Kirchoff eq
Author: n | 2025-04-24
As for the sound: when Kirchoff first came out, I did a bunch of null tests with other EQs. (Weiss, Sonnox, Crave, a bunch of others. Posted my results in the gearspace Kirchoff thread) and I found that Kirchoff was much cleaner with any kind of high boost/shelf. If OP is Jonesing for a new EQ, Kirchoff is the way to go, IMHO. Reply reply
TBTech – Kirchoff EQ V1 (Windows) –
In the box should not be limited to a static nature, IMHO that is. Afterall the signal is not static or is it. Personally I only use these kinds of EQ for surgical or corrective stuff and it being dynamic makes it so much more surgical. But we have options, so there is no need to try to make this into what it's not. But the nature of the GS people is like that, isn't it. Lives for gear Joined: Jun 2013 Posts: 1,181 🎧 10 years Guess what? Fabfilter Pro-Q 1: static. Pro-Q 2: static. Pro-Q 3.. ta da: dynamic! It was not, but now it is. Very awkward those people at Fabfilter, one day they decided: "let's make our static EQ into what it's not: a dynamic EQ". Waaa.. what a concept.. this is so GS.. Lives for gear Joined: Jun 2019 Posts: 1,916 🎧 5 years Quote: Originally Posted by soupiraille ➡️ Guess what? Fabfilter Pro-Q 1: static. Pro-Q 2: static. Pro-Q 3.. ta da: dynamic! I use Crave mostly for high pass, lo pass work, Pro Q for the corrective stuff but now my new baby is Kirchoff which has more filter shapes, is dynamic with useful controls to the dynamic actions. When I first bought a license for Crave EQ I mentioned in the thread I wished it were dynamic...back then! Quote: Originally Posted by soupiraille ➡️ Guess what? Fabfilter Pro-Q 1: static. Pro-Q 2: static. Pro-Q 3.. ta da: dynamic! It was not, but now it is. Very awkward those people at Fabfilter, one day they decided: "let's make our static EQ into what it's not: a dynamic EQ". Waaa.. what a concept.. this is so GS.. Dude, it's NOT about requesting to make Crave EQ dynamic!(this has been requested several times since V1 - and keith said it will not happen!)I would love Crave to be dynamic, too.It was about suggesting to work with Jon V, who makes FirComp! THAT is the part I found awkward. Lives for gear Joined: May 2008 🎧 15 years Quote: Originally Posted by DrAudioBot ➡️ I find this "trend" of suggesting such things (see them a lot lately) quiet awkward tbh.Maybe good intensions but eventually a bit strange to ask. I guess it is very different from person to person what is perceived as awkward - also out in the public. (Is it you who feel awkward, As for the sound: when Kirchoff first came out, I did a bunch of null tests with other EQs. (Weiss, Sonnox, Crave, a bunch of others. Posted my results in the gearspace Kirchoff thread) and I found that Kirchoff was much cleaner with any kind of high boost/shelf. If OP is Jonesing for a new EQ, Kirchoff is the way to go, IMHO. Reply reply Kirchoff EQ seems like a really great offering, but at the end of the day almost all EQ sound the same. Do you feel like the Kirchoff EQ is a step above others? I have Tokyo Dawn stuff and love it, as well as Crave Eq which has a fantastic workflow and great UI. I ask is this the same for you?From inside the DAW is it in the PA Folder or TBT folder?It's been a few days now since I emailed TBT support. Ok, just confirming, that all I have in my components folder for example, is the "KirchhoffEQ.component" (version 1.7.0)It's not a folder. Quote: Originally Posted by Carl Freeland ➡️ Thanks for giving me hope. Even though I uninstalled the PA version I see the TBT Universal version is under PA folder of plugins when you look from inside the DAW (Logic) to choose it. Can I ask is this the same for you?From inside the DAW is it in the PA Folder or TBT folder?It's been a few days now since I emailed TBT support. i think you are using AU but the TBT original kirchoff vst3 seems to always install within the “steinberg” folder within vst3 plugs on mac. I then generally move it. Lives for gear Joined: May 2007 🎧 15 years Quote: Originally Posted by GBP ➡️ i think you are using AU but the TBT original kirchoff vst3 seems to always install within the “steinberg” folder within vst3 plugs on mac. I then generally move it. That is interesting.I just checked my VST3 folder and there is indeed a KirchoffEQ within the Steinberg folder (v 1.7.0) and another in the VST3 folder itself (v 1.6.4) TBTKirchoffEQ - the latter being the Plugin Alliance version. (I am careful not to use that one). Which is very interesting, since I don't have the component version of that installed. It still shows up in Logic.I'm beginning to understand how messy this really is.So, I also just removed the PA version (1.6.4) TBTKirchoffEQ from my components folder. Lives for gear Joined: Feb 2018 🎧 5 years Quote: Originally Posted by mattrixx ➡️ That is interesting.I just checked my VST3 folder and there is indeed a KirchoffEQ within the Steinberg folder (v 1.7.0) and another in the VST3 folder itself (v 1.6.4) TBTKirchoffEQ - the latter being the Plugin Alliance version. (I am careful not to use that one). Which is veryComments
In the box should not be limited to a static nature, IMHO that is. Afterall the signal is not static or is it. Personally I only use these kinds of EQ for surgical or corrective stuff and it being dynamic makes it so much more surgical. But we have options, so there is no need to try to make this into what it's not. But the nature of the GS people is like that, isn't it. Lives for gear Joined: Jun 2013 Posts: 1,181 🎧 10 years Guess what? Fabfilter Pro-Q 1: static. Pro-Q 2: static. Pro-Q 3.. ta da: dynamic! It was not, but now it is. Very awkward those people at Fabfilter, one day they decided: "let's make our static EQ into what it's not: a dynamic EQ". Waaa.. what a concept.. this is so GS.. Lives for gear Joined: Jun 2019 Posts: 1,916 🎧 5 years Quote: Originally Posted by soupiraille ➡️ Guess what? Fabfilter Pro-Q 1: static. Pro-Q 2: static. Pro-Q 3.. ta da: dynamic! I use Crave mostly for high pass, lo pass work, Pro Q for the corrective stuff but now my new baby is Kirchoff which has more filter shapes, is dynamic with useful controls to the dynamic actions. When I first bought a license for Crave EQ I mentioned in the thread I wished it were dynamic...back then! Quote: Originally Posted by soupiraille ➡️ Guess what? Fabfilter Pro-Q 1: static. Pro-Q 2: static. Pro-Q 3.. ta da: dynamic! It was not, but now it is. Very awkward those people at Fabfilter, one day they decided: "let's make our static EQ into what it's not: a dynamic EQ". Waaa.. what a concept.. this is so GS.. Dude, it's NOT about requesting to make Crave EQ dynamic!(this has been requested several times since V1 - and keith said it will not happen!)I would love Crave to be dynamic, too.It was about suggesting to work with Jon V, who makes FirComp! THAT is the part I found awkward. Lives for gear Joined: May 2008 🎧 15 years Quote: Originally Posted by DrAudioBot ➡️ I find this "trend" of suggesting such things (see them a lot lately) quiet awkward tbh.Maybe good intensions but eventually a bit strange to ask. I guess it is very different from person to person what is perceived as awkward - also out in the public. (Is it you who feel awkward,
2025-04-08I ask is this the same for you?From inside the DAW is it in the PA Folder or TBT folder?It's been a few days now since I emailed TBT support. Ok, just confirming, that all I have in my components folder for example, is the "KirchhoffEQ.component" (version 1.7.0)It's not a folder. Quote: Originally Posted by Carl Freeland ➡️ Thanks for giving me hope. Even though I uninstalled the PA version I see the TBT Universal version is under PA folder of plugins when you look from inside the DAW (Logic) to choose it. Can I ask is this the same for you?From inside the DAW is it in the PA Folder or TBT folder?It's been a few days now since I emailed TBT support. i think you are using AU but the TBT original kirchoff vst3 seems to always install within the “steinberg” folder within vst3 plugs on mac. I then generally move it. Lives for gear Joined: May 2007 🎧 15 years Quote: Originally Posted by GBP ➡️ i think you are using AU but the TBT original kirchoff vst3 seems to always install within the “steinberg” folder within vst3 plugs on mac. I then generally move it. That is interesting.I just checked my VST3 folder and there is indeed a KirchoffEQ within the Steinberg folder (v 1.7.0) and another in the VST3 folder itself (v 1.6.4) TBTKirchoffEQ - the latter being the Plugin Alliance version. (I am careful not to use that one). Which is very interesting, since I don't have the component version of that installed. It still shows up in Logic.I'm beginning to understand how messy this really is.So, I also just removed the PA version (1.6.4) TBTKirchoffEQ from my components folder. Lives for gear Joined: Feb 2018 🎧 5 years Quote: Originally Posted by mattrixx ➡️ That is interesting.I just checked my VST3 folder and there is indeed a KirchoffEQ within the Steinberg folder (v 1.7.0) and another in the VST3 folder itself (v 1.6.4) TBTKirchoffEQ - the latter being the Plugin Alliance version. (I am careful not to use that one). Which is very
2025-04-20Element Discovery TimelineWhen Were the Elements Discovered? The last four elements to be discovered are nihonium, moscovium, tennessine, and oganesson.Kateryna Kon/Science Photo Library, Getty ImagesUpdated on October 03, 2018 Here's a helpful table chronicling the discovery of the elements. The date is listed for when the element was first isolated. In many cases, the presence of a new element was suspected years or even thousands of years before it could be purified. Click on an element's name to see its entry in the Periodic Table and get facts for the element. Ancient Times - Prior to 1 A.D. GoldSilverCopperIronLeadTinMercurySulfurCarbon Time of the Alchemists - 1 A.D. to 1735 Arsenic (Magnus ~1250)Antimony (17th century or earlier)Phosphorus (Brand 1669)Zinc (13th Century India) 1735 to 1745 Cobalt (Brandt ~1735)Platinum (Ulloa 1735) 1745 to 1755 Nickel (Cronstedt 1751)Bismuth (Geoffroy 1753) 1755 to 1765-- 1765 to 1775 Hydrogen (Cavendish 1766)Nitrogen (Rutherford 1772)Oxygen (Priestley; Scheele 1774)Chlorine (Scheele 1774)Manganese (Gahn, Scheele, & Bergman 1774) 1775 to 1785 Molybdenum (Scheele 1778)Tungsten (J. and F. d'Elhuyar 1783)Tellurium (von Reichenstein 1782) 1785 to 1795 Uranium (Peligot 1841)Strontium (Davey 1808)Titanium (Gregor 1791)Yttrium (Gadolin 1794) 1795 to 1805 Vanadium (del Rio 1801)Chromium (Vauquelin 1797)Beryllium (Vauquelin 1798)Niobium (Hatchett 1801)Tantalum (Ekeberg 1802)Cerium (Berzelius & Hisinger; Klaproth 1803)Palladium (Wollaston 1803)Rhodium (Wollaston 1803-1804)Osmium (Tennant 1803)Iridium (Tennant 1803) 1805 to 1815 Sodium (Davy 1807)Potassium (Davy 1807)Barium (Davy 1808)Calcium (Davy 1808)Magnesium (Black 1775; Davy 1808)Boron (Davy; Gay-Lussac & Thenard 1808)Iodine (Courtois 1811) 1815 to 1825 Lithium (Arfvedson 1817)Cadmium (Stromeyer 1817)Selenium (Berzelius 1817)Silicon (Berzelius 1824)Zirconium (Klaproth 1789; Berzelius 1824) 1825 to 1835 Aluminum (Wohler 1827)Bromine (Balard 1826)Thorium (Berzelius 1828) 1835 to 1845 Lanthanum (Mosander 1839)Terbium (Mosander 1843)Erbium (Mosander 1842 or 1843)Ruthenium (Klaus 1844) 1845 to 1855-- 1855 to 1865 Cesium (Bunsen & Kirchoff 1860)Rubidium (Bunsen & Kirchoff 1861)Thallium (Crookes 1861)Indium (Riech & Richter 1863) 1865 to 1875 Fluorine (Moissan 1866) 1875 to 1885 Gallium (Boisbaudran 1875)Ytterbium (Marignac 1878)Samarium (Boisbaudran 1879)Scandium (Nilson 1878)Holmium (Delafontaine 1878)Thulium (Cleve 1879) 1885 to 1895 Praseodymium (von Weisbach 1885)Neodymium (von Weisbach 1885)Gadolinium (Marignac 1880)Dysprosium (Boisbaudran 1886)Germanium (Winkler 1886)Argon (Rayleigh & Ramsay 1894) 1895 to 1905 Helium (Janssen 1868; Ramsay 1895)Europium (Boisbaudran 1890; Demarcay 1901)Krypton (Ramsay
2025-03-31