MeldaProduction

valsolim · Post by **valsolim** » Mon Feb 06, 2017 8:21 am

Okay, so MTurboEQ is here

But why there is no edit screen option in it? I think it would be usefull at least for checking the actual response curve. In the current version, it seems to me more like a stripped-down version of the other Melda EQs. What do you think?

Best regards
--
Miloslav

Svama · Post by **Svama** » Mon Feb 06, 2017 8:30 am

All already discussed.
At the end it´s a Mequalizer with predefined curves, which are Vojtechs secret;-).
What´s difference against all other "emulations", you are able to change stepped frquencies against continuos. So more flexible, like always!
No need for edit page, therefore you can use all of the other meq´s.

valsolim · Post by **valsolim** » Mon Feb 06, 2017 9:17 am

Svama wrote:All already discussed.
At the end it´s a Mequalizer with predefined curves, which are Vojtechs secret;-).
What´s difference against all other "emulations", you are able to change stepped frquencies against continuos. So more flexible, like always!
No need for edit page, therefore you can use all of the other meq´s.

Aha, I didn't notice the other thread where the edit screen was discussed. Anyway, in terms of flexibility, MTurboEQ simply doesn't match with MTurboComp or MTurboReverb. I wouldn't have raised any objections if it was named "MVintageEQ" but as it is now it is not "Turbo" at all, sorry...

--
Miloslav

Svama · Post by **Svama** » Mon Feb 06, 2017 9:29 am

I think, this is also not Vojtechs big baby, he did it cause some users asked for.
For me turbo is right, it's fast to set up. The other way you could name mturbocomp, mcomplexcomp;-).

jmg8 · Post by **jmg8** » Mon Feb 06, 2017 9:32 am

valsolim wrote:
Svama wrote:All already discussed.
At the end it´s a Mequalizer with predefined curves, which are Vojtechs secret;-).
What´s difference against all other "emulations", you are able to change stepped frquencies against continuos. So more flexible, like always!
No need for edit page, therefore you can use all of the other meq´s.
Aha, I didn't notice the other thread where the edit screen was discussed. Anyway, in terms of flexibility, MTurboEQ simply doesn't match with MTurboComp or MTurboReverb. I wouldn't have raised any objections if it was named "MVintageEQ" but as it is now it is not "Turbo" at all, sorry...
--
Miloslav

I Agree. MVintageEQ would be more fitting.
Vojtech said he cant open up an edit screen because the competition could copy the shapes. Although the shapes have already been copied and lots of companies are copying them lots of time, theres no real secret here.
It would have been nice to have the extra flexibility of making our own curves and interactions and the like.

However I don't want to put down the plugin too much, because it is actually very good and I'm glad we have it in the melda lineup.

Soarer · Post by **Soarer** » Mon Feb 06, 2017 10:46 am

Do you use it because of it's convenience or do you think it has a nice sound?

This part of the description of it pretty much made me forget about it:
"There is no doubt, that you could do 99.9999% of the sound of any analog equalizer using a versatile parametric equalizer, such as MAutoDynamicEq. It's just frequencies and curves after all, there's no hidden magic."

The honesty is appreciated but you mention the predefined curves here - shouldn't that give it a sound of it's own?

Svama · Post by **Svama** » Mon Feb 06, 2017 10:54 am

The are no other curves, which are not possible to copy with mautodynamiceq in my opinion, but Vojtech did all the work for you. These eqs often sound musical because of the broad curves. For myself I like the 1073/1081 on drums for example. A ssl is useful on everything and I could mix a whole song with it, if the recording quality is good.
These eqs could be a fast solution.

Soarer · Post by **Soarer** » Mon Feb 06, 2017 11:00 am

Ah, I see! Thanks for the info! I'll test it thoroughly then.

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Mon Feb 06, 2017 2:22 pm

That's correct. It's all about the fact, that the designs have already been copied into the plugin. So if you like deep controls, then it is MAutoDynamicEq. If you like quick results based on old and tested designs, then it is MTurboEQ.

spencerlee · Post by **spencerlee** » Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:30 am

And don't forget you have combination Eqs that you would normally have to use 2 EQs to get.

Alphacodex · Post by **Alphacodex** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 2:19 pm

I especially like the air-band of one of the models (can't remember which one it was). However to my ears it sounds like it really only works great in conjunction with at least 2x or even 3x oversampling. Does that make any sense? Vojtech often states that the oversampling in the EQs dont really make a big audible difference. Which frequency is that air band set at? I remember that other developers sometimes set the frequency for the air-band as high as 30kHz or 40kHz - in that case at least 2x oversampling would make a lot of sense, right?

Cheers,
Codex

spencerlee · Post by **spencerlee** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 3:28 pm

It is the same as the Elosis Air Band. From memory it stars below 10k and is a gradual slope up to 18k and beyond.
Spencer

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 2:22 pm

Well, oversampling is problematic

. I'd personally avoid it unless you really hear the difference. And if you DO, then sure, go for it! I simply want everyone to avoid turning it on just because it is possible.

Alphacodex · Post by **Alphacodex** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 2:52 pm

At least I THINK I hear it with that airband in MTurboEQ. I'm a psychologist for my main living, so I am very aware how subtle but mighty those expectation effects can be.
I tried to do a quick "blind test" (literally: with closed eyes) and think the airband sounded less harsh with the 3x oversampling. However switching between 1x - 2x and 3x oversampling can't be done with one click so I had to open my eyes to switch, which could already have affected my perception. Maybe I'll do the test again and just load multiple instances of MTurboEQ with a MCompare after it, then I can do real blind-tests.

Cheers,
Codex

DPhil · Post by **DPhil** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 2:57 pm

Alphacodex wrote:At least I THINK I hear it with that airband in MTurboEQ. I'm a psychologist for my main living, so I am very aware how subtle but mighty those expectation effects can be.
I tried to do a quick "blind test" (literally: with closed eyes) and think the airband sounded less harsh with the 3x oversampling. However switching between 1x - 2x and 3x oversampling can't be done with one click so I had to open my eyes to switch, which could already have affected my perception. Maybe I'll do the test again and just load multiple instances of MTurboEQ with a MCompare after it, then I can do real blind-tests.

Cheers,
Codex

It's very likely that oversampling will affect the highband. HOFA has released a superb free plugin for blind testing

It is the first of its kind and randomizes inputs, you can name and rate them.