Okay, I guess that's good to know now. When was this released, just before X-mas of last year, if I recall? Who'd have ever thought they'd have to pay for new features on a new-to-market plug-in three or four months after its initial release? Kindly look at Valhalla, Klanghelm, DMG and Cytomic, just to name a few. I get that you choose to call it a new product. What new features are there again besides the new analyzer mode? You could also choose for this to be a free update, or at least give the upgrade to your early supporters in reciprocal support. I'm sorry if this is coming off as irate in text. That's not my intention. Who knows, we may only be talking about a few bucks for the upgrade. It does seem nearly precedent setting here in our little audio effect plug-in world though, at least to my recollection.

Actually I have to agree with the post above. For me this eq is not perfect and I bought it because of the mentions and talk of the future upgrades. I would of assumed these small (but important) updates would of been for the version I bought; not a new 'pro version'!

Please think carefully about this as many people buy or don't buy a product based on principles.

the analyzer in 2.0 displays the input?

i don't understand the thinking behind this. analyzers on an eq should always show the output, otherwise you might as well have no analyzer and id use a 3rd party fft

Before you escalate this further, people need to see this as it is:

The Pro version, is by it's own right a new product, it will not interfere with the SplineEQ version you bought.

The SplinEQ version you indeed have bought, will still get updates, improvements and the like, but will be cut of from the advanced upgrades.

The price-tag for the normal EQ is nothing to talk about, having pro versions of software is nothing new, it has always been there.

If you wish to upgrade to pro, that will probably happen with a better price tag for those who already are customers, if they indeed feel like the pro version is something they need.

If you state stuff like "I bought it because of the furture upgrades and what not" - The updates will still be there, but the version you bought never stated that it would bring you a new set of advanced features. You have your product, you bought it knowing what it does.

Don't make a hen out of a feather.

Just for the record the software works perfectly for me,i use it on every track(almost) its been very stable since i bought it in december.I would happily upgrade to the PRO version if i feel the need but @ this moment i can say there is no need.IMHO its the dogs bo@#oc"s and PRO version or not i got what i paid for and i am a very happy customer.jus dont see the point in moaning about something we dont necessarily need.Just saying! Ok rant over.

Alright here's the logic: SplineEQ as it is is great, but it's very simple and kind of basic and that's partly why it has the unprecedented price tag of $19. $19! And it's a great start, so I should build on top of it to make something as full featured as the top of the line LP EQs. Now if I make a plugin that beats in every way plugins that cost ten times as much, I probably shouldn't keep on selling it for $19, right? I'd still keep it much cheaper, but it wouldn't be very cleaver to keep it just as cheap.

Now, the Pro version isn't on the edge of being released, I just started working on it, I'm just keeping you guys in the loop because the outcome is always better when you take feedback and input from users while you're creating the whole thing. Right now I only have 2 or 3 new features in the beta (which I shouldn't even call beta, it's just work in progress), that is the analyser curve thing, the Bézier handles that can be freely extended or contracted and the extra controls for when the handles end up out of the screen. At the moment I'm also working on new handles-related knobs and something like a Q control kind of knob that would rescale the 4 handles are a point to increase or decrease what you think of as Q.

But all of that is nothing compared to everything else I have yet to start doing. Mid-Side editing, zoom, rescalable interface, something like AB comparison, analyser freezing over a time period, whatever else we've talked about in this thread, whatever the $200 plugins have and whatever else will come up. When that's done (don't hold your breath, it's gonna take a few months) you'll see why it shouldn't go for $19.

This being said I can make a few of these upcoming features part of the publicly available SplineEQ 1 version. What would you like to see?


I guess you're right, that would make more sense this way. I'll do that.



Yes, this!


Yeah that's the idea, you don't necessarily need the Pro version, having another version out there that is more fully featured and more polished doesn't make the regular version any less useful or interesting. At the end of the day you'll still have the choice to buy something that does the job and is unusually cheap, you'll just also have the option of buying something more... pro.

New build out.



-Added two knobs for the lengths of the handles
-Added a knob that does something similar to Q, works as a modifier to the 4 handles that surround the selected point
-Now the analysis curve does the output instead of the input as suggested by hardwinte, which makes more sense

-Something that doesn't really matter, but right now the Debug changes the colours of the analysis curve a bit
-As suggested by somebody I changed how many decimal places are displayed in the tip text area above the visualisation area
-On the other hand I've added a second decimal place on knobs for values below 1.0

The formula for the Q Mod effect on the handle lengths is not set in stone, so I'd like to know if it looks about right or not.

Great work man! Still a one of a kind eq!

looks good, but still feel like the numbers little hard to read from a distance. Just the glow-y color/look of it blends into the knob a bit too much for me.

I agree. The glowing number within what looks like a knob with a translucent center is attractive, but it sacrifices legibility/usability too much just to be pretty.

If you're stuck on knobs, the best examples I've seen of getting knobs with legible numbers into a compact space are Wave Arts' designs:



I think it's using the black "panel mounting" behind each knob on which to overlay the LED-like readout that makes it possible to be both legible and hardware-ish in a small space. The illuminated arc tracking each knob's position isn't needed for readability, but without it either the knob would look too small, or the bottom of the knob would intrude into the space needed for the readout. Using fixed (or sequentially illuminating) tick-marks instead of the illuminated arc would probably work, though.

Oh yeah that should do it. Although first I'll try a darker knob background, it'll be less work for me and I could easily backport it.

Alright, is that better? I'm not too sure about the new text colour, but I guess that's okay.



I'll give v1.0 the same changes tomorrow and release it as v1.0.7 then.

This is obviously much better. But I still feel that the numbers are unnecessarily tiny.

Comparing 1:1 with my copy of WaveArts MultiDynamics (referred to by Coises above), they are only about 2/3 of the vertical size of the WaveArts readouts.

As I said, better but still not ideal on a 1980x1200 laptop screen, on account of the font size.

Best,

Joachim

Maybe something like this:



would be more legible in about the same space?

It could be prettier. The above is one pixel wider than the current layout. A bit more space would help it, I think, but I wanted to keep it as close as possible to the existing dimensions as an example; and the dot-matrix-style numbers can't easily change size without getting much larger or much smaller, because they're pixel-aligned.

I understand that the numeric-value-inside-the-knob is a style choice, and you might consider it a sort of signature that you don't want to change. Personally, I don't think it's worth the loss in readability, but that's just one opinion.

Well at this point it's more about the fact that to do something different I'd probably spend a few days in 3DS Max and Photoshop working on a new knob so it's just easier to try to save what I have here. It's ridiculous how long (at least a couple of weeks) I spent in 3DS Max to do the original knob.

Is that better enough? I enlarged the font by 10%, now it's 9.2 pt instead of 8.3 pt.

If that's not good enough maybe I can make the font change size depending on how much space the text takes. For example when it writes something like "0.0" maybe it can be in 10 pt and when it writes CMYW is can be in 8.3 pt?