Lexicon PCM70 still worth getting?

[timoc]

I mix OTB and am currently stuck with using an Alesis Nanoverb for my main send reverb fx.

(I have tried a send loop back to my pc, but this creates too much latency to be useful)

Would something like a Lexicon PCM70 be a worthwhile investment? I am very much a budget home studio guy. Any other suggestions are welcome too.

[The Korff]

I quite like using outboard (I mix on a console too), so I'd say go for it. But about the computer aux/send return thing... Too much latency? Really? If you enable direct monitoring on a channel with a reverb set up as an insert (100% wet), I'd have thought latency wouldn't be an issue. It should only be a handful of milliseconds, which you can adjust for by lowering the reverb's pre-delay anyway.

Cheers!

Chris

[Tui]

The PCM70 is still a great reverb, it was used on countless records back in the day. However, there are now some really amazing reverb plug-ins that are a great deal more flexible than hardware, yet sound just as lush. Two plug-ins I use myself:

http://www.soundsonline.com/Spaces

http://softube.se/tsar1_reverb.php

[nathanscribe]

If you want to try some Lexicon reverb for a decent price, you could do worse than the MPX-1. They were about £1200 new I think, but can be had for £200 these days. They use once Lexichip for reverb, and a generic processor for other effects. Programming them is OK, not too much of a trauma, and they sound good.

[johnny h]

I mix OTB and am currently stuck with using an Alesis Nanoverb for my main send reverb fx.

(I have tried a send loop back to my pc, but this creates too much latency to be useful)

Would something like a Lexicon PCM70 be a worthwhile investment? I am very much a budget home studio guy. Any other suggestions are welcome too.

Not sure how much these go for these days .. but the vst is better.

[timoc]

I quite like using outboard (I mix on a console too), so I'd say go for it. But about the computer aux/send return thing... Too much latency? Really? If you enable direct monitoring on a channel with a reverb set up as an insert (100% wet), I'd have thought latency wouldn't be an issue. It should only be a handful of milliseconds, which you can adjust for by lowering the reverb's pre-delay anyway.

Cheers!

Chris

Thanks for the replies!

Just to clarify: I am not looking for a vst plugin.

My setup is:

IN: 16 individual channels in Reaper--maudio2626&Behringer ADA800--Allen&Heath ZedFX12 (16 separate channels)
OUT: ZedFX12 stereo out--maudio2626--Reaper (into master track)

The mixer has an aux send, but if I send that back into the same computer and software that I'm already using to send the 16 channels, there is inevitable delay (because the fx are taking twice as long as the original tracks) which is quite noticeable on for example snare drum hits. So I'm currently using the on-board fx and the Alesis Nanoverb, but finding the quality, well, ugly.

I see the PCM70 listed second hand for about 600+ euros. That's about right, isn't it? I'll check out the mp1 as well. Are the new units MX200-400 worth using in a home studio? They are much cheaper. I am really only interested in a handful of reverb presets, and don't really need flangers etc.

Thanks again!

[James Perrett]

I still can't see why you can't create an aux send in Reaper for a plug-in reverb which you can then send to another output if you want to mix externally. You may need an extra D/A convertor but it needn't be expensive.

James.

[nathanscribe]

I had an MX-200 a few years ago and was not that impressed. It wasn't bad exactly, but the build quality was cheap, and the sound was not up to what you'd get from a better model. No surprises there, it's a budget unit. I did think the pseudo-plug-in interface over USB was handy though, it saved me writing things down (no audio over USB, just control). For not much more money, the MPX-1 is a substantially better unit and they seem to crop up quite often.

If you're using hardware reverb, you can avoid the latency issue by recording the reverb on its own channel simultaneously.

[timoc]

I still can't see why you can't create an aux send in Reaper for a plug-in reverb which you can then send to another output if you want to mix externally. You may need an extra D/A convertor but it needn't be expensive.

Yes, that's a good point. I guess my goal when I moved to out-of-the-box mixing was to do as much as possible with my hands and through the board, including the send fx. This is partly to learn how all this stuff works (I find plugin interfaces abstract), to get myself to make bigger changes (the mouse encourages me to make minute changes and obsess about them) and to commit to decisions and not rely to heavily on recall. Once I used a hardware compressor, I began to understand how to use vst compressors. I tried going the route of midi controllers but found them not satisfying and sometimes a real pain to set up. But you do have a good point that perhaps in the case of reverb, it's best to just stick with plugins because of the difference in quality for price.

[Tomás Mulcahy]

Why aren't you using the built in effects on the mixer?

[timoc]

Why aren't you using the built in effects on the mixer?

Yes, that's what I've been doing up to now, together with the nanoverb. I'm not blown away by the on board reverb, it's just ok. I think they are probably mainly for live use.

[James Perrett]

I still can't see why you can't create an aux send in Reaper for a plug-in reverb which you can then send to another output if you want to mix externally. You may need an extra D/A convertor but it needn't be expensive.

Yes, that's a good point. I guess my goal when I moved to out-of-the-box mixing was to do as much as possible with my hands and through the board, including the send fx.

In that case - connect the mixer send to an unused input on your interface and patch the plug-in reverb to that input. That way you get the superior user interface and sound of the plug-in while using it like a hardware reverb. Unlike analogue compressors and eq's, stand alone digital reverbs are no better than their plug-in equivalents and often worse. The user interface on a plug-in is usually better unless it has been deliberately designed to look like hardware.

However, if you really want a hardware box, look for the Sony units or something made by Sony that has been rebadged like the Ibanez SDR1000 - they don't have the Lexicon name so they're often cheaper but they sound better than any other budget reverb in my opinion.

James.

[timoc]

In that case - connect the mixer send to an unused input on your interface and patch the plug-in reverb to that input. That way you get the superior user interface and sound of the plug-in while using it like a hardware reverb. Unlike analogue compressors and eq's, stand alone digital reverbs are no better than their plug-in equivalents and often worse. The user interface on a plug-in is usually better unless it has been deliberately designed to look like hardware.

That makes sense and I have spent quite a bit of time trying this out this year. However, because both the tracks and the send effect come from the same source, the send loop takes longer and this is noticeable on, for example, snare drum hits.

I've also tried a stand-alone vst 'player' alongside Reaper to avoid everything coming from the same project, but there is still noticable latency.

However, if you really want a hardware box, look for the Sony units or something made by Sony that has been rebadged like the Ibanez SDR1000 - they don't have the Lexicon name so they're often cheaper but they sound better than any other budget reverb in my opinion.

Thanks for the Sony tip.

[The Korff]

That makes sense and I have spent quite a bit of time trying this out this year. However, because both the tracks and the send effect come from the same source, the send loop takes longer and this is noticeable on, for example, snare drum hits.

Hi Timoc,

Most digital reverb generators (both plug-in and hardware) have a parameter known as 'pre-delay'. This is a delay added to the reverb tail to increase the apparent size of the room (in a real room, the further away the walls are, the longer sound takes to bounce back: roughly an extra millisecond per foot). Most reverb presets have a good few milliseconds pre-delay by default, and most interface loops (A to D then D to A again) are also a few milliseconds, so by simply turning the pre-delay control down you should be able to compensate for it.

Most people have no trouble at all with this extra delay when using reverb plug-ins with hardware mixers. The only way I can see it being a big problem is if you've got some dry signal returning from the computer, which shouldn't be the case. The dry signal (a snare, in your example) should *only* be audible through the mixer channel. The reverb return from the computer should be set to 100% wet, so that that channel you're returning the reverb on is only adding ambience, and not doubling up the dry snare sound.

Does that make sense?

Cheers!

Chris

[James Perrett]

I'd agree with Chris here - if you are seeing more than a few mS of delay then there's something wrong with your setup (or you have a very ancient slow computer).

James.

[timoc]

Most people have no trouble at all with this extra delay when using reverb plug-ins with hardware mixers. The only way I can see it being a big problem is if you've got some dry signal returning from the computer, which shouldn't be the case. The dry signal (a snare, in your example) should *only* be audible through the mixer channel. The reverb return from the computer should be set to 100% wet, so that that channel you're returning the reverb on is only adding ambience, and not doubling up the dry snare sound.

Does that make sense?

Chris

Thanks for your reply. I'll try the reducing the predelay in the vst.

About the point mentioned above, when using any effect as an aux/send effect, aren't you always going to get a mix of the original dry signal with the effect signal? You would dial in how much of the effect you want to add to the dry track, wouldn't you?

In my case:
-snare signal comes in from Reaper on channel 6 of hardware mixer via interface
-I connect 'aux out' on mixer to input on interface to feed into a vst reverb channel set at 100% in Reaper
-the output of the reverb vst channel in Reaper goes back out to interface and into mixer as stereo channel (15&16)
-I use aux control on hardware mixer ch 6 to dial in the amount of reverb I want
-in the master mix, both the dry snare (ch 6) and the reverb tail (15&16) are mixed together

If not a lot of reverb is used, a 'flam' effect is audible. Am I missing something really basic here?

Other than adjusting the predelay on the vst as you suggested, I don't see how the flam on a snare can be avoided.

Even if the latency is low enough to avoid an audible flam, wouldn't you get phase issues as a result?

Just to clarify, I'm using the mixer only to mix a project that I've already recorded.

[The Korff]

From your description, you're doing it the right way! Not sure about the flamming though... Unless you're using a reverb preset with very strong early reflections? Your reverb plug-in may have an ER level control, which you might want to back off, or maybe a diffusion parameter that could be a little higher (this might give you less distinct echoes, which could be the cause of the flamming sound).

Try a nice 'Large Hall' preset or something?

Cheers!

Chris

[andy cross]

When you say "vst reverb channel set at 100% in Reaper" do you mean 100% wet? That's what it needs to be if you want to avoid a slightly delayed dry signal creeping back into your signal chain and giving you the flamming effect you describe.

[James Perrett]

You shouldn't be hearing a flam if the reverb is set to 100% wet. Is there some kind of mixer on your audio interface that could be sending things where they shouldn't go?

James.

[The Korff]

I wondered this... Maybe a direct monitoring path ('input monitor' or somesuch) that's going through the same output as the reverb or summink...

[Mixedup]

Just getting back to the outboard reverb thing...

Don't overlook Yamaha Rev5 or Rev7. Elf thinks they're a bit noisy, but I think they sound great!

If going for something newer, had you considered the new Eventide Space. It's in pedal format but has line I/O and sounds great.

[timoc]

Just getting back to the outboard reverb thing...

Don't overlook Yamaha Rev5 or Rev7. Elf thinks they're a bit noisy, but I think they sound great!

If going for something newer, had you considered the new Eventide Space. It's in pedal format but has line I/O and sounds great.

Thanks for those suggestions! I'm making a list in my Evernote...

[timoc]

You shouldn't be hearing a flam if the reverb is set to 100% wet. Is there some kind of mixer on your audio interface that could be sending things where they shouldn't go?

James.

No wait, you are probably right about that. (and yes I meant 100% wet)

What I mean is this:

When I first tested the setup described above (fx loop from mixer with vst plugin), but put the reverb at 100% dry, then you hear a flam. This means that there is a time difference between when my dry signal arrives in the mixer and when the effects loop send arrives in the same mixer.

Discovering this made me very cautious about using this loop for any effects, including reverb, because wouldn't it be the case that that delay is always going to be there and can therefore cause phase overlap issues, for example when the use of fx is subtle? Or am I being overly paranoid about this?

I appreciate all the replies by the way. I've been trying to solve this problem for ages.

[timoc]

http://softube.se/tsar1_reverb.php

demo sounds good!

[timoc]

I've recorded a bit of a snare drum going through my system both dry and with vst reverb and added mp3 links and screenshots:

Dry:
dry snare with send loop



With vst Reverb loop (zero predelay, 100% wet) : with reverb loop



I need to turn rec and monitoring on on the reverb channel in Reaper in order for it to work.