Gearslutz.com - View Single Post

virtualaudio · 31st December 2009

Although I agree with the bullet points presented by rhythminmind, I find this statement "Nevermind all the technical crap leave that up to us tech geeks. Forget the question of quality" in poor taste.
I thought this board existed to share experience, understanding, knowledge and opinions.
I thought that to admit that one does not know something was the more enlightened approach.
I tried to present information that I have gathered in a somewhat condensed form, not wanting to load down an already lengthy post with examples and experiential observations. If it comes across as techno-babble from an ignorant person, I apologize for not being more specific and rigorous; I did not want to repeat things that have been amply covered in this interesting and informative thread.
The primary point of my last post was to clarify the differences in the Eliosis list and point out that the categories they chose to compare different digital filters are incomplete and potentially misleading. Nothing against Eliosis, but at the intersection between digital coding and product advertisement, there is much room for confusion. It seems to me that this is largely what this thread is about: what is true, what is significant and valuable, opposed to what is specious and redundant.
My comments and questions on the results of different coding methods were stimulated by personal experience - i.e. the Sonoris (mp) eq has a sweeter and less ringy high shelf than the Sonnox or Sonalksis. On the other hand, the Sonoris glitches when the filter frequency is altered; the Sonnox and Sonalksis do not.
The UAD Pultec does not sound like any other digital eq I have ever heard. Aside from its warm and dynamic sound, it seems to flatten somewhat as the signal approaches digital full scale.
The UAD Neve 1073 has interesting phase and harmonic characteristics, as demonstrated by Fader8 in his informative website: Index
The pass filters on the Waves Renaissance EQ have an unusual and significant pass band bump beyond q = 1, which would not be ideal for DC filtering (see above link).
I have heard great linear phase eqs and crummy ones; also there are situations where an LP eq is invaluable, and many others where it is unnecessary.

I heartily agree that your ears are the final arbiter, but not everyone has infinite time and deep pockets; there are many people who are interested in just making music, and the technicalities can be distracting (think John Lennon). On the other hand, we live in an age of DIY (especially considering the current recession). It is becoming more important for creative peeps to understand the basics of the tools they work with to develop their art in an efficient and cost-effective way. Musicians with home studios (and many professionals) come to forums like this one to get information and opinions that would otherwise be unavailable. To draw a line and say 'this is for the technical boffins, you just tend to the music' is an antiquated point of view (lamentably, imho).

Math is math - one cannot beat the nyquist frequency or digital full scale (physical mathematics). I was simply pointing out that there are a variety of techniques and sub-techniques to digital filter design, each providing a different result. Each with a unique property, or quality.

The question of quality seems very relevant to me. I do not encourage people to agonize over the difference between dithers, but for those who have an interest (any one who has made it this far through this thread), I think they should be presented with all relevant information and clear distinctions between fact and opinion.

31st December 2009	#355
virtualaudio Gear interested Joined: Jun 2008 Location: New Orleans, La. Posts: 29	Although I agree with the bullet points presented by rhythminmind, I find this statement "Nevermind all the technical crap leave that up to us tech geeks. Forget the question of quality" in poor taste. I thought this board existed to share experience, understanding, knowledge and opinions. I thought that to admit that one does not know something was the more enlightened approach. I tried to present information that I have gathered in a somewhat condensed form, not wanting to load down an already lengthy post with examples and experiential observations. If it comes across as techno-babble from an ignorant person, I apologize for not being more specific and rigorous; I did not want to repeat things that have been amply covered in this interesting and informative thread. The primary point of my last post was to clarify the differences in the Eliosis list and point out that the categories they chose to compare different digital filters are incomplete and potentially misleading. Nothing against Eliosis, but at the intersection between digital coding and product advertisement, there is much room for confusion. It seems to me that this is largely what this thread is about: what is true, what is significant and valuable, opposed to what is specious and redundant. My comments and questions on the results of different coding methods were stimulated by personal experience - i.e. the Sonoris (mp) eq has a sweeter and less ringy high shelf than the Sonnox or Sonalksis. On the other hand, the Sonoris glitches when the filter frequency is altered; the Sonnox and Sonalksis do not. The UAD Pultec does not sound like any other digital eq I have ever heard. Aside from its warm and dynamic sound, it seems to flatten somewhat as the signal approaches digital full scale. The UAD Neve 1073 has interesting phase and harmonic characteristics, as demonstrated by Fader8 in his informative website: Index The pass filters on the Waves Renaissance EQ have an unusual and significant pass band bump beyond q = 1, which would not be ideal for DC filtering (see above link). I have heard great linear phase eqs and crummy ones; also there are situations where an LP eq is invaluable, and many others where it is unnecessary. I heartily agree that your ears are the final arbiter, but not everyone has infinite time and deep pockets; there are many people who are interested in just making music, and the technicalities can be distracting (think John Lennon). On the other hand, we live in an age of DIY (especially considering the current recession). It is becoming more important for creative peeps to understand the basics of the tools they work with to develop their art in an efficient and cost-effective way. Musicians with home studios (and many professionals) come to forums like this one to get information and opinions that would otherwise be unavailable. To draw a line and say 'this is for the technical boffins, you just tend to the music' is an antiquated point of view (lamentably, imho). Math is math - one cannot beat the nyquist frequency or digital full scale (physical mathematics). I was simply pointing out that there are a variety of techniques and sub-techniques to digital filter design, each providing a different result. Each with a unique property, or quality. The question of quality seems very relevant to me. I do not encourage people to agonize over the difference between dithers, but for those who have an interest (any one who has made it this far through this thread), I think they should be presented with all relevant information and clear distinctions between fact and opinion.