Gullfoss dynamic EQ

[kthulhutu]

Has anyone given this a try? It's primarily aimed at producers but I've heard surprisingly good results using this for my library.
It's a live algorithmic EQ (not ML nonsense) built around two adjustable parameters Recover and Tame. Recover attempts to retrieve detail by increasing the audibility of masked frequencies, Tame is close to the opposite and attempts to reduce frequencies that stick out too much. Bias lets you control the ratio between the two and you have brightness as a generic treble control and boost which can compress or expand the dynamics.

The effect isn't extreme of course, and if you try to make it so (by pumping up the parameters) you will make things sound a lot worse.
Right now the best effect seems to be setting Recover between 0-70% and not touching Tame. Also, use the Master version as it is the 'best' version designed for non-latency and CPU critical situations.
Some people might like boost but I think this is better done via regular EQ, and increasing loudness is something you hopefully never want for a mastered track.

Subjectively I'd describe the effect as what a source upgrade is alleged to be, a subtle enhancement of detail and timbre without damaging the overall tonal balance of a track. I came into this a skeptic but I think I'll be sticking with Gullfoss for the future.

Still, I don't think this will be for everyone. Definitely make full use of the free trial period and don't pay until you've tested it. Keep my advice about not pumping the parameters like crazy and expecting drastic improvement in mind.

 

[rwortman]

It’s a plug in for a DAW. You have to play some tricks to get it working in music playing software. Most people in here want to hear what got cemented in place after mastering so get ready for “artist’s intent” lectures.

 

[Moderate Dionysianism]

It’s a plug in for a DAW. You have to play some tricks to get it working in music playing software. Most people in here want to hear what got cemented in place after mastering so get ready for “artist’s intent” lectures.

Sounds like a super broad, unfounded assumption. From what I've seen, basically every headphone/speaker review here brings up the topic of EQ, badly produced records get bashed, and members keep wishing for gear to offer more DSP capabilities. So really not sure where you picked up this vibe.

As for the tool itself, it should be easy to integrate it into Foobar2000 using the VST Adapter Plugin.* The principle of operation seems almost close to my personal holy grail, i.e. an adaptive EQ that takes not only the FR of the transducer, but also the signal itself into consideration. If this could equalize to headphone targets but considering the signal parameters, then I'd be sold

Will give it a try nonetheless, I'm curious how it will work with a convolver in the same DSP chain. Thanks for sharing, @kthulhutu and welcome to the forum!



*EDIT: it's 64-bit only, won't work with Foobar

 

[threni]

Has anyone given this a try? It's primarily aimed at producers but I've heard surprisingly good results using this for my library.
It's a live algorithmic EQ (not ML nonsense) built around two adjustable parameters Recover and Tame. Recover attempts to retrieve detail by increasing the audibility of masked frequencies, Tame is close to the opposite and attempts to reduce frequencies that stick out too much. Bias lets you control the ratio between the two and you have brightness as a generic treble control and boost which can compress or expand the dynamics.

The effect isn't extreme of course, and if you try to make it so (by pumping up the parameters) you will make things sound a lot worse.
Right now the best effect seems to be setting Recover between 0-70% and not touching Tame. Also, use the Master version as it is the 'best' version designed for non-latency and CPU critical situations.
Some people might like boost but I think this is better done via regular EQ, and increasing loudness is something you hopefully never want for a mastered track.

Subjectively I'd describe the effect as what a source upgrade is alleged to be, a subtle enhancement of detail and timbre without damaging the overall tonal balance of a track. I came into this a skeptic but I think I'll be sticking with Gullfoss for the future.

Still, I don't think this will be for everyone. Definitely make full use of the free trial period and don't pay until you've tested it. Keep my advice about not pumping the parameters like crazy and expecting drastic improvement in mind.

Maybe it would be instructive to share a few before/after flac files so we can hear what it sounds like?

 

[rwortman]

members keep wishing for gear to offer more DSP capabilities. So really not sure where you picked up this vibe.

Most if those discussions are about room correction, not fixing recordings. I got this vibe from defending the use of ”EQ to taste” against the “artist’s intent“ contingent.

 

[Keened]

Most if those discussions are about room correction, not fixing recordings. I got this vibe from defending the use of ”EQ to taste” against the “artist’s intent“ contingent.

The issue is a bit more nuanced then that; it's part of the death of the author debate that can never be settled. The shift of perspective in what 'ownership' of media means (i.e. does creation of something generate it's value or it's utility/usage regarding the user?) means there can never be a singular answer.

So you get a lot of people talking past each other because they are trying to use a valid perspective to deny another valid perspective.

But beyond that, there is a distinction to be made between alterations made to try to stay true what the creator intended and alterations made purely to suit personal taste. The acid test for these two changes is whether the change is trying to correct for a proven deficiency in either sound reproduction in general or in how it's perceived.

We don't hear all frequencies at the same sensitivity, so EQ'ing to adjust for a lower overall DB level while maintaining the same effective perceived ratios is clearly trying to stay true to the source, it's just recognizing that media has to be played in the world and the world is imperfect.

 

[kthulhutu]

Sounds like a super broad, unfounded assumption. From what I've seen, basically every headphone/speaker review here brings up the topic of EQ, badly produced records get bashed, and members keep wishing for gear to offer more DSP capabilities. So really not sure where you picked up this vibe.

As for the tool itself, it should be easy to integrate it into Foobar2000 using the VST Adapter Plugin.* The principle of operation seems almost close to my personal holy grail, i.e. an adaptive EQ that takes not only the FR of the transducer, but also the signal itself into consideration. If this could equalize to headphone targets but considering the signal parameters, then I'd be sold

Will give it a try nonetheless, I'm curious how it will work with a convolver in the same DSP chain. Thanks for sharing, @kthulhutu and welcome to the forum!



*EDIT: it's 64-bit only, won't work with Foobar

Yeah, only downside to this is it takes some fiddling around to get working. My solution was to use a virtual audio cable to route sound through Reaper. I had no luck getting it to work with Equalizer APO or Foobar directly.

Having a DAW at your beck and call does have neat benefits. I've been using Fabfilter for EQ and it is much more powerful than anything else I've used.

 

[dasdoing]

I played with it over many days, not on finished songs though.
two things I recomend:
1) less is more
2) use the live version to leave the transients untouched

 

[kthulhutu]

I played with it over many days, not on finished songs though.
two things I recomend:
1) less is more
2) use the live version to leave the transients untouched

Live version also introduces considerably less latency. I'll need to A/B between them to decide which I like better though.

 

[dasdoing]

Live version also introduces considerably less latency. I'll need to A/B between them to decide which I like better though.

it probably depends on the type of music. more percussive music seams to be shoked by the non live version.