Breverb and Altering Waves with Effects.

What do you all do to add depth to your mixes? Can you give me tips specifically on breverb? What settings do you use on vocals and other instruments?

Every song i mixed have had different settings, so your asking a question that may take years to answer, as i would have to go through thousands of songs and write down each signal chain and gain stage. No thank you. 
 
Every song will need different things done to it. Mixing is not connecting the dots. Think of it like painting. No 2 paintings are the same and the artist that painted each painting used different colors, brushes, brush strokes and tools to get the painting to where he or she wanted it to be.
 
As far a Breverb and any other reverb:
If you learn how a reverb works and what each setting does in a reverb, you can dial in your own sounds thta fit that particular track and song. Each song and tracks will need different things done to it and different settigns for each effect in order for it to sound the way you want it. 
 
This explains what each setting does in a reverb:
http://www.audio-mastering-mixing.com/faq---q-a.html#28
 
CJ

There are so many techniques and musical styles, even without being an expert in all of them (or any of them) it's easy to see you're not going to get a "magic fix" out of this discussion. Maybe some useful tips:
When I want something to sound as if it's in a certain room or space, I use an impulse based convolution reverb (like Perfect Space, in my case, a Waves offering).
When I want something to sound like a pleasing reverb I go for an algorithmic type and I really like BReverb and use it a lot.

Like John, I use the first type as an insert and the second on a send bus. If it's on a send bus I keep it 100 percent wet (so in BReverb that means turning off the dry).
Like you, I don't generally put reverb on bass elements (unless the reverb is the first type and the drumbus or entire mix are going through there).

It's a good idea to experiment with the amount and the level of predelay, especially in algorithmic reverbs where you just want them to make another part "shine" it makes a lot of difference in the sound. Check the extra parameters in BReverb by switching the tabbed menu up top.

I generally use "a couple" of reverbs on a complete project. I try to keep it simple and also feel it's better for the mix to not use too many different ones. I will usually have a separate one for the lead vocal and one for the snare.
I like starting my lead vocal verb with the "a capella vox" preset. I always edit it right away but it's somehow become the starting point on my way to better things.

I sometimes create an artificial parallel "room" bus for the drums with a convolution verb if the plug or loop or actual recording didn't have one. I slam it with something like an 1176 or anything that fits at that time, and mix it with the regular drums. I think this is a very common trick but since you're asking for tips...

EDIT:
Also as general advice on compression and mixing - if you're thinking your mix sounds flat, that's probably because you used too much compression. I don't know this for sure but it's definitely a common problem. Nowadays, in my humble opinion, compressors (especially software ones) don't really have the same function anymore. They should mostly be used because you want a certain sound character that's derived from the effect of compression or from that specific compressor. If your issue is fluctuating dynamics, you need to be less lazy and automate the **** out of your mix ;)
Really, you'd be shocked to see the amount of automation that goes into professional productions, especially on things like lead vocal and bass. You will not only keep a more dynamic and less flattened sound, but you will also be able to adjust individual dynamic differences, not to mention your compressors can now be used purely for the sound they impart (as long as you used clip envelopes, rather than volume fader envelopes).

I high pass and low pass the snot out of the signal before it goes into the reverb, around 500-600Hz for the high pass filter and around 10-12kHz for the low pass. I find in my case anyway that allowing frequencies outside of that band into the reverb return just adds mud and brittleness to the mix and adds clutter. Having said that, if it's a solo part then I may widen that band for effect.

I'm also heading towards using less reverb in my mixes. A careful use of delay can add space to a mix without the need for reverb. You can get a more upfront sound like this. Try it for the instruments you want to position at the front of the mix. Add a delay to each one and pan it to the opposite side of the stereo field. For instance, if you have a guitar panned at 60L then add a delay at 60R. Try rolling the highs (or the lows) off the delayed signal to make it sound different. And experiment with different reverb times.

For the instruments at the back, add a little stereo reverb to blend them. Don't be afraid to use two different reverbs on an instrument - sometimes I'll send a little to a shared room or hall reverb, and a little to a mono reverb that's panned the same as or a little to the side of the instrument. But experiment with panning a mono reverb to the opposite side. Above all, use a little bit less than you normally would. It's surprising how little you need. Sometimes a good gauge is to add reverb at a level at which you think you can't hear it, but when you turn it off you sense the difference.

Ever noticed that in headphones versus near field monitors reverb does different things... what is up with that? How do you balance between the two?
 
If I recall correctly, in headphones you can get away with a lot of reverb where it shows up in near field monitors like a sore thumb... Must be the way the reverb cancels itself out in the air that is the difference... 
 
This is where doing different things in each stereo channel seems to pay off in the final mix. I have heard that certain reverbs can induce sonic altered states of consciousness. (haha!) 

John
How are you using it? Give details. When I use reverb I often use sends and have the reverb on an aux buss. I will if needed vary the amount sent to the aux depending on the track. I try never to have too much reverb which is easy to do.  And I will use two different types, sometimes. The one on the aux and using sends will often be Breverb or one like it then I will use a convolution reverb on the master buss to create an acoustic space/place. I adjust the mix of its wet dry so it sounds right. The aux one will often be 100% wet. But I will lower the fader going to the master buss from that aux buss.
 
There is a nice article in this months SoundBytes web magazine about depth in a mix using reverb. here http://soundbytesmag.net/ 

Got another link, that one did not work for me. :(

It works for me. I just clicked on it and it went to it. Its SoundBytes try Googleing it. http://soundbytesmag.net/

Joking aside, I am guessing that your mixes are probably over compressed and over EQ-ed, and that is what is causing the problem.
 
Don't compress or EQ a track, just because you can.
 
Maybe try to get a static fader mix.  Then play the project back, and if one of the tracks makes you reach for the fader, then think about compressing it.
 
Sometimes a track may not need any EQ, if it is recorded well, apart from maybe a HPF or LPF.  Use EQ to carve out a space for each track, but there is no need to overdo it.  If a track sits well in a mix without EQ, then leave it alone.

RexRed
You have all been a BIG help and this time John the link worked for me. Gonna read it in a few. Maybe they were updating the site.
As for the compression and eqing remarks I made. For years compression and eqing were a mystery to me, a lot of guess work and lots of trial and even more error. But now that you can visualize with wave analysis you can see what the eq and compressor is doing to a large extent but how do you visualize depth? Well raising the mid-range and lowering it is one way but reverb adds a different kind of depth that in my opinion still takes an ear to measure.

I am going to quote this whole post because it seems to me quite thought proving.  I am not sure if i completely understand it Sharke.
 
I think this post helped me figured out what I was doing wrong. 
 
I don't confuse high pass and low pass thought they are inherently confusing terms. I think meant on purpose to confuse. :)
 
It seems what you are saying is my background instruments are too hot on the upper end and drowning out my vocals and solo instruments and their subsequent reverbs. So I put a low pass shelf filter on each of the background instruments and left the vocals with a tiny high pass boost.
 
This lowered the "widening effect" you mentioned. The awesome sounds that come with Dimension Pro, I love that these Dimension sounds are so vibrant and hot but they are stealing all the vital upper end where most of the vocal info is. THIS WORKED!
 
 
I cannot believe it was that simple. 
 
Now my reverbs have room to be heard. Before it seemed impossible the idea of eqing a reverb effect, I thought right, i could barely even hear them above my mix at all let alone think of finely tuning them. 
 
Taming down the high frequencies of my pads and the snare and other background instrument fills opened that vital area where most of the solo instrument frequency info resides.
 
So i guess this was an eq problem and not necessarily a reverb problem.
 
I find hundreds of echos a bit more complicated to get a grip on than compression and equalization.
 
It is funny that I spent years dickering around with eq's and never even knew what a "Q" was... The internet has been such a great resource for learning and I may have progressed much further with my music had I not spent so many years simply going aimlessly round in circles. :)
 
Please elaborate here on any eqing, compressor and reverb effects.
 
I will repeat that I do not find eqing and compression as enigmatic as reverb, doubling, flanges, phase, delays etc... Eqing and compression seem more, though not completely, linear where reverb seems to be a bit more 3d.

I think you might have misinterpreted what I said a little, but that doesn't matter because what you did makes sense too - high frequencies add clarity and air and we associate them with an upfront sound, whereas instruments that are further back lose some of their high frequencies. If everything in a mix sounds sparkly and upfront then nothing does, if that makes sense - you have to have that contrast between bright and dark. 
 
What I was trying to say about reverb was that the signal you send to the reverb effect often needs to be processed before going into the effect. To this end, as has been mentioned before, it's best to set the reverbs up on aux buses as a send, with the wet control set to 100%, so that you can process the reverb independently from the dry signal. This means you can EQ the signal on the bus before it goes into the reverb. I've heard of people EQ'ing the signal after the reverb, but I think it makes more sense the other way around. Just cut off those highs and lows before it goes into the reverb. At the Abbey Road studios, they would roll off everything below 600Hz and above 10kHz before sending it to the chamber or the plate. I learned this from Bobby Owsinski. Of course you're not cutting out those frequencies on the dry signal, just the wet. 
 
Many reverb effects have low and high pass filters built in, but I tend to ignore these and use whatever filters I feel more comfortable with using. Sonar's Quadcurve EQ works great for it. You can also process the reverb in other ways for effect. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. You could, for example, use Channel Tools to narrow the stereo width of the reverb. You don't always want it to spread out across the whole mix. Let's say you have a nice stereo plate reverb on the vocal. It sounds great, but it's overpowering everything else in the mix. Try halving the width, or even narrower. With Channel Tools you could even narrow it and pan it off to one side a little, if it's masking something on the other side. Why not try a little distortion or chorus on the reverb? Doesn't always work, but it might just add a bit of quirk to a track in some situations. 
 
I would highly recommend getting a month's subscription to Groove3 and watching Eli Krantzberg's excellent course on reverb. You'll learn so much from it. He opened my eyes to a lot of reverb ideas that I would have never otherwise considered. 

sharke

RexRed
You have all been a BIG help and this time John the link worked for me. Gonna read it in a few. Maybe they were updating the site.
As for the compression and eqing remarks I made. For years compression and eqing were a mystery to me, a lot of guess work and lots of trial and even more error. But now that you can visualize with wave analysis you can see what the eq and compressor is doing to a large extent but how do you visualize depth? Well raising the mid-range and lowering it is one way but reverb adds a different kind of depth that in my opinion still takes an ear to measure.

I am going to quote this whole post because it seems to me quite thought proving.  I am not sure if i completely understand it Sharke.
 
I think this post helped me figured out what I was doing wrong. 
 
I don't confuse high pass and low pass thought they are inherently confusing terms. I think meant on purpose to confuse. :)
 
It seems what you are saying is my background instruments are too hot on the upper end and drowning out my vocals and solo instruments and their subsequent reverbs. So I put a low pass shelf filter on each of the background instruments and left the vocals with a tiny high pass boost.
 
This lowered the "widening effect" you mentioned. The awesome sounds that come with Dimension Pro, I love that these Dimension sounds are so vibrant and hot but they are stealing all the vital upper end where most of the vocal info is. THIS WORKED!
 
 
I cannot believe it was that simple. 
 
Now my reverbs have room to be heard. Before it seemed impossible the idea of eqing a reverb effect, I thought right, i could barely even hear them above my mix at all let alone think of finely tuning them. 
 
Taming down the high frequencies of my pads and the snare and other background instrument fills opened that vital area where most of the solo instrument frequency info resides.
 
So i guess this was an eq problem and not necessarily a reverb problem.
 
I find hundreds of echos a bit more complicated to get a grip on than compression and equalization.
 
It is funny that I spent years dickering around with eq's and never even knew what a "Q" was... The internet has been such a great resource for learning and I may have progressed much further with my music had I not spent so many years simply going aimlessly round in circles. :)
 
Please elaborate here on any eqing, compressor and reverb effects.
 
I will repeat that I do not find eqing and compression as enigmatic as reverb, doubling, flanges, phase, delays etc... Eqing and compression seem more, though not completely, linear where reverb seems to be a bit more 3d.

I think you might have misinterpreted what I said a little, but that doesn't matter because what you did makes sense too - high frequencies add clarity and air and we associate them with an upfront sound, whereas instruments that are further back lose some of their high frequencies. If everything in a mix sounds sparkly and upfront then nothing does, if that makes sense - you have to have that contrast between bright and dark. 
 
What I was trying to say about reverb was that the signal you send to the reverb effect often needs to be processed before going into the effect. To this end, as has been mentioned before, it's best to set the reverbs up on aux buses as a send, with the wet control set to 100%, so that you can process the reverb independently from the dry signal. This means you can EQ the signal on the bus before it goes into the reverb. I've heard of people EQ'ing the signal after the reverb, but I think it makes more sense the other way around. Just cut off those highs and lows before it goes into the reverb. At the Abbey Road studios, they would roll off everything below 600Hz and above 10kHz before sending it to the chamber or the plate. I learned this from Bobby Owsinski. Of course you're not cutting out those frequencies on the dry signal, just the wet. 
 
Many reverb effects have low and high pass filters built in, but I tend to ignore these and use whatever filters I feel more comfortable with using. Sonar's Quadcurve EQ works great for it. You can also process the reverb in other ways for effect. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. You could, for example, use Channel Tools to narrow the stereo width of the reverb. You don't always want it to spread out across the whole mix. Let's say you have a nice stereo plate reverb on the vocal. It sounds great, but it's overpowering everything else in the mix. Try halving the width, or even narrower. With Channel Tools you could even narrow it and pan it off to one side a little, if it's masking something on the other side. Why not try a little distortion or chorus on the reverb? Doesn't always work, but it might just add a bit of quirk to a track in some situations. 
 
I would highly recommend getting a month's subscription to Groove3 and watching Eli Krantzberg's excellent course on reverb. You'll learn so much from it. He opened my eyes to a lot of reverb ideas that I would have never otherwise considered. 

WOW this and the other posts are SOOOoooo awesome!!!! I LOVE THIS FORUM!
 
Moving the sparkle of my background instruments into the back of the mix by using the low pass shelf gave my song such a boost i am still recovering from it.
 
What you are talking about using the bus and setting the wet to 100% and dry off is a great tip I have tried that before. Having everything sparkle as you said nothing sparkles TRUE!
 
I have never tried making a more midrangy parallel reverb tracks. And also manipulating the reverb to distinguish left and right is also a great tip! That requires lots of thought. Sure cuts away on reverb cancellation in the open air environment and also seems it would add a nice texture/groove to the sound if done well.
 
What you are talking about here is that extra mile that turns a good mix into a million dollar mix. THAT IS WHAT I WANT!
 
I will also check out the tutorial and magazine you suggested. Very interested thanks!  

Not to be annoying, but I have never heard the term "low pass shelf", I can understand what is meant but in my experience "low pass" and "high pass" are used for cut filters. A low pass shelf is a high shelf.

Glad to hear you got this song figured out! Turns out it was an EQ thing after all ;)

RexRed

Sanderxpander
Not to be annoying, but I have never heard the term "low pass shelf", I can understand what is meant but in my experience "low pass" and "high pass" are used for cut filters. A low pass shelf is a high shelf.

Glad to hear you got this song figured out! Turns out it was an EQ thing after all ;)

 
You will notice there is a button in the prochannel mixer which has two states one state is shelf enabled and the other is called shelf disabled. 
 
There is a shelf for high pass and a shelf for low pass.
 
i.e. shelf enabled/shelf disabled... for more info please consult the Cakewalk users manual. 
 

No you can enable a high shelf and a low shelf. Enabling them means switching from a bell curve to a shelf. The low pass filter and high pass filter are separate from this. A low pass filter is basically a high cut. A high pass filter is a low cut. "Low pass shelf" doesn't make any functional sense.
Perhaps you're confused because they're right next to each other?

Err no that's not what a shelf is at all.
http://www.soundonsound.c...ticles/equalisers1.asp
 
FWIW, I certainly don't want to rub errors in your face to elevate myself. It's just helpful to make sure we're talking about the same things. You were pretty adamant about having mastered EQ and compression before by the way, when people (myself included) were giving you tips on them.

Sanderxpander
Err no that's not what a shelf is at all.
http://www.soundonsound.c...ticles/equalisers1.asp
 
FWIW, I certainly don't want to rub errors in your face to elevate myself. It's just helpful to make sure we're talking about the same things. You were pretty adamant about having mastered EQ and compression before by the way, when people (myself included) were giving you tips on them.

Your input in the discussion Sander is much a appreciated and thanks for taking the time to respond. I hope at any point i did not imply otherwise. If so I am sorry. Your future participation is very valued here. 
 
 

As far as background vocals are concerned, my general strategy would be to send them to their own bus for common EQ/compression, then send some from that bus to the reverb bus. I'd probably have more reverb on the backing vocals than the lead vocal, to make them sound further back. You could use the same reverb bus for both backing and lead, or you could say use a hall reverb for the backing vocals and a plate (mono or stereo) for the lead.

My favorite reverb for vocals is VallhallaVintageVerb, it sounds absolutely stunning and a steal at $50.

I do the same thing as Sharke with backing vocals. Interesting to hear about VintageVerb, by the way, I do have ValhallaRoom but have switched back to BReverb, it sounds more open to me. Or maybe I just work it better. I use ValhallaRoom for fx. Is VintageVerb very different?