Lets face it, when it comes to VSL, MIR is going to be the solution - the other half of the puzzle that for me at least, is what is missing. I hope they get to finishing it soon - certainly in the next six months, machines will probably be fast enough to do the offline rendering or close to it. Personally I can't wait THAT long..... but we must. Once it is here, I think anyone who has it will soon comment on how they could never live without it and wondered how they ever did.
Lexicon reverbs? Ahem, does anyone have $25,000? They might be nice but at that price I'd rather wait for MIR when it comes to VSL! The sampled reverbs in Altiverb are *alright* but yes, there is a lot missing there that convolution can't capture off a synth reverb like that... unfortunately. however if you use the direct and sf IR from real world IR's, and then mix with the tail and some SF of the synth sounds as is suggested - yes you can get a very good result and it does sound more "film" like, although I've never done that on a mix yet I've tried it out breifly.
Regarding mixing and matching IR's in altiverb. I've used some such techniques on recent mixes, such as the telex studio which gives a good studio sound. Another technique is to dial down the length and size of the studio to give almost a re-recorded effect on the VSL samples at those very short early reflections stages, really shorten the length so it's very tight (big edit: forgot to say: and reduce the short reflections - treat the short reflections like a wet/dry mix not like a db mix at this initial stage if this is how you want to do your mix, you don't want full mix of SF there since you require a reasonable direct signal for the subsequent reverb mixing so imagine that -60db is 5% wet or so, and 0db is 100% wet you want to mix in the amount you would imagine you would want at the recording stage so if this is the close mic portion of the process then you would say ok I want between 10 - 30% short reflections at this stage of the mix (this is like placing your mics closer or further from the instruments) depending on the IR and how it sounds/works but say start with 25% - 25% of -60db is -45db there's your wet/dry mix on that - now you still have freedom to mix in some early reflections from the second reverb and even I've found you can mix some direct signal but remember, this is the direct signal of the now processed sound - the direct signal of which is 100% wet on the first reverb, this is why you must lower the early reflections or else it's just going to be a mess. Treat everything as you would relative to a real situation - mic distance for your close mics, delays for your far mics on the SR and tails of subsequent instances of the reverb realtive to real world specs relative to the previous IR/instance that you have - you wouldn't close mic your recording with 100% short reflections, the reason you close mic is to cut that out, so imagine we're not going the whole way as VSL does with a dry sound and we're recording with 25% SF, then you go to your reverb for the room sound after that. You can even mix in some tail of a larger IR of the same room almost like ambient room mic's bled into the mix at very low level and mix that with your bigger master reverb anything can work) Basically it works fairly well (not as good as MIR) and then use your ears to do the last stages. You have to use your ears and get the right accoustical result at that level, then you bus that out to a larger reverb of choice, and yes, the synth verbs can sound very good even though they're sampled. However for me the quality of altiverb doesn't shine through those IR's as much as it does on the real spaces. It is harder to make it work on the real spaces and you have to do your eq right for each one, which makes it hard to swap and change your reverbs - because they do affect timbre so much, however you can find some good combinations. Direct sound must be off for the subsequent IR's, and tail should be off for the initial IR's (edit: although these are general rules and can be broken if it works). Even the placement feature can drastically change the timbre and harmonic properties with the smallest move. Frankly I'm not a fan for the fact that it seems very unpredictable in that sense but I do use it reluctantly because it's useful for creating depth not just horizontal placement and also doubles as a stereo width tool when you drag speakers closer together so you don't need to use the logic helper or waves S1 (saves a stage of processing). Altiverb looks fairly simple but when you start mixing and matching, man it can become a rabbits hole of possibilities that you are already at the bottom of before you know what you did, especially when you have a full orchestral mix, and that is to speak nothing of your eq and other parameters going on.
Factors that you have to artistically play with to get the mix right:
direct signal
short reflections
tail reverb
wet/dry mixes
colour wheel
reverb time
size
If using 100% placement busses, the built in eq is quite efficient and is quite good quality straight forward and reasonably clean on stereo signals, and actually many times is really very nice sounding (removing the need for a separate plug in if you prefer)
All these things are in fact mix tools and you are mixing the volumes of these elements, not just the wet and dry of a preset. This is what makes it so potentially complex. An IR that seems muddy at first might be passed over because you can't get the right wet/dry mix, might be perfect if you adjust the other parameters especially the direct/SF and tail parameters.
MIR is definitely what is required here. To mix in the box without a tool of that calibre is going to be looked back upon as madness in the years to come - if by no one else than me! ha ha. Personally I very much look forward to it's completion. The quicktime sounds GREAT.
[8-)]
Miklos.
Lexicon reverbs? Ahem, does anyone have $25,000? They might be nice but at that price I'd rather wait for MIR when it comes to VSL! The sampled reverbs in Altiverb are *alright* but yes, there is a lot missing there that convolution can't capture off a synth reverb like that... unfortunately. however if you use the direct and sf IR from real world IR's, and then mix with the tail and some SF of the synth sounds as is suggested - yes you can get a very good result and it does sound more "film" like, although I've never done that on a mix yet I've tried it out breifly.
Regarding mixing and matching IR's in altiverb. I've used some such techniques on recent mixes, such as the telex studio which gives a good studio sound. Another technique is to dial down the length and size of the studio to give almost a re-recorded effect on the VSL samples at those very short early reflections stages, really shorten the length so it's very tight (big edit: forgot to say: and reduce the short reflections - treat the short reflections like a wet/dry mix not like a db mix at this initial stage if this is how you want to do your mix, you don't want full mix of SF there since you require a reasonable direct signal for the subsequent reverb mixing so imagine that -60db is 5% wet or so, and 0db is 100% wet you want to mix in the amount you would imagine you would want at the recording stage so if this is the close mic portion of the process then you would say ok I want between 10 - 30% short reflections at this stage of the mix (this is like placing your mics closer or further from the instruments) depending on the IR and how it sounds/works but say start with 25% - 25% of -60db is -45db there's your wet/dry mix on that - now you still have freedom to mix in some early reflections from the second reverb and even I've found you can mix some direct signal but remember, this is the direct signal of the now processed sound - the direct signal of which is 100% wet on the first reverb, this is why you must lower the early reflections or else it's just going to be a mess. Treat everything as you would relative to a real situation - mic distance for your close mics, delays for your far mics on the SR and tails of subsequent instances of the reverb realtive to real world specs relative to the previous IR/instance that you have - you wouldn't close mic your recording with 100% short reflections, the reason you close mic is to cut that out, so imagine we're not going the whole way as VSL does with a dry sound and we're recording with 25% SF, then you go to your reverb for the room sound after that. You can even mix in some tail of a larger IR of the same room almost like ambient room mic's bled into the mix at very low level and mix that with your bigger master reverb anything can work) Basically it works fairly well (not as good as MIR) and then use your ears to do the last stages. You have to use your ears and get the right accoustical result at that level, then you bus that out to a larger reverb of choice, and yes, the synth verbs can sound very good even though they're sampled. However for me the quality of altiverb doesn't shine through those IR's as much as it does on the real spaces. It is harder to make it work on the real spaces and you have to do your eq right for each one, which makes it hard to swap and change your reverbs - because they do affect timbre so much, however you can find some good combinations. Direct sound must be off for the subsequent IR's, and tail should be off for the initial IR's (edit: although these are general rules and can be broken if it works). Even the placement feature can drastically change the timbre and harmonic properties with the smallest move. Frankly I'm not a fan for the fact that it seems very unpredictable in that sense but I do use it reluctantly because it's useful for creating depth not just horizontal placement and also doubles as a stereo width tool when you drag speakers closer together so you don't need to use the logic helper or waves S1 (saves a stage of processing). Altiverb looks fairly simple but when you start mixing and matching, man it can become a rabbits hole of possibilities that you are already at the bottom of before you know what you did, especially when you have a full orchestral mix, and that is to speak nothing of your eq and other parameters going on.
Factors that you have to artistically play with to get the mix right:
direct signal
short reflections
tail reverb
wet/dry mixes
colour wheel
reverb time
size
If using 100% placement busses, the built in eq is quite efficient and is quite good quality straight forward and reasonably clean on stereo signals, and actually many times is really very nice sounding (removing the need for a separate plug in if you prefer)
All these things are in fact mix tools and you are mixing the volumes of these elements, not just the wet and dry of a preset. This is what makes it so potentially complex. An IR that seems muddy at first might be passed over because you can't get the right wet/dry mix, might be perfect if you adjust the other parameters especially the direct/SF and tail parameters.
MIR is definitely what is required here. To mix in the box without a tool of that calibre is going to be looked back upon as madness in the years to come - if by no one else than me! ha ha. Personally I very much look forward to it's completion. The quicktime sounds GREAT.
[8-)]
Miklos.
