Core Peak EQ resonance?

I am trying to convert a primary structure using a Peak EQ (the MashQ effect from vectory) to run in a core cell, but there isn't a resonance input (only BW) on the Core Peak EQ.

How do I convert the resonance value to work correctly when connected to the BW input?

And does the dB input behave exactly the same as the B input on the primary peak EQ?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks alot,
Ash

 

I don't know. To figure it out, I'd pass white noise through each of them and compare them using a spectrum analyzer.

 

I'm afraid i'd have no idea how to go about that, or what to look for if i did, my dsp knowledge is weak to non-existant i'm afraid...

I've looked in the reaktor module & core reference book but all it says is "BW input specifies the EQ Bandwidth in octaves" for the core EQ.
The primary module help is a little better:
"Res: Event input for controlling filters resonance (Q-factor). Range of values 0 (minimal resonance, maximum bandwidth) to 1 (maximal resonance, minimal bandwidth). At high resonance the filters Q-factor = frequency [Hz] / bandwidth [Hz] ≅ 1/(2 - 2 Res)."
But I dont really understand it (no dsp knowledge).

Is there not some simple conversion equation?

Many thanks,
Ash

 

I looked into this for a bit although I don't have any immediate answer -- however Wikipedia can help you with this one, check out the entries on Resonance and Q-Factor -- Chet's suggestion of hooking up things to see what it looks like is a pretty good suggestion. The EzFFT library entry has a great 'EzFFT Analizer' that if you pop two of those up and compare primary vs core you can see the differences pretty easily.

Without the DSP knowledge of what 'should' be going on your best bet is to read up on each component (BW, R, Q-Factor, etc) and try to sort it out that way.

Another route to success would be to figure out what the Peak EQ is doing from a general use standpoint and just build it from scratch without using the primary version as your gold standard.

 

If you're on a PC, a quick-and-dirty spectrum analyzer is Wavetools. It's almost as old as dirt, but it's easy to use.

 

I'm on a mac so wavetools is a no go i'm afraid, however I've used the EzFFT analyzer and looked at the two and there are differences in the output, but its beyond my scope of knowledge to figure out what i should do about them. I think i'm gonna stick with the primary version of it for now and read up on each component when I get the time and try that way.

Ash

 

You do realize that even if you manage to duplicate the primary module's functionality in core that it will be at bbest the same CPU usage, but more likely higher cpu usage - right?

Cheers,
CList

 

yeah, i just prefer working in core (it makes a bit more sense to me), and it'll let me turn off the structure when it's not in use without using primary layer switches which i have an irrational hate for (they cause clicks and pops, event resets etc.).

ash