easyQ

[hi-hat]

thanks for doing this!
ive found easyQ completely suitable all around purpose eq for myself!and this separate channels feature very useful

but! we want even more give us linear phase eq and let refined audiometrics to trick people in other places
because we poor children from New Guinea are so talented and smart

[Music Engineer]

linear phase ....hmmm...this is not an easy thing to get right. i can see two approaches to this, each of which with its own problems:

-FIR filters:
-introduce latency
-quality degrades for narrow, low frequency settings
-expensive processing

-forward/backward filtering:
-not suitable for realtime processing

so, somehow both approaches do not really satisfy me which is why i left it out. maybe, someday a golden hammer crosses my path that solves these problems. until then, EasyQ will probably remain minimum phase only.

btw.: i wouldn't be so sure that linear phase is so desirable anyway (also with respect to transients), because it introduces pre-ringing which is more unlikely to be masked than the post-ringing that you get from minimum phase filters. i didn't do listening experiments, though - so, consider this as a lame excuse.

[hi-hat]

well then i have a feature request
put somewhere at bottom a reset option to zero all bands
and add please quick a-b-c-d compare option in top to listen to curves
after that easyq will be considered the best minimum phase eq ever made
at least one man will be of such an opinion

[Music Engineer]

well then i have a feature request
put somewhere at bottom a reset option to zero all bands
and add please quick a-b-c-d compare option in top to listen to curves
after that easyq will be considered the best minimum phase eq ever made
at least one man will be of such an opinion

zero all bands? why not just load the "Flat" preset? the quick-comparison option seems like a good idea. in fact, i had a similar request before and my answer was that i'd actually like to have that for all my plugins - could be very helpful in sound design to be able to quickly compare between variuos variants of a preset. that, however, is then a rather involved framework'ish thing. i may approach it someday. and thanks for yor appreciation of the EQ.

my highest priority for further developments of EasyQ is, however, to decramp all the frequency responses (get rid of the bilinear transform frequency warping - currently this is only implemented for the peak/bell curve)

[hi-hat]

but loading preset only for zero bands interfere easy concept
so big easy to hit button in the middle of bottom panel would be useful and a-b-c-d feature in the middle of upper panel .this as i dream:)...
in sonar for ex easier but in other host actually i solved this bands problem the same way you suggest but in cost of deleting all presets to have ability to reset with only one click on any arrow) - so not the best solution i think
but even in its current state this plugin suits me better than the rest available...
because of easiness which helps to concentrate on listening while arranging instead of staring typing changing parameters
im not sure about range of -48+48db and 6db passes.
but to add alternative peak types would be interesting. to get alternative response out of regular eq. there is a kind of bell with more rounded tip and steeper sides which sounds more definite and localized then smoothed standard bells with sharp tip. so if its not difficult and you know how...
and i dont know if the number of bands complicate development or no but i should mention more then 10 bands is almost useless
could you explain better about "bilinear transform frequency warping" and what this leads to on practice. im too far from maths and physics...

[hi-hat]

...well...
whatsoever...- here is a link -this from my experience with easyq take a look and decide yourself...

http://i.piccy.info/i5/31/90/1089031/easyq.png

[Music Engineer]

i like the idea of the quick-compare A/B/C/D buttons. but i'm sceptical about the full-reset button at the bottom. full-reset is potentially damageful when hit by accident. i think, potentially damageful actions should not be so easy. do you really do a full reset on an eq often enough that it warrants a dedicated button? i don't (but i don't make much music recently anyway). consider also that you don't really need to actually delete any presets in order to have quicker access to the flat-preset. you may just as well place the flat-preset into a different folder.

[hi-hat]

...
since easyq is perfect track eq you need a pair of bands to use most of time so easier to reset curve if what -to have control over how sound changes from original state
undo\redo would be great as well to prevent destructive reset

let somebody else to refer his opinion.looks like im only the single interested and you are an author of free plugin -  not  so rich in content conversation.
i donot expect something - a deal causes my approach not more or less. by far plugin suits me but could be improved.
and dont forget to feel free about how literally and close to heart to take everything users are talking about

[hi-hat]

i know people shy - then i take a word

when in m\s or l\r mode global gain would better work like separated gain!

and btw there is no bandpass filter type..

[Music Engineer]

i know people shy - then i take a word

when in m\s or l\r mode global gain would better work like separated gain!

my idea of the global gain is to use it as compensation gain such that switching back and forth between bypass and active, one can hear the effect of the EQ setting without being distracted by volume changes. as such one would not want the global gain(s) to affect the left/right or mid/side balance - it should just compensate an overall volume boost/loss. but i agree that a "subglobal" gain for L and R or M and S channels could be desirable as additional parameter. i will consider this.

and btw there is no bandpass filter type..

yes. i left it out because we are dealing with a series connection of filters here. chaining bandpasses with different center frequencies does not seem sensible to me - it would not leave much signal, unless the bandwidths are very wide and/or the center-frequencies are close to each other. but in this case, it seems more sensible to me, to use a combination of low- and highpasses when one wants to impose some kind of bandpass characteristic. it would be no big deal to add it, though. but i'd like to hear some more opinions/justifications why we would want it.

[hi-hat]

i came with better separated curves definition-
some wisual improvements would be good for better experience-
color setup is buggy sometimes colors turn black changing plots or widgets hard to achieve something wright

[Music Engineer]

color setup is buggy sometimes colors turn black changing plots or widgets hard to achieve something wright

ah yes sorry - this is a known bug. it should actually work the same way as in CrossOver and EngineersFilter. in the next update, it will.

[jazztard]

Another happy user of your EQ here! I have only 1 request to make: please be sure to fix all the bugs, this is really important. Any further optimisations or additional features would only make this plugin even better!

[hi-hat]

bugs are the worst about software
but this plugin is stable from my experience!
only color setup...- somehow i managed usable green theme but cant reproduce it again))

http://i.piccy.info/i5/26/65/1126526/eq.png

p s
if i were you ,Robin, -i would gather all plugins: cool eq,funcshaper with upsampler,filter,track meter,analyzer,channel matrix under one well organized ui and surpass dmgaudioequality leaving simple separated versions for free use!
the only thing about dmgequality or proq is usability and more-less good linear phase mode that however 90% of users in 90% of cases won't use, depending on their music,ears and taste of course.
and most people are very care about visual look..

[hi-hat]

..please check this!

http://i.piccy.info/i5/16/05/1170516/eq.png