Premium Membership - All Voxengo Plugins at a Fixed One-Time Fee - Click Here For More Info
Summer 2018 Discount at Voxengo
Forums     Discussions     Announces, Releases and Discussions CurveEQ beta 1.9

Hi Aleksey,

Could you explain a little about the 2P and what the intention is - I'm not familiar with the sound of that type of filter mode or what it's for.

Dave, if youcome back in here maybe you could mention what you like about it also.



2-P mode simply breaks the filter kernel into two parts.  The lower part (below 1k Hz) is windowed like the whole kernel in L-P mode.  The higher part is NOT windowed.

I had an idea this could allow a more open sounding equalization in the higher end.  And I guess, it is true.

OK, I've put v1.9e now.

"What's new" contents:

1.  Greatly increased SpectruMatch's and spectrum analyzer's accuracy.

2.  Changed default color of labels located on the GUI.

3.  Spectrum now updates smoother: values you specify for Spectrum Inertia do not allow ultra fast update speeds now.

4.  OutAvg monitoring mode now does not reset spectrum every 12 seconds.  Instead, you can reset it manually with the right mouse button click.

5.  A new "2-P" filter mode added.  This mode allows a more `open' sound in the higher frequency end.

6.  A new monitoring mode "OutPeak" added.  This mode displays output spectrum's peak values.

7.  Latency increased to 4096 samples.  Even if this looks like a questionable change it allowed CurveEQ to have a more even CPU load.  This means you can use more CurveEQ instances in a multitrack project.

Hi Aleksey, can you make the buffer size increase optional -- the reason I ask is that I use CEQ with VSTAdapter in SONAR which does not support delay compensation, so instead I use SampleSlide to line up the tracks.  So if I install the new version I will have to readjust all of the settings in sample slide for all old projects.  It's not a major hassle to change them, but it would at least ensure backwards comptability if the default installation defaulted to 3072, but could be switched to 4096 for new projects... don't worry if this is not practicable.

Just for clarification, is 2P mode linear phase?


I find the top end in the 2P mode to be smoother, cleaner and more open just as Aleksey has described.  Keep up the good work Aleksey!!

Andrew, OK, I'll add a switch like with the most of the settings.  However, when I'm going to release v 2.0 it won't contain such settings...  I'm also thinking about removing saturation modes (I'm not sure they are very useful).  Also, possibly, vintage processing will be improved (it could take something from Lampthruster).

What do you think?

2-P mode is also linear phase.

Aleksey Vaneev wrote:

Andrew, OK, I'll add a switch like with the most of the
settings.  However, when I'm going to release v 2.0 it won't
contain such settings...
If ver2 is registered under a diferent name (number, whatever it is) so that both v1 and v2 show up in my host then that is fine -- it's just for the sake of backards compatibility for older projects.  Having said that in a few months time hopefully Directixer and/or VST Adapter will suppport delay compensation, so I'll have to go back into my older projects and readjust them then any, so really it ain't that much of an issue ;-)

I'm also thinking about removing

saturation modes (I'm not sure they are very useful).
I have used the saturation mode a couple of times (on snare I think) so I wouldn't call it useless-- it's nice to have the option.


possibly, vintage processing will be improved (it could take
something from Lampthruster).
That would be very very nice -- lampthruster is a truly wonderful sounding device, unique in the world of software AFAIK.

I like the graphic updates in the new version -- bolder indications of cursor position, and the help desk looks really good (it's a great way for a newbie to get to know the program); and the new average mode is excellent.  Thanks.

I'm liking the new 1.9h (I think is the latest now).

I can hear the great effect of 2P especially when I have Elephant after CurveEQ.  It's subtle but it smooths things a bit on the highs for me.

I use the saturator sometimes, some of the presets have it too.  A user has a choice since there's a button.  You've mentioned (I think) that saturator is on the front end of CurveEQ.  I was wondering how it would sound on the back-end with it's own threshold so I can push into it a bit.  I know, too many ideas, but that would let CurveEQ keep some of it's non-linear features, mabye even make it a bit tubey in certain cases.

I guess if you're going to put some of LampThruster in there that's why you're thinking of removing Saturator.

I'm really gettin far now using Spectrumatch in the recent version.

I think this has been mention elsewhere.  I use 2 CurveEQs in series.  The first one I do broad spectrum matching if required.  In other words I make a printout of my song and my favorite reference song using the new peak and average modes.  I then mark up the print out into 6-8 bands.  If the slopes on my unbalanced wave are too far out compared to my reference then I'll use spectrumatch with 7-12 points to balance it - kind of like an 8 band wide Q para EQ.  I'll even knock the lowest and highest couple of points down if they are over 6dB one way or the other.  Then I'll use the attenuate arrows so that the largest delta of gain adjustment is not greater than 6dB.

Once the wave is given a reasonable balance then I'll spectrumatch the 2nd CurveEQ using 20-30 points, knock down the low/high ones if necessary, adjust the curve so the largest delta is no more than 6dB (+/-3dB) and there she blows.

Sometimes I'll do a Spectrumatch after having selected one of the presets like 'Mastering'.  Sometimes I Spectrumatch using a preset with Saturation in it that's why I made that earlier comment about keeping Saturation.

Thanks for the cool updates Aleksey - very useful !


Ed.  PS I didn't mention I'm trying to rebalance some badly recorded and mixed material.  This might be a little extreme for good stuff - I wouldn't know !

I guess the visual on using 2 CurveEQs I'm getting is - the first CurveEQ Spectrumatch kind of sets up or balances the general slope of a number of city blocks (7-12 city blocks or points), they can slope somewhat as my reference material shows, but no major earthquakes between them or in them !  The 2nd CurveEQ Spectrumatch then sets up the size of the buildings in each city block (using 20-30 points) giving the balancing more detail to compare with the reference.  Anyway this seems to works better than trying to do a single spectrumatch using 30-60 points right off the bat and trying to match the details first.

OK, thanks for comments about saturation.  I'll keep it then...  So, I'll go with updating VP modes only (not sure though).

I was thinking about removing something simply to give some place to M/S equalization modes.  I've tested it and it seemed to me to be very usable (EQing the side or the central channel) - very good at subtly adjusting the stereo field.

BTW, you can grab v1.9g now.  I've managed to speed up the kernel building procedure.  Now you can draw the EQ curve very smoothly.  This allowed to improve the quality of EQ curve building, too.

This sounds interesting when will the M/S equalization modes be available

This topic was last updated 180 days ago, and thus it was archived.  Replying is disabled for this topic.