More eq type!

[Smilzo]

In each channel it will be useful to have the option to choose different type of parametric eq, from least resource usage to maximum… ie: 2 band eq (baxandall), 2 band dynamic eq, 3 band, 3 band dynamic, 4 band (with de-esser), 5 band (with de esser), 5 band dynamic with de esser.
An option to choose the slope of band should be useful ie (6-12-18-24 db) (shelf/pass).

[SQuser]

These are really nice dreams – i like them – but unfortunately I just have to point out the reality of the processing power required:
Even with the SQ it is only possible to use a maximum of 8 (!) paid 4-band DynEQs or (not and !) De-Essers.
But then you don’t have any other FX (e.g. reverb) available – really none!

And even with the Avantis, too, the use is limited to a maximum of 16 4-band DynEQs.
And if you use a maximum of 12 (2-channel) De-Essers, you don’t have any other FX available here either.
Alone the luxury of being able to use such tools (albeit the complete package) costs about twice as much with the Avantis as some CQs.

[Smilzo]

<I just have to point out the reality of the processing power required>

The current CQ18 can run 18 3-band eq, one each channel. Maybe making 2 band the default, even adding the user the null choice (zero processing power require) we could select the required eq type in the needed channel. Not all channels require equing, non all channel require de-esser.
If there is enough processing power for required eq type than it is loaded, else “warning, no more eq processing power, try to change type in unused channel”.

It is no mandatory to have eq-type maxed out in every channel (unrealistic!). I wish just some mic channel with de-esser. If keyboard and bass don’t have de-esser, it’s ok! 🙂 I just wish to control bass and drums with dynamic eq in sidechain, just adding ONE instance will be enough.

I know Avantis can do much more, but it’s another league and another sport.

Hope this clarify my suggestion…

[cornelius78]

That approach sounds like a recipe for latency and particularly coherency issues when signals are summed at LR.

[SQuser]

@Smilzo
> If there is enough processing power for required eq type than it is loaded, else “warning, no more eq processing power, try to change type in unused channel”.

But you also did read what Keith wrote here recently:
“We have no plans to assign processing on an ad hoc basis …
… it’s never going to happen on the CQ.”

Aux sends – Individual EQ/Compression per send channel

[Smilzo]

<“We have no plans to assign processing on an ad hoc basis …>

Eq is a processing that is already on each channel. It’s different that altering the architecture or the flow of data.
Different eq type is a good thing for the consumer user (few parameters by default) and for the pro (can dive deep into options), like quick channels and complete channels. Latency can be accounted for. Since eq require processing power, and since not all channel require eq, it’s up to the user to select the proper type withing available resource.

That is already processing on ad hoc basis: assign one fx to a channel (say delay), mixed in the same page with bus fx. We have only 4 fx, user assignable. So it is done, and is doable. It’s up to A&H tech.

I think a more proactive and open minded thinking will help CQ developers.

[SQuser]

Please read Keith’s post again and try to understand what he means.

[Smilzo]

If you like more eq option, add +1 to the post. If you don’t like, skip the post.

[Author]

Posts