|
Post by drbill on Oct 31, 2016 11:50:17 GMT -6
Hahahaaaa! Agreed, but I still bet very few "consumers" can hear a difference between it and a good quality Chinese tube mic.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Oct 31, 2016 12:03:10 GMT -6
Hearing the difference of the Bricasti hardware made me wonder about real plates and a real 480, 250 and other legendary verbs and FX. I think we live in a time of close access, but not total, to the sound of those legendary units. I was not surprised a single second that they cant match the M7 because the M7 is very special. If I listen to the demos on YT I can imagine that something special is going on. I was shocked how good it sounds. A whole Jazz Band was sent to the M7. Amazing..... But take the VVV or the LEX PCM bundle we are not even close - we are there. The UAD EMT 250 sounds to my ear very good and reminds me on some of my favorite records. Since I have the PCM bundle I have not touched the PCM90-Hardware anymore - because both are great. I don't care if the plug ins sound exactly like the real deal as long as they deliver something nice that cuts through the mix.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2016 12:22:50 GMT -6
There's nothing really in those verb rack mounts a comp can't do now. No surprise to see this, just tired of slate stuff. Still think VMR is a workflow nightmare and you see guys like Kyle Black and CLA exclusively using the SSL channel because it just puts everything you need in front of you, like a console. The VMR annoys the hell out of me, I don't care how good it sounds.
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Oct 31, 2016 13:19:45 GMT -6
Hearing the difference of the Bricasti hardware made me wonder about real plates and a real 480, 250 and other legendary verbs and FX. I think we live in a time of close access, but not total, to the sound of those legendary units. So far the closest I've got to a real plate is the Abbey Road Plates .... Waves really did a great job on that plugin. BUT Boy oh boy a real plate is just a thing of wonder and if I ever have a place big enough ( and could afford one) I'd buy one in a heart beat - I love the sound of a real plate on vocals. The only other plugins I've used that I feel are very close to the hardware are the UAD EMT250 (apparently the original desginer suppplied the original algo's for that one and you can tell) and the Relab 480 which really is very, very close to the hardware. In addition to a real plate, I'd also love a fully functioning Lexicon 224XL - those things are just great on snare and vox. Is this new Slate reverb a convo?
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 31, 2016 13:24:34 GMT -6
Yes, convo. The new slate takes convolution a step further with (post) IR modulation and some other stuff that takes it further into cool territory than simple convolution IR playback verbs. (Not fully informed - haven't tried it yet). There are those who are in the subscription program saying that the new 480 presets are virtually identical and interchangeable with the Relab 480 presets. Take it with a grain of salt. Just what I'm hearing....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2016 13:43:00 GMT -6
That is cool feature swurveman. Those verbs sounded good. I have the UAD EMT-140, Relab XL480, Bricasti impulses, Poor Plate, and a half dozen freebies that come with Logic and my Waves bundle, so I'm not sure this would matter much. Slate always says his new thing is the greatest thing ever, and on a few rare occasions, it is, but I'd wait and see. He mentioned 8 reverbs, does anyone know which ones, I could see the UAD 250, Lexicon 480, and only one other, a "6000", which I'm unfamiliar with. It would truly be wonderful if this is in fact a step forward, but I wouldn't bet on it. Last week a friend put a nice and simple drum pattern with brushes on a track of mine. When he sent it back, I noticed a different sound to the reverb and asked him about it. It was full bodied, wider, noticeable, but the vocal in the center still was clean and intelligible. It was good to hear something different, and I felt it was just a little clearer than any of my reverbs. It was an inexpensive Lexicon hardware verb, one of those you get on eBay for $100. So, I think somewhere down the line, I'm gonna get a Lexicon PCM 60 or 70. I feel that plugs still don't sound the same as the hardware they emulate, good as they may be in their own right. You are aware that the old Lexicon box is running an algorithm inside of it right? It's not even a matter of emulating, they're taking the algorithms and just moving them to a native host as processing power increases. Unless you're talking about an old chamber, spring or plate reverb that physically produces reverberation no rack mount reverb will ever sound different than what can be done natively. The single exception to this is maybe the M7 which I do believe Slate took a stab at but (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) I think the processing power inside those M7s is probably still beyond what a computer is capable of handling. An old PCM 60/70? It's like saying your nintendo wii port of the old nintendo games isn't the same. It's a 1:1 port, all that changed was the host running the algorithm. Nothing changes there. The only possible argument you could have is maybe that the AD/DA stages on those old boxes sounds more analog and maybe it does but I think we're getting into tinfoil hat territory with that argument. Maybe just make a few round trips on your ADDA if it makes it more analog.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 31, 2016 13:51:44 GMT -6
True, except VERY few (if any) of those original algo's are ported over. They are all attempted clones, or copies. Add to that the crunchy AD/DA of the old boxes, and what you end up with is similar to the kind of "approximation" that new U47 clones sound like when compared to real 47's. Close, but not 100%.
To add to that, the Slate plug is NOT an algorithmic verb. It's convolution. Not running any algorithmic computations in it. Just playing back IR's and tweaking them.
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Oct 31, 2016 13:58:24 GMT -6
Thanks drbill, personally I'm not keen on convo reverbs for some odd reason they sound very static to my ears kinda pasted onto the original signal, but that's just the way I hear it.
I felt that way about the M7 clips someone posted earlier in this thread, the hardware sounded 3D and vibrant and the Slate M7 sounded a hollow static facsimile of it.
Whether the average punter could tell, as pointed out probably not, but these subtle things matter to me even though I know there are bigger fish to fry in my creative life.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 31, 2016 14:34:28 GMT -6
Thanks drbill, personally I'm not keen on convo reverbs for some odd reason they sound very static to my ears kinda pasted onto the original signal, but that's just the way I hear it. I agree 100% on that. This does have modulation and maybe something else(?) following the IR's, so I'm hopeful it will be better than the standard IR playback convo verbs. That said, I pretty much despise most of the Slate offerings. Especially the ones that have never worked right (FGX). I've given up using all the ones I purchased - including and especially VCC. This one might tempt me though, although I won't be selling my M7 or any other piece of reverb hardware anytime soon.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,953
|
Post by ericn on Oct 31, 2016 15:11:15 GMT -6
Thanks drbill, personally I'm not keen on convo reverbs for some odd reason they sound very static to my ears kinda pasted onto the original signal, but that's just the way I hear it. I agree 100% on that. This does have modulation and maybe something else(?) following the IR's, so I'm hopeful it will be better than the standard IR playback convo verbs. That said, I pretty much despise most of the Slate offerings. Especially the ones that have never worked right (FGX). I've given up using all the ones I purchased - including and especially VCC. This one might tempt me though, although I won't be selling my M7 or any other piece of reverb hardware anytime soon. The original Sony and Yamaha Hardware units held so much promise, unfortunately nobody has taken it anywhere beyond those units.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 31, 2016 18:35:38 GMT -6
You are aware that the old Lexicon box is running an algorithm inside of it right? It's not even a matter of emulating, they're taking the algorithms and just moving them to a native host as processing power increases. Unless you're talking about an old chamber, spring or plate reverb that physically produces reverberation no rack mount reverb will ever sound different than what can be done natively. The single exception to this is maybe the M7 which I do believe Slate took a stab at but (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) I think the processing power inside those M7s is probably still beyond what a computer is capable of handling. An old PCM 60/70? It's like saying your nintendo wii port of the old nintendo games isn't the same. It's a 1:1 port, all that changed was the host running the algorithm. Nothing changes there. The only possible argument you could have is maybe that the AD/DA stages on those old boxes sounds more analog and maybe it does but I think we're getting into tinfoil hat territory with that argument. Maybe just make a few round trips on your ADDA if it makes it more analog. I'm well aware that potentially, there should be little or no difference between a hardware reverb and the plugin version if they're using the same algorithms, but there is, why, I don't know. The track my friend sent with the cheap Lexicon reverb was undeniably better sounding than the high end plugins we both have. Don't shoot the messenger ;-) tell me why.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 31, 2016 18:38:49 GMT -6
Because 1 - the box is NOT running the same algo's as the software, and 2 - there are no crappy, grainy converters on the software plug version. Unless modeled, and even that is not an exact science.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 31, 2016 20:12:46 GMT -6
I kinda knew, but was having a little fun.
I'm curious if anyone knows if in the case of the backward engineered Relab LX480, does it have the exact algorithms as the lexicon original, or is it just close enough for comfort?
I seem to recall thinking the real LX480 had more depth to me, but then I use only a couple of presets, so perhaps I'm just not using the same setting as the sound I remember as the "LX480 sound".
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Oct 31, 2016 20:28:12 GMT -6
I kinda knew, but was having a little fun. I'm curious if anyone knows if in the case of the backward engineered Relab LX480, does it have the exact algorithms as the lexicon original, or is it just close enough for comfort? I seem to recall thinking the real LX480 had more depth to me, but then I use only a couple of presets, so perhaps I'm just not using the same setting as the sound I remember as the "LX480 sound". He appears to have painstakingly reverse engineered each 480L algorithm for the same sonic result. Based on the language Martin uses, it must be a very precise breakdown of factors, not just a tweak by ear process, since some algos have different parameters, like Ambience has no early reflections. He seems to be doing the same thing with the TC Electronic VSS4 presets and Relab VSR S24, except the website claims the plugin improves on the hardware calculation limitations, perhaps like LX480 Random Hall HD. Anyway the beta sounds unbelievably good. www.relab.dk/downloads/private/Manual_1.1.pdfVSS4 pretty much ruled the roost for natural reverb before the Bricasti was developed.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 31, 2016 20:52:10 GMT -6
Dang, that's an amazing demonstration, thanks Joseph.
I only could listen on headphones, but will listen on my monitors tomorrow. When I bought the Relab for $400, I could have had a deal on the UAD 224 for only $133, but chose the much more expensive Relab instead. I use the Random Hall HD almost exclusively.
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Oct 31, 2016 21:02:40 GMT -6
I love Large and Small Wood Rooms! Usually tweak the size and low cut. And Ambience, same thing.
I prefer 224 sound on synths only.
But I don't usually like Lexicon reverbs on vocals, more a fan of delays and sometimes subtle plates or chambers.
For plates, chambers and realistic rooms, I use Waves Abbey Road, and Nimbus/Phoenixverb.
In my opinion the Waves Plates sounds more like real plates than the Bricasti London plate.
If I ever get a Bricasti, it will be mainly for Studio A and B and the Sunset chamber.
But the VSR Jazz club sounds so good!
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 31, 2016 21:14:21 GMT -6
Which reverb are you using for lead vocals now Joseph?
I have UAD's EMT-140 and the Poor Plate. I like the Poor Plate because it's wider than the UAD, but the UAD is richer. I've heard the Waves Abbey Road is great, I guess I'll have to look into it, I use plate reverb more than I thought I would. Like Wiz said earlier, I typically use a combination of reverbs. First, the UAD Ocean Way, for a studio room sound, then the Relab, for general reverb, than only a pinch of plate to widen.
I used to use the EMT-140 for acoustic guitar a lot, but grew tired of the muddiness that came with it.
|
|
|
Post by veggieryan on Oct 31, 2016 21:31:21 GMT -6
Boy oh boy a real plate is just a thing of wonder and if I ever have a place big enough ( and could afford one) I'd buy one in a heart beat - I love the sound of a real plate on vocals. Agreed. Even Bricasti plates can't touch a real plate. I scored my EMT 140 cheap and repaired it. I was surprised to find that the metal is soft and flimsy almost like thick vinyl or something when it's not tensioned. Best decision I ever made. Pure magic. With the passive pickups and a high-end preamp it's just infinitely better than any digital hardware or plugin verb.
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Oct 31, 2016 21:40:36 GMT -6
Depends.
As a rule, plate sounds good on everything, so it's easy to get carried away when the song might be better served without it.
I like the UAD, but I don't have a satellite at the moment.
I use Waves Plate (really 4 different plates) with a fair amount of predelay. Only problem is it murders CPU. Valhalla plate can sound good on vocals and especially snare. Has a nice pure less vibey sound that blends well.
Or I'll use Nimbus for a chamber or room when I don't want as obvious a throwback sound.
Generally I'll use delays on vocals. I like Soundtoys Primaltap the most; but sometimes Eventide H910, or Exponential Excalibur.
For rooms on drums I can never make up my mind. Sometimes an Abbey plate. But the LX480 wood rooms have a front to back depth that's hard to match, so I usually try them. But I would never use them on acoustic guitar.
Like I said, I really like the new Relab VSR beta. The early reflections are so good.
Nimbus is probably best overall fallback for a natural sound, though, when other choices are too colored.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 31, 2016 21:42:44 GMT -6
Depends. As a rule, plate sounds good on everything, so it's easy to get carried away when the song might be better served without it. I like the UAD, but I don't have a satellite at the moment. I use Waves Plate (really 4 different plates) with a fair amount of predelay. Only problem is it murders CPU. Valhalla plate can sound good on vocals and especially snare. Has a nice pure less vibey sound that blends well. Or I'll use Nimbus for a chamber or room when I don't want as obvious a throwback sound. Generally I'll use delays on vocals. I like Soundtoys Primaltap the most; but sometimes Eventide H910, or Exponential Excalibur. For rooms on drums I can never make up my mind. Sometimes an Abbey plate. But the LX480 wood rooms have a front to back depth that's hard to match, so I usually try them. But I would never use them on acoustic guitar. Like I said, I really like the new Relab VSR beta. The early reflections are so good. Nimbus is probably best overall fallback for a natural sound, though, when other choices are too colored. Out of curiosity, what genre are you mainly working in?
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Oct 31, 2016 21:44:47 GMT -6
Depends. As a rule, plate sounds good on everything, so it's easy to get carried away when the song might be better served without it. I like the UAD, but I don't have a satellite at the moment. I use Waves Plate (really 4 different plates) with a fair amount of predelay. Only problem is it murders CPU. Valhalla plate can sound good on vocals and especially snare. Has a nice pure less vibey sound that blends well. Or I'll use Nimbus for a chamber or room when I don't want as obvious a throwback sound. Generally I'll use delays on vocals. I like Soundtoys Primaltap the most; but sometimes Eventide H910, or Exponential Excalibur. For rooms on drums I can never make up my mind. Sometimes an Abbey plate. But the LX480 wood rooms have a front to back depth that's hard to match, so I usually try them. But I would never use them on acoustic guitar. Like I said, I really like the new Relab VSR beta. The early reflections are so good. Nimbus is probably best overall fallback for a natural sound, though, when other choices are too colored. Out of curiosity, what genre are you mainly working in? Mostly indie or acoustic. Sometimes electronic. For me reverb choice is more a song by song thing, rather than a genre thing though.
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Oct 31, 2016 21:52:57 GMT -6
To add to that, I think it's important to try a few things on each song. Often the effect I expect will complement the least is actually much preferred by the artist and turns out to be the obviously right decision.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 31, 2016 21:57:06 GMT -6
I've often gone from a large room to a medium room and realized the large room was quite wrong for the song. Still, I don't experiment enough with reverbs and delays. I'll try to remember to spend a little more time on it, instead of just going for the preset I used last time yet again.
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Nov 1, 2016 3:50:08 GMT -6
I tend to think in terms of front to back with reverb, so I'll use a more washy reverb for parts I want to appear at the back wall of the mix and a shorter drier reverb for parts I want up front, or maybe just a short delay and no reverb if I want a part to really stand out.
I'm often using my Relab LX480 as a hall reverb to get a nice wash for the backwall parts - it seems to work really well for that, and then on vocals I like to use a large ambient setting on the Relab LX480 plus another reverb usually a plate, the 480 ambinece adds some dimension and a plate adds some warmth and envolope to the vocal. I find the Relab reverb very useful to create front to back in a mix - it really is a great reveb.
I think it's important not to fight physics when creating a front to back depth to a mix in as much as in reality we hear distant sounds as darker with less top due to high frequency loss as sound travels, so I don't EQ parts I want to sit on the backwall of the mix to be bright otherwise I"m fighting the illusion.
Even though I have tones of reverb plugins (too many) I think I could make a great sounding album with just the Relab LX480 and the Waves Abbey Road Plates plugin.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Nov 1, 2016 8:17:32 GMT -6
Just listened to the comparison Relab video on my monitors. I think I hear the slightest bit more high end on the Lex, but it's so close, I honestly can't tell if I'm imagining it or not, which is amazing. I'm glad I bought it, and that video made me rethink my jonesing for a hardware reverb. There are other much more pressing priorities. I will try to get the Wave Abbey Road verb though, it seems like the consensus is it's the best plate plug yet.
I never tried the wood rooms on the Relab, and will now, that sounded great. The Bricasti just can't be emulated unless you have the same kind of processing power available.
|
|