A question about surround EQ.

[DaveGamble]

Hi,

It's probably not a huge secret that I'm working on a new, very chunky, EQ. To that end, I'd like to get the surround implementation +RIGHT+. A few of you have been very kind and mailed me about how this should be done, and I feel I should throw the conversation open here. :)

Ask and ye shall receive. Routing matrices, control groups, M/S, front-rear M/S, arbitrary subgrouping with arbitrary transforms, solos, mutes, metering, who knows? Tell me what you need and how you want it to work, and it will be done.

Dave.

[Frank Kruse]

-Sonogramm view instead of spectrum-analyzer view would be more helpful to find offending buzz in production sound.

-Real MS-Matrix (encode/decode incl. width control. at the moment there´s only separate EQ for M and S components)

[dr sound]

Dave,
I am a huge fan of yours. The one thing I ask is for you to send me a
"beta" version to make sure it maps out to the center section of an "Icon
D-Control/ Command" prior to final release. Your existing Eq's do not
and buttons are wrong.
Now let other get into specific requests for the "New Super UnEqualed"!

[jesse p]

I'm so happy to see this thread

Good luck Dave, you stuff is awesome!


1. I'd like to be able to use automation to link channels that I want to EQ. I want 6 individual eq's obviously as well as, L+R, LCR, LS RS, L+R+LS+RS

2. I'd love a built in brickwall with some Compassion guts.

3. I don't know how anyone else would feel about this, but what if there were a mirror image eq. A boost in the center would apply and equal cut in the other sat channels for example. One of your fancy sliders could adjust the mirror ratio?

[DaveGamble]

Originally Posted by Frank Kruse

-Sonogramm view instead of spectrum-analyzer view would be more helpful to find offending buzz in production sound.

All good.

-Real MS-Matrix (encode/decode incl. width control. at the moment there´s only separate EQ for M and S components)

If you take a look at EQuick, it allows EQ of Mid and Side (or both) per-band from the same instance. Including a width control. The implementation there is much more sophisticated, so I'm starting from there

Dave.

[Pirate Post]

Another plug from Dave. I'll buy it whatever it is.

I would love a dynamic EQ version of Equality.

[macaholic]

+1 for D-Control mapping...

So looks like my wallet will be a little lighter when this thing comes out, cause I'm sure it'll be brilliant like all the other 3.

[marty lester]

Originally Posted by DaveGamble

Hi,

It's probably not a huge secret that I'm working on a new, very chunky, EQ. To that end, I'd like to get the surround implementation +RIGHT+. A few of you have been very kind and mailed me about how this should be done, and I feel I should throw the conversation open here. :)

Ask and ye shall receive. Routing matrices, control groups, M/S, front-rear M/S, arbitrary subgrouping with arbitrary transforms, solos, mutes, metering, who knows? Tell me what you need and how you want it to work, and it will be done.

Dave.

i'll tell you what i need desperately...i need an EQ "system" that will mimic bass management in some surround monitor controllers.

i was thinking i would come out of my PT system into my MHLabs ULN-8 and out of that to my speakers...using the UNL-8 mixer for delays for monitor distance correction, but i don't have a way to do bass management.

sure, it's easy enough to insert hi-pass filters into each output, but how does
one then combine that crossed "out" low frequency together along w/ the regular information in the .1 channel? that's my understanding more/less of what bass management does...please correct me if i'm wrong.

so to re-cap: can you create an eq template that, when "in" crosses over
the 5.0 channels at a set frequency point, passes the frequencies above that through and combines the low frequencies together and adds them to the .1 channel. i can think of a complicated bussing system to do this but i'd love to have a 1-click in/out solution!

thanks for asking...i know i'm probably asking for something too specific, and possibly impossible.

marty.