Eq In/Out Vu Metering + Output Gain Control

Ideas & suggestions
1

Hey there,

do you use native EQ in your tracks ? Are you aware that every EQ increases/decreases the level/loudness of your signal every time you move a slider ? Do you miss an I/O VU metering and output gain control for loudness compensation like those available in native compressor ?

I do

So, please implement this feature. Most of the big EQ’s have it (like Voxengo GlissEQ for example).

2

I simply LOVE the Renoise EQs! I was I could have them in every other DAW I use. They have become very smooth, and I can hardly detect any phasing colour. Just compare the phase performance to the Live EQs for example: Renoise is way nicer.

Yes I’m very aware that any tweak causes a gain change. For what it is worth, you can always put a Gainer device after your EQ to fine tune the level. Automatic markup based upon amplitude alone would seem a bit mad as it would favour a warped response from the bass freqs, I think.

3

Hey MMD :-),
please don’t get me wrong: this thread is not about the quality of the Renoise EQ’s. Guess the quality is ok BTW.

Regarding gainer: the gainer is of course always possible, but the makeup slider in compressor is a simple gainer, too. We could omit it and work with a simple gainer after compressor, too. But it’s not done, because it was not very convenient.

Moreover, I was not talking about any automatically applied compensation. Rather I was talking about measuring the RMS level of input and output and adusting the output level by hand (Voxengo GlissEQ for example shows also the ratio between in/out).

As you’re into mixing/mastering you know how much loudness influences our decision making. That’s also true for EQ tweaking. I cite from my favorite mixing book (Roey Izaki: “Concepts Pracices and Tools”, Focal Press) page 241 f.:

Equalisation and Levels

By altering the the level of a specific frequency range we also alter the overall level of the signal. As per our axiom, louder-perceived-better, A/B comparisons can be misleading - we might think it is better when boosting on equalizers and worse when attenuating. In order to allow fair A/B comparisons, some equalizers provide an output level control. After equalizing, we match the level of the processed signal to unprocessed signal, so our critical judgement is purely based on tonality changes, not level changes. While it is understood why output level control is not found on the small EQ sections of even the largest consoles, it is unclear why many plugin developers overlook this important feature.

A/B comparisons aside, the louder-perceived-better principle can lead to immediate misjudgements as we equalize, before compensating for the gain-change. the risk is the same - we might thing boosting improves the sound purely due to the overall level increase…
…also for attenuating frequencies output level control makes sense: … if by any chance the loss of overall level bothers us, we can always compensate for it.

IMO most developers also overlook also the convenient metering between in/out. It’s very unconvenient if I have to insert a metering plugin before and after EQ. Voxengo GlissEQ for example provides such metering and I really love it.

So taktik: why not use the code of the compressor for the EQ, too ? Shouldn’t be too much work, either.

4

Well in theory I love your idea! An optional control of attenuation would be cool, especially when A-Bing tone settings. However, I don’t think the EQs are getting an overhaul in at least the next version. They have an issue with running out of parameter slots due to the sliders being linked to the pattern FX (which go from 0 to F). The Devs can explain that better than I can.

5

Oh that’s no good news. But maybe some of the sliders can be omitted by the devs for automation ?

BTW: what do you mean by “A-bing tone setting” ? Multiples of 440 Hz maybe ?

6

it’s just about pattern fx anyway… how many VST’s are there with a bazillion parameters, only accessible for automation envelopes, but not pattern fx? a lot… so is this really an issue/obstruction?

but apart from that I really wish those (and other) “sub-columns” could be 1 to n digits wide, I just have no good idea how to do that UI-wise (that is, how to enter, say, two digits into a one-digit column and have it expand automatically). oh, and don’t restrict yourself to hex where it’s not about values, but identifiers - there is the whole alphabet, and you never ever do math with identifiers anyway.

7

^_^

= doing an A-B comparison

8

Johann is correct.

9

and what about this thread ? :)
i’m also an addict of native eq’s , i only miss the gain (for the total eq) and frequency/Q moving with song (same than the mid range of the native mixer eq but with full range for each points…)
these 2 suggests all in one ;)