I associate Lexicon reverb gear with the 480's unique fat creamy & dence snare reverb... and rich vocal sounds..

Are both of these available within a Lexicon PC M91 ?

At the same time?

Can the 91 operate as a 'dual engine' unit?

Just for the record I have managed without Lexicon for the last 22 years of studio life.

But I AM interested in it...

Please advise...

I have a TCM3000 & an AMS RMX 16

I worked with the PCM91 right when it came out (via AES in a Neve Capricorn room), and was fairly disappointed. It has "Dual Reverb" presets, but is not dual engine like, say, a 480L. The "Spatalizer" preset is kinda cool, but I found myself using the "Tiled Room" and "Brass Plate" on the PCM70 over the verbs on the 91 everytime. The post production engineers I talk to love it, but for most of my applications I was disappointed.

I don't have PCM91, but do own a PCM81. I believe 91 has some Dual Reverb programs where you can run two independent reverb programs. The reverb algorithms on 91 is derived from 480L.

I have a 4 engines M5000. I like it very much, but it's a totally different sounding than the 81 when it comes to reverb. I have played with M3000 a lot and very familiar to the sound of it. The reverb on M3000 is smooth...and 'clean'...sometimes for some songs...I think it's too 'clean'. The 480L sounds...hmm...I am so used to how it sounds...good or bad...I can't really say. I believe the aging A/D and D/A convertors on the 480L play a big part on the sound you get on the 480L.

Also, I had played with M6000 and 960L quite a bit. Once again, the reverb there sound very different. 960L sounds much more smoother than the 480L...probably due to a better convertors. M6000...what can I say...this thing is awesome plus you can get all those options. I want to sell my M5000 and get myself a fully loaded M6000! Always wondering how well the GML EQ option on the M6000 perform in comparison with the 8200.

Anyone want to buy a fully loaded M5000?

I haven'y used the 91 as I'm in love with the Quantec verbs.
you can achive pretty much any reverb with ease.
http://www.quantec.com/
check it out if you can.

...Jules...why wouldnt you simply get another TC M3000??...those things are sweet!!!....personally owned a a 91...used it with my now defunct P.A. it always sounded good in every room but sounded...uh..i guess the way it affected my ears in a recording situation was 'manufactured'...make sense? powerful unit..but its sound was not 'airy'...i know i'm searching for some description but can't seem to get it clear....oh yeah thats it...CLEAR...

Interesting responce... kinda 'underwelming' overall.....

I geuss I will give it a skip....

I used to have both the PCM91 and TcM3000. For a main reverb that glues the mix, the M3000 is much better. The PCM91 was occasionally amazing & sweet, but the M3000 was consistently better. I sold the PCM91 and got a demeter spring reverb... which is really cloudy and fat... not sweet at all. Useful for adding density to mix.

I still long for more reverb options... I want a system 6000 so I can use the new tc reverbs. I bet they'll be upgrading the M3000 soon, too.

Hi Jules,

IMHO the PCM70 is a classic, hip Lexicon at a moderate price ($700 or so on ebay) that you would get a lot of mileage out of.

I like 'em for echos (6 independant delay lines), major/minor chord resonances, chorus/flange, swirls, plates, verbs, you name it. It's all useful, musical stuff.

Lexicon-wise, we have a 480L, 2 PCM70s and a PCM60. The 480L and 70s get constant use...I don't think I could find a mix recall sheet here that doesn't show both 480L engines and both PCM70s in use.

Also, every now and then, the old PCM60 is just the reverb that rocks when you're struggling. That happened during yesterday's mix...the PCM60 came through for a verb when the 480, Orville, H3000, Yardstick, PCM70, Rev1 and SPX90 weren't cutting it.

The one Lexicon that I don't have but would like to pick up, is a PCM42. Actually, a couple of them (PCM42 sellers, feel free to email me directly).

Jon

P.S. Interesting to see people looking for clear-sounding reverbs. I often find myself rolling OFF the high end on the verb settings.

When I use the reverb on M3000, I always roll off the high end on it. Of course, it depends on the song but I do this roll off more often on the M3000 than on the 480L.

I noticed a lot of studio's stocking 2290's instead on 42's. When I asked the studio managers why, they told me that they were actually cheaper than the 42's (and do a lot more). Just something to consider.

"I bet they'll be upgrading the M3000 soon, too."

Well they made the Finalizer jump up to 96k from 44/48

Fingers crossed eh?

The PCM91's aren't bad at all, if used for the right things. Just like the M3000 isn't bad if used in the right situations. Both have their strengths and weaknesses, but I think they actually compliment each other well. They fill the gaps where one leaves off(PCM91 colored reverb vs. M3000 clear and skinny sounding). If you want the 480L sound than get a 480L(or maybe a 224XL or 300L similar sounds). I agree with the poster earlier about the Quantec Reverbs, they are some of my favorites. I would check that out, and also the Eventide DSP7000(its like the stereo cousin of the Orville, same technology that includes the reverbs, grear EMT emulation by the way). But these are more than a used PCM91(about $900 here in the states). For $900 you aren't going to find much in digital reverbs with digital ins and outs(maybe a Sony DPS-V77?). As for the PCM42 and 2290 thing, I think its apples and oranges. Yes the 2290 does more, but it doesn't sound like a PCM42(especially on vocals). Also its not a true stereo unit, so you probably need 2(and if you have the updated software you can run then as one machine, sort of a poor man's eventide). But I guess with Jon's studio, he should actually have a pair of each, because somewhere along the line a client will ask why its not in the rack.

Although the PCM91 algs come from the 480L they do not sound the same. The PCM91 and M300/300L have near the exact same
algs and I like the M300/300L sound better. It might be the the PCM91 converters just to good or are not matched with the reverb algs, but the M300/300L is warmer to me. But if you want the warm and creamy stuff no substitute for real 480L.

The PCM91 does have a lot of dual/split presets and the tap tempo is a nice addition.

AudioGaff

Hey Donald,

Your right up my alley man! I too choose last year the M3000 over the 91 and decided as well to get the amazeing Demeter spring reverb! (I had to get 2 for optimum stereo mixes!)

I find the M3000 to have a more elegant quality in a world of more "processed" sounding digital verbs (under 5K.)

Can anyone fill me in on the features of the M6000? All I know is that Bruce Botnick used it to enhance all "bootleg" releases of full Doors performances, being released slowly on Midnight Records.

I believe they were useing alot of hall simulations.

How does the 90/91 compare to a 300? At some point next year I'm thinking about picking up either one or maybe a TCM5000 if I can find one cheap.

I have both the PCM91 and the M300 and the M300 sounds better to me. Deeper, more of that full lush-ness. It can be subtle sometimes. The M300 gives you 8-soft keys with 8-parameters at your fingertips while the small PCM90/91 gives you one at at time. The PCM90/91 has the tap tempo feature and many more presets to choose from organized by type and function. The M300 gives you SMPTE event input, an option to add the LARC, S/PDIF optical and most of the capability of the PCM80/91 with delays, chours, flange, pitch shift ect.

AudioGaff

Although they all belong to the same family line within Lexicon, the difference in sound between the PCM90 and 480L is much bigger than difference between the 300 and 480L. The longer reverb time (decay), the more obvious (hmm, audible) gap between the PCM90 and its big brothers. On the positive side, PCM90 is capable of creating impressive illusions of smaller spaces, both natural and unnatural.

I've bought and sold them all, at various points. Settling for PCM90 instead of 300/480L doesn't seem to work for me, but selling it is a bad idea altogether. One should have them all. It's so depressing.

Predrag

Nah, I guess I'm wondering because I know that my reverb selection here is good but not great. I've got an MPX-1, an M2000 and a Peavey Valverb spring. At some point I want/need to get something big and lush sounding. I've used 300's a few times and have been pretty happy with them, same thing with the PCM90 but I've never had a chance to directly compare them. Maybe I'll just get a big 'ol EMT plate like a 140.

Tholen - I listened to the one mp3 demo on the Quantec site, very drastic verb - yet showed that it has a very natural room sound that could work wonders for backing elements in a mix, where can one hear more quantec stuff - could you be so kind to make some dry/wet AIFFs to post somewhere?

I'm suprised nobody has mentioned the Eventide line more.

For mixing, I absolutly love so many of the Eventide presents, their color/flavor, and thats just the present...

I am close to purchasing an Eclipse as in it has many of the patches from the 3000 series, older models, and dsp-4000. It's also 96k compatible with wordclock i/o - perfect for linking up to my DAW printing to new tracks as needed (and yes adding a re-call sheet to my notes, yet the unit does have a smart media slot that could serve as that)

nobody here rock the eventide as it was their thang? I listen to some producer's work and get the feeling that they definatly must own one as if it was an american express card - they don't leave home without it.

I'm a big Eventide fan and user as I own three models. I like the reverbs in the DSP series models, but my Lexicon M300 is a whole different and prefered reverb. What the Eventide lacks in reverb, (and it really doesn't lack much) it makes up for with the variety of different effects, number of presets and the flexability to create custom effects algorthyms that can not be done on any other effects box.

I don't think all of the presets on the Eclipse can run at 88K or 96K, but many if not most do.

My all time favorite is the AKG ADR68K for thick, lush, dense reverb. It is a poor mans 480L if you can find one.

AudioGaff

Sorry but I have only an old Eventide H3000 but I love every bit it converts. The reverbs sound a bit special to me, but from time to time I use it as a reverb box (I have 480 and 300 so there's not much to be desired in my reverb world). I love the Eventide for all those nice flanging and chorusing sounds. I wish I had more Eventide stuff.

Jo

Try the new Eventide stuff, it is no comparison to the old stuff. The verbs in the Orville/DSP7500/7000 are superb(especially at 96K). I tried the Eclipse for a week and sold it because it sounded too similar to the old stuff(which I already own). I like the EMT plate emulations a lot and what's great is that you can create your own multi effects combinations within one unit. The DSP7000 I own can be expanded to work as a 4 channel unit and it has the same engine as the father unit(Orville) only in stereo. You can also use the same remote.

where do the Gtr4000's,dsp 4500 series fit in?

I see them for comparible prices to the Eclipse on the used market...but not sure how they compare

The Eclipse has a limited number of presets but has the same DSP power of the DSP7000/DSP7500. They and the Eclipse all have an additional reverb module. All of the modules that make up the effects from the GTR4000/DSP4000/DSP4500 are included with some improved and new modules in the DSP7000/DSP7500 series models. The Eclipse has hand selected presets from many of the standard and popular presets from all of the DSP series models.

The DSP sereis and Orville units allow you to create/build an effects preset or an entire effects chain at the module level and the Eclipse does not and is more like any other effects box in that you can only choose from existing presets.

The DSP7000/DSP7500 has 8X the DSP power of the GTR4000/DSP4000/DSP4500 and gives you twice as much memory for a preset size.

AudioGaff

Are the DSPs difficult to progam? I'm the kind of user which dials a program in and modifies it. I'm to lazy to program a whole effect chain

Difficult is a relative term. If you just chain a few existing presets to create a bigger one, that is fairly easy. But there is a learning curve and it does take some effort. It took me about a week of a few hours a day before I was changing all kinds of stuff and making my own custom presets. Of course some of those presets took hours before I was satisfied and I have some extensive programming experience to begin with. I've sold more two dozen custom presets to clients so it was time well spent for me.

AudioGaff

Thanx for your infos Audio Gaff.
Some last question: could you give an example of a self made preset? Are there other ways to achieve the same sounds? (probably with 2 effects units)
I'getting interseted in those new Eventides

It is rather hard to describe without having the editor and Eventide to show you, but think of it this way.

You find a preset you like such as a EMT plate reverb. It's real nice own it's own but you'd also like to include a delay. So you create one from scratch using the DSP modules that make up a delay or you find another preset that has a nice delay that you like. You can then combine them one into another or run them separate next to each other inside the preset. You then can create or change your interface to them on how they are displayed on the LCD screen, which one comes first, which order do want to see and access the paramaters. Mabe you want to add footpedal control for on/off of each effect or volume of the effect and so on. So you listen to this preset and you like it but you can now imagine many other variations of this preset. This one preset can eliminate one or more outboard effects you may have had to use to accomplish the same thing. You can get rid of them or now use them for something else. Now depending on how big and how much DSP resources you used in this new preset, you can further add to it with mabe another delay, or some pitch-shifting, or trembelo, or parametric eq, or a compressor before and mabe even after, or all of the above.

To me, that is just so frickin bitchin that it inspires me. No other effects box can do this kind of thing at the level that the Eventides do and that's only one reason why I own three of them...

AudioGaff

Audiogaff - I haven't yet had a chance to use a DSP-7000 or an Orville - yet I was almost sold on the Eclipse.

I am a DAW mixer, who was looking to lock the Eclipse to my system, and route tracks AES out into, and AES back into new tracks...

I know that the Eclipse is only presets, yet I'm sure you can still tweak the hell out of them enough to your liking?

If I was/am a fan of was the DSP-4000 can do - will I still be thrilled with the Eclipse.

Thread is making me want to save longer for the DSP-7000

thanks, J

Jason, Will you be thrilled with the Eclipse? Yes, I think you will be. For a preset only box it does include and cover the bases quite well. If you are one who enjoyed the flexability and creating your own presets like in the DSP4000 series, save your money and get that same flexability back along with increased DSP power and additional preset loading memory. I don't need an Eclipse, but I sure wish I had one. I'm one who believes that you should never skimp now if you can afford to wait and save a little so that get something you really want and will make use of.
The Eclipse is a next generation H3000 series model that just happens to have much more DSP power than a DSP4000 series model.

AudioGaff