Wow, you won't find that kind of honesty in the commercial world :-) I appreciate the warning. I've actually used it as an EQ for non-realtime stuff with decent results, but I haven't decided whether it's what I really want for this purpose. I haven't used Jamin at all and I've only used Steve's stuff just a little. The thing I liked about Freqtweak was resolution. With 256 bands using only the boost and cut modules I had the resolution I needed to make surgical changes. What I'd really like that I haven't seen yet is a 31-band 1/3-octave EQ that works something like Freqtweak with the spectral analysis and drawing curves and whatnot. I haven't had a problem with it yet. I did some tests with a microphone and had my Jack latency set to @5ms and I didn't see any noticable Freqtweak latency. I was using the boost and cut modules only with the lowest max delay setting (not really sure what that's for yet) and 256 bands of EQ and I couldn't tell a noticable latency. I don't think the people I play with/mix for would either. My computer is an AthlonXP 2400 so it's relatively fast. I can't imagine that :-) I'm not sure I'm ready to introduce this idea yet, (certainly not in this thread) but I've been thinking about building a system that will be stable and reliable enough to be a PA processor -- sort of like a Driverack or something. I was thinking about using the processing engine of Freqtweak and writing a GUI (or not) to control it that would run separately. I envisioned the processing engine running as a service so if the computer crashed it could be brought back up without having to manually start and set everything and if the GUI crashed the engine would still be running. I even thought about the possibility of running the "controller" on a separate computer so the processing box could be just a text-based Linux with nothing but audio on it. Eventually I'd like this to lead to a real-time live mixing environment where my "console" was just a control surface. The routing and processing options available in the digital domain are just too cool to pass up. I've been taking a hard look at Freqtweak, both to learn the environment and to see if it does some of what I'm looking for. I plan to look at other packages too, just haven't gotten there yet. Greg __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

I know of at least one system like this. I can't remember the name and I don't know what OS it uses, but I suspect it's Windows. A local auditorium uses it. It provides EQ, dynamics processing, delay lines, and routing. They use it for all their FOH and monitor processing, sending a delayed signal to the balcony, and several signals to the green room and other places in the building. I believe it can be controlled via LAN as well. I haven't seen the user interface, but I have seen the rack. There may be other hardware involved besides just the computer. I hope to not wait a few years b/c I need EQ's and compressors right now and can't afford to go buy them and don't have the space to store them. So I'll probably be throwing some code out over the next few months and if it sucks, I'm sure everyone will let me know :-) Greg --- Benji Flaming <lau(a)solobanjo.com> wrote: __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo http://search.yahoo.com

On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 10:39:57 -0700, Greg Reddin wrote: This would be trivial to assemble with jack-rack and a few plugins, or pd if you're that way inclined. pd can be controlled over ethernet with OSC, and jack-rack with DMIDI. - Steve

On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 09:28:17 -0700, Greg Reddin wrote: You want JAMin then. You can edit its curve using a 31-band, hand draw, or using parametric style widgets. The are two spectrum views, 1/3 octave bands and continuous. The latency is probably higher than freqtweak though. If you reduce the limiter release time to its minimum it will be 5.3ms @ 48kHz. - Steve

On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 10:33:14 -0700, Greg Reddin wrote: Yes. - Steve

--- Paul Winkler <pw_lists(a)slinkp.com> wrote: Part of my problem is that I rarely work with stages that big. Our wedges are right at the mics. So even if I built a system that worked in my typical environment it might not scale up to larger sound stages, etc. And it might not be affordable enough for the small-time guy like me to get into it. I mean, even if the software is free, you could buy some good EQ's with the money you'd spend on a decent computer system. I suppose there are other advantages. Greg __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 10:48:41 -0700, Greg Reddin wrote: More or less, yes. Freqtweak and JAMin both use the FFT algorithm, its not possible* to run it without additional latency. - Steve * Actually thats not true, its just far too expensive to run it at very low latencies. halving the latency doubles the cpu cost, and it only works to a point.

You're right, just like it says in the manual :-) Sorry. Greg --- Paul Perkins <speaker-to-vegetables(a)pobox.com> wrote: __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com