|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jul 8, 2022 6:55:04 GMT -6
Unless they model an aspect of saturation or tube/transformer I/O aren’t all these cookbook DSP EQ’s the same? Yes they have different GUI’s, features and workflows (which is important) but sound wise well …. I managed to null to total silence my expensive Sonnox Oxford EQ3 to the stock EQ in Cubase. So much for the Sonnox having a great sound! I should try nulling Pro 3 and Equilibrium to the Cubase stock EQ - they will portably null too. No idea. Probably. But all I can tell you is it seems like I can make less moves and the top end sounds better. So if it makes me happier, and I think I’m getting where I want to go faster, it’s a better tool. I miss the dynamic eq portion, but maybe the ability to do that was causing me to over-eq things. |
|
|
|
Crave EQ
Jul 8, 2022 7:02:53 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by svart on Jul 8, 2022 7:02:53 GMT -6
Unless they model an aspect of saturation or tube/transformer I/O aren’t all these cookbook DSP EQ’s the same? Yes they have different GUI’s, features and workflows (which is important) but sound wise well …. I managed to null to total silence my expensive Sonnox Oxford EQ3 to the stock EQ in Cubase. So much for the Sonnox having a great sound! I should try nulling Pro 3 and Equilibrium to the Cubase stock EQ - they will portably null too. I would think the only difference would be how much distortion/harmonics are added, but that should be a measurable effect and should leave residuals after nulling. Sometimes they're frequency dependant too. Did you use an audio track for nulling, or something like a sine wave? |
|
|
|
Post by mcirish on Jul 8, 2022 7:19:20 GMT -6
Crave and Kirchhoff are my main digital EQs. If i don't need to do any dynamics, I pick Crave because of the speed I can work at. Great EQ.
|
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Jul 8, 2022 11:42:25 GMT -6
Unless they model an aspect of saturation or tube/transformer I/O aren’t all these cookbook DSP EQ’s the same? Yes they have different GUI’s, features and workflows (which is important) but sound wise well …. I managed to null to total silence my expensive Sonnox Oxford EQ3 to the stock EQ in Cubase. So much for the Sonnox having a great sound! I should try nulling Pro 3 and Equilibrium to the Cubase stock EQ - they will portably null too. I would think the only difference would be how much distortion/harmonics are added, but that should be a measurable effect and should leave residuals after nulling. Sometimes they're frequency dependant too. Did you use an audio track for nulling, or something like a sine wave? A drum loop. The Oxford EQ doesn't add any harmonics, IIRC neither does Pro 3 or Equilibrium - unlike for example, some Pultec EQ's that have the tubes and Xformers modelled. |
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Jul 8, 2022 11:56:58 GMT -6
Unless they model an aspect of saturation or tube/transformer I/O aren’t all these cookbook DSP EQ’s the same? Yes they have different GUI’s, features and workflows (which is important) but sound wise well …. I managed to null to total silence my expensive Sonnox Oxford EQ3 to the stock EQ in Cubase. So much for the Sonnox having a great sound! I should try nulling Pro 3 and Equilibrium to the Cubase stock EQ - they will portably null too. No idea. Probably. But all I can tell you is it seems like I can make less moves and the top end sounds better. So if it makes me happier, and I think I’m getting where I want to go faster, it’s a better tool. I miss the dynamic eq portion, but maybe the ability to do that was causing me to over-eq things. To my ears they all seem to have slightly different curves or different Q/Gain relationships/dependencies which make some plugins more immediate and appealing to the ear - which can lead to faster work, which is a good thing of course. For example a razor sharp precision mastering parametric is a different kind of tool and not something I'd personally reach for when mixing, where as I love mixing with the UAD 88RS channel strip EQ as to my ears its just incredibly musical soft and fluffy .... in it's choice of curves and Q/Gain interaction. Then there's the Softube Console One plugins that are also heaps of fun to mix with - does it ever end :-) |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jul 8, 2022 18:30:54 GMT -6
So a client asked today - “did you use a different eq on my vocal?” Because he didn’t like it. I had replaced FF with Crave. Lol. I officially have no idea anymore. Although, I do think it might be that I overused crave because I was excited about it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2022 16:55:34 GMT -6
So a client asked today - “did you use a different eq on my vocal?” Because he didn’t like it. I had replaced FF with Crave. Lol. I officially have no idea anymore. Although, I do think it might be that I overused crave because I was excited about it. Wow because there's pretty much no difference except that Crave is cleaner and Fabfilter has a proportional Q option that will lead to less aggressive EQ but it's still nothing like an API 550 or Oxford Type 4 |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jul 9, 2022 20:13:46 GMT -6
So a client asked today - “did you use a different eq on my vocal?” Because he didn’t like it. I had replaced FF with Crave. Lol. I officially have no idea anymore. Although, I do think it might be that I overused crave because I was excited about it. Wow because there's pretty much no difference except that Crave is cleaner and Fabfilter has a proportional Q option that will lead to less aggressive EQ but it's still nothing like an API 550 or Oxford Type 4 I’m sure it was only because of the moves I made. Not the sound of the eq |
|
|
|
Post by drumsound on Jul 10, 2022 1:45:22 GMT -6
Wow because there's pretty much no difference except that Crave is cleaner and Fabfilter has a proportional Q option that will lead to less aggressive EQ but it's still nothing like an API 550 or Oxford Type 4 I’m sure it was only because of the moves I made. Not the sound of the eq If I'm reading this right, you didn't try to match setting, but replaced the Fab with Crave and went to work? If so, I would believe, as you do, that what the client heard was the different tonal choice, not the different plugins. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jul 10, 2022 11:12:17 GMT -6
I’m sure it was only because of the moves I made. Not the sound of the eq If I'm reading this right, you didn't try to match setting, but replaced the Fab with Crave and went to work? If so, I would believe, as you do, that what the client heard was the different tonal choice, not the different plugins. Yeah exactly. Who knows why I made those different tonal choices. Just my ears at that time of the day? Maybe. I didn’t try to match, just tried to scout it the way I wanted to hear it with crave. I had done the same in FF. Muted that one and used crave. He heard, and asked if I’d used something different on his vocal. I put the ff back on and he was happy. So probably more about him not hearing his vocal the same way he had been |
|
|
|
Post by drumsound on Jul 10, 2022 12:26:23 GMT -6
If I'm reading this right, you didn't try to match setting, but replaced the Fab with Crave and went to work? If so, I would believe, as you do, that what the client heard was the different tonal choice, not the different plugins. Yeah exactly. Who knows why I made those different tonal choices. Just my ears at that time of the day? Maybe. I didn’t try to match, just tried to scout it the way I wanted to hear it with crave. I had done the same in FF. Muted that one and used crave. He heard, and asked if I’d used something different on his vocal. I put the ff back on and he was happy. So probably more about him not hearing his vocal the same way he had been I'm sure that's it. Have you tried to match settings and see how each EQ 'strikes' you? |
|
|
|
Post by drumsound on Jul 10, 2022 12:27:29 GMT -6
Also, everyone who tries all these different 'clean, modern, fully parametric' EQs, are they really that much different in sound for one another, and/or stock 'basic' EQs?
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 25, 2023 15:03:42 GMT -6
ok...I'm back to being off the Pro-Q bandwagon. It absolutely introduces artifacts and crunch when not in beast mode (linear).
|
|
|
|
Post by tkaitkai on Jan 25, 2023 15:49:32 GMT -6
ok...I'm back to being off the Pro-Q bandwagon. It absolutely introduces artifacts and crunch when not in beast mode (linear). Maybe my ears/brain are fooling me, but I swear the Kirchhoff EQ sounds better than Pro-Q, even if only by a hair. Same with the free JS ReEQ. That one is really cool. |
|
