Soundtheory GULLFOSS computional auditory perception EQ

[v1o]

I can see why they put high and low pass filters. They probably couldn't figure out how to keep the dynamic eq from eq'ing dead air or eq'ing irrelevant parts. For instance, a soft violin solo. Gullfoss will destroy the sonic characteristic of that instrument if you left it full band. No...you would have to trim the top end otherwise it would be too bright. So, Gullfoss isn't as intelligent as they say - lol. Seriously though, this tool is definitely a secret weapon in the right hands of someone that knows its limitations.

They market it to be something more than what it is. It's just a dynamic matching eq with pink noise as a reference. That's it.

I still think it's a secret weapon but it's also kind of gimmicky when you really think about it. I mean...who really eq matches to pink noise. Unless you're doing ambient or ethereal...no one. Rather, no one I know.

I’ve never seen anyone make so many completely incorrect and unproven assumptions in a single thread. It’s clear you have an agenda against Sound Theory.

[pekadan]

No. If Mathematics had an agenda he certainly wouldn't ask sound theory to comment on his conclusions based on the tests he has performed.

[jbraner]

I don't think there's an agenda - but the tests are hardly appropriate.

OK, so the "magic" has something to do with referencing pink noise - you are proving nothing by running a plugin like this on noise. It's made to be used on *music*.

So, if the "magic" happens to be a mathematical algorithm - that is hardly a surprise

How does it *sound*? (on music, not noise)

It's like saying that the old Pultec eq's are crap because they're just a few resistors and caps - but the real question is how does it *sound* when you run your music through it.

[sleepcircle]

i don't think he has an AGENDA, no. i am not sure the tests were comprehensive, but i'm looking forward to the official reply, either way.

[Ploki]

most balanced mixes on slow spectrum analyzers actually look flattish.

if they took an average out of billboard top 100, it would turn out to be somewhere between brown and pink noise (depending on how "hot" and how bassy the mix is)...

I doubt the average spectrum would be much different compared to pairing it against noise.

However, the question is how it DOES that.

[Ploki]

also 24dB + of boost

[plexuss]

I’ve never seen anyone make so many completely incorrect and unproven assumptions in a single thread. It’s clear you have an agenda against Sound Theory.

I see no clarity here. I also see no evidence that Mathematics has an agenda against Sound Theory. In fact I think v1o's assertion is irrational and should be retracted unless they have proof to back up their claim.

[yehboy1]

I can't spend $200 on something that I, and apparently everyone else, have no idea what the plugin is actually doing.

[martinjuenke]

I can't spend $200 on something that I, and apparently everyone else, have no idea what the plugin is actually doing.

[martinjuenke]

Or this:

[yehboy1]

Those two songs could use some Gullfoss. How did people tolerate such crappy audio back then?

[MasterTuner]

I went ahead and bought it for the $99 intro price.
I downloaded the demo and tested it. I was very impressed by how it dealt with the mid-range on my individual tracks in a very quick and efficient way. This simply speeds up my workflow significantly. I am relatively new to mixing and always felt the mid-range muddiness/honkyness a challenge to keep on top of.
For those who have been mixing for years, it might not be for you. But it sure as heck makes a difference for me.
I don't care what algorithm its using, it just works really well, and doesn't use much CPU.
If I get bored of it or outgrow it in the future, looks like I can re-sell it and get a decent chuck of my initial outlay back. Plus these guys are still adding new features to it and upgrades for the foreseeable future are free.
Winning.

[plexuss]

Those two songs could use some Gullfoss. How did people tolerate such crappy audio back then?

The same way we tolerate the crappy audio that is created today.

[Scotty]

Winning.

I have Gullfoss and Soothe and Bx Refinement. So far Soothe is proving to be more versatile. I am still having crashes with the VST 3 version of Gullfoss in all version of Cubase from 7 through to Cubase 10x (Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit) and SoundTheory closed my case before coming up with a solution.

I think with Gullfoss a little goes a long way. It is really easy to carve out too much space to get something to sit and actually do more harm than good but that is user error and you can do the same thing with Soothe too. It is just a bit easier to go too far with Gullfoss. It is a good tool to have and at the introductory price, good value in my opinion.

I don't know what exactly it is doing admittedly. I believe it is supposed to be doing some adaptive/dynamic spectral EQ'ing that is somehow designed to be senstive in the places that our non -linear hearing can appreciate.

In the right application it makes my job easier and makes my ears happy.

Wining some and losing others. Having fun most of the time. - Scotty

[v1o]

I’ve never seen anyone make so many completely incorrect and unproven assumptions in a single thread. It’s clear you have an agenda against Sound Theory.

I see no clarity here. I also see no evidence that Mathematics has an agenda against Sound Theory. In fact I think v1o's assertion is irrational and should be retracted unless they have proof to back up their claim.

All his assertions are unproven and based on him trying to disprove Sound Theory’s auditory perception mathematical model as nothing more than pink noise shaping without facts or evidence apart from some truly shoddy testing. Basically he’s made up a fake conspiracy in his head. Sound Theory have gone on the record several times and explained how their system works as best they can without giving away too much proprietary information. There is nothing to be gained from them being dishonest and lying about how Gullfoss actually works. If Gullfoss didn’t work the way they say it does it would have been picked up already.