View Single Post
Old 22nd August 2019
  #2
Gear Maniac
 
Calagan's Avatar
 

Actually, you opened an interesting thread where we could share some feelings about FB 360 workstation (because there's not a lot of infos/forums about it on the net).

I'm using FB 360 v3, and I think I found somewhere that they improved the rear/front localization compared to the v2, but actually I feel the same like you (I need to say I can't compare to the v2 because I never used it).
It's not absolutely the same between front and rear in my case, but it's still not there in my opinion.

Regarding stability, I'm using FB 360 WS V3 on Reaper, on a mac (Sierra) and everything is ok.

Another issue for me is the use of stereo sounds in the spatializer : sometime I can hear some strange phasing artifacts using stereo sounds (it may be something else than phasing, I don't know what it is, but it just sounds bad), and until now I didn't figure out how to improve that because on some sounds it's ok.
Is it the spacing of the sound (far or near of each other) ?
Is it the tonal quality of the sounds used (lot of highs ? lot of lows ?) ?
I don't have any clue, and I would be pleased to have some insight about that from someone who understand what exactly FB workstation is doing to audio for its ambisonic effect.

Last issue, the room modelisation is quite bad in my opinion. It sounds very digital, very harsh, and doesn't give much clues about the room where the action takes place (because you need to set it very low if you want to avoid the digital harshness). It sounds like a bad digital reverb (with only first reflections, so the eventual smoothing of late reflections is even not there).
Using some third party reverb (Breeze, Valhalla, Reflektor - so only good quality stuff) before the spatializer can be tricky too : sometimes it sounds very bad, and I guess it's related to the phasing artifact I'm speaking about when I used stereo sounds.

here are my 2 cents...
I hope someone else can contribute.