sharke
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13933
- Joined: 2012/08/03 00:13:00
- Location: NYC
- Status: offline
Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
Knowing absolutely nothing about analog audio processing or electronics, I can nonetheless imagine that the reason why classic EQ's like the 1066 and 1073 had fixed frequency bands was something to do with the values of off the shelf electrical components (although I'm sure someone will put me straight). However, I was wondering if there was a good reason why digital emulations of these EQ's have the same restrictions, other than authenticity and the fact that they're modeled from the original designs? For instance I love the sound of Waves V-EQ3 when making boosts, but oftentimes find myself wishing that I could sweep somewhere between 3.8kHz and 4.8kHz to find the spot I want, instead of having to choose between those two frequencies. I guess what I'm curious about is, is part of the character of these EQ's a product of the fact that they have fixed bands, or is there no reason why we can't have an EQ with the same sonic character but with sweepable bands?
JamesWindows 10, Sonar SPlat (64-bit), Intel i7-4930K, 32GB RAM, RME Babyface, AKAI MPK Mini, Roland A-800 Pro, Focusrite VRM Box, Komplete 10 Ultimate, 2012 American Telecaster!
|
batsbrew
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10037
- Joined: 2007/06/07 16:02:32
- Location: SL,UT
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/02 10:37:00
(permalink)
they are copying the original circuits, as close as possible, for good or bad
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/02 11:01:52
(permalink)
In hardware, fully-parametric filters are expensive - and the cost is multiplied by however many channels your console has. That's one reason they've historically been fixed.
The other is that it's quicker to dial in an EQ when you have the same filters on every channel. You give up some flexibility but gain ease of use. This is the reason software continues to emulate that design, even though the cost factor no longer applies.
What I don't buy into is the concept of "magic" crossover frequencies, where you're told the EQ works well because of the particular fixed frequencies they've chosen. That's BS. The real benefit is being able to quickly tweak the EQ because you've become habituated to its characteristics.
 All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
wst3
Max Output Level: -55.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1979
- Joined: 2003/11/04 10:28:11
- Location: Pottstown, PA 19464
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/02 21:03:54
(permalink)
twice this century, but I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with Mr. Bit...
There are some "magic" filters out there - might be the cut-off frequency, might be the topology, might be the parts used, I have not yet figured that part out yet, but there are filters that I use because they are just musical. Oddly enough, most are fixed frequency filters - for all the other reasons you listed, but cost is probably the predominant reason.
Examples - the classic Pulteq filters seem really well placed, now do we like them because they are in the right spot or are they in the right spot because we've become accustomed to them?
One of my favorites, strange though it may be, was a cooperative effort between Haffler and Rane - this funky little 1 RU guitar preamplifier that had the most musically useful (for a guitar) tone controls. They didn't even call them filters<G>!
Another favorite was the tone controls on this old Heathkit preamplifier. The filters are all passive, but they just work musically.
Symetrix used to make a couple filter sets that were really useful, and the Urei "Little Dipper" is another one from that era that I really liked.
For modern gear I don't think you can beat the MAAG EQ, that thing is just magic!
Anyway, choice of cutoff frequency is very important, and highly subjective<G>!
Bill
-- Bill Audio Enterprise KB3KJF
|
sharke
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13933
- Joined: 2012/08/03 00:13:00
- Location: NYC
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/02 21:45:13
(permalink)
I also wondered if there were some mathematical reason why certain frequencies were easier to manipulate. These are the sort of things that flit about one's head when one knows nothing about a subject  Anyway I can see the advantage of only having limited frequencies to work with. I must admit I do get carried away sometimes with trying to be "exact," i.e. boosting a certain frequency in one instrument and cutting exactly the same frequency in another. Other times, for instance when giving a little clarity boost on a guitar, one of the frequencies on the V-EQ3 seems to work great no matter what the source.
JamesWindows 10, Sonar SPlat (64-bit), Intel i7-4930K, 32GB RAM, RME Babyface, AKAI MPK Mini, Roland A-800 Pro, Focusrite VRM Box, Komplete 10 Ultimate, 2012 American Telecaster!
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/02 21:53:14
(permalink)
Bill, I thought you were a modern, enlightened and educated guy! Magic? Really? Musical filters? Dude! If you're gonna refute me you'll have to throw in at least a little science. Just to shut me up if nothing else. Next you'll be singing the praises of A-432 and homeopathy! 
All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
drewfx1
Max Output Level: -9.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6585
- Joined: 2008/08/04 16:19:11
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/03 15:08:57
(permalink)
sharke
I guess what I'm curious about is, is part of the character of these EQ's a product of the fact that they have fixed bands, or is there no reason why we can't have an EQ with the same sonic character but with sweepable bands?
Their are certain DSP issues involved with making sweepable bands. Not necessarily dealbreakers, but issues.
 In order, then, to discover the limit of deepest tones, it is necessary not only to produce very violent agitations in the air but to give these the form of simple pendular vibrations. - Hermann von Helmholtz, predicting the role of the electric bassist in 1877.
|
sharke
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13933
- Joined: 2012/08/03 00:13:00
- Location: NYC
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/03 15:48:10
(permalink)
That would appear to explain the crackles and pops I hear when sweeping bands on the QuadCurve.
JamesWindows 10, Sonar SPlat (64-bit), Intel i7-4930K, 32GB RAM, RME Babyface, AKAI MPK Mini, Roland A-800 Pro, Focusrite VRM Box, Komplete 10 Ultimate, 2012 American Telecaster!
|
wst3
Max Output Level: -55.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1979
- Joined: 2003/11/04 10:28:11
- Location: Pottstown, PA 19464
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/04 14:23:45
(permalink)
bitflipper
bitflipperBill, I thought you were a modern, enlightened and educated guy!
Not me... I'm a dinosaur through and through - still have a couple of tape decks even<G>!
bitflipperMagic? Really? Musical filters? Dude!
So maybe that's a little over the top, hyperbole even?
But yes, I do believe that some filters in some devices are more pleasing to some folks. And I do not think any chickens sacrificed in order to pull it off!
bitflipperIf you're gonna refute me you'll have to throw in at least a little science.
This is where science and art start to blur together I'm afraid. This has more to do with psychology than electronics or acoustics, but I believe that the effect is very real.
Think about the number of devices with identical, or nearly identical measurements (S/N, THD, IMD, etc), yet sound markedly different. There are also cases where two devices sound strikingly similar but may have diverge when measured.
As a specific case - I built a handful of headphone amplifiers, most were class A circuits, but a couple were Class A/B, and they used a variety of bias methods, including constant current sources. I used bipolar and field-effect transistors in almost all the different approaches.
Granted my test gear is getting old (Sound Technology ST-1710A, ST-1510A, and ST-3000, and Amber 4400A), but I was able to measure meaningful levels of noise and distortion in most of the circuits.
What did my ears tell me you ask? I'm glad you did...
There was very little correlation between lower numbers and what I liked. There was the hint of a correlation, or at least repeatability, in that I seemed to prefer Class A over Class A/B, but not enough to be compelling. (Maybe in a high gain preamplifier stage, but not in a power amplifier stage.)
My point being that there are some things, even in the little old world of audio, that we can't pin down - scientifically at least - just yet.
bitflipperJust to shut me up if nothing else.
That has never been my goal!
bitflipperNext you'll be singing the praises of A-432 and homeopathy!
Don't hold your breath for that<G>!!
-- Bill Audio Enterprise KB3KJF
|
mixmkr
Max Output Level: -43.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3169
- Joined: 2007/03/05 22:23:43
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/04 22:24:41
(permalink)
Musical... because DimeBag used a Furman PQ3, which was totally sweepable too. :-D
Then those old Moog parametrics... I guess if you're a synth player and need something for your 2600 ??
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/04 22:39:02
(permalink)
Good rebuttal, Bill.
I do believe that there are things that can be heard but not measured, and of course lots of things that can be measured but not heard. If what sounds good could be objectively quantified, we'd have nothing to talk about here.
I am intrigued by the Maag, due to anecdotal testimonials from the likes of yorolpal. I'd love to live with it for a couple months and see for myself, but $229 is too high a price regardless of whether the payoff is a) discovering a wonderful tool or b) vindicating my prejudices.
So for now I'm gonna go with the graphs I've seen in VST Analyzer that reveal the Maag EQ to be just another equalizer, albeit one that attempts to guide your hand for you. I'll stick with my fully-parametric EQs that can do pert-near anything and don't make assumptions about what I want.
All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
drewfx1
Max Output Level: -9.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6585
- Joined: 2008/08/04 16:19:11
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/05 11:30:57
(permalink)
bitflipper
I do believe that there are things that can be heard but not measured,
Perhaps you could clarify this for me?
In order, then, to discover the limit of deepest tones, it is necessary not only to produce very violent agitations in the air but to give these the form of simple pendular vibrations. - Hermann von Helmholtz, predicting the role of the electric bassist in 1877.
|
batsbrew
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10037
- Joined: 2007/06/07 16:02:32
- Location: SL,UT
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/05 11:40:12
(permalink)
the thing is...
no matter WHAT the EQ you use,
the SOURCE, and the CAPTURE,
will always be more important.
every mic has a sonic fingerprint,
and sometimes the make and break point of a particular track is simply the choice of mic.
the whole purpose of having to use EQ in the first place,
is that something is missed in the capture.
there are brilliant guys out there, that create custom eq curves using all sorts of devices (i'm talking hardware eq's now.......)
and they know what they are going for..
but ultimately, their choices still boil down to SUBJECTIVE CHOICES..... most of the time.
i'm afraid that any chasing of particular eq curves, or 'emulations' of famous hardware eq (PULTEC comes to mind) is probably not going to get you any closer to the truth (which is, ultimately, the best tracks you can conjur)
there are so many other factors that come into play that are much much more important.
forest for the trees.
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/05 19:15:36
(permalink)
drewfx1
bitflipper
I do believe that there are things that can be heard but not measured,
Perhaps you could clarify this for me?
Sure. Any aspect of sound that can only be realized through processing by a human brain. In short, you can't measure music, only sound. Music doesn't even exist until it's been created in the listener's brain.Until then, it's just fluctuations in air pressure or a string of numbers in a DAW. Examples. There is no piece of test equipment that can reliably distinguish between pleasant and unpleasant combinations of sounds. Clever, well-constructed lyrics look the same on an oscilloscope as Metallica lyrics. Harmony, counterpoint, dynamics, tension/release are all human constructs that have no meaning outside the realm of mental processing. Same for emotional associations (e.g. pizzacato strings and oboes are light-hearted, trombones are menacing, tympani are majestic) that work by leveraging humans' common experiences and previous associations. These are things that can be heard but not measured.
All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
drewfx1
Max Output Level: -9.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6585
- Joined: 2008/08/04 16:19:11
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/05 20:06:06
(permalink)
OK. I suspected you were talking about art and not audio.  I wanted to clarify because I consider "the ear can hear things that can't be measured" to be the initial premise from which all audiophoolery follows, and didn't want anyone to mistakenly read it that way.
In order, then, to discover the limit of deepest tones, it is necessary not only to produce very violent agitations in the air but to give these the form of simple pendular vibrations. - Hermann von Helmholtz, predicting the role of the electric bassist in 1877.
|
sharke
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13933
- Joined: 2012/08/03 00:13:00
- Location: NYC
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/05 22:49:48
(permalink)
bitflipper
Clever, well-constructed lyrics look the same on an oscilloscope as Metallica lyrics.
Ouch! lol.....
JamesWindows 10, Sonar SPlat (64-bit), Intel i7-4930K, 32GB RAM, RME Babyface, AKAI MPK Mini, Roland A-800 Pro, Focusrite VRM Box, Komplete 10 Ultimate, 2012 American Telecaster!
|
wst3
Max Output Level: -55.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1979
- Joined: 2003/11/04 10:28:11
- Location: Pottstown, PA 19464
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/06 16:37:47
(permalink)
drewfx1
OK. I suspected you were talking about art and not audio.
I wanted to clarify because I consider "the ear can hear things that can't be measured" to be the initial premise from which all audiophoolery follows, and didn't want anyone to mistakenly read it that way.
While it is certainly true that audiophoolery comes from the suggestion that there are things that can be heard but not measured, the same concept is the basis of a LOT of truly great - and useful research. It is not just art, nor is it just science, it is a combination of the two. And some of the best minds in professional audio continue to try to solve this puzzle...why do two amplifiers measure the same but sound different? Among a couple hundred others!
-- Bill Audio Enterprise KB3KJF
|
wst3
Max Output Level: -55.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1979
- Joined: 2003/11/04 10:28:11
- Location: Pottstown, PA 19464
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/06 16:47:35
(permalink)
bitflipperGood rebuttal, Bill. I try<G>! bitflipperI am intrigued by the Maag, due to anecdotal testimonials from the likes of yorolpal. I'd love to live with it for a couple months and see for myself, but $229 is too high a price regardless of whether the payoff is a) discovering a wonderful tool or b) vindicating my prejudices. I've owned or used the hardware, the native plug-in, and the UA plug-in. All three are amazing - about as close to magical as I've ever used, and definitely infinitely musical. Also extremely easy to over-use! I currently use the native version, and the difference between native and UA is so imperceptible (inaudible on my current monitors) so I haven't made the leap to the UA version (it did not exist when I bought the native version.) I've only used the hardware in a studio with a monitor system that is orders of magnitude better than mine, and I found the hardware much easier to use, but I'm certain that was because I could hear everything that was going on. I consider the MAAG EQ to be one of my secret weapons - I kinda wish I was the only one that knew about it<G>! I use it for mixing a lot, for tracking rarely, and even for restoration. It is NOT vintage, but it is amazing, and I find their choices for center and corner frequencies to be very useful. I do not know exactly what goes on under the sheet metal, but I've built very low Q high frequency shelving filters and gotten a similar effect, albeit a much noisier effect. Some pretty solid engineering in that little blue box! Make sure you have the cash handy before you try it, I'd be willing to wager you'll end up buying it! (There is a 14 day demo at Plugin Alliance)
-- Bill Audio Enterprise KB3KJF
|
AT
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10654
- Joined: 2004/01/09 10:42:46
- Location: TeXaS
- Status: offline
Re: Vintage EQ emulations with fixed bands - reason?
2014/09/09 13:22:04
(permalink)
The software replicates the hardware, which was fixed. There is no other reason that software can't switch. But the points chosen by hardware weren't random. Mr. Neve's ears, and Putnam's etc. were good, and they found optimum points and slopes by testing what was available w/ the technology of the day. And guess what, those still sound good.
@
https://soundcloud.com/a-pleasure-dome
http://www.bnoir-film.com/ there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. 24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
|