ORIGINAL: plectrumpusher

The FFT process is filled with compromise, always remeber that you are almost always dealing with data that has been averaged in some manner because of computational limitations and realities. lower block sizes are more accurate in the time domain, but don't display long wave frequency amplitudes well. If you increase the Block size you will be able to observe bass and lower midrange frequency amplitudes better , but at the cost of slower time display accuracy (which leads us back to trusting your ears because there could be cognitive dissonance when you are trying to coordinate two senses and the data recieved by the both of them is not in synch!!).

That's not correct. The efficient FFT algorithm was "invented" in the 70's (or 60's?) and is quite simple in the digital domain. I don't think computer power is an issue.

Hi plectrumpusher-

I've been doing this a while by ear, and I haven't been totally disappointed with the results, but I want to try out some things (specifically, what I've read recently in Bobby Owsinski's "Mixing Engineer's Handbook") -- that's why I'm looking right now for a way to see as well as hear what I'm doing. I probably should have said that. But I definitely take your points and agree with them!.

Thanks-

-Susan

I'm not saying that a FF transform is'nt accurate , But you do have some choices to make when you implement it .

+1 for GlissEQ. The frequency analyzer is very good and the EQ is one of the better ones out there. Not all that transparent, though, if that's what you're looking for.

Dan

Susan , I'm glad you did'nt interprate my post as wagging my finger disapprovingly ; not at all my intention . I've seen some pretty big shouting matches about using freq analyzers! I use them all the time .
Just thinking out loud abit.

Cheers

to all the other plugins I stopped using is also GlissEq.. (god am I difficult to handle)..
I wanted to take advantage of the overlay-feature lately and must admit that it didn't quite work out how it should or how I expected it to be..
I might try it with S7.. as S6 gave me also several problems with i.e. gr3
Back to Gliss.. although you are able to overlay several graphs.. it only worked hm.. "well" with one graph..
adding another graph/source made the gui/graphs "stutter"..
when I disabled the "send" on one GlissEq, I still had it overlaying and updating on the other instance of GlissEQ..
anyway.. like most of the Voxengo stuff.. you really have to learn these plugins.. GlissEQ doesn't work and sound like the "normal" graphic/parametric-eqs we are used to..
I'll have another look at the overlay-feature with S7, and might come back and tell you my results..

+1 for Voxengo Curve EQ or GlissEQ

Roger Nichols Frequalizer (old Elemental Audio Firium, I believe does this)

Hi-

Susan , I'm glad you did'nt interprate my post as wagging my finger disapprovingly

Not at all; not to worry, but thanks!

I'm still inclined to go with the Image-Line Juice Pack. Granted it's $20 USD more than GlissEQ, but EQUO is so easy to work with, and there are a bunch of other FXs included.

Does anyone else here have experience with EQUO? It's just silly easy to draw an EQ curve with it.

Still on the fence-

Thanks-

-Susan

The Sonalksis Essentials EQ does this also.