DMG EQuilibrium

[ZenPunkHippy]

tilt filter?

What about it?

1st order ultra-smooth shelf, with adjustable tilt frequency and variable gain amount.
You've seen before, or no?

Just once Dave, someone in this thread will out-think you.

Not sure when that will be, though.

Looking forward to this

Peace,
Andy.

[rhythmtechnologies]

"Slight exponential" is charitable. It's pretty damn wacky, and with effort you can squeeze a good 20dB out if it!

Dave.

good to know my old ears are still working and im not going nuts

[DaveGamble]

tilt filter?

What about it?

1st order ultra-smooth shelf, with adjustable tilt frequency and variable gain amount.
You've seen before, or no?

Just once Dave, someone in this thread will out-think you.

Not sure when that will be, though.

Looking forward to this

Peace,
Andy.

Oh, I know! I expect it even. That's why I've left plenty of space within which to add new features.

There are certain constraints I'm holding rigid - such as, I +NEED+ scope to innovate - I can't stick to the VST2 featureset, or it'd suck.

I very much see the first few revision being about adding EQ types that pique (I got REALLY close to a 'peak' pun there, but I failed) my interest and that sorta thing.

There really aren't even that many things one needs to reject. (really, modelling the saturation of a Pultec valve stage appears to be the only obvious one - and if you look closely, you'll see that almost all Pultec models do that too. And I'm really unconcerned with doing so, because in the Pultec and even in the API, the distortion is ENTIRELY pre or post the EQ stage. Turns out that feedback inside an EQ circuit sounds bad. So there's ZERO loss of precision by running EQ->Distortion. So, interesting EQ schematics... I mean... if anyone had any obscure schematics and they were to arrive in my inbox... well, that might keep the first few versions interesting eh?)

Dave.

[DaveGamble]

(and in continuation to the last bracketed wall of text... excluding saturation from those specific units leaves open the door to making some kind of unit that models specific unit saturations. I've been trying to convince Marc @ StudioDevil to build a model of the Pultec post-amp stage, because I'm not convinced that anyone else has tube models that compete with his method - which is technically 0dfb btw - but he's SUPER busy, as you'd expect! Anyway, when I say obscure, I mean anything that doesn't come up on the first page of google image search for "x schematics". I have all of those... and quite a few more... but if anyone wants to anonymously email me scans of circuits which i can anonymously add as subtypes then... wahey! But do keep it EQ!!! ... for now .... :D:D:D)

Dave.

[antithesist]

I'd bet there's more transformer sound than tube. Well, on the low end at normal levels, that is. Talk to the guys that make the new ones, look at some old ones, etc.

http://www.pulsetechniques.com/

[Fred_Abstract]

tilt filter?

What about it?

1st order ultra-smooth shelf, with adjustable tilt frequency and variable gain amount.
You've seen before, or no?

Just once Dave, someone in this thread will out-think you.

Not sure when that will be, though.

Looking forward to this

Peace,
Andy.

[DaveGamble]

I'd bet there's more transformer sound than tube. Well, on the low end at normal levels, that is. Talk to the guys that make the new ones, look at some old ones, etc.

http://www.pulsetechniques.com/

Transformers on their own really don't do a great deal at all. Not at line level anyway.
I remember a furore about some plugin "not distorting enough", but when measured, it turned out that it matched the unit with incredible precision.

Valve&xformer interaction is more of a thing.
(Edit: pultec input is just a xformer. Pultec output is valves and transformers. )

Dave.

[antithesist]

DaveGamble: No, I'm with you. I was just meaning that between the two types of slight distortion, I'd put my money on the trafos, up until you started pushing the tube(s) like a guitar amp. Anyway, I'm all for just precision modeling of curves, phase and whatever all else you're doing. I've actually got three or four adequate Pultec plug-ins and a Lindell PEX 500 series module, so that's not really a big draw for me here. Neve 10XX, API 550A (not "-1"), API 560, Avalon 2055/2077, GML 8200, classic consoles, etc. would interest me more. Above all would be the Sontec 432C. I'm guessing you're doing it up to add profiles of classic and modern analog EQ bands, too. Combining those seems like it will be a lot of fun. I guess that's kind of what the Waves H-EQ and 112dB Redline (RIP DJ) are about. Bring it on, I say!

[DaveGamble]

DaveGamble: No, I'm with you. I was just meaning that between the two types of slight distortion, I'd put my money on the trafos, up until you started pushing the tube(s) like a guitar amp. Anyway, I'm all for just precision modeling of curves, phase and whatever all else you're doing. I've actually got three or four adequate Pultec plug-ins and a Lindell PEX 500 series module, so that's not really a big draw for me here. Neve 10XX, API 550A (not "-1"), API 560, Avalon 2055/2077, GML 8200, classic consoles, etc. would interest me more. Above all would be the Sontec 432C. I'm guessing you're doing it up to add profiles of classic and modern analog EQ bands, too. Combining those seems like it will be a lot of fun. I guess that's kind of what the Waves H-EQ and 112dB Redline (RIP DJ) are about. Bring it on, I say!

If you'll pardon the deliberate lack of a point to this statement, I'll just comment that google returns schematics for the 550, the 1073/1081, the SSLs, the V series, and many more.

I'm not actually sure what you meant by ' not "-1" '.

Dave.

[antithesist]

API 550A-1, probably should have and could have been called a 550C, 551 or 552:

http://www.avedisaudio.com/API_eqs.html

Are you "spicing" schemos for curves?

[DaveGamble]

API 550A-1, probably should have and could have been called a 550C, 551 or 552:

http://www.avedisaudio.com/API_eqs.html

Are you "spicing" schemos for curves?

That's part of it, yes. It's a very quick way to get graphs (if you're sure that the schematic is correct), and to test rearrangements to simplify the analysis/algebra.

Dave.

[K-Slash]

I've been reading this with interest.

In fact, if you plan to do a saturation plugin on your own, why not do things like that, multiple algos featuring :
- Neve 1073 preamp
- API op-amp
- Pultec output stage (transfo+valve interaction)
- [...] (you name it)

So it could be used pre or post the "clean EQ" plugin.

Just my thought.

PS : Teaming up with Marc is indeed a GREAT idea !

[Fred_Abstract]

eq boost come a lot from harmonics too i guess? some eq sound almost like enhancers, not exciters.. but something happen , i think i never heard that in a plugin except nebula ,son eq is decent too

[DaveGamble]

eq boost come a lot from harmonics too i guess? some eq sound almost like enhancers, not exciters.. but something happen , i think i never heard that in a plugin except nebula ,son eq is decent too

Well, SonEQ is a Pultec emulation, so that might indeed be what you hear. It basically all seems to resolve back to either:

A: Pultec distortion (which, as I've said, you can add after the fact without loss of accuracy) (and pultec-based designs)
or
B: Any other EQ ever made, which has been designed to be as distortion free as possible.

There IS a world of using ANY piece of kit as a distortion unit (Drum'n'Bass, I'm looking at you here...), but that's not what I'm interested in achieving here - as I've said, I want to make the finest EQ money can buy, and doing so DOESN'T limit accuracy in terms of these distortions - there's no issue with adding that before or after.

Dave.

[DaveGamble]

I've been reading this with interest.

In fact, if you plan to do a saturation plugin on your own, why not do things like that, multiple algos featuring :
- Neve 1073 preamp
- API op-amp
- Pultec output stage (transfo+valve interaction)
- [...] (you name it)

So it could be used pre or post the "clean EQ" plugin.

Just my thought.

PS : Teaming up with Marc is indeed a GREAT idea !

I agree.

The problem with the 1073 and the API, however, is that what you want from them isn't really something that's easy to get. So, if you hook up a mic to a 1073, you get that lovely high-end resonance, and it's shiny and warm. But it's a fair bit harder to use a 1073 as a reamp, as you'll find if you try! Maybe we could build some kind of very quiet, precise volume attenuator and stick that before a 1073 mic pre input.... but REALLY, a massive part of what makes a 1073 so fun is that the input transformer also gives you reflected impedance - which is why the front end of the Liquid Channel was so complex - because you can't model reflected impedance without knowing what's being plugged in (that's what reflected impedance does, in a creepy (not very)magical way).

The 1073 EQ isn't especially interesting compared to, say, the 4000G or even the (frankly fully loopy) Pultec.

Still, as soon as I can get this thing released, you can take a look at the graphs and have a look.

The difference between an API and a 32c is STUNNINGLY small (so much so that I considered ditching the 32c, and just leaving a note about Q adjustments to make to the API) - but I left it in anyway so you can take a look.

Dave.