|
|
Post by stormymondays on May 4, 2019 3:55:12 GMT -6
I didn't want to hijack the ongoing thread about hardware/plugin reverb so I thought I'd open this one.
Do you filter your reverb sends or returns? All the time? On drums only? On specific reverbs only? Why send or return?
And for the "old school" guys:
In the era where real chambers and plates were used, were all reverb sends/returns filtered as a matter of course? (or are they now?)
I used to follow standard advice and filter the sends, but I made a special case for the Bricasti "Studio Close B", which I treat as part of the sound and slap on the mix as early as possible. I leave it full range and make my mixing decisions with it on. I wonder if this workflow would end up clouding up my mix.
I'm also having a bit of a hard time finding my go-to snare plate sound, and I can see where filtering is very useful here, but I'm never sure how far to filter!
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on May 4, 2019 5:18:30 GMT -6
Returns,
Left slope starts at 20 and climbs up to 200hz
Right slope starts at 5K and runs downhill.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2019 6:19:23 GMT -6
According to the 'Recording The Beatles' book, the send to Abbey Road Chamber 2 went through a static Neumann RS-106 filter box (HPF and LPF with steep cutoffs) set at 600Hz and 10k. The return would sometimes go through another Neumann presence box, the RS-127, which had 10db of cut or boost at switched 2.7k, 3.5k and 10k frequencies. Apparently Lennon loved the 10k boost on his voice.
I've played with these settings with various Valhalla reverbs and plugin filters, and like anything, it sounds great on some things but not on others. It sounded great on a vocal group of very dry acapella trad Folk recordings, incredibly realistic, but not so great on a female pop vocal in a busy modern mix.
So I sometimes do it, sometimes not, really depends, just have a play and see what works for the track. I am usually pulling the high end on reverb returns down from about 4k up, sometimes much lower, to get them to sit back behind the source better. And I regularly rip the bass out of the reverb return to get rid of mud, much higher than I would on the dry source. But whatever works, it will vary depending on which reverb you use too.
|
|
|
|
Post by mitchkricun on May 4, 2019 7:33:33 GMT -6
I think it depends on if you want to hear the reverb or if you are just trying to create space. Also consider how much low end the source has, as not filtering that out can cause mud. The Bricasti Studio B Close would be an exception imo. It does become part of the sound. I use the Studio B Far and it sounds like a great room, not reverb.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 4, 2019 8:18:41 GMT -6
Once I started doing EQ on reverb I'm not going back to not doing it.
Mostly I do it on return, but if there's an issue I can fix, I'll do it on send.
Like others said, it's about what works, and I find I can make space while still being able to use a lot of reverb if I EQ it.
Hpf is usually around 100, lpf to taste to get the digititus out or to unclutter the details in the top end.
|
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on May 4, 2019 8:37:02 GMT -6
HPF around 100hz 98% of the time. Occasionally some LPF If there’s too much sparkle, though not a problem with the real plates.
The Ecoplate III has lo/hi EQ and I can’t say what it’s doing.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,941 
|
Post by ericn on May 4, 2019 8:42:56 GMT -6
It’s a case by case basis, what ever works on that project.
|
|
moze
Full Member
Posts: 35
|
Post by moze on May 4, 2019 9:04:06 GMT -6
Filter out the mud on the send. Sometimes I will really carve up the return so it is less obviously "reverby". Also occasionally side chaining a compressor on the return will keep it out of the way except for the tails.
|
|
|
|
Post by notneeson on May 4, 2019 9:18:51 GMT -6
You can get away (often) with pretty heavy filtering on the send, but at the same time I really dislike the way it sounds if taken too far. There’s a tipping point where it stops working for me, but it’s a moving target.
|
|
|
|
Post by stormymondays on May 4, 2019 12:17:10 GMT -6
Very good info, thanks. I wonder if the Waves Abbey Road plates and chambers include the filtering. Gotta revise the manuals.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on May 4, 2019 15:00:56 GMT -6
I used to shape what was going into the plate a lot. Reverbs can have too much low end build up and it can overwhelm it. So filtering the low end can be very helpful. For drums you can also do things like filter to bring out the snare smack more in the reverb and the reverb will make the snare bigger sounding. But like others have said, its a case by case basis. With real Plates you can manipulate it to sound like a lot of different things. Which was often what I was trying to do, make a Plate sound like a room...not a plate. Which you could do quite well. Here is some Classical guitar. Just two mics and an EMT140 that I've eqed and multed the input www.dropbox.com/home/Devin%20GTR%20Demos?preview=Chopin.wavwww.dropbox.com/home/Devin%20GTR%20Demos?preview=Lagoya.wav |
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on May 5, 2019 0:27:40 GMT -6
I often heavily de-ess the reverb send when using bright plate settings on vocals. I'm not a fan of the splashy reverberant sibilance that was common on a lot of late 1980's mixes. De-essing the send makes the verb smoother doesn't take the life out of the verb as can be the case when eq'ing the returns.
|
|
