4 Feb
2005
4 Feb
'05
4:29 a.m.
HI
Can't say I've had a lot to do with Synth reverbs, I come from a ' live'
sound engineering background so tended to use reverbs very sparingly.
As a recording engineer and moving to digital this is a different ball
game. I think it really depends on the type of music you are aiming for.
In the UK if your making a commercial single then anything goes and it
must be as loud as possible!! As in ' Frankie goes to Hollywood ' I
think these songs drip Synth reverb.
I must admit to struggling with reverb settings as they sound ok one
minute and then not the next as the track moves on.
Cheers
Bob
On Fri, 2005-02-04 at 00:31 +0000, tim hall wrote:
Last Thursday 03 February 2005 22:11,
davidrclark(a)earthlink.net was like:
> 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.
>
I agree that we could do with better reverbs.
None of this is to be taken as a diss on Freeverb or Gverb. They still sound
better than my old quadraverb!
Here I'm just going to pay attention and take
notes. There is a certain school
of engineering which goes for naturalistic reproduction and I'm not worthy to
even patch your outboard effects. So, as a humble student I would say that it
doesn't have to be 'realistic'. Over-the-top reverbs have their uses,
however, they do have to be pleasing to ear. I guess I'm not going to be
surprised if you tell me that's best achieved by following naturalistic
principles too, but surely we don't _have_ to try to reproduce the room?
I want a virtual forest please ;-)
cheers,
tim hall
http://glastonburymusic.org.uk