KVR Audio

vieris · Post by **vieris** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 6:26 pm

Nokenoku · Post by **Nokenoku** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 6:38 pm

We just had that topic some days ago here:
http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 18#3223118

Tren · Post by **Tren** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 6:39 pm

I always thought this was the case :) Most people seem to end up living way above their means technologically but subsequently end up living way below their means musically. Shame.

vieris · Post by **vieris** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 6:40 pm

With the amount of emulation hype & sales it's not widely understood.

MitchK1989 · Post by **MitchK1989** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 6:41 pm

That's what I always figured.

Which is why I use logic's channel EQ (which has a brilliant interface btw) instead of purchasing straight up parametric EQs. I'm quite interested in the morphing EQ in filterscape though.

jupiter8 · Post by **jupiter8** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 6:42 pm

If you want to make a lot of friends fast,post this over at gearslutz. They're going to love you,i promise.

Nokenoku · Post by **Nokenoku** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 6:45 pm

LOL, yeah. With posts like that you'll immediatly have a lot of new "friends" over there, "contributing" to your topic.

Audio~Geek · Post by **Audio~Geek** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 6:50 pm

very interesting.

really post this at Gearslutz!

Shy · Post by **Shy** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 6:56 pm

How could I possibly use EQ + external saturator to emulate PEQ Blue's parallel EQs?

vieris · Post by **vieris** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 6:57 pm

1. Parametric/Series - "PEQ".
(These are the most common track EQ's, Most channelstrip EQ's, Waves stuff, Most Native DAW eq's, it's never ending. )

2. parallel - More uncommon in the digital world. Algorithmix has it.

3. Linear phase - Mastering EQ

These 3 types will be different. But PEQ's are the most commonly used/emulated.

Shane Sanders · Post by **Shane Sanders** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 6:58 pm

I've mostly been a channel EQ guy (and I'm big on shelving), too. Not because I knew anything about any of this particularly, but because I'm a moderately lazy artist who mostly needs to make decisions fairly quickly and move on...I generally lean toward the big picture. I'm simply not good enough or disciplined to need a $400 EQ. So, I'm kinda glad to hear this theory.

Rock Hardbuns · Post by **Rock Hardbuns** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 7:10 pm

I think you are right WRT emulation. Or actually, one might say that all EQ's are emulations. Or to be exact, digital and analog EQ both implement mathematical ideal algorithms.

But your first statement.. doubt it. I mean, you'd have to specify what you mean by "proper design", but there is a number of ways to do filters, and they do not all behave the same.

Shy · Post by **Shy** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 7:11 pm

It's also easy to neglect the fact that EQ band curves can be vastly different, and the way bands interact with each other, in digital too. I guess you've tried Blue's various EQ types. You can't simply emulate that using any standard EQ + whatever processor. An EQ is not all about the "sound" or "color", but about the behavior of the curves and bands.

vieris · Post by **vieris** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 7:22 pm

Shy wrote:It's also easy to neglect the fact that EQ band curves can be vastly different, and the way bands interact with each other, in digital too. I guess you've tried Blue's various EQ types. You can't simply emulate that using any standard EQ + whatever processor. An EQ is not all about the "sound" or "color", but about the behavior of the curves and bands.

Go to Blue's page.. It's tells you all the info you need to know.. I linked to it in the OP.

Shy · Post by **Shy** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 7:25 pm

What does it tell me, that everything can be emulated? Well in theory it can, yes, but that doesn't mean all digital EQs are the same and that you can always emulate one with another, not even close. If you're a developer who programs his own emulation, maybe you'll succeed one day.

Digital EQ Fact & Myth.