Re: [LAU] Question about plugin 1970 (EQ)

On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 02:39:40PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>
> > > 100 Hz

Fons wrote:
 
> > it makes not sense to have defaults for the frequencies
 
Thanks Fons. BTW, I follow your postings with interest.
 
> I'll repeat this: Defaults for frequencies are useless, there are no
> defaults! Not only for the mastering, there are also no special defaults
> for instruments. At e.g. SAE they teach idiocy and say, for sax use
> "this EQ setting" etc., or at least some students guess that they should
> learn this, when watching a VIP engineer.
>
> It's nonsense. Frequencies are a "room" and you'll place the instruments
> inside this "room". As there's no default for the panning, there's no
> default for the frequencies.
>
> An exception: 100 Hz isn't a good value. 80 Hz or lower as
> shelving-filter is a good position to start.
>
> I'm not referring to "plugin 1970", but to the usage of EQs in general.
>
> For the master sum I would prefer a graphical, instead of a parametric
> EQ, while for single instruments a parametric EQ might be more useful.

Hi Ralf,

Nama currently uses plugin 1970 for EQ to support
terminal-only users. Those who want graphic EQ can
easily use an insert to send the signal
to an external JACK'able EQ program.

Perhaps there is some equivalent of a graphic equalizer
suitable for terminal users?

Regarding the frequencies, I risked a "dumb" question
to possibly give naive users reasonable defaults.

 
> The parametric EQ is the "fineliner" you use to draw lines to the
> "picture", the graphical EQ for the master sum is to tune
> "contrast/brightness" for the complete "picture".

That seems like a reasonable characterization.

Regards,

Joel

-- 
Joel Roth
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user