The Convolution Reverb Example seems to be unnecessarily complicated. It uses two deperate channel groups and a DSP connection to control the wet and dry parameters, whereas it you could have just used a single reverb channel group and set wet and dry directly using FMOD_DSP_CONVOLUTION_REVERB_PARAM_DRY and FMOD_DSP_CONVOLUTION_REVERB_PARAM_WET.
I’m just wondering is there any reason for this, or do both methods have the same results?
Hi Ed,
Thanks for asking about this.
In the case of the example you could do just as you suggest and use the parameters of the convolution reverb DSP to control the wet/dry mix to get the same results.
However using a separate channel group for reverb and using a DSP send connection as in the example can scale to allow multiple channels to send signal to a single convolution reverb unit while sending their dry signal directly to output, which is a much better approach for most uses.
Cheers
Derek
Ok. thanks for your answer.