|
Post by Martin John Butler on May 2, 2017 8:49:48 GMT -6
Cowboycoalminer sent me a quick mix of one of my songs a few months back. I noticed the reverb was huge, but still much more pleasant than the Relab XL480, or the UAD EMT-140 or the other half dozen reverts I have. It had that real studio reverb sound. I asked about it, thinking, I gotta get me some of that sound, and he said it was a cheap Lexicon reverb he got for less than $100 online. That sound was money. It made me sure that somewhere down the road, I'll get back to hardware reverbs. It'll probably be the Lexicon PCM 70 and maybe the Eventide H9 that nofilterchuck used so beautifully on some tracks he posted here a while back.
In the meantime, I'll probably try the basic version next week. The Relab I have has paid for itself over the four years I've had it. It's an outstanding reverb and was a step above the crowd when first released. The thing is, I'm tired of the same old sound. I have the Bricasti convolution files installed, but I'd much rather have a tweaked easy to use, easy access version.
|
|
|
Post by papag on May 2, 2017 10:32:29 GMT -6
I suggest people try it. It has this quality where the original source is never lost in the air of the reverb, unlike other plugins I've tried. No matter how wet, the sound still has body. Fantastic stuff.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on May 2, 2017 11:47:39 GMT -6
As soon you hear the real hardware compared to plug ins - you are bumfucked.My advise: You should not do such an AB test. As soon you do it you want a real M7 unit and you will hate all your old reverb options. The hardware sounds like tracking in a real room and it takes milliseconds to be hooked by the details the M7 creates. That's exactly what led to me buying an M7. Comparing M7 IR's that I had in a mix, to the REAL patch (same sounds) in an M7 that was brought in to demo. Took me all of about 30 seconds to realize my checking account was about to be decimated. 2d vs. 3d. Fake vs. Real. Call it how you see it, but the difference is staggering.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on May 2, 2017 11:50:02 GMT -6
I yet wait for a plug in that can recreate realty in a believable way. Wait.....WAIT...did I just hear that right? ? I need to bookmark this page. LOL
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on May 2, 2017 12:16:03 GMT -6
The M7 sounds that good that you don't start to fumble with delays to come closer to the real world. Its just there, sounds good and there is nothing more to do.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on May 2, 2017 12:21:01 GMT -6
Cowboycoalminer sent me a quick mix of one of my songs a few months back. I noticed the reverb was huge, but still much more pleasant than the Relab XL480, or the UAD EMT-140 or the other half dozen reverts I have. It had that real studio reverb sound. I asked about it, thinking, I gotta get me some of that sound, and he said it was a cheap Lexicon reverb he got for less than $100 online. That sound was money. It made me sure that somewhere down the road, I'll get back to hardware reverbs. It'll probably be the Lexicon PCM 70 and maybe the Eventide H9 that nofilterchuck used so beautifully on some tracks he posted here a while back. In the meantime, I'll probably try the basic version next week. The Relab I have has paid for itself over the four years I've had it. It's an outstanding reverb and was a step above the crowd when first released. The thing is, I'm tired of the same old sound. I have the Bricasti convolution files installed, but I'd much rather have a tweaked easy to use, easy access version. I still have a few HW units in the rack and I think that is something SW can do very well... if its coded by gifted hands. I don't see a difference running reverb code internal or external? I bet there could be a a way to get the M7 in a plug in .... but that would take away the luxury of putting 4 K on the table....
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on May 2, 2017 13:33:31 GMT -6
There's more to it than code, I've been told. I met the guys from Bricasti 4 years ago at AES in NYC. They had spoken with UAD regarding a plug-in, but said both had concluded it just couldn't be done at the time. So, the actual parts of the hardware, and the huge native dsp power must combine to make it nearly impossible to get completely right.
My Relab XL480 is an excellent reverb. Still, I'm gonna try this soon because I want one more flavor reverb. I was considering getting the Waves Abbey Road plate, which is supposedly better sounding than the UAD EMT 140 I already have, and the Poor Plate too. The Poor Plate is an old algorithm, but it's wider than the EMT-140, so occasionally useful. But now that the 7th Heaven is around, I thin I'll go that way.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on May 2, 2017 13:36:04 GMT -6
I bet there could be a a way to get the M7 in a plug in .... but that would take away the luxury of putting 4 K on the table.... I think there is - but you'd need to chain about 20 computers together. At least it's something like that. I forget what Casey said, but it's over a dozen current model computers. There's a ****load of processing power inside that box.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on May 2, 2017 13:39:59 GMT -6
Yep, that's what I was talking about! Even if somewhere down the road, that much power becomes available to use for one plug-in, it still doesn't have the electrical signal passing through components.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on May 2, 2017 14:17:27 GMT -6
Anyway I did some more ABing and the closest I could get to the real M7 sound was with doing some delay tricks on the reverb output to get a denser tail. To my surprise the ERs are very similar to the hardware...
Tough to match but to be fair its not a bad software reverb maybe the most real sounding one I heard yet.
If someone wants AB files and wants to blind test which is hard and which is software drop me a PM.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 2, 2017 15:26:49 GMT -6
Cowboycoalminer sent me a quick mix of one of my songs a few months back. I noticed the reverb was huge, but still much more pleasant than the Relab XL480, or the UAD EMT-140 or the other half dozen reverts I have. It had that real studio reverb sound. I asked about it, thinking, I gotta get me some of that sound, and he said it was a cheap Lexicon reverb he got for less than $100 online. That sound was money. It made me sure that somewhere down the road, I'll get back to hardware reverbs. It'll probably be the Lexicon PCM 70 and maybe the Eventide H9 that nofilterchuck used so beautifully on some tracks he posted here a while back. In the meantime, I'll probably try the basic version next week. The Relab I have has paid for itself over the four years I've had it. It's an outstanding reverb and was a step above the crowd when first released. The thing is, I'm tired of the same old sound. I have the Bricasti convolution files installed, but I'd much rather have a tweaked easy to use, easy access version. Where is Cowboycoalminer these days?
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on May 2, 2017 15:49:52 GMT -6
Thought he moved ?
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 2, 2017 16:50:09 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 2, 2017 16:50:20 GMT -6
To North Korea?
|
|
|
Post by viciousbliss on May 3, 2017 0:52:57 GMT -6
Its a german review you can download dry and processed files but be carefull you will get addictet to the beauty of the hardware if you do the AB comparsion, the software is not even close .... but still a good software verb. But since then I have now a special M7 account where I put money on - from time to time- without getting wife trouble.... All after me....want one want one want one....did I say I want an M7? www.bonedo.de/artikel/einzelansicht/bricasti-design-m7/3.htmlThanks for posting the link. I downloaded the zip with the wavs. Then I resampled a few in Audacity to 88 using the triangle dither and the best quality. I think Audacity uses one of the best resampling methods now, Sox or something? Imported into pro tools along with the dry vocal. Inserted SHP on the dry vocal with the same presets. No other changes, tried to keep this as pure as possible. Stuff sounds really different, and not to where it's sounding like the same thing with different tails. It will sound like one of them has a lot more pre-delay or ER than the other, for example. Maybe there's things you have to turn off or change in SHP to get the IR to play back as purely as possible(I only adjusted the mix knob). I know that's the case if you want to try and match the regular SH with the pro version. They don't automatically match up if you load the same presets in each and do an A/B. I also translated the German site with google and didn't find any info as to how they made these files. For all we know they ran the M7 through a console or had plugs open. I'm sure the M7 would sound different at 24/96. I didn't find SHP to be harsh or of a lower quality. Maybe a tad cleaner sounding, but that could be because I'm comparing SHP at 32 bit float 88k vs 44/16 wavs. Doesn't look like there's a wav of the mixed song either. I'm not too worried about it, but I'm definitely interested in hearing more from anyone who has access to both an M7 and SHP.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on May 3, 2017 7:34:23 GMT -6
Its a german review you can download dry and processed files but be carefull you will get addictet to the beauty of the hardware if you do the AB comparsion, the software is not even close .... but still a good software verb. But since then I have now a special M7 account where I put money on - from time to time- without getting wife trouble.... All after me....want one want one want one....did I say I want an M7? www.bonedo.de/artikel/einzelansicht/bricasti-design-m7/3.htmlThanks for posting the link. I downloaded the zip with the wavs. Then I resampled a few in Audacity to 88 using the triangle dither and the best quality. I think Audacity uses one of the best resampling methods now, Sox or something? Imported into pro tools along with the dry vocal. Inserted SHP on the dry vocal with the same presets. No other changes, tried to keep this as pure as possible. Stuff sounds really different, and not to where it's sounding like the same thing with different tails. It will sound like one of them has a lot more pre-delay or ER than the other, for example. Maybe there's things you have to turn off or change in SHP to get the IR to play back as purely as possible(I only adjusted the mix knob). I know that's the case if you want to try and match the regular SH with the pro version. They don't automatically match up if you load the same presets in each and do an A/B. I also translated the German site with google and didn't find any info as to how they made these files. For all we know they ran the M7 through a console or had plugs open. I'm sure the M7 would sound different at 24/96. I didn't find SHP to be harsh or of a lower quality. Maybe a tad cleaner sounding, but that could be because I'm comparing SHP at 32 bit float 88k vs 44/16 wavs. Doesn't look like there's a wav of the mixed song either. I'm not too worried about it, but I'm definitely interested in hearing more from anyone who has access to both an M7 and SHP. You cant just throw a preset on/off and come to the conclusion - howdy that is bad. Many factors come into play level of the send signal, EQ matching etc. If you start to match it you will learn a lot. The tail in the software is without further manipulating with big holes like Swiss cheese. The HW reacts different to peaks in the music. I did send you some matched files ... I had to manipulate the tail with delay and stereo widener to get close to the hardware smoothness...
|
|
|
Post by viciousbliss on May 3, 2017 12:04:59 GMT -6
Thanks for the files. I thought the point of using the same presets in any convolution was to accurately capture what's there. That the preset would already have everything tweaked to sound as close as possible to the hardware. Otherwise why use the same names? The manual I don't know was all that clear about how closely the SHP presets match the hardware presets without additional tweaking. Both those files you sent are good. Sounds like A is the hardware and B is SHP based on how those German files sounded. A has more subdued highs and clings to the source more. Not sure if that would always be my preference.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on May 3, 2017 14:23:18 GMT -6
Thanks for the files. I thought the point of using the same presets in any convolution was to accurately capture what's there. That the preset would already have everything tweaked to sound as close as possible to the hardware. Otherwise why use the same names? The manual I don't know was all that clear about how closely the SHP presets match the hardware presets without additional tweaking. Both those files you sent are good. Sounds like A is the hardware and B is SHP based on how those German files sounded. A has more subdued highs and clings to the source more. Not sure if that would always be my preference. A was the software and B was the hardware but this shows that we go by taste and not by brands.... Its a good software reverb... Casey would be stupid to say yes to this deal if the software would be as good as the hardware-- They captured a wind of M7 its nothing wrong with this.
|
|
|
Post by viciousbliss on May 3, 2017 16:02:21 GMT -6
Thanks for the files. I thought the point of using the same presets in any convolution was to accurately capture what's there. That the preset would already have everything tweaked to sound as close as possible to the hardware. Otherwise why use the same names? The manual I don't know was all that clear about how closely the SHP presets match the hardware presets without additional tweaking. Both those files you sent are good. Sounds like A is the hardware and B is SHP based on how those German files sounded. A has more subdued highs and clings to the source more. Not sure if that would always be my preference. A was the software and B was the hardware but this shows that we go by taste and not by brands.... Its a good software reverb... Casey would be stupid to say yes to this deal if the software would be as good as the hardware-- They captured a wind of M7 its nothing wrong with this. Which preset was in use here? B actually sounded kinda messy in some ways, I'd find either style useful all depending. What I haven't heard is how an M7 fairs in a whole mix.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on May 3, 2017 16:25:27 GMT -6
It is a good question .. if you can hear the difference in a dense mix. As long as I have to save for the HW I will go with the little SHV its another reverb color to paint with.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 3, 2017 16:31:44 GMT -6
What am I missing...I don't see a link to an A/B with files comparing the M7 to Seventh Heaven...
I'm wondering too if I shouldn't try the bigger SH...I know I was looking for some size parameters that weren't there on the smaller one.
|
|
|
Post by viciousbliss on May 3, 2017 21:08:08 GMT -6
mrholmes, which version of SH did you use for the A/B? Is it correct that you hooked up a hardware M7 to use with your acoustic track?
John, he is sending the files via pm. I'd definitely recommend trying the pro SH. It has some great V1 presets that are missing, V2, and you havta tweak the settings on the regular to try and make both versions sound the same. Matt from Liquidsonics offered to explain it to me if I had wanted. The pro version's low cpu mode sounds more like the regular one. The regular cpu mode on SHP makes everything blend better and sounds smoother. The regular SH sounds like I gated all the tails with bx_console and doesn't have as wide a dynamic range, at least from my use of it. I guess even on the hardware, V1 stuff does not modulate tails.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 5, 2017 17:19:21 GMT -6
WOW. So I downloaded the professional demo...I don't know if I wasn't listening the first time, or if it's the feature set or what, but this is one I don't know if I can live without. EDIT - ok, listening to the jr version, it sounds really damn good too. I'm not really sure what I was smoking.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on May 5, 2017 17:53:13 GMT -6
Does the Jr. sound the same, just fewer presets and choices, or is there poorer sound and less flexibility?
Cowboycoalminer's probably all caught up with moving now. There's a lot to handle there,packing up everything in your home, leaving one state for another, including kid's schools, etc. And, he's probably setting up a new recording space too. Hopefully he'll be back soon. I haven't heard from him for a while either.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on May 5, 2017 18:04:04 GMT -6
The sound is the same, the larger has more tweakability and many more presets.
|
|