I tried *sending* the sound to two different effects *chains*. (Sorry, that's what I meant from the beginning! Maybe I didn't make it clear).Originally Posted by Jimfish
So the EQ was very definitely working on the reverb!!!
I'll try the insert method... But I did use 100% send, which does the same thing!
>I fail to see how it can be anything else. reverb changes the waveform and eq on a different waveform will sound different.
Hehe! How about this:
Dividing 6 by 2 changes its value, so the effect of multiplying by 3 will change depending on you multiplying pre or post division.
6/2 = 3, 3*3 = 9
6*3 = 18, 18/2 = 9
Oh!![]()
;)
Or this:
Normalising a sound changes the waveform. Normal+verb = verb+normal though.
Stop thinking 'waveform' and think 'frequencies'. An EQ changes the *overall* frequency balance, and a reverb doesn't... Which is why I was interested in the result...
What's the difference between not sending bass frequencies to a reverb, and EQing out the bass frequencies in the whole signal after reverb? Is there any? I suspect it'd just be subtle differences in the phasing of the frequencies...
Hmm... A dynamic effect will change pre or post verb, like compression or expansion. Post reverb compression is radically different to pre!
EQ is a constant process though.
The only case where I can think of any kind of a big effect happening is where the reverb has a built in EQ. This'll screw with the proprotions of different frequencies expressed in a combined reverb+dry sound, which may cause odd differences in the frequency makeup with a pre or post EQ. I'll have a play, but my hungover brain can't cope with modelling that right now!
That wasn't what I was asking originally though... I was talking about send effect chains.
Could you describe the exact set-up that gives you these radically different effects... If I'm wrong about all this, it could be incredibly useful!
;)
Tequila