What EQ???

Dan Worral is a good presenter but he's sometimes another youtube talking head spreading misinformation. Here he isn't looking at the pass band of the EQs. You can't get analog tone and analog phase at 44.1 or 48 khz so to get both, you need to oversample, apply the filters, and downsample again which will have an anti-alias filter. One of the first EQs to do this was the Massenburg MDWEQ which still has one of the punchiest anti-alias filters. Fabfilter Q3 uses Orfanidis type de-cramped filters. It will absolutely not come close to the same phase as an oversampled eq with an anti-alias filter unless he selected the "natural phase" mode, which he did. Then different oversampled eqs will never, ever sound the same unless they use the same anti-alias filters and a clean digital parametric eq will never, ever sound the same as a bunch of inductors. Fabfilter will not be the same as say the Plugin Alliance Bettermaker EQ232D coded by Better Maker or the digitally controlled analog passive Better Maker EQ he chose, which has inductors like a real Pultec, and inductor eqs ring and everything is applied in parallel. That Bettermaker digitally controlled analog eq might have an active gain stage afterwards, which will always add some distortion and change the sound slightly. And you will never create the same filter using different eqs in the real world generally anyway.

The bettermaker EQ he chose sounded good, clean, and thick. The Pro Q3 high end sounded like plastic digital shit. At least he chose drums that made the difference easy to hear vs trying to minimize the different to convince you that the EQs are the same.

This was one of the old gearslutz battle royales. I remember using the free variety of sound eqs back in the day for shelves and whatever 1073 and API 550 emulations I could find because they often sounded so much better than the stock daw eqs.
gearspace.com/board/so-much-gear-so-little-time/330874-digital-eq-fact-amp-myth.html