Hardware vs Software Verb NOW?

[BigJunk]

A few years back most guys were telling me that software verbs were not nearly as good as hardware verb. But I was thinking now things might be different with all the convolution reverbs out. My roomate just bought a Lexicon hardware unit claiming that even a convolution reverb won't sound as good. Whats the deal? Is hardware still king of reverbs? Still????
Junk

[Animus]

I'd say yes. I tried all the software varieties (including convolution extensively) and I could never get what I wanted. This year I picked up a pcm80 and pcm90 and life is good. In fact I just bought a dual Nuverb system as well. THere really isn't any comparison, it's true what they say.

[RusRant]

I'd say it depends more on your source and your comfort factor with the platform. Some people are more comfortable with one over the other. I personally have a few outboard reverbs and tape delays I still use, but have many plugins I use more often as well. I also have a collection of IR's that I am really partial to. It's getting to the point the hardware will probably be going bye bye in the next 6 months as I can get most of what I need from plugins.

[theblue1]

Um... think about this.

Assuming we're not talking about spring or plate 'verbs, we're pretty much talking about digital reverb, whether it's from a standalone box or a plug or other computer effect.

Assuming the algorithms are the same for a given hardware verb versus its software version and the converters are of equal quality there's no reason whatsoever for the plug/comptuer based version to produce any different results.

In fact, if you go out an analog loop to an outboard reverb device you're adding an extra layer of AD and DA degradation -- as WELL as adding extra AD/DA processing latency.


I mean... really... think about it.

[GooberNumber9]

For me the only time software wins out is if I want convolution, which doesn't happen that often. I did some of my first post production work lately and in that environment convolution reverb was perfect. I could just pick a space that was similar to the space I wanted and tweak it a little bit and I was done. If I tried to make a hardware reverb sound like the inside of an SUV, I think it would have taken me a lot longer.

In terms of music, I just haven't been happy with any ITB reverbs. These days I may use an IR of a hardware reverb or more often an IR of a plate (combined with EQ before and after the "plate" and even maybe compression). Other than that, I prefer hardware.

I haven't figured out how come Lexicon doesn't simply put out a (maybe stripped-down) RTAS/VST version of their basic reverb engine and charge whatever they think they can get for it. I can't imagine how it wouldn't make a lot of money. I assume they are afraid of piracy.

Todd Wilcox

[Geert van den Berg]

I agree with Animus here to some extent. It is true that a lot of hardware still has the edge over software. I think the reason for this is that most manufacturers don't use their best algorithms for the software they produce (maybe with software piracy in mind). Lexicon has software plugs available, for example for Sonar, but this are not algorithms as used in their flagship the 960, probably even lesser algorithms as in their PCM line. (which can lead to an interesting point, that lots of people find certain reverbs sounding better in the 480, which is probably due to the D/A converters in that machine).

But take for example the VSS3 reverb from TC Electronic which is used in their M3000, which is a great reverb, this is also available as PT plugin or for the Powercore. I haven't A/B-ed those verbs but I am sure the sound will be 99 procent similar. But again what we are seeing here is that TC doesn't have a plugin available with their VSS4 algorithm, because that would undermine the sales of their M4000 and M6000.

As far as a comparison between convolution and a 'regular' reverb, the difference lies in that for a convolution reverb the impulses also need to be of high quality (though sometimes it's good to have impulses of a crappy room, if you try to match a production reverb from the set while doing post-pro), but more importantly a convolution reverb has no randomness to the sound which can make a convolution reverb seem a little static as if taken from one point of view, which basically is true, while if you stand in a room it's not likely you stand still, you might turn your head a little and hear the sound different again. An algorithm can be made random and also everything is tweakable, the early reflections, the decay, they can both be filtered differently etc

So as time goes I am sure we get software reverbs of equal quality. I hear good things about the IK multimedia CSR reverb, though I haven't tested it myself...

[GooberNumber9]

Originally Posted by theblue1

Assuming the algorithms are the same for a given hardware verb versus its software version and the converters are of equal quality there's no reason whatsoever for the plug/comptuer based version to produce any different results.

That is of course the problem. The algorithms are NOT the same. I think there's a Lexicon TDM plug-in out there. For anyone who is running a native DAW, you can only get Lexicon reverb from a hardware unit. TC Electronic has their PowerCore, which of course requires hardware DSP. Eventide I don't think has anything other than a TDM plugin.

In my shoes, if I want Lexicon, TC Electronic, or Eventide reverb (and who doesn't?), it's cheapest for me to buy hardware. Certainly it's less than $10,000 to go with PT|HD.

Todd Wilcox

[Nerve Nickels]

Sonnox Oxford is the best I've heard native.
Its all about the tails...

[Volodia]

The big hardware reverb use choas math : it doesn't react twice the same: like a real space does . Convolution is not bad but it's static and not tweakable .

And I have yet to hear something like a Lex 480 in Plug in world .

Still i use Eventide Reverb and I quite like the princeton 2016 as well .

On some projects I use lots of reverbs but my main ones are still Lex 480 and TC M6000 system .

[minister]

Originally Posted by Volodia

Convolution is not bad but it's static and not tweakable .

you need to try Altiverb. it is not static and it IS tweakable.

that said, good hardware still rules.

and, as was said, the programming is NOT the same. i thought the Lexiverb sounded terrible.

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by GooberNumber9

That is of course the problem. The algorithms are NOT the same. I think there's a Lexicon TDM plug-in out there. For anyone who is running a native DAW, you can only get Lexicon reverb from a hardware unit. TC Electronic has their PowerCore, which of course requires hardware DSP. Eventide I don't think has anything other than a TDM plugin.

In my shoes, if I want Lexicon, TC Electronic, or Eventide reverb (and who doesn't?), it's cheapest for me to buy hardware. Certainly it's less than $10,000 to go with PT|HD.

Todd Wilcox

Yeah, you and Geert have good points. That's why I'd left myself the wiggle room, there.

My only experience there is with the Lexicon plug that came with Sonar Pro (and its limited li'l bro that comes with regular Sonar) and the Lex 'verb in my MPX100. So, it's not exactly like I'm comparing their top of the line...

And, to be truthful, by the time I got the Lexicon cheapo hardware I was over digital 'verb. I'd gone nuts at the end of the 80s when I got my first, collected a number of mid level boxes; I'd used a fair bit of Lexicon 'verb in various circumstances and the MPX100 sounded close enough for me. I can't even remember why I bought it. I guess 'cause it was cheap.

Er... not to say I don't use artificial reverb. I do. I just kind of consider it a necessary evil. I'm using the resource hungry Perfect Space convo 'verb from Sonar Pro (which appears to be vaguely related to Voxengo Pristine Space, I'm thinking, but what do I know. It's all the devil's work. I think I'm just going to start recording on location. You'll see me in the stairwell of the Chrysler Building with my lappy and my USB mic... cutting vocal overdubs.)

[Volodia]

Originally Posted by minister

you need to try Altiverb. it is not static and it IS tweakable.

that said, good hardware still rules.

and, as was said, the programming is NOT the same. i thought the Lexiverb sounded terrible.

I mean static in a sense that it's perfectly linear . If you record a track with convo verb on it , then record it a second time and put it out of phase with the first it will cancel perfectly .

This won't happen with real space or a non linear reverb .

As far as tweakable you can only go as long as the time sampled and when you shorten the time the tails don't sound the same .

I'm sure Altiverb sound great nonetheless but I have too many reverbs already (including convos) to go and buy another .

[JPZ]

Originally Posted by GooberNumber9

I haven't figured out how come Lexicon doesn't simply put out a (maybe stripped-down) RTAS/VST version of their basic reverb engine and charge whatever they think they can get for it. I can't imagine how it wouldn't make a lot of money. I assume they are afraid of piracy.

Todd Wilcox

Lexicon did have a software reverb called Lexiverb. It was pretty cool as far as digital itb verbs go, probably my favorite one over the years. My problem with digital verbs (itb or hardware) is that they don't sound like any verb in the real world that I know of. Even the most expensive ones just sound fake and hi endy to me and when I hear them in songs it's like nails on a chalkboard -yuck. I find myself low passing them and messing them up with other stuff and then tucking them way back to make them useable. Most of the time I try to not even use verb anymore.

[88fingerz]

Originally Posted by Geert van den Berg

I hear good things about the IK multimedia CSR reverb, though I haven't tested it myself...

This is MY question! How many folks who posted in this thread have heard/worked with CSR?

Check it out first, THEN reply here!

[preben]

From what I understand the TC EMT250 emulation reverb for powercore DVR2 is in fact a VSS4 algo. It's also a little more taxing on those poco chips than the VSS3.

[dkatz42]

Originally Posted by Volodia

I mean static in a sense that it's perfectly linear . If you record a track with convo verb on it , then record it a second time and put it out of phase with the first it will cancel perfectly .

This is purely an implementation issue. A convolution plug could do whatever randomizing mojo the hardware units do. No magic in there, but there probably *is* a secret sauce.

[TheTruffleKing]

Originally Posted by 88fingerz

This is MY question! How many folks who posted in this thread have heard/worked with CSR?

Check it out first, THEN reply here!

This should whet your appetite:

Classik Studio Reverb (IK Multimedia)

[dlmorley]

Originally Posted by 88fingerz

This is MY question! How many folks who posted in this thread have heard/worked with CSR?

Check it out first, THEN reply here!

I've used it and it's excellent. still prefer my EMT 246 and Roland R880.

[backplay]

Originally Posted by 88fingerz

This is MY question! How many folks who posted in this thread have heard/worked with CSR?

Check it out first, THEN reply here!

Mixing ITB, reverb wise, i really don't know how a real hardware reveb sounds like .
So i only use reverb plugs and therefore not a big fan of reverbs at all. Only use it because sometimes you just NEED a bit of space in your mixes.
That said... I must admit i was kinda impressed with the CSR reverbs, comparing them to the other reverbs i use like Reverence (Audio Damage), Art Acoustica, Altiverb and Waves reverbs (on a friends system).

Altiverb did the job for dub and reggae, but with electronic music it just sucked.
Reverence was nice to, but only on snare.
Art Acoustica sometimes does the job on leads.
I don't like the metalic sound of most revebs (read Waves) and the tail of most plugs aren't impressive.
But with the CSR reverbs those things where less of a problem, and it sounded more natural. So if i had to pick one it would be the CSR.

[Mile-High]

Guess this been said before, but why tax your computer with a heavy reverb plugin when you can go outboard and sound better?

I think even older digital reverb boxes, like the Roland SRV-330, sound much better than most plugins. And those are pretty cheap on eBay now.

[taturana]

i´ve been very happy with my plugin verbs.... altiverb, princeton digital and CSR, all of them pretty useful.... and very good..

most times i use them together with an EQ to shape the sound of the reverb...

[JPZ]

All digital verbs hardware or software sound like garbage. Period. I try to not use them at all costs but sometimes it's unavoidable at which point I have to mess around with them forever to get some type of believable ambience. My favorite software verb was an old TDMer called Lexiverb which was simple, low on cpu and somewhat believable. I say somewhat.

[theother]

Originally Posted by Geert van den Berg

(which can lead to an interesting point, that lots of people find certain reverbs sounding better in the 480, which is probably due to the D/A converters in that machine).

Although it's true that the converters add a bit of extra magic to the 480L I have to say that even run digital via AES/EBU (which I have as an option) it sounds way better than the 960L IMO.

Now why we can't have the 480L algos as a plugin I don't know. It must be possible, but Lexicon is a strange company these days....

[F5D]

I'm currently selling my powercore. VSS3 is really great but after testing the IK CSR and Sonnox Reverb, I don't see why would I need a powercore anymore for reverbs. And a full bundle of sonnox plugins costs only a little more than a powercore pci mk2.

[preben]

I'm considering doing the same thing, i.e. selling the powercore and going native.

Only thing is: to my ears the Sonnox (eq, comp, inf which are the ones I have) do not sound the same in native as they do on the powercore platform...

I'm not saying worse or better (although I personally prefer the powercore sound... I think) but they're definitely different sounding.

[Plec]

Most hardware still better than most software. Don't know why, there's no real logical explanation than bad algorithms. The IK CSR didn't sound good at all to me, all their other stuff is cool, but I just thought it sounded unmusical. Source and Reverb sounds very separated... a good reverb gels with the source.

A lot of convolution reverbs sounds awesome like the 480 impulses for Waves IR-1, but is not quite there although it's the best software reverb by far IMO.

[Oroz]

Here's an interesting thread: A real EMT140 VS Altiverb EMT140

[F5D]

Originally Posted by F5D

I'm currently selling my powercore. VSS3 is really great but after testing the IK CSR and Sonnox Reverb, I don't see why would I need a powercore anymore for reverbs.

After writing this, I sold my powercore and couldn't live without it so I swapped my uad1 to my friend's powercore firewire and vss3. I compared the IK CSR, VSS3 and classicverb again and the difference is huge if you use modulation for the tails. TC does a much better job in that and the result is alot better, imo amazing. This was the first time I paid more attention to the modulation parameters in reverb plugins. TC wins hands down. I noticed that most of my projects rely on the modulated tc reverb tails so much that I cannot live without them.

[Kindred]

Originally Posted by TheTruffleKing

This should whet your appetite:

Classik Studio Reverb (IK Multimedia)

I tried this but I didnt quite get the hype - great control over many different aspects but the sound was overly metallic for me.

i can't go past vss3 personally

[preben]

I'm with Kindred...

Due to kernel panics with the public beta for Powercore Firewire and Intel Macs (now solved, thank God!) I had to resort to convolution for a few mixes...

For simplicity's sake I stuck with the M4000 impulses on Logic's Space Designer... but I tell you - it's GOOD to be back.

To my ears there's a LOT more depth and width and fluctuation on the reverb tail (if you want it) to the VSS3 than the convolution reverbs..