improved equalizer with monitor

[musicale]

You've got it! The Starting out and the Professional.
Then it is a matter of marketing vision. It's up to Richard.

I've been there a little longer than you, but quantity is not quality anyway.
I started when I was 5 and at 10 with Fernando Germani and Santana's cousin which was studying Pipe Organ in Rome with him.
Then with Adolph Sandole (John Coltrane's second teacher) etc. I am not new to this.
I have a different outlook at things and I enjoy music without disregarding anyone's needs no matter how silly or useless they are to me, unless you are the one developing, then you can draw the line.

Good night my friend.
Keep the good work. As a tech solution support you are quite good.
You keep an eye on basics and simplicity. Not a common thing in today's super features software world.

[mattox]

I'll just pop in and say: In every masterclass video I've seen on youtube or in magazines, producers are using graphical EQ's to see where sounds are and to help make sure they are all where they end to be.

Ears are of course the best way to do it; but there is nothing wrong with a visual guide. My fav is the FabFilter Pro-Q.

For the mixer volumes maybe its a better idea to do what gol has done with FL (optional setting) and most trackers do... show the waveform rather than volume levels in the mixer?

[V/M]

an EQ is used to boost and cut frequencies.
a spectrum analyzer provides a visual representation of the levels of frequencies.
Pro-Q layers these two in a single plugin.

[Christophe]

i hesitate to participate to the debate but an eq with the visual representation will eat more cpu that something without
i plug a limiter and a spectrum analyzer in the master channel
when i need it, i solo the track to work on and look to the spectrum

[musicale]

i hesitate to participate to the debate but an eq with the visual representation will eat more cpu that something without
i plug a limiter and a spectrum analyzer in the master channel
when i need it, i solo the track to work on and look to the spectrum

Yes, that's the way to go.

[Mark]

+1

[DaZoid]

I would not ask for fancy stuff but visualization is the key to enter and establish your product in the pro market.

Really? So sound quality doesn't matter? Strange, I would have thought it was probably important.

Bones, you are a master of taking things out of their context which leads your argumentation line into a big black hole of nothing. As I cleary stated out Orion does provide a high sound quality and great generators... You just use the sound quality argument to argue against me. That's completely useless. Man! Read the comments of people a bit more carefully...

Visualization is a key as well as sound quality is a minimum requirement.

[DaZoid]

i hesitate to participate to the debate but an eq with the visual representation will eat more cpu that something without
i plug a limiter and a spectrum analyzer in the master channel
when i need it, i solo the track to work on and look to the spectrum

Yes, that's the way to go.

One shoul not be limited by the fact, that one's machine can't handle a better way of working.

[Christophe]

i will never bought redline eq because it adds a lot of latency and it is a cpu hog, so how to use it on a lot of channel at the same time ?
we have limitation and we have to deal with !

[bones]

I'll just pop in and say: In every masterclass video I've seen on youtube or in magazines, producers are using graphical EQ's to see where sounds are and to help make sure they are all where they end to be.

Really? And exactly which "graphical EQs" are those? I've never seen one that gives you realtime visual feedback on what the EQ is doing. I've seen [and own] EQs that show you the input signal but they always leave it to your ears to hear what the EQ is doing to the sound.

Visualization is a key as well as sound quality is a minimum requirement.

Really? So how did anyone ever manage to get anything done 5 years ago, when those kinds of things didn't exist? The first time I went into a studio in 1985, the guy had to send the master tapes away to be run through a spectrum analyser and get a typed report back. Obviously it was a cheap studio but can you guess what the result was? Near-perfect, just using krap equipment and a great pair of ears.
In any event, it has been firmly established that there are several plugins that can do this, so of it is such an essential tool, just go and get one of them. There is no reason at all why Orion needs to cater to every little thing that you might need. If it did, it could be closed like Reason and a hundred times more stable. As it stands, it covers the foundations of any good recording - great sound quality - and leaves it to the individual to decide how to build upon it from there.

[musicale]

I'm calling Verizon to cancel my account.
I'll use pigeons.

[DMuzik]

Really? And exactly which "graphical EQs" are those? I've never seen one that gives you realtime visual feedback on what the EQ is doing. I've seen [and own] EQs that show you the input signal but they always leave it to your ears to hear what the EQ is doing to the sound.

IIEQPro does.

[Audinomaly]

Imho vizualisation can be a great aid, if it does not make you rely less on your ears.

Definitely.

It's also indispensable for taming bass frequencies when your monitoring equipment is, shall we say, sub-optimal.

[bones]

No it is not, or it shouldn't be. Even my tiny Audioengine 2's produce bass down to the limit of hearing. It might be hard to pick in a mix but that's why we have Mute/Solo.