MeldaProduction

Vitaly · Post by **Vitaly** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 9:13 pm

Hi,

If you insert it into a master buss you can use it to analyze/compare different channels to make a space for each other in a mix. For example, analyze a bass channel to find a 'hole' in a spectrum it occupies and 'put' a bass drum right there. Which brings us to an idea of using MAutoEQ as some kind of analyzing center in a session. The only feature it lacks is an ability to import it's eq curve (first 6 bands) into MEqulizer format.

Imagine this, MAuto EQ is in your master buss, you have found a desired eq curve to match (or anti-match) two sounds in your mix. You click on Export button somewhere in MAutoEQ and you see the file menu of MEqualizer (not MAutoEQ). Save it. Now, you need to insert MEqualizer in a channel you want to match, open MEqualizer's file menu, select the preset you have just exported, done. Keep using MAutoEQ to work out other part of the mix. I've already done it, manually.

I'm not saying - let MAutoEQ mix for you, not at all. But in some hard cases it can be very helpful.

A bug. Vojtech, check out readouts of draw curve. They are not correct.

Cheers,
Vitaly.

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 8:28 am

Hi Vitaly,

I understand the idea and I think it is good, I just don't understand the meaning of MEqualizer. Why cannot you use MAutoEq again?
I think that copy/past comparison would be enough, wouldn't it? :

1) Put MAutoEq to the master bus and probably analyse target.
2) Draw the desired frequency response as comparison (Comparison panel/Draw).
3) Put another MAutoEq to any track.
4) Copy the comparison from the first MAutoEq to the second (this is NOT implemented yet).
5) Analyse target in the second eq and click Equalize.

Right?

KungKrille · Post by **KungKrille** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 4:45 pm

I must say that I like this product after several tests so I just bought it

Thanks for a great product

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 6:03 pm

KungKrille wrote:I must say that I like this product after several tests so I just bought it Thanks for a great product

Thanks

. Keep enjoying!

Vitaly · Post by **Vitaly** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 8:09 pm

MeldaProduction wrote:Hi Vitaly,

I understand the idea and I think it is good, I just don't understand the meaning of MEqualizer. Why cannot you use MAutoEq again?
I think that copy/past comparison would be enough, wouldn't it? :

On some reason, I believe that MEqulizer takes less CPU power.

Am I wrong?

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 8:17 pm

Vitaly wrote: On some reason, I believe that MEqulizer takes less CPU power. Am I wrong?

Hey Vitaly,

actually that is not completely true, but almost completely true

.
Teoretically when you close GUI and use non-linear version, the results should be almost the same.

Optomadic · Post by **Optomadic** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 8:46 am

I was wondering exactly how much latency is added with the linear phase version? My host right now cant seem to give an precise number.

Thanks Voj

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:39 am

I think it is 8192. (Or maybe 16384, I'll check if you need)

MeldaProduction

KVR Audio

MAutoEqualizer