The Truth About Digital EQ

[stargazer7]

If there was a flexible parametric EQ, however, that had tons of bands on tap and had presets such as "Neve," "Pultec," "API," etc. then it would be the ultimate. Anyone know of such a plugin (preferably for VST?)

I guess the closest would be "URS Channel Strip Pro"... The EQ band options are selectable based on analog console EQ's including:

1951 Program EQ - Tube (Pultec), 1967 Console EQ - American 4 Band (API), 1970 Console EQ - British 3 band Class A (Neve), 1972 Console EQ - British 4 band Class A/B (Neve), or 1980 Console EQ - British 4 Band (SSL) --- I dont know where the "sound" of the models comes from when you select a model for the band, but I would guess that its in the way the Q works. If its true that all decently coded digital EQ's are essentially the same, then Im sure you can replicate any of the URS CSP EQ models with your DAW's stock EQ with a little work.

With that, I agree in the observation that it is particularly about workflow. If one EQ plug works over the other because its the color Blue or whatever, and it inspires you, then so be it.

 

[Kazrog]

stargazer - the URS isn't quite what I mean, it's not any different than owning other emulated EQs. Also it's not the look of the plugin that matters - it's how it's calibrated in terms of curves. I suppose I could spend hours taking frequency histograms of my favorite EQs and make meticulous presets for a parametric EQ based off of them - but I would honestly pay to have that work done for me already as plugin presets. Then I would pretty much use ONLY that EQ on everything and I would save tons of time AND money.

 

[stargazer7]

stargazer - the URS isn't quite what I mean, it's not any different than owning other emulated EQs. Also it's not the look of the plugin that matters - it's how it's calibrated in terms of curves. I suppose I could spend hours taking frequency histograms of my favorite EQs and make meticulous presets for a parametric EQ based off of them - but I would honestly pay to have that work done for me already as plugin presets. Then I would pretty much use ONLY that EQ on everything and I would save tons of time AND money.

Ok...I got you now. Hey, I totally agree with you. That would be pretty sweet to have an EQ as the one you describe.

I tend to use the Sonalksis EQ all the time because it is very flexable and I has many variables as far as Q, bell and shelf styles/curves are concerned. I dont really need any other EQ really. Any sculpting I need to do with static EQ, its all achievable with that EQ, for me. I dont look at it and worry if it sounds like an SSL 4000 or whatever, and frankly I dont care. I just need a sculpting tool that gets the job done, is easy to use, and that has minimal/zero latency. Besides the essential reasons, I also like it because it has a spectrum display, smooth graphics, and well....because its "blue"

 

[Ermz]

If there was a flexible parametric EQ, however, that had tons of bands on tap and had presets such as "Neve," "Pultec," "API," etc. then it would be the ultimate. Anyone know of such a plugin (preferably for VST?)

This would be what you're after: http://www.tritonedigital.com/product_info.php?cPath=23&products_id=31

and to a lesser degree, this: http://www.ddmf.eu/

FWIW I've used the Waves SSL pack for years now. For some reason I loved what it did to my workflow ever since I got it. I stopped looking at those visual curves, trying to EQ material visually rather than using my ears. It also limited how many bands I could play around with and forced me to make the most of every cut and boost. Along with that it apparently adds some subtle harmonic distortion. All those things combined seem to make it work for me.

 

[AudioGeekZine]

I'm not sure exactly how he's pulling it off, I tried to do the same trick with a number of EQs and couldn't get any of them to null out.
I asked him about it in an email and he's since ignored me.

 

[schnarf2]

What you guys are hearing with the steep filters could be the actual filter ringing -- the filter itself can oscillate a bit.

The deal with minimum phase, if it makes things any easier to understand: You can look at the amplitude and phase response of a filter: how loud does the filter make each frequency, and how does it change its phase. Minimum phase relates amplitude and phase response in a very specific way. So given the amplitude response, and that it is minimum phase, the phase response is fixed.

Also, putting some nonlinear distortion before the EQ will have a different effect than after the EQ, since it's nonlinear.

 

[Kazrog]

Ermin - thanks for the links, I'll check those plugs out, even though they look inferior to most parametric EQs in terms of UI. The best parametric EQ I've come across is Sonalksis, so perhaps it's just a matter of setting up some cool presets in Sonalksis. Sonnox is also great, and of course UAD-1 Cambridge.

Impact of this thread in my daily work: likely nothing, unfortunately. I'll probably keep using my go-to plugins because I like them, but I am unlikely to purchase another EQ plugin, so perhaps the money savings will add up over time.

 

[t-rave]

Great post. I've also read this in Bob Katz's book, but it's really a reminder to get things right outside the box before you start going crazy with EQ in the box.

+1

I have a friend that records bands and he prints most of his eq's and compression on the way in with hardware and his mixes are stunning...he spends most of his time on mic placement and drum tuning and his mixes practically all there before the project is finished...

 

[Soundlurker]

Recently I've been using curveeq a lot. I tend to get carried away, however, with 30-40 bands of eq.

OT
Hey Kazrog, could you host your second banner somewhere else, so that I don't get pop ups requiring a username and password?

 

[thefyn]

So did he recommend one over another? I use the ones in waves and don;t like how much they give me that "through a toilet roll" sound when tweaking.

 

[Ermz]

+1

I have a friend that records bands and he prints most of his eq's and compression on the way in with hardware and his mixes are stunning...he spends most of his time on mic placement and drum tuning and his mixes practically all there before the project is finished...

That's exactly it, but it takes a certain degree of proficiency to know what you want as you're laying it down. But I definitely try to get the most of the good hardware in the studios I record at before the ITB treatment at home.

 

[Sloan]

I can read all this technical bullshit for the rest of my life and I still don't think it will help me create a better song.

 

[Fox Mulder]

edit: oops, wrong topic.

 

[Fox Mulder]

I can read all this technical bullshit for the rest of my life and I still don't think it will help me create a better song.

It wont help you create a better song. But it will make the song sound better.

 

[Josh Burgess]

OT
Hey Kazrog, could you host your second banner somewhere else, so that I don't get pop ups requiring a username and password?

+1 on each page of this thread I got a pop up asking to sign into something for recabinet

 

[Fox Mulder]

Arrite, I finally read each and every post made here and my head hurts.

 

[stargazer7]

The best parametric EQ I've come across is Sonalksis, so perhaps it's just a matter of setting up some cool presets in Sonalksis.

If you ever get around to making those presets for the Sonalksis EQ, I def would like to check em out.

 

[Kazrog]

+1 on each page of this thread I got a pop up asking to sign into something for recabinet

This was a bug, not intentional at all, and I fixed it. Sorry!!