# More Reverb Questions (probably a rookie question)



## Robert_G (Feb 21, 2020)

So now that I've dumped Composer Cloud and I no longer have Spaces II (The only composer cloud product I actually miss), I'm struggling to update my template with Reverbs. Spaces II was easy to use. Just choose a room and go.

I started by trying out using the Hall of Fame LEX PMC 96 I got for free for buying Celtic Era. It's ok, but the more I use it....seems limited.
I'm now experimenting with Roomworks that comes with Cubase Pro and it seems to have potential.
Anyways....I find a room I like, but I'm not sure how to use this type of reverb to place things. Spaces II had multiple instruments for the same room which I really liked about it.
My question is what settings to you use in a reverb like this (Roomworks from Cubase) to bring an instrument closer or further away from the front. Panning is easy enough, but sometimes I want to bring a solo instrument closer without changing the room. I just want to make the adjustment and then save the custom preset.
Anyone have some thoughts?

Edit and while I'm at it, what is it in the reverb options that make the room darker or lighter. 
Sorry, the more I learn, the more I really understand I still have lots to learn.


----------



## storyteller (Feb 21, 2020)

A combination of early reflections and pre-delay is what makes something sound closer or further back. But it works backwards from how you might think it would. Percussion, for example, is usually in the back of an orchestra so its early reflections would be quietest and the FASTEST to occur because it is closest to the back wall. The most upfront instruments would have the most "blur" due to pre-delay and early reflections. Typically the tail would remain the same for all instruments since they would all be in the same space. There are several good resources online. Mattias Westlund has a great article here: https://mattiaswestlund.net/?page_id=448


----------



## storyteller (Feb 21, 2020)

You can also consider placing an INSERT on each section for the pre-delay and early reflections (no tail), but then SEND each entire section to a BUS with just the tail on that particular reverb. There are other methods, but this is one way that might be the quickest for you.


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 21, 2020)

storyteller said:


> You can also consider placing an INSERT on each section for the pre-delay and early reflections (no tail), but then SEND each entire section to a BUS with just the tail on that particular reverb. There are other methods, but this is one way that might be the quickest for you.



Bare with me here. I'm assuming each section means 'track', but what do you mean 'send each entire section to a bus'?

I only have a left, right, and stereo bus for my 'sends'


----------



## storyteller (Feb 21, 2020)

It depends on your DAW. For example, if you use track folders you can have all of your string tracks in a track folder/group. Instead of sending each track to a verb, you could have an INSERT with pre-delay/early reflections only on the track folder, then send the track folder to the a BUS for the TAIL only.

But if you are putting a reverb or busses on each track, it might be a little different for you. You could set up separate bussed reverbs for each section then just send each track to the appropriate reverb. There are numerous ways to slice-and-dice it, but the idea is to most easily manage reverbs throughout your project, you would likely want as few of them as possible (meaning on a track group rather than each track as an insert if possible).

Hope that helps ya.


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 21, 2020)

Yeah it helps a bit. I guess really the pre-delay should be less as you get closer to the back wall, so instruments at the front could use the same reverb as the ones further back but with a longer pre-delay.

I've been using a separate reverb (same room) for each track. I wonder if maybe applying it a group folder is better?


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 21, 2020)

The more I study reverb, the more I get confused.

Does anyone know of a good YouTube reverb video for dummies?


----------



## Zero&One (Feb 21, 2020)

Robert_G said:


> The more I study reverb, the more I get confused.
> 
> Does anyone know of a good YouTube reverb video for dummies?



Just out of curiosity, why don't you buy Spaces II since the cloud ended?


----------



## Zero&One (Feb 21, 2020)

Robert_G said:


> Does anyone know of a good YouTube reverb video for dummies?



Oh, and this is good


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 21, 2020)

Zero&One said:


> Just out of curiosity, why don't you buy Spaces II since the cloud ended?




I spent all my money.

I started doing this at the end of 2018 and I've spent over 10 grand on hardware and software. I was supposed to build a greenhouse with my savings. I've got seedlings in my window that need to go out in a few weeks to the greenhouse (the one I can't afford now) but I ran out of greenhouse money because I spent it all on VIs.


----------



## Zero&One (Feb 21, 2020)

Ahh right, that makes sense. I wondered if it was good... but not worth the money good.

It's certainly a dangerous hole music production isn't it? I'm worried for the seedlings now, what will happen to them?

That tutorial is good, he really takes you through the science in a fun way. I watch it now and again for a refresher.


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 21, 2020)

storyteller said:


> You can also consider placing an INSERT on each section for the pre-delay and early reflections (no tail), but then SEND each entire section to a BUS with just the tail on that particular reverb. There are other methods, but this is one way that might be the quickest for you.



Ok...now I'm getting this. I didn't realize I could send a global tail on the whole mix.
So basically I choose the room for a global reverb tail, and use an individual set delay for each track? Am I getting close?


----------



## storyteller (Feb 21, 2020)

Robert_G said:


> Ok...now I'm getting this. I didn't realize I could send a global tail on the whole mix.
> So basically I choose the room for a global reverb tail, and use an individual set delay for each track? Am I getting close?


Yep!


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 21, 2020)

storyteller said:


> Yep!


Ok....then I'm guessing if the global room has any delay on it, the global room should have the delay set to 0ms? Correct??

Are there other settings that should go to 0 as well on the global tail?


----------



## storyteller (Feb 21, 2020)

storyteller said:


> Yep!


I think I might have spoken without realizing exactly what you were saying. You don’t put a delay on the track. You would still have a reverb on it, but you would only have early reflections in it without the tail. You would adjust the mix and the predelay to taste for each section. Just wanted to clarify. Reverbs generally have individual control over early reflections from the tail.

But, you are correct that the tracks would be bussed to one tail without predelay.


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 21, 2020)

Ok. I hope I'm getting what you're saying....but I've been slow before.

Global - Choose Room (tail)
Global - Set Delay to 0
Global - Set Color (if software has the option)
Global - Set total time including decay (ms) to preference (ie... 3.2ms for an average concert hall)

Individual Track - set additional time if needed (ms) including decay depending on instrument placement
Individual Track - Set pre delay depending on instrument placement.
Do those 6 settings seem right?

As for the 'early reflections'.....I realize the instruments are in different places in the room, but how do you adjust that to each instrument on the software?

BTW, thanks for sticking it out here with me....


----------



## Kony (Feb 21, 2020)

Robert_G said:


> As for the 'early reflections'.....I realize the instruments are in different places in the room, but how do you adjust that to each instrument on the software?


@Beat Kaufmann has some good reverb advice here: https://www.beat-kaufmann.com/vitutorials/about-reverbs/index.php

Also here: 




__





Need help with early reflections...


Hey everybody, I’ve been doing a deep dive and trying to learn as much as I can about reverb and using sends (instead of just putting a reverb on the instrument channel). One thing I’ve seen a lot of people do is create multiple sends for different types of reverbs or for different instrument...



vi-control.net


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 22, 2020)

storyteller said:


> I think I might have spoken without realizing exactly what you were saying. You don’t put a delay on the track. You would still have a reverb on it, but you would only have early reflections in it without the tail. You would adjust the mix and the predelay to taste for each section. Just wanted to clarify. Reverbs generally have individual control over early reflections from the tail.
> 
> But, you are correct that the tracks would be bussed to one tail without predelay.



Ok...ive had to take a step back and humble myself to my capabities and knowledge in regards to post mixing....especially reverb, delay, and room size/placement....etc

Composing is composing and you can either do it or you cant. Modulation, expression, velocity...melody...chord progressions....instruments that sound good together.....etc...i have lots of room to get better, but i have figured a lot of that out. 

Post production and mixing however....is a different beast and i now understand why many composers hire people for post production.

Spaces II made me lazy. I just picked a room and chose an appropriate reverb for the instrument. I learned very little doing it that way. Now i could just purchase Spaces II and stay in that small space....

...but the question is for my type of music....arranged/orchestra classical type music with 100% VI libs with a concert hall type room.....is that sort of post production good enough?????

Ive heard it here at VI so many times...."just slap a verb on it and dont stress".

Which way is correct for me? Spend 100s of hours learning post production or just "slap a verb on it".....or is there a middle????


----------



## Zero&One (Feb 22, 2020)

Robert_G said:


> Which way is correct for me?



Slap a verb on it.
I bought Spaces II after our initial posts, love it. I would rather spend my time making music, arranging etc.
Any skill is a good skill, so learning mixing, mastering, etc is never a bad thing. However, I feel I'll follow a route many of my ventures have taken me... jack of all trades. So for me, I'm concentrating on making music. When reverbs are the only thing stopping me getting a gig or my reverb landed me second place in a competition... then I'll study them more.


----------



## Bluemount Score (Feb 22, 2020)

I know you are asking about reverb and certainly not all libraries (or real recordings!) have them, but don't forget about your different mic positions for what you are trying to achieve here. It's still the most realistic and also easiest way of positioning your instrument close or further away. Reverb mixing is a learnable skill and an interesting one, if you ask me, but it can also be very hard as a beginner.
Personally, I'm often fine with a single reverb on all instruments, same tail length etc., adjustments are only made by changing mic positions whereever needed. I generally want to learn more about the topic but currently I think it works well for me.


----------



## barteredbride (Feb 22, 2020)

Robert_G said:


> I spent all my money.
> 
> I started doing this at the end of 2018 and I've spent over 10 grand on hardware and software. I was supposed to build a greenhouse with my savings. I've got seedlings in my window that need to go out in a few weeks to the greenhouse (the one I can't afford now) but I ran out of greenhouse money because I spent it all on VIs.



Ironically, the IRs in that greenhouse might have helped you out.


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 22, 2020)

Bluemount Score said:


> I know you are asking about reverb and certainly not all libraries (or real recordings!) have them, but don't forget about your different mic positions for what you are trying to achieve here. It's still the most realistic and also easiest way of positioning your instrument close or further away. Reverb mixing is a learnable skill and an interesting one, if you ask me, but it can also be very hard as a beginner.
> Personally, I'm often fine with a single reverb on all instruments, same tail length etc., adjustments are only made by changing mic positions whereever needed. I generally want to learn more about the topic but currently I think it works well for me.



I agree with mic positions being important too.
I usually try to give my solo strings a bit more close mic...just so they stand out a bit. Brass and woods go a bit further back.
Choirs go depending on what I use them for....etc...etc. Percussion goes to the back with a shorter pre-delay.
The left to right positioning is fairly straightforward as I downloaded a few symphony instrument seating plans and imagine where I would be sitting in the crowd and pan accordingly.
I find in regards to front/back, that if I was sitting 40 feet center behind the conductor, and the woodwinds were only 20 feet further back from the strings that the mic placement (front to back) isn't overly crucial...but small adjustments should be made.
Again....still learning....


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 22, 2020)

storyteller said:


> It depends on your DAW. For example, if you use track folders you can have all of your string tracks in a track folder/group. Instead of sending each track to a verb, you could have an INSERT with pre-delay/early reflections only on the track folder, then send the track folder to the a BUS for the TAIL only.
> 
> But if you are putting a reverb or busses on each track, it might be a little different for you. You could set up separate bussed reverbs for each section then just send each track to the appropriate reverb. There are numerous ways to slice-and-dice it, but the idea is to most easily manage reverbs throughout your project, you would likely want as few of them as possible (meaning on a track group rather than each track as an insert if possible).
> 
> Hope that helps ya.



Question. Now that I figured out how to do all this bussing thing, I notice when I send a track to a group/fx track that has a reverb added to it by me..... that the volume increases a fair bit when I play the track. If I remove the send...the volume goes back to normal. I have no idea why this happens since the gain is at 0.


----------



## marclawsonmusic (Feb 22, 2020)

Hi Robert, I used to worry about this too, but placement is fairly simple... 

More reverb (wet) signal = more distance. 
More original (dry) signal = less distance.

If you use the reverb as an 'Insert', you can generally mix the 'wet' (reverb signal) and 'dry' (original signal) in the reverb plugin.

If you use the reverb as a 'Send', you can configure the send as 'pre fader', which allows you to reduce the volume of the 'dry' signal using the mixer - bring volume down to -∞ and you will hear 100% reverb or slide up to blend the dry and wet signal... the more you bring it up, the more you hear 'dry', so the closer it gets. 

Adjusting the wet/dry ratio is the key to getting something to be 'placed' (front / back) where you want it.

PS - You can also use EQ to remove high frequencies on some sounds (depending on the source material) because in nature high frequencies don't travel as far as low frequencies. This also creates the perception of distance - the more high frequency you remove, the farther away something sounds.

PPS - I gave up on the whole pre-delay / early reflections scheme a few years back. A lot of that theory came about when samples were 100% dry (recorded in anechoic chambers - like VSL or Sample Modeling or even LASS). If you are using samples that have ANY spatial information in them (most samples do these days), I wouldn't worry so much about that stuff. Not saying it doesn't matter... but if you are struggling to do basic front / back, I would start with a simple wet/dry approach before you begin tweaking reverb knobs.

Hope this helps.


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 22, 2020)

marclawsonmusic said:


> Hi Robert, I used to worry about this too, but placement is fairly simple...
> 
> More reverb (wet) signal = more distance.
> More original (dry) signal = less distance.
> ...



I agree with this, but the 'expert' videos I'm watching are saying that the group folder which you are bussing too should have it set to 100% wet. But when I do that, no matter what reverb I'm using it seems like overkill.


----------



## Zero&One (Feb 22, 2020)

Robert_G said:


> I agree with this, but the 'expert' videos I'm watching are saying that the group folder which you are bussing too should have it set to 100% wet. But when I do that, no matter what reverb I'm using it seems like overkill.



Sounds like you are sending 100% to the bus. There should be an amount knob on the send, turn that up until desired dry/wet is found


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 22, 2020)

Zero&One said:


> Sounds like you are sending 100% to the bus. There should be an amount knob on the send, turn that up until desired dry/wet is found



No...I am using the mix option. I find around 20-30% wet is perfect for my ears for a nice authentic concert hall sound, but the videos and articles I've been reading are saying that the fx/group track needs to be 100% wet which seems to be overkill.


----------



## VinRice (Feb 22, 2020)

Robert_G said:


> No...I am using the mix option. I find around 20-30% wet is perfect for my ears for a nice authentic concert hall sound, but the videos and articles I've been reading are saying that the fx/group track needs to be 100% wet which seems to be overkill.



If it's an insert on the group then 20-30% is right, if it's a send to an FX track then the wet should be 100% on the reverb and the effect send on the track adjusted to taste (ie 20 - 30 %)


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 22, 2020)

VinRice said:


> If it's an insert on the group then 20-30% is right, if it's a send to an FX track then the wet should be 100% on the reverb and the effect send on the track adjusted to taste (ie 20 - 30 %)




Ah ok....let me guess....this is why my volume is also up.
I have the group/fx track set to 0......not 00 (bottom) on the mix console. Is that what you are saying should be 20-30%?
*goes back to try it out*


----------



## Zero&One (Feb 22, 2020)

VinRice said:


> If it's an insert on the group then 20-30% is right, if it's a send to an FX track then the wet should be 100% on the reverb and the effect send on the track adjusted to taste (ie 20 - 30 %)



This ^


----------



## Zero&One (Feb 22, 2020)

Robert_G said:


> Ah ok....let me guess....this is why my volume is also up.
> I have the group/fx track set to 0......not 00 (bottom) on the mix console. Is that what you are saying should be 20-30%?
> *goes back to try it out*



The bus should be 100%. And you ‘send it‘ 20-30% from the source. The source (original track) volume remains the same... unless you drop/raise it.

So that 1 bus could receive 30% from viola, 40% from cello, 10% from a triangle etc etc


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 22, 2020)

Zero&One said:


> The bus should be 100%. And you ‘send it‘ 20-30% from the source. The source (original track) volume remains the same... unless you drop/raise it.
> 
> So that 1 bus could receive 30% from viola, 40% from cello, 10% from a triangle etc etc



So leave the group track at '0' db and change each individual track to -70 - 80 db on the mix console to achieve my 20-30%?


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 22, 2020)

Here is what my reverb looks like. Right now with 100% wet...it sounds like overkill...


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 22, 2020)

VinRice said:


> if it's a send to an FX track then the wet should be 100% on the reverb and the effect send on the track adjusted to taste (ie 20 - 30 %)



Where is the adjustment for this? Each track send doesn't have a % option....at least one I can find.


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 22, 2020)

marclawsonmusic said:


> If you use the reverb as a 'Send', you can configure the send as 'pre fader', which allows you to reduce the volume of the 'dry' signal using the mixer - bring volume down to -∞ and you will hear 100% reverb or slide up to blend the dry and wet signal... the more you bring it up, the more you hear 'dry', so the closer it gets.



Ok....so I tried this and got the opposite. When I took it down to 00 db I was left with just the dry....it did bring back the normal volume (the same as it was before adding the group/fx track).... but as I brought up the volume in the mixer I got more reverb (wet), but I also got more volume...???


----------



## Zero&One (Feb 22, 2020)

What DAW are you using?


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 22, 2020)

Cubase pro 10.0.5


----------



## Zero&One (Feb 22, 2020)

What’s that 0.00 next to the reverb name on the send?
I use Logic sorry. Is that not the amount aka full


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 22, 2020)

Zero&One said:


> What’s that 0.00 next to the reverb name on the send?
> I use Logic sorry. Is that not the amount aka full



that is the default db. It shows 0 db in the mix console. I'm assuming 0db is full. It goes down to -100db


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 22, 2020)

Its so frustrating that I can't figure it out.
If I simply do each track as an 'insert'. I set the reverb to a wet/dry mix of 25% or so and it sounds great...volume stays the same....great.

But If I send even just one track to the group/fx track with the mix on 100% wet (as I've been told to do), the volume goes up and the reverb is crazy overkill. If I drop the db on the mixer to the bottom, I get my original volume back, but it's completely dry.....take it up even part way and the reverb (wet) comes back a bit but the volume goes up with it.

I must be missing something simple???


----------



## Zero&One (Feb 22, 2020)

Hopefully a Cubase user will point you to the send amount. Be a doddle after that


----------



## Zero&One (Feb 22, 2020)

This looks to be it... they are sending around 90% to the reverb bus. You would drop it further for less verb.
If I’m reading it correct :/





__





Insert Effects and Send Effects


You can apply effects to audio channels by using insert effects or send effects.




steinberg.help


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 22, 2020)

Zero&One said:


> This looks to be it... they are sending around 90% to the reverb bus. You would drop it further for less verb.
> If I’m reading it correct :/
> 
> 
> ...




Interesting, but the math doesn't work simple. It's not a matter of minus 75 to get your 25% wet/dry mix. 
According to that pic you posted, they are running 97.2% wet....but from testing it out I don't think the math works that way,


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 22, 2020)

Zero&One said:


> This looks to be it... they are sending around 90% to the reverb bus. You would drop it further for less verb.
> If I’m reading it correct :/
> 
> 
> ...




Nope...definetly some funky math. I did an insert with 30% wet mix and then did a -70 on the send level.

The -70 is quite dry and the 30% on the insert is just right.


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 22, 2020)

Strange.....it seems that to achieve the equivilant of 25% wet mix on 'insert'...when sending to the fx/group track with the reverb at 100% wet (as I'm told to do), the send level is around -6.20 on the single track in order to get the sound to be the same as each other. 
I have no idea what sort of algorithm is used to get that number


----------



## Zero&One (Feb 22, 2020)

I never really take notice of the values to be fair. I just dial it in from nothing until it sounds good.


----------



## VinRice (Feb 22, 2020)

Robert_G said:


> Strange.....it seems that to achieve the equivilant of 25% wet mix on 'insert'...when sending to the fx/group track with the reverb at 100% wet (as I'm told to do), the send level is around -6.20 on the single track in order to get the sound to be the same as each other.
> I have no idea what sort of algorithm is used to get that number



That means -6dB, which is dead right.The dB scale is logarithmic (-3db equivalent to 50%, -6db equivalent to 25%) When I used percentages I was just following your thinking. The actual figures in the mixer are always in dB. Use whatever sounds good to you. The idea is simply to always have the reverb itself at 100% wet when using it as a send effect. This is so you are not adding more direct signal to the overall mix.


----------



## Paul Cardon (Feb 22, 2020)

VinRice said:


> That means -6dB, which is dead right.The dB scale is logarithmic (-3db equivalent to 50%, -6db equivalent to 25%) When I used percentages I was just following your thinking. The actual figures in the mixer are always in dB. Use whatever sounds good to you. The idea is simply to always have the reverb itself at 100% wet when using it as a send effect. This is so you are not adding more direct signal to the overall mix.


I'd like to add that it's good to be wary of assuming the mix % in your plugins is always acting the same. Some mix % scale quite differently, or some have a "meet at the middle" approach, meaning both wet and dry are at a full 0dB at 50%, then tilting the mix knob turns down the respective side while leaving the other at 0dB, while others put logarithmic scaling into the throw of the knob, so it might not be super easy to "calculate" this in some cases (not to say this is the majority, most mix knobs do act how you'd expect)


----------



## jcrosby (Feb 23, 2020)

Robert_G said:


> Ok...ive had to take a step back and humble myself to my capabities and knowledge in regards to post mixing....especially reverb, delay, and room size/placement....etc
> 
> Composing is composing and you can either do it or you cant. Modulation, expression, velocity...melody...chord progressions....instruments that sound good together.....etc...i have lots of room to get better, but i have figured a lot of that out.
> 
> ...




You're overthinking this a lot... There's a ton of great, very straight-forward information in the very 1st article you were linked to. The article even took the majority of guess work out of the equation for you, as it explained the two more complicated concepts people typically have a hard time understanding - ER and pre-delay. No to mention it does a good job of boiling down the reasoning behind using more than one reverb vs using a single reverb on a send... 

If you're prone to overthinking the basics; (close, mid-room, back room), that's probably a good sign that this is where you need to start... Basically --- If you don't understand addition/subtraction don't move onto trigonometry or calculus, no? Or as someone I learned a ton from said to me -- you can't run before you crawl.. Start simple instead of analyzing yourself into a corner.

(Just wanted to be clear - I'm not saying this to be a PITA, or come across the way people often do on forums. I'm just saying it sounds like you're overthinking some really great, and really approachable information. It's the same advice I'd give anyone if they approached me...)


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 23, 2020)

jcrosby said:


> You're overthinking this a lot... There's a ton of great, very straight-forward information in the very 1st article you were linked to....
> 
> 
> …..I'm just saying it sounds like you're overthinking some really great, and really approachable information.



I am guilty of overthinking....therefore I made an adjustment to my user title.
The first article was great....read it a couple times. It made sense, but different reverbs don't all label their knobs the same...some reverbs have more knobs...some less....some are simpler and have knobs missing....some add knobs that don't even really have anything to do with reverb...I was trying to figure out the technical part of it. I was having an issue understanding the software aspect and the technical terms....
The basics of how a room works in regards to reverb....I'm pretty much understand. Just trying to apply that to the software, DAW and instruments was getting the best of me.

So yes...I do agree....I was taking too much in at one time and it overwhelmed me.


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 23, 2020)

Just a comment for all those who helped me worked through this. Thanks. I've been here for a little over a year and most forums/message boards are full of self righteous aholes. VI is not like that for the most part. This is a really welcoming helpful place to learn and share.

I took a course in different learning/teaching styles years back. One size does not fit all.
The style of learning that is most efficient for me is to have someone stand behind me and make me do it myself repeatedly until I get it right. That doesn't mean I learn blindly by repetition, but by doing it myself I actually learn what it is I'm doing by trial and error. It's probably one of the most uncommon learning techniques which is why it took awhile for me to figure out being helped by the internet helpers...and not someone standing over me. This style of learning is probably the hardest when it comes to taking advice from online sources....impossible in some cases.

But at the end of the day, I learned everything from this thread that I needed to learn...so thanks to everyone who was patient with helping me.


----------



## MartinH. (Feb 23, 2020)

Robert_G said:


> That doesn't mean I learn blindly by repetition, but by doing it myself I actually learn what it is I'm doing by trial and error


"Feedback" is the most important part of learning. I can highly recommend picking reference tracks and trying to emulate the room/reverb through trial and error. Or trying to get one library to sound like one recorded in a different hall. Hearing the constant switch back and forth in a playback loop is your feedback. Just fiddle with the setup and listen carefully with eyes closed. When you start getting confused which is which, you're doing a great job. Don't worry if you don't get there any time soon. You're still learning and getting closer.

In my template I use a combination of the free panagement plugin, microphone positions, tweaking sample release tail lengths and insert reverbs on every section to get them to sound closer to "being in the same room", and then I send it all to different master busses, that each have a different "master reverb" insert (just tail, no ER) and one or more mastering plugins, and then I mute all except one of these different "masterbus versions". It allows me to quickly switch the overall templates sound and experiment a little. It's neither a super common workflow nor one that I'd recommend as a go-to standard because you can't properly save stems from it, but it was fun and educational setting it up, and I'm reasonably happy with the balance of flexibility and simplicity that it strikes for my own humble use. 

The thing that you mention with loudness changing as you use a reverb insert is not really avoidable unless you make a setup where you mix the reverb over something that automatically turns the dry signal down as you send more pre-fader dry-signal to the reverb insert. On the other hand the advantage of the 1-insert-to-rule-them-all approach is that you very easily can change the overall reverb sound from just one place. I can't do that to the same degree in my template because each section already is pretty wet before it hits the different versions of the master bus that may or may not have yet one more reverb on top of them all. 

Stacking multiple reverbs probably has disadvantages in and of itself and may be counterintuitive, but iirc it was recommended in the documentation of Metropolis Ark 1 (Capsule userguide maybe? Can't remember where I read it.) to send it all through a "glue reverb"...
I usually use algorithmic reverbs for that.


----------



## jcrosby (Feb 23, 2020)

Robert_G said:


> I am guilty of overthinking....therefore I made an adjustment to my user title.
> The first article was great....read it a couple times. It made sense, but different reverbs don't all label their knobs the same...some reverbs have more knobs...some less....some are simpler and have knobs missing....some add knobs that don't even really have anything to do with reverb...I was trying to figure out the technical part of it. I was having an issue understanding the software aspect and the technical terms....
> The basics of how a room works in regards to reverb....I'm pretty much understand. Just trying to apply that to the software, DAW and instruments was getting the best of me.
> 
> So yes...I do agree....I was taking too much in at one time and it overwhelmed me.



Fair enough in terms of the parameter names, definitely true.

The one thing I disagree with in the article linked is using a preset. Although your final settings shouldn't be a preset, a preset is a great way to find some base settings you can start from... For example you might find that a darker hall actually sounds more flattering or vice versa. It also gives you a good sampling of the range of a reverb...

I personally think this is the best way for people to start when using an algorithmic reverb. Start with a preset that you find flattering, then adjust form there, and let your ear be the guide. Also don't sweat the stuff you don't understand... As the link says the main parameters you want to hunt for in a reverb are predelay and ER.

Pre-delays generally universal, ER can vary from reverb to reverb. Some have an ER mix or level slider, some let you adjust the parameters of an ER, others bake the ER into the algorithm. It's is one of those parameters that has a wider range of implementations.

The other really useful bit in the article is that reverb can be used to separate elements in a mix.. If you put a few things in a really tight room your brain has an easier time picking them out from elements in a larger space like a hall because it creates psychoacoustic depth of field differences... This is a great way to treat a few things, especially things that don't have to exist in an orchestral space, like synths, electronic percussion, maybe a few specific SFX, etc.

Also don't be afraid to use more than one verb... It's not uncommon to have two reverb tails for your orchestra, one being the primary reverb you 'hear', another longer reverb tucked way back in the mix that gels everything together. Way back, like -30 or quieter... You basically want to just barely hear this expect when there's a pause in the music.

This is a solid starting video for working with algorithmic reverb. Even though it focuses on Pro-R it explains a lot of the issues you're struggling with.. (Not to mention a great reverb!)


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 23, 2020)

jcrosby said:


> Fair enough in terms of the parameter names, definitely true.
> 
> The one thing I disagree with in the article linked is using a preset. Although your final settings shouldn't be a preset, a preset is a great way to find some base settings you can start from... For example you might find that a darker hall actually sounds more flattering or vice versa. It also gives you a good sampling of the range of a reverb...
> 
> I personally think this is the best way for people to start when using an algorithmic reverb. Start with a preset that you find flattering, then adjust form there, and let your ear be the guide. Also don't sweat the stuff you don't understand... As the link says the main parameters you want to hunt for in a reverb are predelay and ER.



I have no problem starting with and keeping an original preset and adjusting it to my liking. Most of the time I find something that is 'almost' what I want....has great color and I adjust per instrument and placement and I'm happy. I don't see why doing it this way would be an issue.



jcrosby said:


> Pre-delays generally universal, ER can vary from reverb to reverb. Some have an ER mix or level slider, some let you adjust the parameters of an ER, others bake the ER into the algorithm. It's is one of those parameters that has a wider range of implementations.



I looked into the whole ER thing, and I agree with some of the comments in this thread. They aren't something I'm going to stress over. Most newer VIs already have some of that information baked in. I can't see myself or really.....the average composer getting that technical over a track composed by 100% VIs. Seems like a purist/perfectionist thing to me. I suffer from that a bit....but not to that extent.



jcrosby said:


> The other really useful bit in the article is that reverb can be used to separate elements in a mix.. If you put a few things in a really tight room your brain has an easier time picking them out from elements in a larger space like a hall because it creates psychoacoustic depth of field differences... This is a great way to treat a few things, especially things that don't have to exist in an orchestral space, like synths, electronic percussion, maybe a few specific SFX, etc.



This is quite interesting. Sometimes you want to lightly add in a soundscape or some ambience here or there. It would be interesting to match a verb to your orchestra. Would love to see some examples of what others have done with that.



jcrosby said:


> Also don't be afraid to use more than one verb... It's not uncommon to have two reverb tails for your orchestra, one being the primary reverb you 'hear', another longer reverb tucked way back in the mix that gels everything together. Way back, like -30 or quieter... You basically want to just barely hear this expect when there's a pause in the music.



Yeah....this is for when I have too much time on my hands which is like never....lol...but the idea does sound cool....although I should probably forgo the temptation to fool around with it.


----------



## Robert_G (Feb 23, 2020)

jcrosby said:


> This is a solid starting video for working with algorithmic reverb. Even though it focuses on Pro-R it explains a lot of the issues you're struggling with.. (Not to mention a great reverb!)




For crying out loud, are you trying to sell me Fab Filter Pro R? That looks so simple to use. Watching that video made me feel even lazier for using Spaces II for so long? I don't think I'd have any issues learning how to use that. The guy explains it really well too. Fab Filter Pro R looks even better than Valhalla Room. I wonder if there are good specials on that?


----------



## jcrosby (Feb 24, 2020)

Robert_G said:


> For crying out loud, are you trying to sell me Fab Filter Pro R? That looks so simple to use. Watching that video made me feel even lazier for using Spaces II for so long? I don't think I'd have any issues learning how to use that. The guy explains it really well too. Fab Filter Pro R looks even better than Valhalla Room. I wonder if there are good specials on that?



Sorry  It really is a fantastic reverb. I also know the teacher really well... Taught a course for him a few years back. I'm not _selling_ Pro-R lol, just thought I'd post a video where I know the instructor is incredibly adept at teaching concepts like reverb in as succinct a manner as possible... He really does a fantastic job explaining it...

Valhalla Room's fantastic for sure. He actually uses both heavily so you can't go wrong with either... They do have different personalities in a lot of ways though... VH Room is a classic all around spatial simulator whereas Pro-R not only does gorgeous traditional spatial reverb, it's also fantastic for creative spacey reverb, and fun fx like the comb presets, etc.

Well worth demoing at some point for sure.


----------

