Plugins, Plugins & More Plugins: Linux DSP MKII Graph-EQ

Announcement from Mr. LinuxDSP: LinuxDSP has recently released the MKII Graph-EQ. This is a significant feature upgrade to the original graphical eq, and not only adds a much improved user interface which shows individual frequency bands in addition to the main EQ curve, but also adds another type of parametric filter which uses innovative DSP processing to provide a de-cramped frequency response similar to analogue EQs.

<img src=""

Plugins offering similar functionality on other platforms can cost as much as $500 and sometimes require extra DSP hardware, which makes this plugin a very cost effective solution. Combine it with the MBC2 multiband compressor to provide a high quality mastering solution. It can be found here:

@Fric: I have received your emails. I just haven’t merged the work into the tree. I get hundreds of messages every day, and don’t have time to acknowledge them as they come in. I tend to do so when I do the SVN commit.

I know, that my following post isn’t exactly to the theme - also first I should say, that I plan for longer time to try to persuade my younger brother to give me contact on any of his friends with experiences in paying via pay pal - simply knowing how these things are made (with credit card etc), for them to take my money and send it to Ardours account + subtraction of little amount for themselves this service: by me money (50-60 dollars) aren’t such a problem, nor I have problems with giving. :slight_smile: I simply kindly refuse every time when my bank offers credit card to me.

My bigger problem: In Ardour is the old version of translation file provided by me - quite a shame in some aspects - and I can’t to reach anybody from the team on common address. No of my e-mails in last months found its addressee: So whats functional connection on anybody with write access rights to repository?

I have both files for 2.8.11 Ardour release and 3.0 branch (finished on 20. 12. 2010)

Why does LinuxDSP keep making things that I need to have?

Because they know you need to have them!

Reminds me of the Waves Renaissance EQ. Very nice.

Still needs some nicer fonts, but looks good!

Submitted by christophski on Wed, 2011-01-19 13:50.

Still needs some nicer fonts, but looks good!


The Graph-EQ is great, no instrument channel should be without one!

BTW, I like those fonts, and after hours and hour of work, I still like them. This is, IMHO, after all tools, not toys :slight_smile:

I’m too stupid to upgrade my MKII version, I have a valid activation key for the MKI versions but I don’t get it how you can use that one for the MKII versions (don’t even find it anymore…), can anyone help me please?

@osterchrisi:Can you send me an email via the Contact Us link on the linuxDSP website and I’ll try and advise.

I purchased this one (and the MBC2) last week.

Friends, I will definitly have to redo all my premastering work, for my ears the plugins really kick out jamin (in sound and handling).

I changed my procedure:

  1. Record all tracks (for I am a keyboarder I do my work via overdubbing)
  2. Add as plugins (where needed) the proChannels from linuxDSP and the IR
  3. Do the downmix
  4. Export to a stereo track (called export.wav)
  5. Now open a session template (it has only the master bus) and import the export.wav
  6. Do the premastering with all benefits of Ardour (automation !) and the linuxDSP MK2 and MBC2
  7. Export the result now to a songname.wav

Doing it that way I experienced that I can get a much better quality than before.

Thanks for that great EQ !

Prof Knaakenbroed

PS: After reading some posts of sealade and linuxDSP, I’d like to be more precise: when exporting to the “export.wav” at step 4, I use “24 bit, floating point” because my Lexicon Omega recorded with 24/44.1 (and I think Ardour internally uses floating point). Only at step 7(CD export) I export with 16-Bit. So I try to keep the recorded quality as long as possible. Do you think, that’s OK ? Or am I false ?

I purchased it last night, and I’m equally excited. Though I’ve not used Jamin, I can’t imagine I’ll ever use another EQ or filter again. Not even the one with the proeq/pro comp bundle, which I paid for earlier. Those old rotary knobs just seem so old fashioned suddenly.

I know it’s called a graphic EQ,and with good reasons, but really it’s a 10 band parametric - just amazing!


You’re right, but you should use 32bit even if your card uses 24 bit for recording. Every track sums a 24bit resolution to the final track, so the bigger resolution you keep until the end, the better. Than you convert to 16bit when exporting.

Good eq, tried it yesterday, I also love lv2fil, a must be in the plugin section.

Looks great.

Unfortunately me and many other individuals and institutions won’t use it until it’s Free Software.

There are business models that would safeguard this plugin’s development whilst respecting user freedom at the same time.

It’s a shame that some of the first and best Ardour plugins have taken the proprietary route.

@samtuke: While I respect your view that the plugins should be free, and I understand the distinction made between free as in the freedom to do what you want to / with the software and free as in no cost, unfortunately, if the freedom to do what you want with the software includes the freedom to distribute it without restriction then that is inseparably linked with the freedom not to pay for it. We released our first plugins as donation-ware, for about a year, in order to see if there was a business model that might support more free provision of the software. During that time, there were large numbers of downloads, and the software was exceptionally well received. Unfortunately only a very small minority of generous individuals took the opportunity to donate. As a business who’s only product is software, it is difficult to see how giving away the intellectual property contained within it for free can constitute an effective business model. However we do acknowledge the many fine open source projects such as Ardour, without which our software would be of limited use, and where possible contribute financially or otherwise to those projects.

"There are business models that would safeguard this plugin's development whilst respecting user freedom at the same time."

This is an often repeated argument in favour of releasing software as free / open source, but without exception, on every one of the many occasions I have seen it used, it is never accompanied by any illustration of what those business models might be. Perhaps you can suggest some?

We developed the plugins, first and foremost as enthusiastic supporters and users of linux audio, who wanted to provide the software for other linux users, and broaden the scope of what was available on this platform and this is currently the only way in which the fulltime development of the software can be funded.

@samtuke: “Unfortunately me and many other individuals and institutions won’t use it until it’s Free Software.” The natural consequence of this is that you will need to wait until some with linuxdsp’s skill set finds it in their heart and mind to develop equivalent software without needing to care about the revenue stream from their work. You’re clearly free to do that, just as linuxdsp is clearly free to adopt a proprietary route toward the task of providing quality plugins. Frankly, though, I think you might be waiting a long time.

As a reminder, Ardour only got started because of my then-financially-independent status. Its only been the money I made at that allowed me to develop Ardour at all, and to take my time in slowly creating a somewhat viable financial model for working on it. That process took roughly 10 years, and works mostly because of a fairly unique set of circumstances that surround Ardour. Its far from clear that it could ever be applied to plugins, at least not of the kind and quality that linuxdsp appears interested in creating.

"There are business models that would safeguard this plugin's development whilst respecting user freedom at the same time."

This is an often repeated argument in favour of releasing software as free / open source, but without exception, on every one of the many occasions I have seen it used, it is never accompanied by any illustration of what those business models might be.

I can perfectly understand linuxdsp.
Yes, free licenses are the best way to distribute software. But good software does not grow on trees, developers must have a solid foundation to pay the rent.
Audio software is not considered buisiness-critical by big companies that sponsor/support free developers because they make money with services around free software in the office/server-world.

So if we want talented devs to write pro-software fulltime, we will have to find ways to finance such development.

It would be much better, if linuxdsp could make a living with releasing plugins under free licenses. Say, there would be a user-base of maybe 6000 and 2000 of them would contribute USD25/year. One out of 3 users would need to waive to buy 2 CDs or 4 packs of cigarrettes or to have one dinner in a middleclass restaurant in a year and one dev could work fulltime and release free software often and early.

This we could do, but we do not.

And as long as this is the case I have full, 100% understanding that linuxdsp does not risk to go open source because he cannot trust us to fund him, if he would.
And I appreciate that someone writes software of such quality natively for Linux and perfectly integrated in the living ecosystem of jack.

I am all for paying for good software.

Open source is great, but there is free and free. Pay for Ardour (subscribe) because ardour is NOT free. Neither should linuxDSP’s great plugins be.

(you may recall that his plugs started out as free, but donations were slow… you yourself are to blame…)