Quantcast
Kirchhoff-EQ: Ultimate EQ plugin with superb dynamic processing and vintage models - Page 3 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Kirchhoff-EQ: Ultimate EQ plugin with superb dynamic processing and vintage models
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #61
Lives for gear
 
sakamoto's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by moonark ➡️
I do, in the "Trash" folder
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #62
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by moonark ➡️
I do, in the "Trash" folder
What's the problem then?
Old 3 weeks ago
  #63
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
This sounds insane on paper. I've been a big DMG Equilibrium user for years. Going to demo and compare.
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #64
Gear Maniac
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by barada ➡️
After further testing well this is one nearly perfect product. Soundwise there's nothing to be said this is really super amazing. As someone said I expected something like this from DMG and alike which is quite amazing IMHO.

I am saying nearly perfect because I've found more little display errors and tiny bugs (reported to developer).

I didn't even realize what Spectrum Grab mean until I explored Manual. Wow another nice feature.

I just want one thing from developer - don't change it drastically because it's icing on the cake as it is. I understand feature requests and so on, you will probably add feature etc. just don't change it drastically as it seems your vision is perfect.

Congratulations on this product.
Based on that, I'm not a potential buyer. I bought it.
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #65
Gear Head
 
TBTech Co. Ltd.'s Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by goshalev ➡️
It would be nice to see in the next update
1.Unlinked stereo(Dual mono) in dynamic section
2.Allpass filter
We are considering both of these functions, especially the allpass function, which may be opened in the future, appreciate for your suggestions!
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #66
Gear Head
 
TBTech Co. Ltd.'s Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by barada ➡️
After further testing well this is one nearly perfect product. Soundwise there's nothing to be said this is really super amazing. As someone said I expected something like this from DMG and alike which is quite amazing IMHO.

I am saying nearly perfect because I've found more little display errors and tiny bugs (reported to developer).

I didn't even realize what Spectrum Grab mean until I explored Manual. Wow another nice feature.

I just want one thing from developer - don't change it drastically because it's icing on the cake as it is. I understand feature requests and so on, you will probably add feature etc. just don't change it drastically as it seems your vision is perfect.

Congratulations on this product.
Thank you very much for your suggestions! Well, we will fix the bugs relatively quickly these days, and then we will discuss the implementability of the suggestions made by all users, and we should make some small adjustments such as "switch eq types with mouse" scroll". Other big adjustments will be carefully considered.
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #67
Gear Head
 
TBTech Co. Ltd.'s Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resoundsound ➡️
You can set the default band types for each frequency area to you liking in the settings. They're all set to bells by default.

Also there is an option in there "show band controller" which gives you a pop up with quick controls over the band selection dots. But you need to get in there and set it to "all".

Been testing this today and putting it against a lot of tough competition. Crave, SSL X-EQ2, Claro, Pro-Q3, Weiss EQ-MP + EQ1. Also extensively demoed Equilibrium and MAAT Blue recently. I'm not easy to please and I find something wrong in all of the above.

Claro is my go-to currently. But I like this one a lot. I prefer the sound and feature set in KirchhoffEQ, but the impeccable auto-gain implementation in Claro makes working with it very effortless.

My poor old eyes are not having the small font (2560x1440 resolution).

Good times.
Thank you for your recognition! The font size issue will be added to the settings in the future for users to adjust! Cheers~
Old 3 weeks ago
  #68
Gear Addict
 
🎧 5 years
More window length like 64k, 128k?
Free phase mode? From minimum/analog to linear to anti-analog/minimum (for reversed sounds etc) and to any position between for each band?
Window functions like kaiser, hann, and mooore?
Saturation options (even, odd, mixed and anything between)?

Imho, if you want a killer of all existing digital eqs, it is better to make an eq that can do anything, all stuff they offer + more. And your eq will be one of the first go-to and musthave. Or even the only one, delete all others.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #69
Here for the gear
 
Does it have auto threshold so that if you change your gain before the EQ, you get the same amount of dynamic reduction?
Old 3 weeks ago
  #70
Gear Nut
 
🎧 5 years
I found where the mid/side/left/right option is, but I'd rather like to right-click on the node itself, and be able to select m/s/l/r/etc options there. By all means leave the m/s/l/r on the bottom left in the GUI too. I really do like that M/S and L/R slider as well. That's pretty cool. Tooltips would be nice since I had to look up the relative band information on the plugin page. (Yeah, I'm lazy).

Slight visual bug: If I resize the GUI, sometimes the left side of the GUI covers up the lower frequencies and the MSLR options there.
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #71
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by btfnk ➡️
This sounds insane on paper. I've been a big DMG Equilibrium user for years. Going to demo and compare.
Equilibrium doesn’t sound so good compared to more recent releases. It doesn’t have mixed phase either. You’d be better off comparing ff pro q3 or crave2.
The only things I ever touch equilibrium for are the bsss bands in IIR. All pass filters for corrective issues. Really it’s too much to set up. I reach for tdr nova way more. And crave 2. That linear phase mode (1000ms) is butter smooth for the non-preringing zone.
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #72
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBTech Co. Ltd. ➡️
Thank you very much for your suggestions! Well, we will fix the bugs relatively quickly these days, and then we will discuss the implementability of the suggestions made by all users, and we should make some small adjustments such as "switch eq types with mouse" scroll". Other big adjustments will be carefully considered.
Yeah, whatever you do just make it "optional" in the way it doesn't clash with your current vision (if possible).

I remember when competing product was out it was really nice then developer started adding features, changing colors and behavior and then in the end - It isn't the same product that I purchased. I can't even make it behave like it did initially.

Good luck with it.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #73
Lives for gear
 
superwack's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
I think this sounds great - trying to convince myself the 117bit processing is just a placebo but it always sounds great to me!

Most of my comments/suggestions have been covered (especially grateful to learn they will be making the font larger!) I'm demoing in Pro Tools and there doesn't seem to be any "band number" I know the nodes are color-coded but in the automation, they are listed as "band 1 slope, band 2 slope, etc." but there is no way to figure out what band 1 is - unless I'm missing something obvious?

The other thing is the spectrum analyzer is very light, I can barely see it - even though I have all the brightness set at 100%. I beta test for another company and they are finding that some of their plugins that look really dark/ black in VST/AU show up really washed out and low-contrast in AAX. maybe that is happening here?

I wonder if it wouldn't be cleaner to have the "analog" options open from the BAND as opposed to having each in their own folder. (or in both places?)

So, for example, by selecting BELL you'd get the pop-out menu of Default, E, G, N, 250, Tube instead of having to go to Type E or Type G or Type N, etc. and then choose bell ELMF or bell E HMF, etc. . It would make it easier to audition the different options.

This is not based on the location of this company but I do think, generally, it's worrisome to be asked to install using an unsigned installer (on mac) by a new/unknown company that also asks to collect data from within the plugin. That's a couple of red flags from a computer safety standpoint and definitely gave me pause.
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #74
Here for the gear
 
menzi11's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emxty ➡️
All of those measurements shown on the product page are down to -150db. Some -175db. It's pretty much below the audible area. It may look cleaner on the paper but this won't affect the audible sound quality. Workflow wise, it can't be compared to the Fabfilter Pro-Q3 and nowhere near to it. Not even close to Toneboosters EQ4. Fabfilter is still the king for the workflow and I see no reason to purchase this one if somebody has Claro and Fabfilter combo. All the technical explanation for this EQ is about Fabfilter's filter design and all of a sudden Fabfilter cannot design cleaner filters? I don't think so. It's a dead end.

Claro for example provides an amazing, different workflow but this one does not. The only reason to get this EQ would be the price point and unfortunately, the current price point is not convincing when we can grab EQ4 for 39 euro.
Hello!

Thank you very much for your question, in fact I believe this is also the doubt of many people.

(The following viewpoints just my own personal opinion, I will not mention our products. The referring to other companies or organizations below is only for discussing about tech., no marketing things)

It's down to -150dB indeed, actually when I tested all these filter structs, I put the measurements down to -300dB.

It's not because anyone here have super power to hear -300 dB hahah, I think only god can.

The reason is: what we called "round-noise" is not just "noise". We call it "noise" because it is treated as noise so we can deal with it in math or in plots. It has another name called "round-error". Noises may not a big thing, but I think errors does. At least for pro-audio.

Here's a page about how many details we can find in a very simple biquad filter implement:
https://www.ranecommercial.com/legacy/note157.html

In this page, we can see what will happen if we don't do anything about round-noises: noise, chaos, limit cycles & jump phenomenon........ many things.

On this page of cytomic (great company), we can see some noise performance plots of several filter structs. Although this analysis was made for different purpose, we can still refer to it:
https://cytomic.com/technical-papers

There is also the github page of iZotope (great company). They made some tests on effects by different Filter structures in Time-Varying. Although this analysis was made for different purpose, it can still be referred to:
https://github.com/iZotope/time_varying_filters_paper

In order to study about Round-noise, I consulted various materials and studied how these good old hardware digital EQs implemented. Due to the limitations of their times, they all work on very low digital precision, like 16bit, 24bit or 48bit integeral, but some of them still has excellent sound (even better than some current-days plugins, in my personal opinion). I am amazed that they use various techniques to reduce round-noise. That's the key how a EQ sound good or not.

So, in general, the first big goal of eq to have a good sound is to reduce the round-noise as much as possible. Improving the precision is the simplest and most effective way.

There' no doubt that the difference between 16bit and 32bit is huge, but the difference between 64bit and 32bit is much smaller. Instead I think for direct form 1 filters, 32bit is sometimes more "warm" and 64bit is too "clean" to me. so we can't just improve the precision higher and higher brainlessly. The key is still round-errors. After using the proper filter structure and properly handled round-errors, everything changed.

Our technical blog:
https://blog.threebodytech.com/72.html

has some audio clips about different filter structures. There are some difference. For example, in our auditory test among them, almost all listeners felt that the sound of the direct form 1 filter was "no surprise". The state-variable filter sound was more "natural".

Also in this blog I write something about how we deal with all those filter structures.

Thank you again for your question. I hope my answer can explain something here.
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #75
Gear Head
 
TBTech Co. Ltd.'s Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by superwack ➡️
I think this sounds great - trying to convince myself the 117bit processing is just a placebo but it always sounds great to me!

Most of my comments/suggestions have been covered (especially grateful to learn they will be making the font larger!) I'm demoing in Pro Tools and there doesn't seem to be any "band number" I know the nodes are color-coded but in the automation, they are listed as "band 1 slope, band 2 slope, etc." but there is no way to figure out what band 1 is - unless I'm missing something obvious?

The other thing is the spectrum analyzer is very light, I can barely see it - even though I have all the brightness set at 100%. I beta test for another company and they are finding that some of their plugins that look really dark/ black in VST/AU show up really washed out and low-contrast in AAX. maybe that is happening here?

I wonder if it wouldn't be cleaner to have the "analog" options open from the BAND as opposed to having each in their own folder. (or in both places?)

So, for example, by selecting BELL you'd get the pop-out menu of Default, E, G, N, 250, Tube instead of having to go to Type E or Type G or Type N, etc. and then choose bell ELMF or bell E HMF, etc. . It would make it easier to audition the different options.

This is not based on the location of this company but I do think, generally, it's worrisome to be asked to install using an unsigned installer (on mac) by a new/unknown company that also asks to collect data from within the plugin. That's a couple of red flags from a computer safety standpoint and definitely gave me pause.
Hi, We can set "axis line brightness:", "input spectrum brightness:", and "output spectrum brightness:" respectively in the settings. The default is 100%, but the actual setting range is 0%-200%, that the brightness can be adjusted. It means the brightness can be doubled again.
However, we found that this value range may be hard to understand, so we will change the value range to "0-100%" in the next version update.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #76
Gear Addict
 
majoraxis's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I am really enjoying this EQ plug-in. In analog mode, I feel like I am able to boost the treble with less artifacts as compared to other name brand EQs plug-in’s. The dynamics with the above and below settings is such a brilliant idea. I am pretty sure this is best sounding digital EQ I have ever used and the functionality supersedes that of other dynamic EQs plugin’s I know of…. If you know of a better sounding, better functioning dynamic EQ plugin, please let me know…
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #77
Lives for gear
Any updates on REAPER stereo track issue with VST3?
It does not allow me to set up stereo input and thinks that the track is mono + sidechain


PS
REAPER does not have mono tracks - all tracks by default are stereo and then you can increase channel count in multiples of 2.
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #78
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercado_Negro ➡️
Looks interesting. Hopefully the Apple Silicon version is not too far away so I can demo.
All their other plug ins work on my M1
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #79
Gear Maniac
 
ericzang's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Very interested to keep exploring this EQ, great work!
Feature Request: how about an option for look ahead for the dynamic behavior? I wasn't able to completely reduce a high frequency transient.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kuulart ➡️
Any updates on REAPER stereo track issue with VST3?
It does not allow me to set up stereo input and thinks that the track is mono + sidechain
recent demo version 1.0.3 is working properly in stereo for me in Reaper 6.40, Win 10, VST3.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #80
Gear Head
 
2021 and still not as good as equilibrium
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #81
Here for the gear
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kuulart ➡️
Any updates on REAPER stereo track issue with VST3?
Have you tried right-click on the "Plug-in pin connector" button and set "Stereo" for "Request VST3 bus channel count"?
Attached Thumbnails
Kirchhoff-EQ: Ultimate EQ plugin with superb dynamic processing and vintage models-2021-11-05_134335.jpg  
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #82
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericzang ➡️
Very interested to keep exploring this EQ, great work!
Feature Request: how about an option for look ahead for the dynamic behavior? I wasn't able to completely reduce a high frequency transient.


recent demo version 1.0.3 is working properly in stereo for me in Reaper 6.40, Win 10, VST3.
I just realized that I am still on the original demo. :/
Will check it out now.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #83
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 10 years
Hi there. I'm enjoying this EQ but I seem to be having a few problems with it on Protools.
1. protools shuts down when loaded (I have no experience with this, but several users have reported this depending on their environment)
2. plugin category is not set on AAX? Can't specify in default EQ
3. plugin name on the narrow mixer appears to be EQ, which is not so much of a problem.
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #84
Gear Head
 
TBTech Co. Ltd.'s Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kuulart ➡️
Any updates on REAPER stereo track issue with VST3?
It does not allow me to set up stereo input and thinks that the track is mono + sidechain


PS
REAPER does not have mono tracks - all tracks by default are stereo and then you can increase channel count in multiples of 2.
Hi, We fix the stereo track issue, please kindly redownload and install it again
Old 3 weeks ago
  #85
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
This looks very nice indeed. Lovely functionality mirroring that of FabFilter EQ which makes me feel right at home.

But I have a major criticism. Those 3D knobs with a perspective. Why? Dear developers, angled 3D knobs are a very bad idea, made worse here since within one GUI you mix a flat, modern UX design with knobs that in one mode, are flat, then in the emulated analogue modes are 3D with a perspective! Then, the tube analog model goes back to 2D 'top view' design. This feels very schizophrenic, since the plugin's graphic design doesn’t know what it wants to be.

Please realise that knobs with a 3D perspective have no place on a computer screen. Some of us are very sensitive to this. Imagine you open your plugin, with the 3D knobs pointed down-left. Then you open another plugin from a different company and place it just above this EQ plugin, but the knobs point right. This creates a distractive view and is totally insane. Why do companies do this?

3D knobs with a perspective are very annoying, very distracting and in some rare cases 3D rendering of GUI elements and rendering of fake angled perspectives gives some people a headache. Please stop this practice. If you want scheuomorphic knob design keep to the flat-view 2D design as implemented in your Vintage Tube mode. Thank you for considering this. I will wait and see if these 3D knobs are changed to 2D versions and will revist this plugin then.
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #86
Gear Head
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by menzi11 ➡️
Hello!

Thank you very much for your question, in fact I believe this is also the doubt of many people.

(The following viewpoints just my own personal opinion, I will not mention our products. The referring to other companies or organizations below is only for discussing about tech., no marketing things)

It's down to -150dB indeed, actually when I tested all these filter structs, I put the measurements down to -300dB.

It's not because anyone here have super power to hear -300 dB hahah, I think only god can.

The reason is: what we called "round-noise" is not just "noise". We call it "noise" because it is treated as noise so we can deal with it in math or in plots. It has another name called "round-error". Noises may not a big thing, but I think errors does. At least for pro-audio.

Here's a page about how many details we can find in a very simple biquad filter implement:
https://www.ranecommercial.com/legacy/note157.html

In this page, we can see what will happen if we don't do anything about round-noises: noise, chaos, limit cycles & jump phenomenon........ many things.

On this page of cytomic (great company), we can see some noise performance plots of several filter structs. Although this analysis was made for different purpose, we can still refer to it:
https://cytomic.com/technical-papers

There is also the github page of iZotope (great company). They made some tests on effects by different Filter structures in Time-Varying. Although this analysis was made for different purpose, it can still be referred to:
https://github.com/iZotope/time_varying_filters_paper

In order to study about Round-noise, I consulted various materials and studied how these good old hardware digital EQs implemented. Due to the limitations of their times, they all work on very low digital precision, like 16bit, 24bit or 48bit integeral, but some of them still has excellent sound (even better than some current-days plugins, in my personal opinion). I am amazed that they use various techniques to reduce round-noise. That's the key how a EQ sound good or not.

So, in general, the first big goal of eq to have a good sound is to reduce the round-noise as much as possible. Improving the precision is the simplest and most effective way.

There' no doubt that the difference between 16bit and 32bit is huge, but the difference between 64bit and 32bit is much smaller. Instead I think for direct form 1 filters, 32bit is sometimes more "warm" and 64bit is too "clean" to me. so we can't just improve the precision higher and higher brainlessly. The key is still round-errors. After using the proper filter structure and properly handled round-errors, everything changed.

Our technical blog:
https://blog.threebodytech.com/72.html

has some audio clips about different filter structures. There are some difference. For example, in our auditory test among them, almost all listeners felt that the sound of the direct form 1 filter was "no surprise". The state-variable filter sound was more "natural".

Also in this blog I write something about how we deal with all those filter structures.

Thank you again for your question. I hope my answer can explain something here.
Thanks for the great explanation. Crave EQ and Claro are offering even cleaner measurements compare to Fabfilter as they are lower than -200db on Plugin Doctor. When these 2 EQs feature the dynamic option I believe they can achieve the same dynamic results as much as Kirchoff. Especially Keith from Crave DSP is a genius about these types of designs and I also believe they will eventually add dynamic features as they are the most requested features so far from these EQs.

I appreciate your obsession with clean filter design. Which obviously you achieved and have the potential to create even better. My humble recommendation would be something very innovative for the market. Like Sonnox did with their Claro. Anyway, I hope all your effort and design and all the hard work you put into this plugin will pay off. Congratulations.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #87
Gear Addict
 
majoraxis's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Purchased - I couldn't resist as I am starting to use this more and more and I wanted to be able to save the settings. I appreciate the science and engineering that goes into the code to reach the design goal of having a super low noise floor. Once all of that is in place then selecting the phase mode changes the sound noticeable and I think that is where the art comes into play in how they designed the Analog phase mode to sound great at all frequencies. Basically they got everything right at the same time and as some else said it is practically "perfect" and I agree.

Last edited by majoraxis; 3 weeks ago at 08:11 PM..
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #88
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by MickeUppsala ➡️
I have bought plugins from hundreds of companies and so far I have never seen Capcha been used every time you login, every time you buy something, etc. And thats the worst kind of Capcha where you have to go through three, four pictures before the system finally agrees that you are a human. 1984 comes to my mind.
1984? Best to keep the politics out of this and stick to discussing audio.
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #89
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Has anyone compared the filters to the Apulsoft apQualizr2 EQ? That has the cleanest digital filters I have heard thus far.
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #90
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
It would be nice to see in the next update
3.Lookahead for dynamics

It has aliasing compared to TDR Nova with lookahead
📝 Reply
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump