so lets say you have a sample

first option: you first Reverse and then put Reverb....

second option: or apply reverb and then reverse

i think these two give different sound result right?

also which one you use most often and is there any reason? or you always check both

thanks

 

you meant ogggg here i guess

thanks!

or maybe i'm confused (i suppose the attack is at the start of the sound) but since u said short O i'm not sure

 

As @No Avenger already said, both options indeed sound different.
You can prove this by undoing one reverse for each option so the sample plays forward again.

Example: [Sample]

Option 1: [elpmaS] --> [elpmaS}[Reverb of mostly "S"]
Undone reverse: [Reverb of mostly "S"][Sample]

Option 2: [Sample][Reverb of mostly "e"] --> [Reverb of mostly "e"][elpmaS]
Undone reverse: [Sample][Reverb of mostly "e"]

I mostly use method one, since you can make nice vocal swells for transitions when the sample+verb get reversed again.

 

Nope, if you only reverse the word, the reverb starts loud and fades out, as usual.

 

Yep, this choice is a classic for vocals when starting a verse or in general after an instrumental section.

 

They use this trick on the lead synth in EDM. I think they bounce the forward sample with the reverb enabled, copy the loop and reverse it, and then move it around; so that when it is moved up against the "drop note" the note doesn't get washed out by 2X reverb.

 

and you reverse it again back to normal after applying reverb
eg: first option: you first Reverse and then apply Reverb then reverse again which you can then drag to just before you first word of your vocals come in as a lead in effect

I've not tried the second option but I'm sure will have a different effect adding the reverb before you reverse

 

it's very different, because reverb isn't just a tail. the sound is also within all the notes, so when you turn it off it sounds thinner a bit. less rich. idk. if you do the entire thing at one time with a synth it is just a nice swell. this is the stuff where "there are no rules" is very true.

 

Having the reverb playing before its source is an old trick invented in the reel2reel multitrack era.
The effect was obtained like this:

- reverse the reel so that ch#1 becomes ch#16 and will play backwards
- apply the reverb and record it on ch#15 (100% wet)
- reverse the reel back to its regular side

Now you have ch#1 the source and on ch#2 the effect, that will play -before- the source
This trick was often applied on the clap to give that "sucked in" effect, Depeche Mode also used it on vocals

The effect can be achieved in the same way with the daw:
- Reverse source
- apply reverb
- export the resulting file
- import file and reverse it again

In order to avoid all this tedious procedure, I've always looked for a plugin for this purpose, but never found it, I'm not sure it even exists

 

It exists as a script in Reaper

 

Reaper doesn't count! If it can order a pizza for you, it's not a DAW!

..seriously, DAWs that handle macros or similar can obviously do it automatically. I remember I had a macro for S1, but I don't use S1 anymore. A plugin would have to have some kind of "buffer". Anyway, I always find myself adjusting the reverse-reverbed build-up and (usually) the vocal to fit, and it's always a bit different depending on meterial..

 

Every day I grow more convinced everything exists as a script in Reaper.
Pizzas are next, wait and see my friends...