Thanks for the clarification, I'm in IT and I believe more in numbers (placebo exists), maybe that's why I'm a little too dependent on measurements and calibration.
In my opinion, it's easier to start from a stable base, and then you don't have to measure every effect, than to adjust everything one by one to the waves.
But I completely understand your point of view, striving for a plug & play solution that is as foolproof as possible, which is more work, but in return the implementation will be easier for the user.
If the effects sufficiently compensate for the unique curve of the given shaker, and we assume that the environment does not distort it too much (directly from the pedal to the foot or on the seat), then it is possible that everyone will get the results you planned.
You've convinced me about the BDS so far, I'm going to get a pair. Maybe for the pedal if the current one is not enough, maybe instead of the BST, or both.
Keep up the good work!
I appreciate your input and interest.
I will go into a bit of a story here (not like me I know) but while it is off the general intention with this thread, here has been a bit of a blog type place for my views or shared experiences anways..
Maybe grab a coffee.....
To some extents a user can increase the strength of frequencies that different effects use by applying more volume for the effect layer. Okay its not like PEQ which offers individual frequency control and Simhub often may not be producing just pure sinewaves but instead the input value given for an effect may only be the centre value but have other lower/higher surrounding frequencies also generated with that.
Lets say a user wanted to increase an effect using 30Hz, as their unit is not so good with that range. Do you think they will run that layer at max volume but to help have a more flat response, they will lower the 40Hz range that their transducer has as one of its best feeling frequencies?
What we often see happening is the opposite, the user will try to boost further the frequency that already feels good, to get it to feel even better. An example of this is also seen in peoples effects. Look how often they will repeatedly use the best feeling frequencies and when multiple effects are operational together this further increases the amplitude of those frequencies. So what happens is, what the user actually experiences is a very narrow frequency range because what they are going to feel most is those peak frequencies the unit already generates best. They are then choosing to further boost these "bestie frequencies" over trying to from a better balance like you propose to help improve how the lesser felt frequencies come through.
So even if someone had APO or applied other forms of EQ, I think that same temptation is their to boost the frequencies the specific unit feels best with.
IIRC APO lets a user increase the gain to silly amounts like +30dB and people could very easily introduce distortion, makes things worse than better or even damage their tactile hardware.
If we compare to some hardware like Behringer DSP amps, those enable +15dB. I have a pair of t.amp Quadro 500 DSP amps (4x 500w per channel) and its DSP enables up to +24dB. Other amps like the t-racks DSP offers +13dB.
If +3dB represents approx 2x the energy for a frequency but from a persons hearing, +10dB is often referred as 2x as loud. If you try to increase frequencies even via simple pure tone tests and by felt determination on how good each feels.
A unit that is not as good at producing say 30Hz or below, with increased dB, some gains may be achieved but a user may still not be able to get a flat response. Simply because the operational performance or limitations of the physical unit just cant handle it or reach thier max regardless of how much gain is applied.
One difference I think we have here, is that unlike audio with music speakers using full range of frequencies via a source. With this tone generation via Simhub, it is restricted tones and we are not often even going to have the full bass range (1-200Hz) active.
I would say that users can find a sweet spot for volume with specific frequencies. This may vary too based on the users setup or their preferences. Yet anyone that spends time trying to tune their setup will discover the best results are not when we crank everything but do at least try to achieve more felt sensations from the frequencies their own hardware can mange to produce relatively well.
My Different Approach
I have two methods that help to get around the problem without necessarily applying EQ. The first is to do what this thread is highlighting and discover what unit operates best for general or all-round usage. Then to combine that unit with a piston based unit for the lower extended bass.
This is a key performance element as we want to be able to deliver as much of the 200Hz bass as possible but within that the first 100Hz is the most important.
The frequencies the all rounder unit maybe struggles with are then not so much an issue, as we use the other low bass unit to represent these.
What most people are missing with budget tactile, is strong enough energy with frequencies below 30Hz and also important, based on the feelings they can generate, right down to below 10hz. The issue is, getting the low bass can be expensive but I have to say, even the MQB1 with BDS feels friggin awesome in the testing I have been doing and as a pairing not crazy expensive.
I will have to see how well the Dayton 300 compares to the MQB1, but alternatives like the BK units are available too. These could be applied to a foot plate or seat.
It all comes down to how much a person wants to spend but this is why I also have wanted to make my own effects that a user with the budget hardware can experience. Yet be able to apply the additional layers for the more expensive units if/when they ever buy into those.
So I really like making the effects scalable like this and its not something I think others implemented with their approaches with effects.
Creating Effects
We see several people looking to improve effects based on making custom effects in how they apply/control the telemetry/data. Some cases in the past when I compared what people were doing, it did not bring much benefits. Things may have improved as people may have honed this more but I would be curious on a % scale what level of improvement in felt immersion custom effects can actually bring? I understand sometimes it enables possible advantages in the operation of the effects that standard effects do not offer.
Its interesting but my talents or focus are not with that. Instead I focus on the hardware and what frequencies can be applied to "represent the effects". What can we do to improve how we apply the available hardware, what hardware should we use etc.
At the end of the day, I believe, this is a larger part of what or how good what the user experiences. I would also say that I do not think the community in general has effects profiles that achieve the best from what the standard effects/controls can offer, even with multi-layering or applying more than one unit approaches.
I prefer to have the ability with the creation of the effects. Based on the desired feel, that I can apply low bass layers for a suitable unit to handle those and likewise with other frequencies the allrounder based unit. So both units can play a part in the generated output for the effect. This is one of the main limitations that any approach with making effects if they rely on a single unit to generate all the effects is then more restricted in what it can produce in feel/depth/detail.
User Tweaking The Effects Output Mix
As I apply often multiple layers for an effect. The user can determine how they want to tweek that by increasing/lowering the individual frequencies the effect uses over whatever units they have installed. So to some extent they have the ability to alter/generate the feel without any need of changing the frequencies. It is not EQ but they are shaping the generated output for that effects character and this gives a nice level of user preference to be applied.
The frequencies chosen for the effect will/should already feel good for that specific effect, as that is part of the process in how I build the effects anyways and to suit specific units. A lot of time is put into that part, especially how I try to combine how various effects when operational at similar times, are not lost in a mush of vibration. It is important to try to have it, that each effects, own vibrational detail/character comes through.
Additional Channels / Multiple Exciters Roles
Single units have limitations with the number of effects we can feel properly.... Everyone experiences this. So having additional channels helps with this (less is more issue). I found that multiple exciters to body locations make this possible.
If we separate effects to different units, and it is an approach worth experimenting with. So that one unit is not having to produce a lot of different effects.
This is why I want more than one BDS on my own pedals and with another on my foot rest section. A scenario would be that, we do not need to rely on one unit to produce Road Rumble / Road Vibration / Road Textures / Road Impacts if we split those to an additional unit, how much better does it let us feel each of the effects? What combinations do we place to one unit or the other? What it does is give the user more options but let us find potential improvements to suit each users preferences.
Frequencies For Effects
So the second element with my own approach is one I hinted at in the past a few times, but nobody else at that time I could see was doing....
We find when we try to apply multiples of effect frequencies, that some work better than others. 7hz and 11hz multiples can work rather well. Another approach is to apply a different layer as a harmonic, an octave higher than the fundamental or first harmonic frequency. This can help bolster the felt sensation. If we apply a 3rd harmonic this can soften the feel. Sometimes just a single frequency may bring the desired feel well enough. These are just examples of things I learned to help create certain sensations for different effects.
Also as discussed with
@mycroftlegros it became apparent to me about 2 years ago in testing, that applying
musical scales/intervals for effects also is excellent.
Equalisers
Why do these have specific frequencies for the slider controls, why is their 31 bands?
Is it not odd that 63Hz is used and not 60Hz and why are other sliders weird values too?
The answer is that a 31 Band EQ uses 1/3 octaves and octaves are important.
So what I decided to do was base things on octaves and apply low / centre / high values for 1/3 or 1/2 or full octaves for various effects. I experiment in effects creation with these and then determine with specific units which values to use.
We have a bit of a limitation in that Simhub only enables rounded values but I just then round up for the frequencies using .5 or more.
We don't have to apply this to all effect layers but as an approach it works very well. Notice also that that multiples of 7Hz and 11Hz do not feature much. So that approach can also be applied to certain effects.
It all comes down to the creator of the effects, own creative expression but at the same time, finding generated sensations that tend to work well for the purpose/nature of the effect.
Those that want more technical info,
knock yourself out
Hope it gives a bit more insight...
All I can do, is share with people my own efforts based on these approaches and for those that consider following or trying the effects I will offer.
How well they compare to other approaches, well who knows but I do know that the quality of immersion this approach, with using the (tested hardware) I will recommend. That combined, with effects built specifically for that hardware, is to a rather excellent standard.