New EQ10Q Release

Installation & Configuration Linux
#1

A new version of EQ10Q is released today under the name “Beta5″. This release includes some small improvements on the GUI drawings, a major bug fix and two completely new plugins: a gate (GT10Q) and a compressor (CS10Q).

Please have a look at eq10q.sourceforge.net for info and download. Feel free to comment your impressions.

#2

Thanks a lot! Already downloaded it, but haven’t tried it yet. I hope, all issues are fixed so I can use it productively.

#3

great work. I use the eq10g plugin as my main eq. Since its very similar to what you get in digital mixing desks used in the live industry, and its easy to use with alot of nice filter options.

Look forward to trying the updated version

#4

I’m liking them! I found a quirky unexpected behavior: when you turn up the make up gain the gain reduction reduces. If I’m not wrong that shouldn’t happen.

#5

Also when I change filter types there are some clicky noises. But those are not worrying. Overall these are great addition.

#6

Oh I forgot to say that I love how they are laid out. From an usability standpoint these are a piece of cake to set up and they provide the info that I need. Also they remind me of ReaEq and ReaComp from Reaper. Thank you very much!

#7

Looks good Sapista keep it!!!

#8

*up!!

#9

@lucianodato: yes, this is a bug in the gain reduction metering code, thanks for reporting it. Notice that the compressor audio processing works well even with makeup and the quirky behavior is only related with the gain reduction meter. This bug will be fixed as soon as possible, and a new beta will released because this is just a simple mistake easy to correct.

About click noise when filter parameter change, don’t worry about that. This happen because there is no interpolation implemented yet. I’m looking for the best filter coefficient interpolation method focusing on CPU usage optimization. This is the main issue in EQ10Q and is the reason why EQ10Q is still in beta stage.

#10

Happy to hear that! I’m to lazy to check the code and report the exact bug hahah. What about using a one pole filter at low frequencies to avoid clicks? That seem to be the recomended method in all dsp related sites. Looking forward to it!

#11

@lucianodato: Sorry but I’m not 100% sure of understanding what you mean with one pole filter at low frequencies. Are you proposing to interpolate the filter parameters using a simple low pass filter? Please can you explain a bit more this topic? Thanks

#12

@lucianodato:

What about using a one pole filter at low frequencies to avoid clicks?

The problem, if you do that, is that it requires re-calculating (sometimes many) coefficient values at every sample, if the smoothing / de-clicking is to be effective - that represents a siginficant CPU overhead (possibly even leading to x-runs) when you adjust the controls. I can’t speak for the EQ10Q developer, but that is the reason why I spent considerable time developing a different method, for example in the DSP for my plug-ins. If you don’t do it in some form it can lead to instability in the filter when you adjust the controls, which may make the filter either ‘lock up’ into silence or create clicks, or in some cases severe pops and bangs which are very unhealthy for speakers (and ears)
#13

*assuming the purpose of the filter is parameter interpolation - if you mean DC blocking, that won’t stop the clicks when adjusting the parameters.

#14

I was referring to DC filtering, but linuxdsp is right, as always. I found this paper that might come handy http://www.dafx.ca/proceedings/papers/p_057.pdf

#15

I’ve just uploaded a new beta named beta5.1 to provide a bug fix for the gain reduction metering. @lucianodato: please have a try and tell me if now have the expected behavior.

#16

Everything is working as expected! I will be using them in a mix for my band this week! Thank you!

#17

Hi,

Thanks for this update, you are obviously working very hard on these and it shows.

In packaging and testing these I have some questions, they appear to work great in Ardour however they do not seem to work in hosts without gtkmm support. For instance with JALV these plugins will not launch their UI unless ‘jalv.gtkmm’ is specified which is rather odd, other plugins including QT4 ones usually will work with jalv.gtk as a wrapper. A second concern is Qtractor, in my tests Qtractor 0.5.12 explodes on contact if any of these plugins are added to a track.

Are you intentionally only supporting gtkmm hosts like Ardour and Mixbus or is this a bug?

#18

A plugin which declares GtkUI (as in this case) should work in a Gtk host - surely gtkmm is or ‘should be’ immaterial as far as host applications are concerned, if the plugin is coded correctly ? That said, weren’t there some issues around gtkmm mismatch and breakage once before? I would think there’s no real need to use gtkmm - for something as simple as a plugin UI

#19

Hi

@sapista

The gtkmm issues are also discussed here: http://linuxmusicians.com/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=12118

On page 2 of that thread falkTX (of KXStudio) has provided a patch to make it compiant with GTK hosts if you are interested.

Patch is here: http://kxstudio.sourceforge.net/Paste/repo/vbr0g

#20

@GMaq I reported this on sourceforge. There are more chances that he take a look at that patch there.