Login / Register
 
Outboard confession
Subscribe
Shaman
Thread Starter
#1
13th April 2004
Old 13th April 2004
  #1
Lives for gear
 
Shaman's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,847

Thread Starter
Shaman is offline
Talking Outboard confession

Charles,

As good as plugin reverbs like REVERB ONE...are...
don´t you feel tempted sometimes to use a 960 / 480 / 6000 / Orville ?

Confess
#2
13th April 2004
Old 13th April 2004
  #2
FX smörgåsbord user
 
Charles Dye's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Location: Hollywood, FL
Posts: 881

Charles Dye is offline
Nope, but that's just me. I'll use 'em if they're in the room. But I don't feel the need to buy one.
__________________
Facebook | MySpace | Auraleo | eSession
#3
13th April 2004
Old 13th April 2004
  #3
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Location: NYC, NY
Posts: 629

Jan Folkson is offline
As much as I like many of the reverb plugs altiverb and eventide come to mind, I can't imagine doing a mix without my 480 or 2016. Reverb is the biggest issue I have with mixing entirely in the box.
__________________
- Jan Folkson
www.janfolkson.com

If you can't make it good, the least you can do is make it perfect.
Shaman
Thread Starter
#4
13th April 2004
Old 13th April 2004
  #4
Lives for gear
 
Shaman's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,847

Thread Starter
Shaman is offline
Quote:
Originally posted by Jan Folkson
... I can't imagine doing a mix without my 480 or 2016.
So do I. It´s just that bit more dimension and magic my yellow 960 gives me.
#5
14th April 2004
Old 14th April 2004
  #5
Lives for gear
 
Mike Tholen's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 952

Mike Tholen is offline
I absolutly love the Quantec QRS for verb.
I have an Orville but compared to the QRS it sucks huge donkey balls for reverb.
#6
14th April 2004
Old 14th April 2004
  #6
Lives for gear
 
robmix's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,552

robmix is offline
I've never been happy with plug-in reverbs. They just don't sit right in the mix for me. I still have to use outboard.

Rob
#7
14th April 2004
Old 14th April 2004
  #7
Lives for gear
 
tunesmith's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Location: Just northeast of LaLa land
Posts: 709

tunesmith is offline
I picked up my Logic Pro upgrade yesterday, and I must say that the space designer is the best plug in reverb I've ever heard. It will vie with my H8000 on a regular basis.

Tunes.
#8
14th April 2004
Old 14th April 2004
  #8
Lives for gear
 
Mike Jasper's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,739

Mike Jasper is offline
The only outboard I use is a Lexicon PCM91, but I don't see how I have much choice, since I'm using Pro Tools LE and don't have access to Reverb One or other great reverb plugins.

That said, I only get one killer verb to work with, and it usually goes to the lead vocal.

Jasper
#9
14th April 2004
Old 14th April 2004
  #9
Gear nut
 
b-magical's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 110

b-magical is offline
I use a Kurzweil KSP-8 for small room verb for drums and plates for lead vox. The plug verbs sound metallic for the small room stuff and not as detailed and lush for the longer verbs. I do use Realverb and Dreamverb from my UAD-1 card on other tracks.

Brian
#10
14th April 2004
Old 14th April 2004
  #10
Gear addict
 
Buddhaman's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Location: CT
Posts: 458

Buddhaman is offline
2nd vote for the KSP-8...really nice small spaces and plates!!!

the remote is pretty cool as well.

Buddhaman
__________________
"Endeavor to persevere"
#11
14th April 2004
Old 14th April 2004
  #11
Lives for gear
 
dave-G's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,534

Send a message via AIM to dave-G Send a message via Skype™ to dave-G
dave-G is offline
Quote:
Originally posted by Mike Tholen
I have an Orville but compared to the QRS it sucks huge donkey balls for reverb.
That would be a hell of a cardboard panhandling sign

"will suck huge donkey balls for reverb"

I wonder how the Quantec "yardstick" didn't make it into that one.

On the non testicular part of this topic, I still like a few "sleepers" like the Sony R7, AKG BX10 and MasterRoom springs.. PCM70s are good for a few algorithms, and I used a Korg DRV-1000 on a few songs last year and enjoyed it's completely "false" sound (I'm on the lookout... gotta be one in a pawnshop somewhere for $50).

But ReverbOne can be plenty useful, and the Waves convolution verb was pretty impressive when I demoed it. Year by year, the choices are definitely getting better in plug-ville.

-dave
#12
16th April 2004
Old 16th April 2004
  #12
Lives for gear
 
Alécio Costa's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: Brazil, Florianópolis/SC
Posts: 1,967

Alécio Costa is offline
hi

I make a mix of several "cheap" hardware boxes.
Generally I start with a Hall and a room reverb.
If the hall is too much for the current song, I shall go with 2 rooms or one room and one plate. Every instrument gets a little portion of them .
From there, I start adding secondary reverbs, very low on mix, but provide a pallete of sounds, combined with early reflection/stereo delays.

Reverb plugs like Lexiverb, trueVerb, Mega reverb are extremelly clean and nice to tweak and automate inside the box but I dunno, they lack some space , depth.

I still use Spx 990´s, Lexicon´s MPX1, even a TSR12 and an ARt SGX2000, which has provided me much more interesting stereo panned/flanged delays/echoes than those of Echo Farm.
__________________
Alécio Costa Studio - Mastering & Music Production, Brazil
www.aleciocosta.com

http://www.facebook.com/alecio.costa
#13
16th April 2004
Old 16th April 2004
  #13
Lives for gear
 
picksail's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Location: Hollywood
Posts: 3,635

picksail is offline
Hey Alecio,

Still using the Yamaha 990 presets within the 02R?

My partner is a reverb nut. Just listen to My Morning Jacket's "It Still Moves".
Anyway, we have all sort of funky reverbs around the studio. Everything from a Fairchild 659 Reverbatron to an Echoplate Plate Reverb. That said, I used a variation of a plate reverb, using Waves RenVerb, on a vocalist today and he was pleasantly surprised by the results. It's all in the predelay, in my opinion.
__________________
Stewart Cararas
IMDB
Discogs
Myspace
Facebook
Studio
Twitter
_________________________________
The new is necessarily abstract - Rudolf Borchadt
#14
17th April 2004
Old 17th April 2004
  #14
Gear interested
 
jahluv supreme's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5

jahluv supreme is offline
Although, mixing with computers is relatively new for me, I have always had to work hard to get the plugin reverbs (mainly waves trueverb and Renverb) to gel or blend into the mix naturally. They always sounded out of place and stuck out. Rolling off the high end helped but didn't quite work.

The convenience of the plugins are great but it just makes mixing more difficult for me. Since the addition of the KSP8 with my Paris rig I have discovered that reverbs can blend quite nicely and easily into the mix without too much effort. Sometimes I can't hear it unless I solo or mute it. Then it is quite obvious. For something like snare verb I've also learned (over time) that the crunchier SRV 2000 sticks out just enough to give the snare some tail. As my mind and ears get better at distinguishing the different verbs I can honestly say that I prefer to reach for the outboard verbs before the soft verbs when mixing. I'll use the native stuff for tracking when I need a little ambience.

Chris
__________________
Get out and support live music!
#15
17th April 2004
Old 17th April 2004
  #15
Lives for gear
 
Alécio Costa's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: Brazil, Florianópolis/SC
Posts: 1,967

Alécio Costa is offline
hi

Hi picksail,
The secret is the blending: some tweaking and blending..
Instead of just eating meat, I prefer some potatoes with salad and minor meat...
nice weekend

Guest
#16
18th April 2004
Old 18th April 2004
  #16
Guest
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

This is an interesting topic to me, as I don't get it?????

Reverb done by a chip is reverb done by a chip(Right?).... I would have to argue that if one likes outboard reverb, they really like the conversion taking place OR whatever not the reverb itself. I know when computers were weak, plugs were written to accomidate but, today outboard is the weaker one. All the power is in the box.


Opinions????

BTW: I have a Lex300 and M5000 for sale.
davidpasch@comcast.net if interested.


D
#17
18th April 2004
Old 18th April 2004
  #17
Lives for gear
 
Alécio Costa's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: Brazil, Florianópolis/SC
Posts: 1,967

Alécio Costa is offline
Ok, I understand your point. But to me a Lexiberb and a PCM81 do not have the same depth and stereo image. Each case has its advantages but...
#18
18th April 2004
Old 18th April 2004
  #18
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Location: NYC, NY
Posts: 629

Jan Folkson is offline
Reverb done by a chip is reverb done by a chip(Right?)....

Do you actually work with audio?

That could be one of the most ridiculous comments that I've ever come across on this or any other forum. First off, there are the algorhythms, which is why a Lexicon reverb will sound different from a TC reverb even though they're both done on CHIPS. Second of all (and here's the kicker) there's the amount of DSP that can be dedicated to the process. Which is why Lexiverb will sound different that the 480 even though they're both done on CHIPS and the algorhythms are by the same manufacturer.

And if you can't hear the difference...good luck in your future endeavours.
#19
18th April 2004
Old 18th April 2004
  #19
Lives for gear
 
studjo's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 2,473

Send a message via AIM to studjo Send a message via Skype™ to studjo
studjo is offline
Jan go easy with this D guy - it's a question you can ask.

Jo
no ssl yet
#20
18th April 2004
Old 18th April 2004
  #20
no ssl yet
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

VERB

ACTUALLY

D IS right the box does have more power than outboard, but the algorithms are a different story. If Lexi or TC were to put there algo's in a plug in then they could be reverse engineered and ther'd be no Lexicon sound anymore.

Every company would have their secrets
#21
18th April 2004
Old 18th April 2004
  #21
Lives for gear
 
steins's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Location: Lillehammer, Norway
Posts: 713

steins is online now
There is also some speculation wether companies like Lexicon, TC etc. are willing to implement their best algorithms in a software product, due to software piracy. No fun in buying a 960 if the bedroom-studio guy next door can get access to the same tools for nothing...

I´m not saying this is the case, but I know there was some talk about this a while ago.

Stein Tore
#22
18th April 2004
Old 18th April 2004
  #22
Lives for gear
 
Alécio Costa's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: Brazil, Florianópolis/SC
Posts: 1,967

Alécio Costa is offline
hi

Hi Steins!
Is that nice swimming pool on the pic at your house back yard?
Nice week
#23
19th April 2004
Old 19th April 2004
  #23
Lives for gear
 
steins's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Location: Lillehammer, Norway
Posts: 713

steins is online now
Re: hi

Quote:
Originally posted by Alécio Costa
Hi Steins!
Is that nice swimming pool on the pic at your house back yard?
Nice week
If it was, you could skate on it....it´s actually a picture I took at the hotel I stayed at last time I was in Los Angeles.

When I look out the window there is still snow, the temperature is still below 0 degrees celcius most of the time, and we are slowly entering the so-called summer, or "the green winter", as I like to call it...

Saving up for a trip to Brazil

Stein Tore
#24
19th April 2004
Old 19th April 2004
  #24
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Location: NYC, NY
Posts: 629

Jan Folkson is offline
Prolly a bit harsh...sorry D.

But the reality is that a computer dedicated to reverb is going to be more powerful than a single chip in the case of TDM or other host based systems or a cpu sharing other processes in the case of native. It's dedicated to a single purpose and the hardware components and algorhithms are selected to compliment each other (in a price is no object manner...to a point), which is not the case with plug in reverb processors on personal computers.

D IS right the box does have more power than outboard, but the algorithms are a different story.

Perhaps, but a PC or Mac are not dedicated to a specific task, they are designed for general purpose. If the box was more powerful in the case of reverb why would anybody buy a TC6000 or Lex 960 when they could buy a fully decked out PC or Mac and have a bunch of dough left over for 2 or 3 more?

This is why NO plug in sounds as good as the top end hardware. This may not always be the case but it certainly is now. Anybody who doesn't think so can come over to my studio and put their best plug in next to my 15 year old 480l and YOUR ears will prove my point.
no ssl yet
#25
19th April 2004
Old 19th April 2004
  #25
no ssl yet
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

jan you are missing my point

I know that the outboard sounds better, but it is not because the chip is more powerful. If you think about the chips in a 480 and their age, they probably are NOT more powerful than what you get in a mac 1.5Ghz

Lexicon could probably put a 480L on a TDM or accel chip if they chose, but what would stop anyone else from stealing their algorithms from the lugins
???
Guest
#26
19th April 2004
Old 19th April 2004
  #26
Guest
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

Jan,
It is not my job. I am a Network Engineer.

"Second of all (and here's the kicker) there's the amount of DSP that can be dedicated to the process. Which is why Lexiverb will sound different that the 480 even though they're both done on CHIPS and the algorhythms are by the same manufacturer."

Wrong! It is still the Algorhythms (The real Kicker!). The DSP only dictates if the job can be done. More complex Algos need more DSP. DSP has no sound and never will. This makes me think of the 480 Algo in my M5000.

Point is, this math/Algo can be done by any DSP hence, my comment above. It is 1's and 0's and they don't have a sound either.

"But the reality is that a computer dedicated to reverb is going to be more powerful than a single chip in the case of TDM or other host based systems or a cpu sharing other processes in the case of native."

You are right for now. But, in the near future PCs will so outpower dedicated boxes it will be scary.

"but a PC or Mac are not dedicated to a specific task, they are designed for general purpose. If the box was more powerful in the case of reverb why would anybody buy a TC6000 or Lex 960 when they could buy a fully decked out PC or Mac and have a bunch of dough left over for 2 or 3 more?"

This is why I think these algos are not being ported. Your are right..nobody would buy the hardware.
This IS the future you speak of. Speak with confidence, it will happen.

"This is why NO plug in sounds as good as the top end hardware. This may not always be the case but it certainly is now. Anybody who doesn't think so can come over to my studio and put their best plug in next to my 15 year old 480l and YOUR ears will prove my point."

All I can say is my Altiverb sounds pretty damn close to the verbs I sampled from my 300 and M5000.
I can hear the difference but, I am finding more and more I am able to stay in the box and am eager for the day the ITB can superceed outboard. The technology is there. And it will.

BTW: I am selling my 300 and M5000 cause I put what I liked in Altiverb.

Are you interested?


Nice touch with the insults.
Keep the luck. My life is very full.



D
#27
19th April 2004
Old 19th April 2004
  #27
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Location: NYC, NY
Posts: 629

Jan Folkson is offline
I've got Altiverb and use it occasionally, by no means is it even in the same league as any of the high end hardware units.

You are right for now. But, in the near future PCs will so outpower dedicated boxes it will be scary.

I've been hearing this since the 80's. The more powerful PCs get the more bloated their OSs and apps get. Parallel computing is where the REAL power is and using hardware outboard frees up my puter to do other things, just like the PC that I run my soft synths on etc.

If you think about the chips in a 480 and their age, they probably are NOT more powerful than what you get in a mac 1.5Ghz

It's not about the power of the individual chips, it's the entire amount of computing power that's available to the process and how the algorithms are designed to take advantage of it. The more complex the algorithms, the more dedicated computing power required. I think we can all agree on that point.

If you could dedicate an entire computer to just doing reverb a 1.5g mac would probably do a great job if it were programmed with some great algorithms specific to that machine, but...oh yeah, that's what outboard is!

And D, if you look at the top of my previous post you'll find an apology for being unduly harsh. Glad your life is full, but we could all use some more good luck
Shaman
Thread Starter
#28
19th April 2004
Old 19th April 2004
  #28
Lives for gear
 
Shaman's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,847

Thread Starter
Shaman is offline
Quote:
Originally posted by Jan Folkson
It's not about the power of the individual chips, it's the entire amount of computing power that's available to the process and how the algorithms are designed to take advantage of it. The more complex the algorithms, the more dedicated computing power required.
And those 480 / 960 algorithms are ART - not just science.
The guy, who developed it spent years with accoustic research.
All he did, day in day out was programming these virtual perfect spaces. I think Lexicon arrested him in chains and he saw no daylight doing his job grudge

Probably the 480 Large room could be done on a single pT HD chip. But there´s something about a dedicated user interface like the LARC.
The fact that most people are STEALING plugins prevents Lexicon from releasing a 480 plugin
no ssl yet
#29
19th April 2004
Old 19th April 2004
  #29
no ssl yet
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

You guys are missing my point. You are fighting on why the computer doesn't have enough power when it does. a G5 could definately do it and so could a fast G4. The truth is that lexi survives on it's algo's even if there was no software piracy they would not release a 480 plugin and offer their algorithms to be reverse engineered by others. and the price of what they could offer a plugin would never compare to that of hardware from a business stand point. Furthermore if it were only about the sheer chips then other Lexicon units with newer chips would sound better than a 480. And they do not.


It would not be good for Lexi's business to make a plugin that sounded like a 480. It would offer other companies the chance to put their spin on lexi's algorithms and would be the end of the Lexicon sound when Behringer made a similiar plug in LOL
#30
19th April 2004
Old 19th April 2004
  #30
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Location: NYC, NY
Posts: 629

Jan Folkson is offline
I'm not missing your point NoSSl, of course, the algorithms are a big factor.

However, I don't believe that it's the only factor. I'm sure that a G4 has enough horsepower to do a great reverb, but I'm not sure it can while it's running a DAW and tons of other DSP intensive stuff at the same time.
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
bobx / So much gear, so little time!
50
Morten Hjort / So much gear, so little time!
0
tsd / So much gear, so little time!
21
moeses / The Good News Channel
2

Forum Jump

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.