PLParEQ and Algorithmix EQs

[RapRogue]

If you want to mimic hardware, try Q-clone. Provided
that you got it...that is.

[bmanic]

Unfortunately, Q-clone is static. It does not sound exactly like the hardware. Only like a 'snapshot' at one particular moment in time and for this exact reason it also sounds a bit 'sterile' compared to the captured hardware. In a mix situation this might of course not matter (having a character EQ that 'breathes' with the source, like a Pultec, then Q-clone fails miserably).

Cheers!
bManic

[RapRogue]

Mayhap a bit static but if you use Q-clone and save the
real thing for the 3 most vital elements, it's very
doubtful anybody will notice.

Besides, if you think one snapshot is too static make
more presets and then automate it to change over time.

With any kind of clipbased FX you can cut it up in
desirable 'cuts' and randomize the whole process.

Infact you can chose what building blocks to use.
Change the whole flow etc.

All comes down to how much work you are willing to put
into it, like changing cables and then make a new
capture, move the gain by the smallest possible amount etc.

On top of my head continuing the Firium EQ states
might be beneficial for any type of EQ impulse responses. /syllables off!!!

[omo]

Qurious: omo, Have you tried the Weiss EQ1 MK2?

- bManic

I have. Although "tried" doesn't really make it "have experience". I've attented a couple of Weiss gear demos out of curiousity and also along with other gear at exibitions. MK2 is magic EQ or ot least it was magic on given material and in given settings, which, btw were what I produced in this thread (download sample) - sharp cuts. MK2 seem to do it great. I was actually more interested in hearing his sompressor but it really did not impress me at all.

[autloc]

There's something about the way analog signal modulates with its hiss, the noise that is caused by component interaction, something extremely nonlinear and difficult to emulate. There hasn't been extensive research about this anywhere in the world (who knows I might take up on it one day).

Surely there must have been extensive research on noise in communications systems. Now that everything's digital it might not all be the right sort of research - a lot about channel bandwidth, optimal pulse shaping and bit error rates rather than aesthetics (though still concerned with the noise sources and types), but I bet if you go back to some journals from the 60s and 70s you'll find a lot of studies on audio-frequency noise in circuits.

If you do find anything, please share -- I'm quite curious too

[bmanic]

I have. Although "tried" doesn't really make it "have experience". I've attented a couple of Weiss gear demos out of curiousity and also along with other gear at exibitions. MK2 is magic EQ or ot least it was magic on given material and in given settings, which, btw were what I produced in this thread (download sample) - sharp cuts. MK2 seem to do it great. I was actually more interested in hearing his sompressor but it really did not impress me at all.

You've had pretty much the same experience as me. I wasn't that impressed with the compressor either (apparently it takes time and patience to learn it). However, the Weiss EQ, when put into Linear-phase mode, sucks. Well, ok, that's a bit harsh wording but I really didn't find it that good at all. In linear-phase mode I much prefere this PLParEQ and Algorithmix.

Cheers!
bManic

[bmanic]

Besides, if you think one snapshot is too static make
more presets and then automate it to change over time.

With any kind of clipbased FX you can cut it up in
desirable 'cuts' and randomize the whole process.

You need to hear a Sintefex or Liquid channel in action to understand what the difference between static and non-static means (one can turn off the dynamic behaviour in these). Even with the sintefex, it is still a stale process as there is a finite number of impulses that it goes trough depending on the level of the input signal.

Like I said before, Q-clone works well when you are not after the captured units own 'colour' or non-linearities but rather the EQ shape itself. As soon as you also want the character and colour of the unit, Q-clone falls short.

Cheers!
bManic

[Kingston]

I bet if you go back to some journals from the 60s and 70s you'll find a lot of studies on audio-frequency noise in circuits.

If you do find anything, please share -- I'm quite curious too

Oh I do realise there are plenty of studies of the analog side of things. Most of this I can even simulate in spice (even thermal issues).

What I meant was that there isn't so much information along the lines of efficient implementations: http://www.simulanalog.org/statevariable.pdf

Heck, even such a simple thing as digital filter lacks that non-specific dynamic emulation. I'm sure it's a number of things interacting, but one should be able to parametrise it and create an algorithm to do all that.

Hydratone manages some of this dynamic sound by "cheating" (dynamic convolution).

I would say noise is still secondary to that and doesn't necessarily need to be simulated if the intermodulation (for lack of a better word) has its own algorithm.

[Kingston]

(excuse the potentional thread hijack again)

Just had a semi-brilliant idea. Take a dynamic model of a good sounding EQ (a bunch of impulses). Compare to a static model of a similar, but fully digital filter impulse set. (just one filter type first)

What things are changing in the analog impulse set besides the expected when compared to the static digital set?

Create an algorithm based on that and slap on the standard filter model used.

Analog emulation magic, level 2.

I think that's going to be my next big project.

[snooky]

it better has to be free then!

[omo]

Weiss EQ, when put into Linear-phase mode, sucks.

I pretty much agree. I'd take some phase shift in MP mode over PL pre-echos any time.

[RapRogue]

Besides, if you think one snapshot is too static make
more presets and then automate it to change over time.

With any kind of clipbased FX you can cut it up in
desirable 'cuts' and randomize the whole process.

You need to hear a Sintefex or Liquid channel in action to understand what the difference between static and non-static means (one can turn off the dynamic behaviour in these). Even with the sintefex, it is still a stale process as there is a finite number of impulses that it goes trough depending on the level of the input signal.

Like I said before, Q-clone works well when you are not after the captured units own 'colour' or non-linearities but rather the EQ shape itself. As soon as you also want the character and colour of the unit, Q-clone falls short.

Cheers!
bManic

As long as not distortion you can capture it, and
reproduce it. Non-linearities can be achieved by
varied responses over time.

However, if you are after one specific thing each
realm do excel at its own domain. But the benefits of
analogue EQ is close to none (nowdays) even though it
has its uses, and some still swear by it. Analogue
compression on the other hand...

Kanye West's last album is a great example of the same
hype.

[bmanic]

But the benefits of
analogue EQ is close to none (nowdays) even though it
has its uses, and some still swear by it.

With this, I do not agree at all though. High-end analogue EQ simply sounds so different to any kind of digital eq that it makes BOTH very valuable and much needed, imho of course.

Cheers!
bManic

[snooky]

hm, what do you guys think, should I add some saturation/drive before or after the plparEQ to get some kind of "analog" sounding harmonic boosting ie, what's closer to the big hardware sound??

[OMU]

bmaniac, I'm happy for you having a FX2000
What do you do about it's noise cause I read it's pretty noisy.
All the best.