Looking at Reason's stock EQs through an analyser

[miscend]

Looks like the stock Reason EQs exhibit frequency cramping near Nyquist. Most well designed EQs use decramping to sound more musical in the high frequency ranges.


12db at 1k




12db at 7k



12db at 1k



12db at 10k

[Kategra]

Musically speaking, for me, it's irrelevant that the curve is not symmetrical and I don't get to boost or cut same number dBs at 15Khz+ as I do at 3Khz. But it would be nice if the graph in the EQ actually fallowed what it was doing to the audio at the current sample rate of the project.

[PhillipOrdonez]

If you use the shelves there isn't any cramping.

[guitfnky]

I think this is kind of the case with most stock plugins in most DAWs—want to say I saw a Dan Worrall video on that recently.

but to Kategra’s point, it’s not really relevant except in some academic sense in most cases. make EQ moves that sound good, with whatever EQ you’re using and you’ll get where you need to be. if one EQ doesn’t do what you need, use a different one (or just stack another).

[drno]

12db at 1k

How do you get those graphics?

[selig]

I looked into all this with ColoringEQ listening to existing EQs and even finding some EQs that don't show cramping on their display but ARE cramping when you measure them - and yet, I would never have guessed they were cramping because I haven't ever heard this as a "problem". Neither have I heard EQs with no cramping to sound any better because of that one difference, but have certainly not done exhaustive tests in this area.
I would call this a "non-issue" issue since it doesn't seem to stop folks from getting great sounds with EQs using either approach.

[chaosroyale]

yeah I have a lot of problems with Reason's outdated EQs, mostly related to UI and lack of bands, but the less-than perfect cramping response is not really a big deal. Even though I use non-cramping VSTs myself, I would be very hard pressed to notice the difference sonically.

I looked into all this with ColoringEQ listening to existing EQs and even finding some EQs that don't show cramping on their display but ARE cramping when you measure them - and yet, I would never have guessed they were cramping because I haven't ever heard this as a "problem". Neither have I heard EQs with no cramping to sound any better because of that one difference, but have certainly not done exhaustive tests in this area.
I would call this a "non-issue" issue since it doesn't seem to stop folks from getting great sounds with EQs using either approach.

[miscend]

12db at 1k

How do you get those graphics?

I used the Bertom Analyzer plug-in via a VST3 plugin bridge.

https://www.bertomaudio.com/eqca.html

[motuscott]

Starting to cramp up.
Need more fiber

[selig]

yeah I have a lot of problems with Reason's outdated EQs, mostly related to UI and lack of bands, but the less-than perfect cramping response is not really a big deal. Even though I use non-cramping VSTs myself, I would be very hard pressed to notice the difference sonically.

I looked into all this with ColoringEQ listening to existing EQs and even finding some EQs that don't show cramping on their display but ARE cramping when you measure them - and yet, I would never have guessed they were cramping because I haven't ever heard this as a "problem". Neither have I heard EQs with no cramping to sound any better because of that one difference, but have certainly not done exhaustive tests in this area.
I would call this a "non-issue" issue since it doesn't seem to stop folks from getting great sounds with EQs using either approach.

SSL EQ will never be outdated!!!
I would suggest the problem is in making a classic console EQ their primary EQ - but at least it's better than the MClass EQ IMO. The lack of a more powerful EQ in Reason is what led me to create ColoringEQ! Still, I love the SSL EQ for basic duties, working as well as any good console EQ should IMO (and the one I learned on all those years ago, so I'm biased!).

I think non-cramping designs may, repeat, MAY be useful for synth filters doing those long full range sweeps with high Q (but maybe not useful for much else).
But I typically never use a parametric in the top two octaves (5kHz and above), especially with such wide Q settings as to reveal cramping as shelves do a better job for me and do not have cramping! I would either be using a narrow Q to isolate something like sibilance, or a gentle shelf for broad strokes. So for me, a non-issue!