lkjb: TinyQ
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 2586 posts since 19 Mar, 2008 from germany
What a bummer!
TinyQ looks really great - and maybe it can
substitute the standard-track-EQ in many
DAWs.
But ...
... it works only in "JUCE's Personal License"
which requires Google Analytics to send data.
Now "Google Analytics" doesn't send only
anonymous data. It's just the opposite:
"Google Analytics" sends a big bunch of
data, very detailed and connected to the
IP-number. Together with all the other
trackers Google has all over the web
"Google Analytics" is one element of a
giant accumulation machinery of personal
data. Still most people are not conscious
of this fact.
So I say "what a pity in respect of this fine plugin"!
TinyQ looks really great - and maybe it can
substitute the standard-track-EQ in many
DAWs.
But ...
... it works only in "JUCE's Personal License"
which requires Google Analytics to send data.
Now "Google Analytics" doesn't send only
anonymous data. It's just the opposite:
"Google Analytics" sends a big bunch of
data, very detailed and connected to the
IP-number. Together with all the other
trackers Google has all over the web
"Google Analytics" is one element of a
giant accumulation machinery of personal
data. Still most people are not conscious
of this fact.
So I say "what a pity in respect of this fine plugin"!
free mp3s + info: andy-enroe.de songs + weird stuff: enroe.de
- KVRAF
- 8826 posts since 6 Jan, 2017 from Outer Space
I am pretty sure Juces personal license is violating the DSGVO in Europe...
This is a no go I was not aware of...
We should send them some lawyers...
This is a no go I was not aware of...
We should send them some lawyers...
-
- KVRAF
- 2265 posts since 30 Aug, 2004 from Lancaster, UK
Re Google Analytics: As far As I know it is the most used analytics tool on websites, so what is different here? I mean, Google already knows who you are... Am I missing something?
Oh - and I would like to hear more impressions on the plug too.
Oh - and I would like to hear more impressions on the plug too.
Thu Oct 01, 2020 1:15 pm Passing Bye wrote:
"look at SparkySpark's post 4 posts up, let that sink in for a moment"
Go MuLab!
"look at SparkySpark's post 4 posts up, let that sink in for a moment"
Go MuLab!
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 2586 posts since 19 Mar, 2008 from germany
Yeah, that exactly is one of the problems with Google.SparkySpark wrote:Re Google Analytics: As far As I know it is the most used analytics tool on websites, ...
The difference here is that now also a tiny innocent VSTSparkySpark wrote: ... so what is different here?
connects - without you seeing it - remotely with Google.
I suppose if you use your DAW without internet connection -
in a professional environment - TinyQ won't work then.
You see, that IS the problem. Google knows alreadySparkySpark wrote: I mean, Google already knows who you are... Am I missing something?
who you are and has several psychological and sociological
profils of you ... if you don't see this as a problem then
nobody can help you.
free mp3s + info: andy-enroe.de songs + weird stuff: enroe.de
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 2586 posts since 19 Mar, 2008 from germany
@lkjb:
In the past lkjb has created so many fantastic
VSTs - without JUCE and without Google.
So what's behind this JUCE-way now?
I really don't get it? Can somebody explain it?
In the past lkjb has created so many fantastic
VSTs - without JUCE and without Google.
So what's behind this JUCE-way now?
I really don't get it? Can somebody explain it?
free mp3s + info: andy-enroe.de songs + weird stuff: enroe.de
-
- KVRAF
- 2265 posts since 30 Aug, 2004 from Lancaster, UK
Well, I do see the problem with big companies knowing about our every move (FB is way worse than Google though).enroe wrote: You see, that IS the problem. Google knows already
who you are and has several psychological and sociological
profils of you ... if you don't see this as a problem then
nobody can help you.
I rest my case though - if Google already has logged what I do in Chrome, Android, Google Docs etc, then what's the big deal with this VST? Isn't that a bit unfair towards the plugin, or am I missing something after all?
You see, Google already knows we downloaded this plugin anyway.
Thu Oct 01, 2020 1:15 pm Passing Bye wrote:
"look at SparkySpark's post 4 posts up, let that sink in for a moment"
Go MuLab!
"look at SparkySpark's post 4 posts up, let that sink in for a moment"
Go MuLab!
-
- KVRAF
- 2265 posts since 30 Aug, 2004 from Lancaster, UK
A bigger problem in my mind is if it won't work without an Internet connection.
Thu Oct 01, 2020 1:15 pm Passing Bye wrote:
"look at SparkySpark's post 4 posts up, let that sink in for a moment"
Go MuLab!
"look at SparkySpark's post 4 posts up, let that sink in for a moment"
Go MuLab!
-
- KVRist
- 194 posts since 13 Oct, 2012
Thank you all for sharing your concerns.
I'll try to explain my reasoning behind the usage of JUCE's personal license:
My previous plugins were all done in JUCE (the first version of ReFine was done using the plain VST3 SDK but later moved to JUCE) using the GPL license. As all plugins are for free I dont have much motivation to spent money for a JUCE license which I hope is understandable.
For TinyQ I used some more advanced filter designs (mainly the peak and shelf width stays the same near Nyquist) which I prefere not to share in source since it involved a bit of R&D. I also started rather late so using a different plugin framework wasn't really an option. The other alternative would have been to use for example JUCE's filters. But than the filter curves wouldn't be as nice as they are now, resulting in my choice for JUCE's personal license.
Regarding the google-analytics usage: I stated this in the product description as well as a text file within the plugin zips (readme_privacy.txt). As far as I know I don't have any access to the collected data. This is used by ROLI, probably to monitor whether the Personal License (PL) might be violated (for example if I sell something for $1000 and it runs on hundreds of different machines the $50000 limit for the PL is probably exceeded).
About the collected data: Besides data about the product it only contains the OS you use as well as an anonymised machine ID. The machine ID is a hash of some internal machine ID generated by specific JUCE code (e.g. it is probably generated differently for websites etc.). Due to this I'm quite certain that it is not possible to link your usage of JUCE PL products to your web movements. What is possible is that ROLI might know what other PL software you (that is: your machine ID) use. It is highly unlikely that ROLI can connect you (person) to the machine ID.
The plugin will work without internet connection. In this case it simply fails to send the data to google-analytics.
I'll try to explain my reasoning behind the usage of JUCE's personal license:
My previous plugins were all done in JUCE (the first version of ReFine was done using the plain VST3 SDK but later moved to JUCE) using the GPL license. As all plugins are for free I dont have much motivation to spent money for a JUCE license which I hope is understandable.
For TinyQ I used some more advanced filter designs (mainly the peak and shelf width stays the same near Nyquist) which I prefere not to share in source since it involved a bit of R&D. I also started rather late so using a different plugin framework wasn't really an option. The other alternative would have been to use for example JUCE's filters. But than the filter curves wouldn't be as nice as they are now, resulting in my choice for JUCE's personal license.
Regarding the google-analytics usage: I stated this in the product description as well as a text file within the plugin zips (readme_privacy.txt). As far as I know I don't have any access to the collected data. This is used by ROLI, probably to monitor whether the Personal License (PL) might be violated (for example if I sell something for $1000 and it runs on hundreds of different machines the $50000 limit for the PL is probably exceeded).
About the collected data: Besides data about the product it only contains the OS you use as well as an anonymised machine ID. The machine ID is a hash of some internal machine ID generated by specific JUCE code (e.g. it is probably generated differently for websites etc.). Due to this I'm quite certain that it is not possible to link your usage of JUCE PL products to your web movements. What is possible is that ROLI might know what other PL software you (that is: your machine ID) use. It is highly unlikely that ROLI can connect you (person) to the machine ID.
The plugin will work without internet connection. In this case it simply fails to send the data to google-analytics.
- KVRAF
- 5361 posts since 20 Mar, 2012 from Babbleon
After the first day of Windows 7 factory install and updates, I never connect my Windows 7 computer anymore to the internet, and TinyQ is working fine on it.SparkySpark wrote:A bigger problem in my mind is if it won't work without an Internet connection.
ah böwakawa poussé poussé
- KVRAF
- 2772 posts since 22 May, 2017
I use lkjb's Luftikus on almost every track I produce, so I was really looking forward to TinyQ.
It sounds good and looks nice and crisp in small GUI mode, but it's a little too tiny. Changing to the large GUI makes the graphics become extremely blurry. Anyone else notice this? Hope to see it fixed in an update.
Nice plug though, lkjb!
It sounds good and looks nice and crisp in small GUI mode, but it's a little too tiny. Changing to the large GUI makes the graphics become extremely blurry. Anyone else notice this? Hope to see it fixed in an update.
Nice plug though, lkjb!
-
- KVRist
- 64 posts since 27 Dec, 2017 from Berlin/Europe
Very good plugin indeed, the google analytics thing is a shame, but i'd rather blame roli for this deal. My VPN is providing some help, the machine ID is afaik generated from computers preferences.
I'd like to contribute some (very little) suggestions:
1. Could you reverse the knob direction of the hpf order? It turns counter clockwise when dragged up, which
2. Since the eq is already very low cpu intensive, i'd prefer the filters defaulting to engaged. I made an eq plugin, which processing turns off when 0.0 dB of gain is applied or the default state of the pass filter is left. This would be suitable for a very quick go to equalizer.
3. The best feature of the DAWs internal eq on which Tinyq is based on was the 4 different filter curves. Do you consider to add some? (Non-) proportional Q etc.?
4. Reaper crashed when dragging the points of the frequency response curve.
5. Maybe a little to tiny. In Reaper, when floating, the main entries of the top panel aren't visible.
EDIT for another suggestion:
6. I would wish the controls would have a more senseful "middle position" (shape?). For example all the frequency knobs are around 600 Hz at 12 o'clock, no matter if its low/high frequency/pass filter, especially the low pass has a suboptimal resolution at regularly used high frequencies.
But after all, a great plugin, good sounding and incredibly low on cpu (0.1% with 6 filters including cascading pass filters is great indeed)
I'd like to contribute some (very little) suggestions:
1. Could you reverse the knob direction of the hpf order? It turns counter clockwise when dragged up, which
2. Since the eq is already very low cpu intensive, i'd prefer the filters defaulting to engaged. I made an eq plugin, which processing turns off when 0.0 dB of gain is applied or the default state of the pass filter is left. This would be suitable for a very quick go to equalizer.
3. The best feature of the DAWs internal eq on which Tinyq is based on was the 4 different filter curves. Do you consider to add some? (Non-) proportional Q etc.?
4. Reaper crashed when dragging the points of the frequency response curve.
5. Maybe a little to tiny. In Reaper, when floating, the main entries of the top panel aren't visible.
EDIT for another suggestion:
6. I would wish the controls would have a more senseful "middle position" (shape?). For example all the frequency knobs are around 600 Hz at 12 o'clock, no matter if its low/high frequency/pass filter, especially the low pass has a suboptimal resolution at regularly used high frequencies.
But after all, a great plugin, good sounding and incredibly low on cpu (0.1% with 6 filters including cascading pass filters is great indeed)
-
- KVRist
- 194 posts since 13 Oct, 2012
Thanks for the suggestions.
1. I considered the order rather than the UI so for me dragging up to get a higher order is more natural. Maybe I'll change this if more people share your point.
2. I'll look into it.
3. The different Q settings only result in different behaviours when changing gain. At the moment I'd prefer to keep it simple.
4. Can you provide a crash log (macOS) or a crash dump (Win)?
5. I don't use presets in Reaper and therefore didn't notice the missing field. As the Reaper window can be enlarged I don't have any immediate plans to change the plugin's size. After all, it's called TinyQ.
6. The freq knobs are logarithmic which results in frequency changes related to the perception of hearing frequencies. Despite their names (and the switchable shelves) all bands are identical which I would like to keep.
1. I considered the order rather than the UI so for me dragging up to get a higher order is more natural. Maybe I'll change this if more people share your point.
2. I'll look into it.
3. The different Q settings only result in different behaviours when changing gain. At the moment I'd prefer to keep it simple.
4. Can you provide a crash log (macOS) or a crash dump (Win)?
5. I don't use presets in Reaper and therefore didn't notice the missing field. As the Reaper window can be enlarged I don't have any immediate plans to change the plugin's size. After all, it's called TinyQ.
6. The freq knobs are logarithmic which results in frequency changes related to the perception of hearing frequencies. Despite their names (and the switchable shelves) all bands are identical which I would like to keep.
The decision to use the JUCE Personal License was mine. Otherwise I probably wouldn't have finished the plugin in time. ROLI is more or less free to decide which license models they offer and it's generally a nice thing that JUCE is now available without having to pay a fee for its usage or share the source code.hannesmenzel wrote:Very good plugin indeed, the google analytics thing is a shame, but i'd rather blame roli for this deal.
-
- KVRist
- 64 posts since 27 Dec, 2017 from Berlin/Europe
Those were only suggestions based on my own preferences, everything a matter of choice/decisions.
I totally agree, it just confuses me since most knobs turn clockwise thenlkjb wrote:Thanks for the suggestions.
1. I considered the order rather than the UI so for me dragging up to get a higher order is more natural. Maybe I'll change this if more people share your point.
Understandable, I personally like the setting with the steeper cuttung bandwidth.lkjb wrote: 2. I'll look into it.
3. The different Q settings only result in different behaviours when changing gain. At the moment I'd prefer to keep it simple.
PM'dlkjb wrote: 4. Can you provide a crash log (macOS) or a crash dump (Win)?
Which is also the cool thing about your plugin. Just thought that other DAWs might have top panels as well.lkjb wrote: 5. I don't use presets in Reaper and therefore didn't notice the missing field. As the Reaper window can be enlarged I don't have any immediate plans to change the plugin's size. After all, it's called TinyQ.
What I really appreciate is that you didn't limit the frequency range of each filter. It's just that I personally use for example LPFs mostly with higher corner frequencies, but thats were the lowest resolution is here. I can easily step between 20 and 21 Hz, but at the top end you have to deal with 500 Hz steps.lkjb wrote: 6. The freq knobs are logarithmic which results in frequency changes related to the perception of hearing frequencies. Despite their names (and the switchable shelves) all bands are identical which I would like to keep.
lkjb wrote:The decision to use the JUCE Personal License was mine. Otherwise I probably wouldn't have finished the plugin in time. ROLI is more or less free to decide which license models they offer and it's generally a nice thing that JUCE is now available without having to pay a fee for its usage or share the source code.hannesmenzel wrote:Very good plugin indeed, the google analytics thing is a shame, but i'd rather blame roli for this deal.
- KVRAF
- 2772 posts since 22 May, 2017
Perhaps my post was missed, or perhaps I was ignored.
Either way, I'd like to repost this:
Anyway, it's no big deal. I can always just use the too-tiny version, after all it is called TinyQ. My old eyes definitely won't thank me though. It's just a shame as I would get a lot more use out of the large version of TinyQ if it was clear and sharp, but at the end of the day, I can deal with it or just continue using my favorite freeware EQ Luftikus.
Either way, I'd like to repost this:
Is this normal for the large version to be blurry? If not, have you any ideas for what could be causing this on my machine?Russell Grand wrote: Changing to the large GUI makes the graphics become extremely blurry. Anyone else notice this? Hope to see it fixed in an update.
Anyway, it's no big deal. I can always just use the too-tiny version, after all it is called TinyQ. My old eyes definitely won't thank me though. It's just a shame as I would get a lot more use out of the large version of TinyQ if it was clear and sharp, but at the end of the day, I can deal with it or just continue using my favorite freeware EQ Luftikus.