TBProAudio releases DSEQ, a dynamic spectral equalizer for Windows and Mac OS X
by TBProAudio   19th April 2020

Just want to second this. Late to the party here with v3.5, but I reported an issue with DSEQ in a particular DAW and got a quick reply and a day later a fix. Amazing.

Great plug-in too - getting a lot of use here for all kinds of things.

Yep, that's typical for TBProAudio. All anyone needs to do is scan through the threads going back a few years here on GS to see where they're coming from. DSEQ has morphed to its current fine self largely because of the back and forth on GS between TBProAudio and GSers. They have provided here a virtual master course in how to do customer service right.

I suppose I am a TBProAudio fan boy. I dunno. But I do know they have earned my respect over the past few years by *always* being willing to listen, kind in their manner, and forthcoming - usually quickly - with resolutions to issues.

I wish they would make a reverb.

Thank you for your feedback.

We are going to redesign the GR display. We will consider your notes, thank you.

What do you think are their standout products?

The CS-5501 channel strip, DSEQ, and the free MVMeter2 are each quite helpful.

If you're thinking of demoing any you should definitely try at least those three, imho.

The channel strip is feature packed and sounds quite good, to my ears at least. I use it often. I have 4 instances in the project I am currently working on, and may wind up with more. It's not the only channel strip I use, but it is one of the ones I use most often; one of my 3 or 4 favs.

DSEQ is a helpful problem solver; unruly guitars, drums, B3, vocals, a plethora of uses. It can be quite precise and involved if you're a control enthusiast, or if you're like me and want a good jump-start, let it learn the sound and give you a good starting point and go from there.

The MVMeter2 is a VU meter with a few wrinkles. I like how it behaves as a meter and there are some - what I think are - likable GUI choices, but it can also be a gain staging tool to adjust incoming signal to a target you set. And for free, there is nothing to lose here, except a few minutes of your time if it's not for you.

There are quite a few videos on u tube about these. None of them may be for you, but my belief is they are at least worth checking out.

DSEQ3 sure is something else . . .

I'd throw in ABLM2 and DEQ6V4 while you're at it

i use ablm2 all the time…

I tried ABLM a few years ago. I cannot remember why I did not purchase it. So I went and tried it again after seeing y'alls posts. I have no idea why I didn't purchase this, so after a short and enlightening demo, purchased.

Thanks for the reply. I'll have to experiment and see if there was a consistent delay amount.

Also appreciate looking at GUI propagation for the future.

@ TBProAudio (or anyone else) can you help me understand how to think about the quality/OS options in a practical way?

My point of reference, though not exactly the same, is soothe2. When you change quality settings in soothe2, the latency stays the same (2048 samples on 48k). But the latency in DSEQ3 changes the latency drastically. How should I understand that?

It also seems that the different settings make quite a difference in terms of sound. For example, when monitoring the delta signal on a full mix, lower quality picks up drum transients (less desirable), while higher quality just seems to pick up tonal resonances.

So, my main question is - it seems like quality makes a huge difference in terms of what is picked up / sound, not just "accuracy" or "artifacts". Given that, what is the purpose for the separate offline rendering mode if the differences can be significant? I would imagine if you are mixing into it at quite a different quality than rendering, you could end up with quite unexpected results on render.

I don't think the Quality parameter has the same meaning as in Soothe, but I could be wrong. In DSEQ, the parameter controls the number of dynamic EQs and thus the resolution of the dynamic linear phase filter. Higher resolution linear phase filters result in higher latency.

Correct, the influence is enormous, as a higher quality influences the signal much more finely (accuracy).
However, the finer control comes at the price of a longer response time (transients vs. tonal).

This is a good question that I would like to pass on to the DSEQ users.

This is why i just built a very powerful new PC!

Plugins are getting heavier (and better).

Personally i wouldn't use a different render setting from the monitoring setting. Depending on your situation, it might be better to pre render stuff so you can hear DSEQ at full resolution.

I find it best to audition the various DSEQ oversampling options.

In my test, higher is not always better.

It very much depends on the source material.

Thanks. Can you clarify, then, what the Natural Phase mode does with respect to quality?

Is this saying that higher quality is "too slow" for some transients? So, if you are trying to catch transients, you need to lower quality? Or am I misunderstanding?

While LP filter could introduce preringing with high frequency content NP could introduce phase shifts.

As DSEQ works in the frequency domain it matters how quickly the frequency content is changing.
If quality setting is higher (higher frequency resolution) it takes longer to adopt changes.

Right, but can you clarify why NP still has high latency?

Sorry for all the questions.

LP and NP filters have the same latency. This is due to the filter design based on impulse responses.