View Full Version : Master Reverb Routing Suggestion

04-07-2009, 09:26 AM

The Master Reverb in the Symphonic Orchestra PLAY edition is a great feature especially during the composition stage. In a multi setup, I've noticed that the reverb is sent to the output that is used for the instrument where the Master button is turned on. In my case, I route the individual instrument groups to their individual output, i.e. flutes, oboes, clarinets, etc. When using the master reverb in a multi such as Woodwinds, all instrument reverb signals are sent to the instrument where I've assigned the master. This routing overstates the signal in the mixer channel of the instrument where the assignment was given.

My suggestion would be to have the option to assign the master reverb signal to a user configurable output the same way that the outputs are selected on the main interface.

Thanks for your consideration.......:)

04-08-2009, 08:11 PM
...or route through a pro sounding reverb like IRverb or Altiverb via an aux send in your sequence.

04-09-2009, 03:37 AM
My suggestion would be to have the option to assign the master reverb signal to a user configurable output the same way that the outputs are selected on the main interface.
Better still, also (ie as well as independent output channels) have a send level for each instrument slot (eg where the current volume knob is?) and an overall volume knob for the (return) reverb channels - ie configure as an ordinary send effect - as another mode for the reverb, in addition to the two current options.

04-09-2009, 07:05 AM
I think Play Pro will get us closer to what we want, but not clear to me yet how much closer. Fingers crossed. I like the way Kontakt handles it and would be perfectly satisfied if that were duplicated.


04-09-2009, 01:04 PM
Depends, the master reverb only helps, and saves CPU, if your working with a multi. If you work with multiple PLAY instances to distribute processing, the master reverb is an obvious problem since having it runing on every instance can waste resources. It's just an unnecessary hit on CPU that you could easily deal better if you route to an external reverb plugin via sends in your DAW.

Now if you could route in and out of a MASTER PLAY verb externally that would be something but I don't see it happening. $.02


04-10-2009, 06:03 AM

Something I'm not understanding here and maybe you could clear it up for me. I understand based on everything I've read on this Forum that one needs to use multiple instances vs Multi's in order to spread processing across all 8 cores. I've tried both approaches. What I've found is that if I use a multi in Logic 8, the CPU meter in Logic 8 shows only using one core per instance as been said here in the forum. If I bring up the CPU meter in the Activity Monitor, it shows distribution across all 8 cores.

Which meter is correct? What am I missing here?:)

04-10-2009, 09:38 AM

Officially, I don't know :-) I don't use Logic but I do know that this has been discussed quite a bit and Logic (ironically) seems to get the most press. I thought the whole standalone VI issue was a way of getting around Logic's memory access limitations was it not? It's not limited to Logic though, DP has a similar issue not so much with core distribution but with showing current workload. The meters are just totally different than what the OS meters are saying.

Opening multiple instances just seems insane to me. One instance per section/instrument? I mean I could possibly have 30 or 40 of these things if not more! I'm alright with a mix of say 8 instances with multiple instruments in each instance but much more than that and it gets really complex. Most sequencers don't have a way to keep all of these open VIs together so they often get "thrown" around screen where you are constantly searching for the right one. The play interface is so damn huge it takes up so much real estate. They really need a "compact" mode or a way to open multiple instances in a secondary host.