Here’s the latest EQ called the Silverhawk (previously known as the excalibur). It’s a bit of a prototype right now but it works well, with a cleaner sound than anything VSTplug has to date.
The real power of the Silverhawk is that it provides both mono and stereo mastering in one equalizer. The release version will include a revolutionary mono to stereo conversion designed by a master in the 1950’s which was re-interpreted by a friend of VSTplug‘s, Spogg from . .com
I think it’s very important to understand the application of both mono and stereo; especially in the case of producing professional music. There are many products; especially those that say that they have reproduced the studios which the Beatles used, the studios which the Rolling stones have used, reverbs etc.
But, they do not have a crossfader, there is no mixer which allows you to increase or decrease the levels of both stereo and mono. How is it they say they are providing a faithful re-creation of an old studio when most of the old Beatles tracks were in Mono. But, arguably their stuff was remixed from mono to stereo with the advent of stereo becoming a popular notion. But that’s where the production team shone, by changing mono to stereo they created new effects never thought of; and it was those effects that became the mainstays of the recording industry.
It was after that they had switched over to stereo that they realized that the inclusion of both is better. Like, for instance how the effect which Silverhawk includes that makes mono vocals sound stereo is the very same technology that studios in the same time of the beatles used!
here is a Youtube video speaking of Mono Vs. Stereo. IMO, the person speaking is maybe a little too pro-stereo but it’s fair at least to hear him saying that the original Beatles albums were in mono and then re-mixed to stereo after the fact.
So, I guess the other point to make is that many of the Beatles tracks were first Mono and then made into stereo. And let’s not forget, the majority of Microphones still used in this day and age are outputting a mono signal. Eitherway, you will still need software that performs the same tasks that the Silverhawk can perform.
Here’s a youtube video speaking of the conversion of mono tracks to stereo and how the studio equipment was used.
try the demo:
Download server 1:
This demo works quite well but it’s missing some labels and frills but for all intensive purposes works well. Unlike other manufacturers; I don’t ask that people use My demos for only free and non-commercial stuff; use it for whatever. It’s an inconvenience, convenience is worth 10 dollars IMO.
EDIT: I just wanted to add, frankly; people who keep trying to push stereo on everyone are in a delusional state. And the reason for that is most every microphone, synth, most every pickup, most every phone and most every portable speaker is using mono. Most keyboards, guitars are still using mono. I, personally have a Roland Boss BR-80 compressor microphone in My storage somewhere, it had been a positive experience; but that was one of those rare exceptions. It’s rare that you ever have access to a stereo Microphone.
Mono microphones are still used to “create” the effect of mono. With this in mind, I’d like people to stop being so opinionated about mono in the way of music. It’s in-escape-able. Mono is the main signal, and stereo is merely the “effect” of depth. Stereo is an illusion that we use to create depth, yet it is depth that we add to mono, it should likely only take up 10 to 15,20% of the entire signal; that should frankly be mixing law. It is frankly sacrilege to try and suggest that a pro studio would be using solely stereo. It’s the most ridiculous thing ever uttered by any producer or any enthusiast who ever lived and I want it to stop please.
The above videos talk about how they made mono recordings into stereo, but the real question is; when were the recordings ever recorded in stereo? You still have to combine two mono signals to make stereo. And furthermore, the most popular method of that era used mid side which is also a mono derivative.
– King Ozami Zim AKA LE Attol
So, the Silverhawk will be well suited to vocal mastering, track mastering, and especially guitar / bass mastering. Though this EQ would be well suited to acoustic guitar, there is an upcoming EQ which will be released soon called the Chieftan EQ. The Chieftan EQ is probably one of the best EQ’s ever concieved to master acoustic guitar.
A great update to the Silverhawk furthermore will be an automatic plosive removal tool and furthermore a peak softener. The brunt of this 40 band EQ and it’s innards shall cost the end user roughly 3% CPU. However, users of the reaper DAW might only see 2% CPU usage (due to its efficient design).
It’s hard to believe that there will be a better sounding mastering solution but My plans for this admittedly had been larger than a CPU can handle. As You might expect I will attempt to update this plug-in as many times as required until I get it using 1% less CPU. I’d be comfortable with it using 2-3%.
It does an awful lot for so many filters so I think end users shall be very pleased.
Obviously, de-essing is something you may wish to add before the fact, I’d felt it was foolish to add a de-esser into this product; it would only serve to exhaust the CPU’s of the end user; when instead they could use the very efficient william de-esser.
Where-as, in contrast the plosive removal and peak softener is something that becomes important for mastering any sound and highly relevant to any mixing situation. A transparent peak limiter may be added as an option with ceiling settings for both the stereo and mono modes.
This should allow you to avoid feedback and clipping in most circumstances. I guess in simplistic terms, in the terms of colour; you could compare the sound of this equalizer to a very well made classic condenser microphone made famous by singers in the 1930’s and 1940’s; usually being chrome and sounding nice.
Here’s an instructional video explaining some of the innerworkings of silverhawk.
This prototype has the new proposed ceiling and floor method. However, threshold will be gauged so as to avoid excessive gain change. I would have liked auto makeup will be employed so as to ensure that volume stays at unity, but I’m not sure if it is possible; but will try to add it as a feature.
More news about the Silverhawk soon, it will be 10 dollars US and sold on the marketplace, as well as the VSTplug site.
Here’s a dry vocal mastered to a rough level using this EQ, this prototype did not have the peak softening, the transparent limiter and furthermore ceiling selection, neither does it have automatic plosive removal (which is all extremely apparent):
This vocal is mixed to a sandbox level, though the sung vocal I feel will need to be re-bounced to a stem file, it was processed twice and I feel it needs less sonic treatment, it’s too quiet.
So, I have been updating the silverhawk and it is almost done. It’s the summation of My audio engineering self-education and it can meet the standards of Most studios.
That’s very acceptable for most and I wanted to make a very in-depth video for beginners. One that isn’t rushed and explains all of the challenges faced by those who are fresh to the business, but also those who are sick of guessing and maybe have some skills and want to know exactly why things sound the way they do.
You’ll be very pleased, there will be graphs and impressive animated drawings as well as referenced facts and figures that make it all make sense.
But, in light of the actual progress of Silverhawk here is some images of the newer version:
in this second image, you can see some arrows and numbers.
I wanted to point out the programming challenge. I’d added the buttons of course so you can choose ceiling floor, but what if, let’s say that you employ automation?
To that end I ensured that it would detect if the signal was close to that button type and furthermore it will detect if it is automating automatically.
Originally. the idea was too complex but I’ve been able to get the automation drain down on the CPU. In fact it adds no CPU use % while automating which is pretty rare. Instead of using a detection algorithm , I merely multiplied the 0-1 float type output by 1000 and then used a string length detector and if it is more than characters, it assumes that it is automating, pretty simple really.
Anyways, thanks reader. Wait till you see the final product 🙂
So, I was thinking about it; and I realized if I were to make this mastering solution without adding the recreation of both distance and pan, I’d be letting the pros in studios down. This software is the ideal medium for such professionals, so I owe it to those people to add technologies that I have already created to make this idea a reality. The only thing I have never figured out however, is to simulate a sound being higher or lower. But, I created a unique technology that allows the producer to perfectly re-create pan with a new filtering mechanism never before employed.
In fact, there will be two states of pan, one in the back and one the forefront. So, that means that mixing engineers can choose the exact location and angle of the instruments path of delivery so as to better emulate a perfect studio recording.
And that technology surrounds the strength of the Legendre filter. The Legendre filter is a strange filter type that has a weird cutoff, it ripples downwards in a strange way and cuts off the treble. I thought it was so extra-ordinary because I’d realized that it could be used to re-create distance.
the original plugin that I created that effect is here:
It’s called King OZ distance and I used the Legendre LP filter to re-create this perfect style of pan and furthermore distance. I’ll do much the same with the silverhawk.
Here’s an image showing how the Legendre filter works:
And here’s some video of the legendre affecting white noise:
As you can see it has a very natural affect and curve. You notice how it resonates on the fly? It undulates and changes as time progresses unlike any filter I have used and it is that action of the Legendre, that in My opinion makes it ideal for recreating the physical phenomenon of rarefaction and compression breakpoints.
So, like a Chebyshev filter, the filter response of the higher octaves is irregular, but the Legendre does it in a slow cumulative way. A way that is almost exactly like the inclusion of the phenomenon of distance upon any sound. This means that instead of using (only) pan law to left and right. I’ll be using a filter that better and more perfectly re-creates the phenomenon.
With that said, it will also be possible to use a 3D image to place the location of the two signals with distances and dimensions. I’ll try and make sure that the distances can be relative to orchestras, studios and specific churches and concert halls of note. The only thing to take into account is that it will be up to the user to decide the diminishing point. In other words, 100 pan left or right causes there to be no sound to the opposing side. So, based upon this same measure; the distance setting uses a 0-1 grade that mirrors the exact diminishing grade of pan. 1 will be so far away that it cannot be heard, 0 will be so close that the volume is at 100%.
The reason I have decided to use this square 0-1 grid system is because it can be later given actual dimension in either imperial or metric grades.
If it was that I did not use a 0-1 grade that of course would be impossible, and with the right testing gear; it’s obviously not impossible to make that transition.
this plugin will not include reverb but perhaps in the future I can make another that takes these calculations into effect and consideration. Frankly I’d need a reverb expert to make that a reality. A hard thing to muster, but we’ll see.
Here’s a youtube video showing the new meters:
So, that’s a good look. And the peak and average selector at the bottom of the meters allows you to see the difference between the average and the peaks in LU (Loudness Units), the world standard in decibel metering.
I decided to separate the two, so that if one one was running the other was not to save CPU. I hope that isn’t too inconvenient. The new meters actually add no CPU use because I heavily optimized them. I think maybe something like 0.05% or something based upon what I am seeing.
The Legendre filters, to better describe this effect of pan and distance are low passes that start to reduce higher frequency at about 4KHz. And that is ideal because that’s the highest frequency that you can still hear at a distance more often than not. This means that in the case of left right it mixes the signal filtered by the Legendre in with the dry signal that is then reduced in volume more effectively. After all, you’d still hear the sound to the right, there’d just be a bit less treble, right? Because the treble would be emulating from the left for the sake of argument.
I try to ensure that the difference that the Legendre filter creates is at about the same db levels of pan so that there really is no measurement of distance required. If I can keep pan at 0 – 50% it’s a simple matter of gauging both left and right and distance. I’ll use that exact same pan measurement of percentile for distance as well so that the two measurements are squared.
I really would prefer a perfect system that uses exact dimensions and decibels (LU) but I am limited by the inability to have a real testing environment to test thresholds of imperceptibility.
If I had such a testing environment, it could be conceivably done. But I would have to provide a video log of exactly how I had recorded the telemetry and logistics so as to be scientifically credible.
thanks for reading about the up and coming Silverhawk and it’s My hope that people will chime in, and I would really appreciate if a fellow audio engineer can chime in perhaps with any useful audio engineering resources that they feel might be handy.
Here’s a clip of that GUI controller in action:
after seeing it, it should become quite clear that the controller will be simple and precise.
So, here’s the new range finder layout:
It looks a lot like a Star Trek TNG GUI. It’s pretty great. I ‘ll incorporate math so that an individual can figure out the 0-1 degrade ratio.
That would be done with a db meter. You’d have to measure from the center of the room and to the sides, and then from the back. You’d have to square it and then your rate of range and hearing will be perfect.
It’s really the only way it can be done; but I’ll include some presets, like dimensions of rooms.
I have a friend who might be able to measure db’s for Me. I’ll ask him.
The point of this layout setting is to allow the user to-recreate a studio where they can choose the type of signal pickup and placing. Such a thing can even practically apply to orchestral too, but perhaps there needs to be more optimization to make that wholly plausible. It would definitely be hard on the processor, but doable.
So, here’s an exciting asset of the new layout manager. And that is angles. I’ll eventually be making 0-360 degrees sop that the measurement is a tactile affair. In other words, producers trying to merge in another singer let’s say or another instrument virtually into a floor plan of a recording already taken will be able to seamlessly.
Update 3:27P 03/10/2020
Here’s more and some exciting new material to look at:
So now I have the degrees working perfectly and that means distance and the measurement becomes possible. Furthermore, so does it mean that using DBSPL math to figure out spatial mechanics in the way of audio is possible too.
TTYS, King OZ
I wanted initially to have a design that appeared physical. Like as if it is metal and could actually be something real. But when I decided to add different modes, including a parametric mode (which will save 2% CPU per signal [1&2]).
Here’s a video showing the difference between the design as it was and the design as it is now:
So, that is pretty cool I thought, and because it has a frame around it; it looks as if the black area is a screen like a phone has.
So, here’s a preview of what I have in mind for the parametric mode, it’s a mockup I made a few days ago:
I hope this seems adequate, I’ll be very pleased especially because I have been able to bring the CPU usage down by a pecentile (1%). I’m also fairly certain that after tall of the optimizations have been added there might even be a full 1.5% CPU usage taken off the top.
I’d also like to announce that the limiter and averager will now be options, that can optionally be de-activated.