Rob Papen RP-EQ Review

[decibel]

looks like a decent little eq, wonder if the sdk would allow this to be built as an rack extension ?

http://www.musictech.net/2016/01/rob-pa ... eq-review/

[EnochLight]

looks like a decent little eq, wonder if the sdk would allow this to be built as an rack extension ?

Unfortunately, not yet. For starters, it's much bigger than any 9U rack device that Reason allows. But I think the biggest feature missing is that you can't have changeable panels (ala Kong/Thor) yet, and there seems to be quite a bit of low-level graphics acceleration access that may be needed. But even if they could mimic the graphics stuff (such as Synapse Audio's accomplishment with GQ-7's spectral display), the missing changeable panels and size would cause many compromises to be made for the GUI. Half of RP-EQ's charm and uniqueness is that GUI, and it just can't be done in Reason and deliver the same experience, IMHO.

That said, Jon @ Rob Papen/ConcreteFX is a genius so - who knows!

[decibel]

That said, Jon @ Rob Papen/ConcreteFX is a genius so - who knows!

plus he always looks after us good folk who use reason
*no doubt the sdk will mature to this point in the not to distant future ? fingers crossed for all our sakes anyway

[decibel]

in other rob papen news ..

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=379895

*actualy this is an old thread from kvr, im sure i seen something mentioned about prisma in regards to some big audio trade fair event (namm) the other day and when i googled it just before i found this but didnt notice the dates untill id posted already lol

[decibel]

i noticed rob mention on a facebook post that they have planned on making this into an RE , will make a great addition to the rack yeah


http://www.musictech.net/2016/01/rob-pa ... eq-review/

[EnochLight]

i noticed rob mention on a facebook post that they have planned on making this into an RE , will make a great addition to the rack yeah


http://www.musictech.net/2016/01/rob-pa ... eq-review/

Huh.. that's cool. But everything I have read (and received in correspondence with them personally) indicated that it would be impossible to do RP EQ as a Rack Extension, given the current state of the RE SDK, without seriously compromising RP EQ's GUI and workflow. Not sure I'd want that in my rack at the end of the day, if so.

Can you point us to (link) to the Facebook post? I'd love to jump in on the conversation!

[decibel]

Can you point us to (link) to the Facebook post? I'd love to jump in on the conversation!

maybe he meant planned as in when the next sdk update occurs ? who knows, heres a screenshot of the post im referring to

[gak]

But I'll live.

[EnochLight]

Can you point us to (link) to the Facebook post? I'd love to jump in on the conversation!

maybe he meant planned as in when the next sdk update occurs ? who knows, heres a screenshot of the post im referring to

Holy crap - that's awesome! I have no idea how he'll pull it off, but I look forward to the results.

[Theo.M]

I don't mean to be rude but this EQ is all looks. I have used the demo extensively in logic and it is just whupped by things like aconEQ and yes, synapse GEQ7. For actual eq capabilities this is a very standard DAW type EQ.. there is only one maximum 24 slope cut filter at either end, and you can't choose types of filter per band. I mean sure it's "good enough" but you already have a better product available to you for months. For ME, and you guys KNOW i am an RP fan, you must know that, this is his most underwhelming plug in release since the company was founded! The air boost is nice but that alone doesn't justify it (and on AU and vst at least there are tons of options to do that. Sure, Re is limited there).

I could never rely on Rp EQ to be my overall EQ, it wouldn't be possible for me, i need much more power than that. For those who have vst access try the acon EQ and compare them and you will see what i mean. Acon has 12 bands, and you can choose any filter you want for any band.. and it allows the slope to be controlled anywhere from 1 to 120 with .1 decimal places in between. It also has a much better filter variety than RP, and can simply do shapes and jobs that it can't. 40khz air boost update coming imminently, i guess to compete with fab filter and this feature of RP's. But in typical acon style he is going to let ANY filter of the user's choice go up to 40khz.. not just a fixed curve single boost parameter.

Honestly this EQ is nothing special at all. I would get GEQ7 and stick with that till something better comes out, if it does. I thought there would have been something by now that was dynamic per band and a few other features but there doesn't seem to be.. RP is not the synapse beater, not by a long shot. It's JADEQ.

[pjeudy]

RP-EQ left me wondering what was Rob trying to accomplish here?

WHAT I DON'T LIKE:
1. RP-EQ spectral display is above the freq band selection window.
2. I find this EQ very cumbersome to use..specially when on M/S mode , having to switch from 2 panels to EQ the Mid or Side. **UPDATE*** I'm starting to get used to it...basically bands 1-4 in panel one...is all Mids and Bands 5-8 On panel 2 is all Sides ..it's kind of seperating them and away that I can learn to live with (nothing is perfect but the fact that I can learn work with it in a short manner of time is reassuring)
4. Freq Slops only goes to 24 db...which felt kinda weird, because the EQ screams modern and forward thinking ...I've gotten to used to using up to 96 db cut off slope on Synapse GQ7 on some sounds
5. you only have peak filter to use on all the bands.

WHAT I LIKE:
1. The modulation part XY of RP-EQ you WILL NOT find on most EQ's like ProQ2,Synapse GQ7 ETC.. It's great!
RP-EQ has 8 bands vs Synapse GQ7 5 *not counting the LP-HP filters

2. A cool feature about RP-EQ that's not in Synapse GQ7 is ... instead of having each band display a freq number (..say 200 hz) you can instead have that one band display the note value corresponding to that band (like G3) . No need to have a freq/Note chart by your side if you use one.

3. The Mono/Stereo split filter is also great. Synapse gq7 Needs something like this. The only way I do this effect with the GQ7 is with 2 instances of the GQ7 ...so RP-EQ nailed this one, only needing the one device!

4. Spectrum Analyzer can be switched off on the front ..*not on the back* Like GQ7
you can set up the Analyzer to display your standard view,then you have bars and the peak freq display only.
you can also have it display both input (what's coming in untouched) and also display the output (what you have effected). Have them overlay on top of one another.
You can also freeze the spectral display if you need to!
it also displays both the Mid and The Sides signal, something GQ7 can not do.
It also has a Hold and release function in ..where you can have the peaks stay a little longer or permanent until the next peak!

Need some Air in your track ? how about a plus 6db boost at 40 khz

5. Gain and Freq Lock is cool....I guess it can avoid you dragging them by accident during long tired sessions.
6. Filters sound great to me !
7. It has Band Visual solo...with ALL 8 bands on display it could get really crowded...then simply hit Band visual solo..then only that band will be visible!

FINAL OPINION !
If you are ok without having the 96 db filtre cutoff of Synapse GQ7, not being able to switch an individual band to a High/Low shelf *I can't remember the last time I used that,but I'm glad GQ7 has it*
If you are ok with having to switch to a different panel to get to the rest of the 8 bands (bands 5-6-7-8 including Side band) then YEAS absolutely this would be more THEN WELCOMED in the Propellerhead shop!

As a straight up EQ?... ...RP-EQ not only stand it's ground against SYNAPSE GQ7 very well, but it actually stands taller then GQ7. And if it where to come out in the shop TODAY it would make the GQ7 look old and out of date even with it's few short comings!
Once you factor in it's modulation features then it will leave Synapse GQ 7 in it's dust !
And knowing how very customer orientated that Rob Papen is. Requesting and him implementing steeper slopes and what ever else we need, should not be ruled out !!

[TritoneAddiction]

I'm sure it's a great product but I don't think this one is for me. Too overwhelming for my workflow. It's so big and so many possible decisions to make. Might be awesome for a lot of people but when I reach for an EQ want it to be quick and simple. Just get it done and move on, not get stuck in EQ land.
The "air" function seems interesting though. But I'd rather have a small device for just that instead.

I feel the same way about RPDistort which I own. It's great, but I find I rarely reach for it because there's so many options once you open it up.
Maybe this is why I use the Saturation knob all the time Simple and awesome.

[selig]

Not sure about this "air band" thing - it can work well in the analog world, but in the digital world the only way it can work is when you use higher sample rates. This is because you can't boost above nyquist (half the sample rate), which at 44.1 kHz sample rate would be 22.05 kHz. The end goal with this type of EQ is to achieve a subtle rise of the audible frequencies, which IMO is easily possible with most high shelf EQs at present.

For example, with the GQ7 a 3 dB high shelf boost at 25 kHz is only affecting frequencies +19 kHz! Even with a 15 dB boost you are still only affecting frequencies above roughly 9 kHz. But you wouldn't do a 15 dB "air" boost typically - the key with these sort of boosts is that there MUST be something there to boost in the first place…

[Theo.M]

yes but nevertheless maag eq boosted at 40khz sounds awesome at 44.1 sample rate.. so what does that mean?

[selig]

yes but nevertheless maag eq boosted at 40khz sounds awesome at 44.1 sample rate.. so what does that mean?

It means it's boosting things BELOW nyquist, I would say. It's hard to get around nyquist…

[Theo.M]

right this is what i thought, just so you know your post makes sense to me, i just wondered how they did it. I suppose in the analog rack version it makes sense though, right?

I don't suppose there is any way you could get the curve off the vst with your expertise and show us what it is doing Giles? when you have a spare minute?

[selig]

right this is what i thought, just so you know your post makes sense to me, i just wondered how they did it. I suppose in the analog rack version it makes sense though, right?

I don't suppose there is any way you could get the curve off the vst with your expertise and show us what it is doing Giles? when you have a spare minute?

I would love to - but I don't have that plugin. I can however give you a file to run through it and you can send me back the results if you're interested…

[Theo.M]

right this is what i thought, just so you know your post makes sense to me, i just wondered how they did it. I suppose in the analog rack version it makes sense though, right?

I don't suppose there is any way you could get the curve off the vst with your expertise and show us what it is doing Giles? when you have a spare minute?

I would love to - but I don't have that plugin. I can however give you a file to run through it and you can send me back the results if you're interested…

well ok. There is a 14 day 100% unrestricted demo at plugin-alliance.com

I don't have any analyser programs but if you mean you just give me an audio file, i put the eq and say do a 6db boost at the 40khz setting, then send the bounced file to you and you then analyse it.. would that work?

[selig]

right this is what i thought, just so you know your post makes sense to me, i just wondered how they did it. I suppose in the analog rack version it makes sense though, right?

I don't suppose there is any way you could get the curve off the vst with your expertise and show us what it is doing Giles? when you have a spare minute?

I would love to - but I don't have that plugin. I can however give you a file to run through it and you can send me back the results if you're interested…

well ok. There is a 14 day 100% unrestricted demo at plugin-alliance.com

I don't have any analyser programs but if you mean you just give me an audio file, i put the eq and say do a 6db boost at the 40khz setting, then send the bounced file to you and you then analyse it.. would that work?

Yes - file already on it's way!

[selig]

We can also use this approach to test whether an EQ's parametric shape "warps" as it approaches nyquist, for the uber curious geeks among us…

[ScuzzyEye]

We can also use this approach to test whether an EQ's parametric shape "warps" as it approaches nyquist, for the uber curious geeks among us…

That's pretty standard though. When you're mapping the poles of an analog filter into the digital range something has to give. Analog filters have a pole at infinity. Since it would take a computer quite a while to process a signal that long, that pole is mapped to the Nyquist limit. The frequencies from Nyquist to infinity have to be squeezed into that space. That's not possible (a brick wall cut) with an IIR, so the warping of the frequency range has to start happening a little further down.

The only way I know around this is to over-sample, and move the Nyquist limit up, so the warping happens at a higher frequency, and then use a FIR to resample back down to the original rate, and get that brick walled response.

[Theo.M]

i didn't get any pm's or emails with files, just a heads up

[selig]

We can also use this approach to test whether an EQ's parametric shape "warps" as it approaches nyquist, for the uber curious geeks among us…

That's pretty standard though. When you're mapping the poles of an analog filter into the digital range something has to give. Analog filters have a pole at infinity. Since it would take a computer quite a while to process a signal that long, that pole is mapped to the Nyquist limit. The frequencies from Nyquist to infinity have to be squeezed into that space. That's not possible (a brick wall cut) with an IIR, so the warping of the frequency range has to start happening a little further down.

The only way I know around this is to over-sample, and move the Nyquist limit up, so the warping happens at a higher frequency, and then use a FIR to resample back down to the original rate, and get that brick walled response.

I was not aware of that workaround - are you familiar with any EQ's that use that approach? I was making my initial comment because I have previously believed it wasn't being done, yet some have believed it was. So if there ARE some EQs using this approach, I may have to eat my words…

[selig]

i didn't get any pm's or emails with files, just a heads up

Dang it - maybe I forgot to hit send, I'll go check and re-send… in the mean time, maybe I'll just do what you initially suggested and use the demo!

[ScuzzyEye]

I was not aware of that workaround - are you familiar with any EQ's that use that approach? I was making my initial comment because I have previously believed it wasn't being done, yet some have believed it was. So if there ARE some EQs using this approach, I may have to eat my words…

Oh, I've never seen an EQ that actually uses that approach. But one that has saturation, and over-sampling to keep the introduced harmonics from aliasing would get that benefit automatically (if the filtering was over-sampled, not just the saturation).