Login / Register
 
Plugin Reverb Tests--:Relab LX480 vs the rest
New Reply
Subscribe
gsilbers
Thread Starter
#1
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #1
Lives for gear
 
gsilbers's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: El Pueblo de Nuestra Senora La Reina de Los Angeles de Porciuncula
Posts: 3,864

Thread Starter
gsilbers is offline
Plugin Reverb Tests--:Relab LX480 vs the rest

im trying different verbs and decided why not have a shoot out.

its my 1st one so please bare w me and please let me know how to improve and do this the best possible way.


the name of the song is "crap i doodle while trying verbs" its basically akustik pianos concert hall doing long notes and staccs and then is LASS full cello doing also long notes and stacc all in the same file.
im doing it blind test just to take out marketing out of the equation. just a blind test, then ill post the names of the reverbs.
hint; there is only one convo verb

so the process was to record the inst, send about 60% to an aux with the diff reverb plugs.
the 480lx is in there, as well as other good verbs. i guess the most talked about verbs latley. all 100% wet on the aux.
all of the presets are large halls.

i posted the mp3 (320kbs)
here
gsilbers - REVERB TESTS MP3 - SoundCloud

and the WAVs here
REVERBS - Folder Shared from Box.net - Free Online File Storage
gsilbers
Thread Starter
#2
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #2
Lives for gear
 
gsilbers's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: El Pueblo de Nuestra Senora La Reina de Los Angeles de Porciuncula
Posts: 3,864

Thread Starter
gsilbers is offline
to GS
Attached Files
File Type: mp3 A_Verb.mp3 (2.07 MB, 2793 views)
File Type: mp3 B_Verb.mp3 (2.07 MB, 2055 views)
File Type: mp3 C_Verb.mp3 (2.07 MB, 1755 views)
File Type: mp3 D_Verb.mp3 (2.07 MB, 1783 views)
File Type: mp3 E_Verb.mp3 (2.07 MB, 1635 views)
File Type: mp3 F_Verb.mp3 (2.07 MB, 1340 views)
File Type: mp3 RAW No verb.mp3 (2.07 MB, 1123 views)
#3
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #3
Lives for gear
 
anguswoodhead's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: On the East Coast of Australia
Posts: 3,874
My Recordings/Credits

Send a message via Skype™ to anguswoodhead
anguswoodhead is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsilbers View Post
all of the presets are large halls.
The only thing I would say is that it would have been nice if you had been able to match reverb length and pre-delay etc a bit better.
ie - have all the clips as 3 sec Large Hall etc. (and having it sound like they are similar)
The differences are quite marked really.
My experience tells me that you tell a good reverb in the graininess of the tail.
I'm guessing they are all software verbs, yeah?

Thanks for doing the shoot out. (Not going to guess as I have no idea what reverbs were used - at least list what you used in no particular order).

I am keen to hear the full LX480 against the Lexicon Native Bundle.
__________________

Mastering all styles and genres using an hybrid approach.
Special rates for unattended online mastering.
Add 24 Ch SSL analog summing for an extra $50 per song.
Prefer 10 stereo stems.

Sunshine Coast Mastering, Queensland, Australia
#4
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #4
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,063

deuc647 is offline
regardless of which is which, i like E the best.
#5
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #5
Lives for gear
 
elambo's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Location: Up here
Posts: 7,303

elambo is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsilbers View Post
...please let me know how to improve and do this the best possible way.
Thanks for doing this.

I'd recommend matching the decay times a little better. Some are long, some are short. One company's Large is another company's Medium.
#6
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #6
Gear Head
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 57

Welkin is offline
Yes, the decay times should be more even. But I still think that C is Eos and F sounds bad.
#7
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #7
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 810

electro is offline
Someone should A/B LX480 with the real 480L
gsilbers
Thread Starter
#8
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #8
Lives for gear
 
gsilbers's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: El Pueblo de Nuestra Senora La Reina de Los Angeles de Porciuncula
Posts: 3,864

Thread Starter
gsilbers is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by electro View Post
Someone should A/B LX480 with the real 480L
hmmm...

not a bad idea, but for a few grand less im guessing it will not sound the same

but still very interested in that comparison.
gsilbers
Thread Starter
#9
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #9
Lives for gear
 
gsilbers's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: El Pueblo de Nuestra Senora La Reina de Los Angeles de Porciuncula
Posts: 3,864

Thread Starter
gsilbers is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by anguswoodhead View Post
The only thing I would say is that it would have been nice if you had been able to match reverb length and pre-delay etc a bit better.
ie - have all the clips as 3 sec Large Hall etc. (and having it sound like they are similar)
The differences are quite marked really.
My experience tells me that you tell a good reverb in the graininess of the tail.
I'm guessing they are all software verbs, yeah?

Thanks for doing the shoot out. (Not going to guess as I have no idea what reverbs were used - at least list what you used in no particular order).

I am keen to hear the full LX480 against the Lexicon Native Bundle.
i tried to keep it similar inside a large hall context. some where already large hall sounding others i changed a bit.

and your wish just came true... (from your last sentence) its there.
(unless u meant the nnon lite version of lx480 which i dont have. :(
#10
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #10
Lives for gear
 
elambo's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Location: Up here
Posts: 7,303

elambo is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsilbers View Post
not a bad idea, but for a few grand less im guessing it will not sound the same
I'm guessing it will sound the same.

Other recent endeavors into software reverb have proven that it's possible. Cost of hardware vs. software doesn't mean anything, especially in this case.

Although several factors may affect the sound of the 480L, making it (potentially) different than the specific 480 Martin copied while making the plugin. Knowing Martin, I'd wager that if we put his 480 side-by-side with the plugin we'd be hard pressed to spot the difference.
gsilbers
Thread Starter
#11
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #11
Lives for gear
 
gsilbers's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: El Pueblo de Nuestra Senora La Reina de Los Angeles de Porciuncula
Posts: 3,864

Thread Starter
gsilbers is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by elambo View Post
I'm guessing it will sound the same.

Other recent endeavors into software reverb have proven that it's possible. Cost of hardware vs. software doesn't mean anything, especially in this case.

Although several factors may affect the sound of the 480L, making it (potentially) different than the specific 480 Martin copied while making the plugin. Knowing Martin, I'd wager that if we put his 480 side-by-side with the plugin we'd be hard pressed to spot the difference.
well, now.. thats interesting.

hope someone with a 480l wants to chime in and maybe grab the non verb file i have and use it as source..
or better ifthat person had both and matched the presets.
#12
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #12
Lives for gear
 
DrFrankencopter's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 978

DrFrankencopter is offline
I thought C had too much modulation for a piano reverb.

I liked D the best for my tastes...enough modulation to keep it dreamy. Not what I'd be going for if a 'real' sounding space was desired. Sounds like a 'Lexicon' to me.

F sounded like it was in a tunnel...weird.

Cheers

Kris
#13
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #13
Gear addict
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 448

wxyz is offline
I liked D, E and B inthat order
gsilbers
Thread Starter
#14
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #14
Lives for gear
 
gsilbers's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: El Pueblo de Nuestra Senora La Reina de Los Angeles de Porciuncula
Posts: 3,864

Thread Starter
gsilbers is offline
oh wow,

about 350 folks listen to it. im glad but not too sure about why there is no more posts... is it just a listening curiosity or is it that im far off the way im trying to do this shoot :(

oh well;
but ill mention the names of the reverbs tomorrow.
#15
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #15
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 709

soundgeezer is offline
okay, on laptop speakers I like A and D
#16
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #16
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 523

Trebor Flow is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by elambo View Post

One company's Large is another company's Medium.
LOL

T
#17
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #17
Lives for gear
 
anguswoodhead's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: On the East Coast of Australia
Posts: 3,874
My Recordings/Credits

Send a message via Skype™ to anguswoodhead
anguswoodhead is offline
We have a nicely working 480L up at Heliport.
Not sure when I will be up there next to do a shootout though. (plus the LX480 trial license only lasts 7 days right???)
As a rule when I'm up there I'm on hourly rate and have no time for any testing or trialing.
gsilbers
Thread Starter
#18
9th July 2010
Old 9th July 2010
  #18
Lives for gear
 
gsilbers's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: El Pueblo de Nuestra Senora La Reina de Los Angeles de Porciuncula
Posts: 3,864

Thread Starter
gsilbers is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by anguswoodhead View Post
We have a nicely working 480L up at Heliport.
Not sure when I will be up there next to do a shootout though. (plus the LX480 trial license only lasts 7 days right???)
As a rule when I'm up there I'm on hourly rate and have no time for any testing or trialing.
just take my raw wav file anyways just in case. and use the random hall algo with large hall preset. (thats how it is in the lx. i dont remember the 480. its been a while :(
#19
10th July 2010
Old 10th July 2010
  #19
Lives for gear
 
Marando's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 976

Marando is offline
It's difficult because the reverb settings are not the same, but here it goes..

A) I don't like the tail of the reverb.. it is unnatural short somehow.. (setting?)
B) I like the sound, the tail is a little bit "dreamy", something that reminds me of Epicverb... I would not use it in a track where I need a realistic reverb, but instead use it in electronic music (ambient/new age)
C) not sure if I like it on the piano, I do however like it on the strings. But this could be because of the setting (you hear a lot of reverb in this one)..
D) Just lovely, both on the piano and the strings.
E) I don't like it, but this might be because of the settings (nothing like the others), sounds unnatural.
F) I don't like it, but might be a setting issue

My Top 3:

1) D
2) B
3) C

(disclaimer: with matched settings, I might have a completely different top 3)
__________________
Music, life would be boring without it.
#20
10th July 2010
Old 10th July 2010
  #20
Lives for gear
 
Warp69's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Location: Denmark
Posts: 553

Warp69 is offline
I don't think this could be called a shootout between different reverbs because of the different settings, but more importantly very different volumes.

Some of the reverb tails are 9dB hight than others, which makes it impossible to compare the differences in quality.

It sounds like you have used three (maybe four - depending on 'F') different reverbs with two different settings (long and short reverb time).

'D' & 'E' lacks spaciousness and doesn't surround the listener - it's very centered. You have limited the stereo field somehow?

'A' & 'C' has a wide reverb tail that surround the listener, but it's 3dB higher in volume than 'D' & 'E' and 9dB higher than 'B', which makes it very difficult to compare.

'B' is a bit similar to 'A' & 'C' in the stereo field, but has a darker tone - differences in the filter settings? And 9dB lower than 'C' - combination of filtering and volume?

'F' - something must have gone wrong with the settings.

I would appreciate a closer match between the settings and volumes to better compare - it's a bit random right now.
__________________
Relab Development Aps

www.relab.dk
#21
10th July 2010
Old 10th July 2010
  #21
Lives for gear
 
elambo's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Location: Up here
Posts: 7,303

elambo is offline
I agree. This is essentially comparing each company's own "Large Hall" preset, but NOT their reverb algorithms.

You'd have to better match each reverb, but then the test would be affected by your ability to match reverb.

It's a tough comparison test to assemble fairly.
gsilbers
Thread Starter
#22
10th July 2010
Old 10th July 2010
  #22
Lives for gear
 
gsilbers's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: El Pueblo de Nuestra Senora La Reina de Los Angeles de Porciuncula
Posts: 3,864

Thread Starter
gsilbers is offline
results:

A) Relab Lx480 Default patch
B) EOS Large Hall
C) Relab (again) with Lexicon's PCM matched settings
D) Lexicon PCM Native Random Hall algo with large hall preset
E) Aether 1.5 Hall 2
F) Space Designer with Todd AO IR (tail only)


a few tech notes:

All reverbs on the same aux so same amount going into the reverb. i guess each reverb inputs volume and output varies.
all reverb 100% wet on the bus.


a few personal notes:

the purpose of this tests was to take it from a consumer point of view and see what all these reverbs offer if u sat in a testing station and intansiated each one with a large hall type setting. the only one i tried to match closely with the settings was the pcm and the relab which i was really interested but i also added the default patch on the relab.

no, i did not try to match all reverbs to have the same settings mainly because i just wnted a large hall for a lush reverb and rely on the developers/progrmmers choices for it, because thats what they are offering. and yes, ones meduim could be someones large... i still kept it similarly lush. and from the playing on those intruments the idea was from a quick listen as u would in a quick testing situation like at namm (but w/o the extreme background noise)

you are most welcome to download each reverbs demo at the same time, set it up, play something you think would be ideal, match al the settings exactly, see that every little aspect is the same and that each dB is perfect. and even if you matched the numbers on screen, internally the programming might have different results, like i said above; i sent the same amount of signal to each verb, still the output was different. then Upload the mp3 and wav files to host sites, post it nice a punlic forum where everyone just tried to argue just arguing and never can please everyone....
better yet, get also the real/hardware versions of the plugins, record them thorugh a good and very clean line of equipment (ad/da)so there is also no problem that can arise to spoil the exactness of it. then you can show the different the tail is or not in a near perfect setting.

my informal approach; "hey i have some time so lets try all these lush reverbs and see how they compare."

so thats the disclaimer.. it never was to be the perfect setting approach as, like many of you, believe each reverb hs its magic and own application.
i just trying out algo verbs cause i like to get one of these.
plus u can still EQ and further process the reverb to make it sound better, and even more important; better within your track. so even if u just select a preset, its just a srating point... the point from which i took these tests.
and true that each reverb will yeold different results on a finshed mixed track.

like the pre amp shoot out tests, there is a lot that makes up a track. the source, room, mic ,processing equipment, mixing, mastering, marketing, distribution, reception and everything i between
but the difference between pres was not as big as mics and mics with source, placement and mixing. i just try to close my eyes and judge by how it sounds in that particular moment in time and try not think that because its this brand is better or worst, or poeple like this or not.
there is no better or worst, its all subjective. ones best is anothers' blah. i based my conclusions on the how they stand on thier own and not labeling as better or worst.

my own conclusions;

i realy liked the relab xl480. very lush and nice sounding, specially with tonys presets. with a little EQ and tweaking, id be worry if i where the lexicon team.
id still want to listen to a comparison with the 480L hardware.
in a non comparing way, i liked a lot the lx480 on its own. very inspiring when i played different instruments.

i think you are a complete fool if you are going to spend THAT much in the Lexicon PCM. that its just stoooopid expensive and i think their marketing dept try to pull the "high price=better" tactic.
dont get me wrong, its good... but not a grand more than the competition. there is also a long thread about the aether vs pcm.
i should of added the LXP series and see how are those. maybe ill added later. just so folks kinda listen to them.

the eos is pretty little treasure. its bit thin sounding than the others but it kept up. for the price... great! simple yet full of nice tricks.

the aether has a different feel than the others, very nice still. its like a different flavor. still lush. it has a lot of settings that can be tweaked. way too many imo but this can affect the sound tremendously so def try the demo.
just try the demo of the aether , actuallt on all of them of course and do your own tweaking, like trying a car.. its also about the feeling you get with each one.
so hope it helps. mainly in the part that marketing and visual factors have a big influence in our desicions. a blind test where you have a $50 plugin verssus a $1000+ plugin can give an idea if realy a grand will make such a big difference, or that a plugin with a vintage look will be better than one with a generic front. at the end is all about what you hear, not what you see or what other/masses seem to be doing. i studied marketing and now how much BS is out there and how much folks buy into it.

so there, for those who agree good, for the haters.. i dont really care. free public forum for anyone to get thier own conclusions. cheers
#23
10th July 2010
Old 10th July 2010
  #23
Gear maniac
 
rob61's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 286

rob61 is online now
Could you explain how you get the embedded file players to show up in your forum posts? I've searched and so far have not found any explaination on how to do it.
#24
10th July 2010
Old 10th July 2010
  #24
Lives for gear
 
elambo's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Location: Up here
Posts: 7,303

elambo is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsilbers View Post
i think you are a complete fool if you are going to spend THAT much in the Lexicon PCM. that its just stoooopid expensive and i think their marketing dept try to pull the "high price=better" tactic.
dont get me wrong, its good... but not a grand more than the competition.
There are a lot of "fools" who disagree with you.

I've gotten a lot of mileage out of my PCMs. I'm at 5 copies now. It goes where my 960 could (it was sold), but is more diverse. You may not think a 960 is worth $1,300-ish dollars, but people are paying $5,000. Value is subjective.

Also, keep in mind that it has been clearly stated that the PCM plugin was NOT intended to be a 960 emulation, and certainly not a 480 emulation, though it shares similarities at times and can be made to sound similar. Not so much in the presets, not in my experience.

Which, again, is why it's important to at LEAST match reverb level and decay times when making these comparisons. But don't get defensive about the advice, it was meant to make your test even more practical and valid. Assuming that was the goal, couldn't it be helpful?
#25
10th July 2010
Old 10th July 2010
  #25
Lives for gear
 
anguswoodhead's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: On the East Coast of Australia
Posts: 3,874
My Recordings/Credits

Send a message via Skype™ to anguswoodhead
anguswoodhead is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsilbers View Post
id still want to listen to a comparison with the 480L hardware.
And you can - check this out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rhythminmind View Post
Hardware/Plugin "RandomHall" comparison.

480L or LX 480

...
#26
11th July 2010
Old 11th July 2010
  #26
Lives for gear
 
Warp69's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Location: Denmark
Posts: 553

Warp69 is offline
I think it's great that you used the time to compare a lot of different reverbs.

I must admit that Im quite surprised about the Lexicon PCM bundle as being 'D' - not something I can remember from my version - did you modify the width? Yes, Im one of those fools

And kudos to Sean - well done.
#27
13th July 2010
Old 13th July 2010
  #27
Lives for gear
 
didier.brest's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,468

didier.brest is online now
Quote:
Originally Posted by deuc647 View Post
regardless of which is which, i like E the best.
+1thumbsup
Edit
I did not saw the answer was allready posted when I expressed my preference for E. I'm not surprised that is is Aether since I'v' got this reverb and I like it a lot.
#28
13th July 2010
Old 13th July 2010
  #28
Lives for gear
 
didier.brest's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,468

didier.brest is online now
Quote:
Originally Posted by rob61 View Post
Could you explain how you get the embedded file players to show up in your forum posts? I've searched and so far have not found any explanation on how to do it.
Click on Manage attachmemts below the window where you write your post. Each audio clip must be smaller than 6 MB. An embedder player is automatically set up for a MP3 file but not available for a wav file.
#29
14th July 2010
Old 14th July 2010
  #29
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 709

soundgeezer is offline
Didn't see that the results are out yet. Well my vote for A and D seems to make me a lexman ... funny as I was only listening through laptop speakers but those were my clear favourites with smooth lushness and an overall pro sound.
Even though the files were no 100% well matched, thanks for doing that, I know what to do now
#30
17th July 2010
Old 17th July 2010
  #30
Gear addict
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 366

adamboon is offline
so which one did/will you buy?

I'm in a similar situation, have been trying the LX480, and it's good... I'm currently using a Lex PCM91, which I love, but I would like something that will lock at 96kHz (which rules EOS out, unfortunately). I have yet to try out the PCM Native. It's probably the best fit, it just seems there are so many really nice and much cheaper options out there (I could probably get the ReLab, aether, EOS & adverb for about the same price as the PCM Native) I already have Waves R-Verb, IR-L and all the Logic Verbs, none of them ever make me feel like I've "Nailed" the rev sound I'm looking for like the PCM91 does (maybe I just don't know how to use them...)
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Silver Sonya / Music Computers
1875
elambo / Product Alerts older than 2 months
12
space2012 / Gear Shoot-Outs / Sound File Comparisons / Audio Tests
1
space2012 / Electronic Music Instruments & Electronic Music Production
0

Forum Jump

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.