Maybe a bit of clever EQing? Lowering the top and bottom ends? Time for the experts I think..

Hi Lowkey,

I understand your problem perfectly. What seems to be so easy and naturally to achieve with a real recording, is like a book with seven seals in the realm virtual orchestration.

Actually, there are little to no dedicated tools to achieve the convincing three-dimensional feel of a large (virtual) ensemble you are aiming for. Up to now, getting it right was always a combination of several different reverb-algorithms, dedicated delays and/or early reflection-patterns, lots of EQing, some fiddling with panorama-settings, maybe a bit of dynamics processing -- and a good amount of luck.

This is exactly the reason why we tried to figure out a convincing (and logical) solution for this problem quite some time ago. I'm happy to say that the upcoming Vienna MIR is _exactly_ what you're looking for. Working in these three-dimensional multisampled venues, you get the perfect sense of depth of a stage, plus the natural blending between the single instruments and ensembles, with surprisingly little effort or additional processing.

Kind regards,

Thanks a lot fot the info! :)

I already read about MIR and it seems to be an interesting approach, that I will definitely take a deeper look into when it finally becomes available. Anyway, I don't think that it's only a matter of purchasing the right tools, because - like you said - it's all possible already with lots of manual tweaking.

The reason I started this thread is to find out about how people approach the problem using traditional tools like EQing, compression, etc.

So for example, I found out that rolling off high frequencies in an instrument, also helps a lot with putting it further to the back of the virtual space. But on the other this method seems to make the evaluation of the exact stereo location harder, which results in a less defined stereo field.

All the best
Heiko

lowkey,

here you'll find all information how to achieve that:

Book tip

or:

http://community.vsl.co.at/forums/t/20411.aspx

Mike

Thanks, Mike. I'll definitely try that. :)

 Hi,

Have you tried out or are you familar with the Origami reverb (Yellow Tools) with its positioning tool yet? Maybe this will help you out.

regards,
Erik

@lowkey said:

So for example, I found out that rolling off high frequencies in an instrument, also helps a lot with putting it further to the back of the virtual space. But on the other this method seems to make the evaluation of the exact stereo location harder, which results in a less defined stereo field.

All the best
Heiko

However, the further back something is, the less defined the stereo field is going to be anyway, even in the real world.

DG

 lowkey,

A pre-delay on your reverb tail makes a signal seem farther away. Too much pre-delay and you'll get an echo effect, though. With Altiverb, some pre-delay was just what I needed to get the woodwinds to sit back on stage with less presence -- I've found it a little hard to get some of the VSL solo woodwinds to sit behind the violins/violas.

Mahlon

Mahlon, this is a common misconception. In nature, a source  _closer_ to the listener will have a longer delay between the direct signal and the first reflections form surrounding walls - simply because the source will have a larger distance to those walls than another source at the back of a stage, close (at least) to one wall.

... of course, this doesn't contradict the principle "If it sounds right, it is right!", so don't be shy to use the solution you seem to like :-)

 Thanks Dietz for the clarification. Does this hold true in the non-natural world of electronic reverberation? I ask because, unless I'm hearing it wrongly, it does seem to set the sound farther back in space. Now you make me wonder if that is just an illusion to my ears -- because I know that often times, I end up hearing what I want to hear.

Thanks,
Mahlon

edited

Yep, I was also confused when reading this for the first time, but it seems to be true, even for the virtual space.

About Predelay

> sound speed 300m/s > 1m = 3.3ms

Imagine you are standing in the center of a church.

Now clap your hands!

After some ms you will get back the first echos - perhaps from the floor or other close surfaces (after 3-6ms).

Because these reflections arive after a very short time and in nearly every room situation our brain ignores them perhaps

more or less.

Then you will get back the first bundle of reflections from the closest walls and other surfaces (after 15ms - 30ms = 5m - 10m = church?).

These are the "early reflections". Our ears and our brain can "produce" an impression of the room size with this time delay between

direct clap sound and the delayed reflection sound.

So when you increase the predelay time you increase the room size impression which also can give an impression of "farther away" on

the other hand. Of course, there are lots of other parameters which are influencing the building a room impression in our brain such

as the volume balance "direct sound - delayed sound", density of the early reflections... as Dietz mentioned above.

Back to our clap... More and more reflections will now reach your ears. They are mixed into each other. Further you will get

reflections of the reflections... this part of the acoustic feedback we call "reverb".

Beat

I find the speaker placement feature in Altiverb pretty good at placing instruments three dimensionally in a concert hall

@bobulusbillman said:

I find the speaker placement feature in Altiverb pretty good at placing instruments three dimensionally in a concert hall

Hm ... as an avowed fan of AltiVerb I have to admit that this is its only feature that always failed to convince me.

 Hey Dietz - I have always had my predelays on the tails 40ms-50-60 (front to back) - but flipped them per your post.   I must say I do like it.

Thanks and all the best,

Rob