32C %%%%%%% ????

[doncolga]

It is not hard to do at all, but it needs a lot sample analyses they have no time or man or feeling for. That's it.

Not sure if it's worth wasting energy (developing and CPU) on calculating the exact cut off frequency of a pot in a simulated analogue RC network with all the tolerance stuff and current dragging which in the end makes up Harrison's sound (and Bruce's famous channel 17). Fact is that you would set, for example, one frequency in upper mid, then change something else in lower mid or even just only the attenuation of any EQ knob and suddenly you would read a different frequency on this upper mid pot. Imagine the uproar here
I'm also not sure if it really says "%" at all, will check later today - that would be weird.
What it does is giving everyone who was screaming for it a "number" to reproduce exact settings - though now we have a bunch of options to save and recall, even share mixer settings so we wouldn't need a "number" at all.
However, following the "every other DAW has that" argument, Harrison could just create some theoretical numbers over the range of the pot and I bet no-one would even check if this is totally accurate.

It's now on you if you want
a) use capacities to get an accurate display
b) leave it as it is and explain
c) just cheat and distribute frequency values evenly over the knob range

Start a poll?

I don't care about how it is now, and the frequency ranges have been published already for those who need numbers for mixing.

Cheers,
MMM

That's a great point too. I tend to just point the center to where I want it, based on the printout around the button itself, then adjust the boost or cut, and don't really look at the number. But when I do look at it, the % feels odd...maybe they could just take it off.

[sunrat]

I've been doing live mixing and a bit of studio work for over 40 years. On analog consoles we could turn a knob until it sounded like the desired frequency and adjust required level as the knob position was just an approximate indicator. It wasn't until about 6 years ago when I started regularly using digital consoles (mainly Digico) that I actually saw numbers for frequency. The rotary encoders don't have a position (unlike in MB), they just proportionally adjust whatever current value exists so a visual readout is useful. MB knobs do actually have a position so that's a good enough starting point for me.
To me, the shown values are fairly irrelevant and are close to the bottom of my list of changes Mixbus should get. Just focus on what it sounds like. I don't really care what the sound looks like!

Posted by grumpy old bloke who fondly remembers mixing on Midas XL4, Yamaha PM4000, Soundcraft Series 4 etc. and still doesn't think digital sound quality has improved over these. Now get off my lawn!

[JamieLang]

The answer is OBVIOUSLY to remove the % readout itself. Problem solved, right?

[Jostein]

I think that % is a good one if one really have to put up something there, with the fact that Mixbus32C emulates a real-world analog circuit, it will be very hard and not so realistic to do it accurately anyway. Things that come to my mind that might mess with this is:

• Wich channel strip on which console to emulate? They all probably sound a little bit different - at least if we are talking accurate values of frequencies and volumes.
  
• How about temperature emulation? The components will act differently when they are cold or hot.
  
• Every knob have an impact on the other ones. The frequencies overlap and the measured value of one knob might change when you dial another one.
  
• How about the age of the components?
  

I agree with the previous post that says: just get rid of it. It is, after all, an emulation of an analog EQ section in a channel strip.

[jonetsu]

It's a matter of consistency. If you're going to print numbers around a knob, assume them and show them in the track's status bar.

Otherwise looking at my stereo tube preamp and stereo tube compressor, there are no numbers evenly spaced around the knobs. Only at the beginning of the travel, middle and end. Or on both sides of the middle point. But then the turning of the knob does mean something to the analog circuit behind it.

Same goes for a well-known channel plugin:

   

So then what happens when the Hi Mid KHz knob is turned ? The VST transmits to the DAW a series of values scaled from the minimal value displayed on screen to the maximal value. The value shown on the UI in the middle of the knob is the current value set by the knob. No fussing around with that. The print something on the UI, they transmit it. And they sell A LOT of those plugins.

Mixbus32C does not need to send VST values obviously. So this is used for illustration purposes of the behaviour of an analog emulation and the actual values used. But Mixbus32C transmits values to the user.

Again, you show something on the screen around the knobs in Mixbus32C - even ever so faintly - at least show the same in the track's status bar.

(Note: I haven't bought the channel strip, just demoing it to write this. There's no absolute need to have this when using Mixbus32C and if I do to give a special tone for certain instruments, I have the OvertoneDSP SSL emulations)

[Tassy]

I think is getting overdiscussed. The quote from Doncolga covers the best what it is about
"I don't really look at the number. But when I do look at it, the % feels odd..."

That's what bothered me, somehow made a strange feeling and not-understanding the idea, % is a linear thing, the EQ scale is logarithmic, how can they refer to each other to give any idea at all, and in my brain there accumulated a lot question marks (?????) What...? but no more
After all using eq I generally close my eyes, but opening them started the thread
Now everything is all right again.
Tassy

[jonetsu]

Some other users mentioned (not in this thread) to not be able to see the numbers clearly.

Aw, let's forget about all that and use our ears. You started the thread with:

"I am feeling the "clever, professional" answer coming: "use your ears"
Please save me from this foolishness! I use my ears!"

Let's go back to full foolishness. 100%

Aw, let's make it 110%

And let's do a Spinal Tap cover.

[sunrat]

Aw, let's make it 110%
And let's do a Spinal Tap cover.

If you make it 110%, someone else will want 120%.

[madmaxmiller]

Aw, let's make it 110%
And let's do a Spinal Tap cover.

If you make it 110%, someone else will want 120%.

That pretty much sums it up. But I'm happy to work with "normal" engineers.
MMM

[jonetsu]

The thread has started with Tassy:

Who the evil can tell in 32C the 52% in midrange what Hz it is? Heee? I am feeling the "clever, professional" answer coming: "use your ears" Please save me from this foolishness! I use my ears!

And Tassy concluded with:

That's what bothered me, somehow made a strange feeling and not-understanding the idea, % is a linear thing, the EQ scale is logarithmic, how can they refer to each other to give any idea at all, and in my brain there accumulated a lot question marks (?????) What...? but no moreSmile After all using eq I generally close my eyes, but opening them started the threadSmile Now everything is all right again.

It really called for making a joke about percentages. Spinal Tap style.

I wonder how prospect customers are seeing this 'pseudo-issue' when evaluating the product, along with other aspects.