**Build 135** EQ Band Module: - The new EQ Band module offers a selection of 2nd order filter types: Bell, Low Shelf, Low Cut, High Shelf, High Cut, Notch, Band Pass, All Pass. - With 3 standard parameters: Frequency, Gain and Q. *Still to be decided / open question on this module* - Whether Q should be scaled and default to 1 or should stick to 1/sqrt(2) = 0.71 - The Q parameter range TBD. Let me know if you have thoughts / requirements - I haven't decided if the All Pass type will remain or if it makes sense as a separate module. Useful for building things like phaser effects. - I can also add first-order versions of the filters. i.e. 6dB/oct slopes and no Q. But could save it for later and see if there's a demand for it add it. - Graphic display (aka filter response) of the filter. I would like to add this, but not sure if it will make the cut for the Mela 4.5 release or maybe I'll save it for later. Most of my efforts are now focused on adding polyphony to Mela, which is a big task with a lot of details that need to be thought out properly. So, I need to manage my time accordingly. Let me know your thoughts.
Nikolozi: sorry for not replying in a timely manner! Your post made me realize how little i know about the inner workings of programming an eq. But i will try to answering : -i cannot answer how the q could be scaled. Is there a place where i can read up? -the q range: maybe 0 to 8 if only meant for general eq’ing as found on some older parametric eq’s. 0 to 40 for surgical cut’s or resonance sweeps. My preference would be 40. -maybe all-pass could be a different module seeing as how the application goes beyond the question for general filtering/eq’ing tools and save time. -the same goes for first order filters. It sounds awesome but goes beyond the request for “normal” eq’ing tools. -graphics would be the icing on the cake and would make usage a whole lot easier for more visual focused sound designer but i can see how this would be a huge time sink especially with the herculean task of adding polyphony and more quality of life then immediately necessary in my opinion. Again sorry for my late reply. What are your own feelings on the questions?
Said van Hattum: > sorry for not replying in a timely manner! All good, no rush here, any feedback anytime is welcome. > i cannot answer how the q could be scaled. Is there a place where i can read up? you can check the first 2 paragraphs of this wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutoff_frequency. It explains the relationship between 1/sqrt(2) = 0.71 = -3dB and cutoff frequency. Scaling simply means that I multiply the real Q value by sqrt(2) when it's displayed to the user. So instead of the default being 0.71 it will be 1. In the end, I chose to scale it. > What are your own feelings on the questions? I agree with your views. I decided to save all-pass filter functionality for future modules. The first-order filters and graphical display were saved as future ToDos.
This is one of the few features that i feel are missing in mela4 at the moment. This would make it very easy to recreate sounds of vintage and modern synths i own and open a whole lot of possibilities for automated filters. I think you are spot on with the idea of a single filter type per module. This gives the option to keep it simple or make it as complex as the use case needs.
Just prioritising a few other tasks over this for now.
I was about to make this exact same post. I'd like a cool 3 band parametric with a graph and everything. I also think an API style graphic EQ could be fun too!
Released as part of Mela 4.5