Can the DYN8 (DEQ4) be improved with intuitive touch controls?
Specifically
the ability to change the width of each point by pinch operation. (This is a new feature in the PEQ and NEQ screens in v1.3)
the function to display not only the frequency value but also the gain value by touching each point.
the function to adjust the gain value by vertical sliding operation so that the frequency changes when the gain of each point is touched and the screen is slid horizontally.
I am having trouble with the operation feel, which is a little different from PEQ and NEQ.
It would be great if this could be improved.
Can the DYN8 (DEQ4) be improved with intuitive touch controls?
I would say it would suit it well.
This should be a given.
This should be not a problem.
I cannot understand why it has not always been this.
Why is a dimension always blocked, making it so difficult to use?
I assume that the “designer” never had to use his work live.
This is also supported by the fact that the in buttons are not in the corresponding fields (see picture), but vertically somewhere where it might look chic.
And the Avantis version is even better than the SQ version, where everything was divided into 2x 2 bands due to lack of space and the in buttons are arranged in a square!
I took the trouble to come up with a suggestion as to how it could be clearer and much more logical - without all the switches - and with not even smaller control elements.
But A&H had no interest in this - they didn’t even want to see my idea.
There were no complaints, so everything stay as it was.
On a thread asking for the imrovement of DYN8 control, started by someone other than me, on which you too have given your +1 and agreed with the OP on several points, including saying that it’s “difficult to use” yourself, you’re now stating that it (controlling DYN8) doesn’t seem to bother anyone?
I don’t understand.
I believe I’ve read elsewhere on this very forum that other people find DYN8 difficult to use too. I’m thoroughly confused about your comment.
Do you mean you agree but you’re surprised it doesn’t seem to bother many other people (outside of you, me and a few others) who are vocal about it?
On your other point: there are plenty of popular dynamic EQ plugins that do offer attack, release and ratio or range controls and why wouldn’t they?
Why would it be more of a multiBD?
It’ll still be a dynamic EQ, just with more control. With the multiband dynamic section of the DYN8 you also get a manual mode to use if you want and well, it so happens to be the preferred mode of some pros
I know some other pros who don’t use the dynamic EQ section ofthe DYN8 because it doesn’t offer deep enough control (it’s too slow to react, for instance).
So they use the multiband section in stead, at the cost of colloration.
The DYN8 dynamic EQ section is a pain to control, it could be much easier on the avantis, no doubt. I use it because I’ve made presets, but setting it on the fly is cumbersome the way it’s controlled now. I can see that people wouldn’t use it because of that.
The only dynamic EQ implementation that’s even worse to control that I can think of is the one in the Digico S21/31. And well…
Yes, that’s exactly what I meant.
Sorry, English isn’t my native language, so I may have expressed myself incorrectly.
But my criticism of it should be evident in my post above, right?
I started a similar topic regarding SQ myself, and it received virtually no support.
I wasn’t ready to give up, so I contacted Keith six months later again with the suggestion, where he admitted that my concept was better than the current implementation.
But that was it.
I think that one thing to bear in mind is: most professionals don’t voice their opinions on these forums.
That’s not to say that professionals don’t voice their opinion on these forums, some of us certainly do but most don’t.
Most professionals find a workaround to get around limitations and get on with their work, they may offer a sugestion to a rep every now and then, if they don’t forget.
So you’re simply not getting a very good indication of user experience by judging these forums and the ammount of votes/+1s.
I do both.
I find workarounds but also take the time to make it known that I think there’s an issue.
It’s a consious effort I make.
When I once told a long time dLive user that I usuallly prefer using dynamic EQ over multiband compression he said the DYN8 dynamic EQ section reacts too slowly and unprecisely for a lot of things, so he told me to use the multiband section in the mode with the manual attack/release times in stead.
Did he ever voice that to a rep or post it on a forum? Very possibly not.
It takes a specific type of person to take the time to go to a forum, register and contribute.
So the types of requests you see on a forum will not exactly be representative of the average gripes and wishes. I’m quite sure of that.
I meet a lot of profesional A&H users at my work and I think the percentage of them contributing to this forum or even regularly reading it is very low.
That’s a handicap for us, for A&H and I believe for them too, but here we are.
You are absolutely right, but for us (at least for me) there is no other way to confront users and manufacturers with certain shortcomings and hope for their support and agreement.
