What's new

More Reverb Questions (probably a rookie question)

B98D34A2-74E4-4EAF-B800-A39C90E02669.jpeg
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,
 
B98D34A2-74E4-4EAF-B800-A39C90E02669.jpeg
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
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)
 
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????


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...)
 
Last edited:
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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!)

 
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.

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.

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.

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.
 
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?
 
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 :P 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.
 
Top Bottom