Opinion: Post-recording reverb/adjustments, yay or nay?

[John Kotopka]

It seems as if a majority of home recording performers, both here and on other internet sites (video sites in particular) seem to add some digital reverb (or other effects like noise removal, level-adjustments, and compression) post-recording. My question is, is this a "necessary" (by convention) addition in order to complete the recording, and is this a good thing for classical guitar music? Sure, I'll admit that the reverb makes the music sound "bigger", but in my opinion one of the beauties of the guitar is in its intimacy, and the artificial effects seem to take something away from that. It's one thing to actually see and hear someone perform in a stone hall with naturally great acoustics, but it seems a bit, "cute", to emulate this effect from one's personal music room. That said, the addition of reverb and other effects seems to be the norm, so I am probably the odd man out here.

Any one else have any (passionate!!) thoughts about this?

[PoeticJustice]

Here is my opinion. And I do not have a digital recorder nor do I record my playing. (Yet!!)

People have said that all classical music (or specifically guitar) recordings only need added reverb. It makes it sound more warm and brings out even more from the instrument, especially if the guitar doesn't have the best projection in the first place. That being said, I almost always listen to classical music through nice headphones and I've noticed that sometimes the reverb when listening that way doesn't sound as good as the speakers projecting into a full room.

If you have a great guitar and a nice recorder, I think it's up to you. If you like how it sounds naturally better and feel you don't need any effects, I would encourage you to not use them. My 2 cents

[Cary W]

If I want to hear the natural sound of the guitar, warts and all, I go to a concert. If I record something, I want to hear a polished sound. I definitely trim the ends of the sound file, normalize the spectrum, then add reverb. This way even the amateur can produce a CD that he can at least give to friends as a sample of his playing.

[Hybrid]

Me personally, i add reverb to my recordings because it sounds good to me.

Traditionally, guitar concerts are given in halls, churches, etc. Not in living rooms or small bedrooms.

I enjoy the way the guitar sounds in these larger spaces. I also enjoy the way the guitar sounds in
a small bedroom, but i prefer the concert hall sound.
My favorite classical guitar recordings all have large amounts of reverb in them as well. Namely, Julian Bream's records.

I never cared much for Segovia's recordings. They sound small and boxy in comparison to Bream's.

H

[Guitar Slim]

Traditionally, guitar concerts are given in halls, churches, etc. Not in living rooms or small bedrooms.

Yes, and those great "natural"-sounding recordings for Delos and Telarc and Naxos are made in just those kinds of spaces, with great natural reverb. And, they're often made with multiple microphones placed in a variety of locations to capture the reverb.

However, there's nothing "natural" sounding about a close-mic'ed guitar recorded in a bedroom or basement with plaster on the walls and carpet on the floor. Such a recording doesn't sound intimate to me, it just sounds lifeless. I'm not sure why the same guitar can sound good to the ear when played in the same room, and sound so unappealing when recorded -- but it does. Just my opinion, of course.

If you want your recordings to sound great, they need some kind of reverb. Natural reverb is ideal if you have a great space to record in and know how to record it. But if you're recording in a very "dead" space, as most of us hobbyists do, then you need to add some artificial reverb of your own. The trick is knowing what kind of reverb, what settings to use, and how to mix it with your dry tracks -- something I'm far from expert at, BTW...

[rojarosguitar]

... That said, the addition of reverb and other effects seems to be the norm, so I am probably the odd man out here.

Any one else have any (passionate!!) thoughts about this?

Hello,

There is a big difference between listening to a performance and listening to a recording. Somehow beeing present with the artist compensates for the enormous span of dynamics between the lowest and highest volumes any instrument is capable to produce. That's why I would advocates some well done compression (of the dynamics).
And then you never sit so close to the player; even sitting in the first row you have a few meters distance to the player. So usually we're listening to what is called the 'far field' of the instrument - and acoustically this is quite different from the 'close field' (or 'near field') where usually the microphones sit (especially in home recording). A good measured dosis of good quality reverb (all reverbs are not born the same) helps to at least lessen the roughness of the near field sound.

I'm not very keen on equalisation, because it's easily overdone and rarely imprve the overall sound of the recording (in my experience, and with a really good recording chain in place).
For me at least it makes the recordings more listenable. Of course, if you can have a great sounding hall and good microphones, and somebody who knows hot to record, then nothing can beat a naturally recorded instrument. But this rarely given to us earthlings, so I'd advocate some decent, tasty seasoning of a guitar record.

best wishes
Robert

[Denis Paradis]

A question of taste but then again...

No reverb is also called dry...

... by chance?...

...Probably not

[Gruupi]

Like others have said, the tools a home recording studio musician has to work with make it so a little added reverb is the best way to add some depth to the recording. Even if a guitar sounds good to your ear in a small room, microphones pick up resonances that sound odd and kind of hollow, emphasising certain frequencies. So unless you have a large acousticly designed space, you should make the best of what you have. Most home studies will do better recording in a rather dead room with added reverb later. I am leary of EQ and especially compression but if you really know how to use them with discretion then you can make really good recordings. I don't think it is cheating to judiciuosly use what tools you have to achieve your goals. A dry recording is actually less honest of what the player is hearing, again, microphones just don't pick up natural reverbs well in small rooms.

[John Kotopka]

Lots of great food for thought here which really makes me glad I asked.

I suppose my aversion to digital reverb was (is still?! Not so much.) more of a sentimental and naive notion of what this instrument is sonorously capable of in a limited home-recording environment. It's certainly true, as pointed out, that what might sound good to my own ears, playing in my living room, won't sound at all the same recorded, not to mention the myriad variables of mic placement and overall positions within the room!

I suppose a little seasoning, as rojarosguitar said, is not a bad thing after all...

Thank you all for your input!

[dmcharg]

Very interesting topic. I only started recording about 12 months ago and its certainly a learning experience. I would agree that in general in a home setup its quite hard to capture the intimate sound of the guitar without having to add reverb when editing. I think the key is really not over doing it and still letting the sound of the guitar come thru. But with a decent mic, a little editing you really can get some very nice results which you can share with others.

[Alan Green]

I tend not to add reverb because I always overcook it


Alan

[serl]

If you have a good sounding room, then you don't need reverb, but this is definitely not the case for everybody, so yes, it should be added (but accurately).

[jaca]

Like Alan, when I use digital reverb I tend to overdo it. That is the only reason I prefer natural reverb (unless I'm recording surf guitar ).

[rojarosguitar]

I think, nobody who has a good sounding room and can do sonicaly satisfying recordings would even think of using reverb. So the issue is for the most people rather whether to stay purist or add a pinch of reverb to an overly dry recording.

Now, all depends of what kind of reverb is available to you. The better it is, the less is it prone to be overdone.
Of course you can spend thousands of dollars on high end stand alone reverb boxes.

A very usable reverb within the rich of an engaged recordist is Universal Audio RealVerb Pro runing on their proprietary hardware, whch is really good.

Another very good piece of software having, among other things, a reverb, is Ozone mastering suite.

And there are certainly some others. I really liked the TC Electronic reverb plug in for TDM ProTools, but I'm not sure if it's still on the market.

And there is the gigantic dutch software which makes all great concert halls of this world available as convolution reverbs. Forgot the name, you have to do a bit of reaserch. It costs very little considering what it offers. My brother, who has a sound studio in LA, swears on it ...

Best wishes
Robert

best wishes

[ogeva]

Sure, I'll admit that the reverb makes the music sound "bigger", but in my opinion one of the beauties of the guitar is in its intimacy, and the artificial effects seem to take something away from that. It's one thing to actually see and hear someone perform in a stone hall with naturally great acoustics, but it seems a bit, "cute", to emulate this effect from one's personal music room.

Well, my music room is a small (2.70 by 3.20 meters) concrete walled room. It's a "shelter" room built into every apartment in Israel since gulf war I, and it's like every other room in the house, except it's smaller and concrete walled.
So obviously, the acoustics is not the best. Now, you're talking about intimacy or warm natural reverb, but that room is very bad. It accentuates the low frequencies, and has a harsh very short reverb behavioristics. So I aim to record as dry as possible. I stuffed bookcases in the room, and a thick carpet.
But then, that sounds, well... dry. So a little reverb actually makes it sound more natural than it really is. I only add a little bit though.
Regarding other edits, such as noise reduction... I don't think anyone thinks the sound of pc fans in the background is nice?