- Jan 22, 2008
I don't think so. Q is a mathematical abstraction, that correlates only distantly with the very object of equalization. I think BW is much more evident. But it can't use the historic definition of BW either.Defining it is easy.
The audio community has more or less settle on a definition of boost/cut for shelving EQ's; it is based on a number of assumptions, but it works. Why couldn't it settle on a imilar agreement for BW in peak EQ's. The only people I've seen using the academic definition of Q in peaking EQ's are DSP programmers, who generally end up with a total cock-up, that needs to be corrected by people who understand audio.
Why choose the value that just doesn't work?Justifying the definition is the hard part. Let's say 3dB.