The SW subjective 'quality' of process remained about the same going from 48k -> 96k.the HW process 'quality' made quite a leap.hence why I say it now sounded 'better'. What I do not fully understand is why the HW reverb is quite different the SW remained almost the same at multiple clock settings. I can easily hear the benefit of the higher sample rate.at least with the HW. I understand what you are saying and it makes complete sense. I can only say that I advise you to process any spatial effect at >48kHz in order to fully realize it's sonic potential. complete noobs or top elite engineers) tell you which is "better" (I thought people would got over this never ending game in 2021.). if you prefer your HW reverb, use it, enjoy its results and OWN the feeling. the loop would go on forever.ĭon't go there. then, you process your HW with some processor further down the road and it becomes "better".
You might process your SW reverb with some distortion down the road, and suddenly it'll become better than your hw. it was from that moment that I came to realize that the statement "HW is ALWAYS better" becomes moot. only at >48kHz can you fully understand this. It was only when I started processing reverbs (ANY reverb) at 88.2 that I came to realize why HW guys "snubs" their SW siblings. They cannot sound "MUCH closer" (which reads: both pleasing to the ear in a way that is not immediately discernible) and at the same time "the PCM is now smoother, wider, deeper, and much 'better' " (or any words that ends with "er"). I hope you do realize there's an innate flow - or, rather, a great oxymoron - in your post ? Just out of interest, in what samplerate were you processing ?
I will still happily use my Lex Plugins until they no longer function.and then I will happily use the hardware until it too.no longer functions. Would anyone ever know the difference in a mix? Maybe Michael would.but I cannot imagine anyone else would be able to pick one from the other in that scenario. Keep in mind, my tests were done on a solo'd source in isolation. Poor words to describe.but the best I have. There are some reflections or something going on in the tail of the PCM-92 that are more active and 'edgy' as the sound trails off.almost like a reverb spiccato. smoother in the tail and slightly darker overall. I think it would depend on your desired sound. At least I *think* they are the same settings.I did not go through every page to compare.
#Lexicon reverb plugin example software#
I could, blindfolded, pick out the hardware / software 100% of the time with the Random Hall algo loaded and the same preset / settings. This is running digital I/O for the hardware so it is not a conversion thing either. I have A/B'd the same preset, using the same algo with the same source switching back and forth on headphones. Actually it works almost identical to the Plugin.ĭo the hardware and the software sound the same? No. I am running it via AES / EBU on a Dante system on Windows, and the System Architect software works just like a remote from my desk. After 10 years of using the plugins, I decided to "future proof" the best I could: I just bought a PCM-92.
0 kommentar(er)
