Ircam Verb vs Bricasti M7: Tailoring Early Reflections
88man
Thread Starter
#1
30th December 2012
Old 30th December 2012
  #1
Gear Head
 

Thread Starter
Ircam Verb vs Bricasti M7: Tailoring Early Reflections

I'd like to find a reverb system that is small room friendly in order to minimize early reflections and maximize the amount of direct sound entering the reverb chain. I am also bringing the mics closer to achieve this. I've narrowed my selection to the Flux Ircam Verb software and the Bricasti M7 hardware unit. Can't get both. I know I can't attenuate the early reflections in the recorded signal, but I am trying to minimize the caustic early reflections bleeding into the reverb tail at least.

I calculated that the onset of early reflections range from 7.5ms to 10.6ms from the nearest dimensions in a piano room measuring 14 x 35 x 8.5ft.

It seems Flux Ircam Verb allows to tailor the early reflection parameters, especially the onset AND duration of pre-delay, while all other software based systems focus on shape and size of the room. Verb can control The "Early Shape" parameter controls the amplitude rise or fall of early reflections, "Early Min" parameter controls the time at which the early reflections start to appear (7.5ms in my case), "Early Max" parameter controls the time at which the early reflections cease to appear (10.6ms in my case).

On the Bricasti M7, there is no duration of pre-delay, just onset of pre-delay. The manual states an "Early Select Parameter: Controls the build up and decay characteristics of the early part of the reverberant field." I am not sure how one can utilize the M7 to control the duration of pre-delay to maximize direct sound and minimize reflected sound entering in the reverb cycle?

Thanks
#2
30th December 2012
Old 30th December 2012
  #2
Lives for gear
 

Better accomplished by attaching thick sound absorbant materials to walls.
88man
Thread Starter
#3
30th December 2012
Old 30th December 2012
  #3
Gear Head
 

Thread Starter
Thanks, but can't place more panels. I need to know which reverb can tailor early reflections better.
#4
31st December 2012
Old 31st December 2012
  #4
Lives for gear
 
king2070lplaya's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by 88man View Post
Thanks, but can't place more panels. I need to know which reverb can tailor early reflections better.
The reflections happening in your room are going to yield a "small room" sound, regardless of how much money you spend on a reverb unit. Both of these reverb options will yield tasteful early reflections, and could add a believable "room" to a well-recorded dead booth vocal track, but your room reflections in the mic are going to kill any hope of that simulation working well. This is because whatever sound is in the mic, whether vox, or reflection, is going to the reverb chain. You cannot use a reverb to "erase" bad sounding reflections. Sorry.
#5
31st December 2012
Old 31st December 2012
  #5
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 88man View Post
Thanks, but can't place more panels. I need to know which reverb can tailor early reflections better.
It's a real hassle, but if you get sound absorbing material over the entire cieling, it will help your artificial reverb simulation of small halls.
#6
1st January 2013
Old 1st January 2013
  #6
Lives for gear
 

The only thing that will help your situation is to change your recording technique. Try different things: parallel cards, parallel hypercards, put your arrays on the floor (or ceiling, walls, etc.) boundary style. Boundary mic'ing can really open up a problematic room, as-in a way-you are removing one set of reflections. Sometimes really simple things-like one mic on each side wall and one mic in the center can work beautifully-you'd want a little time alignment, but on occasion I've used it without in some pretty large rooms. Or just a plain coincident (including MS) or near coincident array on the floor.

Bartlett (I think) wrote a lengthy pamphlet for Crown describing in detail what can be accomplished with boundary arrays, and it is well worth finding and reading. It's an old document. You won't think about reflections in quite the same way after reading it.

And-since you've got these early reflections going on, why not try the opposite and don't do any of that with the reverb, and leave the "real" early reflections in-like you have a choice.....

Then just add a little bit of a darkish shortish plate and listen very carefully to the amount of predelay used to see whether you want just to thicken and round out the sound, or provide a little separate ambience.

You can only do the best you can in the situation you are in.
#7
1st January 2013
Old 1st January 2013
  #7
Gear interested
 

agree,can't place more panels. I need to know which reverb can tailor early reflections better.Thanks
88man
Thread Starter
#8
1st January 2013
Old 1st January 2013
  #8
Gear Head
 

Thread Starter
Questions on the Bricasti M7:

1. As a digital insert in a DAW, how can one use a single Bricasti M7 in a project with multiple tracks? Do I simply send each track through Aux Send/Return, or do I need multiple M7 units?
2. If I can use a single M7, will there be latency issues between tracks, or is latency constant every time?
3. Is it better to add reverb on individual tracks before or after the 2 channel mix down?

In the meantime, I'll see if I can treat part of the ceiling.
Thanks, everyone
#9
1st January 2013
Old 1st January 2013
  #9
Lives for gear
 
king2070lplaya's Avatar
What kind of music are you tracking?
88man
Thread Starter
#10
1st January 2013
Old 1st January 2013
  #10
Gear Head
 

Thread Starter
Some projects are simple stereo spaced pair mics for classical piano. Other projects are new age type multitrack electronic virtual instruments in combination with recorded acoustic instruments. In projects with multiple tracks, how can I use a single M7, or do I need multiple M7 units? How are people doing it?
#11
1st January 2013
Old 1st January 2013
  #11
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 88man View Post
Some projects are simple stereo spaced pair mics for classical piano. Other projects are new age type multitrack electronic virtual instruments in combination with recorded acoustic instruments. In projects with multiple tracks, how can I use a single M7, or do I need multiple M7 units? How are people doing it?
One way is to make a dry mix of the tracks you want to add reverb to,
then make a Bricasti processed version of it.
#12
2nd January 2013
Old 2nd January 2013
  #12
Lives for gear
 
MichaelPatrick's Avatar
 

fwiw, the Bricasti M7 lets you dial a ratio of early reverb (reflections) to late reverb (tails). Sometimes, I use an inboard plate effect to sweeten recorded early reflections and seamlessly tie on the M7's tail. When it works, a small OK room can turn into a nice large hall.
#13
2nd January 2013
Old 2nd January 2013
  #13
Lives for gear
 
Piedpiper's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by 88man View Post
Questions on the Bricasti M7:

1. As a digital insert in a DAW, how can one use a single Bricasti M7 in a project with multiple tracks? Do I simply send each track through Aux Send/Return, or do I need multiple M7 units?
2. If I can use a single M7, will there be latency issues between tracks, or is latency constant every time?
3. Is it better to add reverb on individual tracks before or after the 2 channel mix down?

In the meantime, I'll see if I can treat part of the ceiling.
Thanks, everyone
The usual way to do this is to patch reverb, whether it be an M7 or a plugin, into a stereo aux channel. You then put an aux send on all the channels you want verb on and you can adjust the send amount and panning for appropriate positioning in the sound stage. This works well assuming you want all the tracks to sound like they are naturally in the same room. The latency will also be constant for the aux sends. The latency is also immaterial since the original tracks are untouched. It is only the reverb itself that will have any latency on it. This also keeps the original tracks themselves pristine and unprocessed, always a good idea. If you want artificial effects with more than one type of reverb, then you need more than one M7 or simply use the M7 for the ones where you want a natural sound stage and use plugins for the others.
88man
Thread Starter
#14
2nd January 2013
Old 2nd January 2013
  #14
Gear Head
 

Thread Starter
Thank you, Michael and Piedpiper for the great advice! I've made the decision to go with the M7, over the Ircam Verb at this time. I like the idea that the dry original track remains untouched for reference. "Out of the box," I think the M7 will yield a higher level of predictability than the Ircam Verb. It seems the M7 is excellent and unanimous for natural sounding reverb of acoustical sources. For the non-acoustic tracks, I might go with plug-in reverb(s) in the mix.

Thanks again guys!
#15
3rd January 2013
Old 3rd January 2013
  #15
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piedpiper View Post
If you want artificial effects with more than one type of reverb, then you need more than one M7
If you are recording everything in real time.

If the tracks are recorded dry first, a different Bricasti reverb can be applied to each track, one at a time.
#16
3rd January 2013
Old 3rd January 2013
  #16
Lives for gear
 
Piedpiper's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by aracu View Post
If you are recording everything in real time.

If the tracks are recorded dry first, a different Bricasti reverb can be applied to each track, one at a time.
Yes, of course, you can print each type of verb, one at a time.
Topic:
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Felix (Flux) / Product Alerts older than 2 months
83
Musician / So much gear, so little time!
0
MichaelPatrick / High end
13
A27Hull / Geekslutz forum
11
mad_hatter / So much gear, so little time!
1

Forum Jump
 
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.