Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: Decent reverb

Bob,

You recently posted:

> I use the ' less is more ' when it comes to reverb!
> Also using just one reverb as an Aux send and sending all tracks to it
> with varying amounts really helps.

This is what many hardware synths do for a "performance" or "program." All
of the instruments go through the same reverb (and chorus). The amount of
reverb can be varied for each channel.

With care, this can be made to sound ~OK. Electronic instruments are recorded
directly, so there are no room acoustics. Other instruments are recorded
in rooms with noticeable acoustic properties. When these instruments sampled
under different conditions are combined, the room acoustics are imbalanced.
In order to correct this problem, one can add reverb to those instruments
which have little to none while adding none to those instruments which
were recorded in some sort of room. What is really being done here is that
the user is attempting to recreate the room that some of those instruments
were sampled in, which may sound OK. If one then adds additional nonphysical
reverb to the mix, the sound begins to deviate from that of a real room ---
so "less is more" --- that is, less sounds more like a real room. Any
rooms that samples are recorded in is usually small, so normally there isn't
much overall reverb with this approach.

I can't say and am not saying that this is what you are doing, but it may
at least partially explain why you say "less is more."

Personaly, I don't like the sound that my hardware synths produce when I
attempt to do what you described. Part of it has to do with the reverb, but
it also has to do with the artificial stereo separation for most instruments.
It never sounds good with headphones with this approach no matter what I do.
Even those genres which use little reverb don't sound good. The room
acoustic models, such as they are, and listening models are physics-deficient.
Received on Fri Feb 4 04:15:04 2005