Re: [LAU] Tilt EQ

Hi,
On 05/05/2016 15:23, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Thu, 05 May 2016 13:46:03 +0200, William Light wrote:
>> I have definitely used tilt EQs in the production process. Not as my EQ
>> shape of choice but I've added little bits in as a broad "well, I wish
>> this sound was a bit more trebly/bassy".
> I heard the first time in my life of tilt EQs. After some web research
> I noticed that it's just another kind of HiFi gear alike tone control.
>
> Sure, we even could use chains of EQs and get good results, e.g. a
> parametric EQ for the track, another for the subgroup and at the end in
> addition a graphic EQ for the mastering, but we should reconsider that
> a chain of EQs sometimes might ease the work, but also could be
> counterproductive, one EQ reduces what another EQ boosts, in the end it
> could cause a mess.
Yes, an EQ chain should do the trick also for my needs (I've already
done some test with a graphic EQ).
In that case, the term "tilt" is somewhat misleading. From the point of
view of what a tilt EQ do (intuitively) is clear. On the contrary, there
no exists a tilt EQ topology (in electrical sense). I mean, the filter
topolgy are HP, LP, HS, LS, Peak, ... and the tilt can be a combination
of one or more of this. Just the way the "tone" control of some consumer
device works. It is what tone control do, but any maker design the tone
control using a combination of basic filter types.

>
> If I take a look at this plugin,
> http://www.audiopluginsforfree.com/tal-use/ , I see more than just one
> knob. Usage of some audio tools could make the engineering process
> incalculable.
>
> Another invention of the 70s was the exciter. I only tested digital
> effects produced after the 70s and need to strongly advice against
> those.

The exciter is a psycho-acoustic EQ. That means that is not an EQ in the
classic sense. It adds high harmonics to the signal using non linear
processing.
Can sound good sometimes, but I'm not excited by using exciter ;)

>
> The meat and potatoes of relaxed audio engineering is cautious usage of
> EQing. What seems to provide something useful in the first place, in
> the end easily could become a serious issue.
>
> As a side note, German audio Wikis are usually a good source and also
> www.sengpielaudio.com/ partly in English. I suspect that Mr. Sengpiel
> edited several German audio Wikis before he died. It might be worth to
> translate them. When I learned, the Internet wasn't available, but I
> would have used his information, if it would have being available that
> time. IMO Mr. Sengpiel provides a little bit too much unneeded math,
> instead of teaching intuitive engineering, but IMO his explanations
> could be helpful for many people.
It seems to be a good resource. Unfortunately I don't speak German so I
can access only to a subset of it.

Cheers

> Regards,
> Ralf
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-audio-user mailing list
> Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
>

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