Why do these songs seem to have too much reverb, but not?

C

crimsonhawk47

New member
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNdj0V_c4kM (skip past the intro to around 1:30. The reverb is especially present at around 2 when the higher register voice comes in)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPQCra8FEew (Song really starts around 0:40)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHymGZ93qIQ (Should probably listen to this one for a good 2 minutes)

It feels like there is a lot of echo going on, yet it isn't clogging up the mix.

Even for somebody who might be eqing his verbs, this seems like a lot. How is he getting away with this without it getting to clogged up?
 
A lot of times they gate or sidechain the reverb so it ducks under the main sounds and/or eq using M/S and push it wide.
 
That makes sense, but I was less worried about reverb stepping on the sound it's affecting and more about it stepping on other sounds
 
partially the above partially only using the reverb on single sources rather than the whole track - I struggled to hear any reverb at all except on the guitar part and the vocal in the first one not listened to the others as I am going to guess that they are pretty much the same
 
Isn't side-chaining unnecessary if you have pre delay?

Also do you think the effects were applied during production or during the mix?
 
View attachment Alone Bounce.mp3

For instance I'm working on this track, sort of a similar style. I haven't really balanced levels out yet, but I've done reverb and some compression on the vocals just cause it was bothering the hell out of me.

Do I need to be worried so far? Or are things already sounding like I should halt and tweak the production? It feels a BIT like a wall of sound, but I don't necessarily mind it. I just wish I could make it big and echoey and still cleaner.
 
I don't think "automatic" processes like sidechaining always quite cut it - more often than not I just find it more effective to automate the reverb sends and/or the decay amount, to start with. Sometimes I automate the reverb's EQ/filter as well, to give the reverb more "body" during more open sections and then shelve it back into its slot when things get busier.
 
Hey BC, now that I think about it the first one is light in reverb, but you should really listen to the second one. I definitely feel surrounded in that one.
 
so listened to that 2nd one and my opinion is that each channel has its own reverb signature - this is a common enough approach to put everything into its own sonic space whilst enhancing the track overall - panning of the sources, send to each reverb channel and subtle return levels make this work well
 
As in they all use different reverb? Wouldn't that make everything sound super disconnected?

So would each sound have a unique reverb channel? And by subtle returns do you mean the sends are sent in loud but the, let's say aux track, has its gain turned down? Does that produce different results than turning a send down?
 
Last edited:
yes different reverbs with maybe a global reverb (very subtle returns) to glue it all together

as for doing via manipulating the send level vs manipulating the return level, I find that the latter provides a greater deal of control as you have a full send level going in (0dbrms) and as your return is 100% wet (no original signal other than what is affected by the reverb), you can control exactly how much of the sound comes back

try it on one of your mixes and compare the difference between manipulating send levels vs return levels they do yield different results also, as a low send level will not drive the reverb unit as hard
 
I guess I did something similar on the last track I did because I did some reverb before I mixed and bounced it as it's own sound so I could turn it down in the mix.

I'm having a hard time hearing what doesn't have reverb. The drums don't, but I feel like everything else does. Clap, synths, vox. It's strangely clear for something with that much verb. They say you need dryer tracks for contrast, but it feels like the drums are the only dry track.

I do hear differences for sure, like the absolutely drenched sound in the background. The "oooooh's"
 
Last edited:
crimsonhawk47 said:
That makes sense, but I was less worried about reverb stepping on the sound it's affecting and more about it stepping on other sounds
Click to expand...

if reverb is interfering with a sound then sidechain it, also add in ghost notes for sidechaining to help get the exact ducking you want.

Also, like BC said; panning. If you pan your reverb out wide it won't interrupt those center sounds, helping to create space and keeping those sounds crystal clear.

crimsonhawk47 said:
I'm having a hard time hearing what doesn't have reverb. The drums don't, but I feel like everything else does. Clap, synths, vox. It's strangely clear for something with that much verb. They say you need dryer tracks for contrast, but it feels like the drums are the only dry track.
Click to expand...

And you could also sidechain a dry sound on top of a fully wet reverb of that same sound so it's a dry hit with a splash of reverb following it and not muddying up that sound.

Hope that's what you were asking homie.
 
krushing said:
I don't think "automatic" processes like sidechaining always quite cut it - more often than not I just find it more effective to automate the reverb sends and/or the decay amount, to start with. Sometimes I automate the reverb's EQ/filter as well, to give the reverb more "body" during more open sections and then shelve it back into its slot when things get busier.
Click to expand...

Yep.
I do this with delay a little more than I do with reverb.

-Ki
Salem Beats
 
MilDlrDime said:
Also, like BC said; panning. If you pan your reverb out wide it won't interrupt those center sounds, helping to create space and keeping those sounds crystal clear.
Click to expand...

I didn't say that.

I did say pan your sources out to whatever position works in the mix and then apply your reverb to it; i.e. try to send to the reverb post-pan - this will mean that reverb algorithm treats your sound as though coming from a specific position within its stereo field and the sound on the left and right channels it returns will be different in terms source vs reverb content; ie. one side will have more source (direct sound) than the other

maybe even post-fader
- not all consoles let you do that (you can of course send the channel to a group buss all of its own to get the post-pan/post-fader sound to then send to the reverb
-- some folks would say that that was overkill but whatever works to get the sound you want
 
I'm using pro tools so I can pan a source, and it's pre and post send.

I really do like keeping the send at 0db. I experimented with that a bit and it gave my synth a very spacious feeling without being overwhelming. Then with a pre send I can pan and level source and Verb independently while driving the unit consistently hard. Will experiment with panning some more.
 
I "think" they added a reverb, but also high pass filtered it. So that you don't hear the reverb per say, but you can feel it.
 
BeatbyAS said:
I "think" they added a reverb, but also high pass filtered it. So that you don't hear the reverb per say, but you can feel it.
Click to expand...

Probably.

I often filter my verbs,
sometimes send them to a delay bus,
sometimes distort them,
etc.

Depends on what I'm feeling like playing around with.

-Ki
Salem Beats
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top