For surgical cuts, what EQs are you using?

[TPCalm]

I've been using Presonus' Studio One built in ProEQ for quite some time now but I'm tired of having to open up 2-3 EQs per guitar because 5-bands is all I have to work with.
It's time and CPU consuming.

So, back to the thread title, what could you recommend to help me circumvent this issue?

And so I can avoid this before it starts, I cannot use the search function for this. "EQ" is two characters and the search needs three.

 

[ballstix]

First of all, you can most definitely search: http://www.google.com/cse/home?cx=007593470310830667409:4qw46y8lnza

Second, if you need more bands, FabFilter's Pro-Q is great and has some neat options. My favorite is DMG Audio's EQuality, though, but it only allows for 9 bands iirc, which is enough for just about anything I do.

 

[MetalSound]

waves q10
UAD cambridge eq

 

[luismars]

ReaEQ, infinite bands

 

[guitarguru777]

If you need more then 10 bands on a parametric there is something wrong with your micing technique and its a shit tone to begin with. I have NEVER had to use more then 4 or 5 on any given signal. That being said Waves Q10 here as well.

 

[Ascendant]

I use ReaEQ, I've heard ReaFIR is nice too. Not sure why you'd need to EQ guitars that hard, 5 seems enough (hp/lp, 3 bands).

 

[KHE]

1+ for ReaEQ

 

[luismars]

I use ReaEQ, I've heard ReaFIR is nice too. Not sure why you'd need to EQ guitars that hard, 5 seems enough (hp/lp, 3 bands).

ReaFir adds too many undesired harmonics and I find it very hard to handle.

 

[TPCalm]

Interesting…
Yeah, I was thinking that my problem here is that I shouldn't need that many bands but the info on what everyone else is using is great.
Although I do find that 3 bands + HP/LP is far too little in order to sculpt great tone that sits in a busy mix.
I wouldn't say the source is bad, but as far as what I do now, I'm using a HP/LP, then removing boxiness, then giving some 3-dimensionality, creating room for vox, and removing hi-end fizz.
That's at least 6 bands (assuming there is only one fizzy harsh band in the high-end, which usually isn't the case) and as far as I know, this is a tried and repeated formula to sculpt guitars that sit well in busy mixes.
I could be wrong or just trying to fix something that shouldn't even be there in the first place...

 

[Wisheraser]

DMG EQuality

 

[Loren Littlejohn]

If you need more then 10 bands on a parametric there is something wrong with your micing technique and its a shit tone to begin with. I have NEVER had to use more then 4 or 5 on any given signal. That being said Waves Q10 here as well.

I'm with you, although I don't like my LPF and HPF to take up any of those 4-5 bands, personal preference of course. So a 4 band eq is fine with me as long as the HPF and LPF are separate the main 4 parametric bands. (yeah I guess this means I actually prefer a 6 band eq haha).

 

[crillemannen]

PT Eq III

 

[zvish]

q10

 

[koalamo]

I'm pretty sure this thread gets posted like every two weeks. Apqualizr.

 

[botus99]

waves q10
UAD cambridge eq

+1

 

[Ermz]

If you need more then 10 bands on a parametric there is something wrong with your micing technique and its a shit tone to begin with. I have NEVER had to use more then 4 or 5 on any given signal. That being said Waves Q10 here as well.

Agreed, but ever since I started outsourcing reamping I have rarely ever been able to get away with any less than 15 bands. The reality is that most people will need to process much more heavily than would be necessary under 'ideal' circumstances.

DMGAudio eQuality is the scalpel of choice here.

 

[DigitalMetal]

Sonnox EQ

 

[Straight Shooter]

Sonnox w/GML or Massenburg MDW

 

[wetpenny]

DMG EQuality

+1

 

[TonyS.]

Agreed, but ever since I started outsourcing reamping I have rarely ever been able to get away with any less than 15 bands. The reality is that most people will need to process much more heavily than would be necessary under 'ideal' circumstances.

DMGAudio eQuality is the scalpel of choice here.

Why the fuck 15 bands?