KVR Audio

Aleksey Vaneev · Post by **Aleksey Vaneev** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 10:25 am

dbmcclain, if your EQ should give a symmetrical reponse (forward and backward IIR filtering) then I do not know why with a single dirac spike I do not get a symmetrical response as a result.

Moreover (and do not get me wrong - that's my opinion only), forward&backward IIR filtering using window overlap is not the best solution. Building a true linear-phase kernel (by evaluating IIR filter itself) and then using convolution to apply it to the sound should theoretically be more precise - but of course, you won't get any 'interesting' effects of windowed forward&backward IIR filtering.

Aleksey Vaneev · Post by **Aleksey Vaneev** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 10:25 am

omo, I'll try this later. Hope it works

daizo · Post by **daizo** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 10:25 am

a $1000 bucks for this plugin? come on! Are you nuts, no one is going to pay that much for just an EQ, I could get at least five hardware ones for that much.
lower it down to something more reasonable, like $150-200 range.

Jonny Mumra · Post by **Jonny Mumra** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 10:25 am

I third the mouse-wheel adjusting Q idea.

Jonny Mumra · Post by **Jonny Mumra** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 10:28 am

Dont be a fool, have you heard this thing.

1000 bucks is a bargain for a plugs of this quality.

fritzman · Post by **fritzman** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 10:36 am

Aleksey Vaneev wrote:dbmcclain, if your EQ should give a symmetrical reponse (forward and backward IIR filtering) then I do not know why with a single dirac spike I do not get a symmetrical response as a result.

Hi Aleksey,

should it? Whatcha think?
Does it sound worse now that we know this? Does it sound better than your eqs?

Best wishes, FRitz

autloc · Post by **autloc** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 11:01 am

fritzman wrote:should it? Whatcha think?
Does it sound worse now that we know this? Does it sound better than your eqs?

I've also been curious to see the impulse response of the filter, though a bit too lazy to actually check it out myself. If the impulse response isn't symetric than calling it "phase linear" does seem to be a bit... hyperbolic?

Liked the low end, mind you.

Aleksey Vaneev · Post by **Aleksey Vaneev** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 11:05 am

fritzman, I can't tell much here. I was basing my comment on what the author of this plug-in wrote himself.

Aleksey Vaneev · Post by **Aleksey Vaneev** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 11:10 am

Jonny Mumra, do you plan to spend $1000 on this plug-in?

fritzman · Post by **fritzman** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 11:12 am

Aleksey Vaneev wrote:fritzman, I can't tell much here. I was basing my comment on what the author of this plug-in wrote himself.

OK,

gotcha Aleksey. I wasn't reading all the techie stuff. I only checked the EQ and it sounds very good. And that's what counts for me in the end. Not what some measurements tell me.

Best wishes, FRitz

JonnySun 2.0 · Post by **JonnySun 2.0** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 11:22 am

Aleksey opened a door, and i want to share a suggestion from a man from an other forum. He developed a similar eq-plug for linux - at the moment for himself i guess.

dbmcClain, listen, what he wrote: (Please translate anybody who is good in englisch and german) it because i am not good on this; babelfish and others are shit)
"Also was die da schreiben ist absoluter Kappes.
PC Prozessoren arbeiten intern mit einer FPU Auflösung von 64 Bit,
da führt eine Vorabsenkung des Signals um 24 dB zu keinerlei Bitverlust. Mit ihrer Methode verschlechtern sie das Signal sogar.

Ist also wohl eher Marketingblabla, um es sich nicht bei der
Highend Analogfraktion zu verscherzen.
Schliesslich ist sie ja die Zielgruppe für die 1000.- 10 Band Version

"

Andrew Milne · Post by **Andrew Milne** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:07 pm

Aleksey Vaneev wrote:omo, I'll try this later. Hope it works

Go, go, go, Aleksey

Christian Budde · Post by **Christian Budde** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:22 pm

JonnySun 2.0 wrote:"Also was die da schreiben ist absoluter Kappes.
PC Prozessoren arbeiten intern mit einer FPU Auflösung von 64 Bit,
da führt eine Vorabsenkung des Signals um 24 dB zu keinerlei Bitverlust. Mit ihrer Methode verschlechtern sie das Signal sogar.

Ist also wohl eher Marketingblabla, um es sich nicht bei der
Highend Analogfraktion zu verscherzen.
Schliesslich ist sie ja die Zielgruppe für die 1000.- 10 Band Version "

And he's damn right with that comment. I gave up posting to this thread, because it is senseless, but now there seems to be at least someone...

For free the EQ is ok, at least if it sounds really that good, but I never would spend 1000€ for such a thing. It's totally overpriced,

Christian

fritzman · Post by **fritzman** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:47 pm

Christian Budde wrote: For free the EQ is ok, at least if it sounds really that good, but I never would spend 1000€ for such a thing. It's totally overpriced,

Christian

Hi Christian,

do you have some real points besides being jealous?
You wrote "If it sounds really that good?" So does it or not?

Best wishes, FRitz

P.S. I'm not taking sides here, and definitely nothing against you, Christian! It's just that the facts, will say the SOUND, is REALLY that good to me. Therefore I wonder why people wind up on some papers that the normal user doesn't understand anyway. So what's the point? To me it looks simply like "Hey, it sounds extremely good. So I have to bash it in another possible way."

HanafiH · Post by **HanafiH** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:56 pm

That's the gamble every vendor takes with the market. If you sell 100 units at 1,000 cash, you get 100,000 cash, you need to sell 1,000 units at 100 cash to get as much. Is the VST plug market that big? Not at this level. The price is probably right for the quality in the market.

I think this vendor chappie is trading a cut down freebie for help in shortening the debug cycle - that's a very fair trade off.

10-Band PLParEQ is Here!