Play convolution reverbs or DP's Proverb

[KenNickels]

I really like the reverbs on Eastwest's Play, and they have a "feature" that allows you to have only instance of that reverb loaded to which all of the other instruments slave to, to save resources. The problem is that the output settings are also slaved. If (Play-1 1-2) is set, for example, you cannot have (Play-1 3-4). That means I can't have separate aux channels in DP set up to handle different effects requirements. Bummer. I have to go track by track.

Who uses their vi's reverb and sticks with it in the final mix, and who uses only the original room ambiance, without reverb, and then uses Proverb or something better later? And why?

Thanks

[Prime Mover]

I ALWAYS use an external aux channel bussed from other tracks. With the exception of weird special effects, I never put what to have a reverb directly in a channel's effects chain. I always turn off the built-in reverbs in VIs; for professional mixing, they're just inaccessible and more-often-then-not, poor quality.

Mixing is about getting instruments to work together with each other, and this often means using the same exact reverb for several instruments, or at least having the option to do so. You can't use a reverb built-in to a Kontakt instrument on my audio tracks, so it's immediately problematic. No, you want discrete reverb aux tracks that you can send in any audio you want.

Now, PLAY does have a standalone reverb plugin, just like Altiverb or ProVerb, and that would be perfectly fine to use. As long as it has it's own signal path, apart from a VI, it's fine.

I have no idea what your level of experience is, and I may be re-stating mixing 101, but if you're not familliar with concept of bussing, you should start. Create an aux channel, and assign it a stereo pair of busses. Put your favorite reverb plugin on it, and set the mix to 100% wet. Now, go to an audio or VI track, set one of it's "Sends" to the busses you just assigned the reverb. The advantage to this is that you can send any audio you want to run through the same reverb, and you can adjust their levels independantly with the send level on each channel.

[KenNickels]

Well, I've been using VI's now for about six months, using "regular" gear for a lot longer, so I know what you're talking about. So far, just wanting to get some music down, I've used a single reverb in Play which put all the instruments in the same space. But I want to get a more sophisticated mix going forward with auxes as you describe. For example, I want to roll off some of the high end on only the strings, a little compression on another group. Things like that. The only standalone verb I have is Proverb, which sounds pretty good to my ears. I'll start using that.

[Prime Mover]

Don't under-estimate the potential of a good old fashioned algorithmic reverb, either. Read my other thread on reverb for a more detailed explanation, but I've come to realize that most of the time, my decision to use convolution isn't really because I've made a good aesthetic mixing choice, it's because I think it's SUPPOSED to work better... I mean, it's newer and more sophisticated, right?

But at the end of the day, new technologies like convolution come at a price: control and ease of understanding how to use it correctly.

I think we're on the cusp of a "back to digital" trend. Suddenly, we're ditching samples for algorithmic modeling in VIs, and I've heard that some companies are starting to find ways of taking IRs and creating algorithms based on them. In the "end", I think that's where we're headed. Samples and IRs are static, you can't really modify them in a meaningful way because there's nothing to understand, you record them, and that's it. But if you can turn them into algorithms, you can do anything you want with them! It's really exciting when you think about it. You can create "realistic" sounding spaces that are theoretically impossible... you can create modeled instruments that never existed before. Sound designers can get back to innovating new sounds instead of just trying to replicate things that already exist.

[KenNickels]

I agree. In one of her songs Joni Mitchell coined the phrase, "The 'crazy' you get from too much choice." She used it in the context of women's lib, but it also applies to the endless tweaking that goes on in music production. It's so easy to get lost inside of an algorithm and forget what you were trying to do in the first place, IMO. Sometimes when it comes to knobs, less is more. But you're right, the future is ever expanding and wants more control, not less.

Maybe you've heard of MAX/MSP. I have just recently learned of this programming language, but it seems to have been incorporated into MOTU's Machfive in its granular synthesis and IRCAM implementations, which elevate it from a sampler to a ... bitchin' something or other.

Everything is a trade off. It's complex. To keep our focus on music, one needs to disregard the endless sonic possibilities in order to create effectively. Even if your goal is video games or sound deign.

[Prime Mover]

Heard of it? I actually spent 4 years of college doing Max programming, it's one of my mainstays, I'm commonly writing little Max programs to augment my live performance. I have no idea how it would be incorporated into Mach Five, though. If so, that's completely badass. One of the greatest programs ever created, IMO.

[KenNickels]

Excellent! This is my lucky day. Hope you don't mind a slew of questions because I could not find any books on it. So I'll start with that.

1. Are there any? What's the best methodology for learning it?

2. I've seen several videos on youtube where someone is connecting the objects and making little apps. But also it appears that there are very sophisticated apps too, with professional looking graphics, like Zyklus Improvisor. Does Max by itself have the ability to look pro and to be compiled into runtime apps like C++? I'm guessing here that Machfive used MAX (somehow) but encapsulated it into something like C++.

3. Does it require a sound card? or does it just use the cpu?

4. Apparently it has a lot of power in terms of interfacing with MIDI and other things. What do you use it for?

I've seen some jitter shows that also use Max for controlling the video. Looks REALLY cool.

Thanks!

[Prime Mover]

1. Are there any? What's the best methodology for learning it?

I bet there are, but I recommend going over the tutorials in MAX itself. MAX has one of the most extensive help and tutorial systems I've ever seen. It has a whole dictionary of objects, and well-documented info on how to use them. But the best thing is that you can "option-click" on any object in a patch, and it pulls up an example patch, complete with descriptions of all its ins/outs and characteristics. Start by reading up on the very basics of patch construction, then dive in, do the tutorials and surf the object help files! Honestly, that's a lot more immediate than most books will provide.

2. I've seen several videos on youtube where someone is connecting the objects and making little apps. But also it appears that there are very sophisticated apps too, with professional looking graphics, like Zyklus Improvisor. Does Max by itself have the ability to look pro and to be compiled into runtime apps like C++? I'm guessing here that Machfive used MAX (somehow) but encapsulated it into something like C++.

Yes and No. Max patches cannot be compiled, they will always be interpreted like Java. HOWEVER, you can "build" a patch into an executable app. What it does is stick a mini version of the Max virtual machine inside of the collection, complete with all frameworks. And seeing as though Max is very CPU efficient, you won't really miss the lack of compiling. It's pretty seamless.

As for Graphics, Max supports a number of different objects in which to attach user-created graphics. Backgrounds, buttons (with states), nobs, sliders, rollovers, drop boxes... any basic OS widget you can find. It starts to get a bit unwieldily to build really complex graphical interfaces, but I have friends who would go as far as creating all custom nobs in After Effects and building completely professional user interfaces. I tend to use mine for utilitarian purposes, and like them to be as compact as possible, so I don't really spend a lot of time on graphics (funny, since I'm a video and graphic designer by day).

I still find it entirely impossible to believe that MachFive has any part of it constructed in Max. It just doesn't make any sense. I've heard of people making relatively robust stand-alone plugins with Max using Pluggo (outdated) or Max for Live, but really, it's not exactly designed for making huge commercial plugins. It's designed to be a very simple environment for musicians/engineers to create very specific patches for their own needs. I'm not even sure it's possible to completely integrate it into an AU anymore with Pluggo being killed. No, Max patches are typically standalone programs. Cycling74 has a wonderful (and free) system called Soundflower, which you can use to pipe audio to and from audio apps, so you could easily bus something in from DP to a Max patch, and back out, but other than that, it's stand-alone. I highly recommend getting Soundflower anyway, it's useful for so many things, besides Max.

3. Does it require a sound card? or does it just use the cpu?

Not sure I understand your question. Do you mean, does it require a standalone audio interface? Then no, it doesn't. What computer these days doesn't have a soundcard, and why would you be using an audio program if you didn't have one? Even so, soundcards don't do any processing, not in the same way that video cards do. They're just DA and AD converters with in/out jacks. Audio is always being handled by the OS through the CPU. The soul exception is the DigiDesign TDM system, which are audio interfaces with their own external processing. As great as these devices are, they're hardly a requirement for anything, and are limited to certain high-end plugins by companies such as Waves (which also sells standard versions of all their plugins, too).

Basically, unless you're computer is 20 years old, if you have a computer, you can run Max/MSP. I used to run it on my old 10-year-old TiBook with no problem.

4. Apparently it has a lot of power in terms of interfacing with MIDI and other things. What do you use it for?

MIDI more than anything, these days, but I used to do a whole range of things back in my college years. I've used it to build a number of synthesizers and drum synths, I've used it to trigger real-time sample recording and manipulation. I even built a fairly conventional audio player specially designed to easily play sounds for theatrical performances (I was a stage manager and sound designer at the same time... only way I could make this work without going crazy).

I will admit, I feel that the most useful thing I've ever done in Max is something that hardly anyone would care about. It's called "Channel Cycler", and it's simply designed to re-route incoming MIDI signals to specific channels via a foot switch. It, combined with Jambalaya, is the backbone of my current live performance setup as a keyboardist, and allows me to manage fairly complex keyboard patch changes, easily and reliably.

But, really, Max is incredibly versatile. It's incredibly powerful for both MIDI and audio manipulation... often together. You can basically do any musical operation with it from live performance, to the control room. We have a local composer of some standing, John Luther Adams, who has a permanent audio installation at our Museum. He uses a Max patch to receive data from seismology stations, electromagnetic ionosphere readings from the Aurora Borealis, and tidal currents, and create sound and light in the room from it in real time. It's the biggest Max patch I've ever seen, and uses a dedicated Mac Pro that does nothing else.

But you can also start small with utilitarian programs like building homemade synths, or MIDI routing, or sample triggering.

[KenNickels]

Thanks so much for your generous reply. I'll need to chew on this for a while, but may have some questions for you later. I'm so new to it my questions are naive, as if I was seeing a never-before seen gem encased in rock. How to I get it out, and what will it do once it's in my hands? I've seen the Cycling74 tutorial page and I'll start there.