Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[dave briar]

Yesterday’s post regarding the new firmware for the A&H SQ series included the following:

  V1.4.0
  Additional Features:
  New add-ons available: DeEsser, Multiband Compressors
  (MultiBD3/MultiBD4), Dynamic EQ (DynEQ4)

I’ve always (naively?) assumed that the terms “Multiband compressor” and “Dynamic EQ” were two ways of describing the same functionality. No? 

[Art Welter]

I’ve always (naively?) assumed that the terms “Multiband compressor” and “Dynamic EQ” were two ways of describing the same functionality. No?

No.

Here is a good explanation of the differences:

https://www.sonible.com/blog/multiband-compressor-adaptive-dynamic-eq/

[Tim McCulloch]

Yesterday’s post regarding the new firmware for the A&H SQ series included the following:

  V1.4.0
  Additional Features:
  New add-ons available: DeEsser, Multiband Compressors
  (MultiBD3/MultiBD4), Dynamic EQ (DynEQ4)

I’ve always (naively?) assumed that the terms “Multiband compressor” and “Dynamic EQ” were two ways of describing the same functionality. No?

Dynamic EQ is probably meant to emulate the BSS DPR901.  A decent description of use is here:

https://www.waves.com/how-and-when-to-use-dynamic-eq

A discussion of multiband compression (Wave C6 - I love that plugin) is here:

https://www.waves.com/plugins/c6-multiband-compressor

Lots of stuff on U-toob, too, and many articles online about multiband compression in particular.

Although they have some overlapping capabilities, ultimately they are very different beasts.

ps. Was typing while Art posted; the link in his post is well written (hint).

[dave briar]

Dynamic EQ is probably meant to emulate the BSS DPR901.  A decent description of use is here:

https://www.waves.com/how-and-when-to-use-dynamic-eq

A discussion of multiband compression (Wave C6 - I love that plugin) is here:

https://www.waves.com/plugins/c6-multiband-compressor

Lots of stuff on U-toob, too, and many articles online about multiband compression in particular.

Although they have some overlapping capabilities, ultimately they are very different beasts.

ps. Was typing while Art posted; the link in his post is well written (hint).

Thanks guys. I love learning here. 

This sentence proved most salient for me:

But whereas multiband compressors use crossover filters, which affect fairly broad frequency areas, a dynamic EQ allows you to specify the precise frequencies you want to boost (through expansion) or attenuate (through compression).

[Tim McCulloch]

Thanks guys. I love learning here. 

This sentence proved most salient for me:

But whereas multiband compressors use crossover filters, which affect fairly broad frequency areas, a dynamic EQ allows you to specify the precise frequencies you want to boost (through expansion) or attenuate (through compression).

That's a generalization that ignores the fact that EQs have filters that tend to have lower Q than crossovers, so keep that in mind.

[John Roberts {JR}]

Inventing myriad ways to screw up the sound....

JR

[Chris Grimshaw]

Inventing myriad ways to screw up the sound....

JR

I think it's just shifting the line between "mixer" and "producer" a bit. I remember watching a video of a well-regarded FOH engineer that was going through their signal chain for processing a snare drum. The height of excitement, I know.
Harmonic exciters (producing additional overtones), a couple of different compressors, and a few other bits, and the sound was very far removed from what the mic was actually picking up.

IMO, when it comes to working with decent musicians, the sound they're producing is the sound they want to put out to the audience. Throw a few natural-sounding mics into sensible positions and you're almost there.

Chris

[dave briar]

That's a generalization that ignores the fact that EQs have filters that tend to have lower Q than crossovers, so keep that in mind.

Ok, that makes sense. So is there a use case be that would favor a C6 over a F6 assuming you had both available?

[John Roberts {JR}]

Ok, that makes sense. So is there a use case be that would favor a C6 over a F6 assuming you had both available?

Perhaps describe the problem(s) you are trying to fix.

Multi-band compression has a long history dating back to the FM radio loudness wars when station engineers tried to be the loudest station on the radio. The early stuff used loudspeaker crossovers and simple limiters. Crude but made them sound different and louder. Far from good practice.

Dynamic EQ is a newer (but not new) animal trying to force a desired target spectral balance. I can imagine some future DSP based mixer that can mimic any result you ask for... (make me sound like Madonna  ).  Luckily for me, I should already be dead by then. 

JR 

[Tim McCulloch]

Perhaps describe the problem(s) you are trying to fix.

Multi-band compression has a long history dating back to the FM radio loudness wars when station engineers tried to be the loudest station on the radio. The early stuff used loudspeaker crossovers and simple limiters. Crude but made them sound different and louder. Far from good practice.

Dynamic EQ is a newer (but not new) animal trying to force a desired target spectral balance. I can imagine some future DSP based mixer that can mimic any result you ask for... (make me sound like Madonna  ).  Luckily for me, I should already be dead by then. 

JR

Then not only will you sound like Madonna, you'll smell like her, too!

Okay, that was a cheap shot... you'll smell like her cologne.

[ProSoundWeb Community]