Aleksey,is it possible to generate only early reflections and only diffuse reverb/tail/from impulse modeler? I want to try modulate them both indepently later.
If not,is it possible for future upgrade? Thanks.
Try "stacked" or "layered" reverbs.
A little bit of chorus before each one. A little bit goes a long way. All chorus's should be at very short (15ms or less) delay time. All reverbs are in parallel, hence the terms stacked or layered. Each chorus should have slightly different timings and all on low speed lfo's, and low percentages of signal "swing". Set the outputs to 100% wet. There should be no dry signal at all going into the verbs. Another thing that does wonders is to have the left side at one delay time and the right at another and even using separate lfo's on each. This should not be enough to smear the resulting reverb image. This one thing can do a lot to open up the reverb result, adding considerable depth to it and helping to alleviate ringing.
Blend the result to taste. Like Aleksey said, an artistic or artist's touch here.
I don't know about fully convincing to the uttermost detail, but the results can be very lush and pleasing to listen to with very little to no ringing in the tails. I don't need a Lexicon verb here, although they sure are nice.
By the way, I've been in real spaces that had bad ringing modes. Yuk.
Some of what you are talking about is the result of sound bouncing around to different areas and "getting hung up locally" then doing a sort of "group" exit from that area. Sound waves passing through slight temperature differences or light "wind" will change the results considerably. In a real room this can contribute to breadth and depth, and the overall lushness of the room. I can think of pipe organ in a cathedral with the intricate walls, halls, structures, ornate work, and alcoves. I have a hard time imagining same temperature air in the whole room structure.
John-I have no problems with ringing modes at all.And I´ve tryed layered impulses already,and yes with modulation,but results are very mixed-the more I used modulation,the more i got "living"reverb but at the expense of losing "clarity".And Im using very long reverbs in truestereo,so stacked impulses consumed much processing power and it was not worth the small difference in reverb quality.As Ianmcallister sayed-its a limitation of standart convolution-its too much "perfect "and too much "static" at the same time.Maybe Nebula works better,but its a cpu hog for reverbs-as was stated many times.And I want to use it realtime and altogether with sampler playing huge organ samplesets.
I think that some "magic" of church reverb is in its imperfections /and imperfections of recording gear,too/ and it cannot be fully replicated by means modulation and convolution.And I´m not trying to say that convolution sounds bad-most of the time /and if you use good IRs/ it sound better than real space,only very "predictable".
modulation is an artificial reverb's artificial attempt at creating a natural effect.
i feel it is more a matter of pitch variation than one of time
is the 'flatness' because of static pitch not lack of random impulses? because surely the impulse successfully captures the nature of the real room or algo in amplitude and time, as random as they are. yet the playback in a convo verb is unsatisfactory.
as modulation in the lex can't be captured in a standard impulse,
is it primarily pitch variations that occur in natural spaces that also are not captured?
is it only pitch variation that can not be captured by a real room impulse?
is there anything else? (of significance)
if that is the case, then this is what needs to be introduced to a convolution based reverb.
i see another s/w reverb talking of a new variation of natural sounding tails to mimic "air movement" in real spaces.
do you think that's what we hear in the real space? air pressure variations bending the pitch? (light wind, air movement)
sunny and warm end of the hall, cold dark end etc.
a simple pitch bend down would be my preference. start of impulse is o cents, by the end is a fraction lower. can there be this 'vector' approach to PS?
at each sample point in the vector you have the standard convo of the impulse and the other applies a pitch value for that point.
I do not think we hear pitch modulation in reverb that much - it should be a fairly windy environment to hear pitch variation. Beside that any pitch variation (if any) will result in a more smeared reverberation tail - not in perceived pitch variation (i.e. frequency response of tail will vary a bit). Please do not compare reality to Lex - as I've already replied, reality is much more linear than what Lex offers.
My apporach to 'varying' reverberation will be limited to variation in phase and frequency response as I do not believe anything more than that is going on in real spaces (of course if space is not a wooden house - in that case a lot of non-linear responses appear, but that's really hard to model).
Problems with sampled pipe organ reverb fixed-it only needs different IRs per flute,or minimally one truestereo setup /2 IRs/ per stop!Now it sounds very naturally,no modalation is needed.But another problem arise-I can run only 12 of 5 sec.long IRs in realtime/on my Pentium Dual/,which is not always enough for big organ-I need to run more than 20 IRs in realtime.Offline theres no limit-and it sounds huge.
btw.:real reverb is NOT linear,I have sampled more than 20 different churches in Europe with best equipment and sometimes I got up to 9 records of same position-and they are never same,especially in hi freq.region.The more time passed from first captured sweep,the more they are different...But Aleksey is right,the differences are very small,almost not hearable-on the other side modulation in Lexicon reverbs is usually much more hearable.
This topic was last updated 180 days ago, and thus it was archived. Replying is disabled for this topic.