Simple multiband EQ with separate outputs for each band ?

This forum is for discussing Rack Extensions. Devs are all welcome to show off their goods.
Post Reply
ab459
Posts: 384
Joined: 28 Dec 2018
Location: Minsk Belarus

02 Feb 2019

Hi
I liked the idea in Red Rock Sound RE60 analyzer https://www.propellerheads.com/shop/rac ... -analyzer/, but as i wrote viewtopic.php?p=429513#p429513 it cpu hungry a bit.

So, maybe exists some eq with this ability ? Ofcourse desirable with large amount of bands (16 or more), and graphical or not - no matter. It can be even some simple audio frequency separator (exactly like in RE60) with hard fixed freq's, it's ok.

User avatar
diminished
Competition Winner
Posts: 1880
Joined: 15 Dec 2018

02 Feb 2019

You could build your own with MClass Stereo Imager then do with each band whatever you want
:reason: Most recent track: resentment (synthwave) || Others: on my YouTube channel •ᴗ•

User avatar
Loque
Moderator
Posts: 11188
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

02 Feb 2019

There are plenty band splitters as RE available, payed and free. Stereo Imager in cascades with a bit cabling. ColoringEQ, 4Dyn and probably many more devices can help.
Reason12, Win10

ab459
Posts: 384
Joined: 28 Dec 2018
Location: Minsk Belarus

02 Feb 2019

Guys, yes i understand that i can build this. Moreover, many things that exists in RE could be replaced by internal Reason abilities, but they was made because save time and resourses, and somewhere aesthetic moment. So, need this exactly in form of ready for use module.
I do not want to say that i do not need advices on "how to do it", but this case has such nature that would desirable simple module, without a lot of additional devices\wires inside.

WarStar
Posts: 301
Joined: 17 Oct 2018
Contact:

02 Feb 2019

One idea would be to take the audio you're attempting to EQ-band split and route it into a Spider Audio splitter and then split that audio into six outputs. Take those 6 outputs and plug each split into a EQ, ie perhaps the M-Class or something like the LabOne 131 (31 band EQ). From there pick from left to right what part of the EQ spectrum you want each EQ to focus on. Example: the low-end split a might be frequencies from 40hz to 200hz, the next 200hz to ____, and so on. Important to keep in mind that you should keep all your EQ bands at '0', beside the frequencies you decide to cut/lower in volume.

Play the Audi in a unfiltered audio track as well while you're figuring out your splits, EQ settings and depth of the curves of each EQ. This might cause some phasing issues so you might want to insert a RE that can flip phase on each of the six EQs outputs just to be safe, then you can apply different processing to each of the outputs from six EQs. Then you could route all six EQs outputs back into a Spider merger to combine then into one output.

You could also route the six EQ outs to separate audio tracks/SSL channel strips too.

Most important thing is to try to get as close as possible to the original audio's level/volume while comparing your new band-split processed audio, ie the 6 EQ split.

You might have to mess around with the neighboring EQ bands next to your subtractive split frequencies, as in small positive bumps on the neighboring frequencies to flatten out the areas by your splits.

This is just a idea I had off the top of my head so not entirely sure this approach would be effective for what you're shooting for.

User avatar
O1B
Posts: 2037
Joined: 26 Jan 2015

03 Feb 2019

MB EQing is a pain in Reason, atm. The x-overs are blunt, and band interaction is lacking.

4Dyne is Cool.
But, the rest estate needed to run two for stereo makes it... prohibitive.

Consider this faceplate of audio, x-overs, and CV points - for ideas:
Image
Last edited by O1B on 05 Feb 2019, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
mon
Posts: 169
Joined: 07 May 2018
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria

03 Feb 2019

I would double for the Selig ColringEq but it splits the signal in less bands (7+main).
:reason: 10+
:recycle: :re: :refillpacker:

ab459
Posts: 384
Joined: 28 Dec 2018
Location: Minsk Belarus

03 Feb 2019

Thanks for thoughts.

What regards to
mon wrote:
03 Feb 2019
I would double for the Selig ColringEq but it splits the signal in less bands (7+main).
Besides less outputs he's pretty heavy by look (i guess to resources too, due to a much extra abilities), let it be the moment "simple" in my request as necessary.

scratchnsnifff
Posts: 1423
Joined: 21 Sep 2016

03 Feb 2019

Rob papen eq lets you solo a band. So take an audio splitter and make a bunch of outputs into a few rp eq and use the solo band feature
Mayor of plucktown :evil:

User avatar
Boombastix
Competition Winner
Posts: 1929
Joined: 18 May 2018
Location: Bay Area, CA

03 Feb 2019

GQ7 can send out the eq change only, but it will be a mix of the bands affecting/eq'ing the sound. Small button at top right.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

10% off at Waves with link: https://www.waves.com/r/6gh2b0
Disclaimer - I get 10% as well.

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11746
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

04 Feb 2019

Just to clarify, are you looking for an EQ or for a multi-band splitter? They are pretty much mutually exclusive, which is why there is no “multi-band EQ” in existence that I’m aware of.

Maybe better to ask what you are trying to accomplish?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

ab459
Posts: 384
Joined: 28 Dec 2018
Location: Minsk Belarus

04 Feb 2019

selig wrote:
04 Feb 2019
Just to clarify, are you looking for an EQ or for a multi-band splitter?
Ideally variant for me would be some "frequency separator with fixed values", i.e. exactly what we see in RE60, but without spectrum analyzer.

But, aware of the likely "exoticism" of this kind of things, I decided that it would be more likely to find a similar among EQ's.
selig wrote:
04 Feb 2019
Maybe better to ask what you are trying to accomplish?
It is just interesting to try to divide the source signal into separate frequency channels, and try to process each one separately. As an experiment.
And fixed (and already proportionally divided) frequencies in this case will be even more preferable than with the possibility of their adjustment - that would be redundant for this purpose. Just it's easier and faster.

User avatar
michal22
Posts: 212
Joined: 16 Jan 2015
Location: Poland

04 Feb 2019

The coolest method in Reason is to create parallel channels, filter each of them to a specific bandwidth and machining. In my opinion, it is the best and the most plastic method. The extension of this goal will be more limited than parallel channels. In addition, parallel channels should support delay compensation. The band in the parallel channel can also be filtered using MClass Imager, not just filters.
Ableton Live Suite 10 / Reason 10 / Windows 10 / Fingers - also 10 ;)

User avatar
michal22
Posts: 212
Joined: 16 Jan 2015
Location: Poland

04 Feb 2019

ab459 wrote:
04 Feb 2019
And fixed (and already proportionally divided) frequencies in this case will be even more preferable than with the possibility of their adjustment - that would be redundant for this purpose. Just it's easier and faster.
To automate this process in order to automatically adjust the frequency of the various bands, I recommend using khs multipass. It takes care of all delays and gives wolves the ability to create sound. Great VST. You will like it. :thumbs_up:
Ableton Live Suite 10 / Reason 10 / Windows 10 / Fingers - also 10 ;)

ab459
Posts: 384
Joined: 28 Dec 2018
Location: Minsk Belarus

04 Feb 2019

michal22 wrote:
04 Feb 2019
ab459 wrote:
04 Feb 2019
And fixed (and already proportionally divided) frequencies in this case will be even more preferable than with the possibility of their adjustment - that would be redundant for this purpose. Just it's easier and faster.
To automate this process in order to automatically adjust the frequency of the various bands, I recommend using khs multipass. It takes care of all delays and gives wolves the ability to create sound. Great VST. You will like it. :thumbs_up:
Hm, never tried kilohearts plugins yet, need will be check.

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests