Firstly, thanks for this 13.06 update.
Second, I clearly have an affinity for EQs and musical ranges and this orientation to A4=440 makes my life much easier. I hope others can appreciate how this layout puts the sub bass, which is really the first usable musical range, from Octave 1 and the more-or-less useless frequencies - barring infrasonics - at Octave 0. It has the added benefit of knowing that 440Hz is A4 thereby giving you a solid and obvious basis for calculating other frequencies and recognizing ranges.
Last, I want to share some ideas for EQ usability:
1: EQ, Double-clicking frequency field, keyboard scroll position should be at note closest to current band's frequency.
2: MAutoDynamicEQ Assign different numbers, letters or note name to EQ bands' labels shown in graph area and Bands area.
For example, renaming Band 1 to C or F or even making the label update in real time to reflect its current note or octave range.
Right now, everyone's EQ labels just sit there, dumb. Why not give that valuable real estate some actual value besides, "Ohi, remember me? I'm EQ band 7." I want to know - at a glance - what note I put it on or some other useful info like frequency or even custom color.
3: Ability to marquee select EQ bands to group adjustments, for instance.
4: In Bands area, in addition to Frequency, we could have Note names like C3, G8 etc.
Thank you.
EQ Ideas
-
- KVRian
- 965 posts since 12 May, 2019
-
- KVRAF
- 10376 posts since 2 Sep, 2003 from Surrey, UK
Vojtech already knows my views, but I would like A3=440 Hz, so the first usable range would be Octave 0 (and the MIDI Note names go from C-2 to G8).
For 2: if you move the mouse pointer over the graph you will see the Frequency, note name and gain level in a pop-up. Maybe I misunderstood but naming a EQ band C seems counter-intuitive to me. Perhaps you could use the Areas menu to create you own maps, select "Octaves" then you can Edit it, for ranges, names, size etc and save the result as you own area map.
For 3: Shift+click the nodes on the EQ graph, then drag a node or scroll the mouse-wheel over one.
For 2: if you move the mouse pointer over the graph you will see the Frequency, note name and gain level in a pop-up. Maybe I misunderstood but naming a EQ band C seems counter-intuitive to me. Perhaps you could use the Areas menu to create you own maps, select "Octaves" then you can Edit it, for ranges, names, size etc and save the result as you own area map.
For 3: Shift+click the nodes on the EQ graph, then drag a node or scroll the mouse-wheel over one.
Last edited by DarkStar on Tue Dec 15, 2020 11:13 pm, edited 3 times in total.
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 965 posts since 12 May, 2019
I think the best thing is to be able to choose. People use different assignments for different reasons.
MIDI Note 60 = C3 puts C1 as the lowest key on most keyboards and is the default on some DAWs.
MIDI Note 60 = C4 is in alignment with Scientific Pitch Notation and starts positive octaves in the usable musical range and infrasonics in the 0 Octave.
Everything 'negative' is virtually useless for music. Orienting around C4 also gives you three octaves to the left and three octaves to the right which are mostly useful - 1, 2, 3 and 5, 6, 7. I don't know about you but, when I start counting, I start at 1 and not 0. In fact, I rarely ever use the number 0 when speaking. Zero is not as concrete as 1. 1 is actually an older number than 0 which implies to me that it's a more primal and easy thing to understand.
Furthermore, in music theory, 1 is the tonic and not 0. Sub bass is akin to the 'tonic' of your mix. Not only that but A0 is then the lowest note on a piano giving you just those three extra notes below the first octave. They're 'extra' in that you don't even get the whole octave.
Even Acoustics, which is more of a STEM topic than a musical one, is going to use Scientific Pitch Notation and not one that a few DAWs use. If your room resonates at 55Hz then you know it's scientifically called A1 and can easily and directly find that note in a musical context. No need to immediately start performing mental gymnastics to communicate to the world beyond fellow users of a certain make of synth or software. A4=440Hz is that standard much like the meter or kilogram.
Again, I support a choice but I can think of many more reasons to have C4 be middle C than C3.
I have a highly-accurate system for calculating every frequency and it's based around A4=440Hz. This is a much more obvious figure to remember than A3=440Hz. You may currently prefer C3 as middle C but maybe you don't have a clear association between note names and frequency values.
https://hexspa.com/audio-frequency/
Perhaps you don't even care what the note values are. I do and anyone else who does now has a way to know them. Previously, learning note names was hard and it's clear to me that possibly nobody I've encountered has done it. You might as well orient around a legitimate standard as opposed to 'Welp, Ableton does it like this so I will too.' As far as matching DAWs, Reaper gives you a choice as to what octave offset to use so, in my case, now Melda matches my DAW and I like that.
I already know about the popup but that doesn't change that the big bright colored circle is basically dead and could come to life.
There's nothing counter-intuitive about labeling frequency bands with notes. On the contrary, many people use EQs for musical purposes - maybe you just do dialog mixing for post. Knowing and targeting specific harmonic parts of an instrument is an effective and intelligent way to alter it's spectrum. Separating instruments based on octaves, fifths and thirds also works very well for mixing and is related to how conventional music arrangement is done.
For instance, I can tell you that in Billie Eilish's "Bad Guy" the kick is tuned to D2 and the bass is at G2 with a sub bass one octave down. When done this way, a giant one-octave frequency hole is available which makes using an EQ notch redundant. Unless you're aware of these things, you may never notice them nor use them to more deliberately compose and mix music.
I didn't ask how to multi-select bands because I already know how we can currently do it. That's why this is called a 'feature request' where something previously unimplemented is suggested and then considered. Marquee select doesn't need to be defended because it's very obviously an easy way to do things and certainly much faster and less prone to error than individually selecting each node.
Lastly, this standardization makes the Melda experience more friendly to newcomers. Why should anyone have to remember, for instance, that the EQs had C3 as middle C but C6 for the same MIDI note in MRhythmizer, for instance? It made no sense! I agree that a vote could have happened but, with all due respect, this is something that you all should've voted on before I got here.
My point is that no one mentioned it - I looked - and the system was inconsistent. Now it's consistent and the only comment I can accept is that we can have a choice as to what the entire line will call middle C. I don't care if you call it 'pancakes' as long as I can set it to C4 once and every plugin will reflect that.
I made some presets for the EQs which set the bands to actual notes. All of these I calculated mentally without referencing an EQ chart. Anyone can do it and, once learned, makes using EQ more intuitive for anyone coming from a musical background.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/58wb7h43cwwm ... 0w1oa?dl=0
I've been updating this post so sorry if it doesn't flow most smoothly.
TL;DR - Science is a good thing and it uses C4. Piano is the greatest instrument, has vast adoption and also uses C4. MIDI is and was great because, like Bluetooth and its eponym, it united the disparate. Melda has determined that C4 is the actual MIDI standard and we've lived in this Dark Age of Middle C Disagreement for too long. I agree with a choice between C3 and C4 but I don't agree with removing C4 as an option; in fact it's more rational to dispense with C3 than C4.
MIDI Note 60 = C3 puts C1 as the lowest key on most keyboards and is the default on some DAWs.
MIDI Note 60 = C4 is in alignment with Scientific Pitch Notation and starts positive octaves in the usable musical range and infrasonics in the 0 Octave.
Everything 'negative' is virtually useless for music. Orienting around C4 also gives you three octaves to the left and three octaves to the right which are mostly useful - 1, 2, 3 and 5, 6, 7. I don't know about you but, when I start counting, I start at 1 and not 0. In fact, I rarely ever use the number 0 when speaking. Zero is not as concrete as 1. 1 is actually an older number than 0 which implies to me that it's a more primal and easy thing to understand.
Furthermore, in music theory, 1 is the tonic and not 0. Sub bass is akin to the 'tonic' of your mix. Not only that but A0 is then the lowest note on a piano giving you just those three extra notes below the first octave. They're 'extra' in that you don't even get the whole octave.
Even Acoustics, which is more of a STEM topic than a musical one, is going to use Scientific Pitch Notation and not one that a few DAWs use. If your room resonates at 55Hz then you know it's scientifically called A1 and can easily and directly find that note in a musical context. No need to immediately start performing mental gymnastics to communicate to the world beyond fellow users of a certain make of synth or software. A4=440Hz is that standard much like the meter or kilogram.
Again, I support a choice but I can think of many more reasons to have C4 be middle C than C3.
I have a highly-accurate system for calculating every frequency and it's based around A4=440Hz. This is a much more obvious figure to remember than A3=440Hz. You may currently prefer C3 as middle C but maybe you don't have a clear association between note names and frequency values.
https://hexspa.com/audio-frequency/
Perhaps you don't even care what the note values are. I do and anyone else who does now has a way to know them. Previously, learning note names was hard and it's clear to me that possibly nobody I've encountered has done it. You might as well orient around a legitimate standard as opposed to 'Welp, Ableton does it like this so I will too.' As far as matching DAWs, Reaper gives you a choice as to what octave offset to use so, in my case, now Melda matches my DAW and I like that.
I already know about the popup but that doesn't change that the big bright colored circle is basically dead and could come to life.
There's nothing counter-intuitive about labeling frequency bands with notes. On the contrary, many people use EQs for musical purposes - maybe you just do dialog mixing for post. Knowing and targeting specific harmonic parts of an instrument is an effective and intelligent way to alter it's spectrum. Separating instruments based on octaves, fifths and thirds also works very well for mixing and is related to how conventional music arrangement is done.
For instance, I can tell you that in Billie Eilish's "Bad Guy" the kick is tuned to D2 and the bass is at G2 with a sub bass one octave down. When done this way, a giant one-octave frequency hole is available which makes using an EQ notch redundant. Unless you're aware of these things, you may never notice them nor use them to more deliberately compose and mix music.
I didn't ask how to multi-select bands because I already know how we can currently do it. That's why this is called a 'feature request' where something previously unimplemented is suggested and then considered. Marquee select doesn't need to be defended because it's very obviously an easy way to do things and certainly much faster and less prone to error than individually selecting each node.
Lastly, this standardization makes the Melda experience more friendly to newcomers. Why should anyone have to remember, for instance, that the EQs had C3 as middle C but C6 for the same MIDI note in MRhythmizer, for instance? It made no sense! I agree that a vote could have happened but, with all due respect, this is something that you all should've voted on before I got here.
My point is that no one mentioned it - I looked - and the system was inconsistent. Now it's consistent and the only comment I can accept is that we can have a choice as to what the entire line will call middle C. I don't care if you call it 'pancakes' as long as I can set it to C4 once and every plugin will reflect that.
I made some presets for the EQs which set the bands to actual notes. All of these I calculated mentally without referencing an EQ chart. Anyone can do it and, once learned, makes using EQ more intuitive for anyone coming from a musical background.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/58wb7h43cwwm ... 0w1oa?dl=0
I've been updating this post so sorry if it doesn't flow most smoothly.
TL;DR - Science is a good thing and it uses C4. Piano is the greatest instrument, has vast adoption and also uses C4. MIDI is and was great because, like Bluetooth and its eponym, it united the disparate. Melda has determined that C4 is the actual MIDI standard and we've lived in this Dark Age of Middle C Disagreement for too long. I agree with a choice between C3 and C4 but I don't agree with removing C4 as an option; in fact it's more rational to dispense with C3 than C4.