Reverb - Great SOS article!

I know, I know, I posted this link in my FXs thread.  I don't mean to bore you seasoned pros, however, I was so impressed by the article that I thought it deserved it's own thread.
 
When I got home from work this evening I decided to give some of the ideas/techniques from the article a test ride on one of my songs.  WOW! what a huge difference.  I'm a huge guitar instrumental fan and I've always wondered how the guitars seem very clear, defined and don't seem to be awash in reverb...BUT, I could still here the reverb adding space.  Well, the SOS article really helped me to understand how that works and how to apply it.
 
This, or something like it, should be required reading for anybody interested in learning how to record...great article! 
 
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jul08/articles/reverb1.htm

That's a good article. My favorite reverb tutorial is: http://youtu.be/PWq0SaBPlw4
 
Even though it focuses on the Sonnox reverb, its techniques can be applied to any reverb. I love how it emphasizes the effective, subtle use of reverb(s). You don't notice that the reverb is there, but you sure notice it when it goes away.
 
The video is especially nice because you can hear the effect of his settings as he changes them.
 

amiller


When I got home from work this evening I decided to give some of the ideas/techniques from the article a test ride on one of my songs.  WOW! what a huge difference.  I'm a huge guitar instrumental fan and I've always wondered how the guitars seem very clear, defined and don't seem to be awash in reverb...BUT, I could still here the reverb adding space.  Well, the SOS article really helped me to understand how that works and how to apply it.
 
This, or something like it, should be required reading for anybody interested in learning how to record...great article!  
 

If you liked the article, you'd no doubt like the author's book "Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio".  It has a really useful chapter on reverb, by the way.

SCorey


That's a good article. My favorite reverb tutorial is: http://youtu.be/PWq0SaBPlw4
 
Even though it focuses on the Sonnox reverb, its techniques can be applied to any reverb. I love how it emphasizes the effective, subtle use of reverb(s). You don't notice that the reverb is there, but you sure notice it when it goes away.
 
The video is especially nice because you can hear the effect of his settings as he changes them.
 

Steve, I gotta ask you....though I agree that vid had some cool stuff in it...did you really notice a major difference when he kicked those verbs off and on when the music was playing with the vox? I sure didn't bro. It still sounded dry to me. Like the difference with the verbs on compared to off was like 2% if that in my opinion. I just can't accept some of the stuff I see. Dude uses 3 verbs and you can barely hear them in the mix....yet without them, it doesn't change drastically in my opinion. I understand the concept and sort of do some of that myself which I call "room within a room"....but this dude was pretty much bragging at how great this sounded and to me....it was mega conservative and didn't make enough of a difference to sound "great" in my opinion. Sure I heard the slight change...but man, there's nothing better than a nice verb when someone does note holds to where you can hear something going on.
 
Ever hear Celine sing "My heart will go on"? That little ducked delay on "near....near.....far...far...wherever you are....are" how it ducks in as well as the verb on it is just pure bliss. If that was as dry as the dude in the video, it would have sounded boring and lifeless...just like his chick did in my opinion. The one thing I DID notice in the dry vocal was, you could hear the impact of the room she was recorded in. This is why that vocal to me doesn't sound much different dry than it does with the verb on. Listen close to it now that I'm telling you what to listen for. Don't listen to the part where he solo's it up and jacks up the verb...listen to it with the music when he turns the verb off an on. You hear the same airy track due to the room more so than the 3 verbs in my opinion.
 
Sorry to pick it apart...I just always watch these videos and shake my head at some of the stuff I see. I'm just in the camp of "if you don't want to hear an effect, simply don't use it. If you ARE going to use it, let it be heard but don't swim in it".
 
-Danny

Danny Danzi

Steve, I gotta ask you....though I agree that vid had some cool stuff in it...did you really notice a major difference when he kicked those verbs off and on when the music was playing with the vox? I sure didn't bro. It still sounded dry to me. Like the difference with the verbs on compared to off was like 2% if that in my opinion. I just can't accept some of the stuff I see. Dude uses 3 verbs and you can barely hear them in the mix....yet without them, it doesn't change drastically in my opinion.
 

Depends on the definition of "major". Yes, it's a subtle effect, but to me it takes the sound up to a new level of realism. The totally dry sound sounds exactly like a close mic'ed vocal. Adding the subtle early reflections makes it sound like an intimate "space".  For this recording, a natural sound is needed, so the effect most certainly needs to be subtle. But the dry sound is dull, lifeless, microscopically in your head. Those little reflections take it up into a very real-sounding emotional body wrap-around. So to me, while the effect is subtle, the result is major.

 
 I understand the concept and sort of do some of that myself which I call "room within a room"....but this dude was pretty much bragging at how great this sounded and to me....it was mega conservative and didn't make enough of a difference to sound "great" in my opinion. Sure I heard the slight change...but man, there's nothing better than a nice verb when someone does note holds to where you can hear something going on.
 
Ever hear Celine sing "My heart will go on"? That little ducked delay on "near....near.....far...far...wherever you are....are" how it ducks in as well as the verb on it is just pure bliss. If that was as dry as the dude in the video, it would have sounded boring and lifeless...just like his chick did in my opinion.
 

And I disagree. While I will agree that the Celine Dion song has a suitably impressive reverb that fits that particular piece of music, it is most definately a 'fake' sound that isn't appropriate for the song in that video. And I've already said how I don't think that the end result of that video is boring and lifeless

 
The one thing I DID notice in the dry vocal was, you could hear the impact of the room she was recorded in. This is why that vocal to me doesn't sound much different dry than it does with the verb on. Listen close to it now that I'm telling you what to listen for. Don't listen to the part where he solo's it up and jacks up the verb...listen to it with the music when he turns the verb off an on. You hear the same airy track due to the room more so than the 3 verbs in my opinion.
 

I know what to listen for and I wasn't talking about the solo'ed jacked up verb bit. Those subtle reflections from the 3 verbs (which don't have to be 3 separate ones, that's just how he splits it up to work with them, but that's a post for another time) are the difference between run-of-the-mill typically "great" productions, and a production that goes beyond "great" into the sublime.  IMO, any more noticable reverb would have distracted from the vocalist and focused more on the reverb. It would have been detrimental to the production. A recording like this (and again, there are definitely different styles that would demand different production styles) needs subtlety and the video does an excellent job of pointing out how to achieve those subtle effects.  The reason I love the video so much is that you can then jump off from there to really think about how our ears hear reflections and then how to get better results when there is a need for a more prominent reverb sound.
 

 
Sorry to pick it apart...I just always watch these videos and shake my head at some of the stuff I see. I'm just in the camp of "if you don't want to hear an effect, simply don't use it. If you ARE going to use it, let it be heard but don't swim in it".

Well, of course, who could disagree with that? But the video is not about an effect that can't be heard. To me, the video demonstrates a level of reverb use that goes beyond what is normally discussed.  The biggest mixing mistake I hear is inappropriate reverb. And we can have different opinions on what is an appropriate reverb. But the video outlines how to get a beautiful, natural sound, with loads of depth that completely complements the production.

I have used the subtle reverb thing but frankly it falls flat without a really good external reverb unit. Some reverb things I have discovered:

Reverbs, like you hear on commercial recordings around the vocals, where they sit in the background beautifully, are generally found in hardware. Even inexpensive reverb units sound better OTB than plug ins.

Reverb plugins are generally too flat on the sound stage. They sound good sometimes but they just won't go into the background like they should behind vocals or guitars. A lot of time they have way too much high end or are just sensitive to high frequencies from the source. It takes a lot more time to get decent results because of balance, EQ, flatness etc. when working with reverb plugins. To a little less extent the same is true of delay plugins. Delay EQ control is difficult with plugins.

Last of all, always print your FXs once you have them dialed in. Takes a load off the computer and you can still do all the tweaking once you have a wave file.

Jeff Evans


The quality of reverb does not have that much to do with ITB or OTB. Tell that to Lexicon with their amazing plugin. I have got two pretty classy rack mount reverbs but guess what, I don't use em! Most quality plugins especially convolution types are way better than most hardware.

I think it is important to set up an EQ before the reverb and really control what range of frequencies is actually going into the reverb chamber. It makes a difference. If you limit the frequencies going into any reverb it will sound better by default.

For subtle reverbs use the ER's as I have described above. They can really create a lovely sense of space and still sound like there is no reverb at all. ER's sit well behind instruments.

Another good trick is when you are setting up your compressor on a vocal do NOT put the compressor on the vocal track. A better way is send the vocals to a buss and put the compressor there. On a vocal track the compressor is working the same all the time and always compressing. (because fader and automation come after that) On a buss the vocal compressor is working after the vocal fader. You can either ride the fader or automate and that way you will have a nice level always feeding the vocal compressor. (Note: also if you do this you can afford to use a much lower ratio eg 2:1 which we know makes things sound bigger and then you can actually turn your vocals down further in your mix and still hear them clearly. People overcompress vocals period!)

But send the vocals into the reverb from the track though. That way you have a more dynamic vocal hitting the reverb. When the singer is constant level the reverb will sit just nice and when they hit it hard the reverb gets the louder signal while the vocal compressor on the buss takes care of the level shift, evening it out. Thay way you get reverb that breathes a little nicer.

BTW vocals will always sound better by simply putting the vocal compression on a buss rather than a track. (providing you are using automation or riding the vocal fader which is nice thing to do!) Its OK to EQ and everything else on the track but leave the compression to be further down the chain. Try it, you will hear it sounds better.

I agree with all but that first paragraph. We'll have to agree to disagree on ITB vs OTB.

SteveDepends on the definition of "major". Yes, it's a subtle effect, but to me it takes the sound up to a new level of realism. The totally dry sound sounds exactly like a close mic'ed vocal. Adding the subtle early reflections makes it sound like an intimate "space". For this recording, a natural sound is needed, so the effect most certainly needs to be subtle. But the dry sound is dull, lifeless, microscopically in your head. Those little reflections take it up into a very real-sounding emotional body wrap-around. So to me, while the effect is subtle, the result is major.

 
Thanks for your reply. I guess it must be my monitors as compared to listening in headphones or something. Though I could hear the differences, that recording on my end could have been left dry and sounded pretty much the same to me to where I could take it or leave it with the effects.
 

And I disagree. While I will agree that the Celine Dion song has a suitably impressive reverb that fits that particular piece of music, it is most definately a 'fake' sound that isn't appropriate for the song in that video. And I've already said how I don't think that the end result of that video is boring and lifeless

 
That's ok, we can agree to disagree on that. :) I don't really call anything that enhances music real or fake. I also don't really pay much attention to how natural something is or not. As long as the performance is good and the capture sounds right, I really don't worry about anything else. With impulses and the verbs we have today, the right processing can easily fool someone into thinking a room was used or something was "natural". I don't believe anyone could tell a difference in a test....and I know I sure couldn't.
 

I know what to listen for and I wasn't talking about the solo'ed jacked up verb bit. Those subtle reflections from the 3 verbs (which don't have to be 3 separate ones, that's just how he splits it up to work with them, but that's a post for another time) are the difference between run-of-the-mill typically "great" productions, and a production that goes beyond "great" into the sublime. IMO, any more noticable reverb would have distracted from the vocalist and focused more on the reverb. It would have been detrimental to the production. A recording like this (and again, there are definitely different styles that would demand different production styles) needs subtlety and the video does an excellent job of pointing out how to achieve those subtle effects. The reason I love the video so much is that you can then jump off from there to really think about how our ears hear reflections and then how to get better results when there is a need for a more prominent reverb sound.

 
I'm sorry if what I said sounded like "you don't know what to listen for". I honestly didn't mean it like that and I'm sorry if it came out that way. Sometimes when people watch videos or listen to things, they get into what's going on to the point of possibly missing certain things. To me, listening through good monitors over here, I didn't hear enough of a difference that would make me buy into 3 verbs being used in that example. If he kept them off, no one but engineers would notice anything because the performance and capture were good. I still do not hear a close mic sound with the verb off. I hear some sort of room ambience that is there with the verb turned off that remains when the verb is turned on. But that's just me. I also do not feel that a bit more of a verb presence would distract the vocal. If she wasn't swimming in it with a long tail, there would be no distraction in my opinion. I guess it's a personal preference thing of mine...but I just like to hear a little more to the point of where it allows for a little more vocal resonance and liveliness. Again...subjective.
 

Well, of course, who could disagree with that? But the video is not about an effect that can't be heard. To me, the video demonstrates a level of reverb use that goes beyond what is normally discussed. The biggest mixing mistake I hear is inappropriate reverb. And we can have different opinions on what is an appropriate reverb. But the video outlines how to get a beautiful, natural sound, with loads of depth that completely complements the production.

 
Understood on all counts. I just felt that it was a bit too subtle to where that 1-2% change was not enough to be "incredible" like he praised it in the video. I really don't hear many people over-using verb these days as much as I hear them over-doing compression or room sounds in drum kits. Ok, I know that's a verb in a sense...but what I mean is, it's been pretty rare for me to hear someone using too much verb on a vocal or guitar...or a splashing airplane hangar type verb on a snare drum. What I DO hear is a very conservative approach because people seem to think hearing an effect is now considered a no no.
 
There are many incredible mixes that use effects to where you can hear them and it doesn't mud anything up or kill the mix. Pop music and country are prime examples of this. Sure, there is a time and a place for everything and there are times when you put on an effect that may not be dominant, yet you can tell when it's gone. I'd never disagree with that. However, I just think that often times, people are playing things way too conservative and will lash out at those that may use effects a bit more. Like the conservative people feel their word is the book of the Lord and cannot accept that it's not....it's just an opinion that should be a bit more open to artistic coloration towards those that utilize effects differently than they do.
 
At any rate, thanks for your in depth response Steve. Much respect even if we feel differently about this stuff. :)
 
-Danny

+1 Jeff on the article and your notes.  I was a studio drummer for many years in L.A. and worked in most of the top studios.  The rooms, microphones, and placement really did make a difference which also made the use of applied reverb a little different than today.  

Rimshot

  Thanks for the back and forth conversation guys. It's a very cool learning opportunity ... multiple points of view.