Check the Altiverb forum to an answer to just this question.

DG

I haven't done this but basically yet. However not if you mean to use your other machine as a node - I don't think Altiverb works like that - but you can send via network over to your second G5 and mix through logic on that I don't know how though. Another helpful forum would be the apple support forum logic pro section.

Miklos.

...it's very funny .......they readress me ....here....

Sorry to hear that! Well they're not that helpful then are they. I will look into it for you if I get a minute I know it's possible over a network - maybe you'll get 8 stereo 24bit channels sending and one stereo coming back for your output without too much trouble. AS I said I've never done it but if I get a minute and you still haven't found anything over the next week I will take a look as I'm curious for myself also just to know. But in the mean time try searching on the apple forums for netsend and netreceive or applenetsend applenetreceive something like that - and see what comes up. You may need a free software the name of which I don't know (sorry) that will enable you to port the audio out of logic, send it over the network, and receive it into logic on the other end and of course on those tracks you can insert your altiverb, then send the audio back as a stereo mix.

Miklos.

Thanks

Of course if you have hardware on both machines that would be easiest on the surface - to use ADAT light pipe between two interfaces for example, but I think the network thing is apparently more reliable because you don't have sync issues between interfaces, so probably better technically (potentially) from a sound quality point of view.

Miklos.

...many thanks...again

I guess you could call a friend of mine a "big guy." (Short, actually, but he mixed Superman Returns and X-Men.) He tells me he's using less of the TC reverbs and more Altiverb these days, sometimes exclusively. He just sold one of his TCs. FWIW.

@synthetic said:

I guess you could call a friend of mine a "big guy." (Short, actually, but he mixed Superman Returns and X-Men.) He tells me he's using less of the TC reverbs and more Altiverb these days, sometimes exclusively. He just sold one of his TCs. FWIW.

People rubbish altiverb and "plug ins"..... Technically a hardware box is just a piece of software... a plug in, only you can only use it once. What about the Lexicon reverbs though they're pretty nice... still for $25,000 you can download the IR's off the internet and use them in altiverb... a bit cheaper. Anyway, that's a really interesting piece of information - thanks for sharing.

Miklos.

I have to agree with Dietz, generally the sound of impulsed digital reverbs is not as good as the real thing. You might be better finding a digital reverb plug-in like Ambience or Audio Damage's Reverence. I have an Alesis Wedge that I like for some things, and would love to get a TC Reverb 4000 someday.

"I'd like to suggest to experiment also with IR's from digital reverb units, like the Lex 960 and the TC 6000. These are still used for ochestral film scores - the "big" guys just don't use "real space" IRs..."

Can someone tell me, where to find these gears in Altiverb 6?

I also cannot find the "Teldex Studio".

@Felix Bartelt said:

"I'd like to suggest to experiment also with IR's from digital reverb units, like the Lex 960 and the TC 6000. These are still used for ochestral film scores - the "big" guys just don't use "real space" IRs..."

Can someone tell me, where to find these gears in Altiverb 6?

I also cannot find the "Teldex Studio".

www.Samplicity.com

- sorry for the commercial reply [;)]

A number of Samplicity users are in this discussion and I recently started receiving orders from a number of Hollywood/LA composers and post-pro studios. I thus also believe that a trend has started in moving away from the hardware boxes to IR-plugins. A friend of mine in Germany made the same move, selling this TC Sys6000 in favor of using IRs (also from the same unit).

Cheers,

@Peter Roos said:

[...] I thus also believe that a trend has started in moving away from the hardware boxes to IR-plugins. A friend of mine in Germany made the same move, selling this TC Sys6000 in favor of using IRs (also from the same unit).

Cheers,

Hmmmm ... [H] ... but what will you sample from once all hardware has bitten the dust ...?

But joking aside, Peter - I think you know my point of view in the meantime: As much as I believe in sampling real rooms (read: linear systems), as much I am sceptical when it comes to IRs from synthetic reverb (read: non-linear systems). The beauty of a System 6000 or an L960 is the flexibility in sculpturing the acoustic environment of your needs - with the big trade off of less realism. (I work with both machines regulary, BTW.) By "sampling" these reverbs, you lose the flexibilty, but you don't gain realism, quite on the contrary: You lose the typical modulations of the synthetic reverb-trails, too, as convolution (as we use it) is a _linear_ process.

... don't let us get into another (albeit friendly) argument on this. I know that you work hard and with lots of effort to achieve good results for your IR-sets. You may have noticed that I avoid to make comments like this on other forums. But as long as you are here on _my_ playground ... [;)]

All the best,

Since I still could not find the IR´s "Lex 960" and "TC 6000" in my altiverb 6 (regular).
Are these gears part of altiverb 6 regular?
If yes, where do I find them?
If no, can I download them somewhere for free?

@Dietz said:

Hmmmm ... [H] ... but what will you sample from once all hardware has bitten the dust ...?

But joking aside, Peter - I think you know my point of view in the meantime: As much as I believe in sampling real rooms (read: linear systems), as much I am sceptical when it comes to IRs from synthetic reverb (read: non-linear systems). The beauty of a System 6000 or an L960 is the flexibility in sculpturing the acoustic environment of your needs - with the big trade off of less realism. (I work with both machines regulary, BTW.) By "sampling" these reverbs, you lose the flexibilty, but you don't gain realism, quite on the contrary: You lose the typical modulations of the synthetic reverb-trails, too, as convolution (as we use it) is a _linear_ process.

... don't let us get into another (albeit friendly) argument on this. I know that you work hard and with lots of effort to achieve good results for your IR-sets. You may have noticed that I avoid to make comments like this on other forums. But as long as you are here on _my_ playground ... [;)]

All the best,

Hey Dietz,

I actually agree 100 % with you! No intention at all to start a discussion which would be apples vs oranges!

I just see it from this perspective:

For a lot of composers and smaller project studios there are a lot of tools required and of course they would like to have the very best, but they have to make compromises and smart choices to optimize their sound whilst keeping costs low. Reverb is just one of the many applications that need to be covered.

I think that any composer playing the piano would prefer a real Boesendorfer grand piano, but when it comes to being realistic a very good sample library will just do very finely, given the entire range of tools that they to be invested in.
The same applies to the orchestra, just a really happy few can afford to hire orchestras for commercial productions and the others will have to do with a carefully selected collection of orchestral sample libraries, like from VSL.

Of course the "real things" are always more "real", better playable, more intimate and controllable, etc. but given budgettary restrictions one has to make smart decisions. When you can have the "sound" (or an approximation) of an epensive reverb, a grand piano, or an orchestra for far andfar less then the real thing, I think it is not wrong at all to work with the virtual replacements.

given this background I am making my remarks and sometimes the "wink-wink-see-my-website" remarks, but I certainly do not want to suggest that IR's are as good and/or controlable as their real counterparts. It's just within the entire context of requiring many many tools to get something done within a limited budgets that they CAN be very usable (if they're created well and with attention to the utmost detail - just like VSL's mission is).

Cheers!

Peter

@mpower88 said:

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
Miklos.

This question might sound a little stupid for this thread, but what does the abbreviation "SF" stand for?

@Peter Roos said:

[...]
Of course the "real things" are always more "real", better playable, more intimate and controllable, etc. but given budgettary restrictions one has to make smart decisions. [...]
Peter

From this point of view, I have to agree completely.

I throw my 22 cents worth in...

The quest for purity is interesting. If we base it only on logic, the conclusion can be flawed - sometimes it requires a greater perspective of what purity actually consists of.

If you look at a concert hall, in fact it is in effect something that is man made. Something "truly" pure - you should record concerts in a cave, or in a forest for example, or some kind of a natural amphitheatre shaped rock, strictly speaking. In fact purity or aesthetic perfection is something itself that is determined by our own innate sensibility, it is a. passed on generationally by other people, b. accumulated ideals, refined over time, c. intuitive d. perceptive - experiential, for it to be felt as an artform by other humans. Aesthetic's are ultimately - by the balanced individual (which there are rarely any if any [[:)]] ) harmonic with natural principles.

To abstract it slightly more, a concert hall itself is basically an algorithm, the type of bricks, mortar, paint, size, shape, contents, position of the instruments, and position of the microphones, or ears, if you are listening live. A concert or musical space is typically "designed" algorithm using physical parts that are designed to give the most aesthetically appealing sonic imagery for a wide variety of content (or specific type of content as the case may be - piano, orchestra or a rock band). This type of setting is made by people and is typically modelled on controlling or harnessing certain natural principles of reverberation to achieve the best results. Even if it is modelled on sound itself, not just space, then it is still an algorithm in effect. You take a + b + c and get your result. It is a reverb engine if you want to call it that albeit inherently complex more complex than any one computer or rather software today can calculate.

A synthetic reverb itself is also essentially an algorithm running inside a processor, with a set of parameters. Like a concert hall, it is designed by people, for the purpose of providing aesthetically pleasing sonic space for a variety of content. The difference is that it is virtual and models itself on natural principles of reverberation to achieve the best results - the mediator for this is the engineers ears and aesthetic sensibilities attached to those ears [[:)]]

If you then take an IR of either one of these scenarios, either one will be inherently "flawed" compared to the original, being basically a recording - a second generation from the original, but relative to the price of a. building or recording in a concert hall, or b. buying the necessary hardware, that is up to the user what is best for their budget.

I have bought Peter's IR sets and they are very good I use them in altiverb although I must confess I haven't had any chance to use them much lately beyond a quick try out - so I will give a more full review at another time when I've used them a lot more.

What is interesting is that for a concert hall to sound "right" in a recording it depens largely on the microphones used and also the placement of those microphones, and so sometimes, for the sample based orchestra, it can be "easier" to get an aesthetically pleasing sounding from a synthetic IR which is designed on sound and often, gets the overall sound placement effect on the instruments aesthetically "better" than a real world IR, which, true to it's real world counter part can be difficult to "tame".

In effect there is no conclusion to this post, I like many others are really just looking for the best and most aesthetically beautiful sound we can make with the limited budget we have (limited = relative) and the ability to buy a whole set of reverbs from the TC600 and 960L for a very small fraction of the original machines, and they are very useable (as I said a more thorough review at another time from me) if not the real thing, it's worth it for this composer for one.

Miklos.

@Felix Bartelt said:

"I'd like to suggest to experiment also with IR's from digital reverb units, like the Lex 960 and the TC 6000. These are still used for ochestral film scores - the "big" guys just don't use "real space" IRs..."

Can someone tell me, where to find these gears in Altiverb 6?

I also cannot find the "Teldex Studio".

TC's TDM plug of the 6000 is like having a 6000. I've recently heard of some mixers who A/B the same settings on a mix stage with the M6000 unit. They could not tell the difference between the plug in and the M6000 at all. I'm currently test driving the plugs out. It's great if you are on a TDM system.

There are some IR's (I won't mention any names, but we all know who I'm talking about) sold for altiverb that are of the 960 and M6000. They sound really great. I would go that direction long before buying a hardware unit even if I could afford it.