|
Post by drbill on Oct 4, 2016 9:58:31 GMT -6
A long time back, I demo'd the UAD Lexicon 224 reverb, and the Relab XL480. I had a 3 plugs for $399 deal with UAD, so their 224 would cost me $133. The Relab was $400 then. I bought the Relab, so that has to tell you something. The Relab's HD algorithm's give you back some of that that sense of life and shimmer. The Phoenix Verb was the most realistic room space I'd heard though, so if you want real, look that way. The exception here is the UAD Ocean Way. It really puts you in that room. The thing is, I see it as a re-room, same way you can re-amp an electric guitar. I put all my instruments into the Ocean Way on a bus, and move them forward or back with the level. It just sounds like a room though, not like a Hall on a Bricasti. I can't say I've never used the halls in the bricasti, but it's rare for me. Almost always on a room or chamber of some sort. Best, most consistent "digital" room sounds I've ever heard.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Oct 4, 2016 10:25:26 GMT -6
....the "console paradigm" of it being an instance on an aux IS the "workflow killer" he refers to...
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 4, 2016 11:29:16 GMT -6
When using plugin reverb's, I've always felt "room" sounds like a chamber music listening room. The Ocean Way sounds like a studio room, if that makes any sense.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 4, 2016 11:57:07 GMT -6
....the "console paradigm" of it being an instance on an aux IS the "workflow killer" he refers to... And so he's going to buy a console / summing box? How's that going to fix the workflow?
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Oct 4, 2016 12:20:59 GMT -6
The thing about the Bricast is that, unless you're content with putting it on on Aux/Group track and sending to one instance, it is a workflow killer to use it on other sources. It takes time to bounce individual instruments (vocal) or groups of instruments (guitars) into plates and halls and if you have to edit something you have to do it again. I need to demo other Studio A type reverbs to see if others can get close to it. Good thing I can do it for free. I'm going to take a careful look at whether I can swing keeping the Bricasti. The samples I heard of the SSL Sigma-which prompted the Bricasti trade-in) have been impressive and the otb prefader compression aspect of it-which is unique to Summing Mixers- is a big deal for me, as well as being able to do otb parallel compression with hardware compresssors. I also want to take the next step and get some controllers with 16 faders so I can get more and more out of the box and more like I'm mixing on a console. So, there's the push and pull of "where am I getting the biggest bang for my buck" in all of this I use it the same way I would on a console. Instantiated as an insert on an aux return with aux sends on individual mix elements feeding it. no compromise vs. a console. Same workflow. What other reverbs are you using besides the Bricasti?
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Oct 4, 2016 12:33:34 GMT -6
....the "console paradigm" of it being an instance on an aux IS the "workflow killer" he refers to... And so he's going to buy a console / summing box? How's that going to fix the workflow? I don't think it's going to kill my workflow. What I'm seeing by SSL Sigma users is DAW templates being setup to route DAW channels to DAW Groups that output to the Sigma channels that then get summed to the two Sigma Mix Bus's, or just one Mix Bus depending on what you want. I route all my Daw Channels to DAW groups now, with everything going to the DAW Mix Bus. So, I don't see it as a major hassle as far as work flow goes. I am looking forward to hearing the SSL summing as well as being able to parallel compress otb.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Oct 4, 2016 13:22:11 GMT -6
....the "console paradigm" of it being an instance on an aux IS the "workflow killer" he refers to... And so he's going to buy a console / summing box? How's that going to fix the workflow? Well, he's still going to have a reverb on every channel of his software mixer being sent TO the summer....duh. I will point out that while YMMV, given the actual topic of this particular thread, it's important that there be ONE "studio A" instance that the "band" is sent to.....that's literally part of the sound. If you had 20 Briscatis to tune the room for every given track, it would sound WORSE than sending them all to the one room. You need the cohesiveness.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 4, 2016 13:53:59 GMT -6
OK. IMO it's crazy to have a reverb on the insert of every track. So be it. We never did it that way with a console, and I see no reason to do it that way with a DAW either.
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Oct 4, 2016 13:54:23 GMT -6
And so he's going to buy a console / summing box? How's that going to fix the workflow? Well, he's still going to have a reverb on every channel of his software mixer being sent TO the summer....duh. I will point out that while YMMV, given the actual topic of this particular thread, it's important that there be ONE "studio A" instance that the "band" is sent to.....that's literally part of the sound. If you had 20 Briscatis to tune the room for every given track, it would sound WORSE than sending them all to the one room. You need the cohesiveness. This bring up the question: How common is it for mixer's to send all recorded tracks -"the band"- into a Studio A type reverb? And what was, or still is, the "Studio A" reverb before Bricasti used by major studios? The weird thing is that for major studios that have "Studio A" type live rooms, they often record electric guitar cabinets and vocals in comparatively small isolation booths away from their Studio A. So, are they using a Studio A reverb to send all their booth recordings to, knowing that it wouldn't sound like their own Studio A that their drums were recorded in? This is one (of many) major studio mixing mysteries to me.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 4, 2016 14:04:08 GMT -6
Forgetting whether it's "Studio A", "Hall A" or "Chamber A" or whatever you're using, it's the norm. It's the classic approach. It's how we always did it until guys who have never worked on a console decided to put a different reverb on the insert of every track.
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Oct 4, 2016 14:16:12 GMT -6
On an SSL, pretty common to have a room for the instruments; a plate for the snare; and a plate, chamber, or hall for the vocal; plus darker or brighter predelays into each reverb.
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Oct 4, 2016 16:45:51 GMT -6
On an SSL, pretty common to have a room for the instruments; a plate for the snare; and a plate, chamber, or hall for the vocal; plus darker or brighter predelays into each reverb. Was everything sent to it 100% from each channel and the Aux fader lowered or raised to taste, or were each of the channels sent at different levels? I ask because I saw one of Casey's videos and it looked like he put everything at the same send level to the Bricasti and then brought up the Bricasti Aux channel.
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Oct 4, 2016 17:02:41 GMT -6
On an SSL, pretty common to have a room for the instruments; a plate for the snare; and a plate, chamber, or hall for the vocal; plus darker or brighter predelays into each reverb. Was everything sen to it 100% and the Aux fader lowered to taste, or were each of the channels sent at different levels? I ask because I saw one of Casey's videos and it looked like he put everything at the same send level to the Bricasti and then brought up the Bricasti Aux channel. How I use mine..... I have it on a aux in logic. Everything goes to it, sometimes with slightly differing amounts. It simulates a GREAT room type deal for me. I then use another reverb, most times, not always.. on a per track basis as an effect... most of the time RELAB 480L. That might be a really large hall, for a spooky guitar part etc But, what I use the Bricasti for, is to get all the stuff I have tracked, mostly close mic'd, gelled together with depth and beauty in the same (virtual) room. I even have Bass guitar go through it. cheers Wiz
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Oct 4, 2016 17:04:15 GMT -6
Further to that.. how I choose the verb is to listen to the solo'd bricasti return.. its just wet.
Then I flick through presets and play with decay time, and one will always (well often many more than one 8) ) as being the right vibe for the song.
Listening to reverb returns, can teach you a hell of a lot about how a reverb works in the mix... it also reveals flaws in reverb design (reversed stereo image, non true stereo etc)
cheers
Wiz
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Oct 4, 2016 17:10:00 GMT -6
Was everything sen to it 100% and the Aux fader lowered to taste, or were each of the channels sent at different levels? I ask because I saw one of Casey's videos and it looked like he put everything at the same send level to the Bricasti and then brought up the Bricasti Aux channel. How I use mine..... I have it on a aux in logic. Everything goes to it, sometimes with slightly differing amounts. It simulates a GREAT room type deal for me. I then use another reverb, most times, not always.. on a per track basis as an effect... most of the time RELAB 480L. That might be a really large hall, for a spooky guitar part etc But, what I use the Bricasti for, is to get all the stuff I have tracked, mostly close mic'd, gelled together with depth and beauty in the same (virtual) room. I even have Bass guitar go through it. cheers Wiz Do you use a HPF before or after the Bricasti for things like kick drum and darker drum room mics, or do you just send less to the Bricasti for darker more transient sources. Kick drums in particular can get pretty overwhelming in the Studio A setting at certain send levels while other instruments sent at the same level sound fine. However, with a HPF it sits better, but you're effecting the room for other instruments.
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Oct 4, 2016 17:14:25 GMT -6
Further to that.. how I choose the verb is to listen to the solo'd bricasti return.. its just wet. Then I flick through presets and play with decay time, and one will always (well often many more than one 8) ) as being the right vibe for the song. Listening to reverb returns, can teach you a hell of a lot about how a reverb works in the mix... it also reveals flaws in reverb design (reversed stereo image, non true stereo etc) cheers Wiz Another fun thing is to get the Free Voxengo MSED plugin and solo the sides while listening to classic songs. In particular, I didn't know how much mSec of delay people used before plates for vocals. The MSED helped me hear that they used a lot, which left a swirling modulating sound that doesn't happen if you just send from your vocal channel to a normal plate setting. And they tucked that far back in the mix. To simulate this, just put stereo delay plugin at a high mSec delay amount (to taste) and no feedback before your Plate Reverb plugin.
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Oct 4, 2016 17:47:54 GMT -6
How I use mine..... I have it on a aux in logic. Everything goes to it, sometimes with slightly differing amounts. It simulates a GREAT room type deal for me. I then use another reverb, most times, not always.. on a per track basis as an effect... most of the time RELAB 480L. That might be a really large hall, for a spooky guitar part etc But, what I use the Bricasti for, is to get all the stuff I have tracked, mostly close mic'd, gelled together with depth and beauty in the same (virtual) room. I even have Bass guitar go through it. cheers Wiz Do you use a HPF before or after the Bricasti for things like kick drum and darker drum room mics, or do you just send less to the Bricasti for darker more transient sources. Kick drums in particular can get pretty overwhelming in the Studio A setting at certain send levels while other instruments sent at the same level sound fine. However, with a HPF it sits better, but you're effecting the room for other instruments. Varying amounts does the trick for me here........ It really couldnt be easier and more beautiful than the Bricasti.. I know I sound painful and like a broken record... but its true for me. Yes, it was HUGELY expensive... I am nearly 52... life is too short not to Bricasti! (there is their ad campaign) 8) cheers Wiz
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Oct 4, 2016 17:50:25 GMT -6
Do you use a HPF before or after the Bricasti for things like kick drum and darker drum room mics, or do you just send less to the Bricasti for darker more transient sources. Kick drums in particular can get pretty overwhelming in the Studio A setting at certain send levels while other instruments sent at the same level sound fine. However, with a HPF it sits better, but you're effecting the room for other instruments. Varying amounts does the trick for me here........ It really couldnt be easier and more beautiful than the Bricasti.. I know I sound painful and like a broken record... but its true for me. Yes, it was HUGELY expensive... I am nearly 52... life is too short not to Bricasti! (there is their ad campaign) 8) cheers Wiz I know Wiz. I own one. I'm thinking about selling it, and here I am caught up talking about how great it is. LOL....
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Oct 4, 2016 18:40:20 GMT -6
Bricasti is the ultimate idealized room and chamber simulator, it's true.
But we're pretty spoilt for choice these days. You have Waves Abbey Plates in particular which nails the EMT 140 plate vibe, Valhalla for purer distillation of the plate aesthetic and the Vangelis style fx reverb sound, Nimbus for a naturalistic depature from Lexicon while retaining some warmth, PSP and UAD for digital EMT, and Relab for 480L and TC 4000 (two of the top units before the Bricasti came along) reversed engineered to perfection.
I also think about how many of my favorite records used or needed a Bricasti. The answer is zero.
Still, the Bricasti is such an alluring feat of engineering and has a larger than life vibe, so it's hard to resist.
|
|
|
Post by mulmany on Oct 4, 2016 18:43:44 GMT -6
You could grab a TC M3000 for cheap and use Exponential Audio and Eventide for variety.
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Oct 4, 2016 18:52:14 GMT -6
On an SSL, pretty common to have a room for the instruments; a plate for the snare; and a plate, chamber, or hall for the vocal; plus darker or brighter predelays into each reverb. Was everything sent to it 100% from each channel and the Aux fader lowered or raised to taste, or were each of the channels sent at different levels? I ask because I saw one of Casey's videos and it looked like he put everything at the same send level to the Bricasti and then brought up the Bricasti Aux channel. Check out this thread for an advanced approach www.gearslutz.com/board/high-end/578180-send-returns-large-consoles-what-do-you-have-patched.html
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Oct 4, 2016 20:45:18 GMT -6
All different amounts. I came up in the 90s, when digital reverb developed what they called (sort of incorrectly) "true stereo" reverbs....I've posted about it before---but, there are TWO aux sends for every channel dedicated to whatever room reverb so that you could vary the amount and effectively panning. Cubase allows you to actually PAN the send independently of the channel pan pot--memory serves, Logic did too....but, you have to have a software algo that actually has what was called "true stereo" which means a stereo input matrix. Lexi and a huge number of reverb algos sum the inputs to mono then output stereo from that....after much disappointment in third parties, I found a setting in Cubase's built in IR that will make the initial reflections respond to the stereo input, which is all you need--the long tails of bouncing around are the part that has little to do with psycho acoustic placement.
Anyway--you don't need to high pass things for the send...why? I mean, if the kick has low end, that would come through in the room--if the kick needs a HPF, put it there and it applies to the send too....but, why would I want the kick to only sound smacky in the room? I think if that's a big deal, you're sending too much kick into the reverb--and you probably don't want a natural ambience for the kick. If you want more than a natural sense of space, you need a different approach. I mean if you want 80s drums, you need to look at a different technique all together for them.
Ideally, you don't hear reverb this way. Until you mute it and stuff gets sort of claustrophobic without....if you're wanting to "hear reverb"....as in as an effect, you probably want a Lexi.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2016 23:01:31 GMT -6
Valhalla room, impulses and the Lx480 can very competently replace a hardware Bricasti. Unless you're doing major label work with it and you have everything else in order there's no need for it. I like the Bricasti but it's a DSP box. No reason it can't be a plugin.
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Oct 6, 2016 23:37:11 GMT -6
Valhalla room, impulses and the Lx480 can very competently replace a hardware Bricasti. Unless you're doing major label work with it and you have everything else in order there's no need for it. I like the Bricasti but it's a DSP box. No reason it can't be a plugin. I am just gonna nip out for some popcorn 8) cheers Wiz
|
|
|
Post by jazznoise on Oct 7, 2016 5:06:06 GMT -6
The problem with faking out a room sound vs. recording one imo is that with a set of room mics in a nice space you get the complex mix of predelays between different instruments, you get different frequency response vs. the spot mics on the instruments you can get stereo cues that are much harder to do convincingly in reverb as the mix of time difference vs. volume difference based cues will be different for every instrument. Not to mention you yourself can choose the cues which the mic pattern will be based on - ORTF, AB, XY will all sound different in the same basic position.
So my Room A sound is Room A, almost always. If I have to fake it, as in the dry sound I've been sent doesn't work, it's gonna be an IR and some sweat on my behalf. I'll probably have a few delay/EQ buses feeding the reverb itself to give the reverb a bit more of a character.
|
|