How about a plugin that takes incoming audio and splits it into two halves based on a parameter for frequency, one half above and one half below. It would have 4 outs so you could have both halves stereo. Using this anything could be a multiband effect... for example you could split the signal 4 times using 3 instances of this plug and then route the outputs to 4 compressors with diffent settings and you have a multiband compressor... the same would work for multiband distortion, multiband bitcrushing, multiband chorus, ect...
So what do you think?
Idea for plugin...
-
- KVRAF
- 4644 posts since 28 Nov, 2002 from Chicago
not a bad idea.
Note you can easily do this with two coupled filters though.
two different approaches.
1 - the easy way:
make a rack and place two Tracktion low/hi pass filters in it.
Take your rack input and wire it to both filters (IE in parallel). Take the output from each filter and wire it to a different output stereo pair.
Set one to be lowpass, and set the frequency to you desired crossover.
Set the other to be a high pass and set the frequency as above.
2 - a little more confusing, but lighter on the cpu
take a tracktion low pass, wire the inputs to it and set cutoff to your choice.
place a tracktion PEQ with the invert option selected (or an inverter plug) in the rack.
Wire the output of the lowpass to your first set of audio outs.
Run a second connection from the lpf to the PEQ plug.
Run am second connection from the rack inputs, also to the peq plug. Run the output from the PEQ to your other set of rack outputs.
Note you can easily do this with two coupled filters though.
two different approaches.
1 - the easy way:
make a rack and place two Tracktion low/hi pass filters in it.
Take your rack input and wire it to both filters (IE in parallel). Take the output from each filter and wire it to a different output stereo pair.
Set one to be lowpass, and set the frequency to you desired crossover.
Set the other to be a high pass and set the frequency as above.
2 - a little more confusing, but lighter on the cpu
take a tracktion low pass, wire the inputs to it and set cutoff to your choice.
place a tracktion PEQ with the invert option selected (or an inverter plug) in the rack.
Wire the output of the lowpass to your first set of audio outs.
Run a second connection from the lpf to the PEQ plug.
Run am second connection from the rack inputs, also to the peq plug. Run the output from the PEQ to your other set of rack outputs.
Someone shot the food. Remember: don't shoot food!
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
Why are you guys so creative, and I'm so stuck in my conservative...
PARADIGMS...
?
What a great idea, jxxtt5693b7xxj, and good follow-up on the rack implementation, Valley. No feckin' clue what you're on about with the 2nd suggestion (not because it was unclear, but because I'm a numpty who stopped following!
) but I'll have to give #1 a go sometime soon.Greg
-
- KVRAF
- 3745 posts since 29 Sep, 2002 from Killafornia
I've put something like this together in Reason before. Its pretty easy but I would much prefer to do it in Tracktion. Reason gets annoying very fast when doing things like this. You gotta pull cables millions of modules vertically and each device takes up so much damn room. Its clunky as hell.
Great explination Valley.
Great explination Valley.
-
- KVRAF
- 4644 posts since 28 Nov, 2002 from Chicago
actually I got number two wrong, so it's no wonder it made little sense 
this is actually what I should have described for #2
It works by using the signal inversion feature of the PEQ to make negatives positive and positives negative. Thus the output from the LPF is inverted and added to the raw audio from the input. With a clean enough LPF, the output from the PEQ will cancel out it's mirror signal from the input and give only the remaining signal to "out 2". If you can find a simple signal inverter, this model is by far the most efficient.
That said:
The first idea I gave above gives you a little more flexibilty in how the crossover range behaves. You can tune by ear how smooth the crossover transition is but resumming the output of both filters into one output and then simply adjusting the two cutoff frequencies until you have the ideal comprimise between crossover peak / crossover valley for you purposes.
I like racks.
Code: Select all
/-----[LPF]-------------[out 1]
/ \
[in] \[PEQ]----\
\ \
\----------------------[out 2]
It works by using the signal inversion feature of the PEQ to make negatives positive and positives negative. Thus the output from the LPF is inverted and added to the raw audio from the input. With a clean enough LPF, the output from the PEQ will cancel out it's mirror signal from the input and give only the remaining signal to "out 2". If you can find a simple signal inverter, this model is by far the most efficient.
That said:
The first idea I gave above gives you a little more flexibilty in how the crossover range behaves. You can tune by ear how smooth the crossover transition is but resumming the output of both filters into one output and then simply adjusting the two cutoff frequencies until you have the ideal comprimise between crossover peak / crossover valley for you purposes.
I like racks.
Someone shot the food. Remember: don't shoot food!
-
- KVRist
- 114 posts since 13 Oct, 2002 from Highway 61
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1617 posts since 2 Dec, 2003
Wouldn't the eq use more cpu than a high pass filter, even if you are only using it to invert the phase?valley wrote:actually I got number two wrong, so it's no wonder it made little sense
this is actually what I should have described for #2Code: Select all
/-----[LPF]-------------[out 1] / \ [in] \[PEQ]----\ \ \ \----------------------[out 2]
It works by using the signal inversion feature of the PEQ to make negatives positive and positives negative. Thus the output from the LPF is inverted and added to the raw audio from the input. With a clean enough LPF, the output from the PEQ will cancel out it's mirror signal from the input and give only the remaining signal to "out 2". If you can find a simple signal inverter, this model is by far the most efficient.
That said:
The first idea I gave above gives you a little more flexibilty in how the crossover range behaves. You can tune by ear how smooth the crossover transition is but resumming the output of both filters into one output and then simply adjusting the two cutoff frequencies until you have the ideal comprimise between crossover peak / crossover valley for you purposes.
I like racks.
-
- KVRAF
- 4644 posts since 28 Nov, 2002 from Chicago
that's a jules question, but it never seems to use a lot of juice when being used purely as an inverter. I think it optimizes out to some degree 0dB bands.
Obviously a dedicated inverter would still be cheaper.
Obviously a dedicated inverter would still be cheaper.
Someone shot the food. Remember: don't shoot food!