PSP Audioware NobleQ

[miro pajic]

Genau. It's nothing dramatic but for a "modelled" EQ such as the Abbey Road ones, the natural curve at the top of your spectrum (depending on sample rate of course) should be integrated. Even Live's EQ8 can do it...

Unnatural (decrampled):



With Hi Q setting:



It's surely not always audible but I personally consider these things an important factor when developers say they modelled the curves of a specific EQ (which can simply be done by upsampling AFAIK).

In the end only results count. Most EQ's can be nulled, sure. But it's a lot about the visual effect and how your brain works with what it looks at. Some EQ's are tempting me too boost a lot while others "look" too dramatic when I do a strong boost.

I'm not 100% sure when it's about phase in digital EQ's but there is differnces. Make a large cut in the mids with NobleQ and you should notice that you just take away mids. With many other EQ's I get a weird phasey sound that just sounds weird. The PSP EQ is great to handle and sounds "musical" to my ears.

My conclusion is: The PSP guys know what they're doing


Cheers

P.S. The word decrampled was used here: http://www.eiosis.com/images/amlt/EQCurveComparison.gif

[4damind]

Yes, upsampling is a known solution.

PSP is using some proprietary oversampling (FAT mode).

Fabrice has build with the AirEQ a very good analog modelled EQ. Unfortunately it had many bugs when it was released, was very expensive and the gain behaviour is completely different then expected but it sounds great
Anyway, AirEQ uses no oversampling/upsampling. They using some proprietary thing "AMLT® Filtering Technology".

[DrApostropheX]

Anyway, AirEQ uses no oversampling/upsampling. They using some proprietary thing "AMLT® Filtering Technology".

In that case, the early bugs were probably to be expected: everyone knows you can't make an AMLT without breaking a few eqs.

[4damind]

Anyway, AirEQ uses no oversampling/upsampling. They using some proprietary thing "AMLT® Filtering Technology".

In that case, the early bugs were probably to be expected: everyone knows you can't make an AMLT without breaking a few eqs.

Yeah. But Fabrice has the same problems with VCC (SlateDigital). Many bugs since the first release (March?) and people waiting every day for a bug free version. It's not only a thing of a new technology, it's no proper implementation and missing quality management (beta testing etc)... But this is OT

[kvaca]

Yes, upsampling is a known solution.

PSP is using some proprietary oversampling (FAT mode).

its a pity that it cannot be switched off like in their MasterQ and on the other side-when ultimate quality is needed for render- 2xoversampling is insufficient in some cases,many companies offer better solutions these days

[sunny_j]

but for a "modelled" EQ such as the Abbey Road ones

get your facts straight before u start bashing manufacturers. Brilliance pack DOES NOT suffer from these cramped curves.

[Compyfox]

Genau. It's nothing dramatic but for a "modelled" EQ such as the Abbey Road ones, the natural curve at the top of your spectrum (depending on sample rate of course) should be integrated. Even Live's EQ8 can do it...

Now I finally understand what you mean with "decramped". I understand it more like an unatural EQ boost around the shannon & nyquist "mirror" frequency (around 20kHz) resulting from god-knows-what.

I've actually seen the other way around as well, where the frequency simply "drops" (cuts off, like a 96dB/Oct filter) for both the lowend and highend as well. Both with oversampled and non oversamples EQs. Or unnatural boosts in the lowend section (where these particular devs said "it's like that").

Want to totally freak out? Measure StripBus (especially Strip) from SKnote. (yeah, yeah... Input saturator, not necessarily EQ - just an example in this case)


But let me get back on topic, please:
I still wouldn't say that this is a bug. Did you check the phase response of these EQs? If there is no shift, shouldn't you be fine? Did you cross-check with higher frequency rates in VST Plugin Analyser?

I really try to understand the constant bashing towards certain firms. Is it because it has some relation to the statement "analog modeled"? Or has this more to do with the question/hypothesis by vieris "All digital EQs are the same" (which does not take distortion in the feedback path of each individual frequency "module" e.g. Gain/Q/Freq into consideration)?


BTW:
Abbey Road's Brilliance Pack is a passive, non powered circuity - so you neither see anything worthwhile in terms of THD, but the "wiring" is what makes it special. Same with the ANTEC port from Nomad Factory.

I don't have the book "Recording the Beatles" at hand to read up on the TG console and whether or not the EQ modules were passive, non powered as well (much like the modules of the REDD.51). So, sorry.

In the end only results count. Most EQ's can be nulled, sure. But it's a lot about the visual effect and how your brain works with what it looks at. Some EQ's are tempting me too boost a lot while others "look" too dramatic when I do a strong boost.

This effect is actually wanted as well. Take a look at certain so called "emulations". They look vintage, they should sound like their GUI. But if you take it apart with VST Plugin Analyser (or what you prefer in terms of measuring), you're either in for a pleasant, or a not to pleasant surprise.

But, like you said with the results, isn't the workflow what's most important?
If it works for you, why not?

I'm not 100% sure when it's about phase in digital EQ's but there is differnces. Make a large cut in the mids with NobleQ and you should notice that you just take away mids. With many other EQ's I get a weird phasey sound that just sounds weird. The PSP EQ is great to handle and sounds "musical" to my ears.

My conclusion is: The PSP guys know what they're doing

I'd say it clearly has anything to do with the phase between two frequencies of an EQ. Which is the very reason why there are Linear Phase, Minimum Phase (also known as the most common EQs) and some other rare spinoffs.

I'd say other developers, at least those that are longer it the game, know their thing as well, how to optimize code for CPU cycles (or not). Since the userbase drama with "analog emulation or not" came up (a couple of year ago), programmers take that more into consideration. If they still stick to it after they released that particular creation lies on a whole different ballpark.

The endresult is either having a good performing EQ (I'd count ElectriQ to that), or a mess of code with maybe just an added saturator/waveshaper to let the EQ sound "analog" (a lot of freeware but also commercial candidates).


Which EQ is superior?
I'd say the one you can work with best and produce your desired result the fastest way.

In my case - I use C.Budde's NoNameEQ or (recenty mostly) Cubase's built in EQ. Sometimes for a certain circuity another EQ (like Variety of Sound BootEQmkII or an EQ with locked frequency and passive circuity like the Nomad Factory ALLTEC), if there is one with saturation involved (like Pultronic from G-Sonique) yet another one, etc. Whatever get's the job done - and fast.

There is no real good and bad out there, neither is there a holy grail or non-plus-ultra. And there is no EQ that sounds "better or worse" either. They pretty much do the same thing, just with a different wiring. A tube "emulation" doesn't make it instantly warm either - you need to overdrive the module (or the input gains tage) for that purpose first.

And as long as devs still create their own reference levels (some at -18dB RMS, some at 0dB, some at god knows where) and as long as we're internal 32/64bit float - we can pretty much NOT overdrive a module of purpose unless it has a definite set low turning point (Nebula presets by Alex B come to mind).



Summary:
Yes, pretty much every EQ can (almost) null with each other. Heck even stuff recorded through hardware (I'd count artefacts below -80dB to nulling as well). Big deal.

P.S. The word decrampled was used here: http://www.eiosis.com/images/amlt/EQCurveComparison.gif

Ah, good old Fabrice.
Still a great person and outstanding programmer though.



Anyway, thanks for finally clearing what you meant.
Makes a lot more sense to the readers.

[mikebeck]

In that case, the early bugs were probably to be expected: everyone knows you can't make an AMLT without breaking a few eqs.

You have quite successfully caused laughter from where I sit. No, wait, not from where I sit. That could be misconstrued. Second try: I laughed! Thank you for that.

Oh, and I like NobleQ a whole lot.

[DrApostropheX]

In that case, the early bugs were probably to be expected: everyone knows you can't make an AMLT without breaking a few eqs.

You have quite successfully caused laughter from where I sit. No, wait, not from where I sit. That could be misconstrued. Second try: I laughed! Thank you for that.

Oh, and I like NobleQ a whole lot.

I'm just glad that someone got it! Thank you for that. And thank you to Compyfox for making me feel good about EQs again

[kylen]

I just stopped in to say I really like the NobleQ quite a bit for my remasters. I've been using it for a few weeks now and it has bumped my 'sampling EQ's' out of my chain for now. Besides a really good overall sound and hi-end, having a Boost/Off/Attenuate all in the same switch really is a fine way to quickly A/B my settings. The ear likes this method!

It's a nice match to PSP's OldTimer comp that someone already mentioned earlier. Kudo's PSP !

[VariKusBrainZ]

And also the electricity supply gives a cleaner sound in Germany than anywhere else in the world.....

[Bronto Scorpio]

Just 1 day of the demo left

Cheers
Dennis

[shanecgriffo]

me too !
-so i bought it!

[hibidy]

My decision was that since the full version is only going to be 10 bucks more, I'm going to pass for now. This in no way reflects the quality of the product, just more of a decision that I've got eq's covered and the savings don't quite make me feel "pressured"

[Sequent]

Hm, I'm wondering whether that's accurate or some sort of misprint, since in the past the difference was a lot more dramatic. If it's only going to be $10 more I'm kind of leaning in the same direction as you are.

My decision was that since the full version is only going to be 10 bucks more, I'm going to pass for now. This in no way reflects the quality of the product, just more of a decision that I've got eq's covered and the savings don't quite make me feel "pressured"