Why No Reverb built into Optimod or Omnia??

[ChiefEngineer]

In the 1960's a slight (okay way too much) amount of reverb was a part of radio. Even in the 1970's it was there. I added a digital reverb to our oldies station over a year ago. I am very disappointed in it's performance. Never high enough without being too much.
I wondered why all the reverb departed and noted it isn't included in single box processors. Was there a reason for this or did it just seem the best option at the time?
In trying to be "different" I am trying to recreate the sound of AM (except with high fidelity) and teh sound of reverb on AM was well defined. On FM it just can't re create the same sound. Any ideas (other than use it on an AM station)?

 

[FFoti1]

Your question is valid. In prior generation Omnias, it was a matter of DSP resources. As it was, when we did add a moderate sized function like the "hot" algorithm in Omnia.fm, or diversity delay in Omnia.6, it required an additional DSP card. The same would've been true for reverb.

Now that we've moved onto a broader firmware platform, we have resources available to consider this.

-Frank Foti

 

[Chuck]

Maybe you need to find an old Fisher "Space Expander" which was the reverb of choice for many smaller Top 40 stations. If you can find a Fairchild, (which had three reverb tanks per channel) you'll be up there with top 10 market Drake-Chenault stations.

 

[Tom Wells]

Proportion of reverb is a touchy thing, isn't it?

I have been real happy with the results of a small cheap digital reverb, but I'm not
getting rid of the spring tanks anytime.

If I get chance one day, I'll take all my old bare ( and different ) spring tanks and make up a combination box.

Modulation still being modulation, what I find on AM, is that I need to leave perceptual headroom to be able to sound big "in",
and also leave some space to perceive the reverb "in".

If it's too full, it sounds too full and the reverb is swamped out.

Maybe back down a little bit on the louding.. Not sure why it seems like there's too much or not enough.

Is the audio to the reverb fully tamed, or is it wild? All of it?
If it's wild, the reverb will be too forward.



Hmm, I have one those Fishers right next to me that I suppose I have been keeping for a good home.
Holler if interested.
It works but I have always preferred a home brew with Hammond tank until I went digi.

 

[WNTIRadio]

Do you have a Compellor or other AGC (Ariane) to put in front of the reverb box? Feeding the reverb box a consistent level will also yield you more consistent reverb results.

With the multiband digital boxes, it is a bit more touchy in that you have much more AGC and limiting than what was there in the old Top 40 days. That tends to suck up the reverb a lot more.

It would be cool to have it in a digital box such as the Omnia.11 or Omnia.9 where you could specify its insert point, either before everything, after the single band AGC or after the multiband AGC. I don't think I would want it between the limiter and the clippers though, seems like a way to get into trouble.

 

[ChiefEngineer]

I have experimented many ways with the verb unit. It is a Yamaha digital. At the expense of messing up the purity of the Omnia One I placed it prior to the Omnia. I made many adjustments to both units making sure the level passed at the same analog vu reference (noted on input meters of the Omnia and on dualing Simpson VOM'S).

I recall the old days of processing causing more harm than good. My other question asked and answered didn't indicate reverb was simply unwanted. My peaked interest at reaching a better setting follows the Movie Naptown Rock Radio Wars. We experienced several really neat things in video on the Imax screen at White River State Park. Match this with audio (clean and sometimes remastered) of Jay Reynolds on WIFE, the iconic Chris Bailey aircheck from WNDE (Is there an East Indianapolis) recorded in a moving car between Cincinatti and Indianapolis, and Chris Conner on WNAP circa 1968, all with varying levels of reverb. The gasp of the audience as the Imax sound system blasted "The Wrath of the Buzzard" Legal ID. Each station had reverb and it added to the unique identity of each station.

My guess was that just as multiple boxes were cut to make way for better processing (no question) that reverb was one box that didn't amke the cut. Rather than keep reverb many chose to simply forget it.

We are using True Oldies Channel Programming. I take the feed from the XDS which is usually stable and level controlled to feed the Yamaha, then, it goes to the Omnia.

In the old AM days you could slap any kind of reverb into a Dap and it sounded great on AM. The old WNAP airchecks had a Faichild spring unit noted under the console that you would hit every time you cued a record up. (What's a record and how do you cue it?) We have been verbing for over a year. I experimented with the type of reverb. I think we are on thin plate setting.

My first attempt which was clearly audible had some calls from a few describing the inadequacy of my setting. After setting it alternatively too low or too high I came to a setting I am still uncomfortable with. My wife noted without prompting that some days the reverb is slightly noticeable, other days not at all. She is 10 years younger and her ears are better. Obviously this is an upside down marriage.

One area of radio that many don't explore is the unique relationship a station ahs with listeners. Something unique like the cue burned "tic toc tic toc it's 4 o'clock" ID, the way a station sounds, and even the old friend reverb that almost 99 percent of stations have thrown out, some with good reason. I don't want anyone else to even consider using reverb though as it is an old concept no one likes (or alternatively I want us to be unique in this and I do like it).

We haven't had any listeners mention reverb as a reason they listen. Those that listened to the music new listened to it this way though. It just seems to be as warm and inviting as the modulators singing in a Collins 21B.

We process not too heavily with the Omnia. The reverb is ahead of it. Settings are currently at 5 percent on the Yamaha. I would love to have it on voice only, however there are many sources unique to the satellite and that can't happen.

 

[BobOnTheJob]

I have experimented many ways with the verb unit. It is a Yamaha digital. At the expense of messing up the purity of the Omnia One I placed it prior to the Omnia. I made many adjustments to both units making sure the level passed at the same analog vu reference (noted on input meters of the Omnia and on dualing Simpson VOM'S).

I recall the old days of processing causing more harm than good. My other question asked and answered didn't indicate reverb was simply unwanted. My peaked interest at reaching a better setting follows the Movie Naptown Rock Radio Wars. We experienced several really neat things in video on the Imax screen at White River State Park. Match this with audio (clean and sometimes remastered) of Jay Reynolds on WIFE, the iconic Chris Bailey aircheck from WNDE (Is there an East Indianapolis) recorded in a moving car between Cincinatti and Indianapolis, and Chris Conner on WNAP circa 1968, all with varying levels of reverb. The gasp of the audience as the Imax sound system blasted "The Wrath of the Buzzard" Legal ID. Each station had reverb and it added to the unique identity of each station.

My guess was that just as multiple boxes were cut to make way for better processing (no question) that reverb was one box that didn't amke the cut. Rather than keep reverb many chose to simply forget it.

We are using True Oldies Channel Programming. I take the feed from the XDS which is usually stable and level controlled to feed the Yamaha, then, it goes to the Omnia.

In the old AM days you could slap any kind of reverb into a Dap and it sounded great on AM. The old WNAP airchecks had a Faichild spring unit noted under the console that you would hit every time you cued a record up. (What's a record and how do you cue it?) We have been verbing for over a year. I experimented with the type of reverb. I think we are on thin plate setting.

My first attempt which was clearly audible had some calls from a few describing the inadequacy of my setting. After setting it alternatively too low or too high I came to a setting I am still uncomfortable with. My wife noted without prompting that some days the reverb is slightly noticeable, other days not at all. She is 10 years younger and her ears are better. Obviously this is an upside down marriage.

One area of radio that many don't explore is the unique relationship a station ahs with listeners. Something unique like the cue burned "tic toc tic toc it's 4 o'clock" ID, the way a station sounds, and even the old friend reverb that almost 99 percent of stations have thrown out, some with good reason. I don't want anyone else to even consider using reverb though as it is an old concept no one likes (or alternatively I want us to be unique in this and I do like it).

We haven't had any listeners mention reverb as a reason they listen. Those that listened to the music new listened to it this way though. It just seems to be as warm and inviting as the modulators singing in a Collins 21B.

We process not too heavily with the Omnia. The reverb is ahead of it. Settings are currently at 5 percent on the Yamaha. I would love to have it on voice only, however there are many sources unique to the satellite and that can't happen.

Long shot but have you asked Scott Shannon how he feels about adding some reverb to the TOC?

 

[ChiefEngineer]

I haven't. I ahve another station on TOC that is wanting to add reverb. Your comments on reverb and it's suefullness are requested.

WCSI had reverb years ago. It wasn't the whole reason the station did well but was one component that was a part of the big picture.

How do you fell about reverb in the processing chain and as a listener?

 

[Smiths and Smittys]

A little bit of a curve ball on this subject...

I always liked the News/Talk stations that had the time check tone at the top of the hour.
There was something about those ID's that ended with a time check followed by the tone into the CBS News sounder. Guess I'm a little old school.

 

[stacker]

How do you fell about reverb in the processing chain and as a listener?

My experience has been mixed. Women seem to like a little reverb. Men hear it and complain that it makes you sound different. Frankly, I like it, added to an oldies format.

In the old days, reverb was a way to increase modulation density. With today's processors, that is not necessary. If you add it for effect, a little bit goes a long way.

 

[WNTIRadio]

A little bit of density buildup can also sound good on an oldies station. Sometimes I hear oldies/classic hits stations that have the processing set to super clean and it sounds kinda boring and flat.

I like it when the music sounds "big" and jumps out of the radio for that format. When it lays flat the whole thing can just sound bland. The jingles, the music and the jocks need to pop.

Of course, don't overdo it to where it pumps like an old Volumax, but a little bit of that snap in the audio can go a long way to making it sound authentic.

Again, regarding the reverb unit, make sure you hit it with consistent levels that have been smoothed out by something prior. That's the only way you'll get predictable results from it. The louder something hits it, the more 'verb there is. Likewise, if something is really soft, the 'verb effect will be less.

Had the mics on one station processed by a DBX-166 and then fed to the Orban spring reverb. Sounded sweet, as long as someone didn't barge in the door and knock into the rack!! Sounded like Star Wars!

Have also used an Alesis unit on the PGM output, fed by a Compellor, output 100% wet and then mixed back in with the audio. That's another way to get the 'verb in without mucking up the audio on the Omnia.One. Make your own sidechain, then you can dial in the conditioned, compressed reverb to your taste.

 

[radiorob2.0]

An AGC prior to the reverb is a good idea for all the reasons stated. If I were ever to have an opportunity to add reverb it would be as a side chain and not direct. A simple line mixer with an aux send and return might give you a bit more control and hides any conversion artifacts that happen with a direct pass through if the reverb AD/DA isn't the best.

WHAS Louisville had reverb on it's airchain until about dozen years ago. The last unit was a Yamaha Rev-7. Towards the end the reverb was there enough but didn't stand out. It gave the audio just enough depth that added a sweetness. It really sounded good on talk programming. When Rush was added to the WHAS line up you could compare with other affiliates and Rush on WHAS sounded a little better with a tad of reverb.

 

[ChiefEngineer]

I like the Gordon McClendon quote.

My use of reverb to be different is just one of the things I am looking at to be unique.

So many stations are so "the same" that radio hardly seems relevant these days. Television isn't any better.

WHAS is an example of a station that had a lot of neat features. Wayne Perky starting a Town and Country Ford Ad after some banter about something in Kentuckiana comes to mind. The lost art of radio.
I can't tell it apart from WIBC or a host of other stations now.

Now that Henry and the secret handshake are out of WSON I hope Indiucky never is uttered again...

 

[pellmell]

We used an Orban 111B. The input was bridged off of the input to the Dorrough DAP 310, and the output was fed through a summing resistor to the input of the line amp in the DAP. It would have been just as easy to passively sum the 111B and DAP outputs into the transmitter. We got lots of calls wanting to know how our reverb was configured. It sounded great.

 

[rorban]

In the 1960's a slight (okay way too much) amount of reverb was a part of radio. Even in the 1970's it was there. I added a digital reverb to our oldies station over a year ago. I am very disappointed in it's performance. Never high enough without being too much.
I wondered why all the reverb departed and noted it isn't included in single box processors. Was there a reason for this or did it just seem the best option at the time?
In trying to be "different" I am trying to recreate the sound of AM (except with high fidelity) and the sound of reverb on AM was well defined. On FM it just can't re create the same sound. Any ideas (other than use it on an AM station)?

We at Orban don't think that it makes sense to put reverb in the processing because it is only useful on a small number of formats, there are a lot of good-sounding digital reverbs available at low cost from pro audio manufacturers, and everyone has his own preference regarding the reverb sound desired. Yamaha? Lexicon? etc... Putting the reverb in the processor would unnecessarily constrain the artistic tuning of the overall air sound compared to giving users the almost infinite number of choices available from external reverb boxes.

Bob Orban

 

[BobOnTheJob]

I haven't. I ahve another station on TOC that is wanting to add reverb. Your comments on reverb and it's suefullness are requested.

WCSI had reverb years ago. It wasn't the whole reason the station did well but was one component that was a part of the big picture.

How do you fell about reverb in the processing chain and as a listener?

This is a great discussion. I can only speak to the WCSI experience, which if aired today as was, would be oldies. To me, it made the station sound bigger than life, it was a subtle but important part of the 'magic' of the radio station. I will always remember standing outside the studio with a good sounding portable radio and while listening, looking at the building, then the radio and then the building in amazement that what I was hearing was coming from the second floor of a small town bank building. Much of the magic of radio has evaporated over the decades. Anything that can be done to re-create the magic in an oldies format should be pursued in my opinion. I believe that part of the reason WCSI AM's el cheapo Tapco reverb sounded so predictable was the simplicity of the processing chain. The console fed the reverb, the reverb fed the phone line. The phone line fed an AM Solid Statesman limiter with the release time sped up. Peak limiting was about 17db. The quick release allowed a very small amount of reverb (IIRC around 6-9%) to respond exactly the same at all times. There was no gating, multiband processing, slow AGC, etc to throw the EQ a curve ball. Todays processors may or may not respond as predictably. Now Chief, I know you'll mention the DAP 310....it was added at a later date but in an unusual way....the AM Limiter was first in the line in order to keep the signature sound with the DAP being the final processor. It was set up so as to add perhaps 3db of low and mid limiting and perhaps 6-9db of high end limiting to brighten up the sound. Set up this way, it had little effect on the reverb's character as there was still no slow/gated AGC and only a carefully controlled amount of multiband processing. That sounded great on AM...getting the same thing to happen on FM today will not be as simple...as you've already determined.

 

[rrsounds]

There has been a lot of work in the public domain regarding digital reverb algorithms, and IIRC, there are even a few open-source collections that could be readily adapted to a new product at little or even no cost.

The thing about reverb for broadcast is that, IMHO, its quality is not nearly so critical as that normally required for recording, if for no other reason than because the formats that might use it are typically very tightly run, and simply offer few to no opportunities to hear it 'naked.' Especially if it is placed late in the chain where there is little subsequent processing to accentuate it.

Because of this, historically, a radio station could actually get away with using a spring unit, whereas springs were rare in a recording studio, which often had an actual chamber or, minimally, a plate such as those by EMT.

In my own experience, on-air reverb that is forefront is just too much; at Z100, my setting philosophy was very simple: if it draws attention to itself, it's too high.

When I have spec'ed a digital reverb for a client (admittedly not very often these days!) it has always been among the cheapest models available, because it would never be run high enough to hear in detail. Any unit that offers adjustable 'plate' and 'hall' settings will usually suffice, for my purposes anyway.

To sum: reverb is a VERY niche product requirement. But it is also, in my estimation, non-critical qualitatively if run at a reasonably low level, because broadcast requirements are not as stringent as in a recording studio. And lastly, in today's DSP environment it is not particularly expensive from a development or CPU usage standpoint.

FWIW, the processing software project I have been working on includes basic reverb.

Kind Regards,
David

 

[richard.vanderveen]

FWIW, the processing software project I have been working on includes basic reverb.

Just out of curiosity: would that be the project you showed during the last 'processing freakday' in Weerselo?

 

[whit979]

To sum: reverb is a VERY niche product requirement.

You're right. I do wonder, though, how many more stations would use it (or try it out) if they had easy access to it via the processor already in the rack instead of through having to buy a separate box.

 

[mikl73]

I enjoyed it one some CHRs that tried to be different and use it in the late 80s early 90s. I recall a few stations taking it a bit too far and it was annoying.