avatar

Hermetech Mastering

Gold Finger

Posts: 384 Member Since:22/02/2011

#21 [url]

Feb 10 17 3:37 AM

DMG EQuilibrium and TDR Slick EQ M here too, as my only digital EQs (although am a beta tester for TDR, in the interests of full disclosure). They are both very versatile and sound great, that's it, really. :) I also turn off all bling on EQuilibrium, main mastering preset is a seven band (HPF, Low Shelf, Bell, Tilt, Bell, High Shelf, LPF). Always IIR with highest settings, all DMG curves. I play with the Series/Parallel settings depending on the project. Very CPU light like this in IIR mode, never really tried the FIR mode more than a few mins as prefer sound of IIR.

Gregg Janman, Hermetech Mastering

Quote    Reply   
avatar

maarvold

Aqua Marine

Posts: 3,031 Member Since:23/01/2011

#22 [url]

Feb 10 17 10:23 AM

morespaceecho wrote:
and IIR 512 isn't even very processor intensive. put it on the longest FIR setting and watch your CPU crumble.

 
But... but... "Friends don't let friends use FIR".  I've been VERY happy with IIR.  

Quote    Reply   
avatar

zakco

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,071 Member Since:02/03/2011

#24 [url]

Feb 10 17 12:04 PM

jerry tubb wrote:
So in summary, I've used many plug-in EQs over the decades, and found that the User Interface is ~almost~ as important as the sound, how quickly & easily you can navigate around it, load presets you've designed, whether the color scheme makes you feel groovy, and the probability that your attending client looking over your shoulder doesn't own the same plug, because it's too expensive for their home studio budget.
That's a very honest answer and really cuts to the point, thanks Jerry!

Quote    Reply   
avatar

zakco

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,071 Member Since:02/03/2011

#25 [url]

Feb 10 17 12:07 PM

morespaceecho wrote:
slick eq i mostly use the german high shelf, again just because i think it sounds cool. can be really transparent, depending on the mix you can pile on A LOT of boost and it sounds smooth and natural.
Is Slick EQ a IIR or FIR design?


Quote    Reply   
avatar

zakco

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,071 Member Since:02/03/2011

#26 [url]

Feb 10 17 12:16 PM

zmix wrote:
Here are some papers on Biquad analog filters:

https://mysite.du.edu/~etuttle/electron/elect65.htm

http://www.analog.com/media/en/training-seminars/tutorials/MT-205.pdf


The equations are one of the basic building blocks of DSP flter design, and so far nobody has "reinvented the wheel" so to speak, in the pro audio world (despite marketing claims).


A simple PDF from Rane about designing a digital filter, including areas where the design can differ from the analog equivalent:

http://www.rane.com/note157.html


The first link immediately brings to my attention the limits of high school math and the possible consequences of my fondness for various substances in my late teens and early 20s. The Rane paper is very interesting and well presented for mortals. Thanks!

Quote    Reply   
avatar

zakco

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,071 Member Since:02/03/2011

#28 [url]

Feb 10 17 1:42 PM

morespaceecho wrote:
i believe slick eq is IIR but i don't know.

http://www.tokyodawn.net/tdr-vos-slickeq-ge/
That was my impression, which brings me back to my first question...how can Slick's top end be more "transparent", "smooth" or "natural" than another (well implemented) IIR EQ? Are you sure that it sounds better or is it possible that you prefer the GUI as Jerry was musing about? For the record, I'm not trying to be annoying...I'm genuinely interested! Are you using the saturation part of Slick or straight digital?

Quote    Reply   
avatar

morespaceecho

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 2,250 Member Since:29/01/2011

#29 [url]

Feb 10 17 2:26 PM

i actually prefer the equilibrium GUI to the slick, but....there's like 5 different eq styles in slick eq, you can scroll through them and hear the changes in the curves. so when i first got it, i slapped a couple db high shelf on a mix and checked out the various curves. the german high shelf jumped out at me as sounding really nice. so, ok great, that's going in the toolbox. 

most of the time i use the high shelf on a hardware bax. sometimes i use the slick eq. sometimes i use the dmg shelf. i could sit here and spend time trying to get slick eq to null with equilibrium or whatever but who cares? i like them both. why spend the time?

maybe all digi eq's are based on the same biquad whatever, but there have to be some differences in the implementation, no? nobody thinks the renn eq sounds like the Q10 do they? i don't think equilibrium sounds the same as the sonoris min phase eq. i used that for years and liked it, but when equilibrium came along it seemed pretty clear to me that it sounded better. 

anyway the saturation stuff in slick eq is pretty subtle. i don't use the "eq sat" that often, but sometimes it's nice. i do like the "exciter" output saturation though. like i did with the various shelves, i scrolled through the output sats and that one was the one that jumped out to me as sounding cool. 

www.oldcolonymastering.com

morespaceecho.bandcamp.com

Quote    Reply   
avatar

jerry tubb

Gold Finger

Posts: 625 Member Since:06/02/2011

#30 [url]

Feb 12 17 10:28 AM

zakco wrote:

jerry tubb wrote:So in summary, I've used many plug-in EQs over the decades, and found that the User Interface is ~almost~ as important as the sound, how quickly & easily you can navigate around it, load presets you've designed, whether the color scheme makes you feel groovy, and the probability that your attending client looking over your shoulder doesn't own the same plug, because it's too expensive for their home studio budget.

That's a very honest answer and really cuts to the point, thanks Jerry!

Thanks Zakco!
I used to do these long stream of consciousness posts back on Brads forum, but have tightened up my babble in recent years.
happy that you found it useful.
im gonna give the DG EQ another try, just for curiosity!
best, JT

Quote    Reply   
avatar

maarvold

Aqua Marine

Posts: 3,031 Member Since:23/01/2011

#32 [url]

Feb 12 17 11:07 AM

waltzmastering wrote:
Still use the Ren 6 here a bit.
The only preset that I made is called the De-pee-er
Which is basically a hpf filter set right under 200Hz to zap plosives.
Surprised that no one has marketed a De-pee-er.

 
iZotope has a Plosive tool in RX5 Advanced that works GREAT!!

Quote    Reply   
avatar

waltzmastering

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,623 Member Since:02/02/2011

#33 [url]

Feb 12 17 11:42 AM

I've been procrastinating about picking that up, but now on the short list.
Izotope, I think is or was local to Cambridge MA.
We used to do some limited run CD dupes for their first product. (Ozone 1?),
back in the day, maybe for trade shows or early demos

Quote    Reply   
avatar

maarvold

Aqua Marine

Posts: 3,031 Member Since:23/01/2011

#34 [url]

Feb 12 17 11:53 AM

waltzmastering wrote:
I've been procrastinating about picking that up, but now on the short list.
Izotope, I think is or was local to Cambridge MA.
We used to do some limited run CD dupes for their first product. (Ozone 1?),
back in the day, maybe for trade shows or early demos

 
I've said it before: RX is a magic plugin--actually a suite of plugins.  What I mean is that sometimes I fix something with RX and I shake my head and go, "How the heck can it do that".  For me, the most powerful tool is Spectral Repair.  But DeClip also can save you and the Plosive tool works great.  And, between DeClick and Spectral Repair, I can get rid of pretty much any click I can find.  It took some time for me to get pretty good at it (Spectral Repair), and I'm sure there are some total experts out there who are way better than me.  But it is a GREAT thing to have in your toolbox imo.  

Quote    Reply   
avatar

zakco

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,071 Member Since:02/03/2011

#35 [url]

Feb 12 17 3:24 PM

morespaceecho wrote:
maybe all digi eq's are based on the same biquad whatever, but there have to be some differences in the implementation, no? nobody thinks the renn eq sounds like the Q10 do they? i don't think equilibrium sounds the same as the sonoris min phase eq. i used that for years and liked it, but when equilibrium came along it seemed pretty clear to me that it sounded better. 

This has always been my impression too, but this thought is certainly in question given what evidence I've seen beyond my subjective experience. I definitely think I can hear a difference between EQIII and DMG, but I can't help but wonder if my impression is biased based on all the glowing reviews I've read by golden eared MEs and/or justification of an expensive purchase :) Having said that, I'm NOT convinced that trying to null two plugins is a way to prove/disprove this, which is why I am here trying to pick the brains of folks that are smarter than me and have perhaps have more acutely trained ears for this sort of stuff...

Perhaps the differences are simply the choice of curves by the developers and Slick EQ's "German" shelf is just a particularly pleasing example, which certainly justifies using it as a tool instead of another less pleasing design.

I would love to hear from Dave Gamble or Fabien from TDL speak on the subject. Perhaps they already have somewhere on the interknots...


Quote    Reply   
avatar

zakco

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,071 Member Since:02/03/2011

#36 [url]

Feb 12 17 3:27 PM

dcollins wrote:
minister wrote:
 Given the varying implementations, how can one get all Biquad EQ's to eventually null? It is really a matter of saying EQ 1 needs -1.2dB gain and a Q of 4.756 @1200Hz, but  EQ 2 needs -1.75dB gain and a Q of 6.225 @1195Hz to null against each other?
Yes, I think that is probably a big part of it.  There are all kind of errors that can creep in to the implementation (freq resp. errors near Nyquist, errors from finite word-length) but I've certainly seen reports of nully nulls.

Do these errors simply affect the precision of the curves or are they capable of more substantial problems such as distortion or aliasing etc, which would define the actual "quality" of the EQ?

Quote    Reply   
avatar

zmix

Aqua Marine

Posts: 3,991 Member Since:20/01/2011

#37 [url]

Feb 12 17 4:50 PM

zakco wrote:
dcollins wrote:
minister wrote:
 Given the varying implementations, how can one get all Biquad EQ's to eventually null? It is really a matter of saying EQ 1 needs -1.2dB gain and a Q of 4.756 @1200Hz, but  EQ 2 needs -1.75dB gain and a Q of 6.225 @1195Hz to null against each other?
Yes, I think that is probably a big part of it.  There are all kind of errors that can creep in to the implementation (freq resp. errors near Nyquist, errors from finite word-length) but I've certainly seen reports of nully nulls.

Do these errors simply affect the precision of the curves or are they capable of more substantial problems such as distortion or aliasing etc, which would define the actual "quality" of the EQ?

With respect to "freq resp. errors near Nyquist", this is called "cramping" and the shape of the curve is progressively distorted as the Fc approaches Nyquist.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

jerry tubb

Gold Finger

Posts: 625 Member Since:06/02/2011

#39 [url]

Feb 13 17 7:09 AM

waltzmastering wrote:
Still use the Ren 6 here a bit.
The only preset that I made is called the De-pee-er
Which is basically a hpf filter set right under 200Hz to zap plosives.
Surprised that no one has marketed a De-pee-er.

I also use the Ren EQ plug for treating plosives in mastering, but with a low shelf preset to either 60 or 90Hz, and cutting either -6 or -9dB, depending on the situation, and as an audiosuite plug in PT HD, processed pre-pitching. It's very fast and easy to use, multiple passes sometimes. Luckily many mixes we receive these days have already been de-popped by the mix engineer, unlike olden times when home & project studio mixes were filled with many issues to repair :~)>

honestly I still really enjoy doing repair moves, especially with an attending client present, as long as there aren't dozens or hundreds to do, doubling the time on the session clock.

as to the RX spectral repair, I find it most useful for reducing acoustic guitar squeaks. It's amazing how many times there'll be a delicate finger picking intro to a song, & when the guitarist changes chords with new strings and sensitive mics, there'll be a huge SQUEAK spike to jar the listener. Often a tightly focused EQ can do wonders here, but the RX sprectral repair can do miracles, Star Trek level repairs.

best, JT

Quote    Reply   
avatar

waltzmastering

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,623 Member Since:02/02/2011

#40 [url]

Feb 13 17 9:47 AM

maarvold wrote:
GREAT thing to have in your toolbox imo.  


 


Thanks Mike.  Not sure why I drag my feet about getting new stuff that I usually then say, why didn't I get that a while ago.

I do it about the same way Jerry (AudioSuite). Doesn't happen often, but can see why the occasional stray one can sneak through sometimes.

I don't worry so much about the initial edit points and drag the whole space around the plosive to another track, set the hpf
at the frequency right above where it makes it go away. Then after processing, drag the same chunk back on to the track and fine tune the in and out points and put a small cross fade at each end, ..that happens before the air that's at the edge of the consonant, so happens pretty quick.. Good to know about the gtr squeaks. Thx

Quote    Reply   
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help