Weiss EQ vs Waves Q10

[Nordenstam]

Originally Posted by docdued

I switched from float to double processing somewhere around version 3.02. I think that explains the differences...

<checking> .. Sure, 3.02 in first test and 3.11 now.

That's very interesting to hear! Am I reading you right when I take it that the relatively loud artifacts in the first test where rounding error in 32 bit floating point?

As a developer, do you think it makes any difference to go to double precision (integer(?)) instead of using 64 bit float?



@ TranscendingM: try refresh/F5.

[docdued]

There was an exhaustive discussion about this over at KvR: KVR: Integer is King? - final thoughts about the EQ challenge . Well, mathematically it looked like you could gain a little bit with int64 but we're already at -150 dB and below. Maybe my dog can hear this but even with him I'm not sure... but indeed the step from float to double precision seems to pay off when the underlying algorithm is complex enough.

[TranscendingM]

Originally Posted by Lupo

<checking> .. Sure, 3.02 in first test and 3.11 now.

That's very interesting to hear! Am I reading you right when I take it that the relatively loud artifacts in the first test where rounding error in 32 bit floating point?

As a developer, do you think it makes any difference to go to double precision (integer(?)) instead of using 64 bit float?



@ TranscendingM: try refresh/F5.

For some reason IE didn't want to display the png files; jpg's were fine though. Firefox displayed the png's, no problem. Thanks for the graphs Lupo thumbsup

[MIROSONIC]

Originally Posted by Mark1353

Interesting thread. Thanks for all the tips.

I made a pointless test for you to listen. Just for fun. I threw together a couple of loops in Ableton and didn't mix it except added a chorus effect and some fattening on the kick drum. (That rhodes is leaning a bit to the right dont die because of that...)

Then I EQ'd the master channel with Q10 and Flux Epure version 1. Their website doesn't work so I couldnt get their version 2.

There's also some 2bus compression and limiting.

I used 10 bands of narrow cutting. Epure Q was 100 and Q10 Q was about 52. I tried to match the Q value by ear. Q10 seems to be able to make a lot narrower cuts.

I don't have fresh ears now, but I think Epure might be a bit more smoother/liquidy/clear sounding. But the difference is so small that I doubt if anyone would notice?

There's a noEQ version too for comparison.

Very impressed with the Q10 here

The sound of digital equ's are never the same.

On my monitors it is so evident.
Eq ing therfore is difficult because of the choices, and then experience is needed to decide which eq plug in to use for different scenarios to iron out deficiancies.


When I use Sonnox eq there my tracks seem to have the Sonnox characteristics and there is no way my wave arts track plug 4 will ever sound the same.
On cheap monitors its hard to tell the difference as the sound is colourd by the monitors on both versions.

The reason why the Wiess seems to be so good, IMHO is that its characterisitcs are aesthetically of a high quality and very proffesional sounding.