# Neat reverb trick?



## Rob (Apr 12, 2020)

or not... I thought this could be an improvement over simple stereo reverb send, but I'm rather naive when it comes to these technical audio things, being definitely more a musician than an engineer... anyway here's the idea, please don't laugh. Cubase+Spaces here but it can be done in every daw I believe


1) Create an FX bus, configured as 5.0 
2) Insert an instance of Spaces
Load an IR, that will be our front reverb
3) Insert a second instance of Spaces
Load an IR, that will be our rear reverb (maybe turn dry signal off?)
Set its audio routing to Ls/Rs using the arrows on the right








Done!
Now, when we set the bus as the track’s output we’ll be presented with a diagram with the 5 usual speakers, and we can freely position our track within the hall. Up, the front reverb, down, the rear one. 
The perspective is as if we are on the back of the stage, looking towards the audience…







I keep the center near or at 100% so the center signal isn’t too present…


----------



## 22evan (Apr 12, 2020)

Wow! Good thinking. Audio exmaples? please....


Be safe.


----------



## Rob (Apr 12, 2020)

thank you, Evan, sure... here's a silly clarinet phrase taken for a ride. Chose staccato because it allows to hear the reverb more...

View attachment RevTrick.mp4


----------



## 22evan (Apr 12, 2020)

Oh man! sounds nice, thank you for sharing, im going to experiment all day with this.


----------



## muk (Apr 13, 2020)

It looks interesting Rob, and I'd like to try it. I can't get the Ls and Rs channels to receive any audio though. Here is what I have done:


set up a stereo midi track with a vsl clarinet staccato patch.
create an FX track, configured as 5.0
Insert the two reverbs as you wrote. In the routing editor, configured the first one to receive from L C R channels. Configured the second one to receive audio from Ls and Rs channels.
Route the stereo midi track to the 5.0 FX channel.
Now, where do you insert the VST multipanner? I've tried it on the stereo midi track, and I tried it as first insert on the FX bus, before the two reverbs. In both cases, only the first reverb (set to L C R) receives any audio. The second one (Ls Rs) doesn't receive any input.


----------



## Pablocrespo (Apr 13, 2020)

It looks really good, and haven´t seen it before...I think you should send it to steinberg so they could make the process more streamlined something like "VST space panner"....they would implement it in cubase 15.5

Good find!


----------



## Rob (Apr 13, 2020)

muk said:


> It looks interesting Rob, and I'd like to try it. I can't get the Ls and Rs channels to receive any audio though. Here is what I have done:
> 
> 
> set up a stereo midi track with a vsl clarinet staccato patch.
> ...


No need to insert the multipanner, Muk... 
1) you choose the fx bus as the output of the track - the audio fader will show the multipanner









2) you send to the fx as a normal fx send, the multipanner is here

View attachment Multipanner-Send.mp4


----------



## muk (Apr 13, 2020)

Thanks Rob. That's what I had, so I must be doing something else wrong. Somehow the FX bus doesn't pick up any signal on the Ls and Rs channels, despite the MultiPanner showing output there. Will have to investigate more.

Do you have a short audio example with this setup compared to the same thing with just normal stereo reverb? It's nice to have the stage placement option. I'm wondering if it makes a difference for the reverb part as well.


----------



## Rob (Apr 13, 2020)

muk said:


> Thanks Rob. That's what I had, so I must be doing something else wrong. Somehow the FX bus doesn't pick up any signal on the Ls and Rs channels, despite the MultiPanner showing output there. Will have to investigate more.
> 
> Do you have a short audio example with this setup compared to the same thing with just normal stereo reverb? It's nice to have the stage placement option. I'm wondering if it makes a difference for the reverb part as well.


what happens, as it's predictable, is that as you progressively get farther from the front the reverb gradually disappears...

View attachment OneReverb.mp4


----------



## muk (Apr 13, 2020)

Found the mistake. I hadn't configured my reverb programs input setting the right way. Works flawlessly now.

Thank you for sharing Rob. I will try to make a mix using this method when I have the time.


----------



## Rob (Apr 13, 2020)

perfect... I've meanwhile tried on a sort of mix, I find I get better results eliminating the central channel entirely, and creating a 5.1 fx channel instead of 5.0. Inserting a UM226 plugin before the reverbs the LFE becomes an additional resource. Like here, it helps the pizzicato of basses (don't mind the sloppiness)


----------



## muk (Apr 13, 2020)

Beautiful music Rob! Spatially the mix sounds very good. Looks like you are onto something here.Which strings are these?


----------



## Rob (Apr 13, 2020)

muk said:


> Beautiful music Rob! Spatially the mix sounds very good. Looks like you are onto something here.Which strings are these?


thank you Muk! Not my music though... it's due to Jens Klimek, found the score on IMSLP. Nice music indeed!
Strings are Dimension Strings SE...


----------



## batonruse (Apr 13, 2020)

Thanks for introducing me to this composer and concerto Rob. Fantastic rendition and the strings, for me, are probably the best I've heard here.....is it specifically Synchron Vol 5 and please, what reverb did you use? Thanks again.


----------



## Rob (Apr 13, 2020)

Thank you, Batonruse, yes it's SYNCHRON-ized SPECIAL EDITION Volume 5...
Reverb, which is the subject of this thread is in this case two instances of Acon Digital Verberate 2, one as front stage and the other for the back.


----------



## batonruse (Apr 13, 2020)

Sorry, forget the question about reverb, I was so engrossed with the music and your rendition that I forgot about the reason for the post (that and cabin fever I guess)


----------



## Rob (Apr 14, 2020)

now that I think of it, the front stage should probably have more of the hall than the rear, as they are actually facing the hall... at least for a theatre kind of simulation


----------



## shomynik (Apr 14, 2020)

Hi Rob,

A fantastic use of this isolation time, have to say.  

I wonder - what is the point of this actually? As you are moving toward the rears, you are switching/cross-fading from the front verb to the rear one. If I'm understanding the process here correctly, on the far ends (front and rear) you are getting one or another verb, and in the middle you have a mix of the two verbs. The left-right dimensions are just simple balance/panning.

So basically, if you want your clarinet in the middle of the space, you can get the same result by using two stereo fx tracks and sending the clarinet to both. Is this correct?

If I'm right, I'm missing the benefit of this way of routing things. Care to correct me?

Milos


----------



## Rob (Apr 14, 2020)

shomynik said:


> Hi Rob,
> 
> A fantastic use of this isolation time, have to say.
> 
> ...


I can see two benefits using this,
1) if you have to move the instrument in the "hall" it's one movement you're doing, instead of having to set two send faders and pan. Moreover, you can choose the width of the stereo image of the instrument and move its left and right independently...
2) the multipanner gives you a graphical representation of the positioning of the instrument, while the two sends don't have any graphical meaning
But the result should be the same, yes... not pretending that is like a poor man's Mir Pro, just a better (for me) way of sending a track to reverb


----------



## shomynik (Apr 14, 2020)

Rob said:


> I can see two benefits using this,
> 1) if you have to move the instrument in the "hall" it's one movement you're doing, instead of having to set two send faders and pan. Moreover, you can choose the width of the stereo image of the instrument and move its left and right independently...
> 2) the multipanner gives you a graphical representation of the positioning of the instrument, while the two sends don't have any graphical meaning
> But the result should be the same, yes... not pretending that is like a poor man's Mir Pro, just a better (for me) way of sending a track to reverb



Yes, that multipanner is practical indeed, both visually and by having those control options in the same gui. For the same level of control I use a couple of inserts plus sends. The only thing I don't like about send multipanner is having to open the channel settings and only then click to open it. Did you find any other way of opening it? Or even better having it seen all the time like what we have with normal fader panners? Not that I have that posibility with my inserts and sends, but at least I see them in the Inspector and Mixer... not completely sure which way is better though, I would need to work with your idea to actually make the conclusion.

Thanks for sharing the idea Rob!


----------



## Rob (Apr 14, 2020)

not at the computer right now, but can't we keep the channel settings open all the time? I think it updates as we scroll through the tracks... but yes we have to double click on the panner to open it. Will investigate more, thanks


----------



## shomynik (Apr 14, 2020)

Rob said:


> not at the computer right now, but can't we keep the channel settings open all the time? I think it updates as we scroll through the tracks... but yes we have to double click on the panner to open it. Will investigate more, thanks


I just tried and you are right. There is an option "Stay on Top" for the Channel Settings window and it indeed updates while scrolling through tracks (I almost never open Channel Settings window). The Multipanner "position" is clear in the icon without even opening the Multipanner window, and after opening it, while it doesnt update, it stays opened even when you move on to the next track, so it's possible to open multiple Multipanners for different instruments at the same time and tweak them with a clear overview.

Neat indeed. 

May I ask what's your difference in reverb settings between front and back verb?


----------



## Billy Palmer (Apr 14, 2020)

Sounds convincing to me!
Spacial/binaural positioning tools always make the eq sound odd to my ears, particularly with classical instruments. This, however, sounds very pleasing !


----------



## Rob (Apr 15, 2020)

shomynik said:


> I just tried and you are right. There is an option "Stay on Top" for the Channel Settings window and it indeed updates while scrolling through tracks (I almost never open Channel Settings window). The Multipanner "position" is clear in the icon without even opening the Multipanner window, and after opening it, while it doesnt update, it stays opened even when you move on to the next track, so it's possible to open multiple Multipanners for different instruments at the same time and tweak them with a clear overview.
> 
> Neat indeed.
> 
> May I ask what's your difference in reverb settings between front and back verb?


I used a brighter, shorter reverb, with close early reflections (Verberate 2 allows this), and a darker, bigger reverb for the back. If Spaces is the reverb, it has FR and RR versions of the halls which I take mean Front Reverb and Rear Reverb (could be wrong though). I think it needs some experimenting and common sense. Hope it helps


----------



## shomynik (Apr 15, 2020)

Rob said:


> I used a brighter, shorter reverb, with close early reflections (Verberate 2 allows this), and a darker, bigger reverb for the back. If Spaces is the reverb, it has FR and RR versions of the halls which I take mean Front Reverb and Rear Reverb (could be wrong though). I think it needs some experimenting and common sense. Hope it helps


Great, so I thought. Thanks Rob.


----------



## Silence-is-Golden (Apr 15, 2020)

Rob said:


> Spaces is the reverb, it has FR and RR versions of the halls which I take mean Front Reverb and Rear Reverb


Correcto!



edit: inventive idea, will see in the coming time how to do this in Logic X.


----------



## hdsmile (Apr 15, 2020)

Silence-is-Golden said:


> Correcto!
> edit: inventive idea, will see in the coming time how to do this in Logic X.



I liked the idea and it sounds pretty good overall, I agree that it would be nice to do it for Logic.


----------

