reverbs, too. Maybe we've already arrived. I kind of doubt we'll see much new development of expensive dedicated hardware reverb boxes in the price range of current high-end Bricasti/Lexicon/TC Electronics units. I really don't think the market is there for them, especially considering the amount of R&D that would be required to build and code software for a box that would blow ITB reverbs out of the water. Not all that different from the task that camera makers are having trying to come out with small, reasonably priced digital cameras that are significantly better than the latest iPhone camera. At the end of the day, it's about how many you can sell at what price.


----------



## Living Fossil (Dec 14, 2019)

Lee Blaske said:


> Well, when you're dealing with high-end clients, there are certain accouterments that are expected to signify "quality."



I was not refering to the aspect of walking-in-clients.
I meant that with a Bricasti you have an absolute high end tool in your arsenal that you may want to use, even if it's not in all situations.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 14, 2019)

Living Fossil said:


> I was not refering to the aspect of walking-in-clients.
> I meant that with a Bricasti you have an absolute high end tool in your arsenal that you may want to use, even if it's not in all situations.



But what yardstick are we using to establish it as an "absolute"? There are a number of plug-ins that really impress me (B2, R4, Fabfilter Pro-R, BlackHole, Altiverb 7, etc.). Certainly, the user interfaces on a number these totally blow away anything in a hardware box. There are a lot of plug-in reverbs that sound fantastic to me (and I spent years mixing through excellent high-end hardware reverbs). Who are we designating as the person who has thoroughly listened to all of the presets and permutations of all of these reverbs, and has determined which is the clear winner? AFAIK, there's no metric or analysis that can give you some kind of numerical test result to declare a winner.

I would think it would be as difficult as determining which wine of all the wines in the world is the best wine.


----------



## Living Fossil (Dec 14, 2019)

Lee Blaske said:


> But what yardstick are we using to establish it as and "absolute"?



You're overcomplicating it.
I didn't wrote it's an "absolute"...
There are just patterns in the relation of income - reinvestition, and in this sense it's a great tool.
It's neither religion nor a dogma...


----------



## Virtuoso (Dec 14, 2019)

Quick comparison of Seventh Heaven Pro and a Bricasti M7 with the same settings (Studio A - mix 50%). The source is Modo Drum, set dry with the shitty onboard reverb OFF.

(Compressed to mp3 unfortunately, since the board doesn't seem to let you upload wavs)


----------



## Jediwario1 (Dec 14, 2019)

Virtuoso said:


> Quick comparison of Seventh Heaven Pro and a Bricasti M7 with the same settings (Studio A - mix 50%). The source is Modo Drum, set dry with the shitty onboard reverb OFF.
> 
> (Compressed to mp3 unfortunately, since the board doesn't seem to let you upload wavs)



I did a quick blind test.
The Bricasti does have more depth/3dness to the sound but it sounds like it has slightly different settings (room sounds bigger) I wonder if you tweaked the settings by ear you could get them closer.

For this particular example the low end of the kick was too much in the Bricasti, much tighter with 7th Heaven, but the snare sounded better with the bigger room sound of the Bricasti.


----------



## Virtuoso (Dec 14, 2019)

That may be because I'm an idiot and screwed up the bounce - accidentally included some of the dry track!  Re-uploaded it now, so please try again!


----------



## bvaughn0402 (Dec 14, 2019)

I don't hear any difference between the two personally.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 14, 2019)

Sounds identical to me, too. The kick sounds a bit distorted on both.


----------



## synergy543 (Dec 14, 2019)

I hear a slight different in the snare, its a bit more open in the Bricasti and very slightly muffled in the 7th Heaven ex. The difference is extremely minor though (listen carefully for the room sound), and unlikely to be heard in most cases (especially in a full mix). However, if I were asked to mix for a major artist, I'd choose the Bricasti.

[EDIT] Maybe not though. I'm surrounded by hardware boxes I never use (EventideH3000, PCM91, etc.) so I've truly converted to in-the-box. My go to reverb is Lexicon PCM Native + Altiverb or ReLab LX480 (dual mode is cool).


----------



## Virtuoso (Dec 14, 2019)

Another example, this time with some Cello (from Sonuscore Lyrical Cello Phrases) through the Vienna Hall preset. I'm not really trying to make a point here, but 90% of the time I use Seventh Heaven Pro. It's _good enough_ and so much more convenient.


----------



## NickDorito (Dec 14, 2019)

Commenting before people try to pretend the Bricasti sounds better but you just can't hear it because it's an mp3


----------



## Jediwario1 (Dec 14, 2019)

Virtuoso said:


> Another example, this time with some Cello (from Sonuscore Lyrical Cello Phrases) through the Vienna Hall preset. I'm not really trying to make a point here, but 90% of the time I use Seventh Heaven Pro. It's _good enough_ and so much more convenient.



With the drums it was a little bit easier to hear the subtle differences (thud of the kick, crack of the snare) but with the Cello I can't reliably tell the difference, they're too close.

Considering the usability of the plugin and the price it's not even a contest.

Thanks for doing this.


----------



## quantum7 (Dec 14, 2019)

A lot to consider after reading all this...especially with Seventh Heaven being so good. Speaking of Liquidsonics, anyone here tried Illusion yet?


----------



## jononotbono (Dec 14, 2019)

Check out Exponential Audio


----------



## quantum7 (Dec 14, 2019)

jononotbono said:


> Check out Exponential Audio



I bought R4 last year and really like it.


----------



## Virtuoso (Dec 14, 2019)

Exponential Audio Symphony is really good too if you need the tweakability of an algorithmic reverb. And it does full surround/Atmos. Hideous UI though, like all the EA verbs - something I hope iZotope can sort out.

Here's one last example, this time with a vocal through one of the modulated v2 algorithms - Shimmering Sky. This is where convolution reverbs typically tend to fall short, so I think the difference between the plugin and the hardware is much more apparent here.


----------



## synergy543 (Dec 14, 2019)

Jediwario1 said:


> With the drums it was a little bit easier to hear the subtle differences (thud of the kick, crack of the snare) but with the Cello I can't reliably tell the difference, they're too close.


I agree.


----------



## jononotbono (Dec 14, 2019)

Just rent one. You’ll soon see if you love it or not!


----------



## tokatila (Dec 14, 2019)

"Even if you can't hear it, you just know it."

Bricasti, Because You're Worth It.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Dec 14, 2019)

I'm sure that sitting in a Bentley feels infinitely more comfortable than sitting in my car.

Do I need that Bentley now?


----------



## Virtuoso (Dec 15, 2019)

Ok, one more. Sleep is overrated.

Bricasti Sunset Chamber compared to UA Capitol Chamber:-


----------



## burp182 (Dec 15, 2019)

I own a LOT of excellent reverb plugins and get what I consider to be great results with them. Having said that, when it really counts, I call up the Bricasti, 480L, Quantec or System 6000.

Yes, there is a difference. Only you can decide if it's worth the cost and effort in your situation. But don't kid yourself - it's not the same.


----------



## tmhuud (Dec 15, 2019)

Bricasti all the way. And you will need more than one.


----------



## Henu (Dec 15, 2019)

I think this discussion is basically the same that why would someone buy a real SSL compressor instead of using a Waves clone. Or "nobody's going to hear the difference between the EWQLSO Strings and Berlin Strings anyway".

Reverb is everywhere in your mix. Everything cumulates. And yes, for what I've heard and experienced, the Bricasti is really bringing that last 10% to the package. It's all up to you if you need that last 10% or not.


----------



## robgb (Dec 15, 2019)

quantum7 said:


> I keep getting tempted to buy a Bricasti M7. Anyway, it's nearing 2020 and there are a bunch of fantastic software reverbs available, so is spending $4k these days for a Bricasti really worth it? I would love to hear your thoughts regarding this. Thanks!


Short answer: no.
Long answer: no.


----------



## robgb (Dec 15, 2019)

Longer answer:

Look, if you're trying to impress someone and have $4,000 to burn for what really amounts to a miniscule difference in sound (that most consumers of your music will be entirely unable to hear), buy the Bricasti. OR, you could buy a truly great Orchestral library and a Paul Reed Smith guitar and probably still have change left over. The choice is obviously yours.


----------



## Braveheart (Dec 15, 2019)

robgb said:


> Longer answer:
> 
> Look, if you're trying to impress someone and have $4,000 to burn for what really amounts to a miniscule difference in sound (that most consumers of your music will be entirely unable to hear), buy the Bricasti. OR, you could buy a truly great Orchestral library and a Paul Reed Smith guitar and probably still have change left over. The choice is obviously yours.


My point exactly. We all suffer from GAS, but this is over the top.

Advice to the OP: take a deep breath, show this thread to your wife, and it will pass.


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Dec 15, 2019)

I'd think you'd better have very specific needs, and a very specific (and well-paying) career or studio production company to get a $4k reverb and have it be worthwhile. These people/situations absolutely exist, and I have no doubt several people on this board fit the bill. So to speak. 

To me, that's both Sequential Prophet 6 and OB-6 desktop modules (B-Stock). Plus another nice reverb plugin or two.


----------



## sostenuto (Dec 15, 2019)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> I'm sure that sitting in a Bentley feels infinitely more comfortable than sitting in my car.
> 
> Do I need that Bentley now?



If you got it _ flaunt it ! 
OTH, aging ears can't appreciate Bricasti (fully). Aging bum surely can appreciate Bentley seats ...


----------



## David Kudell (Dec 15, 2019)

Reading this thread is interesting - I still haven’t seen any scientific answers about why a reverb algorithm will be any better just because it’s running on some black box instead of on your computer’s CPU. It’s still just 1’s and 0’s.

Some people think the algorithms are somehow better in hardware, even though the people who wrote those algorithms for the hardware have gone on to make plugins (Exponential Audio as one example). Those plugins are being used on Hollywood mixing stages to create multichannel surround mixes.

I’m not saying the Bricasti doesn’t have a great algorithm, just saying if they put that code into a plugin, it would sound exactly the same.

BTW, I’m selling a special HDMI cable that improves your TV’s picture quality. It’s not a huge difference, it’s just that last 10% that makes it better. 😁


----------



## quantum7 (Dec 15, 2019)

Ok, here’s the deal- I earn a decent royalties from past commercial projects and albums. I am also blessed with a pretty good financial situation such that a $4k reverb is not a big deal at all really. I realize that a Bricasti, or the like, will only get me another 5 or 10%, and 90% of my listeners would Most likely not hear that extra 5 or 10%. The Bricasti would just be for my own personal enjoyment when both composing and playing. I love the sound of reverb on an instrument and love to get lost in that dreamy lushness a good reverb provides, therefore if I can hear a difference....even if it is only a minimal difference, then it would be worth $4k to me. I may just order on at Sweetwater and let them know in advance that I will return it if I cannot hear an improvement over my favorite software reverbs.


----------



## Drumdude2112 (Dec 15, 2019)

quantum7 said:


> A lot to consider after reading all this...especially with Seventh Heaven being so good. Speaking of Liquidsonics, anyone here tried Illusion yet?


Illusion is fantastic ..LOVE the chambers , and tweakability is insane .
GREAT plugin.


----------



## Drumdude2112 (Dec 15, 2019)

quantum7 said:


> Ok, here’s the deal- I earn a decent royalties from past commercial projects and albums. I am also blessed with a pretty good financial situation such that a $4k reverb is not a big deal at all really. I realize that a Bricasti, or the like, will only get me another 5 or 10%, and 90% of my listeners would Most likely not hear that extra 5 or 10%. The Bricasti would just be for my own personal enjoyment when both composing and playing. I love the sound of reverb on an instrument and love to get lost in that dreamy lushness a good reverb provides, therefore if I can hear a difference....even if it is only a minimal difference, then it would be worth $4k to me. I may just order on at Sweetwater and let them know in advance that I will return it if I cannot hear an improvement over my favorite software reverbs.



sounds like you’ve answered your own question .Like I said for ME the difference between the hardware unit and seventh heaven pro wasn’t enough for me to keep 4K in the Bric...was it ‘better’ then the plugin ?...to my ears it was yes ...(not drastically so and sometimes more then others ) one may say the bricasti in this day and age is a ‘Luxery item’
But it IS a sexy beast and if it inspires you and you have the cash , it’s absolutely worth it ...Enjoy !!


----------



## Zero&One (Dec 15, 2019)

The spitfire video (although laughed at) and previous audio examples give me the conclusion 'no'. 
Even the slight difference some may have heard in the examples... was an isolated drum beat. Aint no way I'm hearing the difference when 30 other instruments are added to the mix.

But if I had the money yeah. Why not


----------



## Braveheart (Dec 15, 2019)

quantum7 said:


> Ok, here’s the deal- I earn a decent royalties from past commercial projects and albums. I am also blessed with a pretty good financial situation such that a $4k reverb is not a big deal at all really. I realize that a Bricasti, or the like, will only get me another 5 or 10%, and 90% of my listeners would Most likely not hear that extra 5 or 10%. The Bricasti would just be for my own personal enjoyment when both composing and playing. I love the sound of reverb on an instrument and love to get lost in that dreamy lushness a good reverb provides, therefore if I can hear a difference....even if it is only a minimal difference, then it would be worth $4k to me. I may just order on at Sweetwater and let them know in advance that I will return it if I cannot hear an improvement over my favorite software reverbs.


I think you don’t need advice here, your mind is set. Nothing rational, but it’s your money If you want to buy a shiny new toy.


----------



## robgb (Dec 15, 2019)

quantum7 said:


> even if it is only a minimal difference, then it would be worth $4k to me.


If you've got the money and it's important to you, by all means. But then why did you ask in the first place? It seems to me you were having doubts about the idea. But even if you have an overflow of cash, why spend it on something that makes little difference? It's a bad financial move. That's my feeling anyway. Clearly you feel differently. Enjoy!


----------



## quipurite (Dec 15, 2019)

benatural said:


> I took the plunge and bought a Bricasti two years ago. I'll say that I used to always be dissatisfied with reverb results having tried a few like Alitiverb, 2C, Pro-R, Waves stuff, Steinberg verbs, and a few others.
> 
> Now I never worry about reverb. Never muddies the mix, super transparent, super lush, very realistic sounding, all with very little effort. You could probably get incredible results with software plugins. It's very subjective. For me, the results make me happy.



Agree with all of your descriptions, benatural. 
The main thing I think that the Bricasti does is create a real room around your instruments without adding to the sounds themselves. The best plugins, and you have tried them and compared them to the M7, always muddy or add color to the sounds that make up the music in your mix. It is strange when you get tuned into that aspect of the M7 and what sold me on it. It does not color or add to the sounds,
it just puts them in a realistic room.

There are other places to put the $3 plus thousand in equipment of course. But in the end ask yourself, why use a reverb at all? Why are they a basic building block in creating music? Something so essential to music making seems like a good place to put some big money if you are serious about music making and have the cash. The M7 will become an essential part of your music making.

and.... like any great music making purchase, if you care to compare with the other reverbs which cost less no doubt, do that after a month or so of getting familiar with the M7 to where you don't think about what it is doing. You will be astounded how un-Natural those other reverbs sound. Keep it real!


----------



## benatural (Dec 15, 2019)

Not sure about the assessment that - in order to justify the cost of expensive gear - you need to be a composer making millions, or that you need scientific proof that one thing is better than another.

If you feel it helps you do your work better in some way, and you can figure out a way to come up with the money, then it's worth it. If you don't feel it will help, then it's not worth it. Neither approach is right or wrong.

An unhelpful way of looking at it would be to make a decision based on what other folks do or don't do.
I got one because it solved a very particular problem set for me.


----------



## JohnG (Dec 15, 2019)

benatural said:


> The one and only thing that makes it inconvenient is when printing stems, since they have to be done in real time. That can be a real pain. But while working, I have a beautiful and inspiring reverb sound that requires no maintenance for me and keeps me in the creative mood.
> 
> So again, it's all about what you value. It enhances my workflow technically and creatively, maybe it will for you, maybe it won't



For all the reasons @benatural listed, I also use hardware reverb, a tc electronic (although "hardware" is a misnomer because they're all in-the-box unless you're using an actual spring or physical hall or plate or something).

I use individual reverbs to print stems, yes, but the tc is the one I compose with. Sounds great every time.


----------



## Muldor (Dec 15, 2019)

Rent one for a free weekend or evening/following day. If it deepens your musical perception and makes you mix with more captivity, it is a good investment. If it fails to do so you can let the question go.


----------



## jononotbono (Dec 15, 2019)

Exactly. Renting is going to be far more beneficial than listening to the advice of people that don’t actually own one or have ever used one. 😂


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Dec 15, 2019)

I'd just like to point out that Shawn Murphy used to use 3 Bricasti's for mixing scores and now he's switched to using Seventh Heaven. Are they exactly the same? No. Does one sound better than the other? No. Is one more convenient than the other? Yes, Seventh Heaven is a fraction of the price, doesn't require a rack of gear, doesn't require dealing with connecting outboard, is recallable anywhere you are, and you can have as many instances as you'd like. Is it as impressive as an M7? No except that his clients are the ones who have to foot the studio and rental rates so...

Same thing with using outboard EQs like 3 Massive Passives. He's doing it all in the box now. If it's good enough for Shawn Murphy, it's good enough for me.

Edit: To be fair, I should point out that the benefit of running multiple instances isn't really valid for him since he runs things at 192kHz. Your system pretty quickly grinds to a halt with too much more than you'd realistically run with outboard. It's not like you can put this on every stem. Pretty much still just running on a single orchestral stem. He also needs to run 3 - 4 PT rigs so offline printing isn't a thing.


----------



## quantum7 (Dec 15, 2019)

Muldor said:


> Rent one for a free weekend or evening/following day. If it deepens your musical perception and makes you mix with more captivity, it is a good investment. If it fails to do so you can let the question go.



As much as I love living in Boise, Idaho, the only downside to me personally living in a smaller metro area is that I seem to be the only one with any high-end gear. LOL No places in all of Idaho to rent a Bricasti....at least that I've heard of anyway.


----------



## quantum7 (Dec 15, 2019)

Gerhard Westphalen said:


> I'd just like to point out that Shawn Murphy used to use 3 Bricasti's for mixing scores and now he's switched to using Seventh Heaven. Are they exactly the same? No. Does one sound better than the other? No. Is one more convenient than the other? Yes, Seventh Heaven is a fraction of the price, doesn't require a rack of gear, doesn't require dealing with connecting outboard, is recallable anywhere you are, and you can have as many instances as you'd like. Is it as impressive as an M7? No except that his clients are the ones who have to foot the studio and rental rates so...
> 
> Same thing with using outboard EQs like 3 Massive Passives. He's doing it all in the box now. If it's good enough for Shawn Murphy, it's good enough for me.
> 
> Edit: To be fair, I should point out that the benefit of running multiple instances isn't really valid for him since he runs things at 192kHz. Your system pretty quickly grinds to a halt with too much more than you'd realistically run with outboard. It's not like you can put this on every stem. Pretty much still just running on a single orchestral stem. He also needs to run 3 - 4 PT rigs so offline printing isn't a thing.



I guess I'll have to compare it with my own ears because I've heard from others that the M7 sounded much more "alive" to their ears over the sampled convolution Seventh Heaven attempt. I was on the beta team for Seventh Heaven and found it sounded very nice, but not as nice as some of the finest reverbs I remember from back in the 80's. Perhaps I need a vintage unit with all its imperfections, I don't know. Seventh Heavem, B2, Exponential Audio, Valhalla....they all sound great, but I still feel there has to be something out there that sounds a bit more organic and alive. 

I have a friend who has the Eventide Eclipse, a Lexicon (cannot remember the model right now) and he recently picked up a cool little Otto Bam reverb. All of these just have a certain sound that I cannot seem to get with software. Maybe I just need to learn my software reverbs better? I don't know.

Anyway, I truly am grateful for ALL your opinions here. I need to read them in order to make the best decision because I would HATE to have to return a Bricasti back to the store. I really only want to purchase it if i am at least 90% certain that I will truly enjoy the sound over my current software reverbs. Thank you all for your input.


----------



## staypuft (Dec 15, 2019)

I sold my 2 units after Seventh Heaven.....don´t miss them, close enough. The Briscati is an amazing piece of tech but not worth 4k$. Certainly back in 2007 but not not in 2020. And let´s not talk about the practicality of working itb


----------



## shapednoise (Dec 15, 2019)

I’m personally amazed that people are still using cheap stuff like the M7

i will only use the BEST Possible equipment as my music is worth it.


----------



## Virtuoso (Dec 15, 2019)

quipurite said:


> The main thing I think that the Bricasti does is create a real room around your instruments without adding to the sounds themselves.


I said earlier that I use Seventh Heaven 90% of the time, mainly for the convenience. The other 10% is made up of two main use cases:-

1. Taking a dry voiceover and putting it in a very realistic (small) space to fill it out and give it more body and character. The Exponential Audio plugins are very good, but nothing does this quite as well as the Bricasti, and you can tweak it to perfection.

2. Exposed solo Piano. The Bricasti sounds very natural here, where convolution reverbs can sound flat and 2 dimensional, and you really don't want any kind of modulation on the reverb tail.


----------



## nas (Dec 15, 2019)

If you have to ask... then it's probably not worth it.


----------



## quantum7 (Dec 15, 2019)

shapednoise said:


> I’m personally amazed that people are still using cheap stuff like the M7
> 
> i will only use the BEST Possible equipment as my music is worth it.


 I know people like these old Alesis reverbs, but I owned a lot of those in the late 80's and HATED them. They just dirtied my beautiful synth sounds too much. I was writing New Age music then though and just wanted some CLEAN reverb.


----------



## quantum7 (Dec 15, 2019)

nas said:


> If you have to ask... then it's probably not worth it.



I don't know about that. I had a friend who asked me and other if she should get a nose job. Years later with hew new and beautiful nose, looking beautiful as ever, it definitely seemed worth it to her. LOL


----------



## shapednoise (Dec 15, 2019)

there's realistic… then there is… Erbe-Verb! 





Make Noise Co. | Erbe-Verb


(email: [email protected] text: Contact Technical Support) (email: [email protected] text: Contact Sales/Dealer Inquiries) (email: [email protected] text: Contact Media / Marketing) (email: [email protected] text: Contact Jobs) (email: [email protected]



www.makenoisemusic.com


----------



## tmhuud (Dec 15, 2019)

Yep. NOTHING does your 1. And 2. Better than the M7. Nothing.


Virtuoso said:


> 1. Taking a dry voiceover and putting it in a very realistic (small) space to fill it out and give it more body and character. The Exponential Audio plugins are very good, but nothing does this quite as well as the Bricasti, and you can tweak it to perfection.
> 
> 2. Exposed solo Piano. The Bricasti sounds very natural here, where convolution reverbs can sound flat and 2 dimensional, and you really don't want any kind of modulation on the reverb tail.


----------



## Zero&One (Dec 15, 2019)

quantum7 said:


> I don't know about that. I had a friend who asked me and other if she should get a nose job. Years later with hew new and beautiful nose, looking beautiful as ever, it definitely seemed worth it to her. LOL



You really wanting an M7... or are we discussing a potential lift, tuck, extension/reduction here?
(asking for a friend)


----------



## quantum7 (Dec 15, 2019)

James H said:


> You really wanting an M7... or are we discussing a potential lift, tuck, extension/reduction here?
> (asking for a friend)



I keep forgetting how serious this forum is. Just having fun!


----------



## Zero&One (Dec 15, 2019)

quantum7 said:


> I keep forgetting how serious this forum is. Just having fun!



So was I dude 
Sometimes things get lost with text. But yeah, I was joking lol


----------



## Jack Weaver (Dec 15, 2019)

It really takes a commitment to a special level of excellence to invest your hard-earned funds into making a professional level audio experience. I don't do as much mixing as I used to. But when I was, there was always a joy I could turn to receive the feeling of beauty. And that has been the m7. My customers came to expect that. 

I've had four of them. Currently, I have 3 and the m10 remote (and of course the DAW software to control them also.) I have more software 'verbs than I can recall. Each one of them has a particular strength I enjoy. 

If you're totally a composer, these days so many libraries have tons of mic and ambient mics. Those mics really help and to some degree obviate the 'need' for quality reverbs. 

But man, when you have an m7 for long strings, another for short strings and one for brass - it really makes a difference. All of those require severely different settings. Of course, you can just have one and print the reverb for those busses separately. When you mix for a living you typically don't have time to do all that extra printing. 

I'm probably going to let one or two of them leave (a little tear in the corner of my eye) because of the situation. But I don't plan to ever be without one of them.

I've recently sold my 480L and TC m6000 but I expect to always have that Bricasti sound in my rack. 

.


----------



## jononotbono (Dec 15, 2019)

quantum7 said:


> I keep forgetting how serious this forum is. Just having fun!



Not to be an enabler (I really am) I think you should just buy one. Imagine how much joy you could have already had if you just clicked that Buy now button days ago. And get it from Sweetwater. They give free bags of sweets which is always a nice treat. 😂


----------



## quantum7 (Dec 15, 2019)

James H said:


> So was I dude
> Sometimes things get lost with text. But yeah, I was joking lol


My bad!


----------



## quantum7 (Dec 15, 2019)

jononotbono said:


> Not to be an enabler (I really am) I think you should just buy one. Imagine how much joy you could have already had if you just clicked that Buy now button days ago. And get it from Sweetwater. They give free bags of sweets which is always a nice treat. 😂



I've actually spent so much money at Sweetwater that I've gained 10 freakin' pounds from the sugar! Oh the humanity! LOL


----------



## jononotbono (Dec 15, 2019)

quantum7 said:


> I've actually spent so much money at Sweetwater that I've gained 10 freakin' pounds from the sugar! Oh the humanity! LOL



It’s a disgrace isn’t it!


----------



## Zero&One (Dec 15, 2019)

There's definitely _something_ about owning nice gear though isn't there?
I never looked at my Kemper modelling amp and grinned. Not like when I looked at my Mesa triple Rectifier. Both done the same job, but one done it with joy.

Plugins don't make me grin either :|


----------



## quantum7 (Dec 15, 2019)

James H said:


> There's definitely _something_ about owning nice gear though isn't there?
> I never looked at my Kemper modelling amp and grinned. Not like when I looked at my Mesa triple Rectifier. Both done the same job, but one done it with joy.
> 
> Plugins don't make me grin either :|



I know. I was originally all hardware in the late 80's through the early 2000's. Then I thought my composing life would be so much easier going 100% ITB. In some ways it was, but in other ways it killed my experimenting with sound. The mouse is NOT a musical instrument!!!!!! Anyway, I've gone crazy getting back into hardware synths again now owning a Baloran The River, a Modal 002, a Yamaha Montage 7, a Prophet 12LE, a Moog Grandma, and a Sequential OB6...with more on the way. I have never enjoyed composing with synths more in my life now. Also with my New Age music albums, I always use real musicians, as a 100% software created album would just seem like a sin to me. My Kontakt libraries from Spitfire and others though have been invaluable to me, of course. I guess now I'm hoping to put some non-software reverb into the mix. I absolutely love my PC in what it gives me, but if I don't have as many reasons to let go of that mouse in favor of something "real" it sucks the enjoyment out of my passion with composing.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 15, 2019)

There can be a LOT of pleasure in owning hardware, especially beautifully constructed hardware. If it's something you enjoy, great. If we were talking about analog circuitry, there's a possibility there would be some modicum of difference. But, if we're comparing an ITB digital reverb with and out of the box stand alone unit, the ONLY reason there could be any difference is if the box has coding/programming/presets that an ITB reverb didn't. There's no reason that an ITB solution can't be as good or even much better than a stand alone unit. It's just about adding 1's and 0's, and newer computers with extremely powerful multicore CPUs can do an astounding job of adding 1's and 0's.


----------



## purple (Dec 15, 2019)

I hear a difference, but not $4,000 dollars of difference. I bet you can match the sound of the Bricasti by tweaking the knobs a bit. The only difference is the hardware is a _tiny bit_ brighter. Not something that can't be replicated with a cheap plugin I'd imagine. That box will have far more value as a showpiece/something you can list on your studio page than it will musically TBH.


----------



## robgb (Dec 15, 2019)

Well, for what it's worth, one of the best and most successful mixing engineers in the business is Andrew Scheps, and he mixes completely in the box. So I'm not sure the aim for "professional studio" excellence is really a reason to buy.


----------



## Braveheart (Dec 15, 2019)

quantum7 said:


> I know. I was originally all hardware in the late 80's through the early 2000's. Then I thought my composing life would be so much easier going 100% ITB. In some ways it was, but in other ways it killed my experimenting with sound. The mouse is NOT a musical instrument!!!!!! Anyway, I've gone crazy getting back into hardware synths again now owning a Baloran The River, a Modal 002, a Yamaha Montage 7, a Prophet 12LE, a Moog Grandma, and a Sequential OB6...with more on the way. I have never enjoyed composing with synths more in my life now. Also with my New Age music albums, I always use real musicians, as a 100% software created album would just seem like a sin to me. My Kontakt libraries from Spitfire and others though have been invaluable to me, of course. I guess now I'm hoping to put some non-software reverb into the mix. I absolutely love my PC in what it gives me, but if I don't have as many reasons to let go of that mouse in favor of something "real" it sucks the enjoyment out of my passion with composing.


If you want something else than a mouse for control, you can get a good controller for a couple of hundred dollars. I use Studio One with Faderport 8 and Console 1. Recent update of Studio One now allows automatic mapping of third party plugins in Faderport. I can now use any plugins to mix in the box with the feeling similar to a console. If you really would want to save you money, I'm pretty sure you would find a way to get a similar result from good reverb plugins and a solution for tactile mixing.


----------



## randybobandy (Dec 16, 2019)

quantum7 said:


> A lot to consider after reading all this...especially with Seventh Heaven being so good. Speaking of Liquidsonics, anyone here tried Illusion yet?



Illusion is superb as is Lustrous Plates.

On the Bricasti thing, if money is no object then go for it. It has the slight edge on Seventh Heaven and sometimes that extra 10% just costs a lot. If the investment was going to make a big personal difference (less money for family, no holiday this year, not being able to afford repairs to stuff etc) then it's a stupid thing to do when it is this close. But like you say for you the money is not an issue, so why not?!


----------



## synthetic (Dec 17, 2019)

Oooh I covet The River. That thing seems amazing. 

The sad part about expensive gear is that it's like 5-10% better for triple the cost. But that's most high-end things, like a Ferrari is not 5x the speed of a Corvette. I love my M7, though. Software reverbs don't have that Z depth and smoothness, yet.


----------



## garylionelli (Dec 17, 2019)

I have an M7, but I mainly use Exponential's Symphony reverb because when I'm on a deadline and printing stems I can do faster-than-realtime bounces. But the M7 still sounds better. Tried hard to beat it...can't.


----------



## Gingerbread (Dec 17, 2019)

I'd be willing to bet the OP (or anyone else) can't tell the difference, in a BLIND test, between Seventh Heaven and the M7....if someone were to make a test using, say, the Robber using CSS, and posting wav files from their dropbox. Prove me wrong!

The OP should only buy it if he can actually pass the test. It's the only way for him to get the answer to the question he asked in the topic heading.


----------



## JohnG (Dec 17, 2019)

Gingerbread said:


> I'd be willing to bet the OP (or anyone else) can't tell the difference, in a BLIND test, between Seventh Heaven and the M7....if someone were to make a test using, say, the Robber using CSS, and posting wav files from their dropbox. Prove me wrong!
> 
> The OP should only buy it if he can actually pass the test. It's the only way for him to get the answer to the question he asked in the topic heading.



that's not a test I'd recommend.

Where I can really hear the Bricasti is on live sources -- especially vocals or classical guitar -- not so much samples.

If you're releasing a vocal track on a single, it's totally amazing what Bricasti can do. If I'm writing an action segment for TV only -- no soundtrack release -- then overkill.


----------



## Gingerbread (Dec 17, 2019)

JohnG said:


> that's not a test I'd recommend.
> 
> Where I can really hear the Bricasti is on live sources -- especially vocals or classical guitar -- not so much samples.
> 
> If you're releasing a vocal track on a single, it's totally amazing what Bricasti can do. If I'm writing an action segment for TV only -- no soundtrack release -- then overkill.


Good idea. Could you try posting some blind examples (.wav's) of vocals, some using the M7 and some using Seventh Heaven? Let's see if people, especially the OP, can actually identify which is which.


----------



## garylionelli (Dec 17, 2019)

JohnG said:


> that's not a test I'd recommend.
> 
> Where I can really hear the Bricasti is on live sources -- especially vocals or classical guitar -- not so much samples.
> 
> If you're releasing a vocal track on a single, it's totally amazing what Bricasti can do. If I'm writing an action segment for TV only -- no soundtrack release -- then overkill.



I went back and forth with Seventh Heaven and the M7, and like a lot of others have said, the character is close but the aliveness and immersion of the source into the signal is missing from Seventh Heaven.

I don't get why so many want to bring the M7 down a notch and say a plug-in is as good.

Who cares? If you like an M7, use it...or don't.


----------



## JohnG (Dec 17, 2019)

Gingerbread said:


> Good idea. Could you try posting some blind examples (.wav's) of vocals, some using the M7 and some using Seventh Heaven? Let's see if people, especially the OP, can actually identify which is which.



[Vader Voice] I find your lack of faith...disturbing...

*Monitoring*

Whether you'll hear any difference depends on a lot of things, but certainly how you're listening. I just bought new earbuds with rave reviews. They stink. I think you could use a $100 spring reverb or a Bricasti and not know the difference. By contrast, on my studio setup or in a mastering suite, you can hear everything, and that is where the Bricasti douses magic on the sound source.

*Are You Mixing the Final?*

As a practical matter, most composers aren't going to need a killer hardware reverb unless they're mixing the final-before-mastering mix. Even then, you probably can't afford the time if it's for TV or a game or movie and you have an hour or so of music that needs stereo stems plus 5.1 versions of everything, and so on. So you'd need a lot of time and / or multiple units to print all that.

I do have a nice hardware reverb that I use on all my demos. Sometimes the demo is the most crucial sound source -- it's stereo and, in media, it's the "pass-fail" test of whether something you wrote gets recorded, or whether you get hired in the first place. Plus it just sounds great 100% of the time with no effort and no CPU, so I'm glad to use it to write with even if it's not on the final versions.

*What Kind of Materials?*

I have one engineer who's using a Bricasti right now, and one who isn't; the first guy is mixing very intimate cues including (in some cases) vocals. The second guy is mixing the majority of the score, which has a lot of percussion plus a large/ very large ensemble. The relative benefit I think is obviously tilted toward the more exposed solo / vocal material.


----------



## purple (Dec 17, 2019)

Gingerbread said:


> I'd be willing to bet the OP (or anyone else) can't tell the difference, in a BLIND test, between Seventh Heaven and the M7....if someone were to make a test using, say, the Robber using CSS, and posting wav files from their dropbox. Prove me wrong!
> 
> The OP should only buy it if he can actually pass the test. It's the only way for him to get the answer to the question he asked in the topic heading.


I would say only if one can _consistently _pass the test with multiple examples.


----------



## KEM (Dec 17, 2019)

Braveheart said:


> With the current level quality of software reverbs, the difference of price is not justified. Nobody will know the difference with your tracks.



This is how I always feel, literally no one cares, if it sounds good then it sounds good. Some kid listening to your tracks isn't going to judge them based on the fact that you used a software reverb instead of a hardware one, they just want to hear a good piece of music.


----------



## Geocranium (Dec 17, 2019)

synthetic said:


> Software reverbs don't have that Z depth and smoothness, yet.



I'm very much in the "anti-voodoo" camp of things, and posts like this trigger an immediate skepticism. What magic could the unit be doing that a plugin couldn't also replicate? When people say things like "the M7 just sounds more *alive*" than plugins, what is the actual, physical reason for that? What process is being applied to the sound that is apparently exclusive to this $4k unit?

From the given examples in the thread of M7 vs software equivalent, I can't tell a difference sonically.


----------



## Greg (Dec 17, 2019)

Buy one used and sell it if you don't like it. It really is the only way to figure out if its worth it for you. They're like $2700 or less used.


----------



## Architekton (Dec 17, 2019)

I believe 98-99% of Bricasti reverb owners/users wont be able to say in a blind test on a full mix of orchestra which audio example uses Bricasti reverb and which one uses software one. Also, those guys who say that Bricasti adds additional space or z plane or whatever to the sound should definitely study more about reverb, especially because Bricasti is just a software running on a ancient dsp chip, there is no analog drifting, saturation trickery here. This reminds me of a story when people wrote all over the internet how Lexicon PCM plugins dont sound exactly the same as hardware one until the creator of both (now an Exponential Audio owner/designer) came and wrote that the code for both is same and that there is no difference at all, than suddenly everyone was silent. And you have to take into consideration psychological effect, Bricast reverb, which cost couple of thousands of dollars, will always sound better to their owners only because they need to justify their purchase. And when time for blinds tests arrives, you mostly likely wont get any answer from hardware (of any kind) supporters. Also, if you cant make a decent reverb mix/sound in your production in almost 2020 with software reverbs, than you are in wrong business...mix wise. You might be a good composer, but that doesnt mean you are a good mixing engineer. Lexicon PCM, Valhalla, TC Electronic, 2C Audio, Relab, Exponential Audio...wow, so many high quality options. You cant go wrong with any of them, seriously.

EDIT: dont get me wrong, Bricasti is excellent reverb, but definitely not worth the price when you have those high quality software reverbs which I mentioned above/previously!


----------



## synthetic (Dec 17, 2019)

What, am I made of money? Of course I can hear the difference. That was a big check to write, especially as I had already bought a Lexicon PCM96S. If you can’t hear the difference then maybe you don’t need one yet, the way it takes a beginner photographer a while to outgrow their first SLR camera. As soon as I buy a plug-in reverb that sounds as good, I’m selling the M7. Before everyone else does and crashes the market.


----------



## tmhuud (Dec 17, 2019)

garylionelli said:


> I have an M7, but I mainly use Exponential's Symphony reverb because when I'm on a deadline and printing stems I can do faster-than-realtime bounces. But the M7 still sounds better.



This is an important point and I’m not sure the OP is aware of the extra time required. And TIME is money too. 💰


----------



## bvaughn0402 (Dec 17, 2019)

I think one of the reasons I don't consider the hardware is ... it seems rather old. I mean, it was released when ... 2007 or 2008? And it isn't that this is bad ...

But you have to wonder ... how old is the DSP? And at this age, at what point will they release an updated version? And if not, then how much faith do I put in a company that doesn't release an update in 12 years?

And no USB? No Firewire or Thunderbolt?

I'm sure (as others have mentioned) that if I listened to this versus software, I could hear the difference. But in the mix? Probably not. And would anyone else? Not really.

I tell people to hear differences when I mix my music, and they can't hear what I would consider obvious changes. So I doubt they would hear the difference in a buried reverb.

Still ... if I had $4-5k lying around ... and assuming I already bought a Taylor acoustic, I'd probably still pick one up. Well, until I found a Mellotron ...


----------



## Gingerbread (Dec 17, 2019)

synthetic said:


> What, am I made of money? Of course I can hear the difference. That was a big check to write, especially as I had already bought a Lexicon PCM96S. If you can’t hear the difference then maybe you don’t need one yet, the way it takes a beginner photographer a while to outgrow their first SLR camera. As soon as I buy a plug-in reverb that sounds as good, I’m selling the M7. Before everyone else does and crashes the market.


If the difference is so clear, then someone should be eager to post some blind examples of both M7 and Seventh Heaven, and see if people can discern the difference.


----------



## germancomponist (Dec 17, 2019)

JohnG said:


> [Vader Voice] I find your lack of faith...disturbing...
> 
> *Monitoring*
> 
> Whether you'll hear any difference depends on a lot of things, but certainly how you're listening. I just bought new earbuds with rave reviews. They stink. I think you could use a $100 spring reverb or a Bricasti and not know the difference. By contrast, on my studio setup or in a mastering suite, you can hear everything, and that is where the Bricasti douses magic on the sound source.



+1000

For me, monitoring is the most important thing.


----------



## JohnG (Dec 17, 2019)

Gingerbread said:


> If the difference is so clear, then someone should be eager to post some blind examples of both M7 and Seventh Heaven, and see if people can discern the difference.



I'm not clear on why anyone would be "eager" to rebut antagonistic posts by an anonymous writer, whose monitoring could be anything from great to not-great. We don't know anything about you, bruv. You could have golden ears or -- not.

I agree with synthetic:


synthetic said:


> If you can’t hear the difference then maybe you don’t need one yet, the way it takes a beginner photographer a while to outgrow their first SLR camera.



When I started out I was skeptical about a large range of things, like expensive cables, which I thought was a con job, or that amplifiers could really be that differentiated -- so many things.

Bricasti sounds great but costs a lot. If it's a demo for a low budget film using samples, no doubt a needless expense. If it's for a singer or other live performer whose work will be broadcast all over, then it's worth it.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 17, 2019)

It would actually be strange for a 10+ year old hardware reverb, using a 10+ year old CPU with 10+ year old programming to be better than new software running on today's much more powerful processors (especially without the added jitter that an external box contributes). It's very rare for software to not improve.

The only way for the external box to be better would be for the 10+ year old coding to be better than anything being written today. Is there anyone here that thinks an Emu or Akai sampler from the early two thousands is better than our current day sampler plug-ins? This is essentially the same combined hardware/software comparison we're making. 

Things don't stand still. At best, a hardware reverb IS ONLY an expensive dongle protecting certain algorithms that a manufacturer is preventing being ported to a plug-in version. There is not more power in these vintage boxes. It would be very odd if software designers can't top 10+ year old software.


----------



## germancomponist (Dec 17, 2019)

I have an old Ibanez SDR 1000 in my rack, very old, but yeah, it sounds amazing. (Only 16 bit).


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 17, 2019)

BTW, I wouldn't limit tests and comparisons to comparing the 7th Heaven plugin to the M7. The field really needs to be opened up to every plug-in reverb product out there. I find I really gravitate to totally new designs that aren't trying to emulate something from the past. That's imposing an arbitrary limitation. Just try to design a new reverb, and make it the best.

There's a built-in bias to hardware units that used to be extremely expensive (or are still being made, and still expensive). In discussion threads like this, that always leads to a perceived value. That's why blind tests are needed. When it comes to reverb, though, a valuable blind test is going to be essentially impossible to do. It's only going to ***seem*** somewhat valid on plug-ins that are emulations of hardware units, where a preset has an identical name. I think those sorts of comparisons are useless. Does one sound brighter than the other? Plug-ins have tons of parameters. Just brighten it up a little, or tweak any number of other paramenters.


----------



## JohnG (Dec 17, 2019)

you guys are presenting arguments, not experience. "It _can't_ be that great because..." Are you talking yourself into a position, or heatedly defending it without even listening to the unit? Moreover, do you think Bricasti never updates its software or makes any other improvements? Like there's just one preset or something that never gets updated?

My engineer just used it on a number of very exposed tracks and the thing sounds great; if you don't think it's worth it then that's up to you. 

It's certainly true that there are lots of ITB solutions now that are quite good.


----------



## germancomponist (Dec 17, 2019)

Lee Blaske said:


> BTW, I wouldn't limit tests and comparisons to comparing the 7th Heaven plugin to the M7. The field really needs to be opened up to every plug-in reverb product out there. I find I really gravitate to totally new designs that aren't trying to emulate something from the past. That's imposing an arbitrary limitation. Just try to design a new reverb, and make it the best.


Reinvent the wheel? Sound is sound, and even the old analog instruments and analog studio technology sounds natural and very good. Digital technology has never achieved this sound, at least not until today. And yes, I say this based on what my ears tell me.


----------



## David Kudell (Dec 17, 2019)

$4,000 will buy an awesome set of studio monitor speakers that will make your software reverb plug-ins sound pretty amazing.


----------



## Braveheart (Dec 17, 2019)

It will also buy you a pro mixing engineer that will make your music sound awesome, whatever reverb being used.


----------



## clisma (Dec 17, 2019)

Having a bit of a déjà-vu here... we already went through something like this in 2017, with member @JFB kindly providing 4 audio files rendered with the M7 and 7th Heaven respectively. Most participants correctly identified the hardware unit for its transparency and ability to envelope the source.

You can read it here, though the samples are no longer available, it might still be of interest to go through the thread.






Software reverbs vs. hardware (continued from Bricasti thread)


here's a thought (and that's all it is)... could it be that hardware devices tend to lend themselves more to tweaking because all the knobs are right there in your face? It is different and using a control surface can help to bridge the gap, but is still isn't the same. If I'm not mistaken, a...




vi-control.net


----------



## chillbot (Dec 17, 2019)

JohnG said:


> you guys are presenting arguments, not experience. "It _can't_ be that great because..." Are you talking yourself into a position, or heatedly defending it without even listening to the unit? Moreover, do you think Bricasti never updates its software or makes any other improvements? Like there's just one preset or something that never gets updated?


This is well said. I love my Bricasti (the sound) so much but can't really compare it, to me it comes down to how you work whether it is faster for you in the box or out of the box. For me hardware is faster, and I like the way it sounds.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 17, 2019)

JohnG said:


> you guys are presenting arguments, not experience. "It _can't_ be that great because..." Are you talking yourself into a position, or heatedly defending it without even listening to the unit? Moreover, do you think Bricasti never updates its software or makes any other improvements? Like there's just one preset or something that never gets updated?



But similarly, if you've already judged the M7 to be best and THE tool to use for high-end mixing, you're all set, satisfied, and not out actively looking for something better.

I've worked with a number of what I considered to be excellent engineers who essentially had their outboard reverb settings superglued in place. Certainly, not everyone operates that way, but there are a LOT of people who arrive at their magic setting. The CH reverb shoot-out video talked about the TC Electronics VSS3 "Large Warm Hall" that's used extensively on film scores. Why does everyone use THAT preset? I think there's an element of fear. Some people want to play it safe by using something that's approved in some manner.

A lot of my skepticism of these sorts of issues is because I've seen the same scenario play out numerous times with different gear and different technologies. A lot of factors can obfuscate things (and studio salesmanship is a big issue). I remember a very similar situation happening back in the day when numerous studios had invested heavily in buying Lexicon 480Ls. Then, Lexicon came out with the 960L, and people were doing A/B shoot-outs with similar preset names. They were both very good units, but people had strong opinions. I had a suspicion that some studio owners were casting shade on the 960L because they simply didn't want to shell out a bunch of money to buy one (or more). Then, we had years of battling over whether analog tape and large format consoles were the only way to get a quality recording (thankfully, that battle is pretty much over).


----------



## Gingerbread (Dec 17, 2019)

JohnG said:


> I'm not clear on why anyone would be "eager" to rebut antagonistic posts by an anonymous writer, whose monitoring could be anything from great to not-great. We don't know anything about you, bruv. You could have golden ears or -- not.


Whoa, wait a second. I haven't been (intentionally) antagonistic, sorry if it came across that way. My suggestion was to see if the _OP_ (not me!) could discern the difference, since he was the one asking if it was "worth it." And I still think that's a worthwhile endeavor.

The reason I must disagree with your position regarding monitors is that the same would apply to ANY and ALL comparisons to everything mentioned here at VI Control, whether between string libraries, brass, reverbs, or anything. Whichever monitors one is using will affect the quality of tone they hear. But that's not a reason to never compare differing products---heck, it's what's done all the time here! And blind tests are always a better way of comparing than non-blind.

I fundamentally believe that objective, scientific approaches such as blind comparisons are the only way to go, even with variables like monitors, audio interfaces, etc. Anything else is totally subjective, which is what this thread has mostly been so far, which limits its usefulness.

(And JohnG, I will add that I'm especially sorry I came across as antagonistic because I've always enjoyed and respected your posts in the many years I've lurked here.)


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 17, 2019)

A well-constructed blind test would be a great way to settle things, but wow, when you get into reverb, there are a gazillion parameters, and slight tweaks could favor one unit over the other. There are also reverb plug-ins that can be operated with such a high degree of precision (even with modern chips) that they need to be rendered off-line.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 17, 2019)

James H said:


> I presume you have seen this before. But linking it for others as it's a good video.




BTW, I thought I saw that video before, but it was a new one. I had previously seen the first one. There's exhibit A right there for plug-in defense.  And, they're not even using what I personally consider to be one of the best reverb plug-ins out there (Galbanum B2).

We're never going to get a chance to do this, but I'm pretty certain that if any of us were sitting in that chair listening to a large number of reverbs, I seriously doubt anyone would be able to deftly pick out any given one, plug-in or hardware.

People will continue to argue about this, but in other forums, people are arguing about power and speaker cables costing thousands and thousands of dollars. I'm becoming more and more convinced that some people can hear price tags.


----------



## Virtuoso (Dec 17, 2019)

JohnG said:


> Moreover, do you think Bricasti never updates its software or makes any other improvements? Like there's just one preset or something that never gets updated?


The M7 came out in 2008. It was updated with v2 algorithms in 2010 via a new hardware chip (it is not software updatable). There has been nothing since then. The v3 update was originally expected in 2017 along with a new M200 lower end multi-effects unit, but has been 'still about a year out' for several years now. I think I read, probably on Gearslutz, that it only currently exists in the form of mathematical models, since the hardware capable of running it does not yet exist.


----------



## Michael Antrum (Dec 17, 2019)

Lee Blaske said:


> I'm becoming more and more convinced that some people can hear price tags.



Very succinctly put.

For your own personal safety, don't go to the gearslutz forum with that - they've bumped people off for less heresy than that.....


----------



## JohnG (Dec 17, 2019)

has even one of those criticising / questioning the Bricasti's value actually used it or had his engineer use it? 

If the answer is, "no," then consider that you're questioning, if not badmouthing a product you haven't tested or used yourself. I would be very cautious doing that, personally. 

WE've all seen breathless reviews of products that we don't care for ourselves after purchasing, but that's not what seems to be on this thread. Instead, it's, "you're fooled by the marketing," when you haven't even tested it yourself. Goofy.


----------



## tmhuud (Dec 17, 2019)

JohnG said:


> has even one of those criticising / questioning the Bricasti's value actually used it or had his engineer use it?
> 
> If the answer is, "no," then consider that you're questioning, if not badmouthing a product you haven't tested or used yourself. I would be very cautious doing that, personally.
> 
> WE've all seen breathless reviews of products that we don't care for ourselves after purchasing, but that's not what seems to be on this thread. Instead, it's, "you're fooled by the marketing," when you haven't even tested it yourself. Goofy.



This is so well said. I wish this would carry across to ALL of the posts in this forum. How many people criticize products and they don't even own or use them? If I had a dollar for every post that starts with someone asking a legitimate question about a product and then the second post is some chuckle head that comes back with "Well, I don't actually HAVE that product, but this is what I think...."


----------



## tmhuud (Dec 17, 2019)

JohnG said:


> My engineer just used it on a number of very exposed tracks and the thing sounds great; if you don't think it's worth it then that's up to you.



Same here. My mixing guy SOLD me on the Bricasti without even trying. Did it replace HIM? Hell no. But if I cant afford him on something on a 2 minute ditty I use it because IT SOUNDS GREAT. I can HEAR the difference. I don't care if no one else can. I have to sell ME on my track before I sell my client. My experience has nothing to do with what the OP may find out. He may buy it, not hear a difference, or it may slow him down because it changes his work flow, etc but if he HAS the money then why the hell not? Or, he'll want more of them. And if you do get one, "Welcome to the Bricasti family!".


----------



## SBK (Dec 18, 2019)

before anything else, try Metaplugin or similar host that does oversampling to all your plugins! you will be amazed how much more high quality the reverb plugins sound with x4 oversampling, I wish there was more but currently Metaplugin does x2 and x4


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 18, 2019)

JohnG said:


> has even one of those criticising / questioning the Bricasti's value actually used it or had his engineer use it?
> 
> If the answer is, "no," then consider that you're questioning, if not badmouthing a product you haven't tested or used yourself. I would be very cautious doing that, personally.



Criticizing a product and questioning its value are two completely different things. I have not said, nor will I say that the Bricasti M7 is not a good sounding reverb. I've been involved in sessions where it's been used, and it's good. But it does come down to how it compares to other products. The familiar theme in a thread like this is "if you're doing high end work, and you care about the end product, then you WILL use the expensive hardware Bricasti." That's what I don't accept. 

As I mentioned earlier, I can appreciate the craftsmanship that goes into making an extremely expensive Rolex. I trust that that extremely expensive Rolex keeps flawless time. I can appreciate that the person who possesses that Rolex has immense pride of ownership and wants the world to see that he/she owns it. But, that doesn't make me jump to the conclusion that the person with the Rolex carries more accurate time. And, I don't need to go out and buy that Rolex myself before I'm allowed to come to that conclusion.

The SA video was very revealing. Extremely low cost and free plug-ins beating high-end hardware units (including the Bricasti M7). It was not a case of any of the contestants sounding bad. CH owns both the M7 and 6000, so he has no vested interest in the plug-in outperforming the hardware so he won't feel the need to buy one. Just a case of in an A/B situation, they liked one a little better than the other. And even there, a subtle parameter tweak might have changed the outcome. 

I have not yet seen anyone set up a plausible blind test that clearly and reliably establishes any given piece of reverb software/hardware as a victor. If you know of a test like that, point me to it. Until I see a test that sways me, I'm going to continue to assume that we are now in the land of very subtle differences with these products, and that many (if not most) of them are totally worthy of being used on work of any level of importance without compromise or need for apology.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 18, 2019)

tmhuud said:


> And if you do get one, "Welcome to the Bricasti family!".



Wow, there's even a tribal component to this.


----------



## Braveheart (Dec 18, 2019)

Lee Blaske said:


> Wow, there's even a tribal component to this.


Yes, there's a marketing pride for flashing after burning so much money.


----------



## robgb (Dec 18, 2019)

JohnG said:


> has even one of those criticising / questioning the Bricasti's value actually used it or had his engineer use it?


I've been recording at home and in studios for over forty years. I have used and abused every single piece of gear you can think of. The only thing that remains a holdover from the analog days in terms of value are some of the microphones I've used. The mixing board is gone. The hardware compressors, reverbs, EQ units, and delays are all gathering dust in my garage. 

The Bricasti is a beautiful sounding unit, no doubt about it. But we are so far advanced now with software reverbs (and other fx) that there is absolutely no practical reason to spend $4K other than bragging rights. OR, if you work in a high end studio and you're trying to impress clients because—again—bragging rights.

No one will ever deny there are differences between the hardware and software units, but the differences are slight. And the software units make up for any vague deficiencies in sound by being extremely easy to use and deal with in your DAW. As I said, Andrew Scheps—who is no slouch as an engineer—mixes completely in the box, because he knows that the outboard gear is no longer necessary. Many other engineers have begun to follow his lead.

If the Bricasti were a couple hundred bucks, I'd say go for it. But $4K? Ridiculous.


----------



## robgb (Dec 18, 2019)

For anyone interested, here's a test of the Bricasti using an analog synth:



And on vocals:


----------



## apollinaire (Dec 18, 2019)

robgb said:


> As I said, Andrew Scheps—who is no slouch as an engineer—mixes completely in the box, because he knows that the outboard gear is no longer necessary.



And, he was a guy that was using 100% analog outboard (not even hybrid mixing) for all his mixing prior to going 100% ITB. It's really a sign of the times.


----------



## quantum7 (Dec 18, 2019)

I really should have put in the original thread post that I wanted to hear from people who have actually used a Bricasti. I own nearly 20K in hardware synths and I'm guessing some would say I'm stupid for spending that money since "software is just as good". Owning the actual hardware, being able to touch it and interact with it, being able to see it everyday in my home studio is SOOOOO much more gratifying than continually day after day starring at a PC and doing everything from a mouse. I love hardware! Software is also awesome, and it saves me a lot of time....but I don't find it particularly fun to use everyday. I use software for commercial projects that need to be done in a hurry, but when I am writing and playing just for ME, well then hardware is a luxury that I am blessed to own. Going to into my home studio everyday with my glorious hardware is just heaven on Earth.....which inspires me and makes me want to spend even more time in there creating.


----------



## bvaughn0402 (Dec 18, 2019)

Cool setup!

I can understand what you mean by this. I guess, my bias, would be to go to an older plate reverb, or tape reverb/delay, because then it really colors the sound and I can play with it. 

This reverb is more like a digital plugin, but in rack form (to me). 

I guess ... to me ... it is the difference in owning an actual Mellotron ... vs the digital Mellotron ... vs the plugin Mellotrons. I can't wrap my mind around a digital Mellotron vs plugin Mellotrons (unless I was playing live). But an actual Mellotron ... yeah, I'd so be buying that.


----------



## Jdiggity1 (Dec 18, 2019)

quantum7 said:


> I really should have put in the original thread post that I wanted to hear from people who have actually used a Bricasti. I own nearly 20K in hardware synths and I'm guessing some would say I'm stupid for spending that money since "software is just as good". Owning the actual hardware, being able to touch it and interact with it, being able to see it everyday in my home studio is SOOOOO much more gratifying than continually day after day starring at a PC and doing everything from a mouse. I love hardware! Software is also awesome, and it saves me a lot of time....but I don't find it particularly fun to use everyday. I use software for commercial projects that need to be done in a hurry, but when I am writing and playing just for ME, well then hardware is a luxury that I am blessed to own. Going to into my home studio everyday with my glorious hardware is just heaven on Earth.....which inspires me and makes me want to spend even more time in there creating.


Do you have any stems or material you'd like sent through an M7? I can make some *blind tests* using the hardware and software equivalents, I'm just not sure what to run through them.


----------



## Jack Weaver (Dec 18, 2019)

robgb said:


> As I said, Andrew Scheps—who is no slouch as an engineer—mixes completely in the box, because he knows that the outboard gear is no longer necessary. Many other engineers have begun to follow his lead.


Alan Meyerson - himself no slouch as an engineer either - mixes mostly in the box but uses 6 Bricasti m7's. He apparently considers some outboard gear as necessary. 

Please feel free to follow or lead as you wish. However, I would guess that more people on this forum would choose to mix in the style of Alan Meyerson other than Andrew Scheps simply because of the different styles of music they tend to be involved with. 

.


----------



## robgb (Dec 18, 2019)

Jack Weaver said:


> Alan Meyerson - himself no slouch as an engineer either - mixes mostly in the box but uses 6 Bricasti m7's. He apparently considers some outboard gear as necessary.


Meyerson has that luxury. But his ability to buy and mix with six units doesn't negate the fact that the Bricasti is way overpriced in comparison to a nearly equal (or to most ears equal) plugin. Clearly the Bricasti is aimed at the same people who are frothing at the mouth over the new Mac Pro. A vastly higher cost, however, does not equal vastly superior performance.


----------



## Michael Antrum (Dec 18, 2019)

There are regularly threads like this on Gearslutz - about the difference between inexpensive software plugins, and expensive hardware, and there are many in both camps - and these discussions often get very heated.

It's impossible to argue against the 'inspirational' aspect of using hardware - I totally accept that using a wonderful piece of hardware can be a much superior experience, and users will often feel far more open to experimentation when using hardware - Human beings are tactile creatures and twiddling physical knobs etc is a often far superior experience that lends itself to more experimentation.

But whenever these threads continue, they often end up with someone suggesting a 'blind listening test', and its interesting to see how quickly advocates of expensive hardware become reluctant to participate in these blind tests. Ultimately it's the sound that is the final product, and if you cannot tell by which method the reverb is generated, then it's difficult to argue the difference between a $4k hardware unit against a $100 plugin.

But, of course, I'm a complete hypocrite, because on my wrist is a £ 3k Omega Seamaster, rather than a £10 quartz watch - which will tell the time more accurately and more reliably.....And I'm sure as hell keeping the Omega.

So if you want a Bricasti, I say fill your boots - you only live once. You an always sell it on if it doesn't live up to your expectations.

(whoever said it was never a good idea to meet your heroes ? I've never bought a DX7 for that reason, although I've always wanted one since I first heard one as a kid).

Several years ago, my father nearly died of a heart attack, and thank goodness he survived with no real ill effects. We discussed it after he'd recovered, and he told me something that has stuck in my mind ever since.

He told me that when he was laid on the trolley, in absolute agony thinking he was going to leave this life, that it was not the things he did that he regretted, but all the things he hadn't done.

Made me think a bit that did.....


----------



## NoamL (Dec 18, 2019)

robgb said:


> Meyerson has that luxury. But his ability to buy and mix with six units doesn't negate the fact that the Bricasti is way overpriced in comparison to a nearly equal (or to most ears equal) plugin. Clearly the Bricasti is aimed at the same people who are frothing at the mouth over the new Mac Pro. A vastly higher cost, however, does not equal vastly superior performance.



It's true that the last 10% of performance and perfection costs disproportionately higher. That'll be true in anything. The reason why people in that position pay more is because everything is more competitive and demanding at that level too. Everything they deliver has to be bang spot on perfect. It's going into a $250 million dollar film.

In more ordinary working situations it seems to me that the extra advantage (if it exists) is not worth the workflow difficulties.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 18, 2019)

NoamL said:


> It's true that the last 10% of performance and perfection costs disproportionately higher. That'll be true in anything.



That might have been true historically for some things, but that's no longer true regarding performance in the digital age. For instance, say I have one Mac Pro, but then I wish to double my DAW studio's power and capability (for instance, by using VEP on a second computer). So, I buy a second Mac Pro and network it. That's twice the power, and the second 50% of performance cost me the same as the first 50%. These days, a lot of things are simply scalable.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 18, 2019)

NoamL said:


> The reason why people in that position pay more is because everything is more competitive and demanding at that level too. Everything they deliver has to be bang spot on perfect. It's going into a $250 million dollar film.



I would accept that if it has been incontrovertibly proven that something actually IS better. I have not seen that. I've only seen highly subjective opinions.


----------



## JohnG (Dec 18, 2019)

Rob never likes anything expensive, lol

@quantum7 I totally hear you! I have a pretty big Steinway. Why??? Whenever I'm stuck I can play a few notes on it and it sounds absolutely glorious. Even a few chords and suddenly it's music, not a computer.

Is it a "waste?" Who's to say?

I recorded a large orchestra in London this summer with top session players. Was it worth the enormous amount to do it there instead of, say, in Canada or Nashville? But they were god-like.

Arguably, it's not worth it to spend one's life trying to make music, at least in "expected value" terms. It's nuts, but here we all are.

The Bricasti took our singer's vocals and the guitar, and made them sound absolutely magic. She does have a good voice and the guitar player is justifiably famous, but with that reverb -- really nice. Didn't try to "beat" it with an ITB solution so really can't compare.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 18, 2019)

quantum7 said:


> I really should have put in the original thread post that I wanted to hear from people who have actually used a Bricasti. I own nearly 20K in hardware synths and I'm guessing some would say I'm stupid for spending that money since "software is just as good". Owning the actual hardware, being able to touch it and interact with it, being able to see it everyday in my home studio is SOOOOO much more gratifying than continually day after day starring at a PC and doing everything from a mouse. I love hardware! Software is also awesome, and it saves me a lot of time....but I don't find it particularly fun to use everyday. I use software for commercial projects that need to be done in a hurry, but when I am writing and playing just for ME, well then hardware is a luxury that I am blessed to own. Going to into my home studio everyday with my glorious hardware is just heaven on Earth.....which inspires me and makes me want to spend even more time in there creating.



I suppose it could be argued that that money could go toward feeding starving people, but that argument aside, if you love it, it gives you pleasure, and it inspires you, it's TOTALLY worth it for you.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Dec 18, 2019)

JohnG said:


> Didn't try to "beat" it with an ITB solution so really can't compare.



Can you come up with something just as good with a less expensive reverb, whether outboard or onboard?

That's the question for project studio use (as opposed to a scoring stage with a billion dollar board, etc.), and my hunch is that the answer is probably yes.

But that demo robgb posted above with the buzzy synth run through it sure sounds good. No sparklies, no artificial metallic stuff, no brittle sound - just really, really nice reverb.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 18, 2019)

JohnG said:


> Is it a "waste?" Who's to say?



Through an interesting fluke, I happen to own three Selmer Paris Series 22 low Eb alto clarinets. Do I need them?


----------



## Virtuoso (Dec 18, 2019)

I'll just point out that the only reason we have the excellent Seventh Heaven plugin is because we first had the excellent Bricasti M7. The plugin sounds close to the hardware because the designer gave his approval and assistance to the project, which is pretty generous in my opinion.

No need for all the hostility - it's just a piece of equipment. Do people get this wound up over Hilti power tools?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Dec 18, 2019)

Try a buzzy sawtooth synth through a Lexicon plate from a PCM 91 or software equivalent.

It's pretty damn good too.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Dec 18, 2019)

Virtuoso said:


> Do people get this wound up over Hilti power tools?



Yes! I hadn't heard of them, but $450 for an impact driver - a brute force tool, nothing subtle like a reverb - is insane.

I'm terribly wound up, jumping up and down maniacally.


----------



## robgb (Dec 18, 2019)

JohnG said:


> Rob never likes anything expensive, lol


That's only partly true. If the item is actually worth the money, I'll spend it. I once dropped three grand on a Yamaha sequencer—back in the eighties—which is about seven grand by today's standards. And it was well worth it to me at the time. I just don't see the value here.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Dec 18, 2019)

robgb said:


> I once dropped three grand on a Yamaha sequencer



QX-1?


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 18, 2019)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Try a buzzy sawtooth synth through a Lexicon plate from a PCM 91 or software equivalent.
> 
> It's pretty damn good too.



Especially if you upgrade the PCM 91 with a CT-1 Ultimate Reference Helix Power Cord... 

https://www.tweekgeek.com/ct-1-ultimate-reference-helix-power-cord/?sku=&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI7fe1_KPA5gIVEdvACh0NvAJrEAQYASABEgL42fD_BwE


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Dec 18, 2019)

Lee Blaske said:


> Especially if you upgrade the PCM 91 with a CT-1 Ultimate Reference Helix Power Cord...



That's the one I use on my impact driver.

I heartily endorse that one for reverb too. It's hellishly difficult finding a power cord I can stand to listen to.


----------



## Peter Williams (Dec 18, 2019)

If you have the money and you love the sound, a Bricasti will make you happy and sound great. As a hobbyist retiree, I'm happy with the cheap options, especially products like Valhalla Room. If you have a true recording studio and you are working for clients, some high end hardware can make you more competitive. You may need to wave around names like Bricasti, Manley and Rupert Neve to impress the kids and show that you have the very best hardware. Otherwise, stay within your budget and enjoy the process, along with the affordable digital processors.


----------



## robgb (Dec 18, 2019)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> QX-1?


Yep.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Dec 18, 2019)

robgb said:


> Yep.



Tha was a *serious* sequencer back in the day.

I started with a QX-7 then graduated to a QX-5 (which was a fantastic sequencer).


----------



## chimuelo (Dec 18, 2019)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Tha was a *serious* sequencer back in the day.
> 
> I started with a QX-7 then graduated to a QX-5 (which was a fantastic sequencer).



I made so much money live with a QX-1, and others buying my covers from ads in the back of Keyboard Mag, not to mention 4 other groups working the strip. Brought mine back from Osaka ^ months before they were in West Hollywood or Manny’s in NYC.

I had erased all of the white overlay by 1990, and in 2003 IIRC the power cord needed replacement. Sold it for 100 bucks. They don’t make gear like that anymore.

And a Bricasti will be bought by me finally because of the new FPGA (I might be wrong) I heard is required for their upcoming powerhouse that will be a Model 7 on steroids.
Only reason I didn’t buy one is I’m still happy with my PCM70 and TC units.
But recently starting recording with software because I can use 96k like on ReLabs ancient DSP version of a PCM that’s really good, but not as editable as the hardware.

Cant wait for AES 2020.
If an FPGA must be used to harness the necessary horsepower I bet it’s Intel’s 44 billion transistor chip, worlds largest.

I love the Model 7 so much I hate anyone who owns it.


----------



## bvaughn0402 (Dec 18, 2019)

If someone wants to loan or let me have their M7 I would love to be proven wrong. 😀


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 18, 2019)

Peter Williams said:


> If you have the money and you love the sound, a Bricasti will make you happy and sound great. As a hobbyist retiree, I'm happy with the cheap options, especially products like Valhalla Room. If you have a true recording studio and you are working for clients, some high end hardware can make you more competitive. You may need to wave around names like Bricasti, Manley and Rupert Neve to impress the kids and show that you have the very best hardware. Otherwise, stay within your budget and enjoy the process, along with the affordable digital processors.



Interestingly, being well equipped with external devices is more common now with project studios open for outside business. In the glory days of big studios, it was more common for studios to be somewhat bare-bones when it came to outboard gear, and all the fancy stuff would be an extra add-on rental. Clients would specify what they needed, and it would be brought in. What the studio had on hand wouldn't be a major determining factor. Labels had big budgets, and there was no need to give away things for which you could charge.


----------



## tmhuud (Dec 18, 2019)

Lee Blaske said:


> Wow, there's even a tribal component to this.



Yep, We all gather once a year and dance around the fire naked. Its great fun.


----------



## chimuelo (Dec 18, 2019)

tmhuud said:


> Yep, We all gather once a year and dance around the fire naked. Its great fun.



That’s the beauty of Rain Dances, you dance until it Rains and everybody says see I told you he was good....


----------



## tmhuud (Dec 19, 2019)

chimuelo said:


> I love the Model 7 so much I hate anyone who owns it.



I would never have guessed.


----------



## kgdrum (Dec 19, 2019)

Have any of you considered part of what might help make the M7 sound so good is the power supply and output circuits?
This might not make sense to some people here but a good power supply is a commonly overlooked component that affects the sound of gear.
Good amps,preamps always have great power supply’s why not a 1st class hardware reverb?The M7 weighs 9 pounds,I suspect part of that weight involves a nice power supply,circuitry, wiring etc..........
I don’t have a M7 and have never opened one up but I suspect it has wiring not printed circuit boards,a great piece of gear is not just the chip it’s also the power,supply, transformers,wiring etc..........


----------



## Braveheart (Dec 19, 2019)

You should check all the free reverbs offered right now. Native Instruments, Arturia, just in case you get what you want for free. But I know it's less glamourous, "Welcome in the Arturia family for free".


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Dec 19, 2019)

Sure, great components can make a definite difference, but my PC weighs at least 30 pounds and has really good components in it. And the metal case alone is a big part of it.


----------



## smoothielova (Dec 19, 2019)

I use my Bricasti M7 on everything I do. Software doesn't even come close.


----------



## kgdrum (Dec 19, 2019)

vitocorleone123 said:


> Sure, great components can make a definite difference, but my PC weighs at least 30 pounds and has really good components in it. And the metal case alone is a big part of it.




I’m not an electrical engineer but as I understand it computers use a switching power supply and quality outboard gear will generally use a linear power supply which offers less distortion,noise etc.....,,a switching power is more efficient & has a smaller footprint but can introduce audio artifacts that a good quality linear power supply will avoid.


----------



## Henu (Dec 19, 2019)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> I started with a QX-7



I started with QY-10, beat that! :D


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 19, 2019)

kgdrum said:


> Have any of you considered part of what might help make the M7 sound so good is the power supply and output circuits?
> This might not make sense to some people here but a good power supply is a commonly overlooked component that affects the sound of gear.
> Good amps,preamps always have great power supply’s why not a 1st class hardware reverb?The M7 weighs 9 pounds,I suspect part of that weight involves a nice power supply,circuitry, wiring etc..........
> I don’t have a M7 and have never opened one up but I suspect it has wiring not printed circuit boards,a great piece of gear is not just the chip it’s also the power,supply, transformers,wiring etc..........



I would think that would only make a difference (and probably a subtle difference, if any) if you were getting the signal in via A/D and back out via D/A. If you were going in and out via AES/EBU, I wouldn't expect much difference.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 19, 2019)

kgdrum said:


> I’m not an electrical engineer but as I understand it computers use a switching power supply and quality outboard gear will generally use a direct power supply which offers less distortion,noise etc.....,,a switching power is more efficient & has a smaller footprint but can introduce audio artifacts that a good quality linear power supply will avoid.



But if you were staying ITB, and rendering your final output via bounce to disk, where would the artifacts have a chance of being introduced in your final product? (I would assume any A/D on the front end of your DAW would have its own power supply).


----------



## quantum7 (Dec 19, 2019)

JohnG said:


> Rob never likes anything expensive, lol
> 
> @quantum7 I totally hear you! I have a pretty big Steinway. Why??? Whenever I'm stuck I can play a few notes on it and it sounds absolutely glorious. Even a few chords and suddenly it's music, not a computer.
> 
> Is it a "waste?" Who's to say?



Steinway- wow, I do envy that! We have a Kawai Grand in our music room downstairs. I'd have to sell everything in my synth studio though to upgrade to a $100k+ Steinway.....maybe in 20 years when I'm 70 I'll be too old and senile to mess with my electronics anymore, then I will get my Steiny. Our neighbors across the street recently bought a $150k Steinway, and after playing it, it is definitely worth EVERY penny. An instrument or musical equipment that inspires is priceless IMO.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 19, 2019)

quantum7 said:


> Steinway- wow, I do envy that! We have a Kawai Grand in our music room downstairs. I'd have to sell everything in my synth studio though to upgrade to a $100k+ Steinway.....maybe in 20 years when I'm 70 I'll be to old and senile to mess with my electronics anymore, then I will get my Steiny. Our neighbors across the street recently bought a $150k Steinway, and after playing it, it is definitely worth EVERY penny. An instrument or musical equipment that inspires is priceless IMO.



Grand pianos are another odd commodity these days. That's an area where I definitely have made a significant investment. In days gone by, having a fantastic piano helped sell a studio. I have a flawless Yamaha CFIII 9' concert grand (retrofitted with MIDI send), and fantastic mics and pres to record it. It's a great sounding piano. But nowadays, with the rapid development of piano VIs, people want to select from a whole range of different pianos with different sounds. You'd need to own and maintain a whole bunch of instruments to cover all the expected bases. Using only one sound would be limiting.


----------



## sostenuto (Dec 19, 2019)

_*MAINTAIN * _is definitely a major consideration !  
Decades with Mason Hamlin _ then Grotrian Concert 223 taught notable $$ lessons re. tuning & regulation. 
Recently saw (TV) Shigeru Kawai SK-EX in use by Yoshiki Live at Carnegie Hall  __ ~ $200,000 + ??
Once auditioned several fine Kawai grands, but the SK-EX is quite impressive.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Dec 19, 2019)

Yeah, I'll take a good sampled piano over a lousy real grand that isn't maintained well any day, even when it's exposed.

Somewhere I have a recording of a small film I scored in the 80s - before good sampled pianos - to demonstrate why. Two winds and cello sounded amazing, the piano sounded like arse. All outstanding musicians.

They had a DIY plate reverb in that studio, by the way, I believe a copy of the AMT. It sounded awesome.

But a lot of digital reverbs have been able to do good plate emulations for years.


----------



## Pianolando (Dec 19, 2019)

Get Seventh heaven Pro. Then you’ll get something extremely close to the Bricasti, almost unlimitly scalable and with a better interface for less than 1/10 of the price of the hardware.

I do love hardware stuff, own analog synths, 2 Rhodes, a clavinet and a 1964 Wurlitzer. But this is not a vintage analog instrument or even a tube compressor. It’s digital code in a box with a small interface and I don’t think it can be compared with a beautiful Steinway or analog synths which gives an extremely gratifying hands on experience.

This specific code is written by a true genius and nothing sounds exactly like it so it definitely has it’s worth and use, but still, the ITB alternatives are extremely good these days, even if you want something that sounds more or less exacly like a bricasti.
I read a good explanation ages ago why the shark processors in the bricasti does things even the modern CPU’s cannot do, but I cannot for the life of it explain what that is or really understand it, but I do trust the people explaining it.
I can highly recommend Exponential audios reverbs R4+Nimbus plus Seveth heaven as said. Those verbs are also written by certified geniuses.


----------



## chimuelo (Dec 19, 2019)

kgdrum said:


> Have any of you considered part of what might help make the M7 sound so good is the power supply and output circuits?
> This might not make sense to some people here but a good power supply is a commonly overlooked component that affects the sound of gear.
> Good amps,preamps always have great power supply’s why not a 1st class hardware reverb?The M7 weighs 9 pounds,I suspect part of that weight involves a nice power supply,circuitry, wiring etc..........
> I don’t have a M7 and have never opened one up but I suspect it has wiring not printed circuit boards,a great piece of gear is not just the chip it’s also the power,supply, transformers,wiring etc..........



Very True.
I had Bellari RP562’s modded with Analog Devices OpAmps, RCA Command Line Tubes (NOS/NIB 1956 from Ammo Bunkers) and new Power Supplies from Voodoo Labs.
I already liked the sound but on 100% soak I didn’t like the artifacts so when they came back from the Mods the difference was shocking, but it was also the proper matched tubes and OpAmps too, but the guy was so excited to see two mint condition RPs I told him give them everything he envisioned.
100% soak with only a change in the grease added.
I used one for my FPGA Based Hammond B3 Module, and the other on an AUX in the FOH which was magical.
Wouldnt be able to do that with the original consumer grade PSU.

Bricasti gear is ALL using the very best components.
Those pricey Converters are pretty impressive, would love to see those in action.


----------



## chimuelo (Dec 19, 2019)

Pianolando said:


> Get Seventh heaven Pro. Then you’ll get something extremely close to the Bricasti, almost unlimitly scalable and with a better interface for less than 1/10 of the price of the hardware.
> 
> I do love hardware stuff, own analog synths, 2 Rhodes, a clavinet and a 1964 Wurlitzer. But this is not a vintage analog instrument or even a tube compressor. It’s digital code in a box with a small interface and I don’t think it can be compared with a beautiful Steinway or analog synths which gives an extremely gratifying hands on experience.
> 
> ...



My hardware Solaris synth uses 6 x ADSP 21369s, my Audio interface uses 18 SHARC DSPs, My Strymon Pedals also use SHARC DSPs.
Ive been convinced for years of their audio prowess.


----------



## jononotbono (Dec 19, 2019)

Virtuoso said:


> Do people get this wound up over Hilti power tools?



Of course. Why would anybody use that shit.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Dec 19, 2019)

I believe that Bricasti gear is very overpriced. Especially considering that they also sell hifi gear (go look at those prices...) and I know a reasonable amount about what goes into that and how companies tend to price those things).

Let's assume that they're using stellar A/D and D/A in the 7M with an amazing power supply, clocking, and output circuits. OK, so then how much would a box with only digital I/O cost? If those parts are really amazing, then for a digital only unit you definitely shouldn't pay more than $1000. For under $1000 I'd certainly consider getting one. Or three.

Their cheapest DAC is $5500. This is both A/D and D/A plus the actual DSP circuits. Are you saying that the parts in the 7M are god-awful then? What are you really paying for? The converters? The DSP with lousy converters? Average quality everything?


----------



## jononotbono (Dec 19, 2019)

I'm not entirely sure why people would think a Blind test would be worth doing?

I mean, what are people using to monitor music with? What monitors? Little KRK Shit boxes or $500k of PMC? Have you actually got proper Bass management or using some kind of unmatched sub without evening knowing what a crossover is? What are your Monitor Amps? Behringher? or $35k Mark Levinsons (for 1 mono amp)? What are your rooms like? Professionally built or a piss stained mattress on the back wall that you call a "bass trap" and some foam tiles scattered about? What interfaces and AD/DA conversion do you use? Lavry Blues? Prism? Or an Audient? What headphones? The usual suspects or something over $1k? What headphone Preamp?

I'm in no way having a dig at people using cheap equipment or people using the most expensive gear on the planet. It's a wonderful time to be alive and so much cheap stuff is good... but it doesn't mean it's good. There's also a lot of ridiculousness that comes with the High End world.

Then... what is your hearing like? Are you actually any good, as in, do you actually have a pair of ears? Do you have world class hearing like all mixing and mastering professionals have and constantly use on every hit record they work on?

Then... What music is going to be run through this blind test? Is it great music (subjective I know but something with great writing/Structure/Harmony/Arrangement), mixed by a professional with serious clout in the business and they will use the Bricasti on various elements throughout the mixing process resulting in a mix their reputations are known for? And then you could do another mix but with a Software Reverb to A/B the two. Or is it going to be some slapped together, half arsed bit of sonic dog shit, made completely from Sample libraries lacking in dynamics and devoid of any quality that is necessary to make sample libraries sing (as best as they can) that inevitably has T-Racks or Ozone ramming the volume into a Sausage shaped Waveform and then run that through a Bricasti? And then through a software reverb? Shit in, Shit out.

I'm just curious why a blind test would be a good idea with so many uncontrollable variables and so many skill levels (ranging from basically nothing to Grammy/Oscar award winning/whatever). The results are confounded before a test is even done. There will be one guaranteed absolute from doing a blind test. Everyone that hasn't ever used a Bricasti will still be saying, "I've never used one but I know they aren't worth the money". 

Anyway, I'm sure what I've written will offend someone. Good. You're an idiot.


----------



## robgb (Dec 19, 2019)

smoothielova said:


> I use my Bricasti M7 on everything I do. Software doesn't even come close.


See, I'd probably say the same thing if I'd dropped $4K. Otherwise how could I justify the expense? I'm not saying that's what you're doing, of course. I just know my own nature.


----------



## smoothielova (Dec 19, 2019)

robgb said:


> See, I'd probably say the same thing if I'd dropped $4K. Otherwise how could I justify the expense? I'm not saying that's what you're doing, of course. I just know my own nature.


You justify the expense by getting the best reverb on the planet that makes your music come to life.  I thought the same thing. After hearing so many scores and watching live mixing videos with guys using it like Alan Meyerson, it was one of the best desicions I have ever made. It really is an ESSENTIAL part of the sound I want. You justify it by how specific you are about the sound you want and the tools it will take to achieve that sound.


----------



## Gingerbread (Dec 19, 2019)

jononotbono said:


> I'm not entirely sure why people would think a Blind test would be worth doing?
> 
> I mean, what are people using to monitor music with? What monitors? Little KRK Shit boxes or $500k of PMC? Have you actually got proper Bass management or using some kind of unmatched sub without evening knowing what a crossover is? What are your Monitor Amps? Behringher? or $35k Mark Levinsons (for 1 mono amp)? What are your rooms like? Professionally built or a piss stained mattress on the back wall that you call a "bass trap" and some foam tiles scattered about? What interfaces and AD/DA conversion do you use? Lavry Blues? Prism? Or an Audient? What headphones? The usual suspects or something over $1k? What headphone Preamp?


So you're saying that no blind A/B tests should be done on VI Control comparing the sound or tone of string libraries, or brass libraries, because people have different monitors and studio setups? What's the difference, given that audio comparisons are what's done on VI Control every day for everything else? Somehow the Bricasti is the only thing exempted from such scrutiny? Why exactly is that?

You ask what audio should be used? I'm sure _somebody_ has a good quality, uncompressed, isolated vocal track that can used for such a test. Why make a straightforward blind test seem more difficult than it is?

Having an objective blind test, even with the variables, would be far more useful to any serious prospective buyer of a Bricasti, than the voodoo, tribalism, and religious dogma that's been substituted for legitimate inquiry. I'd rather be the "idiot" advocating an objective, scientific approach which is equally fair to all sides, than the idiot using rain dances, mysticism, and namecalling.

I can't help but conclude that some are truly _scared_ of a blind test. Only they can explain why.


----------



## tmhuud (Dec 19, 2019)

Gingerbread said:


> What audio should be used?



Your EARS bro. Find someone local who has one? Rent one? The rest of your post is hyperbole.


----------



## kgdrum (Dec 19, 2019)

Gingerbread said:


> So you're saying that no comparisons should be done on VI Control comparing the sound or tone of string libraries, or brass libraries, because people have different monitors and studio setups? What's the difference, given that audio comparisons are what's done on VI Control every day for everything else? Somehow the Bricasti is the only thing exempted from such scrutiny? Why exactly is that?
> 
> 
> Having an objective blind test, even with the variables, would be far more useful to any serious prospective buyer of a Bricasti, than the voodoo, tribalism, and religious dogma that's been substituted for legitimate inquiry. I'd rather be the "idiot" advocating an objective, scientific approach which is equally fair to all sides, than the idiot using rain dances, mysticism, and namecalling.
> ...




I think what Jono and others are trying to say is with all of the variables the premise of an objective scientific blind test is not realistic.Everyone would be listening on different systems ,in different rooms with different ears and bias,there’s nothing objective or scientific that can be concluded under these type of circumstances.


----------



## Gingerbread (Dec 19, 2019)

kgdrum said:


> I think what Jono and others are trying to say is with all of the variables the premise of an objective scientific blind test is not realistic.Everyone would be listening on different systems ,in different rooms with different ears and bias,there’s nothing objective or scientific that can be concluded under these type of circumstances.


I understand that's what he's saying. I reject the premise, because the _only thing_ being tested in such a blind test is simply whether the OP can consistently distinguish the real M7 from the emulation---NOT whether one is _better_ than the other.

Think about it: if there are six different A/B audio examples, and the OP (using _his own_ monitors and studio setup!) can correctly identify more than 3 of the real Bricasti clips, then he's well justified in buying it instead of the emulation. If he can't, then well....


----------



## jononotbono (Dec 19, 2019)

Gingerbread said:


> I reject the premise, because the _only thing_ being tested in such a blind test is simply whether the OP can consistently distinguish the real M7 from the emulation---NOT whether one is _better_ than the other.



Hey man, there are plenty of people that can't distinguish between a Thai Lady Boy and a Lady. And neither (apparently) is better than the other. Just different.

And as for my "Idiot" comment... Just a bit of fun. I haven't called anyone names. It's in the eye of the beholder to decide to give one's self a title. I'm English. What do you expect? You new around these parts? We're all friends here.


----------



## robgb (Dec 19, 2019)

smoothielova said:


> You justify the expense by getting the best reverb on the planet that makes your music come to life.


Yes, I've often wondered how all the geniuses who came before us managed to make their music come to life without the benefit of the Bricasti. I also wonder how all the engineers today who work completely in the box manage to do it, too. We should contact them and tell them how lifeless their music is.


----------



## smoothielova (Dec 19, 2019)

robgb said:


> Yes, I've often wondered how all the geniuses who came before us managed to make their music come to life without the benefit of the Bricasti. I also wonder how all the engineers today who work completely in the box manage to do it, too. We should contact them and tell them how lifeless their music is.


I hope you know I was joking. :D Of course you can have a great mix without it. It all really comes down to what you want in your secret sauce. That is it really.


----------



## Gingerbread (Dec 19, 2019)

jononotbono said:


> Hey man, there are plenty of people that can't distinguish between a Thai Lady Boy and a Lady. And neither (apparently) is better than the other. Just different.


Crap, I chose my Thai lady in a blind test, so now I'm not sure....

It's all good, Jono. People should get whatever makes them feel like making more music. I'm sure I'll love my Bricasti when I win the lottery


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 19, 2019)

robgb said:


> See, I'd probably say the same thing if I'd dropped $4K. Otherwise how could I justify the expense? I'm not saying that's what you're doing, of course. I just know my own nature.



If you know what you're evaluating (or think you know what you're evaluating) I really think your verdict will be clouded by your preconceptions. That's why I think that Spitfire Audio test (as imprecise as it was) was pretty interesting. I'll bet CH didn't sell his TC Electronics 6000, or his Bricasti after they didn't come out on top. At the very least, it's still cool to have those remotes glowing in your workspace. 

If you're not dealing with a blind test, it can often take quite a bit to get past your preconceptions. Case in point... Many years ago, I was with my brother and we were watching a 4th of July fireworks show over the Mississippi River in St. Cloud, MN. He was drinking a can of Bubble Up. While he wasn't looking, I dumped out his can of Bubble Up and refilled it with river water. It took him several drinks from that can before he realized something wrong. And, once he did realize something was wrong, he took another drink from the can to confirm it. 

I guess I've just grown jaded about a lot of audiophile comparisons, and people speaking hyperbolically about the quality of a given item (like an expensive power/speaker cable) when they know that's what they're listening to.

If it takes a famous mastering engineer with a world class sound system to be able to tell the difference, should we even care? Is the famous mastering engineer going to be willing to take a blind test? And what if our senses are just different? There's no way I can get into another person's brain and hear what they're hearing.

Also, is a *difference* always better? For the sake of argument, I think a person could put a pejorative spin on any difference. Say the reverb you're rooting for is a little brighter. That could be good if you liked a brighter sound, or someone could pronounce that it sounds "hyped." Can't a difference just be a difference (especially on equipment that has a huge number of parameters that can be adjusted)?


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 19, 2019)

Gingerbread said:


> Think about it: if there are six different A/B audio examples, and the OP (using _his own_ monitors and studio setup!) can correctly identify more than 3 of the real Bricasti clips, then he's well justified in buying it instead of the emulation. If he can't, then well....



What would be really interesting to do, if you had both the hardware and software available, would be to minutely tweak one or the other so that they both match as closely as possible to your ears. And then have a third party do a blind test on you.


----------



## Virtuoso (Dec 19, 2019)

It's arguably the best reverb out there at the moment, but it's not really _that_ expensive.

It costs less than a decent Les Paul. Or a Yamaha Montage 8. Or a Neumann U47. Or a Yanagisawa Sax. Or a DW drum kit. I could go on, but you get the point.

I paid $3600 for mine 5 years ago and used it a ton (before Seventh Heaven came out and I got lazy). That's $14 a week. It has already paid for itself a hundred times over. And if I sell it, the resale value is so strong that I'll probably get $3300 back!


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 19, 2019)

BTW, in a lengthy discussion like this, it's interesting to note the various logical fallacies that pop up. #4 and #12 are coming up a lot.






15 Logical Fallacies You Should Know Before Getting Into A Debate


There are 15 common logical fallacies you should know before getting into a college debate.




thebestschools.org


----------



## jononotbono (Dec 19, 2019)

Gingerbread said:


> Crap, I chose my Thai lady in a blind test, so now I'm not sure....
> 
> It's all good, Jono. People should get whatever makes them feel like making more music. I'm sure I'll love my Bricasti when I win the lottery



It's why I've never wanted to go to Thailand. Forget the venomous Snakes and the rapist Monkeys (not talking about the Western World Tourists - the actual indigenous mammals - in this case). The real danger is... I know I won't fail the A/B test when sober but I have sick feeling I'd get too drunk and deliberately choose the regrettable morning. 

When I win the lottery, I will send you a Bricasti AND a copy of Valhalla Room. Then we can play a game of Groundhog Day!


----------



## Michael Antrum (Dec 20, 2019)

jononotbono said:


> It's why I've never wanted to go to Thailand. Forget the venomous Snakes and the rapist Monkeys (not talking about the Western World Tourists - the actual indigenous mammals - in this case). The real danger is... I know I won't fail the A/B test when sober but I have sick feeling I'd get too drunk and deliberately choose the regrettable morning.
> 
> When I win the lottery, I will send you a Bricasti AND a copy of Valhalla Room. Then we can play a game of Groundhog Day!



Jono, me old China, just say no......


----------



## robgb (Dec 20, 2019)

smoothielova said:


> hope you know I was joking.


Yes. I was, too.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Dec 20, 2019)

robgb said:


> Yes, I've often wondered how all the geniuses who came before us managed to make their music come to life without the benefit of the Bricasti



They had real plates as I described above, or real echo chambers, snark aside.


----------



## synthetic (Dec 20, 2019)

Bricasti is just a dongle for software? The thing has 12 SHARC chips inside. It's the most DSP power anyone has ever thrown at a reverb, that I know of anyway. And he's building a new one with double (or more?) that DSP. Six UAD quads to run a stereo reverb. 

Seriously I would hock it if I thought plug-ins sounded as good. I want new speakers and converters. But I can't bear to part with it. Any time I run a live instrument through it makes me smile. So it stays.


----------



## bvaughn0402 (Dec 20, 2019)

Maybe the next version can keep things more in the digital domain. I’d be more interested then.


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Dec 20, 2019)

That is a lot of processing power for a reverb. The only comparison I can find, and it's in raw data not the system as a whole, is 1 SHARC Blackfin in the current M7 processes about 5.4 GFLOPS of data, so 12 = 64.8. A single i9 9900K at stock speed I think is around 232. Given that people don't generally use 25% of their i9 9900k for a single reverb.... 

But processing power is brute force - it all comes down to the algorithm making use of that force. And, as has been said, if that small but probably noticeable at least on a single instrument or voice that doesn't get washed out in a mix can be heard by you and your client, and you can afford an M7, by all means, go with the M7!


----------



## Virtuoso (Dec 20, 2019)

bvaughn0402 said:


> Maybe the next version can keep things more in the digital domain. I’d be more interested then.


Definitely.  

Currently you have to use a MIDI interface and 2x 5 pin DIN cables to communicate with it, plus either 4x XLRs or 2x AES cables for the audio. It would be great to have a version that's essentially like a UAD Satellite, with no need for any AD/DA. It could probably run over a single USB cable.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Dec 20, 2019)

synthetic said:


> It's the most DSP power anyone has ever thrown at a reverb, that I know of anyway. And he's building a new one with double (or more?) that DSP.



Serious question: is that necessary?

Until about 20 years ago, off-the-shelf computers simply didn't have the power to produce a reverb nearly as good as a decent hardware reverb. Or if they did, as a practical matter nobody was interested in dedicating a whole computer just to running a reverb. My understanding - probably slightly off - is simply that the algorithms were very complicated and took a lot of power, i.e. it wasn't just a matter of not being able to produce enough delays (although that was probably part of it).

There actually were some okay software reverbs, such as Digiverb, but none of them was on the level of a good hardware unit. Maybe a very cheap one, but not really even that.

Then Altiverb came along and used the PowerPC co-processor to run a convolution processor, which sort of threw the above argument on its head. The first algorithmic reverb I heard that could be mentioned in the same breath as a decent hardware unit was Overloud Breverb about 15 years ago. It still isn't quite a PCM-90 (we compared it to the PCM-90 Andrew K was using at the time when I wrote the review), but it was close, and I suspect that's just because Lexicon had decades of experience on them. Different algorithms.

It's a totally different game with modern computers. All the software reverbs mentioned in this thread are comparable to decent hardware reverbs. And it would cost next to nothing to dedicate a 15-year-old machine to running a single reverb if that made any sense - which it doesn't.

Circling back, what is all that SHARC power used for, given that any current computer can run algorithms as complicated as hardware processors have - and run a bunch of them along with a sampled orchestra while you check email and surf the web?


----------



## Lee Blaske (Dec 30, 2019)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Serious question: is that necessary?
> 
> Until about 20 years ago, off-the-shelf computers simply didn't have the power to produce a reverb nearly as good as a decent hardware reverb. Or if they did, as a practical matter nobody was interested in dedicating a whole computer just to running a reverb. My understanding - probably slightly off - is simply that the algorithms were very complicated and took a lot of power, i.e. it wasn't just a matter of not being able to produce enough delays (although that was probably part of it).
> 
> ...



It would be interesting to compare how much brute computer force is in a hardware Bricasti reverb vs., say, one core of a new 2019 Mac Pro. I would think one core would bury the Bricasti.

I remember, not that long ago, when VSL had a LOT of excitement about their MIR convolution reverb software, and how the ability to give every instrument or section a completely different reverb characteristic and position would revolutionize things. In the early days of MIR, I seem to remember that it was going to need to be an off-line rendering process, because the amount of computer power needed was going to be out of the question for most intents and purposes. But, CPU power increased, and it came out as a real-time process. I bought it, but I can't say I used it a lot. HUGELY time consuming, and I don't know if it made that much difference. But now, with VSL "Synchronizing" all of their libraries, it seems like the whole MIR concept is being left behind by VSL. 

Maybe reverb only needs to be good to a certain degree, and after that, our ears can't tell the difference in actual, real-world mixes. Also, for me at least, the infinite possibilities of MIR were/are kind of parlalyzing. If you're constantly faced with too many options and decisions that need to be made, it's hard to get anything done.


----------



## Geocranium (Dec 30, 2019)

jononotbono said:


> I'm not entirely sure why people would think a Blind test would be worth doing?
> 
> I mean, what are people using to monitor music with? What monitors? Little KRK Shit boxes or $500k of PMC? Have you actually got proper Bass management or using some kind of unmatched sub without evening knowing what a crossover is? What are your Monitor Amps? Behringher? or $35k Mark Levinsons (for 1 mono amp)? What are your rooms like? Professionally built or a piss stained mattress on the back wall that you call a "bass trap" and some foam tiles scattered about? What interfaces and AD/DA conversion do you use? Lavry Blues? Prism? Or an Audient? What headphones? The usual suspects or something over $1k? What headphone Preamp?
> 
> ...



Honestly, this post is very cathartic to me. If noticing the difference between a Bricasti vs any other run of the mill reverb is gated behind thousands and thousands of dollars in gear and years of industry/listening experience, then it may as well be in another galaxy from me. This basically lays out that a Bricasti will never be useful for me, and I can safely save several grand by forgetting about it and never looking back.

If its perks only become noticeable in an environment that I will never exist in, then I can safely say that it doesn't tempt me to ever own one  

This is one case of GAS that, for me at least, has been cured


----------



## babylonwaves (Dec 31, 2019)

lets not forget to throw skills into the equation. i know some guys who bought multiple 1176 compressors and can’t operate them. As a result, a good engineer is likely to get a better result from a stock compressor in logic or cubase. I don’t want to say that the M7 owners here can’t operate their reverbs but I’m sure that the 10% you might gain from using the hardware also depending how good you are on adjusting the algorithm to taste.

also it’s worth to consider that DAWs sound different when you bounce online. from my personal experience the difference in sonic quality is huge, especially when you max out the cpu resources. All this needs to be considered when you integrate hardware in your setup.


----------



## Dietz (Dec 31, 2019)

Slightly OT reply, just to avoid misunderstandings:



Lee Blaske said:


> it seems like the whole MIR concept is being left behind by VSL.



No, not at all! VSL software engineers work on a substantial update right now.



> [...] the infinite possibilities of MIR were/are kind of parlalyzing. If you're constantly faced with too many options and decisions that need to be made, it's hard to get anything done.



MIR might be overwhelming when you look at it (or should I say: misuse it) as a "reverb engine", but as soon as you grasp the actual concept of spatial mixing and _mix through it_ it's all straight-forward WYSIWYG. A recent user-comment was: "It's so easy to achieve good results, it almost feels like cheating."


----------



## David Kudell (Jan 1, 2020)

babylonwaves said:


> also it’s worth to consider that DAWs sound different when you bounce online. from my personal experience the difference in sonic quality is huge, especially when you max out the cpu resources.



I’ve never considered this...do you feel the sound quality is better or worse when doing an online bounce vs offline?


----------



## chillbot (Jan 1, 2020)

Lee Blaske said:


> What would be really interesting to do, if you had both the hardware and software available, would be to minutely tweak one or the other so that they both match as closely as possible to your ears. And then have a third party do a blind test on you.


Can you elaborate on this? I was thinking of doing a real simple blind test between my Bricasti and a few other popular hardware verbs and software verbs just for fun. Any suggestions?


----------



## chillbot (Jan 1, 2020)

Here's what I would try to compare to keep it simple:

HARDWARE

Bricasti M7
Lexicon PCM92
Yamaha SPX2000

SOFTWARE

Seventh Heaven Pro
Lexicon MPX
Blackhole

I don't use a lot of software verbs so I'm not sure there's anything else I have worth throwing in. Breverb2 (Cakewalk), Blueverb (Nomad Factory), NI RC48, etc.


----------



## Architekton (Jan 1, 2020)

babylonwaves said:


> also it’s worth to consider that DAWs sound different when you bounce online. from my personal experience the difference in sonic quality is huge, especially when you max out the cpu resources. All this needs to be considered when you integrate hardware in your setup.



This is total nonsense and this has been proved as wrong many times. Guys on gearslutz forum did tests and exports nulled so, pls, dont spread wrong information around. You can easily do the online and offline export test yourself and you will see they null, which means there is no sound difference.


----------



## MartinH. (Jan 1, 2020)

babylonwaves said:


> also it’s worth to consider that DAWs sound different when you bounce online. from my personal experience the difference in sonic quality is huge, especially when you max out the cpu resources. All this needs to be considered when you integrate hardware in your setup.



Does online sound better or worse?




chillbot said:


> I don't use a lot of software verbs so I'm not sure there's anything else I have worth throwing in. Breverb2 (Cakewalk), Blueverb (Nomad Factory), NI RC48, etc.



I'd love to see NI RC48 in the test too, and maybe their new free one that has received so many positive comments (it's called Raum if I recall correctly)


----------



## Architekton (Jan 1, 2020)

chillbot said:


> Here's what I would try to compare to keep it simple:
> 
> HARDWARE
> 
> ...



I would add Relab LX480 and VSR here plus Exponential reverbs as they are "imo" of higher quality and more suitable to orchestral work than MPX and Blackhole.


----------



## MartinH. (Jan 1, 2020)

Architekton said:


> This is total nonsense and this has been proved as wrong many times. Guys on gearslutz forum did tests and exports nulled so, pls, dont spread wrong information around. You can easily do the online and offline export test yourself and you will see they null, which means there is no sound difference.



Afaik there are plugins (like e.g. Guitar Rig) that have a "high quality mode" that by default gets turned on in offline rendering and off in online, but you could still change that manually to always use that high quality mode. For Guitar Rig I'm sure it sounds different in the high quality mode. If I can hear it, the difference isn't even that subtle. But I believe you that if everything is set up correctly there is no difference between online/offline. That's what I always assumed to be the case at least.


----------



## chillbot (Jan 1, 2020)

Architekton said:


> I would add Relab LX480


Except for the part where I don't own them... but I guess the 10-day demo would work for this?


----------



## garylionelli (Jan 1, 2020)

It really comes down to the Bricasti M7 code, and not so much about whether a plug-in verb sounds better or worse. Bottom line is this: if Bricasti ever decides to port their full M7 code over to a plug-in, I'll buy it and use it. Until then, I'll stick with the actual M7 in a box. No reverb plug-in as of yet has the ability to meld the source to the reverb signal like the M7.


----------



## babylonwaves (Jan 2, 2020)

MartinH. said:


> But I believe you that if everything is set up correctly there is no difference between online/offline.


All you need is enough load on the CPU. We all know how a DAW starts to sound then - clicks and other types of sonic degradation. When you bounce the same project offline, it sounds ok again. Kontakt lets you choose how it handles those overloads. Do nothing (crackle) or cut voices. Bounce offline and things sound good again.


----------



## chillbot (Jan 5, 2020)

I did a blind test here... see if you can pick out the Bricasti?





__





Completely unscientific blind reverb throwdown: hardware vs software (including the bricasti debate)


I tried to balance all the settings and specs and levels best I could. But let’s be honest, I really just slapped some verb on some samples. If you want to nitpick the settings this is probably not the thread for you. That said, I'm happy to tweak any levels if they don't sound right. These...




vi-control.net


----------



## quantum7 (Jan 8, 2020)

*UPDATE ON DECISION*

In case anyone is wondering what I did- Man, I put a whole lot of time and thought into my decision, listening and demoing just about every reverb available. I finally decided to keep with the software for 1 more year before deciding again if I want to go the hardware route. Even though I already own great software reverb such as B2, R4, and more, I still wanted something simple...like I would get with a Bricasti. Like I said, I demoed every software reverb that I didn't already own, but was most impressed with Relab's Sonsig Rev-A . It was very basic and simple to use, looked great, but most importantly sounded absolutely fantastic to my ears. I actually did a 1 year subscription for all of Relab's reverbs and will re-evaluate my reverb needs next January....if still desired.

Thank you ALL for your opinions and suggestions. It really helped out.


----------



## John Longley (Jan 8, 2020)

quantum7 said:


> I keep getting tempted to buy a Bricasti M7. Anyway, it's nearing 2020 and there are a bunch of fantastic software reverbs available, so is spending $4k these days for a Bricasti really worth it? I would love to hear your thoughts regarding this. Thanks!



Disclaimer: I don't own this unit, but I have been around the block with mastering hardware, and have spent most of my money on gear for too long at times.

Worth it? Why are you buying it?

In my opinion, hardware dsp has no advantage over software dsp in 2020. Do they make amazing algos? Yes.

I think if you are buying because?
1. You own a large format console and work OTB, at least largely, or print offline? Sure, I would buy it. It is an amazing design, with world class algos, made by a small classy team with a lot of experience and great UI options.
2. Because you think all other DSP is sub par when running natively?.... I would not buy it for that.
3. It's emotional, you want a boost? I would buy it if I could afford it.

I think buying hardware stopped being objectively better sometime ago, unless the format is required itself.


----------



## nas (Jan 9, 2020)

quantum7 said:


> *UPDATE ON DECISION*
> 
> In case anyone is wondering what I did- Man, I put a whole lot of time and thought into my decision, listening and demoing just about every reverb available. I finally decided to keep with the software for 1 more year before deciding again if I want to go the hardware route. Even though I already own great software reverb such as B2, R4, and more, I still wanted something simple...like I would get with a Bricasti. Like I said, I demoed every software reverb that I didn't already own, but was most impressed with Relab's Sonsig Rev-A . It was very basic and simple to use, looked great, but most importantly sounded absolutely fantastic to my ears. I actually did a 1 year subscription for all of Relab's reverbs and will re-evaluate my reverb needs next January....if still desired.
> 
> Thank you ALL for your opinions and suggestions. It really helped out.



The Relab stuff is amazing. I use the LX480 quite a bit and it sounds very very close to the hardware unit which I have used extensively. Haven't tried the Sonsig Rev-A yet but I may have to after your post! 

BTW I think you might a good decision.


----------



## Lindon (Jan 9, 2020)

chillbot said:


> Here's what I would try to compare to keep it simple:
> 
> HARDWARE
> 
> ...


As it happens there is--- any list of top software reverbs is amiss if it doesnt include the Valhalla DSP products.


----------



## ywshuo (Jul 10, 2022)

the value of hardware digital reverb like Bricasti or other digital effect boxes lies in their power to do complex algorithms with specialized DSP chips instead of using CPU. if you were to put the exact same algorithm on a CPU, it would eat up too much resource. With more powerful CPUs their advantage may eventually disappear but not now, even in 2022. That's why the plugin can't even faithfully emulate a PCM 90 built in the 90s.

why is a complex algorithm important? well in the real-world, reverb is made from countless reflections. So the more reflection, the more realistic it will be, thus it needs a lot of computing power to calculate. The best reverb is always natural reverb, thus big studios or echo chambers. The next best thing is a really complex algorithm. Sure a plugin can be really complex too but you won't buy it if it gives you a 1000ms delay and use up 50% of your CPU.


----------



## Nimrod7 (Jul 10, 2022)

ywshuo said:


> the value of hardware digital reverb like Bricasti or other digital effect boxes lies in their power to do complex algorithms with specialized DSP chips instead of using CPU.


I am not sure if that's the case anymore. 

They run I believe six dual core ADSP-BF561, which they made sense back in the day (2009?).

Other hardware like the Weiss DS-1 have been transferred 1:1 to native processing (however I believe they use 5 ADSP-21065L which are simpler DSP processors). 

However is hard to compare DSP processors to CPUs, maybe someone can chime in to fill that part. 

Plus with native, you can run another instance without having to pour $4.5k.


----------



## shapednoise (Jul 10, 2022)

quantum7 said:


> *UPDATE ON FINAL DECISION ON POST #230*
> 
> I keep getting tempted to buy a Bricasti M7. Anyway, it's nearing 2020 and there are a bunch of fantastic software reverbs available, so is spending $4k these days for a Bricasti really worth it? I would love to hear your thoughts regarding this. Thanks!


Get one of these, cheaper and to my ears identical. https://en.audiofanzine.com/reverb/alesis/Microverb-1/


----------



## ZenBYD (Jul 10, 2022)

I had a Bricasti M7 for many years and I absolutely loved it... it was better, somehow, than the software equivalents (e.g Seventh Heaven). In an A/B test it can be hard to tell apart... but the reality is that the real M7 when it's in context of a mix... is somehow superior. 

But, the quality of Seventh Heaven and the conveniences of being completely in the box (multi instance, easier to work in surround/atmos, better recall, offline render, stemming easier etc) won out for me in the end... I was sad to switch it off though... it was absolutely solid and sounded great for all the years I used it.


----------



## ModalRealist (Jul 10, 2022)

I don’t really understand why CPU usage is an issue. Can’t plug-ins simply have an offline render mode where they exactly emulate hardware, and a cut down live tracking mode?

It’s like with 3D rendering. There’s no need to limit your render to what’s possible in real-time on your rig if your target output is a flat file (E.g. image, video… _audio file_…)


----------



## Nimrod7 (Jul 10, 2022)

ModalRealist said:


> Can’t plug-ins simply have an offline render mode where they exactly emulate hardware, and a cut down live tracking mode?


Is what AudioSuite plugins are in Pro Tools. 
But is a unique feature and format to that DAW. Maybe there are other DAWs with a similar feature but I haven't heard any. 

But I doubt it will be useful to go that path for a reverb, you have to preview and then render offline.

Kind of misses the point of interactivity.


----------



## Architekton (Jul 10, 2022)

ywshuo said:


> the value of hardware digital reverb like Bricasti or other digital effect boxes lies in their power to do complex algorithms with specialized DSP chips instead of using CPU. if you were to put the exact same algorithm on a CPU, it would eat up too much resource. With more powerful CPUs their advantage may eventually disappear but not now, even in 2022. That's why the plugin can't even faithfully emulate a PCM 90 built in the 90s.
> 
> why is a complex algorithm important? well in the real-world, reverb is made from countless reflections. So the more reflection, the more realistic it will be, thus it needs a lot of computing power to calculate. The best reverb is always natural reverb, thus big studios or echo chambers. The next best thing is a really complex algorithm. Sure a plugin can be really complex too but you won't buy it if it gives you a 1000ms delay and use up 50% of your CPU.


LoL, so many wrong info in this post.  Please, dont spread nonsense around - even the guy who created and developed the Lex PCM hw said that todays cpus eat old dsps for snack - there is complete post on the gearspace forum. The same story was around UAD DSP cards and that these plugins cannot be ran by todays CPUs, now when the UAD plugins are native, it just proved otherwise, they even dont use 1-2% of cpu power per instance on a single core.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Jul 10, 2022)

Architekton said:


> LoL, so many wrong info in this post.  Please, dont spread nonsense around - even the guy who created and developed the Lex PCM hw said that todays cpus eat old dsps for snack - there is complete post on the gearspace forum. The same story was around UAD DSP cards and that these plugins cannot be ran by todays CPUs, now when the UAD plugins are native, it just proved otherwise, they even dont use 1-2% of cpu power per instance on a single core.


Totally agree. The idea that modern day CPUs aren't up to the challenge is silly. There are countless fantastic reverb plug-ins out there these days.

The only thing that you might find is that a particular stand-alone reverb has not been reproduced in a plug-in version. But, with so many great choices, it's hardly an issue.

Regarding the stand-alone Bricasti vs. the Seventh Heaven plug-in version, it is important to note that the hardware version is algorithmic, whereas the plug-in version is a convolution equivalent with chorusing of tails (like Altiverb). But even if a plug-in version of an algorithmic Bricasti doesn't exist, there are plenty of other high-end plug-in algorithmic reverbs that do.

For those that haven't seen it, the Christian Henson reverb shoot-out blind test is interesting...


----------



## muziksculp (Jul 10, 2022)

I love my Bricasti M7 , I use the Exponential Audio VST editor to tweak, and save patches. Although I have a lot of the high-end Software Reverbs, I still find the M7 very unique, and special. Super transparent is the best way I can describe it. It's connected to my interface via Digital AES cables.


----------



## garylionelli (Jul 10, 2022)

muziksculp said:


> I love my Bricasti M7 , I use the Exponential Audio VST editor to tweak, and save patches. Although I have a lot of the high-end Software Reverbs, I still find the M7 very unique, and special. Super transparent is the best way I can describe it. It's connected to my interface via Digital AES cables.





muziksculp said:


> I love my Bricasti M7 , I use the Exponential Audio VST editor to tweak, and save patches. Although I have a lot of the high-end Software Reverbs, I still find the M7 very unique, and special. Super transparent is the best way I can describe it. It's connected to my interface via Digital AES cables.


Yes, I love my M7. Do any of the plug-in emulations sound exactly like it? No, not quite. They just sound slightly different, but not necessarily any worse. But you can't offline bounce with an M7, and so with film music, when you have to produce 45 cues plus stems, there isn't always time to do that many real time bounces. So I save the M7 for the pieces that I think can use it the most. But there are so many other things about any given piece of music that are more important than whether you used a real M7 or a plug-in that sounds 99% as good.


----------



## muziksculp (Jul 10, 2022)

garylionelli said:


> Yes, I love my M7. Do any of the plug-in emulations sound exactly like it? No, not quite. They just sound slightly different, but not necessarily any worse. But you can't offline bounce with an M7, and so with film music, when you have to produce 45 cues plus stems, there isn't always time to do that many real time bounces. So I save the M7 for the pieces that I think can use it the most. But there are so many other things about any given piece of music that are more important than whether you used a real M7 or a plug-in that sounds 99% as good.


Very true.


----------



## muziksculp (Jul 10, 2022)

@garylionelli ,

By the way, I love your scores. 🧡 😎👌


----------



## Daniel James (Jul 10, 2022)

No one will know or care, so long as the music is good. Motown records still work today even though the production would leave a lot to be desired.

Im sure people can pull isolated examples of how superior it might seem above a plugin...but we don't tend to have music in isolation, we have them in full mixes, where I promise you, unless you have set the tail to long and the wet mix to 100% on an insert, nobody will know or care.

The only people who might notice or say something are the most anorak, invested, sonic nerds who live and breathe this stuff. But I imagine that isn't your main target audience. I promise you, 'regular' people are perfectly content listening to music made with basic midi from soundtracks they love, because of the music, not the reverb. The Metal Gear Solid 1 soundtrack still gives me goosebumps, but production wise it wouldn't fly today. I never even made a mental note of the reverb in it and I have listened to that soundtrack every year since the 90's...and I do this for a living.

So is it worth 4k for the reverb. For the sound alone, these days I don't think its worth it for the diminishing returns it would provide over the various reverbs I imagine you already have.

If it makes you feel like one of the 'big boys' or your favorite artist used it and by having the same equipment and achieving the same tones is inspiring...then it could be worth it.

But if the question is based on sound alone, then no, you don't _need_ it. And if you have to debate to yourself if it is too expensive or not, then it is.

I have been to so many studios full of awesome analog gear, then notice as the person works on their music, they rarely use any of it, if at all. I do believe a lot of it is to convince our inferiority complex that we are legitimate, that we are serious that's why we build these 'studio nests' around us that are usually things we don't even use that much but but it triggers that - "as the big guys studios look that way maybe I am not a real composer unless mine does too" fear.

At the end of the day your audience will hear your end result, not see what gear you have and I don't think the bricasti will do anything in a mix that various other plugins couldn't do....particularly for the ears of a regular person, in a production, behind dialogue and sfx, through iPod headphones.

BTW this is the same stance I have on most analog gear these days. I have seen enough slate shootout threads to know that even the most arrogant of sonic elitists can't accurately tell what is hardware and software with any consistency...and that's in isolated shootouts by people who WANT to be right so badly. So write some music that's really connecting first, before worrying about spending thousands on a production technique which wont really change what people actually 'hear' the first time, which would be the music itself, not the production....that comes later, if they listen again....you know, cause the music is awesome.

Anyways I am going round in circles but I think you get me. At the end of the day man its your call. And whatever your reasons for wanting one are, whatever you decide will be correct. Don't second guess it and just plow forward and keep creating mate!

Have a good one 

-DJ


----------



## method1 (Jul 10, 2022)

I sold my m7 after a few hours testing against 7th heaven. 
Am I deaf? Maybe, but now I'm a deaf guy with an extra $3k


----------



## Casiquire (Jul 10, 2022)

We're down to the classic hardware versus software debate. Do whatever works for your mixes and workflow. Hardware does make a difference but whether it's better or worse is a matter of taste. 

The problem with this conversation is that the claims are unfalsifiable. There's no great way to A/B this and even if you could, it wouldn't give you an idea of how they perform in your own hands and with your own decision making. "Blind tests" of sample libraries come to mind where an example sounds terrible to me but I own the same library and know full well the library can sound way better than the best sounding example, just because I know a library well. 

So I hate to boil it all down to "it's up to you" but I really think that's as good as can be definitively said.


----------



## MarcMahler89 (Jul 10, 2022)

Casiquire said:


> We're down to the classic hardware versus software debate. Do whatever works for your mixes and workflow.


Exactly! 
If it came down just to how good a reverb sounds in a specific setting (like having an instrument/section solo'd), id probably still use Arts Acoustic Reverb for everything (nobody knows that specific Reverb, but if i remember correctly, @Daniel James used it as well for quite a few years). Personally i switched to Cinematic Rooms, just because its much easier to fit in a busy mix, whereas AAR tended to mudy things up too much on its own, but sonically speaking, i actually prefer other reverbs when listening to them out-of-context (including AAR)

From what ive heard, the M7 sounds great on its own AND is easy to fit into a busy mix, so thats probably the reason why, besides the ,at least to this extent, unjustified legend-myth, a lot of people spend this much on a reverb processor.


----------



## robgb (Jul 10, 2022)

Sorry, but no matter how you slice it, hardware or not, no reverb is worth that kind of money today. The ONLY person who will know it's a Bricasti is you. No one else will know or care.

If you're simply trying to impress a client by showing off your expensive gear, however, then that's a different matter.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Jul 10, 2022)

garylionelli said:


> Yes, I love my M7. Do any of the plug-in emulations sound exactly like it? No, not quite. They just sound slightly different, but not necessarily any worse.


A well-managed double blind test would be the only way to come to a firm conclusion. All of the higher-end products are EXTREMELY tweakable.


----------



## Lee Blaske (Jul 10, 2022)

robgb said:


> Sorry, but no matter how you slice it, hardware or not, no reverb is worth that kind of money today. The ONLY person who will know it's a Bricasti is you. No one else will know or care.
> 
> If you're simply trying to impress a client by showing off your expensive gear, however, then that's a different matter.


Really, with today's technology, it's like having an extraordinarily expensive Rolex watch. You're not going to have a timepiece that beats what your phone is telling you. But if you enjoy having it and it gives you pleasure, there's no harm in that.

When it comes to hardware reverbs for me, if it's not doing something I can do just as well with plug-ins, and especially because it can't do offline bouncing, there's no reason why I'd want it.


----------

