KVR Audio

aabyssx · Post by **aabyssx** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:23 pm

cthmusic wrote:Any chance of a mac version in the future? Your products look great, im always looking for different eq's and compressors.

Thanks

All our plugins are planned to be multiplatform plugins (OS X and Windows).
But currently all our resources are allocated to finish and support the current PC releases.
Mac versions of all our plugins are on schedule but the priority is lower.

bjm4tt · Post by **bjm4tt** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:29 pm

Sicklecell666 wrote:
9b0 wrote:Funny.
Enjoy your brilliant but brief Career Suicide, Einstein.

Why just care about the sound? Such a shitty fuss about an installer, or dll, or whatever. This eq does some major commercial stuff for FREE! There was not much interest around their another two plugins NWsynth and Dynamix, despite of their quality. I think, lots of the visitors here at KVR believe rather in the HYPE around a software, than in the SOUND itself. I think your reply is a bit unkind for a developer, who develops the most advanced filters nowadays. You should care about your ears, not your f...in' plugin folder...

pw · Post by pw » Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:35 pm

I like it, thanks for making it free.

I don't care about the installer, not such a big deal, certainly not worth a page of two of argument when it is a nice, free, eq/filter.

aabyssx · Post by **aabyssx** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:39 pm

Jens wrote:
Jens wrote:I see - but what about switching all five bands off by default?
still no answer to this very reasonable ( I think) suggestion?

Yes, reasonable. By calculating only one band instead of the 5 you can spare about 50-60% cpu time.
A simple solution is where bands with -oo dB gain are no calculated. But I am afraid you will not gain that much CPU time.

Anyway, ~customer~ feedback is important so it may be implemented into V1.1 sometime.

BTW the CPU performance monitor lies a bit if only one instance is used because the host overhead. Try measuring the CPU performance by using more instances of NWEQ. I assume that you will get better results.

mauseoleum · Post by **mauseoleum** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:40 pm

installer wars ... ouch.

it's been an aesthetically pleasing experience at least ...

imo their installers are on par with their guis - they show some class ...

jens · Post by **jens** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:41 pm

aabyssx wrote:
Jens wrote:
Jens wrote:I see - but what about switching all five bands off by default?
still no answer to this very reasonable ( I think) suggestion?
Yes, reasonable. By calculating only one band instead of the 5 you can spare about 50-60% cpu time.
A simple solution is where bands with -oo dB gain are no calculated. But I am afraid you will not gain that much CPU time.

Anyway, ~customer~ feedback is important so it may be implemented into V1.1 sometime.

BTW the CPU performance monitor lies a bit if only one instance is used because the host overhead. Try measuring the CPU performance by using more instances of NWEQ. I assume that you will get better results.

thanks!

will try to measure more instances!

diverdee · Post by **diverdee** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:41 pm

bollox as to whether it's an installer or not - i prefer dll's, but i don't look gift horses in the mouth. Bad installer's/deinstaller's tend to mess up peoples sytems if their numpty's - personally i always manually deinstall stuff so i can check what's going on. Anyway thanks for the plug - i'll give it a whirl l8r.

aabyssx · Post by **aabyssx** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:41 pm

You too send an e-mail to info@wwaym.com!

BTW 9b0 had a hard day with testing and support. Forgive him.

edit: to Sicklecell666

aabyssx · Post by **aabyssx** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:54 pm

WWAYM is a profit oriented company. It is no secret that the reason to release free but complete and quality products is to make road and reputation for pay products. Therefore WWAYM cannot afford to publish products that leave bad taste in the customers mouth - including a buggy installer. Therefore I think that you don't have to be afraid.

edit: to Ian B

diverdee · Post by **diverdee** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:09 pm

i'm afraid of nothing tonight mate, paddy's night & the guinness is flowing my wings are like a shield of steel.

zammo · Post by **zammo** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:39 pm

thanks nice plugin..

snooky · Post by **snooky** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:46 pm

TotcProductions wrote:
fractalism wrote:Am I the only onte that thinks this thing sounds really harsh ans is best used as a sounddesign tool using the filters seperatly.
Yes and no. I think it is very...umm....can't think of a word....solid (?)...it's not transparent....but i think with careful tuning of the parameters it would definitely be able to add alot of character to a mix.

Nicely done.

Thanx WWAYM.

peace!

yeah, but the highs are so harsh...well, as a sounddesign tool it's kinda cool tho' and free.

dealwithit · Post by **dealwithit** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 8:54 pm

I just installed it to a desktop folder, dragged (drug?) out the .dll, and uninstalled. I then placed the .dll in my VST folder. I do this with every freebie that insists on an installer.

Thanks for the EQ, there's not enough good free ones. I'll have to give it a go later.

9b0 · Post by **9b0** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:17 pm

However. Except the CPU usage, what do you wait from an EQ? How could we make this EQ, or a new plugin even better?

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:53 pm

Well, if I had to say something...A/B switch, maybe?

NWEQ - free parametric EQ from WWAYM