Kjaerhus Gold Series, Overlap?

[Aleksey Vaneev]

EssEQ, GlissEQ and HarmonyEQ could just as well be one single product, and having switches to activate different features.

You are probably joking about combining EssEQ and GlissEQ. HarmoniEQ can't be combined with any EQ plug-in, because it is too CPU-heavy and could render GlissEQ or any track EQ unusable for in-track insertion.

But will your existing plugins be updated with 64bit support?
(not for free, but for a smaller fee of course)
Or will there be yet another product series, and expecting customers to buy them all over again?
This is the core of my topic and reasoning here.

Of course, existing Voxengo plug-ins will eventually be ported to 64-bit code, with a small upgrade fee requirement. You are forgetting my point that most existing Voxengo plug-ins gained a lot of new features for free, for all existing users.

So, if developer releases a new plug-in that SEEMINGLY looks similar to other plug-ins, you'll have to check all elements of the equation before saying 'how greedy this developer is'.

[kylen]

...most existing Voxengo plug-ins gained a lot of new features for free, for all existing users.

This is true and has been for a few years now. Anyone who wants to confirm this statement can easily go to the Voxengo forum (and KVR forum for that matter) and also the downloads page to see how many free features have been implemented - many of the features have been suggested by customers in the forums - or anyone with a persuading argument! It's pretty extraordinary IMO

[lfm]

EssEQ, GlissEQ and HarmonyEQ could just as well be one single product, and having switches to activate different features.

You are probably joking about combining EssEQ and GlissEQ. HarmoniEQ can't be combined with any EQ plug-in, because it is too CPU-heavy and could render GlissEQ or any track EQ unusable for in-track insertion.

Joking, not at all. All modern hosts have easily accessed freeze function, and there are just a couple of plugins you need to run in realtime at a time anyway.

And as you choose features by a switch, you will be able to move cpu load to what is actually used.

Aleksey, it's your business and you can do what you like with my feedback.

From what I've seen you have quite a group of followers on KVR and elsewhere and is a highly respected developer. But I will never be part of the Voxengo owners, that it quite clear to me now. Your thinking totally contradict mine.

[Aleksey Vaneev]

lfm, OK, it is your choice. But on the matter of combining EssEQ and GlissEQ - you should check both plug-ins before making such suggestions. There is no way to combine graphics equalizer with parameteric equalizer without adding two independent control layers - (i.e. without creating a two-headed monster). This, of course, does not fit my development guidelines.

[headquest]

I see graphic EQ and parametric EQ as two totally different effects. I would not want an EQ that attempted to do both tasks - that seems to me a fairly silly suggestion

I do have a question about the Voxengo EQs though, while we're here ...
I demoed both CurveEQ and GlissEQ, which are very different (and both very tempting to me - excellent plugs!) but I did not understand the purpose of HarmonieEQ. I read the blurb but didn't quite understand. Could you explain in simplet terms how is it different? Thanks!

[lfm]

I see graphic EQ and parametric EQ as two totally different effects. I would not want an EQ that attempted to do both tasks - that seems to me a fairly silly suggestion

Silly or not, I think Izotope has a really clever approach to this.

http://www.izotope.com/products/audio/ozone/eq.html

Widen the horizontal rectangle, and Q-value changes, and just drag it in place, and center frequency changes, and drag it up/down to position the amount of adjustment in dB. Very rapid way to listen in realtime and find the edge you are looking for.

Same style is used in both Trash and Ozone.

[M'Snah]

Silly or not, I think Izotope has a really clever approach to this.

Then look no further . I've been perfectly happy with the Voxengo plugins I used to have, and I'll probably get them again when my skills and hearing have developed enough to actually benefit from having different EQ's etc in my toolbox.

[headquest]

But Ozone is essentially a mastering tool, with several integrated processes, and is CPU intensive as a result. I don't think it a good idea to use that as a channel insert... surely that is real overkill. Tools like GlissEQ are far better at the mixing stage. Aleksey already explained this...

[Aleksey Vaneev]

Widen the horizontal rectangle, and Q-value changes, and just drag it in place, and center frequency changes, and drag it up/down to position the amount of adjustment in dB. Very rapid way to listen in realtime and find the edge you are looking for.

Voxengo GlissEQ has control keys for this kind of EQ tuning (coordinates locking).

[Aleksey Vaneev]

I did not understand the purpose of HarmonieEQ. I read the blurb but didn't quite understand. Could you explain in simplet terms how is it different? Thanks!

HarmoniEQ was mainly designed as an EQ with character - for those who like it. It is by no means a required tool (like GlissEQ, for example) - HarmoniEQ was also mainly designed as a post-processing (mastering) tool. Beside that I do plan to refine plug-in desciptions in the future.

[bmanic]

I see graphic EQ and parametric EQ as two totally different effects. I would not want an EQ that attempted to do both tasks - that seems to me a fairly silly suggestion

Silly or not, I think Izotope has a really clever approach to this.

http://www.izotope.com/products/audio/ozone/eq.html

Widen the horizontal rectangle, and Q-value changes, and just drag it in place, and center frequency changes, and drag it up/down to position the amount of adjustment in dB. Very rapid way to listen in realtime and find the edge you are looking for.

Same style is used in both Trash and Ozone.

Eh? You do know that GlissEQ can have it's gain changed, Q changed and position without using any modifier keys, without even letting go of the 'dot'? To change Q, keep BOTH mouse buttons pressed in and drag up/down.

You can then with modifier keys lock it in place where you want.

IMHO Voxengo handling of Gain/Q/Frequency is by far the quickest and most intuitive to use. No need for extra fancy graphics or 'handles'. Simple drag and shape as you like.

- bManic

[bmanic]

I did not understand the purpose of HarmonieEQ. I read the blurb but didn't quite understand. Could you explain in simplet terms how is it different? Thanks!

HarmoniEQ was mainly designed as an EQ with character - for those who like it. It is by no means a required tool (like GlissEQ, for example) - HarmoniEQ was also mainly designed as a post-processing (mastering) tool. Beside that I do plan to refine plug-in desciptions in the future.

.. which would suggest that Overtone like harmonic distortion would be AWESOME for HarmoniEQ. Please consider this.

Or at least don't forget about HarmoniEQ. I think it's unique 'dynamic' way of adding harmonics is a cool consept but it's somehow a bit rough still. I can't quite put my finger on it but this EQ feels like a slightly rough-diamond still, sound wise.

Don't get me wrong, it is excellent but I hope you have some time to consider improvements to this little bugger too.

Cheers!
bManic

PS. yes, I am selfish.. I don't own GlissEQ so hence the suggestions!

[justjazz]

...

[lfm]

But Ozone is essentially a mastering tool, with several integrated processes, and is CPU intensive as a result. I don't think it a good idea to use that as a channel insert... surely that is real overkill. Tools like GlissEQ are far better at the mixing stage. Aleksey already explained this...

It was just a comment to your wish for parametric contra graphic. You can have both - paragraphic.

And I have both Ozone and Trash since 2003. Yes, if using all things in there and on 4 bands, it's cpu heavy. But using just EQ or compressor it's not so bad. And as mentioned it's easy to freeze a track nowadays, and the plugin is disabled in the process automatically, saving cpu.

My aim was never to trashtalk Voxengo products as much as finding out why all these products to confuse customers. Answer was more or less, well let us developers decide what is best - and my reaction is that we users knows best what we want. Reaction to this was that developer does not like what I like, and there we part. There is nothing more to it and nothing to battle about. One size does not fit all.

[bmanic]

Exactly, you said it yourself, and obviously YOUR size does not fit all.

- bManic