On Thu, 05 May 2016 13:46:03 +0200, William Light wrote: >I have definitely used tilt EQs in the production process. Not as my EQ >shape of choice but I've added little bits in as a broad "well, I wish >this sound was a bit more trebly/bassy". I heard the first time in my life of tilt EQs. After some web research I noticed that it's just another kind of HiFi gear alike tone control. Sure, we even could use chains of EQs and get good results, e.g. a parametric EQ for the track, another for the subgroup and at the end in addition a graphic EQ for the mastering, but we should reconsider that a chain of EQs sometimes might ease the work, but also could be counterproductive, one EQ reduces what another EQ boosts, in the end it could cause a mess. If I take a look at this plugin, http://www.audiopluginsforfree.com/tal-use/ , I see more than just one knob. Usage of some audio tools could make the engineering process incalculable. Another invention of the 70s was the exciter. I only tested digital effects produced after the 70s and need to strongly advice against those. The meat and potatoes of relaxed audio engineering is cautious usage of EQing. What seems to provide something useful in the first place, in the end easily could become a serious issue. As a side note, German audio Wikis are usually a good source and also www.sengpielaudio.com/ partly in English. I suspect that Mr. Sengpiel edited several German audio Wikis before he died. It might be worth to translate them. When I learned, the Internet wasn't available, but I would have used his information, if it would have being available that time. IMO Mr. Sengpiel provides a little bit too much unneeded math, instead of teaching intuitive engineering, but IMO his explanations could be helpful for many people. Regards, Ralf _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
