correct spectrum analyzer use

TraceyStudios


I have applied the cakewalk spectrum anaylzer to the effects bin of various tracks to look at the freqs used and look for any that i can remove. I make changes for example apply a HP filter at 80 hz with -24 db. the I can hear the differrence but the analyzer doesn't indicate the change. What is the correct way to use the spectrum analyzer so it will indicate the post eq audio accuratly? Perhaps I need to get a better analyzer plug? 

Are you sure you have the spectrum analyzer inserted in the chain after the eq.

Try placing the analyzer on the Master buss, just for integrity, and solo the channel you're EQ'ing. Some EQ plug-ins will give you a directly viewable spectrum analyzer, such as DMG Audio's EQuality. 

What was your slope setting? If it's low then you're still going to see a fair amount of activity below your cutoff point. Also I have found that the console emulation adds some low frequencies as well so try turning that off to see if it makes any difference. 

Yeah I would ditch the Cakewalk one and get either the Bluecat analyzer or Vonexgo Span. They are both excellent. 

swamptooth


the cakewalk analyzer does not accurately reflect frequency cuts, esp in low ranges, and i would be wary because of this that it accurately reflects activity across the frequency range.  here's a screenshot showing cake's analyzer and blue cat's after a 96db/oct filter was applied to a track...

don't disagree. 

from the help file...

Lower resolution yields faster updates but less accurate low frequency analysis. Higher resolution yields much better low frequency analysis but slower updates.

here's a shot of bandpass and the bottom one is span vs blue cat where i get the same results.  might be how you have them set up.  it's worth noting that if you turn precision down to 5 on blue cat you get the same results as cakewalk analyst.  :/

rabeach

swamptooth


the cakewalk analyzer does not accurately reflect frequency cuts, esp in low ranges, and i would be wary because of this that it accurately reflects activity across the frequency range.  here's a screenshot showing cake's analyzer and blue cat's after a 96db/oct filter was applied to a track...

don't disagree. 

from the help file...

Lower resolution yields faster updates but less accurate low frequency analysis. Higher resolution yields much better low frequency analysis but slower updates.

yeah, raebach, but as you can see my resolution in CW analyst is already set to hi. unless there's a hidden setting somewhere, that's as good as it gets! ;)  

I was bored, so I did some testing on this with straight Sine waves.

I'm not sure how it translates to actual music ... but as far as a straight signal goes ...

I created a Mono 100Hz tone in Sound Forge. I picked that so it would fall on a grid line in the Analyzers.

I found that none of them were 100% accurate ... but Melda's free one was the closest.

Span has something funky going on with the db range it looks like, unless I'm reading it wrong.

Cakewalk Analyzer looked to be fairly accurate, but it seems it's shifted a bit. The Red line is the Max Hold setting. The peak of it is exactly at 100Hz, but you can see the Real Time bars are shifted. When I hover my mouse over the center of it, it shows 87Hz. That's quite a difference IMO.

I tried using the Pro Channel EQ and cut the 100Hz tone by -10db and all three reflected the change ... Melda being the most accurate.

Right click on the image to view it in high res.

I don't know how all this translates to analyzing music, but this is how it looks with a 100Hz Sine wave.

swamptooth

rabeach

swamptooth


the cakewalk analyzer does not accurately reflect frequency cuts, esp in low ranges, and i would be wary because of this that it accurately reflects activity across the frequency range.  here's a screenshot showing cake's analyzer and blue cat's after a 96db/oct filter was applied to a track...

don't disagree. 

from the help file...

Lower resolution yields faster updates but less accurate low frequency analysis. Higher resolution yields much better low frequency analysis but slower updates.

yeah, raebach, but as you can see my resolution in CW analyst is already set to hi. unless there's a hidden setting somewhere, that's as good as it gets! ;)  

the help file didn't say gives excellent low freq analysis.  I have always used voxengo span.  

I won't do another screenshot ... ... but I just increased the scale on the Melda one too and it shows roughly the same as Cake and SPAN.

Bub


I won't do another screenshot ... ... but I just increased the scale on the Melda one too and it shows roughly the same as Cake and SPAN.

hey bub. yeah i just ran a 100hz sine wave through all three and they seemed to be the same, even when i threw on the hpf.  tried it with music and analyst was still showing movement well below the filter's cutoff frequency.  probably a resolution thing.  

Yeah that's a cool one. comes in handy for targeting levels in frequencies and assigning the automation envelopes to corresponding frequency gain in the prochannel eq for neat little dips and stuff. :D

I downloaded the freebie Voxengo Span and it does seem to be accurate. Then I discoverd there are multi channel spectrum analyzers, started browsing around.  I would really like to get one, but I have spent so much money lately that I am hoping to find a multi channel for cheap. Anyone have any suggestions for an inexpensive multi channel SA ?