# Reverb: The Large Hall Shoot-out



## hbuus (Jan 25, 2009)

Here's a cello *) playing a beautiful little melody.

After the recording, the dry signal was processed using 3 different reverb models from 3 different manufacturers (very expensive, high-end gear).
The reverb patch used was in all cases Large Hall, and in several cases different types of it.

Here is the result (8 different MP3-files / 320bps):

1: http://www.box.net/shared/c4gvhdzhet

2: http://www.box.net/shared/kshsb3unl6

3: http://www.box.net/shared/58by23ss9l

4: http://www.box.net/shared/6fbnobb0pj

5: http://www.box.net/shared/zje0y9pgxa

6: http://www.box.net/shared/jqanec9lom

7: http://www.box.net/shared/5py1fpnqxc

8: http://www.box.net/shared/raka5clr5a

Can you guess where the reverb in each of the examples comes from?

*) Later in this thread I will give credit to the cello player, but not now, as it might reveal stuff


----------



## bryla (Jan 25, 2009)

Have you been performing this comparison?


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jan 25, 2009)

While I think the cello example is very beautiful, I wonder if you could repeat this experiment with a larger, denser arrangement.


----------



## hbuus (Jan 25, 2009)

@bryla:

What do you mean?


@Ned:

Below is the experiment repeated with a larger, more complex arrangement.

There are six audio files (two different Large Hall-patches from each reverb model), and this time they are ordered in pairs:

audio files 1 and 2 = unit 1
audio files 3 and 4 = unit 2
audio files 5 and 6 = unit 3

Here are the mp3s:

1: http://www.box.net/shared/ext8ips3jn

2: http://www.box.net/shared/gplvan0d64

3: http://www.box.net/shared/qxa2jekgyj

4: http://www.box.net/shared/gco29licea

5: http://www.box.net/shared/73g1m5skpc

6: http://www.box.net/shared/dqcbijoy3t

Enjoy


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jan 25, 2009)

I could listen to number 3 with much pleasure. Interestingly, a number of them sound like the wet/dry setting was different.

THANKS FOR DOING THIS! 8) =o o-[][]-o


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jan 25, 2009)

PS: Percs or Brass please


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Jan 25, 2009)

Very nice strings!

I am really curious about the reverbs (I know you have the Samplicity IRs, have you used these as well?) - but I can't properly listen to the reverb differences on my laptop...


----------



## bryla (Jan 25, 2009)

I was wondering if you had done the recording and applied the reverb for them?
And also for the second part of it: Is it your music?

I like them all  I would probably pick them for different situations.... but... they are all.... =o

Could you upload dry versions?


----------



## hbuus (Jan 25, 2009)

@Peter:

Thanks. No, this is not the Samplicity IRs, it's the real thing.  


@bryla:

Thanks. I will answer your questions later and also upload dry versions, but not yet.


----------



## hbuus (Jan 25, 2009)

Here's the last example I will be posting.
It's kind of in-between the first two in terms of how much is going on in the music.
It's one mp3 pr. unit.

1: http://www.box.net/shared/pkm0i1dhyq

2: http://www.box.net/shared/md0vfg5tir

3: http://www.box.net/shared/seh7bkkz93


----------



## bryla (Jan 25, 2009)

hbuus @ Sun Jan 25 said:


> Thanks. No, this is not the Samplicity IRs, it's the real thing.


Uhm... the real thing..... boxes?!

I guess the real thing would be... THE REAL THING... as stages or a large hall

can't wait


----------



## hbuus (Jan 25, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Sun Jan 25 said:


> PS: Percs or Brass please



Ned, I missed this, sorry. :oops: 
No more examples for now.


----------



## hbuus (Jan 25, 2009)

bryla @ Sun Jan 25 said:


> I guess the real thing would be... THE REAL THING... as stages or a large hall



Ok, ok, not THAT real!


----------



## bryla (Jan 25, 2009)

hbuus @ Sun Jan 25 said:


> I will answer your questions later and also upload dry versions, but not yet.


I don't see why, since it's something that should be credited, and doesn't affect any opinion.


----------



## hbuus (Jan 25, 2009)

Ok, here's the deal with this experiment:

The other day I stumbled upon another forum where the Bricasti M7 got a lot of praise, and as I sat back and listened to some of the sound examples people had attached, I could only agree: This unit sounds absolutely fantastic. Out of curiosity, and since a few of the sound examples were attached in dry version also, I got the idea to try and match this M7 reverb using the best reverb I have, which is Peter Roos'es Samplicity impulse responses – in my case played back through Voxengo Pristine Space. And here's where I got really surprised, because with my humble setup it was possible to come out with reverb sounding – to my ears - really, really well in comparison with the M7 examples previously mentioned. To begin with I tried to match the Large Hall M7-examples with Samplicity, then Small Room, and in both cases Samplicity could deliver very well.

Next step was to bounce stuff into anonymously named files; upload them to box.net; and then e-mail the links to my big brother – he's an accountant (!) and thus not engaged in making computer music at all, but he's got an interest in film music, especially that of John Williams. I told my brother the truth, that the reverb in the examples were generated with 3 different types of equipment, one of which being a hardware box probably 10 times as expensive as the two other types of equipment (being Samplicity). His job was now to find out which examples were generated with the ”real thing”, which he couldn't – he could hear the examples each sounded different, but as he said ”they all sounded very good; none of them came close to actually failing”.

Now I thought I could use some help from you guys. At first I was simply gonna say: ”Here are some sound examples, some are made with convolution reverb and impulse responses, some are made with a Bricasti M7”, but then it hit me that people would go into the listening experiment focusing on ”error finding”, as in finding flaws in the sound that would reveal which sound examples came from ”cheap” convolution reverb. I would much rather have people focus on the way the various reverb examples made the music sound and THEN see if the Samplicity-reverb-examples would be able to stand up against the Bricasti-examples. Because – sure - I have ears and so does my big brother, but none of us have experience using expensive reverb gear, like many of you guys have. If Samplicity was gonna be tested, it had to be against people with experience, listening with an open (unbiased) mind. Therefore I decided to not tell the truth to begin with in this thread, which I hope you can forgive me for. Of course, when Peter asked me if I had used Samplicity, I could simply not say yes at the time, because it would ruin the experiment.

It was never my intention to embarrass anyone, as in ”look at him over there – he can't tell the difference between convolution reverb and an M7”. Instead I wanted to see if I could show, just as you write, Synthetic, that in *some* cases, convolution reverb with high quality impulse responses can in fact be very hard to distinguish from a hardware unit 10 times more expensive.

Having said all this I would really like to make more comparisons between high end gear and Peter's Samplicity IRs. It's interesting to see where the difference lies, as in which situations the expensive hardware units simply crush convolution reverb. If anyone is interested in generating dry and wet sound examples, it would be fun to look more into this.

Best regards,
Henrik

PS. As for credits, you can find the M7 audio clips here:
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/high-end ... hoooo.html
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much- ... mples.html
http://community.vsl.co.at/forums/t/19225.aspx


----------



## synergy543 (Jan 25, 2009)

Henrik, Casey of Bricasti posted this example by Kosi of a Bricasti M7 perc hit long decay. Try, cutting off the tail and using the dry source in other reverbs for comparisions if you want to really hear the differences. Be sure to edit out all ERs if you do this and post the results for us to hear.

http://www.da-x.de/media/content/kosi_bricasti/Bounces_SN/Rim_Europa.mp3 (http://www.da-x.de/media/content/kosi_b ... Europa.mp3)

OK, here I did it for you:

http://home.comcast.net/~synergy543/Rim_Europa_dry.wav
Now feed this into your example reverbs and be sure to compare volume levels too so its apples vs apples.

Also, please don't confuse me with Synthetic. >8o Although I have an excellent security alarm and guard dogs on the grounds, I don't want to be attacked by angry GIGA mobsters by mistake. :mrgreen:


----------



## hbuus (Jan 26, 2009)

synergy543 @ Mon Jan 26 said:


> OK, here I did it for you:
> 
> http://home.comcast.net/~synergy543/Rim_Europa_dry.wav
> Now feed this into your example reverbs and be sure to compare volume levels too so its apples vs apples.
> ...



Thanks, and sorry for the name mix-up :oops: 
I'll look at the reverb thing later, I spent pretty much all day yesterday and a good part of the night also fiddling with reverb, so I need a little break from it.

Btw. I fully understand your concern about having a safe home.
I myself moved to a different location recently, and increased security was a big part of it (with my expensive gear and all):

http://www.worth1000.com/entries/319500 ... qVyu_w.jpg

I really ought to get rid of that boat though - it's a potential security breach.


----------



## bryla (Jan 26, 2009)

Hannes_F @ Mon Jan 26 said:


> bryla @ Sun Jan 25 said:
> 
> 
> > hbuus @ Sun Jan 25 said:
> ...


Well now it turns out: he's not even playing by his rules. Saying they are all 3 very expensive high end gear, when in the end, they are not


----------



## hbuus (Jan 26, 2009)

bryla @ Mon Jan 26 said:


> Hannes_F @ Mon Jan 26 said:
> 
> 
> > bryla @ Sun Jan 25 said:
> ...



Funny, this hrmpff-reply was exactly what I was expecting from you.


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 26, 2009)

hbuus,

haha, too bad you let out the cat out of the bag so early. Next time just be firmer in ignoring questions that are not targeting at the point, then you could also stay by the truth.

Actually nobody spotted the samplicity IRs, so obviously you did a good job mixing-wise (and Peter with his IRs).


----------



## hbuus (Jan 26, 2009)

Thanks, Hannes 

I'm glad you took it this way. Yes, the cat was let out of the bag early, but I just...I don't like misleading people like that. I was also afraid that the longer I let this run, the more anger might build up in the end in some people when I revealed the truth.

Ned is right though that the amount of reverb applied varies a little in some cases. I was mixing each of the mp3s yesterday, and as you guys know, it's tough to keep neutral ears for several hours in a row.

And Peter's IRs, yes - they really are spectacular *waves a sign saying "Peter Make Those Lexicon PCM-70 IRses Now!"*


----------



## bryla (Jan 26, 2009)

Well not to be the hrmpf-guy, but you were misleading people by stating it was all high-end and expensive. Just say: listen! which do you like. No need to tell anything other.

I like them all too, and would love to hear some perc or brass with it.

Who was playing the cello, then?


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 26, 2009)

hbuus,

as I understood it you invested quite some time into making this a mixing experience for yourself first and then a blind listening test for us.

I think blind tests are a good thing and nearly always helpful. But of course they only work if they are really 'blind' and no shortcuts can be taken by outleaked information.

It is interesting that most people say the recordings are too good in a way to compare the reverbs. If that is true it would actually mean the examples out there are not as relevant as we may have thought.

Are we looking at two different sorts of reverbs actually?
1. Reverbs for putting a real recording into a room.
2. Reverbs for making samples sound more real.

I am not really sure both are exactly the same BTW.


----------



## hbuus (Jan 26, 2009)

bryla @ Mon Jan 26 said:


> Well not to be the hrmpf-guy, but you were misleading people by stating it was all high-end and expensive. Just say: listen! which do you like. No need to tell anything other.
> 
> I like them all too, and would love to hear some perc or brass with it.
> 
> Who was playing the cello, then?



Hm, you could be right, it should have been done that way. On the other hand I thought that by stating it was 3 high-end reverb models, it would make the playing field completely even, because then nobody would sit back and wonder if convolution reverb was used in any of the mp3 pieces. Instead the goal was that people would sit back and think to themselves, "Ok, 3 high-end reverb models, that's got to be Lexicon and TC and one other machine, so which of these mp3 files have Lexicon-reverb and which have TC-reverb".

The who played the cello-remark was just something to confuse people  
The cello-examples were uploaded in a thread about the Bricasti on another forum - I've deleted them from my preferences now, but the links are listed in a post above (the one named something with woohoo).

You are welcome to upload some brass and percussion, then I shall add whatever Samplicity-reverb to it you would like to hear. But not until tomorrow, I'm a bit sick of reverb today and need a day's break.

Thanks for listening and for commenting.


EDIT:

Here's the link:

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/high-end ... hoooo.html

Page 1 = strings
Page 5 = cello


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Jan 26, 2009)

Hehe,

I will get bacòÅr   “XÅr   “XÅr   “XÅr   “X	År   “X
År   “XÅr   “XÅr   “X År   “XÅs   “XÅs   “XÅs   “XÅs   “XÅs   “XÅs   “XÅs   “XÅs   “XÅs   “XÅs   “XÅs   “XÅs   “XÅs   “XÅs   “XÅs   “XÅs   “XÅs   “XÅs   “X Ås   “X!Ås   “X"Ås   “X#Ås   “X$Ås   “X%Ås   “X&Ås   “X'Ås   “X(Ås   “XûÅs   “XüÅt   “X)Åt   “X*Åt   “X+Åt   “X,Åt   “X-Åt   “X.Åt   “X/Åt   “X0Åt   “X1Åt   “X2Åt   “X3Åt   “X4Åt   “X5Åt   “X6Åt   “X7Åt   “X8Åt   “X9Åt   “X:Åt   “X;Åt   “X<Åt   “X=Åt   “X>Åt   “X?Åt   “[email protected]Åt   “XAÅt   “XBÅt   “XCÅt   “XDÅt   “XEÅt   “XFÅt   “XGÅt   “XHÅt   “XIÅt   “XJÅt   “XKÅt   “XLÅt   “XMÅt   “XNÅt   “XOÅt   “XPÅt   “XQÅt   “XRÅt   “XSÅt   “XTÅt   “XUÅt   “XVÅt   “XWÅt   “XXÅt   “XYÅt   “XZÅt   “X[Åt   “X\Åt   “X]Åt   “X^Åt   “X_Åt   “X`Åt   “XaÅt   “XbÅt   “XcÅt   “XdÅt   “XeÅt   “XfÅt   “XgÅt   “XhÅt   “XiÅt   “XjÅt   “XkÅt   “XlÅt   “XmÅt   “XnÅt   “XoÅt   “XpÅt   “XqÅt   “XrÅt   “Xs              òÅt   “XuÅt   “XvÅt   “XwÅt   “XxÅt   “XyÅt   “XzÅt   “X{Åt   “X|Åt   “X}Åt   “X~Åt   “XÅt   “X€Åt   “XÅt   “X‚Åt   “XƒÅt   “X„Åt   “X…Åt   “


----------



## artsoundz (Jan 26, 2009)

Hi Peter,

I noticed your Samplicity site is down for the moment. Where can I purchase your IR package? I googled but no gogo. Thanks!


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Jan 26, 2009)

I have been working on a new webshop, but it is not yet finished. I only want to offer downloads, no more expensive shipping etc (FedEx for example, charges me more than 50 euro for a fast delivery).

If you want to order, you can contact me via email and I can give you download access and PayPal handling.

Please understand that Samplicity is just a very small project of mine and not a serious business.

Best regards,

Peter Emanuel


----------



## hbuus (Jan 27, 2009)

synergy543 @ Mon Jan 26 said:


> Henrik, Casey of Bricasti posted this example by Kosi of a Bricasti M7 perc hit long decay. Try, cutting off the tail and using the dry source in other reverbs for comparisions if you want to really hear the differences. Be sure to edit out all ERs if you do this and post the results for us to hear.
> 
> http://www.da-x.de/media/content/kosi_bricasti/Bounces_SN/Rim_Europa.mp3 (http://www.da-x.de/media/content/kosi_b ... Europa.mp3)
> 
> ...



Synergy, thanks for doing the work, however I found out that the dry version of the percussion hit is actually also downloadable from the homepage you link to, which is this one:

http://www.da-x.de/news/2007/09/06/hall ... -masstabe/

I chose to use this for the following examples.
Also I am not sure how to compare volume levels. :oops: 
Therefore I have not done so - hope this stuff will be useful anyway.
I may make corrections later otherwise, and upload again.

o/~ 

*BRICASTI*

At the page above, you can listen to some Bricasti-mp3s called:

Rim_North_Church (http://www.da-x.de/media/content/kosi_bricasti/Bounces_SN/Rim_North_Church.mp3)

Rim_East_Church (http://www.da-x.de/media/content/kosi_bricasti/Bounces_SN/Rim_East_Church.mp3)

Rim_West_Church (http://www.da-x.de/media/content/kosi_bricasti/Bounces_SN/Rim_West_Church.mp3)

(sadly the link to the South Church-mp3 does not work).

You can use these for comparison with the following examples using relevant Samplicity IRs:

o/~ 

*SAMPLICITY*

1: L96 Large Church
http://www.box.net/shared/nmf6ebbtt5


2: L96 Big Empty Church
http://www.box.net/shared/ylnpm1bfgf


3: T600 Church
http://www.box.net/shared/dmarhg316l


4: T600 Cathedral
http://www.box.net/shared/efsor140r0


5: T600 Warm Cathedral
http://www.box.net/shared/kq57h4pzh9


...and some non-church, non-cathedral IRs'es, which however do have very long reverb tails:


6: T600 Big Orchestra Hall
http://www.box.net/shared/ubdfgl8r00


7: L96 Reverb Tail
http://www.box.net/shared/zp9gqfffqu


That's it!


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jan 27, 2009)

I hate to be a P.I.A., but these examples are too clinical for me. I would much rather hear a musical passage (doesn't have to be long), even if it's percs or brass only, than a single rim shot. Also, FWIW, the rim shot is so close, the high frequencies are so present, that every example sounds 'fake' to me. I do very much appreciate the work though! :wink:


----------



## hbuus (Jan 27, 2009)

Peter Roos @ Mon Jan 26 said:


> Hehe,
> 
> I will get back with more comments soon. For now, (obviously) I like this topic. And I enjoy Henrik's enthousiasm, which I share with him.
> 
> ...



You are welcome, Peter!

Yes, these IRs you have recorded are wonderful, which is why I keep bugging you about making a recording of those PCM 70 IRs, hehe! 

Anyway, I have a question for you, or rather, a challenge.
Try listening to this example where the poster has added Large Hall Bricasti-reverb to the cello-piece used earlier in this thread:

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/atta...7-woohoooo-cello-large-hall-5-second-tail.mp3

This mp3 I deliberately chose NOT to upload as part of this little experiment, simply because no matter what I did, I was unable to even come close using Samplicity.
Notice how this long reverb tail kind of "grows" or "builds" ? It sounds SO wonderful!
Can this be done using Samplicity?

At the Voxengo Pristine Space user forum there is a thread of relevance to this:
http://www.voxengo.com/forum/pspace/1545/

Anyway, I do not have time to write more right now - will probably later today.
But I'm really looking forward to hearing your comment on the above.
If Samplicity can be made to create reverb like this....uuuuhhmmm....I will be an even more happy user!

Best regards,
Henrik

PS. Yes, reverb is interesting! I do share your passion for it.


----------



## hbuus (Jan 27, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Tue Jan 27 said:


> I hate to be a P.I.A., but these examples are too clinical for me. I would much rather hear a musical passage (doesn't have to be long), even if it's percs or brass only, than a single rim shot. Also, FWIW, the rim shot is so close, the high frequencies are so present, that every example sounds 'fake' to me. I do very much appreciate the work though! :wink:



Well then, Ned, just as with Peter above, I also have a little challenge for you!  

It goes like this:

Write a little piece which you would like to hear reverb on, and upload it.
Then when I get home later today, I will look at it.
I am curious to hear what you come up with!
And curious to hear Samplicity being used on it.

Best regards,
Henrik


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jan 27, 2009)

I have so little time today... but I will do it (if I can find dry brass or percs in my collection).


----------



## Waywyn (Jan 27, 2009)

Now just out of curiosity, but Peter:
Wouldn't that be something to sample a Bricasti reverb unit?

I often use IRs of halls and rooms, but somehow it turns out that real IRs (I mean just IRs of rooms, not digital reverb units) are not that useful all the time.

So I wanna say I so often stick with the Large Hall of Samplicity and it just suits the instrument well


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Jan 27, 2009)

A first quick remark:

I have the same feeling about "real space" IRs... Maybe it has to do with the fact that emitters (speakers) and mics are included in the recording process...

The fun with expensive units is, that they are psycho-acoustically optimized.

I guess that for these reasons most soundtrack recordings add some Lex or TCE tails to the ER-rich soundstage recordings and not Altiverb real space IRs...


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jan 27, 2009)

Henrik,

2 files are uploaded for you here: http://nedfx.com/reverb/


----------



## hbuus (Jan 27, 2009)

Thanks, Ned - just got back and am downloading.

To be continued


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Jan 27, 2009)

Peter Roos @ Tue Jan 27 said:


> A first quick remark:
> 
> I have the same feeling about "real space" IRs... Maybe it has to do with the fact that emitters (speakers) and mics are included in the recording process...
> 
> ...



Any tipes on how to add your IR's to the mix without having the stero field blurred? I place intruments where I want them, but when I add an extra verb the whole thing narrows and gets diffused.


----------



## hbuus (Jan 27, 2009)

Ned,

Here are the processed files. I hope the treatment was done in accordance with your expectations.
There are more Hall IRs in the Samplicity set than those below, for instance T600 Natural Hall and others.
But the line had to be drawn somewhere  

Hope it's useful.

Best regards,
Henrik

o/~ 

*BRASS*

L96 Large Hall
http://www.box.net/shared/k22b707dnr

L96 Large Hall, Larger Size
http://www.box.net/shared/mk34f0njlu

T600 Large Hall
http://www.box.net/shared/4v4roky0r1

T600 Big Orchestra Hall
http://www.box.net/shared/ahijchzh7y

o/~ 

*PERCUSSION*

L96 Large Hall
http://www.box.net/shared/bkac5yzum2

L96 Large Hall, Larger Size
http://www.box.net/shared/qil152uqg1

T600 Large Hall
http://www.box.net/shared/16x0n4jk07

T600 Big Orchestra Hall
http://www.box.net/shared/tm49hd4frb


----------



## synergy543 (Jan 27, 2009)

Henrik, Thank you for posting these excellent examples.

NED, clinical as the Rim examples may be, they are extremely informative and revealing. Testing a reverb with slow attack and decay sounds will mask the reverb effect. Using a percussive attack is the most revealing. 

Of course, the most important result is simply if you like the sound with musical instruments. But be careful not to be deceived this way - for you may like it with one musical instrument but not another - and it might sound terrible with your music overall. Reverb sounds are very specific to musical instruments - in other words, whether the sounds is pleasing to you will depend upon both the instrument being used as well as the program. Percussive hits being the most revealing don't lie - they really reveal the true qualities of the reverb. Notice in the various examples how you can hear the ERs, the bloom, the smoothness of the decay - all from a single rim shot hit! Now try to hear the same with an orch sound - you won't be able to focus on these details nearly as well as the orch will mask the reverb. Yet, its the final "blend" that counts - but its good to know what you're working with. So, when selecting and testing reverb sounds, its sometimes very helpful to use percussive sounds or different instruments so you can hear the subtle differences and details of the reverb program. Then, blend the reverb back into your orch. Hopefully the designer did this job for you and you could just select but there are so many different programs and varible including mixing balance, so its really worth learning the differences on your own. 

For example, listen to the following examples:

Bricasti - Rim_North Church
Bricasti - Rim_West_Church

In both examples, you'll hear what sounds like looping waves in the decay. Now listen to Peter's:

Rim-L96-Reverb-Tail. 

You don't hear the looping. This is very surprising to me as the Bricasti designers claim there is no looping for 30 sec. Well, whatever it is, the swooping in the decay is clearly audible to me. Maybe this is the difference between the Lexicon which has modulation and the Bricasti which doesn't have it yet? (It is my understanding that in V2.0 they will supposedly release an update with modulation). But there is no denying in these examples, that the Bricasti is denser but the Lexicon 'looping' is smoother (although with its trademark less dense "sha-sha" sound). The Bricasti reminds me very much of the Quantec Room Simulator.

Now listen to the Rim-T600-Cathederal

You will clearly hear the Early Reflections. Where as they are much less apparent in the Rim-T600-Church. So depending upon your music and needs for ER, its helpful to know the difference between these.

Well, I hope this helps explain how to use these useful clinical examples and why you might really want them in addition to music examples.

Thanks again Henrik,

Greg


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jan 27, 2009)

Henrik,

Thanks for your work, very cool of you to do. A couple of things:

- I prefer a much dryer sound. The reverb is too wet for my taste.

- As well, I would really like to hear a comparison between boxes and convolution verbs.

The examples don't have to be full resolution though. MP3 would do fine, imo.


----------



## hbuus (Jan 27, 2009)

[quote:515a077f32="hv @ Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:35 pm"]Hi, Henrik. I agree with the implications regarding the m7 sound... more Nordic than Lex to my ears too. I picked up an my m7 about 6 mos ago and find it just a wee bit cleaner than my rev4k which uses the same engine as the bigger box I think Peter worked with.

òÆ-   “~‹Æ-   “~ŒÆ-   “~Æ-   “~ŽÆ-   “~Æ-   “~Æ-   “~‘Æ-   “~’Æ-   “~“Æ-   “~”Æ-   “~•Æ-   “~–Æ-   “~—Æ-   “~˜Æ-   “~™Æ-   “~šÆ-   “~›Æ-   “~œÆ-   “~Æ-   “~žÆ-   “~ŸÆ-   “~ Æ-   “~¡Æ-   “~¢Æ-   “~£Æ-   “~¤Æ-   “~¥Æ-   “~¦Æ-   “~§Æ-   “~¨Æ-   “~©Æ-   “~ªÆ-   “~«Æ-   “~¬Æ-   “~­Æ-   “~®Æ-   “~¯Æ-   “~°Æ-   “~±Æ-   “~²Æ-   “~³Æ-   “~´Æ-   “~µÆ-   “~¶Æ.   “~Æ.   “~€Æ.   “~Æ.   “~‚Æ.   “~ƒÆ.   “~„Æ.   “~·Æ.   “~¸Æ.   “~¹Æ.   “~ºÆ.   “~»Æ.   “~¼Æ.   “~½Æ.   “~¾Æ.   “~¿Æ.   “~ÀÆ.   “~ÁÆ.   “~ÂÆ.   “~ÃÆ.   “~ÄÆ.   “~ÅÆ.   “~ÆÆ.   “~ÇÆ.   “~ÈÆ.   “~ÉÆ.   “~ÊÆ.   “~ËÆ.   “~ÌÆ.   “~ÍÆ.   “~ÎÆ.   “~ÏÆ.   “~Ð


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jan 27, 2009)

Thanks Henrik! I like them much better now. Actually, they're almost too dry - don't kill me!!!! :shock: :lol: The 600 impulses sound great.


----------



## hv (Jan 27, 2009)

Hi, Henrick. Here's a link to a thread over there from when I first tried the m7 and posted some comparative mixes. http://www.gearslutz.com/board/3475824-post18.html 

After spending more time in their halls, I've been liking the m7's Sandors the best. Lately I've been lost in their plates which I think might show a little lex heritage. Peter, you definitely gotta rent one of these puppies.

Howard


----------



## hbuus (Jan 28, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Tue Jan 27 said:


> Thanks Henrik! I like them much better now. Actually, they're almost too dry - don't kill me!!!! :shock: :lol: The 600 impulses sound great.



http://www.box.net/shared/cj7dqdg3ik



(hope it works - I have not tried to share a folder via box.net before)


----------



## hbuus (Jan 28, 2009)

Howard, thanks for the link. I did actually come across it for the experiment, but since there was no dry version for download, I couldn't use it, hehe. I think the difference is noticeable in the way the vocals sound. Although it is subtle, the woman's voice to me sounds slightly more "light" and better controlled in the Bricasti-version. In comparison it's like there is a fine curtain hanging over the voice in the rev4000-version, creating a little blur. Hard to describe.


----------

