Narrow Bandwidth

[djclueveli]

when they say narrow bandwidth (Q), what number fall into that category and when they say wider bandwidth (Q), what numbers fall into that category.

[sixways]

what? don't really understand the question.

[easychair]

http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-bandwidth.htm

Narrow BW= high Q number
Wide BW = low Q number

[djclueveli]

thanks alot for the help

[rpe]

easychair....

that's a handy chart!!

Originally Posted by easychair

http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-bandwidth.htm

Narrow BW= high Q number
Wide BW = low Q number

[Ford Van]

Originally Posted by easychair

http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-bandwidth.htm

Narrow BW= high Q number
Wide BW = low Q number

Hey, that is a neat looking formula! LOL

[Ford Van]

By the way, not all eq's follow that formula.

Checking the eq's that I usually use, or might use:

Sonalksis 517 does
Sonitus does
Waves Q and Lin Phase does
Paris EQ does
Steinberg QMetric does

Sony Track EQ doesn't
Timeworks Mastering EQ doesn't
Steinberg Q doesn't

So really, one should check and use their ears.

I find it interesting that Steinberg does it both ways! Talk about confusing things!

Also, I generally find that the "numbers" that represent Q on an eq is absolutely meaningless to use as a "comparison" to the Q of another eq. 2 on one eq might sound like 4 on another. You know what I mean?

[Ethan Winer]

> when they say narrow bandwidth (Q), what number fall into that category and when they say wider bandwidth (Q), what numbers fall into that category. <

The dividing point is probably somewhere between a Q of 0.7 and 1.0. Higher Q values are considered narrow bandwidth, and a lower Q would be broader.

--Ethan

[easychair]

Originally Posted by Ford Van

By the way, not all eq's follow that formula.

Checking the eq's that I usually use, or might use:

Sonalksis 517 does
Sonitus does
Waves Q and Lin Phase does
Paris EQ does
Steinberg QMetric does

Sony Track EQ doesn't
Timeworks Mastering EQ doesn't
Steinberg Q doesn't

So really, one should check and use their ears.

I find it interesting that Steinberg does it both ways! Talk about confusing things!

Also, I generally find that the "numbers" that represent Q on an eq is absolutely meaningless to use as a "comparison" to the Q of another eq. 2 on one eq might sound like 4 on another. You know what I mean?

Thanks for pointing that out, it's totally true. Thanks for keeping me honest. Personally, I've been going nuts trying to translate eq curves among various digital PA processors, dbx has chosen to use a different implementation than everyone else in the industry.

Q has a definition, like ohm or amp, but actual curves vary. That EQ article linked a few posts back has a good basic talk about it.