It's here the new RPEQ Effect by Rob Papen

[decibel]

At a glance, any obvious advantages / disadvantages between this EQ vs Synapse's EQ ?

96 dB HP and LP filter in synapse's GQ-7 makes it the go to eq for me

this has also become my go to for air in the mix, its so sick

https://shop.propellerheads.se/product/ ... equalizer/

[O1B]

MDynamic EQ from MeldaProduction has 108 and 120dB ...
- but, it's a little glitchy on my MBP/Sierra right now so Im patiently waiting on a bug fix (or, i may need to update Sierra)

Had to load up a GQ-7. It most certainly IS a beast (S/Solo Mode... Yes!, Compensation, and on)

But, scanning the Freq Spectrum of RP's EQ-Analyzer appeals to me. I'm in.
A rainbow spectrum splitting up the bands would be Perfect (or a grey scale option - if you can Mr. Papen.

Truth be told - I currentl use MClass EQ 99% of the time - I try to rely more on RECording and Synth Settings rather than abuse EQs, in this time.

At a glance, any obvious advantages / disadvantages between this EQ vs Synapse's EQ ?

96 dB HP and LP filter in synapse's GQ-7 makes it the go to eq for me

this has also become my go to for air in the mix, its so sick

https://shop.propellerheads.se/product/ ... equalizer/

[EdGrip]

Is there anything special that these super EQs do that couldn't be achieved by putting a couple of MClass on top of each other and sticking them in a combinator? I've always assumed that the "colour" comes from an EQ attenuating certain frequencies when it boosts others, and vice versa.

[selig]

Is there anything special that these super EQs do that couldn't be achieved by putting a couple of MClass on top of each other and sticking them in a combinator? I've always assumed that the "colour" comes from an EQ attenuating certain frequencies when it boosts others, and vice versa.

Assuming common EQ architectures and not linear phase EQs…

In most if not all cases, if you can match the curve you will match the sound. Sometimes I see folks matching the values between two EQs and noticing it doesn't sound the same at all. This is because the "values" can mean different things in different devices - when you look at the analysis of the response, you'll see it is indeed quite different in many cases even when the settings match. SO the only way to really match curves is using something precise like FuzzMeasure (or any software using a swept sine technique). Once the curves match, I've not been able to tell any two EQs apart (unless there is saturation involved). This includes any of the coveted "air" bands, which are easy to match once you can clearly see what they're doing.

The question for me when choosing which EQ to use is typically more about choosing the EQ that makes sense for the job at hand, which is often the EQ that gives me the best and quickest results.

But matching the curve isn't always possible with every EQ - you have to be able to go as high/low and as narrow/wide as the device you're matching, and that's not possible with every EQ. That is to say, if two EQs cannot be curve-matched, it's more a limit of the controls and ranges that are available to you on the device in question than because of any lack of sonic abilities. And while you can certainly curve-match any EQ given enough bands and parameters, it's much more difficult to match the INTERACTIONS of bands (as you adjust them) on such classics as those from Trident, Maag, and Pultec.

[Blast]

I have been explained here: https://www.puremix.net/video/study-of- ... ained.html

you gonna need a subscription to see the whole thing, though however its great advice.

[TritoneAddiction]

Is there anything special that these super EQs do that couldn't be achieved by putting a couple of MClass on top of each other and sticking them in a combinator? I've always assumed that the "colour" comes from an EQ attenuating certain frequencies when it boosts others, and vice versa.

I don't like the Mclass EQ because it's so limited compared to GQ-7. With Mclass you can't have as wide Q settings as with GQ-7. Mclass also create these horrible dips when you use the high and low shelf bands, makes it sound ugly and harsh in my opinion.
When I compared the two EQs I could pretty much match the shitty curves of Mclass with GQ-7, but I found it a lot harder to match the (imo) better sounding curves in GQ-7 with Mclass, especially the high and low shelf bands.
GQ-7 also has a bunch of other features that Mclass lacks, like a lot of filter slope options, Mid-side stuff. It's also visually easier to work with.

It might be possible to make them sound the same with a lot of work, but who wants to spend extra time matching EQ curves when you can get great results right away? Between the two, GQ-7 is the clear winner for me.

I haven't tried RPEQ so I can't comment on that.

[aeox]

‎

[EnochLight]

‎

[Loque]

‎

survive.gif (322.51 KiB) Viewed 1336 times

[Ottostrom]

Does anyone know if this Re usually goes on sale? Just realized it has an Alt+drag shortcut for adjusting Q value which is something I've wanted in a Re EQ (with a spectrum display) for a long time.
Even wrote to Synapse asking for it to be added to GQ-7 but I doubt that will ever happen. The mid/side eq in one device is also a big plus for RPEQ