Twangström Public Beta (Update: rev 8131)

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

hey just demoed rev 8131, it sounds MUCH better to my ears. dunno exactly what you did, but with the filter open - the spring sounds pretty much like i'd want. I don't need much total tweaking within the plugin to get there. I definitely wouldn't want anything darker though. I love the twang, i think i'll be post-compressing and EQing in many cases, just to bring out the top end out a bit more.

I don't think anything's changed with the high end just yet. I believe this is Sascha talking about the most recent revision when someone else said that it was brighter.

Hehe, that's funny... We haven't changed a single thing on the reverb tank (yet). If you say 'high frequencies are much more prominent now' something's playing tricks on you, but then it's not us, really.

That was a few pages back, and I don't think there's been another Mac/Win revision since.

[sqigls]

I haven't followed this thread for the last week or two sorry.
i demoed the first beta, on my speakers, the spring was not jumping out to my liking. It sounded quite dull, which is why i said it needed more edge or more dirt. I just demoed this most recent incarnation late last night on my HD650s and it sounded ok to me.

I'll throw it on the speakers later, maybe it does sound the same.

It's possible that the HD650s high frequency lift is playing tricks on me.

[sascha]

We left the dsp part where it was, but maybe there was some snake oil leftover doing its thing... better do a null test...

[sqigls]

hey all jokes aside. I'm no null-tester.
like i say, i tried the original on my flat studio speakers at low to mid volume,
and the newest beta on the cans at a good level.
so it's likely the extra volume and the fact the HD650s have about a 3-4dB bump from around 4-6k, so it makes sense that the high end sounded clearer to me on the second beta.

[sqigls]

anyway, i bought the flipping thing, cos it sounds a bit of alright.




damn snake-oil peddlers

[kintsugi]

Spent the first day largely underwhelmed. Classy sound, not my thing. No love at first listen. Perhaps I was influenced by some of the comments here.

Aware I didn't delve deep into the controls, returned to it on day two, created and tweaked a few presets. Got pretty close to where I want to be. Didn't have much time, decided to wait and compare against the competitors on day three. My real world experience with spring reverbs has been a bunch of guitar amps with accutronics long tanks, and a roland 501 for a short while; plugin-wise only what's included in guitar rig.

Day three, installed the first plugin demo, a highly praised one by a competitor and perhaps sadly, this is what it took to persuade me. Twangstrom is simply on another level. Didn't even feel the need to test competitor #2 (based also on the controls available). Happiness and grins here when I fire it up. Twangstrom feels 3D, alive, malleable yet always classy. Another LFO would open up obscene possibilities, I can live with one though. I was similarly amazed by True Iron and Contemporary Color this year.

A tune I'm presently working on is begging for spring reverb on certain parts, and I've got an album's worth of stuff coming up that will benefit from it incredibly. Truly a godsend. Thanks u-he.

[Dozius]

+1 for more modulation. Twangstrom really comes alive with modulation.

[aaron aardvark]

I finished a new song yesterday (probably won't go public with it for years). I put some Twangstrom reverb on a keyboard part. Before the keyboards played, Twangstrom was chirping away like a bird, even though no audio input was going into Twangstrom. I decided to keep some that chirping as part of the song.

[nichttuntun]

Cool. I like it if plugins have "a life" of its own...

[D2sX9ek8w3]

I wish the Mix Function had some sort of switchable dual function option, so that a 2nd option is available to add wet to dry without reducing the bright dry tone while adding the wet.

I have been using Twangstrom on a parallel bus to get this sort of mix and it sounds freaky good, but I would rather not use a bus for instances where Twangstrom will be used as an instrument effect that is specific to the core to the sound of the instrument.

It seems like a switch that swapped out two different Mix functions could be helpful.

Thank you!!!

[btw]

I wish the Mix Function had some sort of switchable dual function option, so that a 2nd option is available to add wet to dry without reducing the bright dry tone while adding the wet.

I have been using Twangstrom on a parallel bus to get this sort of mix and it sounds freaky good, but I would rather not use a bus for instances where Twangstrom will be used as an instrument effect that is specific to the core to the sound of the instrument.

It seems like a switch that swapped out two different Mix functions could be helpful.

Thank you!!!

Unless I’m missing something, setting the dry-wet mix on a channel instance to 50%, for example, ought to be equivalent to sending the dry signal at full level to a parallel bus instance with a 100% wet mix... only the result of the latter is of course louder. Can’t you simply set the mix on your channel instance and adjust the channel level to compensate? Or do you perceive a fundamental difference in the sound of the mix when using a parallel bus?

[D2sX9ek8w3]

The existing mix function turns down the bright dry signal when the relatively dark wet signal is turned up. I agree that it is true that at 50%, or any other setting that there is an equivalency that can be related to, but I also think that, from a practical point of view, the "adjustability" of the existing function lacks subtlety, and for lack of a better word seems overly "precise". The slightest movement of the current Mix knob sacrifices either the brightness or the reverb.

When I set up a parallel bus and add the reverb to the dry signal, there seems to be wider range of adjustment that feels agreeable.

I can not speak about AKG studio reverb boxes, however, the hardware spring reverb effects I am familiar with, both free standing and built in to instrument amplifiers, employ a mix topology where the wet signal is added to the dry signal, so the brightness is not turned down while the reverb is applied.

It may not be a fundamental difference but there is a palpable difference that can be sensed while making the adjustments.

If you want to see for yourself, you can set up a paralleled bus and run Twangstrom at 100% wet and fold it back into the dry signal to see if the results seem more familiar.

I am doing this and feel that there is more wiggle room to bring the reverb up or down in without having the brightness disapear.

Any particular setting I arrive at with the parallel bus should have an equivalent with the current Mix function, but the parallel system seems to have a wider sweet spot that that makes searching for the ideal balance feel more comfortable.

Thank you.

[btw]

...
Any particular setting I arrive at with the parallel bus should have an equivalent with the current Mix function, but the parallel system seems to have a wider sweet spot that that makes searching for the ideal balance feel more comfortable.

Thank you.

Makes sense. I also usually prefer the psychoacoustic experience of maintaining the dry signal level while adding wet, and of course in most hardware mixing scenarios this is how reverbs are employed: on a bus. That said, I can’t think of another reverb plugin that offers this kind of additive wet-dry mix option; do you know of any? I think developers typically leave that up to routing in the DAW. Perhaps this is instead a question of scaling on the wet-dry mix knob so that finding a sweet spot on a channel instance is easier. For my part, I don’t have a problem with the scaling in Twangström. If I’m using a spring reverb as an insert effect, then I’m probably not looking for subtlety.

[D2sX9ek8w3]

...I can’t think of another reverb plugin that offers this kind of additive wet-dry mix option; do you know of any?

Sure, here is one of many examples:



Here is another one:



You may or may not choose to adjust the dry signal with these circuits. In fact, you may not even need the dry signal level control.



There are a couple million guitar amps like these:


Here is a classic keyboard layout:


What I am saying, is that it would seem helpful to not turn down the dry signal while adjusting the amount of wet that is added to it, and I am suggesting that it may be possible to provide a switch where the function of a single Mix knob alternates between the current format and a function that just adds the wet on top of a fixed amount, as set at the input stage, of dry signal.


FWIW, when I use a spring reverb effect on a guitar or keyboard it is an essential part of instruments core tone. It is not routine to use a bus for these applications. The bus is helpful when you want to share the effect with several instruments. An effect that is integral to the tone of the instrument is likely to be patched before other track or instrument effects such as EQ or compression which may also be considered part of the track. In these cases, the use of a parallel bus, and then a consequent summing bus for the wet and dry signals, makes the patch unnecessarily complicated.

It is my thought that the many claims, seen here, that Twangstrom sounds dark and muddy can be attributed to the readily apparent loss of dry signal when bringing in the wet.

Thank you.

[btw]

Ah, of course you're right—providing two separate controls for dry and wet level is a common way to achieve this, and it's useful for the reasons you mention. I guess what I meant to say is that I've never seen it done the way you propose, with an additive option, when a reverb plugin provides a single dry-wet mix knob. It would seem a bit kludgy to me, but that's just my opinion! Peace