Voxengo Premium Membership - All Voxengo Plugins For a Fixed One-Time Fee
Forums     Plugins     CurveEQ curve eq ver.3!

This topic was created before release of the latest product version, and it may contain details irrelevant to this version.  Replying is disabled for this topic.

Aleksey, no problem, thank you for listening to your users :D

kylen, the morph would essentially work simialr to the UP and DOWN arrows that currently are in CurveEQ.  So if we had a gain of 10 db at 1 kHz and then moved morph to 50 %, the gain would become 5 db.  The reason to have an additional control for the height of the EQ curve is...

- More accuracy than the UP and DOWN arrows.

- Independence from the UP and DOWN arrows.  This is especially useful when using the match feature.  When you match a particular spectrum, the resulting EQ curve is almost always too drastic.  One currently has to always use the UP and DOWN arrows to lessen the effect but by doing so, the exact matching EQ curve is lost.  Additionally, it is unpleasant to hear such a drastic change in EQ when using the match feature.  By having a separate slider or knob called morph, one may set morph to say 50 % and thus when using the matching feature, the matched EQ curve won't be as drastic.  Additionally the EQ curve remains untouched.  It is like a no-destructive UP and DOWN control that affects all EQ points, almost like a Wet / Dry control.  Not sure how much better I can explain it, it's a little tricky to put into words, hope that helps.  If you can get your hands on a demo of Steinberg Freefilter, you'll see exactly what I mean, the use a moreph slider in that plugin.



Thanks fots, I understand - amplitude morphing, not morphing or changing over time.

It is pretty brutal to hear an entire 100% spectrumatch - not CurveEQ's fault, Ozone3 and Firium are pretty brutal also since it highly depends on what you match.  Even using super relevant matching material it usually make sense to only "push" into it a certain percentage - or more in the mids or highs or bass by selecting certain points and using the arrows, depending on the desired sound.  Other matching EQs allow a certain percentage of smoothing which in CurveEQ amounts to selecting fewer match points like 12 or 20, or more points like 40 or 60 for example.

I'm also looking forward to seperate Left and Right matching which I think is comoing pretty soon.

sounds awesome, v3 is gonna RAWK :D



You are welcome :)

I don't know if this is now an official Curve EQ3 feature request thread, but...

...the one big improvement I'd like to see would be the ability to make steeper curves down at the bass end.

Andrew, yes, this is planned, but of course it's all about overall latency.  Steep bass end curves means latency will be close to 16000 samples.  The only way to decrease it without reducing bass end precision would be to get rid of the phase-linear mode...  I'm not sure this will be desirable.

Hi Aleksey,

I'm quoting from the CurveEQ manual:

"CurveEQ is perfect for mastering applications where you don't need some very special character from the equalizer, but where you need control and transparency (plus CurveEQ can offer you a special character if you need it to)."

Is this still the goal for the EQ section of version 3 - control and transparency?  That would be my vote anyway.  Since I picked up CurveEQ in the spring of 2003 it has had a great run for me.  Now at the end of 2005 I have begun working at 96KHz and using 64bit summing busses I would like to see what you can do for CurveEQ transparancy and control if that is still the main driving feature of the EQ section.

Thank you,


Of course, CurveEQ will be transparent and will be offering curve-driven control.  However, as we now know, 'transparency' in technical means does not always please engineers.  Linear-phase design usually leaves 'pre-ringing' artifacts some people dislike.  And I too tend to hear it does make transients a little washed out - though, this is not always bad.  Minimum-phase equalizing, on the other hand, does not wash-out transients, but introduces coloration which does not always sound OK as well.

Given all this, it's really hard to please everyone.  But I'll stay with linear-phase design - maybe i'll only try to optimize it a bit.

Probably, some 'phase tricks' can be also desirable - for example, intentional shifting of frequencies that are being equalized back and forth in time may change the perception of the degree of smoothness equalizer has.

Hi Aleksey

Great Eq!

How about making an option to choose between linear and minimum phase eqing like Electri-Q does?  I like Curve Eq (demo) a lot but I'm not so happy about the latency.  If it had minimum phase eq, it would be possible to use it real time, right?

It's fine to use Cuve Eq as a track eq, isn't it?  That's what I need the most.

FR: Have you planned to make the gui a little wider like Span?  I find it a bit too narrow.

CurveEQ already allows you to switch between linear- and minimum-phase modes.  However, minimum-phase mode does not decrease latency (this feature was not included into design, but in any case latency could not be less than 256 samples even if it was).
This topic was created before release of the latest product version, and it may contain details irrelevant to this version.  Replying is disabled for this topic.