setting up reverb for film mix

[Henchman]

For outdoor I use the reverb one schoolyard preset as a starting point.

[drakem]

Thank you Henchman, but I dont have access to Reverb one. I assume it has got a lot of ER but shifted in time. Would a chamber work for that?

[Henchman]

Originally Posted by drakem

Thank you Henchman, but I dont have access to Reverb one. I assume it has got a lot of ER but shifted in time. Would a chamber work for that?

What verb are you using?

[kosmokrator]

Originally Posted by drakem

By the way how do you guys simulate outdoor/street?.

Reflector algorithm in the 6000 is good for that.

[drakem]

I still have got Wizoo W2 which i love . ArtsAcoustic verb as well for the ER engine. I'm waiting for Altiverb 7 to come to PC.

[drakem]

Just googling reflector tc6000 I found this topic:
Mixing ITB - outdoor reflector FX

Thank you kosmokrator for mentioning it!

[sonicparticle]

Henchman and Gloria, thanks again about the responses here. I have revisited this post from time to time and I have this daft question if you don't mind me:

What are the instances where you guys use a mono reverb on the dialogue auxes?

Following the advice here, I am upgrading my home HD2 system to HD3 (the HD2 system cannot cope with 128 tracks per session and 9 TDM reverbs in the auxes) and offload the Blackmagic video card to another Mac via Satellite LE. If anyone was about to part with either, feel free to contact.

[Willeyh]

I tend to use an A/B setup with an "FX" as a third. All parameters automated and snapshot IR (altiverb).
So A in 1 scene, then B in the next (if location change). Then bypass the verb not in use, change IR, then activate verb not in use again. This is to get rid of any pops or clicks while changing IR.

All tracks have similar sends. Verb A, Verb B, Verb FX, and maybe Verb M (mono, if I find it suits the recording when inserting ADR).

Havent done any features yet, but it works great on shorts and when limited CPU / native mixing is what you do!

[JesseG]

Originally Posted by Henchman

3 separate auxes for each stem.
For speed sake I have a mono, a 5.1 for interior and a stereo for exterior.

To add to Sonicparticle's question, can you explain why a stereo for exterior? Why not a 5.1? Or conversely why not a stereo for interiors?

Thanks for all the help in this thread, tons of great info.

[soundboy]

Originally Posted by sonicparticle

Henchman and Gloria, thanks again about the responses here. I have revisited this post from time to time and I have this daft question if you don't mind me:

What are the instances where you guys use a mono reverb on the dialogue auxes?

Following the advice here, I am upgrading my home HD2 system to HD3 (the HD2 system cannot cope with 128 tracks per session and 9 TDM reverbs in the auxes) and offload the Blackmagic video card to another Mac via Satellite LE. If anyone was about to part with either, feel free to contact.

My guess would be that he does this because Dx is mono. It lives in the center channel. The stereo is probably if he needs a particular effect. There are no hard and fast rules for this, but if I'm trying to match ADR, or get two different mics to match smoothly, I'm using a mono verb routed to the center channel.

[sonicparticle]

I see. Thanks for that Charles. So, the general consensus would be that a mono would be to match any ADR cues with the rest of the dialogue? (if anyone else wants to chip in on that).

I absolutely understand the premise, with the dialogue being anchored to the centre channel.

Charles, Georgia and Henchman are all your dialogue verb auxes mono?

This issue makes me ask this: is your dialogue stem mono or stereo?

[Henchman]

Yes, it's exactly as Charles put it.
Nothing telegraphs ADR better than a stereo verb

[sonicparticle]

Good to know. Is your DIAL stem a stereo track Henchman? I do the odd dialogue panning when the opportunity arises and I have been asked to by directors as well. Should I advise differently?

[Henchman]

Originally Posted by sonicparticle

Good to know. Is your DIAL stem a stereo track Henchman? I do the odd dialogue panning when the opportunity arises and I have been asked to by directors as well. Should I advise differently?

No, it's a 5.0
As I will use a surround verb for effect.

[sonicparticle]

Makes sense. Thanks for the input!

[soundboy]

I out put a 5.1 stem for DX. Most of the time it's just the center channel with info, but it gives me options J.I.C...

[ACP]

A lot of really great information in this thread. I honestly never really thought about mono reverb for ADR. I've spent hours trying to match ADR to location stuff before, and for some reason it never occurred to me to try mono reverb.

[Ljudit]

Great stuff here
I have som questions I want to discuss with you. I am a Pro Tools user so I'm writing from a Pro Tools point of view.

1. Do you usually use sends for reverb as pre or post fader? I prefer post fader but i find myself in situations where I want a lot of reverb and not so much direct sound. In that case +12 on the send fader is not enough. There is of course workarounds but I want to hear your thoughts.

2. When I mix ADR I usually put a mono reverb on every ADR channel, just to match it with the boom or lavalier (if there is any), to simulate mic distance and so it doesn't sound to dry. I could also bounce the ADR with the reverb instead. After that I send it to a surround reverb. Any thoughts about this approach?

3. When you have a surround reverb, do you have reverb in the center channel? Or du you want the dialog in the center channel as dry as possible?

4. Finally, if you pan the dialog, do you also pan the surround reverb? Do you usually have real surround reverb or just stereo reverb panned to the rear channels?

Interesting to hear your thoughts.

[Henchman]

Who do you have a Mono verb on every single ADR channel?
Why not use a send?
And why would you send it to a 5.1 verb after that?

[Ljudit]

Originally Posted by Henchman

Who do you have a Mono verb on every single ADR channel?
Why not use a send?
And why would you send it to a 5.1 verb after that?

Because I want to process the source material on the ADR channels with a mono reverb (just a little), to get away from that tight clean sound recorded in the studio. I want to be able to separately treat every channel with its mono reverb before I send it to a surround reverb. I don't want a mono reverb but a surround reverb as the final result. The to different reverbs has different purposes as you see.

[Henchman]

Originally Posted by Ljudit

Because I want to process the source material on the ADR channels with a mono reverb (just a little), to get away from that tight clean sound recorded in the studio. I want to be able to separately treat every channel with its mono reverb before I send it to a surround reverb. I don't want a mono reverb but a surround reverb as the final result. The to different reverbs has different purposes as you see.

Why not use a send?

[Ljudit]

Originally Posted by Henchman

Why not use a send?

As I said, I want to be able to separately treat every channel with its mono reverb before I send it to a surround reverb. Of course I sometimes use a send as you suggests instead of inserts but I find that the surround reverb in many situations sounds better when it gets ADR with some mono reverb instead of the ADR all dry. I find this the easiest way for me to get the sound that I want
Exactly how would you do it?
Do you have anything to say about my other questions?