OK Aleksey The difference is becoming more clear to me now. I'm not used to dynamic EQs. Maybe I will get used to it or just never like this kind of EQ.
You say you are going to completely rewrite Curve EQ. will this involve getting the latency down? It would be fantastic to have a powerful EQ that could be used for mastering and live low latency input. If you could also implement The overlays as well as lower latency this would make Curve EQ an incredible tool. You could do everything with Curve. The latency doesn't have to be extremely low just enough to play and hear the effect without noticable delay.
A lot of people don't actually know what dynamic equalization means. Just a short description of things like this would suffice. Most people using plugins like me aren't audio engineers so they need to know this stuff.
Actually GlissEQ2 seems different than another dynamic EQ that I have in that it enhances transients (slight increase only) in a certain way.
It seems there are 3 seperate parameters for Gliss related to this:
1. Gliss allows selection of a filter shape by the user - shelf, peaking, peakingZ, etc.
2. Gliss allows filter gain adjustment either plus or minus dB.
3. Gliss has a dynamic section that enhances transients allowing a user configurable range of 1-9 which covers minimum thru maximum transient enhancement. 4 is the factory default, I end up using 4 -7 currently depending on the added transients - the transients always seem kind of enhanced - maybe upward expanded (slightly), never compressed or lessened, independent of EQ gain setting.
I'm guessing the block diagram per filter is:
filter type setting ---> gain setting ---> dynamic transient enhancement setting
My other so-called dynamic EQ allows downward compression AND downward expansion for the dynamic component. If you look at Soniformer2 it allows downward compression OR upward expansion for the dynamic component per individual filter (32 filters). I've got another in a multiband compressor that just uses downward compression per band.
Anyway that's kinda my take on GlissEQ2 after trying it out and hearing it. I'm working it into a piece I'm fixing up now (tape transcribe) and using it's automatable params in Sonar3. Thanks for the automation Aleksey !
Kyle, I have updated GlissEQ to v2.0b. Now spectrum will be shown correctly. By the way, the vertical scale of the spectrum is 72 dB.
Andrew, I don't really see how one can correlate the amount of cut or boost to transients. Although, if boosting emphasizes the transients, cutting actually de-emphasizes the transients (it flattens the transients).
Ok - thanks for the spectrm update Aleksey !
As far as the cut & Boost of transients goes - at first I was trying to make GlissEQ work like an ultra-precise Soniformer2 but it doesn't do that at all.
Musicians sometimes hate comparisons to other artists so I'm sorry for this but this comparison might affect some people. For me GlissEQ2 is somewhat similiar to a combination of Eqium EQ and PSP TrebleMix. For those that don't know TrebleMix allows transient enhancement all along the audio spectrum not just in the treble area. GlissEQ use of trqnsient emphasis is much more subtle since the setting ranges are in the pleasant sounding area.
As Far as GlissEQ2 spectrum overlay goes I'ver never seen anything like that so this part seems to be somewhat revolutionary.
Am I getting any of this right Aleksey, hehe :)
OK - just trying to feel around here.
I don't mean to say that the sound of GlissEq2 is the same as running Eqium and TrebleMix in combination. Just trying to make a statement and find some common ground concerning GlissEQ2 functionality using older tools that folks might be familiar with.
I guess it's quite simple actually - GlissEQ2 is an EQ that includes transient emphasis.
I think part of my early confusion about how to use GlissEQ is what happens when I make a cut. If I make a -6dB cut at 100Hz using a peaking filter then I think that does not affect the transient nature of the filter other than providing the 'transient black box' with 6dB less input signal. Adjusting the Dyn setting would then affect the transient balance of the -6dB filter - meaning that with a setting of Dyn 1 you get a minimal transient boost to the -6dB filter, at Dyn 9 you get a maximal transient boost. Depending on the musical nature of the wave at 100Hz and the Dyn setting the band may have greater energy than what a similiar cut on a normal EQ would have. GlissEQ would never have less energy - in other words it will not decrease relative transients even if a cut in dB is specified.
So the Dyn setting will only do transient emphasis, not transient de-emphasis (like a compressor would).
What I'm working with is a mix that has a ride cymbol with too much meat so I'm making a peaking filter centered about 9KHz for about 2 octaves, doing a -5dB cut but setting Dyn to 6 or 7. It seemed to smooth things out a bit but I'm still tring things out. Also Gliss has automation so I can dial settings in on the fly if I want to fix a one time resonance.
Just trying to share a few thoughts cause Gliss may be a little tricky on first use it was for me anyway. Please share comments everyone...
ED: Or I could just read the review more carefully I guess...one of the reviewers says that there is transient de-emphasis during EQ cuts so I'll have to go back to the drawing board...their reviews are listed here:
OK - I've got it all wrong of course (I'm guessing ! sorry !)
I think the block diagram looks like this:
band transients --> band gain
This makes a difference because, like one of the reviewers mentioned in the review, once you change the DYN setting the rms/peak levels change so the gain may need to be changed again. Is that right Aleksey ?
Here's a simple test I ran using 1KHz bandpass filtered pink noise (using 1 octave FFT filter centered at 1KHz)
GlissEQ2 no filters enabled:
Peak Amplitude: -11.76 dB
Maximum RMS Power: -19.3 dB
Average RMS Power: -21.49 dB
Total RMS Power: -21.46 dB
Average RMS to Peak Amplitude = 9.73 dB
Maximum RMS to Peak Amplitude = 7.54 dB
GlissEQ2 1KHz, .33 octave, +9dB gain, DYN=1
Peak Amplitude: -8.27 dB
Maximum RMS Power: -16.31 dB
Average RMS Power: -18.47 dB
Total RMS Power: -18.42 dB
Average RMS to Peak Amplitude = 10.20 dB
Maximum RMS to Peak Amplitude = 8.04 dB
GlissEQ2 1KHz, .33 octave, +9dB gain, DYN=9
Peak Amplitude: -10.73 dB
Maximum RMS Power: -18.48 dB
Average RMS Power: -20.61 dB
Total RMS Power: -20.58 dB
Average RMS to Peak Amplitude = 9.88 dB
Maximum RMS to Peak Amplitude = 7.75 dB
GlissEQ2 1KHz, .33 octave, -9dB gain, DYN=1
Peak Amplitude: -13.65 dB
Maximum RMS Power: -21.14 dB
Average RMS Power: -23.31 dB
Total RMS Power: -23.28 dB
Average RMS to Peak Amplitude = 9.66 dB
Maximum RMS to Peak Amplitude = 7.49 dB
GlissEQ2 1KHz, .33 octave, -9dB gain, DYN=9
Peak Amplitude: -12.53 dB
Maximum RMS Power: -20 dB
Average RMS Power: -22.21 dB
Total RMS Power: -22.17 dB
Average RMS to Peak Amplitude = 9.68 dB
Maximum RMS to Peak Amplitude = 7.47 dB
Well now I was expecting to see some larger variance of the transients there so I guess it doesn't take much. Also I don't know much about measuring such things - for now I better just listen a bit...I was trying to satisfy my questions about transients using measurements.
This topic was last updated 180 days ago, and thus it was archived. Replying is disabled for this topic.