Stereo Tool

Is there a methodical approach for callibrating Equalizer by analyzing the output in a wave editor? To elaborate, I need to know how can I accurately boost highs just enough to get a natural timbre post multiband section. Vocal, bass midtones sound ok. If anyone can suggest a definitive guide to accomplish the same (rather than just listening to bunch of tracks and doing it in trial and error fashion), it would serve my purpose for the preset I'm working on. Thanks in advance!

_________________
visit website

Phoenix,

You are aware of this if I remember correctly?
http://help.stereotool.com/6.00/multiba ... iter.shtml -> measure & show median

Hans, MB compressor/limiter callibration is fine to my taste. I need to tweak only the EQ somewhat like exciter to boost high(prob last 3 bands). Unfortunately, median value indication doesnot seem like taking in to account the EQ settings, or am I missing something here? I did pour my focus over every possible details of the MB sections prior posting this thread but very little has been mentioned concerning EQ callibration, so I presumed that this exercise involves troubling my already troubled ears.
If I remember correctly, prior releasing ver 6.00 (during beta phase), forum members complained about lack of highs when compared with most hardware rig sound signatures, post which you updated most FM presets by altering EQ settings. How did you so that? Just by listening, comparing and so on? Please elaborate a little for I am staring at a completely clueless situation.

_________________
visit website

Ah. I took some tracks for which I had recordings from other devices, processed them, opened both files in an audio editor (the old and still really good CoolEdit), one per channel, and ran a frequency analysis. Then I changed the settings a bit and kept repeating this until the difference was at most about 1 dB per frequency.

Maybe you could also try feeding already processed audio into Stereo Tool, check the median output, then run 2 ST's in a row, let the first do the processing and use the 2nd to view the median output again - if they are roughtly equal you're very close. But this does not sound very easy to do.

I give up!

_________________
visit website

Well, actually all is in trail-and-error with presets.
I already tryed to emulate some already processed stuff and to tweak ST to sound like that, but always result is not good.
First, because ANY two processors are not same, processing way. If you try to emulate one you will not go anywhere! For one track it will be WIN, and for other FAIL.

I must say that all audio FM processors (but no ST) have "HIGHS". Meaning, emulate LOUD sound. Every avarage listener will tell you that THAT sound LOUD because there are "HIGHS". But we all know that HIGHS are not only sound in audio band.

Many says that some FM presets in ST have too much highs. I just wonder, whether they have heard other processors (hardware/software)

So even you've undergone the same annoying trial-and-error process? I mean I had this presumption in my mind that by doing some meticulous analysis as Hans suggested, you can arrive at a desired signature. But even what Hans suggested needs trial-and error judgement both for hearing and visual senses.
Well I gotta say coming from the days of Stereo Tool 2.x when it was all highs and no bass tool, I used to think then -will software DSPs ever get that kinda bass. Now when we can make ST to ooze out bone-crunching bass, highs feel deficient. And as you said Bojcha, that every hardware DSP has loud highs which differs based on manufacturer and callibration , so on. If you remember the recording that I uploaded using which Hans created O'84 preset, well that has a typical muddy highs but nonetheless it's there.
However there's one station that recently came up and uses Omnia 6, trust me, you can't get that kinda highs - after several weeks of trial run on air, the audio engineers have made it sound so nice and open. And coupled with the bass it gives a difficult to describe thunderous sound.
Now in ST if you try emulating that, as you pointed out, some tracks sound ok but then others sound artificially excited.
Gonna give one last try. Have but till morning for another tormenting session.

_________________
visit website

Probably on the verge of success...though not sure how to implement the same settings in Stereo Tool MB section's EQ unless I change the center frequencies...

_________________
visit website

...
i mantion this erlier...
Last 2 or even 3 bands in MB should be joined! And freqs slightly rearranged.

For this problems with highs, ST MB is guilty!
The famous boxes have no more then 5-6 bands in MB (except some Vorsis models). BBP (in some presets have 7, Lows splited to bass and sub bass,which i think it's good!)
Last band (highs) for, let's say, Omnia is at 6~7kHz. In ST you have almost 3 bands for that same range. Part of problems with ST MB is there. My oppinios will stay same. no more then 7 bands is enough for MB.
Also, there is separate compress AND THEN limit per band ..ratio settings etc.., which can have good impact if you put MB like that in ST.

And also a Paragraphic Equalizer after loudness, may also be helpful...something BBP has too. I used one of Ozotope and achieved results far better than I had desired. An important inference is the amount of difference of highs in my preset from that of the Omnia recording...just 17 db at about 10 KHz! God knows what kind of limiter do these boxes use...
The redline shows the difference, the indigo line shows the output curve of Omnia recording...

_________________
visit website