24 Jan
2005
24 Jan
'05
7:03 p.m.
Hi all,
This question is not really a problem with hardware or software per
se, but I would just like to know what people's favorite reverbs out
there are. I used to do all of my pro audio work on Mac and Windoze,
and I'm having great success getting things working with Linux, but
I've never really found any really decent reverbs, and this is
unfortunately keeping me from doing more final mixes with Linux. What
I'm looking for is something like a LADSPA or other plugin, or a
program that will process sound non-realtime (or even destructively,
like Audacity) with some decent sounding reverbs.
The TAP Reverberator plugin was okay, I guess, but really the only
other LADSPA reverb I've come across is Freeverb, which is not good,
at least using it for intimate vocal tracks and guitars. I mainly use
Ardour for tracking and mixing, Audacity for destructive editing and
cleaning up tracks, and Csound, which I've been known to use for DSP a
bit in the past.
Maybe I just have not stumbled upon the right plugins or programs.
Any suggestions of favorites?
One more related question: Does anyone know if any soundcards with
DSP in hardware work with Linux? I'm thinking of something along the
lines of the Creamware cards (the ones with the integrated DSP's), but
I'm assuming that most of these also need a software component to make
them work, and that is most definitely closed-source. I can dream,
though, right?
Jon M.
24 Jan
24 Jan
7:41 p.m.
On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 17:03, Jon Morin wrote:
Hi all,
This question is not really a problem with hardware or software per
se, but I would just like to know what people's favorite reverbs out
there are. I used to do all of my pro audio work on Mac and Windoze,
and I'm having great success getting things working with Linux, but
I've never really found any really decent reverbs, and this is
unfortunately keeping me from doing more final mixes with Linux. What
I'm looking for is something like a LADSPA or other plugin, or a
program that will process sound non-realtime (or even destructively,
like Audacity) with some decent sounding reverbs.
The TAP Reverberator plugin was okay, I guess, but really the only
other LADSPA reverb I've come across is Freeverb, which is not good,
at least using it for intimate vocal tracks and guitars. I mainly use
Ardour for tracking and mixing, Audacity for destructive editing and
cleaning up tracks, and Csound, which I've been known to use for DSP a
bit in the past.
I only use Freeverb on stereo tracks. It doesn't sound very good to
me otherwise. Gverb is nice for mono tracks. While it's not a reverb
you might try the Tape Delay Simulation for vocals (very lightly).
You probably need to master your tracks - use JAMin (blatant plug
;-)
Jan
25 Jan
25 Jan
2:16 a.m.
Maybe I just have not stumbled upon the right plugins
or programs.
Any suggestions of favorites?
SIR on http://www.knufinke.de/sir is kind of ok. v1005 runs fine with
jack_fst and wine-20040505. But then again reverbs are so ludicrous,
are they not? I wish people would use less reverbs and instead record
in rooms that sound beautiful :O)
Wolfgang
1:29 p.m.
On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 07:16 +0100, Wolfgang Woehl wrote:
But then again reverbs are so ludicrous,
are they not? I wish people would use less reverbs and instead record
in rooms that sound beautiful :O)
...or just use convolution reverbs. ;-)
Anyway, i'm pretty disappointed with the software reverbs available on
Linux. Myself, i resigned for the moment to hardware reverb:
http://www.tcelectronic.com/M-OneXL
It's not convolution but it's actually pretty damn good (and very
flexible).
Anyway, yeah, we need much better reverbs on Linux. We're lagging behind
a lot in that area.
--
Florin Andrei
http://florin.myip.org/
2:55 p.m.
I've found that the ladspa collection limits me....
and pushes me back to nuendo and it's SOLID vst collection all the time..
Of course Rome was not built in a day...
Florin Andrei wrote:
On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 07:16 +0100, Wolfgang Woehl
wrote:
But then again reverbs are so ludicrous,
are they not? I wish people would use less reverbs and instead record
in rooms that sound beautiful :O)
...or just use convolution reverbs. ;-)
Anyway, i'm pretty disappointed with the software reverbs available on
Linux. Myself, i resigned for the moment to hardware reverb:
http://www.tcelectronic.com/M-OneXL
It's not convolution but it's actually pretty damn good (and very
flexible).
Anyway, yeah, we need much better reverbs on Linux. We're lagging behind
a lot in that area.
26 Jan
26 Jan
4:32 a.m.
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 07:16:42 +0000, Frank smith wrote:
Hi All
Can we use VST plugins with any Linux apps?
Only those that use a vst loading libarary or support dssi plugins.
However this is not really a solution, your still running propreitary,
windows code. One or the other is probably not too bad, but both? :)
- Steve
4:52 a.m.
Steve Harris wrote:
So what is the best path of action to ensure we have
access to professional quality reverb sometime this
century ?
What are the possible options?
--markc
Can we use VST
plugins with any Linux apps?
Only those that use a vst loading libarary or support dssi plugins.
However this is not really a solution, your still running propreitary,
windows code. One or the other is probably not too bad, but both? :)
5:34 a.m.
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 06:52:38 +1000, Mark Constable wrote:
Steve Harris wrote:
So what is the best path of action to ensure we have
access to professional quality reverb sometime this
century ?
Well, I'm not a reverb expert, but my impression is that convolved reverbs
are the way to go*. The actual code is relativly simple, and we allready
have open source examples, and its possible for people with decent
recording equimpent and access to spaces with interesting acoustics, or
artificial reverb units to capture thier own impulses. They can also be
synthsised using a method similar to raytracing.
The downside is that the parameters you can control are very limited, and
it burns quite a lot of CPU power, and there can be latency. The upside is
that the sound can be very good.
There is an obivious technique to prevent any latency problems, but bits
of it are probably patented by Lake DSP, though the situation is a bit
murky.
If I had more time I'd like to take the code in brutefir and make it into
a DSSI plugin with a simple dropdown select-an-impulse, set gain type
interface.
I have a sizeable library of impulses, but unfortuantly I dont know the
provenance of many of them.
- Steve
* In the interests of full disclose, I have an addiction to convolution
that should be decalred :)
Can we use
VST plugins with any Linux apps?
Only those that use a vst loading libarary or support dssi plugins.
However this is not really a solution, your still running propreitary,
windows code. One or the other is probably not too bad, but both? :)
11:13 a.m.
Steve Harris wrote:
Well, I'm not a reverb expert, but my impression
is that convolved reverbs
are the way to go*. The actual code is relativly simple, and we allready
have open source examples, and its possible for people with decent
recording equimpent and access to spaces with interesting acoustics, or
artificial reverb units to capture thier own impulses. They can also be
synthsised using a method similar to raytracing.
Sounds encouraging. Surely there is a really obvious and
common set of a dozen or so presets that would cover 90%
of most users needs ?
To me, the main need for a highly configurable interface
is because there is no obious "Hall 1" thing to click on
so, sure, we need reverbs interfaces with lots of intricate
and barely understandable options... if these mythical presets
were well targetted and convincing then most folks would not
need to understand the inner sanctum of audio engineering
to have some half decent onboard reverb.
The downside is that the parameters you can control
are very limited, and
it burns quite a lot of CPU power, and there can be latency. The upside is
that the sound can be very good.
Most encouraging.
There is an obivious technique to prevent any latency
problems, but bits
of it are probably patented by Lake DSP, though the situation is a bit
murky.
If I had more time I'd like to take the code in brutefir and make it into
a DSSI plugin with a simple dropdown select-an-impulse, set gain type
interface.
Sounds like a plan.
I have a sizeable library of impulses, but
unfortuantly I dont know the
provenance of many of them.
Uhm, what's that mean in English :-)
* In the interests of full disclose, I have an
addiction to convolution
that should be decalred :)
Sounds like a safe enough addiction... Steve, what would you
outline as the most direct path to solving the general problem
of not having decent open sourced reverb code under linux ?
In my wildest dreams I'd like to think "we the community"
could get it together to even fund an effort like this to
ensure "we" have a solution sooner than later. I mean, it's
going to cost me, and anyone else, quite some dollars to
buy decent hardware so it makes practical sense to me to put
those dollars into an open sourced solution that is then
available to everyone. Pay once, use everywhere.
--markc
1:25 p.m.
Hi,
onsdagen den 26 januari 2005 16.13 skrev Mark Constable:
--
http://spamatica.se/music/
Steve Harris wrote:
Some years ago I experiemented quite a lot with brutefir and the result can be
extremely good, though very CPU consuming... And if I understand things
correctly, unless Lake DSP's patent can be circumvented or proven invalid
(Oh, I think it's already been proven invalid, but not in a legal
sense...IANAL) we will have a hard time getting the CPU-cost down.
Still brutefir is a working OSS solution that plugs into jack, no guis
though ;-).
If anyone wants to experiment there's always http://noisevault.com/ with
plenty of impulse responses.
I've got some config files for brutefir also, if anyone is interested. It's
kind of tricky to get going though...
Regards,
Robert
Well, I'm not a reverb expert, but my
impression is that convolved
reverbs are the way to go*. The actual code is relativly simple, and we
allready have open source examples, and its possible for people with
decent recording equimpent and access to spaces with interesting
acoustics, or artificial reverb units to capture thier own impulses. They
can also be synthsised using a method similar to raytracing.
Sounds encouraging. Surely there is a really obvious and
common set of a dozen or so presets that would cover 90%
of most users needs ?
To me, the main need for a highly configurable interface
is because there is no obious "Hall 1" thing to click on
so, sure, we need reverbs interfaces with lots of intricate
and barely understandable options... if these mythical presets
were well targetted and convincing then most folks would not
need to understand the inner sanctum of audio engineering
to have some half decent onboard reverb.
The downside is that the parameters you can
control are very limited, and
it burns quite a lot of CPU power, and there can be latency. The upside
is that the sound can be very good.
Most encouraging. There is an obivious technique to prevent any
latency problems, but bits
of it are probably patented by Lake DSP, though the situation is a bit
murky.
If I had more time I'd like to take the code in brutefir and make it into
a DSSI plugin with a simple dropdown select-an-impulse, set gain type
interface.
Sounds like a plan.
I have a sizeable library of impulses, but
unfortuantly I dont know the
provenance of many of them.
Uhm, what's that mean in English :-)
* In the interests of full disclose, I have an
addiction to convolution
that should be decalred :)
Sounds like a safe enough addiction... Steve, what would you
outline as the most direct path to solving the general problem
of not having decent open sourced reverb code under linux ?
In my wildest dreams I'd like to think "we the community"
could get it together to even fund an effort like this to
ensure "we" have a solution sooner than later. I mean, it's
going to cost me, and anyone else, quite some dollars to
buy decent hardware so it makes practical sense to me to put
those dollars into an open sourced solution that is then
available to everyone. Pay once, use everywhere.
--markc 
1 Feb
1 Feb
6:26 a.m.
Hi,
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 09:34:13 +0000, Steve Harris
<S.W.Harris(a)ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
If I had more time I'd like to take the code in
brutefir and make it into
a DSSI plugin with a simple dropdown select-an-impulse, set gain type
interface.
I have similar plans to take the code in BruteFIR and implement it in
SuperCollider.
Maybe this would help a bit to also make it into a dssi plugin...
but, that is still some future plan (which hopefully works out this year.
sincerely,
marije
8:15 a.m.
On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 11:26:11 +0100
nescivi <nescivi(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 09:34:13 +0000, Steve Harris
<S.W.Harris(a)ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
Hi,
you guys should also take a look at the "library" in my jack_convolve
package. The partitioned convolution code has an api consisting of three
functions and should be easy to wrap in DSSI (or anything else for that
matter).
I will release a new version (0.0.4) later today with some cleanups,
etc..
Flo
--
Palimm Palimm!
http://affenbande.org/~tapas/
If I had more time I'd like to take the code
in brutefir and make it into
a DSSI plugin with a simple dropdown select-an-impulse, set gain type
interface.
I have similar plans to take the code in BruteFIR and implement it in
SuperCollider.
Maybe this would help a bit to also make it into a dssi plugin...
but, that is still some future plan (which hopefully works out this year.
8:16 a.m.
On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 11:26:11 +0100
nescivi <nescivi(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 09:34:13 +0000, Steve Harris
<S.W.Harris(a)ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
Hi, although i don't know yet how it compares performance wise to
brutefir, but you might want to use the partitioned convolution code
from my jack_convolve package. The api consists of three function calls
and it should be very easy to wrap into a DSSI plugin.
flo
--
Palimm Palimm!
http://affenbande.org/~tapas/
If I had more time I'd like to take the code
in brutefir and make it into
a DSSI plugin with a simple dropdown select-an-impulse, set gain type
interface.
I have similar plans to take the code in BruteFIR and implement it in
SuperCollider.
Maybe this would help a bit to also make it into a dssi plugin...
but, that is still some future plan (which hopefully works out this year. 
25 Jan
25 Jan
10:02 p.m.
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 09:28:56 -0800
Florin Andrei <florin(a)andrei.myip.org> wrote:
Anyway, i'm pretty disappointed with the software
reverbs available on
Linux. Myself, i resigned for the moment to hardware reverb:
http://www.tcelectronic.com/M-OneXL
It's not convolution but it's actually pretty damn good (and very
flexible).
I still go to a rack of outboard gear for a number of my effects, including
compression and reverb. I use a t.c. M300 which also has a multi-effect
channel.
Anyway, yeah, we need much better reverbs on Linux.
We're lagging behind
a lot in that area.
There's been some good work done by folks so far, but yes, this is true.
--
======================================================================
Joe Hartley - UNIX/network Consultant - jh(a)brainiac.com
Without deviation from the norm, "progress" is not possible. - FZappa
11:30 p.m.
I actually just started using ecasound, and it can do some pretty cool
things. I'm still looking for that "perfect" reverb, but I'm
constantly amazed by the depth and variety of audio software available
for Linux. I do a lot of non-realtime stuff, so ecasound, csound,
Audacity, apps like that are very useful to me. I love being able to
script things like ecasound, and it's just awesome the number of ways
(different ways from other platforms) that these tools can be used. I
understand that audio on Linux is still a maturing platform, and my
prediction is that in a year, I won't be wanting for much when it
comes to my dream Linux studio. My hats off to all of the Linux audio
developers.
Jon
26 Jan
26 Jan
6:34 a.m.
Florin Andrei <florin(a)andrei.myip.org>rg>:
On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 07:16 +0100, Wolfgang Woehl
wrote:
No. The point i'm trying to make is: Don't use reverbs. Think of real
rooms instead of technical devices. It will change your music. This is
about *music*, right?
Wolfgang
But then again reverbs are so ludicrous,
are they not? I wish people would use less reverbs and instead
record in rooms that sound beautiful :O)
...or just use convolution reverbs. ;-)
10:53 a.m.
Wolfgang Woehl wrote:
No. The point i'm trying to make is: Don't use reverbs. Think of real
rooms instead of technical devices. It will change your music. This is
about *music*, right?
That's fine if you happen to be into recording live
performances and just happen to have physical access
to some fine acoustic environment... my bedroom doesn't
quite make the grade. I'm also into electronica and need
to process and _master_ my music internally. Every linux
generated reverb I've heard basically sucks compared
to the warmth and translucence of hardware 'verbs. My
needs are simple... just a dozen of the most common
presets would be preferable to some endlessly confusing
set of options as long as the result was convincing.
Surely 2Ghtz plus CPUs are powerful enough to provide
decent reverb for 1/2 dozen tracks these days ?
--markc
But then again reverbs are so ludicrous,
are they not? I wish people would use less reverbs and instead
record in rooms that sound beautiful :O)
...or just use convolution reverbs. ;-)
11:03 a.m.
You are 100 percent correct, except for this: some people (like me)
make our music in a small project studio or apartment, and have no
easy access to great sounding rooms. If I could record my tracks in
spaces with decent acoustics, I would, but most of the time, I'm stuck
at home, and my studio sounds dead and flat. Therefore, when I need a
good reverb (and I don't soak everthing in verb, but some things call
for it), I need to do it in hardware or software.
Jon
27 Jan
27 Jan
2:40 p.m.
Jon Morin <jon.j.morin(a)gmail.com>om>:
You are 100 percent correct, except for this: some
people (like me)
make our music in a small project studio or apartment, and have no
easy access to great sounding rooms. If I could record my tracks in
Sonically the most beautiful room to record in is your nearest forest. I
learned a lot about reverberation there. A matter of taste I guess.
Call it great, call it beautiful, whatever. I think it's about whether
you and your listeners can relate to the sonic space you build or not.
It's easy to relate to something that is real, you know?
Let's say that convolution comes close. Can you relate to, say the
impulse response of the Cathedral of Reims? You'd remember your frozen
nose from sitting there. If you had played an instrument in there like
its organ that would have made an inspirational difference. Choosing
"cath_reims.ir" from a list of presets instead ... well, wouldn't that
be a bit thin?
The effort you put into going to Reims or going to the woods or finding
that special mic-position and corner in your home studio will shine in
your music. Some call it soul.
Wolfgang
3:18 p.m.
On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 07:39:07PM +0100, Wolfgang Woehl wrote:
Jon Morin <jon.j.morin(a)gmail.com>om>:
Turning this on it's head, has anyone experimented with mixing different
sonic spaces in the same piece? I do it all the time in my haphazard,
random and noisy ways. But, I wonder if there are others using this idea
or if it might even be a standard practice to some degree.
--
Eric Dantan Rzewnicki | Systems Engineer I
Technical Operations Division | Radio Free Asia
2025 M Street, NW | Washington, DC 20036 | 202-530-4900
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
This e-mail message is intended only for the use of the addressee and
may contain information that is privileged and confidential. Any
unauthorized dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly
prohibited. If you receive this transmission in error, please contact
network(a)rfa.org.
You are 100 percent correct, except for this:
some people (like me)
make our music in a small project studio or apartment, and have no
easy access to great sounding rooms. If I could record my tracks in
Sonically the
most beautiful room to record in is your nearest forest. I
learned a lot about reverberation there. A matter of taste I guess.
Call it great, call it beautiful, whatever. I think it's about whether
you and your listeners can relate to the sonic space you build or not.
It's easy to relate to something that is real, you know?
28 Jan
28 Jan
4:09 a.m.
Eric Dantan Rzewnicki <rzewnickie(a)rfa.org>rg>:
Turning this on it's head, has anyone experimented
with mixing
different sonic spaces in the same piece? I do it all the time in my
haphazard, random and noisy ways. But, I wonder if there are others
using this idea or if it might even be a standard practice to some
degree.
Brian Wilson, George Martin. Just to name 2 definite wizards of sonic
space. There's never one straight coherent space in their mixes and yet
they work of course. I think the coherency of their work is rooted in
the whole setup: The Beach Boys were supposed to crank out hit singles.
Therefore Capitol took them to the finely tuned Western Studio 3, Brian
learned the instrument and there you are. It made sense.
Wolfgang
27 Jan
27 Jan
3:21 p.m.
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:39:07 +0100, Wolfgang Woehl <tito(a)rumford.de> wrote:
The effort you put into going to Reims or going to the
woods or finding
that special mic-position and corner in your home studio will shine in
your music. Some call it soul.
Wolfgang
Do you think the cathedral would mind me lugging my feedback
generators and an 808 there to record?
:)
1 Feb
1 Feb
3:53 a.m.
On Thu, 2005-01-27 at 19:39 +0100, Wolfgang Woehl wrote:
Let's say that convolution comes close. Can you
relate to, say the
impulse response of the Cathedral of Reims? You'd remember your frozen
nose from sitting there. If you had played an instrument in there like
its organ that would have made an inspirational difference. Choosing
"cath_reims.ir" from a list of presets instead ... well, wouldn't that
be a bit thin?
I think you're dangerously close to saying that recorded music sucks and
only the live one is "true music". :-)
Anyway, yeah, i listened to all kinds of records with pre-classic music
played on organs. It was pretty cool, sort of. But then i listened to
The Real Thing, a true, breathing organ at Biserica Neagra (The Black
Church) in Brasov, Romania. It blew my mind. Light years ahead of any
canned music.
Unfortunately, not everyone can go to the Cathedral of Reims or to
Biserica Neagra whenever they feel like. Hence, the need for procedures
that emulate that sound. And you know what? If i record music live in
the cathedral, and then i record the same music in the studio but then
run it through convolution, and the sound is the same, who cares?
It's just recorded music in both cases. It does not compare with live
performance. But if it sounds the same, who cares? (and, with modern
reverbs, it will sound pretty damn much the same on a CD)
--
Florin Andrei
http://florin.myip.org/
10:26 a.m.
difference.
Choosing "cath_reims.ir" from a list of presets instead
... well, wouldn't that be a bit thin?
I think you're dangerously close to saying that recorded music sucks
and only the live one is "true music". :-) Anyway, yeah, i listened to all kinds of records with
pre-classic
music played on organs. It was pretty cool, sort of. But then i
listened to The Real Thing, a true, breathing organ at Biserica
Neagra (The Black Church) in Brasov, Romania. It blew my mind. Light
years ahead of any canned music.
Probably great.
Unfortunately, not everyone can go to the Cathedral of
Reims or to
Biserica Neagra whenever they feel like. Hence, the need for
procedures that emulate that sound. And you know what? If i record
music live in the cathedral, and then i record the same music in the
studio but then run it through convolution, and the sound is the
same, who cares? It's just recorded music in both cases. It does not
compare with live performance. But if it sounds the same, who cares?
(and, with modern reverbs, it will sound pretty damn much the same on
a CD)
I use convolution for lots of things *but* reverb. By the way: Don't
expect any upcoming realtime convolvers to sound like what they
promise. It's tricks and good mixing of different effect stages that
make these algorithms usable in realtime. Basically I'm trying to say
that you should care for the difference -- not because of the sound but
because of the soul you put into your music.
Wolfgang
26 Jan
26 Jan
11:17 a.m.
Wolfgang Woehl wrote:
No. The point i'm trying to make is: Don't use
reverbs. Think of real
rooms instead of technical devices. It will change your music. This is
about *music*, right?
There once was a site called silophone.net where you could upload your
sounds and have them played through a silo. The system used lowres
realaudio, so it was not fit for audiowork. It lead me to a mad idea,
though. This was to have a silo or other kind of room with nice reverb,
wich you could play sounds through via the net and download them in high
quality. This would provide a good natural reverb. In fact some studios
use similar analog/mechanic reverbs where they have a hole in the
concrete wall with a speaker and mike, and mix that with the original
signal to make reverb.
Anyone know if such a service exist? Would this be a good idea? I'm also
wondering if the "convolution" tecnique, wich I've never heard of
before, could be useful in connection with such a reverb system.
--
-johannes ringheim,
ringheims auto
http://ringheimsauto.1go.dk
11:39 a.m.
--- Johannes M Ringheim <jri(a)broadpark.no> wrote:
Wolfgang Woehl wrote:
If for no other reason, and there are some, it's
impracticle because I need the results in realtime.
For example, what reverb applied to chorus vocals
sounds best with that which I'm using on the lead
verse vocal or drum kit? The answer has to be
immediate.
ron
I'm also
No. The point i'm trying to make is: Don't
use
reverbs. Think of real
rooms instead of technical devices. It will change
your music. This is
about *music*, right?
There once was a site called silophone.net where you
could upload your
sounds and have them played through a silo. The
system used lowres
realaudio, so it was not fit for audiowork. It lead
me to a mad idea,
though. This was to have a silo or other kind of
room with nice reverb,
wich you could play sounds through via the net and
download them in high
quality. This would provide a good natural reverb.
In fact some studios
use similar analog/mechanic reverbs where they have
a hole in the
concrete wall with a speaker and mike, and mix that
with the original
signal to make reverb.
Anyone know if such a service exist? Would this be a
good idea? wondering if the "convolution" tecnique,
wich I've
never heard of
before, could be useful in connection with such a
reverb system.
--
-johannes ringheim,
ringheims auto
http://ringheimsauto.1go.dk
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
12:13 p.m.
mercoledì, 26 gennaio 2005 alle 16:26:47, Johannes M Ringheim ha scritto:
Anyone know if such a service exist? Would this be a
good idea? I'm also
wondering if the "convolution" tecnique, wich I've never heard of
before, could be useful in connection with such a reverb system.
Yes, I've used only with csound (there's an opcode called convolve), but
brutefir should be a dedicated app to do convolution. There's a lot of
impulses on the web to use for convolution based reverberation:
http://altiverb.daw-mac.com/library.html
http://www.audioease.com/IR/index.html
http://www.digifreq.com/digifreq/discussdetail.asp?TopicID=4092
http://www.cksde.com/p_6_250.htm
http://purgatorycreek.com/convolution.html
http://www.xs4all.nl/~fokkie/IR.htm#Downloads
http://www.memi.com/echochamber/responses/index.html
http://www.phonmeister.de/samp.htm
http://www.ressl.com.ar/realreverb/index_old.html
http://pcangelo.ramsete.com/Public/IMP-RESP/
http://www.memi.com/echochamber/responses/index.html
(those link are not controlled, some may not exist anymore)
Here is a description of the process with csound:
http://kevindumpscore.com/docs/csound-manual/convolve.html
I'm not that expert, but I've done it in the past and the results were
impressive, though I don't know if it can be done in realtime (probably
yes, with a powerful machine)
Best regards,
--
Emiliano Grilli
Linux user #209089
http://www.emillo.net
12:50 p.m.
Some of these sites are proprietary...
http://altiverb.daw-mac.com/library.html
http://www.audioease.com/IR/index.html
http://www.digifreq.com/digifreq/discussdetail.asp?TopicID=4092
http://www.cksde.com/p_6_250.htm
http://purgatorycreek.com/convolution.html
http://www.xs4all.nl/~fokkie/IR.htm#Downloads
http://www.memi.com/echochamber/responses/index.html
http://www.phonmeister.de/samp.htm
http://www.ressl.com.ar/realreverb/index_old.html
http://pcangelo.ramsete.com/Public/IMP-RESP/
http://www.memi.com/echochamber/responses/index.html
Be sure to look at http://www.noisevault.com/ which is an open, non
proprietary source for the exchange of impulse responses.
Cheers,
Greg Wilder
www.gregwilder.com
3:15 p.m.
Whoa, thanks for those links. I'm a newbie csounder myself, and if
anything at all, this sounds extremely interesting. The only problem
is, I get addicted to playing with stuff like this and never get any
recording done :)
Jon
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 17:11:54 +0100, Emiliano Grilli <emillo(a)libero.it> wrote:
mercoledì, 26 gennaio 2005 alle 16:26:47, Johannes M
Ringheim ha scritto:
Anyone know if such a service exist? Would this
be a good idea? I'm also
wondering if the "convolution" tecnique, wich I've never heard of
before, could be useful in connection with such a reverb system.
Yes, I've used only with csound (there's an opcode called convolve), but
brutefir should be a dedicated app to do convolution. There's a lot of
impulses on the web to use for convolution based reverberation:
http://altiverb.daw-mac.com/library.html
http://www.audioease.com/IR/index.html
http://www.digifreq.com/digifreq/discussdetail.asp?TopicID=4092
http://www.cksde.com/p_6_250.htm
http://purgatorycreek.com/convolution.html
http://www.xs4all.nl/~fokkie/IR.htm#Downloads
http://www.memi.com/echochamber/responses/index.html
http://www.phonmeister.de/samp.htm
http://www.ressl.com.ar/realreverb/index_old.html
http://pcangelo.ramsete.com/Public/IMP-RESP/
http://www.memi.com/echochamber/responses/index.html
(those link are not controlled, some may not exist anymore)
Here is a description of the process with csound:
http://kevindumpscore.com/docs/csound-manual/convolve.html
I'm not that expert, but I've done it in the past and the results were
impressive, though I don't know if it can be done in realtime (probably
yes, with a powerful machine)
Best regards,
--
Emiliano Grilli
Linux user #209089
http://www.emillo.net
3:40 p.m.
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 11:27:54 -0500
Jon Morin <jon.j.morin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Whoa, thanks for those links. I'm a newbie
csounder myself, and if
anything at all, this sounds extremely interesting. The only problem
is, I get addicted to playing with stuff like this and never get any
recording done :)
Btw: Supercollider3 has a Convolution UGen, too :) I haven't played
around with room response files yet though.
Flo
--
Palimm Palimm!
http://affenbande.org/~tapas/
27 Jan
27 Jan
7:58 a.m.
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:26:47 +0100
Johannes M Ringheim <jri(a)broadpark.no> wrote:
There once was a site called silophone.net where you
could upload your
sounds and have them played through a silo. The system used lowres
realaudio, so it was not fit for audiowork. It lead me to a mad idea,
though. This was to have a silo or other kind of room with nice reverb,
wich you could play sounds through via the net and download them in high
quality.
...
Anyone know if such a service exist? Would this be a good idea?
I want that as a JACK plugin :)
--
======================================================================
Joe Hartley - UNIX/network Consultant - jh(a)brainiac.com
Without deviation from the norm, "progress" is not possible. - FZappa
8:34 a.m.
Whoa...that is a great idea.
-E
Joe Hartley wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:26:47 +0100
Johannes M Ringheim <jri(a)broadpark.no> wrote:
>There once was a site called silophone.net where you could upload your
>sounds and have them played through a silo. The system used lowres
>realaudio, so it was not fit for audiowork. It lead me to a mad idea,
>though. This was to have a silo or other kind of room with nice reverb,
>wich you could play sounds through via the net and download them in high
>quality.
> ...
>Anyone know if such a service exist? Would this be a good idea?
2:40 p.m.
Johannes M Ringheim <jri(a)broadpark.no>no>:
Wolfgang Woehl wrote:
Now that's a funny idea at least. It's like making convolution a real
pain and adding maximum latency on purpose for a change. Was the silo
filled with something? If so don't tell me with what :%
Wolfgang
No. The point i'm trying to make is: Don't
use reverbs. Think of
real rooms instead of technical devices. It will change your music.
This is about *music*, right?
There once was a site called silophone.net where you could upload
your sounds and have them played through a silo. The system used
lowres realaudio, so it was not fit for audiowork. It lead me to a
4:41 p.m.
Wolfgang Woehl wrote:
Yeah. Dunno if convolution would do the same good, but the idea is to
get 100% natural reverb by playing the dry sound through the silo with a
speaker and recording the sound in the other end with a mic. One could
then mix this signal with the original signal the way some
recording-studios in fact do, except they haven't got silos but only
small concrete cubes in the building.
Yes, I realize this is crazy, but when silophone.net worked i tried it.
Even in bad Realplayer-resolution it sounded quite good and different
from any digital reverb. Those were the days ,)
Nothin serious, just buggin...
-johs.
There once was
a site called silophone.net where you could upload
your sounds and have them played through a silo. The system used
lowres realaudio, so it was not fit for audiowork. It lead me to a
Now that's a funny idea at least. It's like making convolution a real
pain and adding maximum latency on purpose for a change.
5:07 p.m.
Johannes M Ringheim wrote:
Wolfgang Woehl wrote:
Yeah. Dunno if convolution would do the same good, but the idea is to
get 100% natural reverb by playing the dry sound through the silo with
a speaker and recording the sound in the other end with a mic. One
could then mix this signal with the original signal the way some
recording-studios in fact do, except they haven't got silos but only
small concrete cubes in the building.
Yes, I realize this is crazy, but when silophone.net worked i tried
it. Even in bad Realplayer-resolution it sounded quite good and
different from any digital reverb. Those were the days ,)
Nothin serious, just buggin...
-johs.
Here's my issue ....
using a canned reverb setup before the final mix of a song is done is
like selling your car before you know the bus id coming to your house to
pick you up...
a small selection of ladspa reverb presets is a way better idea to me...
--
Timothy A Gorman
IT Dept.
Petr-all Petroleum
cell (315) 415 8108
office (315) 446 0125 x126
There
once was a site called silophone.net where you could upload
your sounds and have them played through a silo. The system used
lowres realaudio, so it was not fit for audiowork. It lead me to a
Now that's a funny idea at least. It's like making convolution a real
pain and adding maximum latency on purpose for a change.
1 Feb
1 Feb
3:42 a.m.
On Wed, 2005-01-26 at 16:26 +0100, Johannes M Ringheim wrote:
In fact some studios
use similar analog/mechanic reverbs where they have a hole in the
concrete wall with a speaker and mike, and mix that with the original
signal to make reverb.
Anyone know if such a service exist? Would this be a good idea?
I think this was the very first method to add reverb to records, before
the spring reverb and the rest.
In theory, a convolution reverb should do all that, only cheaper and
more convenient.
--
Florin Andrei
http://florin.myip.org/
25 Jan
25 Jan
5:35 a.m.
On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 06:03:02 -0500, Jon Morin wrote:
Hi all,
This question is not really a problem with hardware or software per
se, but I would just like to know what people's favorite reverbs out
there are. I used to do all of my pro audio work on Mac and Windoze,
and I'm having great success getting things working with Linux, but
I've never really found any really decent reverbs, and this is
unfortunately keeping me from doing more final mixes with Linux. What
I'm looking for is something like a LADSPA or other plugin, or a
program that will process sound non-realtime (or even destructively,
like Audacity) with some decent sounding reverbs.
The TAP Reverberator plugin was okay, I guess, but really the only
other LADSPA reverb I've come across is Freeverb, which is not good,
at least using it for intimate vocal tracks and guitars. I mainly use
Ardour for tracking and mixing, Audacity for destructive editing and
cleaning up tracks, and Csound, which I've been known to use for DSP a
bit in the past.
There is also gverb. I prefer the sound to freeverb slightly myself.
I still use my lexicon and yamaha outboard reverbs.
You could try brutefir - if fed with decent imulses it should make a very
good reverb. http://www.ludd.luth.se/~torger/brutefir.html
Maybe I just have not stumbled upon the right plugins
or programs.
Any suggestions of favorites?
One more related question: Does anyone know if any soundcards with
DSP in hardware work with Linux? I'm thinking of something along the
lines of the Creamware cards (the ones with the integrated DSP's), but
I'm assuming that most of these also need a software component to make
them work, and that is most definitely closed-source. I can dream,
though, right?
You can use the creative dsp chips, but thye dont have enough horsepower
to run a reverb. Someone was looking into support for the creamware cards,
but I dont know how far they got.
It would be nice to have support for some of the PCI DSP cards, even with
closed source plugins, but I dont know how complicateed they are, and I
suspect extracting the plugins from the mac/win drivers would be tricky.
- Steve
4:29 p.m.
On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 09:34 +0000, Steve Harris wrote:
You can use the creative dsp chips, but thye dont have
enough horsepower
to run a reverb. Someone was looking into support for the creamware cards,
but I dont know how far they got.
It would be nice to have support for some of the PCI DSP cards, even with
closed source plugins, but I dont know how complicateed they are, and I
suspect extracting the plugins from the mac/win drivers would be tricky.
Actually the Creative/EMU stuff might work well. After all EAX is just
a userspace API to access the hardware reverb on the emu10k1/2 chips,
and these were designed to do 3D audio effects (a lot of which is
reverb) for Windows games. It's probably not for you if you need
professional studio-quality effects but Windows gamers love the stuff,
and anything that's good enough for a modern video game would certainly
be useful for live performance type applications.
The EAX 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 reverbs have been extracted from the Creative
dlls and the reverse engineered DSP source code is available here (check
out the SDK in the downloads section):
http://www.kxproject.com
There are also hundreds of other effects for the emu10k1 DSP. Most of
them seem to be free software (there is a restriction that you need
Eugene's permission to use the DSP code in a commercial product). The
reverse engineered stuff is covered by the original Creative/EMU
licenses anyway. AFAIK no one has tried to use these reverbs on Linux
yet but there's nothing to stop you. The instruction set is fairly well
known so you can write your own. The DSP loader is not as mature as the
Windows driver but it does work.
http://ld10k1.sf.net
The emu10k2 based chips have a lot more DSP horsepower than emu10k1.
Lee
26 Jan
26 Jan
4:50 p.m.
Lee Revell <rlrevell(a)joe-job.com> writes:
Most of them seem to be free software (there is a
restriction that
you need Eugene's permission to use the DSP code in a commercial
product).
This is a restriction that does not exist with free software.
--
Esben Stien is b0ef(a)esben-stien.name
http://www.esben-stien.name
irc://irc.esben-stien.name/%23contact
[sip|iax]:b0ef@esben-stien.name
5:18 p.m.
On Wednesday 26 January 2005 21:50, Esben Stien wrote:
Lee Revell <rlrevell(a)joe-job.com> writes:
This depends afaik on the license you use. As far as I remember the GPL allows
using the code in commercial products with making the changes public as LGPL
is somehow changed. Wether it was more close or more open I don't remember...
Arnold
--
There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the
Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be
replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened.
-- Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
Most of them seem to be free software (there is a
restriction that
you need Eugene's permission to use the DSP code in a commercial
product).
This is a restriction that does not exist with free software.
9 Feb
9 Feb
8:28 a.m.
Arnold Krille <arnold(a)roederberg.dyndns.org> writes:
This depends afaik on the license you use. As far as I remember the
GPL allows using the code in commercial products
Free Software, as in the definition by the FSF, does not have a
restriction where you need to ask the author about using the code in
commercial software. There is nothing wrong with libre/free software
being commercial. Don't confuse proprietary and commercial.
Most of them seem to be free software (there is a
restriction
that you need Eugene's permission to use the DSP code in a
commercial product).
This is a restriction that does not exist with free software. with making the changes public as LGPL is somehow
changed.
I don't understand this statement..!
Wether it was more close or more open I don't
remember...
Not this either..!
--
Esben Stien is b0ef(a)esben-stien.name
http://www.esben-stien.name
irc://irc.esben-stien.name/%23contact
[sip|iax]:b0ef@esben-stien.name
25 Jan
25 Jan
7:31 a.m.
Hi,
I was also a bit frustrated not getting any decant reverb. I find,
within limits, the reverb (Advanced reverb) in ecasound to be
workable.
ref.
ecasound -i:filename.wav -ea:100 -epp:50 -ete:15,50,50
PS. As someone said. Routing the sound out in a speaker in a nice
ambient room and sampled back isn't that bad :-) DS.
/Bengan
8:27 a.m.
On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 06:03:02PM -0500, Jon Morin wrote:
This question is not really a problem with hardware or
software per
se, but I would just like to know what people's favorite reverbs out
there are. I used to do all of my pro audio work on Mac and Windoze,
and I'm having great success getting things working with Linux, but
I've never really found any really decent reverbs, and this is
unfortunately keeping me from doing more final mixes with Linux. What
not that i particularly recomend it, but i just note that the TC Native
Reverb VST just about works on X86 linux-based sytems.
regards
--
Tim Orford
7255
days inactive
7271
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
44 comments
25 participants
participants (25)
-
Arnold Krille -
Bengt Gördén -
Emiliano Grilli -
Eric Dantan Rzewnicki -
Erik Thorsson -
Esben Stien -
Florian Schmidt -
Florin Andrei -
Frank smith -
Greg Wilder -
Jan Depner -
Joe Hartley -
Johannes M Ringheim -
Jon Morin -
Lee Revell -
Mark Constable -
Matthew Allen -
nescivi -
R Parker -
Robert Jonsson -
Steve Harris -
Tim Orford -
timg gorman -
Timothy Alan Gorman
-
Wolfgang Woehl