DMG EQuilibrium

[DaveGamble]

it will be a stricly clean eq or will feature a transformer emulation or things like that?

Strictly clean. All the EQ circuit models feature the things that make them interesting as EQs, but none of the stuff that would make it impossible to have, say, a Pultec in parallel with a 550. Because that's the flexibility that I wanted here.

Also, the distortion you get out of two units is never exactly the same, while the EQ behaviour is often pretty close (and can be corrected with a little tweaking), so it removes the dispute about whether it sounds EXACTLY like the original etc... It'll do what the original does, without the noise and distortion, which you may add to taste later

Dave.

[zvenx]

I just hope it is easy to use, like Equick.....Compassion still sounds great but I rarely ever use it......for an audio/engineer geek its a treasure I am sure.
I like things that are ez to operate.... get me the sound I want as quickly as possible...

rsp

If you choose to, you can use it as either EQuick or EQuality.

Dave.

Wonderful

rsp

[zvenx]

[..............
Also, the distortion you get out of two units is never exactly the same, while the EQ behaviour is often pretty close (and can be corrected with a little tweaking), so it removes the dispute about whether it sounds EXACTLY like the original etc... It'll do what the original does, without the noise and distortion, which you may add to taste later

Dave.

does that mean you don't model the noise and distortion anywhere in the plug in and it is up to the user to use another plugin to model? or does it mean you do model noise and distortion in general, but the user can choose to apply it or not on the output stage.. if that makes any sense?
rsp

[djanthonyw]

it will be a stricly clean eq or will feature a transformer emulation or things like that?

Strictly clean. All the EQ circuit models feature the things that make them interesting as EQs, but none of the stuff that would make it impossible to have, say, a Pultec in parallel with a 550. Because that's the flexibility that I wanted here.

Also, the distortion you get out of two units is never exactly the same, while the EQ behaviour is often pretty close (and can be corrected with a little tweaking), so it removes the dispute about whether it sounds EXACTLY like the original etc... It'll do what the original does, without the noise and distortion, which you may add to taste later

Dave.

It's a clean EQ, but with different circuit models? So there is no saturation?

Will this also be a dynamic EQ?

[bishop666]

The eq is clean but you can add dirt to it( within the plugin) if you like to.

[DaveGamble]

[..............
Also, the distortion you get out of two units is never exactly the same, while the EQ behaviour is often pretty close (and can be corrected with a little tweaking), so it removes the dispute about whether it sounds EXACTLY like the original etc... It'll do what the original does, without the noise and distortion, which you may add to taste later

Dave.

does that mean you don't model the noise and distortion anywhere in the plug in and it is up to the user to use another plugin to model? or does it mean you do model noise and distortion in general, but the user can choose to apply it or not on the output stage.. if that makes any sense?
rsp

No noise or distortion anywhere in the plug. This is a precision EQ.

Dave.

[zvenx]

[..............
Also, the distortion you get out of two units is never exactly the same, while the EQ behaviour is often pretty close (and can be corrected with a little tweaking), so it removes the dispute about whether it sounds EXACTLY like the original etc... It'll do what the original does, without the noise and distortion, which you may add to taste later

Dave.

does that mean you don't model the noise and distortion anywhere in the plug in and it is up to the user to use another plugin to model? or does it mean you do model noise and distortion in general, but the user can choose to apply it or not on the output stage.. if that makes any sense?
rsp

No noise or distortion anywhere in the plug. This is a precision EQ.

Dave.

ok,
got ya

rsp

[DaveGamble]

it will be a stricly clean eq or will feature a transformer emulation or things like that?

Strictly clean. All the EQ circuit models feature the things that make them interesting as EQs, but none of the stuff that would make it impossible to have, say, a Pultec in parallel with a 550. Because that's the flexibility that I wanted here.

Also, the distortion you get out of two units is never exactly the same, while the EQ behaviour is often pretty close (and can be corrected with a little tweaking), so it removes the dispute about whether it sounds EXACTLY like the original etc... It'll do what the original does, without the noise and distortion, which you may add to taste later

Dave.

It's a clean EQ, but with different circuit models? So there is no saturation?

Will this also be a dynamic EQ?

No saturation. Not dynamic. I think you can imagine what my dynamic EQ will look like, and I have no interest in compromising the design to add in flimsy dynamic support.

Dave.

[DaveGamble]

[..............
Also, the distortion you get out of two units is never exactly the same, while the EQ behaviour is often pretty close (and can be corrected with a little tweaking), so it removes the dispute about whether it sounds EXACTLY like the original etc... It'll do what the original does, without the noise and distortion, which you may add to taste later

Dave.

does that mean you don't model the noise and distortion anywhere in the plug in and it is up to the user to use another plugin to model? or does it mean you do model noise and distortion in general, but the user can choose to apply it or not on the output stage.. if that makes any sense?
rsp

No noise or distortion anywhere in the plug. This is a precision EQ.

Dave.

ok,
got ya

rsp

Precisely because the question "what would neve distortion in parallel wil api distortion" has no real answer, while "what would a neve in parallel with an api EQ sound like, without distortion" does. This is the best possible solution.

Dave.

[zvenx]

[..............
Also, the distortion you get out of two units is never exactly the same, while the EQ behaviour is often pretty close (and can be corrected with a little tweaking), so it removes the dispute about whether it sounds EXACTLY like the original etc... It'll do what the original does, without the noise and distortion, which you may add to taste later

Dave.

does that mean you don't model the noise and distortion anywhere in the plug in and it is up to the user to use another plugin to model? or does it mean you do model noise and distortion in general, but the user can choose to apply it or not on the output stage.. if that makes any sense?
rsp

No noise or distortion anywhere in the plug. This is a precision EQ.

Dave.

ok,
got ya

rsp

Precisely because the question "what would neve distortion in parallel wil api distortion" has no real answer, while "what would a neve in parallel with an api EQ sound like, without distortion" does. This is the best possible solution.

Dave.

proof of the pudding will be in the eating.
But your scenario above won't have been similar faced by Urs et al when doing Diva with modules from different synths and I am pretty sure they included saturation.

rsp

[DaveGamble]

What am I even saying about distortion and noise? Hardly any of the EQs of note have distortion characteristics you'd even want (head nod to API and Pultec as exceptions). All the other major EQs are famous BECAUSE they're quiet and clean!

Dave.

[DaveGamble]

proof of the pudding will be in the eating.
But your scenario above won't have been similar faced by Urs et al when doing Diva with modules from different synths and I am pretty sure they included saturation.

rsp

I am confident you will find it (perhaps unexpectedly) delicious!

My scenario is rather different to that in Diva, which switches out one module for another, but perhaps this will be easier to see when you have the thing in your hands. Because EVERY BAND CAN USE A DIFFERENT EQ MODEL...
And you can still run them in parallel, or configure their phase behaviour.

Dave.

[Aiynzahev]

What am I even saying about distortion and noise? Hardly any of the EQs of note have distortion characteristics you'd even want (head nod to API and Pultec as exceptions). All the other major EQs are famous BECAUSE they're quiet and clean!

Dave.

Oh I just noticed your location. I was born in Truro myself and only recently left there.

I wanted to ask and this above is pretty much an answer already, but do you think distortion and saturation in EQ's is really all that important to the sound of an EQ? Isn't it primarily the curve or gain-Q relationship?

As you said, in most units distortion and noise was intentionally kept the the very minimum.

Finally, do you expect people will feel this EQ to be in actual fact a replacement of the dedicated emulations of Pultecs, Neves and API's for example?

[zvenx]

What am I even saying about distortion and noise? Hardly any of the EQs of note have distortion characteristics you'd even want (head nod to API and Pultec as exceptions). All the other major EQs are famous BECAUSE they're quiet and clean!

Dave.

Touche, its the Pultec I had in mind behind most of my questions...

but, as an owner of Equality, Equick and Compassion I am pretty sure I will be getting it ..

Equick is my EQ of choice for most things.....the only thing it isn't is my pultec pro (uad) which I use on vocals) and of course Nuendo's standard EQ which I use for gentle cuts on non essential instruments in a track....



rsp

[DaveGamble]

What am I even saying about distortion and noise? Hardly any of the EQs of note have distortion characteristics you'd even want (head nod to API and Pultec as exceptions). All the other major EQs are famous BECAUSE they're quiet and clean!

Dave.

Oh I just noticed your location. I was born in Truro myself and only recently left there.

I'm 15 mins away from Truro!

I wanted to ask and this above is pretty much an answer already, but do you think distortion and saturation in EQ's is really all that important to the sound of an EQ? Isn't it primarily the curve or gain-Q relationship?

There are times when one might drive a Pultec, to get the benefit of the valve output stage. But is that really EQing, or rather reamping?

The reamping issue is something, I think, to address in it's own terms, rather than jamming something into an EQ (and potentially limiting how far you can go with it).

The gain-q interactions have been modelled very carefully, and also some weirder interactions (the Pultec, for instance), plus things like "reciprocal gain-q" and all that kind of stuff. It all reduces to measurable equations.

As you said, in most units distortion and noise was intentionally kept the the very minimum.

Finally, do you expect people will feel this EQ to be in actual fact a replacement of the dedicated emulations of Pultecs, Neves and API's for example?

Well, strangely one finds that the most revered models of these units are not necessarily ones that model the saturation in any meaningful way, but rather implement the EQ curves in a precise "analogue" (read: accurately approximated) way.

So, I offer you the first (?) linear phase (or whatever phase you feel like) Pultec, which models the low frequency interactions, the shelf-filter style of high cut, and the weird parametric high boost... And I'll be very interested to see whether simply doing what the hardware does, with awesome digital models, will end up preferable to some or even all dedicated models... (And of course, bear in mind you get a graph too).

That said, I have deliberately simplified the Pultec model, so you can pick individual bands. Interaction between lows and highs is pretty minimal (...Ian found, working on liquid mix), and the high band interaction is pretty weak too, but I'll be interested to see.

In some ways, what I've striven for with EQuilibrium is to build the Platonic Ideal of an EQ, and the Platonic Ideal EQ is certainly noise and distortion free!

Dave.