The "right way" to add reverb to split stereo channels
  • Currently the reverb node takes a mono signal and spits out L and R, which makes sense.

    What if I'm starting off with L and R channels? Do I put a reverb on each, then mix each L with each R? When I did that one time, it muddied the stereo space (the things on the left were less obviously on the left, etc), but perhaps that's just the nature of reverb?
  • Using one verb is better - you should send a mono submix to the reverb and feed the output back in through a 4x1 node with the dry L + R. You might be thinking you need to keep the sounds separate while going through the verb but you really don't - a lot of studio recordings will just have even a mono plate mixed in for reverb. I doubt it makes a big difference to most algorithms. A real plate or spring will sound (subtly) different with more or fewer tracks running through them, but to my knowledge that is not so with DSP.
  • Yes, that makes sense. Thanks.

    Would you make the reverb completely wet, then just attenuate/gain when you mix it back in?
  • @jjthrash That is what I would do, with the following caveat. You will notice that the wet output of the reverb is very hot. Don't burn yourself!
    Alternately, I might use two reverbs but only one output from each panned hard. I would wire the controls of the 2 reverbs to single knobs so both reverbs would have identical settings.
    I haven't tried running a reverb in poly mode.
  • this conversation is making me realize someone out there needs to build a stereo separator for turning mono signals into stereo
  • @biminiroad Like M/S separation? Is it possible to separate a pure mono signal without introducing chorus or something?

    I built a LR->MS and MS->LR setup and played with it (increase separation by increasing gain on S channel, add neat sound by adding delay or filter on S channel, etc). It's really easy.
    IMG_0144.PNG
    2048 x 1536 - 148K
    IMG_0146.PNG
    2048 x 1536 - 147K