Wow! check this!

[funkmuscle]

Yep I've used that before. In fact was the first real nice reverb next to TAP but very confusing at least to me.

[jonetsu]

As far as regular reverbs goes, the free Protoverb from u-he is nice. It's in prototype state but functional and was created as a survey tool for users to give feedback (survey now expired). Takes some CPU, but the sound can be quite good.

They also have Zrev which is a reverb research tool. Not sure if that one is free though. There are some presets for it. I have used Protoverb, but not Zrev.

Protoverb:

https://www.u-he.com/cms/protoverb

[funkmuscle]

As far as regular reverbs goes, the free Protoverb from u-he is nice. It's in prototype state but functional and was created as a survey tool for users to give feedback (survey now expired). Takes some CPU, but the sound can be quite good.

They also have Zrev which is a reverb research tool. Not sure if that one is free though. There are some presets for it. I have used Protoverb, but not Zrev.

Protoverb:

https://www.u-he.com/cms/protoverb

Protoverb is cpu hungry and crazy xruns.. I have large sessions. 20 -25 tracks. Protoverb is nice though.

[CrocoDuck]

I see - thanks for the explanation. Then made an extension of the current IR that could include several transmission lines could benefit fromt he work that's already done. Then again, this transmission line must be some kind of a wide cone, not a tunnel, and would also include reflections from behind, above, bounced on the walls and floor. But all relating to a single point in space which is located at a certain distance from the sound source.

If it was possible to model a space in such a way that the 'listener' could actually move within the space eg, to the left and right of the source, or going around the source, then this could be modulated as a performance parameter. I wonder what the effect would be with stereo headphones. It wouldn't be like panning all reverbs and parts of the sources to one side or the other, it could be much more of a complex effect, maybe.

Having several impulse responses is somewhat less flexible. The cool thing of a model is that in principles the sound transmission law can be computed in real time. You can simulate the effect of walking in a sound field filled environment.

The transmission line between two points in an enclosure is described by the laws governing direct sound transmission between the source and the receiver, plus the laws governing reflection/absorption and diffusion of the sound at the enclosure boundaries, which are due to boundary geometry and material. By packing all of this together you get the impulse response, which completely describes the said transmission line.

So, the sound arriving at the receiver is a stream of copies of the original sound, but their amplitude is scaled by the fact that absorption and diffusion at the boundaries steal energy to the primary wave. Also, absorption and diffusion are not uniform in frequency, so the reflections are also filtered. Usually, the energy loss is higher the higher the frequency. If diffusion is modelled, there is also the effect of the incidence angle.

I short, as you walk in a room (in real life as in a good model) you get a different time pattern of reflections differently filtered by different linear processes. The difference between two close listening points can be very big, especially at low frequency (< 300 Hz) where the response is modal.

As a note, it is not completely correct to think about the direct transmission line as a cone. Source directivity is a fairly complex function of angular direction and frequency. For pistonic loudspeakers (the usual kind of loudspeakers) it is governed by the pistonic functions, defined in therms of Bessel functions. Roughly speaking, at low frequency every source is pretty omnidirectional. As the frequency gets higher the sound tend to be radiated more and more in a cone, but with significant lobes of radiation at lateral directions. The higher the frequency the more "geometrical" the radiation gets (optical approximation). The side lobing is counter intuitive and it is due to the fact that sound originated at different points in the transducer surface will superimpose with phase shift depending on the geometric path they travelled. So, depending on frequency, it can happen that there are location at the sides where sound radiated by zones of the transducers gets reinforced by in-phase addition. Real transducers show modes at high frequency, which further complicates the radiated waveform. For modelling reverberation sources are often assumed omnidirectional, but directivity can be included.

[wjl]

Interesting things are going on at http://cdm.link/2017/03/steinberg-bring ... od-things/ me thinks...

[davephillips]

Interesting things are going on ...

The party has already begun : https://www.linuxmusicians.com/viewtopi ... 24&t=16854