Selig ColoringEQ In The Shop!

This forum is for discussing Rack Extensions. Devs are all welcome to show off their goods.
User avatar
wendylou
Posts: 216
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: Saint Joseph, MO

Post 28 Jan 2018

If anyone doubts the utility of the Coloring EQ, look at what you can do with CV, such as the "Flanger x2 Series.cmb" patch in the included "Modulation FX" folder. Dual CV waveform sweeps driven by Pulsar creating flanging – luv it!

Image
:PUF_balance: http://www.galxygirl.com -- :reason: user since 2002

JdA57
Posts: 48
Joined: 20 Jul 2017

Post 28 Jan 2018

selig wrote:
28 Jan 2018
JdA57 wrote:
28 Jan 2018
:D Sorry, (hopefully) a last question:

Wow, ist perfect for modularconcept too. But (sorry for that 'but' again):
This question is only 'luxus!' and I don't think you can realize, but I wanna ask.

Because ColEQ working from left to right (what really nice (Y) )

a) I used first EQ (allways sep. Outs) for synth 1, 2. EQ for synth 2 and then I need 3 & 4 EQ for next synth. So I go audio in 3 and audio out 4. Working fine. But maybe it will be really great, if there will be a "link" button between EQ-Parts, so, that maybe saturation of 3 & 4 will go to output of 4. Actually it seems, that sat of 3 will be routed to master out.

b) Hahaha :D and really cool will be, if there will be a radical high / low pass only for created Saturation-Snd.

ok, I think it's too much, but really, while testing I got to this points and missed them.


I know, if I'm using 1 ColEQ per Sound my first wish a) is cleared.

and a next one:

c) it will be very, very, very usefull if I can sort EQSlot (later) by (used) Frequence or maybe can copy one EQ-Slot to another.

- - - - -


Please don't kill me for all this :D :D . But this RE is as so creative (Y) . Fantastic. And pricing is really ok.
:reason: A: This already happens internally - all EQ and saturation logical follows any possible routing scenario. This was not a simple task, and I owe David/Pitchblende a huge shoutout for making this part work as smoothly as it does!



:reason: B: Both filters can already affect the saturation signal if you prefer (if I'm understanding your question correctly).



C: This WOULD be handy - will look into it for future updates but fear the SDK may make it more difficult than it should be with the current design.
:reason: --> A)

Nope. if I use 3 & 4 (example above = Audio-Input EQ 3 Audio Output EQ 4) I can hear only the Sat from EQ 4 at output 4. Sat from EQ 3 is ignored
First I thought, that EQ3 Sat is ignored or don't work in that case. But for to hear what happens with EQ3 Saturation I've to use the Sat-sep-out of EQ 3.
Or I'm thinking wrong?

:reason: --> B)

What I mean is, that I wish, that I can Hard-cut the Result / Freq.-Range of only the new build Saturation-Frequ / Sound.
Actually I did it while get the Saturation from the seperate Sat-Out's to a next EQ and cut them (Freq / Range) that way and mix / add them with a mixer back to the EQ'ed sound
(Maybe this is a simple explenat.: I mean the effect, that F1 & F2 are doing, if you position them 'after Saturation' but "only for the Saturation-Signal!" .

(It's as example interesting for synth-sounds but too for other things like cymbals & voice. Some Exciter can do that with a seperate filter after new added Harmonics, before it will mixed to the original ...)

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7902
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 28 Jan 2018

JdA57 wrote:
28 Jan 2018
selig wrote:
28 Jan 2018


:reason: A: This already happens internally - all EQ and saturation logical follows any possible routing scenario. This was not a simple task, and I owe David/Pitchblende a huge shoutout for making this part work as smoothly as it does!



:reason: B: Both filters can already affect the saturation signal if you prefer (if I'm understanding your question correctly).



C: This WOULD be handy - will look into it for future updates but fear the SDK may make it more difficult than it should be with the current design.
:reason: --> A)

Nope. if I use 3 & 4 (example above = Audio-Input EQ 3 Audio Output EQ 4) I can hear only the Sat from EQ 4 at output 4. Sat from EQ 3 is ignored
First I thought, that EQ3 Sat is ignored or don't work in that case. But for to hear what happens with EQ3 Saturation I've to use the Sat-sep-out of EQ 3.
Or I'm thinking wrong?

:reason: --> B)

What I mean is, that I wish, that I can Hard-cut the Result / Freq.-Range of only the new build Saturation-Frequ / Sound.
Actually I did it while get the Saturation from the seperate Sat-Out's to a next EQ and cut them (Freq / Range) that way and mix / add them with a mixer back to the EQ'ed sound
(Maybe this is a simple explenat.: I mean the effect, that F1 & F2 are doing, if you position them 'after Saturation' but "only for the Saturation-Signal!" .

(It's as example interesting for synth-sounds but too for other things like cymbals & voice. Some Exciter can do that with a seperate filter after new added Harmonics, before it will mixed to the original ...)
A- I believe you have found a bug
B- I believe ColoringEQ can do what you're asking by routing Filters to "Post Sat". In that routing position they affect ONLY the saturation signal.
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
miscend
Posts: 1304
Joined: 09 Feb 2015

Post 28 Jan 2018

fceramic wrote:
28 Jan 2018
This sounds awesome, but I think I'll wait for Spectre. Mid/side, tons of saturation algorithms, beautiful responsive interface, vst-format and 69€ intro price.


Is saturation EQs a new trend?

Update: If ColoringEQ was 30€ I would buy it, but I think 99€ is too much for something that has a sluggish GUI and can't be resold.
But how does it sound?

Ostermilk
Posts: 1514
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 28 Jan 2018

Congratulations on the new release.

I know that you've put a great deal of time and effort into this in order to make an EQ that isn't just another EQ..

I hope it really goes well for you.

JdA57
Posts: 48
Joined: 20 Jul 2017

Post 29 Jan 2018

selig wrote:
28 Jan 2018
JdA57 wrote:
28 Jan 2018


:reason: --> A)

Nope. if I use 3 & 4 (example above = Audio-Input EQ 3 Audio Output EQ 4) I can hear only the Sat from EQ 4 at output 4. Sat from EQ 3 is ignored
First I thought, that EQ3 Sat is ignored or don't work in that case. But for to hear what happens with EQ3 Saturation I've to use the Sat-sep-out of EQ 3.
Or I'm thinking wrong?

:reason: --> B)

What I mean is, that I wish, that I can Hard-cut the Result / Freq.-Range of only the new build Saturation-Frequ / Sound.
Actually I did it while get the Saturation from the seperate Sat-Out's to a next EQ and cut them (Freq / Range) that way and mix / add them with a mixer back to the EQ'ed sound
(Maybe this is a simple explenat.: I mean the effect, that F1 & F2 are doing, if you position them 'after Saturation' but "only for the Saturation-Signal!" .

(It's as example interesting for synth-sounds but too for other things like cymbals & voice. Some Exciter can do that with a seperate filter after new added Harmonics, before it will mixed to the original ...)
A- I believe you have found a bug
:reason: --> B- I believe ColoringEQ can do what you're asking by routing Filters to "Post Sat". In that routing position they affect ONLY the saturation signal. < --
:reason: B) Yes I know (after a while :D ) . The naming (in my eyes) seems first confusioning. Pre EQ = All (whole signal incl. Sat) Post EQ = Only EQ without Sat & Post SAT = only Saturation.

What I mean is "this per EQ-Part"!


Yes, yes, I know, this will be hard to do, and there maybe is not enough space on the GUI (and maybe no need for most users?) and this will be luxury. But this will be really perfect and top notch.

I'd some situations where I'd to do this,
because it sounded phasing or because cymb. (while EQ Stereo-complete-Drumset) in sum doing to much in low range etc. (I'm not enough specialist to see why this happens - but after I cut via sep- Outs it was fixed) BUT I've to do some tricky things, because using the Sat-Sperate-Outs will not remove this Saturaton-Audio-Signals from the EQ-Audiostream (Stereo out) - And seems to switch 'Saturation OFF' will stop sat on seperate Outputs too.

User avatar
raymondh
Posts: 1195
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 29 Jan 2018

selig wrote:
28 Jan 2018

Wish I could afford to make such cool videos for my products, maybe that would help sell them? ;)
It would be good to see some tutorial type videos like you've done for your other products.
Last edited by raymondh on 29 Jan 2018, edited 3 times in total.
Win 10 64-bit | :reason: 10 | Scarlet 18i8 | M-Audio Code 61 | KRK VXT-6 | JX-8P | System-8 | D-05 | JP-08 | Sirin
www.soundcloud.com/raymondhayter

User avatar
Majestik Monkey
Posts: 622
Joined: 07 Jul 2015

Post 29 Jan 2018

It's a F*kin PowerHouse of Kolor , strate outa space !

& i'am Moon walking through frequencies like MJ :lol:

User avatar
avasopht
Posts: 1929
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

Post 29 Jan 2018

This is brilliant!

I usually spend a lot of time fudging around with distortion, and this looks like it could save me considerable time!
---

User avatar
mbfrancis
Posts: 581
Joined: 02 Feb 2015

Post 29 Jan 2018

OK I'm pretty confident I'm not worthy of this release. This looks amazingly cool, and the Combis w/ modulation must be amazing. Congrats, Selig, thanks for putting out great stuff for the RE platform. I'll resist trying this until I can afford it ha.

User avatar
O1B
Posts: 1617
Joined: 26 Jan 2015

Post 29 Jan 2018

Mr Selig. Sir. I gotta say. I just heard. And, I've listened to the video twice.
About to settle in for a slow third.

I gotta say. I am amazed at the ideas this Beast has given me already.
If those (per BAND) Saturation and Drive Colorations are on Point..? Then, I am so IN.

That Flanging. Key Tracking. TILTING!! (I'd like to think that was me) GLOBAL Attenuators.
CV. Filters. And, so much More.
And, IN REASON! Man. oh Man!

There's Pro Q. There's SEQ-2. ..a few others... And! There's Selig EQ

Ill try to tomorrow. . But, this seems the Killer EQ.

Thank you.
O1B

calebbrennan
Posts: 245
Joined: 16 Aug 2016

Post 30 Jan 2018

To my minds eye this looks like a mastering tool.

To squeeze and massage the stereo mix of your track you already have and are confident of

Ostermilk
Posts: 1514
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 30 Jan 2018

First impressions are really good even without getting deeply involved in it so far. The per band saturation is far more effective than I would have imagined, particularly on stems that have had too much attention spent on the highs and lows, it really does add more life into the mid range areas if those are somewhat lacking.

I'm also really liking having the individual proportional controls in the master section as often I'll get in the right ball-park but I've gone to far or not far enough. Seperate adjustment particularly overall tweaks to gain and/or Q will be very useful to me. Many EQ's of course will allow proportional control but usually it's the combination of Gain and Q that gets adjusted without the individual control over each aspect.

That might all sound a bit mundane given all the features available here but I wanted to check first how it works as a gpto multi-band parametric EQ and I must say it has passed that requirement with flying 'colors'. (see what I did there?), and given all the functionality it has on top of that I'm sure a myriad of specific use cases will become apparent as I get familiar with it.

The only slight niggle I have with it so far is that the numeric display that appears when adjusting parameters returns to displaying its default label before I've had chance to read the numbers sometimes. It would be helpful to me if the numeric display persisted for a little longer but that may be due to my advancing age.

Aside from that, tiny gripe, it's a superbly flexible device that will cover all the workaday bases which will encourage enough daily use in order that you would become familiar with everything else it has to offer.

As for price, well put it this way, some of the RE's I already own will be made redundant because of the availibility of this, and they cost me a significantly higher total than the entry fee here and had it been available a few years ago I'd have actually saved money by buying it.

User avatar
stratatonic
Posts: 1027
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: CANADA

Post 31 Jan 2018

Ostermilk wrote:
30 Jan 2018
...must say it has passed that requirement with flying 'colors'. (see what I did there?),
I saw what you did there. You wrote the American version of "colors" and not the British version "colours" as written by folks where you live.

Thanks for not confusing the forum. That was mighty neighbourly of you. :puf_bigsmile:

User avatar
O1B
Posts: 1617
Joined: 26 Jan 2015

Post 31 Jan 2018

How does it sound?
Stellar Saturation/Drive/Gain on Vocals for sure!! Really, really nice.
SOLO works well, EQ ON and other Global functions are appreciated.

gotta RTFM on Routing Modes.. didn't see an A/B mode ...yet..

The GUI is a PITA - but, worth the results.
any way to select all and drag (curves)?...

Ostermilk
Posts: 1514
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 31 Jan 2018

stratatonic wrote:
31 Jan 2018
Ostermilk wrote:
30 Jan 2018
...must say it has passed that requirement with flying 'colors'. (see what I did there?),
I saw what you did there. You wrote the American version of "colors" and not the British version "colours" as written by folks where you live.

Thanks for not confusing the forum. That was mighty neighbourly of you. :puf_bigsmile:
lol.

I knew this tasty guitarist from Brooklyn who was fresh across the Atlantic.

He couldn't understand why people kept cussing him when he thought he was playing well and he was starting to feel a bit demoralized. Until he learned that when an Englishman is calling you a bastard, ****, or wanker it was most often a term of endearment, he was being applauded for his work.

Of course we all have the universal term 'sick' these days and we all know by the inference in the tone dictates whether someone thinks your playing is 'sick' or it's just plain 'sick'. :lol:

Now all we need is a language EQ so we can all sing out of the same hymn book... :geek:

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7902
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 31 Jan 2018

O1B wrote:How does it sound?
Stellar Saturation/Drive/Gain on Vocals for sure!! Really, really nice.
SOLO works well, EQ ON and other Global functions are appreciated.

gotta RTFM on Routing Modes.. didn't see an A/B mode ...yet..

The GUI is a PITA - but, worth the results.
any way to select all and drag (curves)?...
Well, essentially that’s what the Masters do, but using sliders instead of handles to do so.

But what you request will be doable with the latest SDK. This device was started with the previous SDK, and we fully plan to update it in the future. The ideal to drag all bands at once is planned for that update!


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

Ostermilk
Posts: 1514
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 03 Feb 2018

selig wrote:
31 Jan 2018

Well, essentially that’s what the Masters do, but using sliders instead of handles to do so.
This is key.

I found that I felt that I should be clicking and selecting handles because that's what I was used to doing. When I realised that all I had to do was simply turn the knob to adjust the full selection it was a bit a revelation for me. It's a time saver.

Handle selection would still be useful when you just want to affect (and automate) subsets of bands rather than all of them if it becomes a possible in a future update..

I love this device, it's a proper Reason update, stick one on yer default template.

PhillipOrdonez
Posts: 509
Joined: 20 Oct 2017
Location: Colombia

Post 03 Feb 2018

Gotta start saving for this!

User avatar
Voyager
Posts: 499
Joined: 21 Dec 2015

Post 07 Feb 2018

Trying ColoringEQ and i must say i'm very pleased... Having a Low/High pass up to 48dB/octave open more possibilities and that saturation is so well controlled and add a warmth like no other but the fact you can EQ it is the cherry on the cake.

At some point i was a bit worried because when adding saturation to my low end it was obviously adding some more harmonics to it and could muddy it a bit but then i found out you can set your Low/High pass to Post Saturation an cut the excessive low end. Just brillant...

Few questions :

a. Wasn't possible to add the fine tune to each band independently ?
b. What is the difference between the Low shelf 1 & 2 ? I just notice that the slope on Low shelf 2 is subtily more pronounced than the 1.
c. When you'd want to use a band reject over a narrow parametric ?
d. I notice that for Saturation, when you level up the gain band you raise the saturation volume but the level band act as a gain saturation too. So can we say that the level is a somehow fine tune gain ?
e. Saturation out is only the wet signal ? So it's meant to be used for parallel processing only ?
f. When using Saturation out so we can't use any Low/High pass, any reason ?
g. This device could definitively replace the SSL EQ so it could very probably take place in every mix channel. But the question is could we use it in every mix channel without bringing the CPU to its knees ? Is the device CPU friendly ?

One suggestion, in the EQ display the number box can sometime overlay and one may hide another or make it not easy to click on. What would be nice is that if we double click on the EQ off/on switch then the hidden box number popup forward and the other switch behind. Make it easier to spot and grab.

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7902
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 07 Feb 2018

Voyager wrote:Trying ColoringEQ and i must say i'm very pleased... Having a Low/High pass up to 48dB/octave open more possibilities and that saturation is so well controlled and add a warmth like no other but the fact you can EQ it is the cherry on the cake.

At some point i was a bit worried because when adding saturation to my low end it was obviously adding some more harmonics to it and could muddy it a bit but then i found out you can set your Low/High pass to Post Saturation an cut the excessive low end. Just brillant...

Few questions :

a. Wasn't possible to add the fine tune to each band independently ?
b. What is the difference between the Low shelf 1 & 2 ? I just notice that the slope on Low shelf 2 is subtily more pronounced than the 1.
c. When you'd want to use a band reject over a narrow parametric ?
d. I notice that for Saturation, when you level up the gain band you raise the saturation volume but the level band act as a gain saturation too. So can we say that the level is a somehow fine tune gain ?
e. Saturation out is only the wet signal ? So it's meant to be used for parallel processing only ?
f. When using Saturation out so we can't use any Low/High pass, any reason ?
g. This device could definitively replace the SSL EQ so it could very probably take place in every mix channel. But the question is could we use it in every mix channel without bringing the CPU to its knees ? Is the device CPU friendly ?

One suggestion, in the EQ display the number box can sometime overlay and one may hide another or make it not easy to click on. What would be nice is that if we double click on the EQ off/on switch then the hidden box number popup forward and the other switch behind. Make it easier to spot and grab.
Glad you’re enjoying it, and thanks for the feedback!

A-fine tune for each band independently was totally possible and in the initial mockup. But when working with the prototype, it was a control I never used. The only time you would need fine tune is with super high Q settings, and the chance of needing to hear one pitch out of tune with the rest was extremely low. It also saved a ton of space on the front panel to use one global fine tune control.

B-The difference between Shelf 1 and 2 is subtle, and disappears when using high Q (otherwise the tuning would be WAY off). Shelf 1 is asymmetrical, boosting a wider range than cutting (similar to how the asymmetrical parametric EQs work). When working with the code for the shelves I could I could disable the “symmetry” code and was left with a slightly more primitive but interesting (and unique as far as I know) Shelf EQ type!

C-Band reject is far more “steeper and deeper” than cutting a parametric EQ. You can totally remove a sine wave mixed with noise, leaving just the noise!

D-Gain and Drive are more the same than Level. Increasing EQ Gain or Drive will increase the saturation effect (more harmonics/sustain). Level will ONLY control the “level” (volume) of the saturation effect, and will not change the amount of harmonics/sustain.

E-Saturation out is only the saturated signal. In ColoringEQ, Saturation is added in parallel, so it’s easy to tap the saturation signal to split it out for further processing (such as filtering, FX, ???).

F-not sure I understand this, but if you take a saturation out and patch it to someplace else, then you cannot use the filters since you have removed the saturation from the ColoringEQ’s signal path. To add filtering, patch from a saturation out into a Filter, and also patch out of the filter to another destination (to avoid a feedback loop).

G-The device is as CPU friendly as we could possibly make it, starting from the first code that was written since we knew it COULD be a hog. Code was optimized a few times along the way to account for changes and to ensure the device would be as CPU friendly as possible!

As per your suggestion, there are changes such as you suggest that we can implement with the display after updating to SDK 2.5, but then you have to use a more recent version of Reason…


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
Voyager
Posts: 499
Joined: 21 Dec 2015

Post 07 Feb 2018

selig wrote:
07 Feb 2018

D-Gain and Drive are more the same than Level. Increasing EQ Gain or Drive will increase the saturation effect (more harmonics/sustain). Level will ONLY control the “level” (volume) of the saturation effect, and will not change the amount of harmonics/sustain.


Indeed i tried again and gain add saturation as well. So when having the EQ off and using only the Saturation i just can add for example 3 or 4 dB gain on a high shelve to make the saturation kick in and then dial with the drive ?

selig wrote:
07 Feb 2018


F-not sure I understand this, but if you take a saturation out and patch it to someplace else, then you cannot use the filters since you have removed the saturation from the ColoringEQ’s signal path. To add filtering, patch from a saturation out into a Filter, and also patch out of the filter to another destination (to avoid a feedback loop).


My fault, while testing i misunderstood the idea behing the backpanel and made a bad routing. I just tried again with a synth on the Master Input/Output and took the Saturation Out to a FX hooked to its own mix channel and i still can use the Low/High pass when set on post saturation :thumbs_up:

User avatar
challism
Posts: 1512
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

Post 07 Feb 2018

selig wrote:
26 Jan 2018
Gorgon wrote:
26 Jan 2018


The sale doesn't include ColoringEQ then?

And I can read your banter just fine without any EQ! :P
Come on, you KNOW my banter is better with EQ…in fact, it's better with just about anything added… ;)
I've found that using a filter is often a very handy tool when reading banter. And Selig ColoringEQ has TWO OF THEM!

Congratulations on an extremely useful RE release, Giles. Nicely done!!

User avatar
selig
Moderator
Posts: 7902
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

Post 10 Feb 2018

Voyager wrote:
selig wrote:
07 Feb 2018

D-Gain and Drive are more the same than Level. Increasing EQ Gain or Drive will increase the saturation effect (more harmonics/sustain). Level will ONLY control the “level” (volume) of the saturation effect, and will not change the amount of harmonics/sustain.


Indeed i tried again and gain add saturation as well. So when having the EQ off and using only the Saturation i just can add for example 3 or 4 dB gain on a high shelve to make the saturation kick in and then dial with the drive ?
Correct!


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
Voyager
Posts: 499
Joined: 21 Dec 2015

Post 10 Feb 2018

selig wrote:
10 Feb 2018
Correct!


Thanks, must say ColoringEQ saturation is by far the best one i heard until now. Hats off. En route for my 4th Selig device.

  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests