Creative Reverb: What SuperPlate Can Do

[@roq_itrecordingstudio4152]

Hello Justin !!! Sound Toys absolutely HIT IT OUT OF THE PARK with this one! Thank you for suggesting Sound Toys !! I have the full complete bundle and I use them everyday and in every session !! Thank you !

[@redplanet2010]

Really enjoyed this deep dive....given me ideas. Absolutely love all the ST modules. Thanks for an entertaining 50 minutes.

[@philbartlett6918]

Thanks for the great content, Justin. 👍

[@SonicScoop]

A pleasure! Thanks for tuning in. -Justin

[@tonerangermusic]

Love it

[@TannerByTheSea]

Yo Justin, I accidentally download the whole bundle! Oh well! Let’s run it! I’m going to email you the track I was working on… It’s a little bit Mo Betta 🙏🏼 great show dude I’m getting ready to watch it again! God bless

[@SonicScoop]

Awesome to hear Tanner! Justin

[@GloveBunniesVideos]

Great video, thanks so much!

[@spielman2893]

Superb interview and awesome tool, BUT the predelay point at 16:40 is kind of strange eh....just implement the sync predelay into Superplate. 🤷🏻‍♂😄

[@AVDRE]

Great stuff Justin. Any chance you can stream at 1080p? It's a bit easier to read text onscreen with the higher quality. Not a big deal though

[@SonicScoop]

Thanks for making the request. I’ll give it a try soon and see if there are any bandwidth issues that way. Usually the live streams are all talking, so I didn’t consider that before! Thanks, -Justin

[@Octwavian]

The ducking feature seemed interesting in the beginning. But when I thought about it for a while, I realized that practically changing the room size is not a great way of controlling reverb. Preserving the room size (reverb time) keeps an instrument in a steady space, while shortening the reverb time keeps contracting and expanding the room!? It's interesting as an effect, but I don't think it's the way to go in most situations. Anybody else thought about this?

[@SonicScoop]

I don’t think of it as changing the room size. I think of it as emptying the reverb buffer in a much more natural and organic way. I understand what you are saying conceptually, but in practice, it does not sound like the room size is changing. It sounds like the next new sound is coming in more clear and uncluttered than you’d expect, so you can get away with having a larger consistent “room size” than you otherwise could. You don’t hear the old reverb shortening because the old long reverb has a new long reverb immediately stacked on top of it, with some overlap between the two. You are momentarily shortening the decay time of the prior reverb but immediately adding a new longer reverb on top, just with less non-harmonic clutter underneath it. Because the two reverbs overlap briefly-rather than the new one cutting the old one off-it feels totally seamless. And you can make it have more or less overlap. The actual sonic impression is not one of the changing size. It’s of a bigger cleaner reverb than you can otherwise use on harmonically complex material. Try it for yourself and let me know if you agree! -Justin

[@GingerDrums]

I wish sound toys had oversampling for their saturation plugins...

[@SonicScoop]

Question: How do their saturation plugins SOUND? :-) -Justin

[@roq_itrecordingstudio4152]

Sounding insanely AWESOME !!! Mic drop !! ❤

[@GingerDrums]

@@SonicScoop Short answer: great but could easily sound better and I feel they are missing a trick. Their saturation plugs sound better at 192khz... I sent them samples of sine sweeps distorting through decapitator at 48 and 192 where the bass is CLEARLY better and where aliasing chirping dissapears in the highs (even my untrained girlfriend could ABX it). Got pretty gaslighty response unfortunately. Fabfilter, Tokyo Dawn Labs and others have oversampling toggles, I think its pretty much a done deal by now...

[@SonicScoop]

I believe you! But I do have a couple of important questions: 1. Can you hear this effect on actual music content, or only on super loud, super high frequency sine wave sweeps? And, 2. Closely related: How low down compared to the peak and RMS level were any added high frequencies? While I won't doubt that you've discovered this if you have, my question is whether it matters in practice... or if you are allowing something that doesn't matter in practice stop you from using something you otherwise like using! Are we talking about extra HF content that is like -60dB down below the signal... in an area where peoples' hearing is less sensitive... and in an area where the RMS level of the musical content is much lower than the RMS of the rest of the signal? Could this difference be picked out on actual musical content in double blind listening tests? Or is it only potentially audible if we try to "break" the plugin by using super loud, super simple, super high frequency content that have nothing to do with what real music sounds like? In practice, super high frequency content will be of a much lower amplitude than the rest of the signal, and then any unwanted distortion on it would be even dramatically lower still! So the real test is if you can hear it blind in that scenario. That said, if enough people give this feedback, maybe they'll issue an update! I'm a proponent of oversampling myself. (Though I temper that with recognizing how small the differences can be in many practical cases.) So I wouldn't be against adding such a button at all! But then again, people love the sound of them as they are already, so maybe they are not in a rush to fix what ain't really broken. Those plugins have made it onto countless huge records the way they sound currently. I think oversampling is useful, but we also have to recognize-if we venturing into the world of being super scientific and pedantic together-that certain kinds of distortion cannot be hear by humans if it is far enough below the average signal level, and especially so if it is in an area where human hearing is less sensitive. Being able to hear unwanted distortion on a 0dBFS simple sine wave sweep is VERY different than being able to hear it underneath full range pink noise, a full mix, or even a single instrument! That's the kind of listening test I recommend doing, especially for this kind of "special effect" plugin. Give that a try, double blind, and let me know if it informs your opinion any differently. I hope that makes sense! -Justin

[@GingerDrums]

@@SonicScoop Hey, yes of course! try crushing a bass guitar at 44.1 and then at 192 with decapitator... you let me know which one has coherent subs. The oversampling is CPU optemised in soundtoys, but yea... "just give me the tools to work as I like" is kind of my point, especially with such a premium brand. EDIT: ABX no problem at all... I hate golden ears specialists, but I also work as a commercial sound designer for TV and advertising, often I need to crush something and I just never reach for sound toys because I know there are cleaner, better engineered plugins a click away as far as aliasing is concerned. It's a shame because the interfaces are great and the sounds are well crafted... Put another way... If it's objectively better then why not implement it?