ZynewaveAlso, I’ve extended the zPEQ with a feature that allows Podium to reduce the plugin CPU usage when the plugin is processing silence. This feature is not part of the standard VST spec, and so will not be available when the z plugins are used in other hosts.
ZynewaveI agree with Suges regarding making the z series dedicated to Podium.
As I hinted at earlier, the z plugins will not offer revolutionary signal processing. Their main advantage will be the editor integration in Podium. Using the plugins in other hosts will not make the plugins much more appealing than other freeware alternatives. Allowing the plugins to work as a no-editor plugin in other hosts enables you to transport Podium projects that uses the z plugins to other hosts, if that is required in a studio situation.
Some z plugins may be made available only to licensed Podium users.
ZynewaveI think 5 bands is fine for what it is – a sequencer based EQ this will come (free?) with Podium. If people want better, then they should buy a third party plug
After some consideration, I think I’ll agree with you. The focus with the z plugins is to keep the complexity and number of parameters to a minimum. At some point I may make an advanced series (xPEQ?) which would include more bands, separate channel adjustments with band/channel locks, multi-channel support etc.
ZynewaveIt’s perfectly alright for the parametric bands to have no slope control (as long as they’re set to a musically useful slope), but the two shelves should definitely have adjustable slopes.
Only the low and high pass types have a fixed slope. The shelving types have a slope parameter from 3 to 12 dB/octave. The Parametric, band pass and band reject have a bandwidth parameter from 0.01 to 10 octaves.
– Number of bands
zPEQ would be useful for more things if it had more bands. I think 5 or 6 parametrics (plus the 2 shelves) would be the right number. Especially useful for EQing anything “live”…vocals, acoustic guitars, mic’d amps, mic’d drums, real room verb, anything like that. In my experience only synthesizers and VERY VERY well-recorded live stuff in very expensive studios are already EQd so well that you can just throw on a couple parametrics and a low-pass and you’re done. With vox especially I’m doing all kinds of notches and bells.
Interesting. I limited it to 5 bands because I was concerned with how much space it takes up in the track inspector. I’ll try to add two extra bands, and then make the editor in the track inspector hide the parameters for bands that are not enabled.
ZynewaveWill the LP/BP/HP filters have selectable dB/oct slopes and resonance?
Resonance can be adjusted, but dB/oct is fixed. As a workaround you can place an additional band with the same type and at the same frequency to create steeper slopes. I have made it possible to add further band types in future updates of the plugin.
ZynewaveThe basic plugin functionality is done. I’m working on optimization and also the editor needs a few extra touches. Hopefully I can release it in a couple of days.
ZynewaveOk, the band type parameter stays. I have settled on the following types:
Low shelf
High shelf
Parametric
Band reject
Band pass
Low pass
High pass
The shelving types use Q as a slope in dB/octave.
The parametric and band reject/pass types use Q as bandwidth in octaves.
The low/high pass types use Q as a resonance value.
I’m having fun with this 🙂
ZynewaveYou said they will not offer advanced processing. What do you mean exactly as they already will be 2.4 compliant with 64 bit processing or is that just the EQ?
What I mean is that the plugins will be based on existing DSP technology. I will not spend time on trying to invent new stuff, until I have the bases covered with the z plugins. Currently the zPEQ is based on the public domain RBJ cookbook filters, which I suspect is used in a large number of freeware and commercial plugins.
ZynewaveI’ve posted a preview of the first Zynewave plugin:
ZynewaveI may decide to change it so that playback render always starts at punch in. It probably is ok to leave it up to the user to ensure that the bounce render start point is not cutting previous sound.
ZynewaveWhen doing an offline bounce it seems that the regardless of the section you are bouncing it plays the complete track
It plays from beginning but should stop at the punch out position (if enabled). The reason is that there may be stuff played in the preceding parts that are still sounding in the section you bounce. It could be a reverb tail or synth notes that are still in the release phase. So I chose to always let the bounce render play from the beginning but only start recording at the punch in position.
ZynewaveThanks for the encouraging comment. I’m glad you are enjoying it.
ZynewaveZynewaveZynewave