Upgraded MClass EQ

Have any feature requests? No promise they'll get to the Props but you can still discuss them here.
chaosroyale
Posts: 272
Joined: 05 Sep 2017

Post 25 Sep 2019

Insomnia tonight so I knocked this up. I think a new MEQ would be very welcome - not to mention very overdue.
(quick and dirty 20-minute editing job on the GUI, but it should be obvious how it works. Lo and Hi switches choose hp/lp filter or shelving eq. All bands go from 20hz-20k like they should)

meq ii.jpg

EDIT: I just realized what day it was; probably the worst time to raise an idea like this. Best of luck to whoever is dealing with the release of R11 in one way or another.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Data_Shrine
Posts: 488
Joined: 23 Jan 2015

Post 25 Sep 2019

They probably won't ever do this - but a better sounding/transparent MClass would have been great.

User avatar
guitfnky
Posts: 1532
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

Post 25 Sep 2019

Data_Shrine wrote:
25 Sep 2019
They probably won't ever do this - but a better sounding/transparent MClass would have been great.
how is the M-Class stuff poor, or not transparent-sounding?

chaosroyale
Posts: 272
Joined: 05 Sep 2017

Post 26 Sep 2019

Guitfnky is right; all modern digital non-coloring zero-latency EQs sound exactly the same. The difference is their feature set, choice of curves, and UI.

*edit: This is true for all EQs based on standard RBJ filters at all frequencies (most DAW and VST EQs), and for EQs of any type up to about half nyquist. There are, to be fair, some types of EQ with different filter curves at the extreme high end but even then it is a small difference.

The problem with the MClass EQ is not the sound, but the crappy UI and limited feature set. I was trying to imagine a way that a single dev could update the unit in one afternoon, while keeping backwards compatibility, making it more useful, and speeding up workflow (no need to switch between 2 units to do fairly basic 5 band eq-ing, an external spectrum option, variable LP/HP filters, etc).

The other MCLass stuff though, is very poor indeed except the stereo imager/crossover which is fine inasmuch as it is a very basic bit of kit.

The maximizer in particular is straight up garbage. *soft clipper is fine, but needs oversampling.

The compressor is, well, functional. Hardly "mastering class".
guitfnky wrote:
25 Sep 2019
Data_Shrine wrote:
25 Sep 2019
They probably won't ever do this - but a better sounding/transparent MClass would have been great.
how is the M-Class stuff poor, or not transparent-sounding?
Last edited by chaosroyale on 08 Dec 2019, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Loque
Posts: 6326
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

Post 26 Sep 2019

I don't care much about updating those devices anymore, but i would appreciate a bit of improvement and CV in/out.

The quality is ok for all MClass stuff.
:reason: 11, Win10 64Bit.

chaosroyale
Posts: 272
Joined: 05 Sep 2017

Post 26 Sep 2019

I am pretty sure they could make an updated RE version of the EQ which had all the old features (close enough - like Fabfilter does, to keep things more-or-less compatible but not at the expense of innovation), and add extra bands and a bunch of modern updates, in literally one day. It baffles me that they have let the EQ slide for 13 years or however long it has been.
Loque wrote:
26 Sep 2019
I don't care much about updating those devices anymore, but i would appreciate a bit of improvement and CV in/out.

The quality is ok for all MClass stuff.

User avatar
DParris
Posts: 45
Joined: 09 May 2019

Post 26 Sep 2019

chaosroyale wrote:
25 Sep 2019
Insomnia tonight so I knocked this up. I think a new MEQ would be very welcome - not to mention very overdue.
(quick and dirty 20-minute editing job on the GUI, but it should be obvious how it works. Lo and Hi switches choose hp/lp filter or shelving eq. All bands go from 20hz-20k like they should)


meq ii.jpg


EDIT: I just realized what day it was; probably the worst time to raise an idea like this. Best of luck to whoever is dealing with the release of R11 in one way or another.

That looks terrific. All would be great improvements. Ad text input for values and you've got a winner.
Smart to include the backward-compatible version in a button.

And I agree with the others that the M-Class EQ sounds just fine as-is; it's really a functionality thing.

I would complain about the sound of the Maximizer, and have in the past, but I'm boycotting loudness culture. RS can do whatever they want with that unit.

User avatar
Creativemind
Posts: 3103
Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Location: Stoke-On-Trent, England, UK

Post 26 Sep 2019

Looks cool that. They do tend to just make something (device-wise) and then never improve on it or touch it again with the exception of Dr.Rex to Dr.Octo.Rex and Rv7000mkII.
:reason:

Propellerhead Reason 10.4 / Cockus Reaper 5.982 / Cakewalk By Bandlab / Pro Tools First / Steinberg Cubase LE 5
http://soundcloud.com/creativemind75/iv ... soul-mix-3

User avatar
friday
Posts: 240
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

Post 26 Sep 2019

chaosroyale wrote:
25 Sep 2019
Insomnia tonight so I knocked this up. I think a new MEQ would be very welcome - not to mention very overdue.
(quick and dirty 20-minute editing job on the GUI, but it should be obvious how it works. Lo and Hi switches choose hp/lp filter or shelving eq. All bands go from 20hz-20k like they should)


meq ii.jpg


EDIT: I just realized what day it was; probably the worst time to raise an idea like this. Best of luck to whoever is dealing with the release of R11 in one way or another.
I like the idea, even if my go to rack eq, these days, is the synapse. But this one also lacks of direct manipulation in the curve window. So if that would be possible in the MEQ, I definitely would use it agin. And your design looks very good!

Edit: a drop down for different LP and HP models would also be cool 😎

User avatar
Loque
Posts: 6326
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

Post 26 Sep 2019

chaosroyale wrote:
26 Sep 2019
I am pretty sure they could make an updated RE version of the EQ which had all the old features (close enough - like Fabfilter does, to keep things more-or-less compatible but not at the expense of innovation), and add extra bands and a bunch of modern updates, in literally one day. It baffles me that they have let the EQ slide for 13 years or however long it has been.
Loque wrote:
26 Sep 2019
I don't care much about updating those devices anymore, but i would appreciate a bit of improvement and CV in/out.

The quality is ok for all MClass stuff.
Idd they gambled too many years with crap instead of innovating and improving their main product. I think they realized it and now focus on Reason and creating strategies to increase their market presence. But there is a lot to do and not everything can be done at once. Even simple things can get complicated.
:reason: 11, Win10 64Bit.

User avatar
MarkTarlton
Posts: 528
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: Santa Rosa, CA

Post 26 Sep 2019

It's hard to beat all the features fabfilter's EQ has.

24 Bands, not that I would ever need that many...dynamic eq mode, slopes for the filters....spectrum visualization and ability to make full screen...m/s processing...tilt filter....double click parameter entry...eq match...linear phase mode...it goes on and on, and sounds fantastic!

chaosroyale
Posts: 272
Joined: 05 Sep 2017

Post 26 Sep 2019

Fabfilter Pro-Q3 is the best EQ I have ever used. But it's a VST with a pro price tag, not a stock EQ. The problem with Reasons EQ is that it could easily be a lot better without much effort, and having a good workhorse EQ in the rack gives you that nice at-a-glance visual feedback and instant hands-on UI, which a VST does not. It also makes Reason look more up-to-date for new users of the Rack plugin, who will be accustomed to the more advanced EQs in other DAWs.

For really intense EQ work, certainly use Fabfilter if you have the cash. But for quickly sticking a decent EQ on each of your Redrum outputs, a nicer stock device would be very welcome. Considering EQ is the single most-used effect in mixing, it would be a big benefit to users for little extra work.
MarkTarlton wrote:
26 Sep 2019
It's hard to beat all the features fabfilter's EQ has.

24 Bands, not that I would ever need that many...dynamic eq mode, slopes for the filters....spectrum visualization and ability to make full screen...m/s processing...tilt filter....double click parameter entry...eq match...linear phase mode...it goes on and on, and sounds fantastic!

splitpen
Posts: 29
Joined: 22 Mar 2017

Post 27 Sep 2019

Nice ideas!, Be sure to check out the free qrange from ikjb, there is also latency free function added last week. For me this eq is a winner :D

User avatar
MrBlue
Posts: 49
Joined: 12 Oct 2015
Location: France - Burgundy

Post 29 Sep 2019

Good idea, just waiting for RS 12...

User avatar
Loque
Posts: 6326
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

Post 29 Sep 2019

chaosroyale wrote:
26 Sep 2019
Fabfilter Pro-Q3 is the best EQ I have ever used. But it's a VST with a pro price tag, not a stock EQ. The problem with Reasons EQ is that it could easily be a lot better without much effort, and having a good workhorse EQ in the rack gives you that nice at-a-glance visual feedback and instant hands-on UI, which a VST does not. It also makes Reason look more up-to-date for new users of the Rack plugin, who will be accustomed to the more advanced EQs in other DAWs.

For really intense EQ work, certainly use Fabfilter if you have the cash. But for quickly sticking a decent EQ on each of your Redrum outputs, a nicer stock device would be very welcome. Considering EQ is the single most-used effect in mixing, it would be a big benefit to users for little extra work.
MarkTarlton wrote:
26 Sep 2019
It's hard to beat all the features fabfilter's EQ has.

24 Bands, not that I would ever need that many...dynamic eq mode, slopes for the filters....spectrum visualization and ability to make full screen...m/s processing...tilt filter....double click parameter entry...eq match...linear phase mode...it goes on and on, and sounds fantastic!
I use Fabfilter EQ for every important track or bus. The overlap view is so great and a absolut winner! And yes, you can quickly dial in some dynamic if needed. Best EQ i ever used. But pricy...
:reason: 11, Win10 64Bit.

User avatar
DParris
Posts: 45
Joined: 09 May 2019

Post 29 Sep 2019

Loque wrote:
29 Sep 2019
chaosroyale wrote:
26 Sep 2019
Fabfilter Pro-Q3 is the best EQ I have ever used. But it's a VST with a pro price tag, not a stock EQ. The problem with Reasons EQ is that it could easily be a lot better without much effort, and having a good workhorse EQ in the rack gives you that nice at-a-glance visual feedback and instant hands-on UI, which a VST does not. It also makes Reason look more up-to-date for new users of the Rack plugin, who will be accustomed to the more advanced EQs in other DAWs.

For really intense EQ work, certainly use Fabfilter if you have the cash. But for quickly sticking a decent EQ on each of your Redrum outputs, a nicer stock device would be very welcome. Considering EQ is the single most-used effect in mixing, it would be a big benefit to users for little extra work.

I use Fabfilter EQ for every important track or bus. The overlap view is so great and a absolut winner! And yes, you can quickly dial in some dynamic if needed. Best EQ i ever used. But pricy...

I'm a big fan of TDR Nova myself. Can't beat the price! Upgrading M-Class with a dynamic option would be hella great.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, my favorite sweetening EQ is the "tone" module in the Waves TG Mastering Chain. I'm not sure how they did it, but the frequencies and slopes are just so delicious and musical. It's really hard to get a bad sound out of that unit, even with big control knob inputs. It's about the only thing I put on my master bus.

While we're requesting ridiculous things, let's add this to the mix: a vintage-inspired program EQ with minimal knobs, detents for frequencies and slopes, and some saturated mojo. Along with an upgraded surgical M-Class, and the whacky sound design modulating EQ I suggested in another post, that would be one hell of a trio of standard devices.

I know, the options already exist elsewhere. But no one ever complained about stock devices being too good.

  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 4 guests