MDynamicEq and MAutoDynamicEq released with riddiculous introductory prices! - LAST CHANCE!

[ryandfl]

I mean that it is extremely easy to "overuse" the plugin and end up with results which impress you at first but later make you want to hide in a closet. It's a tool that you really, REALLY have to learn to use and handle. Imagine a bunch of kids with M16's running around. Yeah.. that's the kind of power and responsibility this requires.

Intense. Alright, demo downloaded.

[kylen]

I'm getting on this bus! The video 'tutorial' looks fine and I've been demoing the 'Melda' plugs for a little while but don't own one. I believe the interface isn't for the 'faint of heart' but can be learned with some practice and patience.

I'd like something to complement GlissEQ, DQ1, C6 for re-mastering of 2-track cuts that were tape based. Give them new life. Less about the 'compression' but taming resonances, de-essing and de-poping with dynamic eq. Un-compressing a bit with the expander which I've been working with Flux, Maximus and Ozone4 processors to do. Having full access to the transfer curve should make it easier to dial in the needed dynamics.

I like bmanic's M16 reference, this might even be an M50 so I'm glad there's a nice phase-safe mix knob to push up (or down) the entire new sound a bit and listen. According to the video individual filters are easy to tweak and it looks fast to operate.

I may not use the spectrum analyzer much, expecially since SPAN is around and I think compyfox mentioned the speed, I tend to set a slower average and listen for resonances or pops then verify with a peak analyzer. Otherwise I'm getting seasick watching the peaks and valleys for 4 minutes... I'm looking forward to working with the sonogram since I'm not too good at that yet and think it might be a good balancing/repair monitor.

Anyway, enough jiber-jabber - time to demo the dynamic eq - been looking forward to adding a quality affordable eq to my toolbag.

[ryandfl]

Wow, the Analyzer's floating whole notes indicators are pretty cool.
Having skipped the tutorial or manual, I don't get the dynamics section at all and the sonogram is not super intuitive either. Fancy stuff. I'll have to hit the instructions.
It's sounds nice and smooth to me so far.

[Compyfox]

I can only back up IIRs and bManic in terms of "you have to LEARN this plugin".

Dynamic EQ, the same as with Mastering, is art and something you have to learn and fully understand since you can mess up so much.

The thing is, just like M/S, that it's "the new thing" and almost everyone has to jump on this since it's just cool, new and the likes. Especially at this intro-price. But if you don't get it (which I read a lot in here now - and DynEQs are around for a while!), even after reading the manual - is it really your new tool?



@IIRs:
I'm sure you messed with that plugin for a while by now. Looking a both FR's that bManic and I asked for while overlooking the craping filter, but taking into consideration the massive editing capabilities in the advanced settings...

What's your opinion on it now? Is it the DynEQ you always looked for?

[lingyai]

Any tutorial, that shows how to use and to abuse this EQ, may be very helpful, as I am a commoner Thanks.

g7

+1

[miro pajic]

Why make things so over-complicated!? Nobody has to use all the features just because they're there.
How many times will someone do more than adjust the EQ bands (like a regular EQ) and eventually use the dynamic section to tame higher peaks or sibilances or use some little upward expansion to enhance some transients etc.? Besides using attack and release, most other functions are to be used rarely IMO.

But that's KVR: most ppl love to talk and write and analyze a lot instead of making music and using the tools (...instead of testing them from top to bottom and then have millions of improvement suggestions)

[lingyai]

Why make things so over-complicated!? Nobody has to use all the features just because they're there.
How many times will someone do more than adjust the EQ bands (like a regular EQ) and eventually use the dynamic section to tame higher peaks or sibilances or use some little upward expansion to enhance some transients etc.? Besides using attack and release, most other functions are to be used rarely IMO.

But that's KVR: most ppl love to talk and write and analyze a lot instead of making music and using the tools (...instead of testing them from top to bottom and then have millions of improvement suggestions)

With respect, it is not overanalysing to pay for something with lots of features, and to then want to know how to use those features

[miro pajic]

I get your point but whenever I look in the effects forum, these things come up. Always the same scheme. Most functions should be more or less easy to find out by playing with it, using it instead of always needing a guide to takew you by the hand and tell you. That's not even ranting just my opinion, by the way.

[lingyai]

I see your point too, Miro, and yes, there sometimes seem to be lots of complaining for its own sake on KVR. But in this thread I don't think it's the case. This appears to be an unusually sophisticated and novel tool. Yes, one could learn by trial and error, but having a guide would reduce the learning time by a lot. And it is only reasonable to expect the developer to provide that guide if he is selling it. It doesn't matter that Vojtec is extremely generous (I love many plugs from his freee bundle). If he introduces something somewhat "revolutionary" like this, he needs to make it accessible. Or it won't reach it's potential -- i.e. only relatively few people with bother with it, and a fine innovation will sit in the shadow.

My own specific complaint, by the way, is not about needing a detailed guide -- it's about not being able to find the preanalysed songs for use with the AutoEQ feature, which were prominently cited on his site and in his promotional video. Asking that these be made easy to find is hardly asking too much.

[miro pajic]

Well, since I never rely on things like AutoEQ, this one's not interesting me.
But like with all sophisticated tools, most of the times you learn it bit by bit.
Even I don't believe to fully know MDynamicEQ at all. That'S why I said I'm using it with it's basic features (Basic EQ, some dynamics to either tame or accentuate a frequency or maybe two, use attack and release times if needed) only for now. Using it for days, weeks and months will do the rest. And sure, I'm also watching the video Vojtech did about this new plugin which surely can help.

[Compyfox]

A dynamic EQ is (not only IMO) the most hard to learn thing in direct comparision with a compressor. You can f*ck up a lot if you don't know what the heck you're doing. So actually reading, and learning that thing from the ground up (like you should do with everything from Synths to Effects) is essential.


Finding things that could be improved in the process is only natural. Look at VUMT from Klanghelm for example. Version one was okay but kind of screamed for improvements - now on v1.5.7 there are features requested by many users (engineers especially) that are now implemented which sets worlds apart with certain competition. SKnote - look for fast RoundTone evolved. And this all to your (the users) benefit: more features, simpler usage, better sound/usability, more stable, etc.

Or would you rather have a creation stand still?


If the developer takes time to take note in a PUBLIC BOARD outside of his page, why not? At least it's better than "come over to our board and raise your FR's there".

And if the features are there, why "not" use them? Or do you only get a compressor and only use the output gain for fixing your volume needs, miro?



No rant either... just saying.

[kvaca]

My own specific complaint, by the way, is not about needing a detailed guide -- it's about not being able to find the preanalysed songs for use with the AutoEQ feature, which were prominently cited on his site and in his promotional video. Asking that these be made easy to find is hardly asking too much.

hm,I ve never found useful any preanalyzed songs for my EQing...but you should definitely contact Vojtech directly via e-mail for this

[miro pajic]

But Compyfox...I mean OF COURSE you can over-cook it. You can over-cook a multiband compressor as well, but I believe every halfway experienced musician/artist/mixer etc. knows that and uses these tools with respect/caution.
Like in mastering, a MBC or a dynamic EQ will just a little bit. If you use it as your friend to help/enhance or tame an audio file, you surely don't think of abusing it. IF you have a i.e. VERY VERY bad recorded lofi vocal you know you will probably use the MBC or dynEQ much, much more...

Your comparsion with the usage of a compressor isn't valid IMO, because we are talking of a plugin with so many features, while a compressor mostly has basic functions.

Just because I could use the compression shape in many Melda plugins, doesn't mean I will do it. Most of the times the "standad" functions will do the job.
Being a dynamic EQ makes this tool already very different to others, so even without using it all I do use a unique and nice tool.

Do most people use every of Ozone's sections? Nope...they could but most of the times two or three will cover what you need.

[Compyfox]

Any tutorial, that shows how to use and to abuse this EQ, may be very helpful, as I am a commoner Thanks.

I usually don't post tutorials to products from the competition in a product specific thread. But until there is a proper tutorial being released by MeldaProduction, I'm sure the OP won't mind.

Here are two videos by HOFATraining showing "their" attempt on a dynamic EQ and how to use it. This should pretty much explain what the heck is going on. Learning this tool is still essential, and like Dan Worrall (IIRs) said several times with his Dynamic EQ, "a world in itself, much like Mastering".

for part 1
for part 2

Even though the German tutorials on the HOFA page are better IMO.

Just because I could use the compression shape in many Melda plugins, doesn't mean I will do it. Most of the times the "standrad" functions will do the job.

But isn't that the point with this particular creation? It's designed as a dynamic EQ, so why not "use" it as a dynamic EQ even though the backbone is a regular minimum phase EQ.

I understand where you want to aim at with the "auto" features - personally I don't need that either (which is why I'm not interested in the MAudioDynEQ, even though it has two bands more). But this tool is a special application. Something you need to learn, to understand.

Of course you can get a tool like (let's say) a synth with four different synthesis mode - and then only use subractive synthesis. But then again, what's the point in getting that synth in the first place?

[miro pajic]

I said I use the dynamic section but not necessarily the processing "shape"

I use attack/release/amount and to me this does it most of the times.

By the way: So in love with his solution for the HP/LP filters and the "click in the graph to have an auto-listen function just for that area. Congratulations Vojtech!