Maybe you should ask on the physics.SE? :-)

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it's not particularly about music.

It's a shame lack of significant common sense leads to inadequate decisions. Unfortunately I should have spelled it out in further layman terms how this is relevant to music production. Physicists are not mixing engineers to be able to give a contextual answer regarding reverb. Either that's beyond your comprehension or you don't care to mix your muddy tracks. SE is lesser a community than what it could be because of moderator gatekeepers who are in their 40s putting relevant questions on hold.

Not to mention that musical instruments and composition are purely physics but this is your show and you're making a mess of the community.

@Tim Questions about reverb are at least tangentially related to music. While it's true that most of Seery's questions don't explain how they relate to his music-making, it's not too hard to imagine how they could. That said, he might still get better answers on the physics site, and I think there is also a sound design site which might be even better for learning about how to use reverb in mixing.

@Seery - I'm in my 70s, not 40s, and don't believe any recording mixer folks find this particularly relevant. They will dial in 'reverb' as and when they desire, not according to any physics - which is far more important as far as your question is concerned. I understand your frustration as far as rejection of the question is concerned, but still stand by my decision.

@Seery Most of the questions I've seen you ask could be quickly answered by googling or reading on Wikipedia. I suggest you maybe try those avenues first, and then come here if you need clarification, or help applying the ideas to music. As an aside, I feel like your time would be better spent making music, instead of doing all this research on topics which really should be secondary to the music-making. You'd learn more about how reverb works by experimenting with your reverb plugin. turn some knobs and see what happens.

@Tim Dialing reverb is no use without the understand of the workings, hence my position. The purpose of reverb is to emulate the physical parameters of a room. I feel no matter how obvious i make this, you're going to reject it so i'm not investing more time into this back and forth. I wonder if in your 7 decades, did folks attempt to obstruct your path of learning like you are now.

@ibonyun i've done about 80 hours of research on mixing the last 2 weeks and have a pretty large search history but the when the answers i find are not quite as specific, i come here and also to validate theories i find in my research. I spent a few months here building a music production research document and mixing is in the forefront now. I like to understand the mechanics of what i'm doing in its most fundamental principles as opposed to intuitive or "good enough" means. It allows for tremendous leverage.

@Tim there are lots of ways to think about reverb, but one of them is to try to emulate the way a particular acoustic space works. We've said that music production is on topic on this site, so it sounds odd to say that this question isn't about music. Voted to Reopen.

@topoReinstateMonica - what I'm trying to understand is the ramification of this. I doubt whether reverb will be changed for each individual instrument, whether it's a small group or an orchestra. The portraying of a small room or an auditorium will also be affected by how the listener listens - cans, front room, hall, etc., so there are many other parameters which cannot be controlled by the idea. That apart, the scenarios quoted are, I feel, fairly straightforward to be logically understood, and are more about physics than music, as stated in OP's profile.

@Tim OP's profile states that he wishes not to learn music through "practical" watered down systems of theory but through the actual and real source of music composition which is physics. Music is a manipulation of physics. You seem to have halted a question because your view of how music should be learned, doesn't subscribe to mine, which in fact has been highly encouraged in the last few months. It could indicate also that despite numerous comments agreeing this is music related and you still halting the question, this may be a pride issue of having got it wrong? Thats a rhetorical question

@Seery - not wishing to become embroiled in any more discussion, but it's fair to say that my view is as valid as anyones - including yours. It's just that they differ.

@Tim I don't see the connection of changing reverb 'for each individual instrument' to this question, particularly? Of course I agree that there are many factors affecting the sound that are down to the listener, not the producer - that's one of the often-discussed problems of music production!

@Tim we are entitled to our own perspectives. The difference is that you're imposing yours over mine, so i don't know how your comment is applicable to the situation.

Looks like a good question to me, but perhaps better asked on a recording forum. Any good mixer will know the physics and psycho-acoustics. If you know the speed of sound all else follows. Try listening to a percussive sound while altering the pre-delay time and hear how it shifts backward and forwards in the mix. .

@Seery Even if this does not get closed (or is reopened), I really think you should consider also asking at Sound Design SE, where more users would have the kind of knowledge you seek. I think that SE will be able to give you better answers.

@piiperiReinstateMonica, the word "honestly" in your comment strikes me as condescending.

I agree strongly with @topoReinstateMonica. Room acoustics is part of music, and many audio engineers would be interested in this topic. Surely this falls under the category of "audio effects." People who create their own electronic music would also be interested in the musical impact and implications this question is asking about.