Overb ?

Cpilot · Post by **Cpilot** » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:47 pm

Well, I did a lot of playing around with the Overb parameters, using Cathedral Organ and still couldn't get it to sound right. Switched to Hall or Smooth Hall - perfect. Sounded just like being in a cathedral. Played all sorts, Pomp and Circumstance no. 4, Bach, War March of the priests etc. I think I'll stick to Hall. I should add that I was sitting 6 feet from a pair of full range speakers spaced 12 feet apart in a room 27 feet long. I imagine it would sound quite different with a couple of amps or a pair of near field monitors in a control room or studio.

Bryan

Zeroesque · Post by **Zeroesque** » Thu Dec 15, 2011 3:31 pm

Cpilot wrote:I should add that I was sitting 6 feet from a pair of full range speakers spaced 12 feet apart in a room 27 feet long.

My mixing space is a little larger than a closet, ha! Unfortunately for me, most of my critical listening is done with headphones.

Also, convention states that your head should form an equilateral triangle with your stereo monitors. Not that this should cause you to judge the O-Verb much differently (which I do prefer when compared to the older Korg spaces).

Cpilot · Post by **Cpilot** » Thu Dec 15, 2011 7:52 pm

I was thinking about what I posted a little while afterwards and realised I had got it wrong, so I measured it. The speakers are placed 10 feet apart and I was seven feet away from both. A bit closer to an equilateral triangle. It's the room that's 12 feet wide so that's where I got confused (I'm always a bit confused anyway). I could sit further back but there's a table in the way.

Bryan

RonF · Post by **RonF** » Fri Dec 16, 2011 7:18 pm

Assuming you are using near field monitors, 10 feet apart is too wide for proper near field monitoring anyways, IMO. That triangle should be closer in at all 3 points. I wouldn't want perhaps more than 6 feet in each direction. A bit less may be better still.

JPWC · Post by **JPWC** » Fri Dec 16, 2011 8:10 pm

Don't know what monitor placement or even the JP-80 have to do with Overb, but............

I do my critical monitoring (mixing and EQ with effects) in a 3 foot triangle. KRK's

But when jamming I use Mackie SRM450's spread at about 10 feet.

I am trying to suggest your monitor placement should match your application.

And when I am getting ready for a gig with my guitar playing friends, I use headphone with me in the right ear and other heavy metal guitar CD's playing the left.

Maybe the point here is that without proper monitoring you can not judge the sound quality or mix of any effect, including the Overb.

philmagnotta · Post by **philmagnotta** » Sat Dec 17, 2011 12:52 am

Some thoughts about digital reverberators...
First, as regards the O-verb as a mastering verb. Well if you mean on the master bus of kronos, then sure, it will be very serviceable.
If you mean as master for audio being brought-in to kronos, it depends on the source/arrangement.
Most important is the fact that a reverb processor requires experience/skill for best results. Although most units have algorithms and presets designed for getting you to various types of source scenarios for the material to be processed.
Like compressors, they do require specific adjustments relative to the material at hand.
As for the technical quality of any unit, even if you were using Briscati units there is no guarantee that the verb will be properly adjusted for a particular application unless you've acquired some lengthy period of experiment and study regarding their usage.
Since the O-verb is not the most advanced- best quality verb ever produced, you have to know how to achieve a best compromise solution.
BTW, the Kurzweil KDFX processor included in their present keyboards has already been established as a top performing unit- both as was implemented in the rack unit and on their keyboards.
It is not true to say that the o-verb is the best ever placed in a keyboard.
Nevertheless, any reverb unit in a current top of the line workstation will do the job- if you know how. Besides many excellent recordings have made using digital reverbs that were not up the standards of o-verb.

aron · Post by **aron** » Sat Dec 17, 2011 2:51 am

the Kurzweil KDFX processor included in their present keyboards has already been established as a top performing unit- both as was implemented in the rack unit and on their keyboards

Are you saying that the verb in my PC3 is better than the Korg reverb? Just wondering. I haven't spent enough time comparing.

philmagnotta · Post by **philmagnotta** » Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:21 am

aron wrote:
the Kurzweil KDFX processor included in their present keyboards has already been established as a top performing unit- both as was implemented in the rack unit and on their keyboards
Are you saying that the verb in my PC3 is better than the Korg reverb? Just wondering. I haven't spent enough time comparing.

Yes, but with further explanation.
First, the KDFX rack unit was widely accepted and praised as a studio and mastering effects processor and still is. However, that units analog input/output circuitry and the A-D, D-A converters are part of the whole unit. I am not certain about those circuits as compared to the the ones on-board the pc3 whether they be the same or less.
I'll assume that both the Kronos and pc3 have quality analog and converter circuits, even if there are quality differences between those units.
Apart from the Kronos's greater number of inserts, etc., Reverb is the topic here so, if we had the Kronos and pc3 side by side in a high quality mastering chain and fed both of them the same material through their inputs and through their reverb processing sections and out, you'd find the KDFX preferred by most experienced professionals with well equipped studios.
Certain expensive units are expensive because they are proven in the field to be superior sounding and the KDFX has been fully ported with more memory processing than the original, so yes its a better sounding unit than Kronos.

Kevin Nolan · Post by **Kevin Nolan** » Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:21 pm

Agree with the other posters - Overb is excellent. Its 'engine' is certainly the equal of the TC Electronics M2000 (my best hardware reverb) - a respectable reverb - and of course it has very good editable parameters making it adaptable to various different scenarios.

As a test - choose the 'Infinite' preset and listen to how smooth the reverb remains even on that setting (or other very long reverb times). It really shows how capable and smooth the reverb generating engine is - it is noticeably better than the other reverbs on board.

I agree with Dan - the 750+ effects presets (given as a free upgrade to the OASYS and seemingly on board the Kronos by default) are an exquisite package - there's a lot of excellent and very usable programming and configuration gone into to those presets.

JPROBERTLA · Post by **JPROBERTLA** » Sat Dec 17, 2011 3:02 pm

Kevin Nolan wrote:

Agree with the other posters - Overb is excellent. Its 'engine' is certainly the equal of the TC Electronics M2000 (my best hardware reverb) - a respectable reverb - and of course it has very good editable parameters making it adaptable to various different scenarios.

As a test - choose the 'Infinite' preset and listen to how smooth the reverb remains even on that setting (or other very long reverb times). It really shows how capable and smooth the reverb generating engine is - it is noticeably better than the other reverbs on board.

I agree with Dan - the 750+ effects presets (given as a free upgrade to the OASYS and seemingly on board the Kronos by default) are an exquisite package - there's a lot of excellent and very usable programming and configuration gone into to those presets.]

In the second paragraph you mentioned an "Infinite" preset. Where is this? On the FX pull down menus, there in only one Overb.[/b]

Cpilot · Post by **Cpilot** » Sat Dec 17, 2011 3:14 pm

One effect that seems to be conspicuous by its absence is convolution. However, the amount of processing required would probably kill the Kronos. Maybe we'll have to wait for Kronos 2 with a Core I7 or something similar. In the end though, reverb comes down to personal taste like anything else. Our ears and perception are different for everyone.

Bryan

EXer · Post by **EXer** » Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:47 pm

JPROBERTLA wrote:In the second paragraph you mentioned an "Infinite" preset. Where is this? On the FX pull down menus, there in only one Overb.[/b]

For each Effect you have a list of Presets.
100: Overb > P14: Infinite Space
(cf. p.256 of the Voice Name List).

marianghioda · Post by **marianghioda** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 1:25 pm

Great topic, reminded me the importance of reverbs. On the same note, what are the other effects (delay, compressor, etc.) that you guys find newer and better quality, comparable with Overb?

BTW, THIS is what we should focus on in this forum, not bitchin and whining about every little thing that we can't figure out in 5 minutes.

Cpilot · Post by **Cpilot** » Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:05 pm

I played around with Overb yet again and FINALLY got it to sound the way I wanted. Had to do lots of adjusting with the damping and reverb time. Lot of fiddling though. I suppose I could save the preset after adjustments but it's much easier just to select Hall and that sounds right without any changes. This only applies to the Cathedral Organ though. Be a lot different for other stuff. The Operation Guide is a bit misleading. The paragraph about selecting effects presets just gives information about Insert effects as though you couldn't use presets with Master or Total effects.

Bryan