Interesting Piece on Digital EQ

[Melodeath]

I found this article couple days ago,a nd thought you guys might be interested.

http://www.rhythminmind.net/presetblog/2009/03/digital-eq-fact-myth/

Apparently modelling EQs are the same as regular digital EQs, but with added saturation. And, apparently the reason why emulations wont sound exactly like hardware (other than the fact that there are differences between ahrdware units) is the fact that they don't seem to include phase distortions in the modelling

 

[Ermz]

This actually started on a GS thread several months back. If you search you can see my thread on it called something like 'The Myth about Digital EQ'. It was a really cool one to read!

 

[Erkan]

Yea I remember that thread... extremely educational and interesting.

Makes you wonder why the fuck you would spend all that money for that absurdly expensive EQ... what was its name, GenWave EQ or something? Isn't that like one of the most expensive digital EQs? Fucking hilarious if all it is is a bunch of saturation after a standard digital EQ huh

 

[TRA]

I was trying to explain this in the Waves SSL thread, and someone was trying to call b.s. on me. Thank you for posting this.

 

[Ermz]

Makes you wonder why the fuck you would spend all that money for that absurdly expensive EQ... what was its name, GenWave EQ or something? Isn't that like one of the most expensive digital EQs? Fucking hilarious if all it is is a bunch of saturation after a standard digital EQ huh

That one had a horrid GUI too and not much flexibility with picking center frequencies. Truly horrible with a weird, wonky super-coloured sound.

What this does come down to is workflow. I would still rather use an instance of SSL E-channel for EQ rather than loading up a stock Cubase EQ and then fiddling with various saturation plug-ins to get the desired effect. The former is much quicker, more expedient and efficient, which is crucial when mixing professionally.

But when it comes to standard 'clean' PEQs like the Waves Q series, Flux Epure, Sonnox EQ etc. it seems you can basically roll with anything. It's all the same deal.

 

[musickey]

 

[TRA]

I just created a file with equal boosts/cuts that AB tests the following EQs:

-PSP Neon
-Cubase 4 Studio stock EQ
-T-Racks 3 Linear Phase EQ
-Izotope Ozone 4 EQ

If anyone wants me to upload it let me know. I'm playing back on Bowers & Wilkins speakers using a custom power amp in a treated room....I can't hear a difference.

 

[GarethSE]

id like to hear it man, yeah.

 

[Melodeath]

I'm just wondering why they don't emulate the phase distortions in the analog gear.

 

[colonel kurtz]

I just created a file with equal boosts/cuts that AB tests the following EQs:

-PSP Neon
-Cubase 4 Studio stock EQ
-T-Racks 3 Linear Phase EQ
-Izotope Ozone 4 EQ

If anyone wants me to upload it let me know. I'm playing back on Bowers & Wilkins speakers using a custom power amp in a treated room....I can't hear a difference.

any null tests?

 

[Kazrog]

I use the standard EQ in Cubase for a lot of things these days, does the job nicely. When I want some extra flavor I go for UAD-1 Neve and Pultec EQ. If I had good outboard EQs, I would use them (a Vintech would be nice.)

 

[TRA]

any null tests?

No problem. To put the argument in the Waves SSL thread to rest I'm going to throw in the Waves SSL EQ. That ilok is at the studio so I won't have that file until this weekend.

I should have the file comparing the other EQs uploaded tonight.

 

[Andy Sneap]

how much do you think the graphics con you into thinking it sounds better?

 

[Ermz]

how much do you think the graphics con you into thinking it sounds better?

A hell of a lot!

I KNOW the SSL E-chan doesn't do anything special but I still use it just because the GUI makes me warm and fuzzy

 

[DanLights]

Yeah definitely looks of the GUI wins customers, I hate the gui of the poshifopishopiwhateverthefuck Eq, I love reaEq. I also use reaEq cause the filter options are very comfortable and easy to use, never actually did shootouts with other Eqs so can't say it sounds better, i just find it cooler and easier to use

 

[TRA]

how much do you think the graphics con you into thinking it sounds better?

Seriously. The GUI makes people feel good about parting with $800. It's sexy looking, but doesn't do anything different than the Cubase EQ.

 

[greyskull]

yeah i found that whole discussion VERY interesting.
Long story short, the next eq i buy will be this..

all the ITB eqs i got do the job just fine

 

[Mutant]

Yeah definitely looks of the GUI wins customers, I hate the gui of the poshifopishopiwhateverthefuck Eq

Hahaha !

I love it !

But i have some nice custom guis for it.
http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=167984

 

[Suicide_As_Alibi]

how much do you think the graphics con you into thinking it sounds better?

In the computer programming world, front-end designers get paid about the same as the hardcore developers that actually make the programs, simply because people will spend more money on things if they look pretty.

You just have to try and remember that ugly things have to try harder to get your attention

Steve

 

[Erkan]

Yup, I've been thinking about the GUI too and how much it affects us and it is VERY safe to say that a pretty GUI rapes our "objective" hearing when we look at the screen and compare stuff. It's just the way we work... if one of our senses is pleased, it affects our other senses. Fucking hate it but I guess that's the way it is...