|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 4, 2021 13:20:35 GMT -6
I know this has been talked about a lot...but I didn't see a dedicated thread. Am I crazy or does this have less of a "sound" than Pro Q3? I swear PQ3 does something to the top end...but it could totally be confirmation bias...
I really, really like Crave though - didn't think there would be anything easier to use than PQ3, but this might be it. Wish it had Dynamic EQ though.
Do they ever do any sales?
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 4, 2021 13:27:07 GMT -6
Never used PQ3 but when I was about to buy it I found Crave instead. I mentioned it in a couple EQ threads but no dedicated thread that I know of. Cheaper, almost as fully featured as PQ3, but with the additional ability to change phase algorithms. Crave is also very lightweight so CPU and memory aren't eaten up using it. It's definitely in my list of top plugins.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 4, 2021 13:31:11 GMT -6
So ok, I just went to their website to check some info and they have Crave 2 out now. I'm still using Crave 1. I might upgrade because you can do nutty stuff like position the filters in M/S or L/R space. Wow. Crave 2 also uses less CPU and memory than it did, and it was already lighter than others to begin with.
I like the GUI from crave 1 better though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Mar 4, 2021 13:55:55 GMT -6
Crave is always $70. I find it to be super transparent with a slightly dark or mellow sound, almost thick compared to some other EQ's, very subtle though. Doesn't have the same high end punch of the next two I'll mention.
Fab Pro Q3 does something just a tiny bit bright, tiny bit midrange to my ear, very subtle, but it's a pleasant sound. Doesn't quite have the same large wide image, in direct A/B.
I chose Toneboosters EQ4, compare it to the other two if you do a shootout. It's even more transparent, and can sound huge on a master or a mix. Price is always about $50. Features are similar to the other two, IE, tons of features. Super low CPU footprint also. The website is really ugly but I would say to get the plugin in your folder and listen, you might hear it. Try the demo of all three.
Could use any three of them, no problem. All are great choices depending on your specific preference. All are super easy to work with and will do anything an EQ could do.
|
|
|
|
Post by mcirish on Mar 4, 2021 14:03:46 GMT -6
I use Crave v1 and V2 on every session. It's very well done. I have a ton of EQ options and this just gets it done. Keith is also pretty quick on any bug fixes. I'd buy it again.
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Mar 4, 2021 14:07:55 GMT -6
When I did a blind comparison a couple of weeks ago I preferred Pro-Q3 because it sounded a little less messed with to me, clearer. But Crave is cool and this is totally splitting hairs (and also totally subjective). Also, sometimes 'messed with' is exactly what I want, just not in my main utility EQ. And again, total hair splitting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Mar 4, 2021 14:20:51 GMT -6
Yeah, regarding the OP, if I already owned Pro Q3, I'm not sure I'd go shopping for Crave unless looking for a slightly different flavor. It also doesn't do dynamic EQ yet, although that could come in a future update.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 4, 2021 14:50:05 GMT -6
Yeah maybe I'm just hearing shit.
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Mar 4, 2021 14:57:26 GMT -6
Yeah maybe I'm just hearing shit. Or maybe you do just dig Crave more. I'd say it's definitely worth processing a few key tracks with both, bouncing something (I just did like one minute of a mix), and comparing the two blind with a keystroke. You might save yourself some cash. Or you might find you do really like Crave better and you can sell your Pro-Q3 license. It should sell fast. |
|
|
|
Post by superwack on Mar 4, 2021 15:04:46 GMT -6
I mentioned this in the other EQ thread but I think I like Crave more than FF and have done blind A/B tests and always pick Crave. For some reason, I enjoy using Crave and find it more inspiring plus I think it sounds "better." having said that I already own FF and it's a more developed product and I can't convince myself I want to go through the hassle of changing for such a slight difference. Keith from CraveDSP said he is going to do a Pro Tools pass and implement PT's automation shortcuts and the channel EQ display, etc. at some point this year. After that, I'm going to re-evaluate and decide (or not?!)
|
|
|
|
Post by ab101 on Mar 4, 2021 15:23:42 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by professorplum on Mar 4, 2021 15:28:05 GMT -6
Been using Crave as my main EQ for years. Love that you can change the phase type per instance - really does make a difference if you use alot of them throughout a session, and can make for different sounds on the mix buss
|
|
|
|
Post by superwack on Mar 4, 2021 15:33:17 GMT -6
Been using Crave as my main EQ for years. Love that you can change the phase type per instance - really does make a difference if you use alot of them throughout a session, and can make for different sounds on the mix buss Do you have any tips of what phase mode you usually use where? I'm still playing around with the demo - thanks! |
|
|
|
Crave EQ
Mar 4, 2021 16:39:06 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 4, 2021 16:39:06 GMT -6
Yeah maybe I'm just hearing shit. Or maybe you do just dig Crave more. I'd say it's definitely worth processing a few key tracks with both, bouncing something (I just did like one minute of a mix), and comparing the two blind with a keystroke. You might save yourself some cash. Or you might find you do really like Crave better and you can sell your Pro-Q3 license. It should sell fast. I need to save cash post haste. |
|
|
|
Post by nomatic on Mar 4, 2021 17:34:43 GMT -6
I use crave over most digital EQs for mastering and prefer it to FF and DMG...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2021 20:57:58 GMT -6
Crave, Sonnox Oxford EQ, PSP MasterQ2 and the Tokyo Dawn Slick EQs are genius. I think Sonnox Oxford EQ is still the fastest decramped, zero oversampling pramretic eq. I like knobs and scrollwheel. nomatic I find DMG Equilibrium unusable. It’s like a build your own eq and has poor knob weighting imo. The knob weighting is super important and Sonnox and especially Tokyo Dawn just nail the digital knob feel. |
|
|
|
Post by drastic on Mar 4, 2021 22:25:59 GMT -6
Hadn’t tried the Crave EQ before tonight. Dig it! 👍
|
|
|
|
Post by mcirish on Mar 5, 2021 8:43:10 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on Mar 5, 2021 14:46:42 GMT -6
I use crave over most digital EQs for mastering and prefer it to FF and DMG... Crave, Sonnox Oxford EQ, PSP MasterQ2 and the Tokyo Dawn Slick EQs are genius. I think Sonnox Oxford EQ is still the fastest decramped, zero oversampling pramretic eq. I like knobs and scrollwheel. nomatic I find DMG Equilibrium unusable. It’s like a build your own eq and has poor knob weighting imo. The knob weighting is super important and Sonnox and especially Tokyo Dawn just nail the digital knob feel. I still love EQuilibrium, and I bought it within a few weeks of its original launch, so I've used it a long time now. But I get that it's not for everyone. It's so powerful, but its organization is admittedly a bit complicated at first. I mean, it's DMG, so what do you expect? M/S or L/R on any individual band? EQuilibrium's been doing that since 2013. I have my default setup with it reflect circuit models I really like, and then I have quick presets to switch into whichever specific other model I might want. It's quick and painless. The "Q" knob does seem to be weighted oddly on some of the models, but IIRC Dave said he weighted them to closely mimic what the real hardware in question does when turning its "Q" knob. So if you turn it 80% of the way through its path and the Q changes very minimally, followed by the final 20% with drastic Q changes, it's b/c the hardware does that, too. Same with how much gain actually occurs when turning the gain knob on a particular model. The graph tells the truth, so you can see what the knobs are actually doing, irrespective of knob position. Anyway, I do think it's due for an update, so I hope Dave cleans up some of the GUI. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 5, 2021 15:29:47 GMT -6
I use crave over most digital EQs for mastering and prefer it to FF and DMG... So if you turn it 80% of the way through its path and the Q changes very minimally, followed by the final 20% with drastic Q changes, it's b/c the hardware does that, too. Same with how much gain actually occurs when turning the gain knob on a particular model. Ah yes, the good old "we used linear pots because reverse log combo pots were impossible to get and/or too expensive to have made" result. |
|
|
|
Crave EQ
Mar 5, 2021 15:58:13 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by jampa on Mar 5, 2021 15:58:13 GMT -6
The last big test I did, Equilibrium won
Over here it still reigns. I had a long learning curve with it, which isn't for everyone
TDR slick M was second. Yes it is much faster to use
Crave came before ProQ3
|
|
|
|
Post by jaba on Mar 6, 2021 10:57:00 GMT -6
Big Equilibrium fan here but have only used the others briefly.
It's set to load a very simple four band EQ with high and low filters. No RTA. If I need more, I can easily get to it but often don't.
Good call on the feel of digital knobs. It's very satisfying but I think I've gotten so used to what I use it's a non issue. Between the mouse's scroll wheel and a finger on a keyboard key for fine tuning I can't say it slows me down in any way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Mar 6, 2021 11:31:11 GMT -6
That reminds me of a small idea, whichever one you pick, learn the workflow, all the secrets and little shortcuts, become efficient. That's sort of the whole point of these things, fast accurate EQ. I'm still learning the Toneboosters, picked up a couple new shortcuts yesterday. They all work a little differently regarding key commands and so on so you have to pay attention.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2021 21:46:24 GMT -6
I use crave over most digital EQs for mastering and prefer it to FF and DMG... Crave, Sonnox Oxford EQ, PSP MasterQ2 and the Tokyo Dawn Slick EQs are genius. I think Sonnox Oxford EQ is still the fastest decramped, zero oversampling pramretic eq. I like knobs and scrollwheel. nomatic I find DMG Equilibrium unusable. It’s like a build your own eq and has poor knob weighting imo. The knob weighting is super important and Sonnox and especially Tokyo Dawn just nail the digital knob feel. I still love EQuilibrium, and I bought it within a few weeks of its original launch, so I've used it a long time now. But I get that it's not for everyone. It's so powerful, but its organization is admittedly a bit complicated at first. I mean, it's DMG, so what do you expect? M/S or L/R on any individual band? EQuilibrium's been doing that since 2013. I have my default setup with it reflect circuit models I really like, and then I have quick presets to switch into whichever specific other model I might want. It's quick and painless. The "Q" knob does seem to be weighted oddly on some of the models, but IIRC Dave said he weighted them to closely mimic what the real hardware in question does when turning its "Q" knob. So if you turn it 80% of the way through its path and the Q changes very minimally, followed by the final 20% with drastic Q changes, it's b/c the hardware does that, too. Same with how much gain actually occurs when turning the gain knob on a particular model. The graph tells the truth, so you can see what the knobs are actually doing, irrespective of knob position. Anyway, I do think it's due for an update, so I hope Dave cleans up some of the GUI. Mark, do you know what Digital+ Compensation does? Adjust feedback and give analog phase? Also any ideas on what FIR "analogue" mode is? That seems like a bit of a non-sequitur to me. |
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on Mar 6, 2021 23:33:29 GMT -6
I still love EQuilibrium, and I bought it within a few weeks of its original launch, so I've used it a long time now. But I get that it's not for everyone. It's so powerful, but its organization is admittedly a bit complicated at first. I mean, it's DMG, so what do you expect? M/S or L/R on any individual band? EQuilibrium's been doing that since 2013. I have my default setup with it reflect circuit models I really like, and then I have quick presets to switch into whichever specific other model I might want. It's quick and painless. The "Q" knob does seem to be weighted oddly on some of the models, but IIRC Dave said he weighted them to closely mimic what the real hardware in question does when turning its "Q" knob. So if you turn it 80% of the way through its path and the Q changes very minimally, followed by the final 20% with drastic Q changes, it's b/c the hardware does that, too. Same with how much gain actually occurs when turning the gain knob on a particular model. The graph tells the truth, so you can see what the knobs are actually doing, irrespective of knob position. Anyway, I do think it's due for an update, so I hope Dave cleans up some of the GUI. Mark, do you know what Digital+ Compensation does? Adjust feedback and give analog phase? Also any ideas on what FIR "analogue" mode is? That seems like a bit of a non-sequitur to me. I'm not nearly as into the super-deep-dive on EQuilibrium as some folks are, but I have arrived at some settings that my ear seems to prefer. Though I really haven't experimented heavily with all the options. Here's what Dave says in the manual re: the various FIR modes: Re: Digital vs. Digital+, I honestly don't know what the "+" is doing. I know Dave says it's a little better, but I don't know the technology behind it. He originally said for almost every usage in tracking and mixing, IIR mode withOUT Digital+ is good. But that's what he said when EQuilibrium launched, when CPUs were considerably slower. Most of the time, I find myself using DSP settings of: FIR mode, Analogue phase, Impulse length of around 4096 (except on Render DSP, I set it to 65,536), x1 padding, Kaiser Window Shape, Window Parameter of 0.50. I may try out IIR mode again soon for realtime just to see if I notice anything detrimental, but keep the Render settings where I have 'em. I've never played around with the Free Phase setting, but I know some MEs use it, and honestly, the description of it sounds cool - I just haven't tried it in lo these many years. Hope that's at least somewhat helpful... |
|
