Geeks of the world unite: NoEqual modelled after Neve 1073?

[JouniL]

Just out of curiosity:

Is the "NoEqual" modelled after any particular existing well known EQ? I recognized that all the preset EQ Bands/Shelves of it corresponds to the ones on the classic Neve 1073 EQ. Excactly what is so magic with these frequencies: 35, 60, 110, 220, 360, 700, 1.6K, 3.2K, 4.8K and 7K. Someone wrote that these corresponded to "musical" frequencies ... ?

What kind of characteristics does the "No Equal" have, is it more like a digital (Linear phase) clinical sound or is it modelled after an analog device with corresponding tonal colouring/distortion?

[michelle]

Hi JouniL,

Here is a bit more information on No Equal:
http://www.sonomawireworks.com/effects.php
http://www.sonomawireworks.com/noequal.php

Cheers,
Michelle

[JouniL]

Thnx Michelle! Interesting info, but my questions was kind of "getting behind the scene" - kind of questions. Did you have any particular EQ in mind when you designed "NoEqual"?

[dug]

Hi JouniL,

NoEqual is not strictly a model of a Neve, but yes, we pulled the frequencies off of a Neve 1073. It behaves like the much talked about "British EQ". What is that you ask? This refers to a semi-parametric EQ where there are no Q (bandwidth) controls, but the bandwidth varies proportional to the boost applied. With low amounts of boost or cut, the eq is very wide, as more boost/cut is added, the EQ gets peakier. I'll have to look up the exact ranges of the bandwidth, but the reason you don't need continuous control is because the bandwidth never really gets narrow enough to need the frequencies in between.

When you have the EQ set at 110, that's the center of the curve, and it is boosting all the frequencies around it. Upto about 150 and down to around 70. At 220 you're modifying from around 150 to around 300, etc. So all the bands overlap.

Why did we choose to do it that way? Lots of DAWs and EQ plugins have graphical displays that show you the curve that you're applying. We believe that you should let your ears do the work, not your eyes. If you are looking at a graph, the signals from the optic nerve tend to guide your choices, instead of your ears.

cheers,
dug

[JouniL]

Thnx Dug!

That was very interesting information! Regarding the optical-ear-issue, I couldn't agree more. Sometimes I just get confused looking at a EQ-curve which tells me "this should sound good" - while my ears tell me a whole different story

/Jouni

[JouniL]

British EQ (quoted from Sweetwater.com)

Today's Word for the Day was a special request from one of our inSync readers. British EQ - Can be loosely defined as any equalizer circuit that is designed and built in a way that emulates (in design or sound or both) the classic EQ circuits from the legendary mixers that came out of England in the 1950's, 60's and 70's. Soundcraft, Amek, Neve, Trident, and many other brands achieved legendary status during those years because engineers and producers liked their sound, and in particular liked the performance and sound of their equalizers. During the 1980's and 90's less expensive products began to show up from other parts of the world. British EQ was thus coined as a marketing term that became used by many of the English companies to combat the less expensive products. They felt that by making the distinction that not all mixers and EQ circuits sound the same they could maintain market share even at higher prices. By all accounts the idea worked because there is still today quite a bit of mystique around the concept of British EQ.

[blue4u]

Hi JouniL,

NoEqual is not strictly a model of a Neve, but yes, we pulled the frequencies off of a Neve 1073. It behaves like the much talked about "British EQ". What is that you ask? This refers to a semi-parametric EQ where there are no Q (bandwidth) controls, but the bandwidth varies proportional to the boost applied. With low amounts of boost or cut, the eq is very wide, as more boost/cut is added, the EQ gets peakier. I'll have to look up the exact ranges of the bandwidth, but the reason you don't need continuous control is because the bandwidth never really gets narrow enough to need the frequencies in between.

When you have the EQ set at 110, that's the center of the curve, and it is boosting all the frequencies around it. Upto about 150 and down to around 70. At 220 you're modifying from around 150 to around 300, etc. So all the bands overlap.

Why did we choose to do it that way? Lots of DAWs and EQ plugins have graphical displays that show you the curve that you're applying. We believe that you should let your ears do the work, not your eyes. If you are looking at a graph, the signals from the optic nerve tend to guide your choices, instead of your ears.

cheers,
dug

Wow!! Thanks for that GREAT explanation Dug! I always wonder about such "geeky" things. I rely on the RiffWorks EQ a LOT. This information is helpful in understanding how things are applied so I'm not "flyin' blind" when I make boosts and cuts. Very cool stuff I think this one deserves a sticky

Thanks JouniL for raising the question!

Rich

PS - Have I told you guys *lately* how much I looooooooove RiffWorks?!

[GuitarSlinger]

Maybe not a sticky but I'd like to see a developers blog on the site somewhere with information like this.

[blue4u]

Or, a history of Riffworks, how it came to be, what was modeled for the effects, it's vision, etc. etc.

[rhynoclemmis]

Maybe not a sticky but I'd like to see a developers blog on the site somewhere with information like this.

That'd be great!