Should Reverb be Added to Everything Always?

[Test Cut]

Curious about this now, so am bringing this over from another thread. The conversation was specifically about mixing Metal guitars.

Originally Posted by Test Cut

Other rules of my own: never overly compress, and always add a bit of reverb, even if it's only like at 1%.

Originally Posted by Vanan

I don't claim to be a pro, and definitely ain't a senior member (whatever that means. ) but pray tell how the heck would you be able to tell the difference between flat and 1% reverb? Forgive me if I sound like I haven't paid enough attention to what I'm listening for but I find that I can only tell the difference when I bring the 'verb up to 10% or more. Am I just too under-developed?

Again, I don't claim to be a pro, so you seniors please forgive me. I say if you like it flat, good. If you want a reverb, tweak it in there. But I don't see the point of adding 1% reverb, "just cos". *humbly slinks away to the nether depths*

Originally Posted by Test Cut

The reverb thing came from a professional sound engineer i used to live next to, and i think it's one of those psychological things. Like when someone has an eye slightly higher than the other. You look at their face and can tell something's wrong, but can't tell what it actually is. Similar with reverb. Everything you hear in real life has some kind of reverb. Nothing is ever flat. So if you record flat it sounds unnatural. And if you add so little that you can't hear it, you are still perceiving it. Now that might be the biggest hunk of shit ever, but it was said by someone who used this technology to feed his kid, so...

The guy in question was trying to help me out with my first recordings so may have been over simplifying. And of course he was talking about natural instruments and basic Rock sounds, so this wouldn't extend to anything that's trying to sound unnatural. Anything released on Cold Meat Industries springs to mind. But is it true? Should you add reverb to everything, even if it's just that tiny bit over the masters? i know how much effort recording studios put into making rooms flat...

[paul999]

Originally Posted by Test Cut

Curious about this now, so am bringing this over from another thread. The conversation was specifically about mixing Metal guitars.
The guy in question was trying to help me out with my first recordings so may have been over simplifying. And of course he was talking about natural instruments and basic Rock sounds, so this wouldn't extend to anything that's trying to sound unnatural. Anything released on Cold Meat Industries springs to mind. But is it true? Should you add reverb to everything, even if it's just that tiny bit over the masters? i know how much effort recording studios put into making rooms flat...

I often put a small amount verb on the master buss while mastering. I rarely use digital reverb on anything. Capturing the room with the original source is the best reverb usually. If you have a good space.

[bozmillar]

I could be wrong here, but what I believe these guys are trying to say is that even a little reverb, even if it doesn't make it sound reverberated, can really make things sound better. To say 10% or 1% is kind of irrelevent because those numbers don't really mean anything. If I want a really dry sound, I add a bit of small room verb. That just keeps it from sounding like it was recorded in a closet.

a 100% dry track just sounds a little awkward and unnatural.

[BatPat]

I try not to do things for the sake of it, although I loose many battles :-). It's very easy to slap on reverb just because there's supposed to be.
If you have a mix with loads of instruments it can be effective to have an instrument or two dry. But it's not a rule. It's mostly about taste, not right or wrong.
If 1% reverb do any difference on a single instrument in a mix I don't know. On a solo instrument and good monitors some people can tell a nuance.
1% reverb on the master can make a difference, not huge though.

[Test Cut]

Off topic, of course rules are there to be broken. To think that the first guitar distortions came from someone saying "I know. I'm gonna go my really expensive speakers with a knife". Hahaha. i'm always trying to experiment too, but more often than not i'll just go with what's worked for me in the past. Seems like maybe 1% of people are real innovators. The rest of us just copy. Even when i think i may have come up with something new i realise that at best i've just combined what two other artists have done already.

If you have a couple of flat tracks they'd still be hiding behind the 'verb on the others. From multi to stereo you couldn't tell where the 'verb is actually coming from. And anything recorded through a mic' is going to have some kind of echo coming back. Even in the flattest space. i agree that natural is better, and have seen plenty of people drag their equipment around so they can record in their tiled up bathrooms. Think the engineer was mainly referring to direct input. If you DI your guitars and have all the drums coming from a machine it's gonna sound like shit anyway in my opinion, but am still wondering whether adding reverb so low you can barely or not even hear it is a technique used by pros or whether i was just told that as an oversimplification for a beginner.

And might i also say, i'm one of those reverb sluts and usually add it in massive amounts to everything, always. The song i'm working on atm has some really ****, close up guitars in each ear, a sample that sounds like a fight happening a little in the distance, and everything else sounding like it's coming up from a cavern somewhere behind. In Japan there's a derogatory word for someone who uses too much soy sauce with their sushi. Should be the same thing with me and 'verb

And just to add some more flame, pretty sure i heard one of the Ministry guys once say that he added distortion to absolutely everything to make it sound more natural

[Test Cut]

???? Why has wa/rm been replaced with ****?

[newkid]

Originally Posted by Test Cut

Curious about this now, so am bringing this over from another thread. The conversation was specifically about mixing Metal guitars.

The guy in question was trying to help me out with my first recordings so may have been over simplifying. And of course he was talking about natural instruments and basic Rock sounds, so this wouldn't extend to anything that's trying to sound unnatural. Anything released on Cold Meat Industries springs to mind. But is it true? Should you add reverb to everything, even if it's just that tiny bit over the masters? i know how much effort recording studios put into making rooms flat...

Of course not

you add reverb when reverb makes the recording sound the way it should. EG if you are doing an orchestra with VSTi_s you would want some reverb so it sounds like it was live in a concert hall.

Record acoustic flamenco guitar players in your studio then you leave it alone. Reverb would not be natural.

[Danny Danzi]

Originally Posted by Test Cut

The guy in question was trying to help me out with my first recordings so may have been over simplifying. And of course he was talking about natural instruments and basic Rock sounds, so this wouldn't extend to anything that's trying to sound unnatural. Anything released on Cold Meat Industries springs to mind. But is it true? Should you add reverb to everything, even if it's just that tiny bit over the masters? i know how much effort recording studios put into making rooms flat...

In my opinion, absolutely not. There is no reason for anyone to add a reverb on a track just because someone says it should be there. Why add something you can't hear? If I recorded something and added 1% and gave you 2 mixes to listen to, if you got it right you'd be a lucky guesser. If I added 10% to one and 1% to the other, you'd still probably not get it unless you were lucky.

Now, if you're mastering something that just sounds super dry, by all means you can slightly verb it a hair if need be. But if you have the mix with all the instrumentation on it, you will not need to do this on a master buss or in the mastering procedure. Keep in mind, a verb on an entire mix can be a nighmare due to the kick drums and cymbals. It *could* sound like a big mess if you weren't careful. It's just not something I think needs to be there really. The less signal processing you have going on, the better. Process when you need to, leave it alone when you don't and NEVER just add something because someone told you to or you read something somewhere. That's just my opinion for what it's worth.

Originally Posted by Test Cut

And anything recorded through a mic' is going to have some kind of echo coming back. Even in the flattest space. i agree that natural is better, and have seen plenty of people drag their equipment around so they can record in their tiled up bathrooms. Think the engineer was mainly referring to direct input. If you DI your guitars and have all the drums coming from a machine it's gonna sound like shit anyway in my opinion, but am still wondering whether adding reverb so low you can barely or not even hear it is a technique used by pros or whether i was just told that as an oversimplification for a beginner.

I'll have to disagree with the "recorded with a mic and echo" comment. If you close mic something in a fairly tight room, you will hear 0 room ambience. If you're in a large room, you may get a little of what I call "blowback" but even then, you are not going to get enough reverberation at close range to where you will hear that room in the recording, nor will it make a difference in the size of your sound. You will NOT hear any drastic room effects of a voice or instrument that is mic'd unless you are about 3ft away or more. Try it and see.

Originally Posted by Test Cut

And might i also say, i'm one of those reverb sluts and usually add it in massive amounts to everything, always. The song i'm working on atm has some really ****, close up guitars in each ear, a sample that sounds like a fight happening a little in the distance, and everything else sounding like it's coming up from a cavern somewhere behind. In Japan there's a derogatory word for someone who uses too much soy sauce with their sushi. Should be the same thing with me and 'verb

And just to add some more flame, pretty sure i heard one of the Ministry guys once say that he added distortion to absolutely everything to make it sound more natural

You may want to alter your choice of prostitution as not much is heavily reverberated these days. Most of the stuff you hear is very direct and in your face using room ambience as thickening ever so slightly in the background. You may hear a nice verb on a voice on a ballad, you may hear a gated reverb on a snare, you may hear a longer decay verb on a snare in a ballad and you may hear a little on an acoustic guitar or lead guitar. But to be honest...most of that is done in 80's rock or today's rockin' country music. Verb is a killer habit that will continuously clutter your mix and make it sound bad if you just add it on everything hoping it will make things bigger and more lively. That's not how the pro's did it, and it's not how they do it now.

The key in today's times is room ambience by way of real rooms used that specialize for that particular instrument, or by way of impulses which are real models of rooms. not digital reverbs. Huge difference with impulses. In a project these days, I may use 25 different impulses. Some will be rooms, some will be speaker emulation, some will be speaker to cab air in between, some will be wood floor, high ceiling, small rooms.....it's always different and I never use the same one twice in a project.

Also, each room, impulse or even reverb, needs to be eq'd correctly and panned accordingly or you're just wasting your time. Just like each instrument in our mix needs it's own eq and pan placement, so do your effects. Any stereo verb you add in by default is equal to hard left/hard right. Just like we wouldn't pan all of our instrumentation hard left/right, we don't want our effects set up in that fashion either. And, the effects need to be eq'd correctly so they don't degrade the instrumentation they are supposed to be enhancing.

So keep all this in mind because it's important. For what it's worth, I like to think I'm a pro, so I'm not just a punk kid sitting here trying to argue a point with you. I've been doing this a very long time and have a pretty decent track record within the industry for myself as an artist and many others worldwide that I have worked with and worked for.

That said, if something works for you and you're happy with your results, don't listen to me or anyone else that gives you any advice. You are the one that has to live with the musical decisions you make first and foremost...and you are the one that needs to be happy with what you are doing. If you are, and reverb all over is one of the deciding factors for you, you are right where you want to be. Best of luck!

Originally Posted by Test Cut

???? Why has wa/rm been replaced with ****?

That word is banned from this site because there are far too many people that do not know what it means...and those that think they do, have a different definition of the word that is different from those that KNOW what it truly means. To me, the word means smooth and chocolatey without harsheness. Others think it means abbrasive. Ever buy something from reading a mag or something that claimed it was w a r m and when you tried it, it was harsh, brittle and sounded like ass? This is why the word is banned by the site owner.

[BatPat]

Originally Posted by Test Cut

Seems like maybe 1% of people are real innovators. The rest of us just copy.

I agree.

If you have a couple of flat tracks they'd still be hiding behind the 'verb on the others.

Not necessarily, or is that an excuse to have reverb on everything?
Depends on what reverb you use and how you use it.

i agree that natural is better

If it's done "right" - yes. But my ears prefer good digital reverb before bad natural.

...but am still wondering whether adding reverb so low you can barely or not even hear it is a technique used by pros

I'm not a pro but reverb is often used as a "non-reverbial sound enhancer" - what about that word? You can use "non-hearable" ambient reverb that fattens up a sound: reverb that doesn't sound like a reverb. This I believe is very common.

[brandondrury]

#1 - No rules.
I don't think anyone here is implying that you are SUPPOSED to put reverb on EVERYTHING.

#2 - Too dry sucks
If done correctly, ambiance adds life. Adding the wrong kind, too much, or adding it to boomy / boxy tracks may not sound good, but being too dry is only slightly better than being too wet. (We'll avoid the chick jokes this time around.)

The general philosophy I've been taught is there is generally a whole lot more crap on the mixes than you may realize. Maybe not on a Nancy Sinatra record, but on the kind of rock/pop/metal/techno junk I listen to this is the general consensus. As I discuss in Killer Home Recording: Murderous Mixing, I always start heavy with effects and bring them down over time. The idea is to hide the fact that I have THAT much ambiance or delay on there.

I've grown more and more keen on alternating the panning of a super short delay and sending pretty much everything to it unless it sounds bad.

You can use "non-hearable" ambient reverb that fattens up a sound:

It is hearable because if you took it off, you'd miss it. Part of my "Miss 'em when their gone" theory of mixing.

I kind of look at the beginner phases of recording going something like this:
1) Newbie adds shitty reverb to everything in huge quantities
2) Next person goes through turbo dry phase
3) Somewhere in there a person realizes that playing it safe with no ambiance often sounds like shitty 70s production and begins to see the light and find ways to sneak the ambiance in there.
4) Ten years later, I'm still trying to figure it out.

Of course this is all general mixing philosophy. In a great room you may not need to add anything other than room mics.

Brandon