If you get the time that would really be appreciated as the model on ebay won't last long and I can't wait any longer for the XITE-1 DSP 96k/64bit version. There are FOH engineers that drag those to the gig and use the provided SHoCo 480L's for more static chores like drums, etc. I love my PCM70 still but the lack of AES/EBU or SP/DIF make it difficult to use in my current set ups. If it can move the Decay/Room Size w/o artifacts I will owe you a big favor for reminding me of this unit. I really need a quality hardware model or DSP model that can do this and a used V77 is only 800 bucks. Well everything except the Decay/Room Size.Ĭould you check and see if your Decay parameter on the V77 has artifacts when using in realtime. So if I can tweak the parameters of certain hardware units w/o hearing zippers this should apply to the DSP models I use. But both of these hardware models use DSP chips. Lexicon has an entirely different and musical approach. IMHO it's on the developer and thier experience with coding.įor example the M7 is the most realistic hardware model for creating real space. The point is that there are some plugs in Native that sound pretty close now days to a mid range quality hardware unit. I hear a big differnece in the above metioned.īut not from the DSP PCM Emulation I use. There's really not that much differnce in the sound of these Native and DSP plugs IMHO.Īether sounds great if you just need something for strings or even percussion.īut just twist the knobs once and listen to those destructive zippers.this is why they use hardware on the big jobs. I could actually turn my XITE-1 into a reverb machine.įunny thing.This plug will cost Scope users about 5-600 bucks. I am waiting for a developer who is working on a DSP reverb where all parameters will be zipper free.Īfterall a Model 7 uses the same ADSP21369 chips that I have.īut I have 18 of those beasts each with 64MB's of RAM attached to it. Lexicon changed their hardware around after the Digitech takeover, hence the 91's cheaper design. Try a PCM90, I am not sure if it is capable. This makes the instrument breathe instead of having some static Cavern or Cathedral preset.Īnyone who wants to add this dynamic capability to a mix should buy a PCM70.they are 400-500 USD on ebay and built to last for decades. Said Violinist then returns to the section and the same parameters are reset to the velocity at a lower level. Now through velocity have the decay amount increased, which gives you a longer tail with more depth. The 1st Violinist starts playing a solo phrase where his velocity level is twice the level of the section. Just think how boring electronic synth music would be if modulating the Filters Cutoff had zippers.?^&^ The 91 allows the tails to be modulated for chorusing by using the LFO's but don't touch any other parameter or you'll get zippers. Model 7's and Yardsticks are capable of this probably too. I have great sounding DSP plugs and Native ones and none of those can Modulate in realtime. I stuck it in my live rig and use the AES/EBU with the XITE-1. My PCM91 was huge let down becasue the sound quality decreased and the MIDI control of parameters revealed zippers when Modulating the decay. Static reverbs are fine and sound as good as some hardware these days. Or simply get yourself an algorithmic reverb and be done with it You can get somewhere near the ball park though with work. Tails specifically can prove problematic to sample. Peter Roos also has nice IR libraries - specifically those of some of the hardware titles at Its probably not entirely possible to derive all the benefits of algorithmic reverbs using convolution engines. and here is a good convolution library to work with: Here is an example of pink noise to work with: The end result when done properly is to achieve the same room size, same tails but no added Q. The Match EQ algorithm nearly always detects the boost in some of the muddier frequencies and compensates for it by reducing them for a flatter response. One way to circumvent some of the effects of excess Q in IRs for Altiverb would be to sample pink noise as a target source in Logic's Match EQ and adjust the percentage of applicable matching EQ by ear. One advantage (imo) that Lexicon and the algorithmic reverbs have in general over their convolution engine counterparts is the lack of Q they're adding to the mix as a result of being activated. Many of the IR libraries available unfortunately bring a lot of mud into the mix - a nearly universal boost in 250Hz which is a fine frequency until you have too much of it. There is a closer comparison when comparing Lexicon with Altiverb when the latter has a decent convolution impulse response library to work with.
0 kommentar(er)
