get rid of EQ3

AdamJay · Post by **AdamJay** » Fri May 13, 2005 1:19 am

Spaiz wrote:
AdamJay wrote:
Patch wrote:How do yuo set up EQ4 to act like EQ3??? I'm still using Live 2, and haven't even got EQ3, but I cannot get EQ4 to behave like the EQ control on a DJ mixer. Does anyone have settings on EQ4 to get a nice, DJ style sound on the EQ adjustments?
just turn off 1 of the mid bands and adjust the other mid band so that it occupies the mids and give all 3 remaining bands a wider "Q"

now, use the Gain controls of those 3 remaining bands as your 3 band EQ
Adam! Please explain, what exact values on freq and Q should we choose?

alright, so you want a 3 BAND DJ EQ with EQ Four?

use bands 1,2,3 - disable 4
band 1 = 100hz
band 2 = 1 khz
band 3 = 10khz

put the same Q amount of 0.36 on each band

now assign the GAINs of bands 1,2,3 to your midi knobs (such as UC33)
and make sure the 3 bands used the Parametric frequency setting (not the shelf or pass setting)

me thinks the issue with alot of people not using EQ Four is because people just dont understand how to use it.

EQ Three seems more visually logic to them, so they naturally use it instead.
thatts too bad, i consider EQ Four to be the most powerful and versatile effect in Live. has been doing the job for me since version 1.5

AdamJay · Post by **AdamJay** » Fri May 13, 2005 1:30 am

Livewire wrote: burn your brain cells on either making music, helping others on this forum, or coming up with great ideas for the next version of Live, not complaining

I thought i was pretty playful about my feature "removal", but i guess some people missed the point, so i'll start with responding to you.

i've made plenty of music, and i've helped plenty of people on this forum.
i've contributed to the wishlist a good bit too..
but still, i'm not allowed to criticize an effect that does nothing but chew cpu for people who can't figure out how to use a simple parametric equalizer?

yea okay. i'm complaining , yer right.

This is a FORUM, not a fanboy hang out.

I can't believe i am even responding to someone in a thread about EQ3, who doesn't even know how to kill frequences with an EQ4. Its like arguing with a catholic about the merits of buddhism.

You want to use an effect that requires 3x more resources and at the same time isn't as sonically transparent as the one listed just below it in the devices browser? Be my guest!, i was just trying to help. It didn't seem like rocket science to me, but rather common sense. But i guess its only common sense for those of us who actually know how to use an effect.

excuse my Detroit, but you asked for it.

AdamJay · Post by **AdamJay** » Fri May 13, 2005 1:38 am

Chris Cowie wrote: Totally Agree with you. I have always wanted to say this on the forum but didnt in case people thought I was moaning or something.

yep GET RID OF IT or change the way it works.

It would seem as though your apprehension was just... i feel like i shot the Pope.

Livewire · Post by **Livewire** » Fri May 13, 2005 1:42 am

common sense would be not to use the EQ3 if you dont like it, not beg Ableton to remove it. I use both. Thanks for teaching us how to use the EQ4 though. I'm using it more now.

AdamJay · Post by **AdamJay** » Fri May 13, 2005 2:10 am

Livewire wrote:common sense would be not to use the EQ3 if you dont like it, not beg Ableton to remove it.

i'm not saying that the removal of EQ3 is common sense.
i'm saying using EQ4 instead is.

Livewire · Post by **Livewire** » Fri May 13, 2005 2:24 pm

lol ok so I guess this thread shouldn't have been called "get rid of eq3" and it should have been in the tips and tricks section. but dont worry about it, I'm using eq4 more now thanks.

Chris J · Post by **Chris J** » Sun May 29, 2005 4:18 pm

does the term "backward compatibility "mean something to you ?

if Ableton was to listen to people not liking an effect by removing it, what a let down for people wanting to work again on tracks made on earlier versions, using that effect.

Even giving good tips on a forum doesn't make one's fancy more meaningful

anti-banausic · Post by **anti-banausic** » Sun May 29, 2005 5:35 pm

Goodness,

All AdamJay was really trying to do was make people aware of the fact that you can use EQ4 the same way if not better than EQ3.

Does anyone seem to remember everyone griping about removing Operator from the LIVE instruments/fx area? Plenty of people on that bandwagon.

I don't really think that Ableton would remove an effect, especially for the reason stated about backward compatability, but then......I haven't tried, but I can't seem to open a LIVE4 set in LIVE3 anyway, what with all the changes that have occurred.

So, stop complaining that somebody complained. That is just a vicious cycle.

AdamJay did a favor to at least me by posting this, so......

I just want to thank him for that.

Ambioun - Techno Man · Post by **Ambioun - Techno Man** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 7:10 am

Every damn time i use EQ 3 i get the cpu usage of 8 EQ 4's

EQ 3 is a HOG and if ableton is improving their effects for their next version they should take adams setting for eq4 acting like eq3 or somthing similar and put it in the eq3 interface. Its just pretty damn simple.

I think that ableton should improve the CPU usage of all of their plugins. If there was an eq4 than only used .25 of my CPU. I would be in heaven.

Oh, and ableton. Your reverb is the biggest pig of them all. Make it drop a few and make it more usable in live situations.

Never drop an ableton reverb into a track in the middle of performance... i learned that the hard way

Matthias · Post by **Matthias** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 10:01 pm

hi all,

with eq4 you can nearly do everything that can be done with eq3. but eq3 has a much more deeper steepnes up to 48dB per octave and for that you would have to chain 4 * eq4s. I like both of them.

kind regards,
matthias

Kas. · Post by **Kas.** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 1:02 am

Forgive me for pointing out something totally trivial in this technological debate, but did anybody notice eq3 aqtually *sounds* very good and quite unlike eq4 on some material?

Filter design is a science and a art by itself, many engineers keep a range of filters and eq´s around for different material so I aplaud Robert for implementing a range of options that´s both versatile and consistent with Live´s aesthetic, I for one would welcome a third eq.

Sure; if it sounds the same to you at less resources; use eq3, but it doesn´t to me.

AdamJay · Post by **AdamJay** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 1:14 am

Kas. wrote: Sure; if it sounds the same to you at less resources; use eq3, but it doesn´t to me.

i assume thats a typo and you mean EQ4?
actually, i don't think it sounds the same. I think EQ4 sounds better than EQ3.
so thats 1 reason not to use it. the 2nd is it uses more resources, the 3rd is it's not as versatile.

the point of me starting this thread was that i couldn't find a single reason to use EQ3.

treysmith · Post by **treysmith** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:00 am

Matthias wrote:hi all,

with eq4 you can nearly do everything that can be done with eq3. but eq3 has a much more deeper steepnes up to 48dB per octave and for that you would have to chain 4 * eq4s. I like both of them.

kind regards,
matthias

Says it all, really....

Kas. · Post by **Kas.** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 2:14 pm

AdamJay wrote:
Kas. wrote: Sure; if it sounds the same to you at less resources; use eq3, but it doesn´t to me.
i assume thats a typo and you mean EQ4?
actually, i don't think it sounds the same. I think EQ4 sounds better than EQ3.
so thats 1 reason not to use it. the 2nd is it uses more resources, the 3rd is it's not as versatile.

the point of me starting this thread was that i couldn't find a single reason to use EQ3.

Yes, sorry, that was a typo; I was tirered and jetlaged when I wrote that. Apologies if it caused confusion.

To get back on topic; I too enjoy parametric eq´s; my favourite eq is my D&R stereo dual parametric eq rack. Eq4 is a marvelous little device; I use it for anything from filtering to dc offset removal to livening up things a little with subtile eq modulations to straightforward eq-ing. I use eq3 more for colouring sounds, shelving and so on, especially for repressing the mid a little it sounds deeper to me.

If we only got one eq I´d loudly second you but as a second one I think it´s very pleasant to have around.

Kas. · Post by **Kas.** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 2:21 pm

treysmith wrote:
Matthias wrote:hi all,

with eq4 you can nearly do everything that can be done with eq3. but eq3 has a much more deeper steepnes up to 48dB per octave and for that you would have to chain 4 * eq4s. I like both of them.

kind regards,
matthias
Says it all, really....

Placing filters in series isn´t quite the same as one bigger one; the feedback loop is different making the phases different. If I understand the manual correctly eq3 isn´t meant to sound as transparent as possible either.