DigitalAudioSoft - EQ Suite

Post by **hubird** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:56 am

On 2006-09-23 06:33, digitalaudiosoft wrote:
i have never seen a man like you !
go playing with your sdk...

i have never seen a develloper like you!

digitalaudiosoft · Post by **digitalaudiosoft** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 6:00 am

self edited..

[ This Message was edited by: digitalaudiosoft on 2006-09-23 07:06 ]

MCCY · Post by **MCCY** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 6:10 am

picture removed. There is a more actual discussion. Posts of discussion has been changed and so it could mislead.

voidar · Post by **voidar** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 6:34 am

Is one of those master meters really connected with the output?
I don't know how they work, but that seems strange.

MCCY · Post by **MCCY** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 6:37 am

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 6:38 am

On 2006-09-23 07:37, MCCYRANO wrote:
Why strange?
One Meter is connected to the output BEFORE phase inverted addition, one is connected AFTER adding phase-inverted PEQ. => Result is ZERO output, which should prove, that signal is identical.

Feel free to rebuild and test other settings.

Martin

he means the first master meter is connected to outputs and not ins.....

I am not sure.... I haven`t used master meter yet.

[ This Message was edited by: hifiboom on 2006-09-23 07:39 ]

MCCY · Post by **MCCY** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 6:41 am

Ah, I see, I'm stupid !!!!!
Do I have to rebuild it again, now? Just turned off computer...

This way it really looks as if I messed it, but be sure, it is the left meter (which obviously works)...

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 6:47 am

I hope for DAS,
that you did a mistake with your meters, MC ...

thats kind of funny....

[ This Message was edited by: hifiboom on 2006-09-23 07:48 ]

MCCY · Post by **MCCY** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 6:52 am

You're right I could not hold back loughing out loud!!!! ;o) In this situation I bring in a obviously wrongly cabled project. I rather correct it... I'd like to express how funny this really is, but my english is too bad for that

)))

Martin

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 6:52 am

voidar · Post by **voidar** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:10 am

On the new picture it almost looks like the EQ's are not connected at all

... I had to look twice, hehe.

Is this possible to do with the demo versions?

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:18 am

On 2006-09-23 08:10, voidar wrote:
On the new picture it almost looks like the EQ's are not connected at all ... I had to look twice, hehe.

Is this possible to do with the demo versions?

another question: Do you think MCCyrano has bought any DAS plug, if he is doing tests like this?

I ve not checked it yet, but if its true, I think DAS will loose CW as supporter.

[ This Message was edited by: hifiboom on 2006-09-23 08:24 ]

Post by **hubird** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:38 am

I just hope that the following discussion will be based on arguements and open views instead of 'stay with your toys' stuff.

Martin, you could organize the modules in a way the 'cables' show the ins and outs more clearly, but it's a minor point

[ This Message was edited by: hubird on 2006-09-23 08:40 ]

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 9:34 am

well, just had to try that, but I used my own setup for simplicity.

DX200 plays a beat and comes in on adat, parallel connected to the Polteq and EQ-X, stereo
both eqs have their Dynamixer stereo channel, one of those is phase inverted

with both devices bypassed the signal extinguishes perfectly, so setup is working.

to come to the point - imho Martin is wrong in his assumption, it was not possible at all to extinguish the PEQ4 with the Polteq under whatever circumstances...
but a creeping suspicion regarding the filter bandwidth...

so I longed for ISON, set it to Q 0.5, got closer, and an indication I was on the right track, adjusted gain etc and then back to the Polteq's bandwidth...

the 11 o'clock position on Polteq is equivalent to 0.5 - and at 11800 Hz and 16db gain it extinguishes with ISON as perfect as expectable from that source, a (very) faint brizzle was left.

[added]
well, a closer examination reveals a too high dependency of the source material - it doesn't stand a white noise test, so I removed the conclusions
[/added]

cheers, Tom

pretty funny results, considering I did this by adding the test setup to an already crowded project.
The more tweaking, the more it seemed to freak out...
those results are simply random as the devices get spread arbitrarily over DSP boundaries.
I've repeated the test with a fresh project (with Martin's presets) and he's perfectly right.
Both EQs cancel each other out

[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2006-09-23 16:11 ]

[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2006-09-24 07:10 ]

MCCY · Post by **MCCY** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 10:13 am

sonolive · Post by **sonolive** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 10:44 am

hi martin ,

On 2006-09-23 07:41, MCCYRANO wrote:
Ah, I see, I'm stupid !!!!!

not so far

I made your tests (first with a wave, then with a 1000 HZ sine, and also with a pink noise !!!)
I don’t own this master meter so i took a simple input meter of a « channel » device included in CW pack
, and i can say you i do not have the same results !!!

<IMG SRC="http://perso.orange.fr/p.f.records/PZ/PHCHK.jpg">

FIRST OF ALL : WHAT KIND OF SIGNAL DID YOU SEND IN THE WAVE SOURCE ? DO THIS SIGNAL CONTAINS 12000 HZ FREQ ? IF NOT, YOUR RESULT CAN’T BE GOOD !!! (UNDERSTAND ?)
MY SIGNAL IS A DRUMS SOLO DURING A LIVE SHOW, IT CONTAINS 12000 HZ BUT NOT SO MUCH ! TRY OUT WITH ANOTHER FREQ, RESULT WILL BE DIFFERENT ACCORDING TO YOUR SOURCE SIGNAL !

I don't know what is this "PHASE CHECK" you built but you will have to explain how it works !!! (or doesn't work !)
does it inverse a phase ? sum ?
it seems to invert one of the signal phase and sum them ? is it ? in that case , why a stereo output ?

SO , in order to proove your are completely « out »
I did my own tests !!! (can say you that i was sure of the results before doing them !!! ) but with real phase analysis tool, a phase meter ! ( the one of WAVE LAB passing thru wave dest )
And here are my conclusions , except the fact that i think you should take some hollydays right now, because you seem to be very tired !

Here are the screen shots of the tests, prooving that with the same settings, they are absolutely not in phase !!! WITH A PHASE METER ! OF COURSE ! MUCH MORE PRECISE THAN SUMMATION FOR PHASE CORRELATION (RIGHT ?)

SIGNAL USED IS A PINK NOISE AT -20Db FS

A – polteq at / +12 / 12000 HZ / Q =0.7 AND PEQ 4 SAME SETINGS, >> BUT ALL TWO BYPASSED !
<IMG SRC="http://perso.orange.fr/p.f.records/PZ/COFF.jpg">

WAVE DEST IS PLUGGED TO WAVE LAB INPUTS

RESULT :

<IMG SRC="http://perso.orange.fr/p.f.records/PZ/WLEQOFF.jpg">
absolute phase / NORMAL,

B – polteq at / +12 / 12000 HZ / Q =0.7 AND PEQ 4 SAME SETINGS, >> BUT ALL ACTIVE (NOT BYPASSED) !

<IMG SRC="http://perso.orange.fr/p.f.records/PZ/SFPON.jpg">

RESULT :

<IMG SRC="http://perso.orange.fr/p.f.records/PZ/WLEQON.jpg">

THIS IS NOT WHAT I CALL PHASED SIGNALS !!! DO YOU ?

SO MARTIN,

I don’t really know what is the aim of all these posts against our plugs ?

If you wanna compare phases, you should use preper tools : a phasemeter !!! coz levels and phases can be correlated but not necessary !!!

I hope you will try and build good (better) (sounding) plugs instead of trying to copy or attack other ones !
Cheers,
olive

[ This Message was edited by: sonolive on 2006-09-23 11:46 ]

[ This Message was edited by: sonolive on 2006-09-23 11:47 ]

[ This Message was edited by: sonolive on 2006-09-23 11:51 ]

sonolive · Post by **sonolive** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 10:56 am

On 2006-09-23 11:13, MCCYRANO wrote:
Um was wollen wir wetten, dass ich recht habe;o)? Habe mich einfach zu lange mit dieser Sache beschäftigt;o) und absolut eindeutige reproduzierbare Ergebnisse OHNE Ausnahme bei mir. Es gibt keine Einstellung, die ich nicht hörbar & sichtbar wegphasen kann (hab es auch schon mit 'nem Mischer gemacht.)

we don't speak german ... and of course i do not understand this ? can you translate plz ?

MCCY · Post by **MCCY** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 11:07 am

sonolive · Post by **sonolive** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 11:25 am

MARTIN,
I THINK YOU ARE CREAZIEST THAN EXPECTED !!!
THIS BAND IS A SHELF ONE ! AND YOU TRY TO COMPARE IT WITH A PEAK ONE (ON PEQ4) !!!

INCREDIBLE !

TESTS ARE NOT A SIMPLE GAME !
TOU NEED "PROTOCOLS"

SO DON'T TRY ANYTHING ELSE FOR TONIGHT !
HAVE A GOOD SLEEPING NIGHT, EVERYTHING WILL BE BETTER TOMORROW

cheers,
olive

Post by **hubird** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 11:31 am