The use of reverb when posting clips?

[Aanvil]

....verbal abuse shouted by experienced session musicians.

To bad there isn't a way to replicate "muscling in".

[ImNotIrish]

Okay, just for comparison sake, I have recorded a down 'n dirty, one take of the rolling wave #2 with and without reverb ( my usual reverb setting). I'd like to hear your views...


Arbo

http://www.box.net/shared/h50x5bo2s8 (with verb)
http://www.box.net/shared/zl7zcbtm5h (without verb)

[MTGuru]

If you really want high quality telephone ringing effects, you're going to have to wait for Gurusonic™ Series D: Annoying Interruptions.

Seriously ... In this case, I'd say it's a toss-up. The flute seems so close-miked that the reverb adds little, though it's OK. At that perceptual distance, you wouldn't hear much natural reverb anyway.

[Aanvil]

I was looking for the "crumping" sound of exploding 88 shells and someone yelling "Corpsman!!!"

You wouldn't have an "Adenne forest/Bayonne" series?

[rama]

Okay, just for comparison sake, I have recorded a down 'n dirty, one take of the rolling wave #2 with and without reverb ( my usual reverb setting). I'd like to hear your views...


Arbo

http://www.box.net/shared/h50x5bo2s8 (with verb)
http://www.box.net/shared/zl7zcbtm5h (without verb)

no no no cheating cheating cheating or or or trickery trickery trickery detected detected detected

[ImNotIrish]

If you really want high quality telephone ringing effects, you're going to have to wait for Gurusonic™ Series D: Annoying Interruptions.

Seriously ... In this case, I'd say it's a toss-up. The flute seems so close-miked that the reverb adds little, though it's OK. At that perceptual distance, you wouldn't hear much natural reverb anyway.

Master,

That would be approximately 6 inches from the mic,

[ImNotIrish]

Okay, just for comparison sake, I have recorded a down 'n dirty, one take of the rolling wave #2 with and without reverb ( my usual reverb setting). I'd like to hear your views...


Arbo

http://www.box.net/shared/h50x5bo2s8 (with verb)
http://www.box.net/shared/zl7zcbtm5h (without verb)

no no no cheating cheating cheating or or or trickery trickery trickery detected detected detected

TRIPLE that! O'ramabama.

[talasiga]

Dear Arbo,
While I have a great leaning to this sort of position:-

The thing is ... Recording close and dry directly into a microphone in a typical home setting (living room, bedroom) - that's about as artificial-sounding as you can get.
........
The proper job of reverb is to add back the natural room ambience that is lost, nothing more.
...................

I must honestly say that my emotions reverberated better with your clip without the reverberation. For me, I felt a greater childlike intimacy in my listening without the reverb. as if though the less filling out allows a space for the listener's engagement.

The other thing is that I feel that the bare melody carries its own ambience in music such as this. I mean, this is a sample of Irish music thick with embellishment. The contrast of a "dead recording situation" only heightens the richness in the music.

Best Wishes.

[jemtheflute]

Arbo, I've just listened to both versions. Firstly, you seem to have added less reverb to this 'verbed-up one than you often do, but it is still a bit railway tunnel-ish and clearly not a natural acoustic sound but an electrickery one. I agree (!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!) with talasiga that the "dry" version is (not at all dry because your tone is so rich) much more intimate and natural. I don't find this particular reverbed one too objectionable, but I have a clear preference for the untweaked recording -and that based on simply listening to both with as open a mind as possible, not because of prejudice or from trying to appear consistent.

As I said initially in this thread, you don't need reverb: your own tone generation is plenty rich enough to stand on its merits and the application of artificial reverb is (OK, a matter of artistic taste and choice) something of an affectation, to my mind. My own much less strong tone generation would probably benefit from subtle addition of reverb if recorded in flat acoustics - I'd say about 1/3rd of the amount you've added here - and yes, that would be "cheating" in that it would make me sound "better" than I actually am....... I do think one should try to sound (in various senses) like oneself at the best standard one can manage. I confess to my general personal tastes being orientated towards the natural, unmessed-with, not pretending to be what you're not, etc. (e.g. women & make-up - not a puritan objection, just a puzzlement as to why they and most other folk seem [to have learnt to] think they look better caked in the stuff than they do without it....... ooooops! Digressive hobby horse cantering over the horizon...... )

Recording in a chosen naturally lively acoustic does, of course, enhance one's sound, but IMO it is less of a cheat for a recording engineer to set up boundary mics etc. to record that actual performance in its real context......given the underlying fact that any recording can only ever be a selective representation of the actual performance (and then, from which/whose listening point?). I think that kind of recording is generally preferable if feasible to studio recording in a neutral acoustic, though I think some studio software these days is very good at creating an artificial ambience of a chosen type of acoustic setting.....electrickery, yes, but rather more subtle. I know that is several steps up from the kind of home self-recording we are dealing with, though. Just slapping on reverb is like - slapping on slap.......

[Carey]

I liked the one without the reverb better. It might have to do with how I listen to it. When I hear a flute playing ITM, I'm listening for the details because I'm usually trying to learn something from it in addition to enjoying the music. How does that person play this tune? Is that a cut or a tap? Many quick breaths vs. fewer longer ones. That sort of thing. Clean recording is like HDTV. You didn't miss it when you didn't have it, but hey don't turn it off once you've started watching in HD. It's the details.

But I did use reverb when I recorded my Christmas carols this year. Is that because the tunes needed more life or because I just want to hide by playing? I think in general the player is be more critical of their own playing than they need to be. Sorta like hearing your own voice on a recording?

[andyras3]

Hi Arbo,

I like the tune, you play it well.

As for Reverb or no, I gotta say I prefer to hear your playing without, It's easier for me to play along with. the Reverb one is fine, but I guess if you're playing for flute players, they're gonna be biased.

Keep the tunes lit...

Andy

[G1]

Listening to your 'dry' recording, I notice it does have some natural ambiance (reverb) with a very light, short slap (I'm listening on studio monitors though)... so your room is not completely dry - and it does sound very nice. My personal preference is not miked quite so close for wind instruments, but it does carry a more intimate feel about it.

The one with reverb is a bit deep for modern standards. All, or most (known professional) producers use reverbs (a variety to keep sounds in their own space), but with no real generation of a tail or slapback. Usually these days (unless you are recording something to sound like a particular era - like rockabilly slap back echo), it is used almost imperceptibly as a way to give width and space to a sound only (which is one of the demons I struggle with, since I started producing in an era where reverb and echo were thick like morning fog after too much Drambuie). I am curious as to what reverb unit or software you are using. It adds a lot of dark color to your sound, muting some of the natural harmonics of the lower register.

So, yeah - nice dry recording, and I liked your expressiveness as well. Schweet!

[ImNotIrish]

Thanks G1,Andy, Tal,and Jem
for your comments and opinions. I suppose I shall post future clips dry, but will most likely still record close to the mic. G1, I am using the standard reverb on Garageband, which allows for very little 'fine tuning.'
Arbo

[billval3]

The recording WITHOUT reverb does not sound as "real" to me. It sounds too dry, unlike what I would hear if I was actually in the room with you. As others have said, reverb can be used to give a natural and pleasing sound. It's not necessarily about trickery in my opinion, it's about making something sound good!

To go back to the analogy of make-up...I think if it's done with skillful restraint, you don't necessarily need to know it's there and yet it can enhance a person's natural beauty. It's not a matter of trickery so much as taking full advantage of what's there. The same is true, as G1 has pointed out in producing a recording.

Edit: Okay, I'm listening to it again. Maybe I was being a little prejudiced. The dry recording is actually fairly lifelike. I could see why some would prefer it to the wet one. That doesn't change my opinion about the tasteful application of reverb, though.

[Wanderer]

In most cases I would prefer the recording you made with reverb (except in the case of comparing a flute's tone, etc).