The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
How close is Altiverb to Real Units?
Old 28th January 2003
  #1
Lives for gear
 
M2E's Avatar
 

How close is Altiverb to Real Units?

On the verge of getting it because everybody's talking about this one. But How close is the sound to the real things. I looked at some of the IR's(Impulse Response's) and man they have everything from Lexicon 480L to 244 Plates To 300L's even the PCM70, 80, and so on.
But I wanted to know how close does this unit come to the real thing. Everybody says it's the best Reverb Unit in PT's.

Talk to me...

Thanx
M2E
Old 28th January 2003
  #2
Lives for gear
 
malice's Avatar
 

Nice post Erik, I totaly agree...

Some IR response are great, but I was rather disapointed by those coming from Hardware reverbs over thoses comming from real rooms.

Still it is a very nice concept, that Is still to be improve probably, but that gives an interesting alternative to very expensive piece of gear.

I love the fact that it often works on sources that a traditional reverb unit can't handle

malice
Old 28th January 2003
  #3
Lives for gear
 
Messiah's Avatar
 

Re: Re: How close is Altiverb to Real Units?

Quote:
Originally posted by bombguy

Unfortunately, using "chamber" and "room" reverbs really isn't in fashion right now. I think they overstepped their bounds a little when they started sampling everything under the sun. There's another company that does this in hardware with LA-2As, Neve mic preamps and the like. They also fail because these are not snapshot systems. (They try to solve it by having hundreds of IRs for each piece of gear in all the settings, but it still won't capture things like the 'memory effect' that gives the LA-2a its special response.)
Care to name names? I don't want to get this thread, or you, into an LA-2A emulation argument, but I'm curious to know which piece of hardware you are refering to....
Quote:

A guy recently posted some impulse responses, and people went nuts over them, just couldn't believe how good they sounded. Turns out, he'd just sampled specific RealVerb and RenVerb settings. So clearly there's a little bit of psychology at play with this product.
What were these? Where were they posted?
I agree with you, for every good IR set I've heard there are at least 2 bad ones, IMO.
Quote:

To end this ramble before I get into trouble: if you need a Lexicon, buy a Lexicon. If you need a room simulator, Altiverb will give you textures that the chamber and hall presets on Lexicon and TC units do not offer. I wouldn't expect much beyond that.

(Yes I work for Bomb Factory but note that we don't make a reverb.)

--Erik
Again, I agree . I think you'd have to be pretty stupid to buy Altiverb with the intention of making it your only reverb. Altiverbs strength is it's realism of acoustic environments, but realism isn't always what's required. The 480/960 IR's I've heard/got, whilst not being altogether useless, lack the "unfolding" depth of the original presets due to Altiverb not being able to capture modulation fx.

I think comparing Altiverb to digital hardware units misses the point a bit. It's like comparing a synth to a sampler.

The IR's on Audioease's site are quite varied. Worth mention are the "Bill Putnam Chambers" (very good), "Utrecht Music College" (especially "The Chapel", great on acoustic guitar amongst other things) and "School Building" is a good example of Altiverbs usefullness! Some of the cathedrals sound amazing, but I've never found any use for them, personally.
Worth avoiding, "Clone verb" and "Classic High end 1980's digital reverb" for the reasons Erik has already stated.
Old 28th January 2003
  #4
Lives for gear
 
Messiah's Avatar
 

Re: How close is Altiverb to Real Units?

Quote:
Originally posted by M2E

But I wanted to know how close does this unit come to the real thing. Everybody says it's the best Reverb Unit in PT's.
Oops, forgot to answer this...
If by "the real thing" you mean acoustic environments, it's as close as you can get without leaving your chair. If you mean close to other units by "the real thing", I'd say it's a very usuable compromise, but not fully there (see above posts) when modulation is a part of the IR's sampled source.

It is, IMO, the best reverb plug for PT, quite easily.
Old 28th January 2003
  #5
Re: Re: Re: How close is Altiverb to Real Units?

Quote:
Originally posted by Messiah
Care to name names? I don't want to get this thread, or you, into an LA-2A emulation argument, but I'm curious to know which piece of hardware you are refering to....

.

Maybe he is talking about the Sintefex.
Old 28th January 2003
  #6
Erik,
I'm with you 100% also.
Old 29th January 2003
  #7
Lives for gear
 
M2E's Avatar
 

Hi Erik and others,
Erik, to my understanding you are the main guy at "Bombfactory". Would you think about trying your hand at Reverb Plug's?
PT's really needs a great one as you can see.
How hard would this be for you and would you?

Also me and a few friends are going to give up the bucks for the Guitar Tuner and Corelation(Phase) Plug. I think I spelled that right.
As I found out about this plug, I told a few of my hardcore PT's guys that had no clue about this one and there going to get them as well.
Reason for saying is so hopefully that money can go towards a great Reverb Plug.

Who's up for supporting the New Bombfactory's "Realistic Reverb"???

Thanx Guys
M2E
Old 29th January 2003
  #8
Lives for gear
 
Faderjockey's Avatar
 

Man I'm glad I have a big live room.
Old 29th January 2003
  #9
Gear Maniac
 

I recently did a comparison between the KSP8 and Altiverb :
First I sampled some of my favourite KSP settings, processed them in Altiverb, and then used the same sample send to Altiverb and to the Kurzweil :

There`s a big difference between them.

The original sounds way deeper with lots more of dimension. Altiverb always sounded more shattering.

I already put the Kurzweil IR`s on my page, fell free to download them at the project section at www.clipgod.com

I can post the processed soundfiles as well if anybody`s interessted.
Old 29th January 2003
  #10
Lives for gear
 
Renie's Avatar
 

clipgod,

Thanks for posting your test and thoughts on it. What do you mean by 'shattering'?

cheers
Old 29th January 2003
  #11
Gear Maniac
 

Altiverb sounds like it doesn`t have the processor power to calculate the original reflections and the reverb tail, like a KSP8 algorythm run by a REV5.

I am not saying that it actually is that way, but that`s a good way to image what it sounded like.

Another thing I realized is that Altiverb seems not to be able to capture gated reverbs. As there were no gated presets I sampled some from the KSP last night, but they all came out as small rooms - anybody made the same experience ?
Old 30th January 2003
  #12
Lives for gear
 
malice's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by bombguy
It's not a processing issue, it's a limitation of the technology itself. Some reverb algorithms are actually two patches that cross-fade. The first one is the early reflections, the second part is the tail. If you take an impulse, you only capture the first program. So it sounds bad.

This is a brilliant illustration of the limitations of convolution/sampling technology. A gated reverb is an effect that changes over time. But because you're only sampling one moment in time with the IR, it never "learns" that something interesting happens later... the gate closing.

--Erik
Solution might be an hybrid technology that would take advantage of convolution/sampling with time related parameters.
I'm not a tech, so flame me if it is totaly unachievable.
I get the impression that this technology is at the same point as the first samplers we had, with very few editing capabilities vs an EMU IV, with all that filters and envelope etc ...

malice
Old 30th January 2003
  #13
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
It's not a processing issue, it's a limitation of the technology itself

Totally agree with that.
I used this comparison to describe the sound difference between the Alti and the KSP, not to explain why Altiverb doesn`t sound as good as the original.

Having that said, I still think Altiverb is the best digital reverb inside PT !!!!
Old 30th January 2003
  #14
Lives for gear
 
Messiah's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by clipgod
Totally agree with that.
I used this comparison to describe the sound difference between the Alti and the KSP, not to explain why Altiverb doesn`t sound as good as the original.
I thinks it also worth noting that your KSP won't come anywhere near close to Altiverb at what Altiverb is good at. So, you could reverse your comments to the KSP doesn't sound as good as Altiverb, which it won't for some things, but, again, it's a bit like comparing apples to oranges.

In terms of the previous early reflections comments regarding Altiverb, I agree, but lets not forget that you are not limited to just one instance of Altiverb on an insert. It's possible to set up two individual instances of Altiverb on one aux buss/channel, one dedicated to early reflections and one to the main reverb, you just have to adjust the latter instances dry/wet control to alter the balance between them. The beauty of this approach is that you can mix and match the sources of each. Speaker phone/Chapel, control room/chamber, car/kitchen, etc...
I'm not saying this is a cure for the early reflections side of Altiverb (although I don't think it's that much of a problem anyway when using it for what it's meant for) but it's great for coming up with some creative reverbs that you would find it hard to replicate with most hardware units.
If you try this, don't forget to experiment with them in both series and parallel because it changes the results significantly.
Old 30th January 2003
  #15
Lives for gear
 
Messiah's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by clipgod

Another thing I realized is that Altiverb seems not to be able to capture gated reverbs. As there were no gated presets I sampled some from the KSP last night, but they all came out as small rooms - anybody made the same experience ?
I'm aware of Eriks response and your agreement with him, but, it's easy to just put a gate after Altiverb and takes it's input from a buss mix that's the same as what is being sent to Altiverb. Job done.

I think it's a bit silly to criticise Altiverb for not capturing gated reverbs if you understand the technology and theory behind convolution. As I said, if you want a gated verb, put a gate after it, easy.

Check the Quantec Yardstick IR's here;
http://altiverb.daw-mac.com/library.html

I'm sure some of these ARE gated and reversed(?).
Old 31st January 2003
  #16
Here for the gear
 

the great "apples compared to oranges"-mp3s!

To maybe somehow help M2E with his original question:
"How close is Altiverb to Real Units?"

Some Mp3s of a compare between original KSP 8 reverbs and their results in Altiverb IR's done by clipgod can be downloaded at:
http://www.clipgod.com --> "projects"

Smile and relax, all you tech-teachers, the best thing Altiverb brought to me was inspiration. Making own IR's is fun, carrying an IR of my own recording room, staircase AND toilet bowl to other studios around the world on a CD is priceless.
heh
Old 31st January 2003
  #17
nkf
Lives for gear
 

Re: Re: How close is Altiverb to Real Units?

Quote:
Originally posted by bombguy
So if anything about the system changes over time, it won't be represented in the destination.
... Second, the IR only represents one snapshot in time. So if anything about the system changes over time, it won't be represented in the destination.
...
The first one is the early reflections, the second part is the tail. If you take an impulse, you only capture the first program. So it sounds bad.
...
This is a brilliant illustration of the limitations of convolution/sampling technology. A gated reverb is an effect that changes over time. But because you're only sampling one moment in time with the IR, it never "learns" that something interesting happens later... the gate closing.
Because audio is about changes in time it would not make sense if convolution could not capture this. It is true that it is a 'snapshot' in the sense it's more like a time window and can reproduce what happens in this time window. This is the similarity to audio sampling. I don't know much about Altiverb but I have Acoustic Mirror and a Yamaha SREV1. Of course it is possible and even easy to reproduce gated reverbs, multitaps, delays of all sort etc. To doublecheck this for me, although I did IRs from nonlinear reverbs before, and to show the practical result here, I sampled the AMS emulation from my System6000 (AMS NonLin B)
with the SREV1. Then I've sent the same simple snare drum sample thru both of them and tried to match the levels. The results can be found and compared here:
http://www.forcedmedia.com/examples/...6000reverb.wav
www.forcedmedia.com/examples/SREV1reverb.wav
Even if the levels are not 100% perfect matched the examples are very close for me. Any other opinions?
There was no EQ or anything else done to the impulses - straight recorded from the dithered AES/EBU out of the DM2000.
What could be the problem with the Altiverb sampling of the Kurzweil device I don't know. Recently I carefully IR sampled an old EMT240 and it was indeed very difficult, because you have to find the right levels and the correct impuls or sweep to work with. Afterwards it needed some EQ tweaking on the SREV1 to match better the analog I/O of the EMT but I think that the results are very close to the original.
Where convolution really doesn't work is pitched stuff.
Old 31st January 2003
  #18
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
I thinks it also worth noting that your KSP won't come anywhere near close to Altiverb at what Altiverb is good at. So, you could reverse your comments to the KSP doesn't sound as good as Altiverb, which it won't for some things, but, again, it's a bit like comparing apples to oranges.
I thought the name of this thread is " how close is ALTIVERB to real units "


Quote:
I think it's a bit silly to criticise Altiverb for not capturing gated reverbs if you understand the technology and theory behind convolution. As I said, if you want a gated verb, put a gate after it, easy.
Criticise ????
Don`t know where you got this from, as I was just wondering why it didn`t capture the sampled gates and was hoping that someone could explain my missunderstanding of the theory - can you ????
Old 31st January 2003
  #19
Lives for gear
 
Messiah's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by clipgod
I thought the name of this thread is " how close is ALTIVERB to real units "
It is, but I thought we'd generally confirmed that that's not really what Altiverb is about.

Quote:

Criticise ????
Don`t know where you got this from, as I was just wondering why it didn`t capture the sampled gates and was hoping that someone could explain my missunderstanding of the theory - can you ????
I didn't mean for "criticise" to be as stressed as you've taken it. But, again, I'll use the sampler/synth analogy. Let's say you sample a DX7 patch, load it into your sampler and compare them. Firstly, they're going to sound different and, secondly, the DX7 is going to be more versatile and sound better, mainly because it's your reference point. The sampler will be ballpark, but different, but, you are not playing to the samplers strengths.
Now, if you load a decent piano program into the sampler and try and replicate that on the DX7, or any synth, you will get nowhere near the quality/sound of the sampler. And before anyone jumps in, I know sampled piano is a comprimise to a real piano's response!

Altiverb and hardware digital reverb units are a similar story. You can sample your KSP presets into Altiverb, but you aren't using Altiverbs strengths and, IMO, you may as well use your KSP. Load a decent hall into Altiverb and try and replicate it in your KSP, and I'm sure Altiverb will win hands down, YMMV.

Having Altiverb, or any sampling reverb unit, in your sonic arsenal should be seen as an addition to your reverb palette that compliments your digital units.
We don't compare synths and samplers, do we(?), but both have their place.
Old 31st January 2003
  #20
Gear Head
 

For those that dont have Altiverb and use a PC (Sadly no MAC VERSION YET)

Here is a free impulse reverb. I have tried it on my office PC and it sounds pretty good to me considering the fact that its competely:


FREE



http://home.t-online.de/home/5200737...ndex_plug.html
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump