Our reverb prayers have been answered...

[IOComposer]

There is a new \"reverb\" plug-in just released from <a href=http://www.Audioease.com>AudioEase</a> called AltiVerb that I believe is better and more realistic than any hardware reverb currently available. It\'s based on the acoustic modeling technology exhibited in the $$$Sony777. It\'s not a DSP based reverb but more a physically modeled representation of actual halls. The product ships with (among others) a model of the Vredenburg concert hall which sounds absolutely gorgeous.

I\'ve spent the last few days experimenting with it and A/Bing it with my TCM3000 and LexiPCM90. As far as realism goes, it pretty much puts both units to shame (which bums me out, because I\'ve got over $4K invested in these boxes).

I believe that this reverb will help you achieve more realistic orchestral emulations, however there is a caveot and that is that it\'s only available as a plug-in for Digital Performer on a G4 Mac. PC guys are bummed, but even if you bought a new mac, the plug-in, and Digital Performer, you\'d still get a modeling reverb at a third of the cost of a Sony777. Something to think about http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif
-J

btw- I posted a little test that I did with me playing my \"close miked oboe\" in the Vrendenberg hall. Check it out here: http://www.DramaticAudio.com/audio/AltiverbOboe.mp3 (\"http://www.DramaticAudio.com/audio/AltiverbOboe.mp3\")

[This message has been edited by IOComposer (edited 08-16-2001).]

[PatS]

How does Altiverb compare with Sonic Foundry\'s Acoustic Mirror (http://www.sonicfoundry.com/PRODUCTS/NewShowProduct.asp?PID=10 (\"http://www.sonicfoundry.com/PRODUCTS/NewShowProduct.asp?PID=10\")), which is now part of Sound Forge 5.0? I don\'t hear folks raving about Acoustic Mirror, but its underlying technology seems similar to that of Altiverb (\"acoustic impulse responses\"). Perhaps it could serve as a decent alternative for those of us who don\'t own or have access to Macs.

Pat

[This message has been edited by PatS (edited 08-16-2001).]

[KingIdiot]

Modeling Reverb/Convalution has been aroundfor a while. Acoustic Modeler and Cool Edit and OLD samplers have been doing it for a while. IMO AM sounds really great and one can share all kinds of models of different halls with different people.

I\'m not sure if the Audio ease one does it any differently but I wouldn\'t think so...unless it works fmore like Cakewalk\'s sound stage and it allows you to \"place\" instruments in the space both stereo and #-d. Then it might be more of a true modeling system...somewhat more like the POD Guitar Amp simulator that models what happens to sound at different stages of an Amps chain. Convolution just uses reverb tails called impulse responses to base its models after...albiet it sounds REALLY REALLY good, its not true modeling/simulation in my opinion, but rather more like sampler.

sooo PC guys have had this stuff for a while http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

------------------
Really...I am an Idiot

[IOComposer]

The problem that I find with acoustic mirror is that I find it unrealistic to mix with. Because it\'s not a real-time tool, doing a large mix requires a huge amount of grunt-work file processing. If I were just passing a mix through, it would be ok, but since I\'m doing different verb mixes for different sections (plus augmenting with Lexi-verb), I need to be able to use it in real-time. Plus, I run eq for each section before verb so that I can manipulate the mix pre-reverb. Doing this as a non real-time process would be ultra-arduous, although not undoable if you don\'t have deadlines and don\'t mind spending all of your time mixing instead of composing http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif
-J

[KingIdiot]

Jsut read about it... Four Channel Reverbs....\'.nice http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

you\'ll get \"true\" placement
you can do this with a bouple of AM models tho http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

I can use AM in Realtime at its 4 setting most of the time in a 1 gig athlon. put two of them in and it starts to choke. I agree its a pain not working in realtime tho....BUT what you can do is IF you are working with wet and dry mixes you can render jsut the Reverb to track and then mix the wet signal as just another track.
------------------
Really...I am an Idiot

[This message has been edited by KingIdiot (edited 08-16-2001).]

[Neal Keane]

Very nice, Jamey! Excellent performance.

Slightly OT: Are you using a wind controller and if so, what kind?
Thanks,
Neal

[IOComposer]

Yeah. It\'s a WX5 http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif It\'s become my main instrument.
-J

[Kenn159]

Hi IO Composer
Just wondering what library you are you using the oboe from and is the tremelo in the sample or applied by you in realtime via some controller within the WXK?
Thanks , Ken

[Kenn159]

I mean WX5

[Aenigma]

IOComposer, that oboe has some nice expression. I\'m about to get a WX5, but I\'m wondering how you\'ve done this vibrato. I don\'t have any sounds that add vibrato though any controllers (that I know of), but can this kind of vibrato be played in n the WX5 using lip vibrato to send pitch bend information? Can this be done with something like Dan Dean\'s woodwinds NV patches?

[IOComposer]

The tremolo is done with my breath. That\'s why you use a breath controller. There was no vibrato in the sample at all. In fact, it wasn\'t even a sample. It\'s just an oboe patch from my vl70m. It sounds real because it is played like a real instrument. I\'ve been practicing for a couple of years now trying to perfect the vibrato (tremolo) and according to these responses, it looks like I\'m starting to get it! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif
The WX5 is an amazingly expressive instrument, but there is a bit of a learning curve to play it expressively. You\'re going to need to spend some time in the woodshed. However, it\'s a fun instrument to play and I\'ve had nothing but joy practicing. I think I play it better now than I do the trumpet or keyboard, and I\'ve only had it for a couple of years, so that should tell you that the learning curve is relatively easy. If you do get one, I would recommend joining the windlist (wwwlwindsynth.org) as there are people there that will help you learn how to play it. It was an invaluable resource for me.
Good luck!
-J

[IOComposer]

I should add...
You can NOT play this expressively using Giga and samples!!! I\'ve been after Nemesys to support wind controller, but the functionality is very disfunctional http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/frown.gif
-J

[Aenigma]

Any chance you could go into detail about how the WX5 performs with giga? This is how I planned on using it.

Let me just make sure I\'m not misunderstanding something....

I don\'t need the controller to play expressively running right into giga, but rather as I record the MIDI tracks in Cakewalk.

I was going to place my order for my wind controller monday, so you can understand why I\'m sitting here shouting, \"Eeek!\"

[Jamieh]

The problem as I understand it is that doing stuff like adding vibrato with your breath cannot be done unless the patch/sample has been programmed to respond to this. In general I believe synthesizers respond much more to data like this than samples, since the synthesizers are creating the sounds on the fly whereas samples are just playing back pre-recorded data.

[IOComposer]

Yes, that\'s totally true.
You\'re best off using a synth module such as the Roland JV-1010, Yamaha vl70m, or the Alesis Nanosynth. They just respond well to breath control. You can use breath control for samples, just not very well with Giga. I\'ve used samples in an E4XT and it works extremely well. It works best with layered sounds with differing effects and response controls per layer. The main aspect of the wind controller is the cc#2 that it outputs. It\'s just like any other continuous controller, but how the synth/sampler responds to this controller is everything when it comes to performance dynamics. The note on velocity that it triggers can be adjustable, but it is only one velocity and can\'t be changed. For example, if you have a multi-velocity layered sampled instrument, the multiple layers won\'t matter because it will only trigger the sample that is triggered on the initial note attack. Amplitude fluctuations from that point on are simply affecting the one sample dynamic. However, if you link controller filters to that one dynamic, you can get very expressive results but with giga it just sounds synthy due to inacurate response of cc information. I\'ve sent Nemesys all of the details as to how to make this better, but I have not heard of any plans to implement them. I\'m just crossing my fingers and rallying for support http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

There is potential with linking cc#2 to control the dynamic crossfading functionality of Giga, but due to it\'s inaccuracy it does not do a good job of it at this time.
There are however, many synths and soft synths with full support for Wind controller (Unity DS-1 being a leader) and I\'m sure that Giga will follow suit if they find there is enough demand to justify the expense.
Hope that helps. Please feel free to email me personally if you need further assistance.
-J

[Aenigma]

I do have some other questions... what is your email address? Or if you prefer you can contact me at jdtolman@swbell.net

I do own a Roland JV-1080 with the orchestral expansions, but I don\'t know if just using those sounds will justify the cost of a wind controller.

I though I had read on this or another message board that a lot of people used wind controllers to record their string parts. Maybe I was wrong and they were using AKAI or other format disks NOT with Giga.

Another reason for my interest in a wind controller is because I\'m a windwind player - I think that I\'d be a lot more productive when recording monophonic lines playing them on a wind controller as opposed to a keyboard. (Piano fat finger syndrome, I guess!) I compose mostly wind band and orchestral music, so this alone might justify the purchase.

Maybe I\'m just searching for a general opinion, is it worth having a wind controller despite it\'s current limitations with giga?

[johner]

Jamey,

Which Vl-70 patch was that, if I may ask?

Thanks,
John

[dnortana]

Jamey,
As you well know, I\'ve been trying to get decent sounding orchestral reverb for some time now, hesitant to plop down the $4K for new boxes. What I heard on your oboe demo was excellent sounding!
Being a DP user on a mac, this new Altiverb could be just the ticket. But it is a real rsource hog, is it not?
Oh well, I was planning on upgrading to a dual G4 within a year, maybe it just needs to be sooner.
Thanks for the post.
Regards,
Trond.

[Neal Keane]

Aenigma wrote:
\"Another reason for my interest in a wind controller is because I\'m a windwind player\"

Definitely a win-win combination! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

[OH]

\"I\'ve sent Nemesys all of the details as to how to make this better, but I have not heard of any plans to implement them. I\'m just crossing my fingers and rallying for support\"

Why not opening a topic to Jeff/Tascam on the other forum and ask him about it...?

[IOComposer]

Trond- I\'m mixing a score for a film right now and I\'m getting results that I\'m very happy with. I\'m using the Altiverb in combination with the PCM90. It\'s a very huge, Hollywood sound. The more I use Altiverb, the more I like it. It\'s making my brass library really shine. My main interest in it is being able to sample the environment of a shooting location, to match the environment in post for sfx and adr. I haven\'t done this yet, but I\'ve been experimenting with making my own impulse files and it\'s very cool. The downside is that it is indeed a resource hog. My G4/500 is pretty much maxed out to the point where I have to get a second processor. I was planning on doing that soon anyway. I\'m making some money now (for a change http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif ), so it\'s not too big of a deal for me.
Johner- I usually use Matt Black\'s patches from the Patchmanmusic website. He\'s a great programmer. I cannot program the VA stuff like that, although I hope to learn some day.
-J

[Bruce Mitchell]

I have Altiverb running on a Mac G4 Cube. It is gorgeous! It is also a major resource hog. I\'m thinking of getting a G4 notebook just for the reverb and run it thru an 828 Firewire.

What I really like is the ability to choose the front of the Hall cardioids for strings and back of the hall Omnis for brass.

It makes any sound come alive IMHO. I also use Lex PCM 91. So i have something good to compare it to.

[Freya]

Another very interesting \"real\" reverb simulation can be found at www.catt.se. (\"http://www.catt.se.\") It\'s called FIReverb. It\'s not a real time pluggin, though it\'s \"realtime\" or faster WRT the compute time vs. the length of the music. I particularly like the mic selections - mono, coincident, spaced omni\'s, B format, and 5 channel are provided. It\'s the first reverb I\'ve used that actually \"turned the piano around\" and placed it in a natural sound field. A demo is available for download but be advised it\'s an extremely complex piece of software.

[dnortana]

Freya,
Thanks for posting the information about FIReverb. I followed the link, read up on the software, and it sounds quite impressive. If Deutsche Grammofon uses it to process too-dry recordings, as CATT claims in their downloadable PDF, it must have some serious, good sounding horsepower!

Subsequent to first posting this, I went to the site, and downloaded the demo. They are very responsive there! Haven\'t installed and tried it yet, but it looks promising.
Thanks,
Trond.

[This message has been edited by dnortana (edited 08-20-2001).]

[Bruce A. Richardson]

Hi all,

I would also recommend the Waves Renaissance Reverb. It was a real pig when released, using about 50% of my CPU. CPU usage has been cut dramatically in the newest update--drastically.

Especially useful, and almost unnoticeable in the interface, is a set of six linearity models for each algorithm. They drastically change the character, and I have found that in almost every case there\'s a \"perfect\" setting for every use in one of the six.

Also, the latest Sonic Timeworks reverb is gorgeous-sounding, really stunning. However, it is very difficult to run in realtime due to its extremely high CPU usage, and it is not quite as tweakable as one would like.

Sonic Foundry\'s Acoustic Mirror WILL run in realtime, by the way. It runs best in Vegas, although you will almost always have to run a large buffer to get gap-free performance at the maximum quality setting.

However, I think convolvers are a little overrated. Fact is, the \"authenticity\" of convolver reverb can work against you more often than not. Since individual samples are likely to have different reflections, different mic\'ing techniques, etc.; it\'s usually necessary to tweak the reverb a lot for best results, and convolvers don\'t offer a lot of \"tweakability.\"

So many times, the way to get a natural sound from an unnatural source (like a sampler) comes via unnatural means. Very often with sampling, your reverb is not only being used to enhance imaging, but to help match disparate elements--a somewhat corrective use, one might say. Convolvers are practically useless for this.

As a practical example, say you\'d really like some nice long decay on a pizzicato bass--and you\'d like it to have a very low resonant bass quality in the mix. That\'s tricky, because increasing the low frequency content also \"fools\" your ear into thinking the basses are closer to you, the classic proximity effect.

But if you leave the EQ of the bass sample alone, and instead increase the bass response of your reverb, you\'ll get a nice low \"spread\" without bringing the bass section closer to you in the mix or making it sound unnaturally \"thumpy.\"

One must often do VERY unnatural things to arrive at a natural result.

Best regards,
Bruce

[KingIdiot]

The thing I like aobut convolvers is the amount of \"depth\" you can get without having a long decay. You can lose the proximity effect with some EQ, but the amount of depth you get wih lowering the decay envelope is nice, ad adding a fake reverb or different reverb on top of the \"newly\" effected samples with the depth helps smooth out the whole mix

------------------
Really...I am an Idiot