Maselec plug in shoot out

While they do sound very close, thought the hardware sounded more open and more mid bass weight.

Can buy plug for $149, seems good value.

The MH sontec sounds great! I have had most of the nice Hardware mastering EQs and I could easily roll with the Plugin on masters.

Which one is the one the Carson guy from NE did?

And I just don’t know if I even know how to judge eq’s. Either they sound good and accomplish the task or they don’t.

You can match the shelves and there’s no distortion at sample rates that are increments of 44.1 kHz. The maselec shelves start lower or higher than the Massenburg are listed it and the bells are unique. The anti-alias filter is different at 48 kHz.

It’s too bad you didn’t put it in Plug-in Doctor first to see how it looks. Could have saved yourself the embarrassment of weighing in (in public no less) on an audio processing tool after merely having listened to how it processes audio. Smh

A very good demo of spl as a mastering tool:

I’ve got all the Relab plug-ins so I’ll look forward to demoing this one.

Currently the only plugin EQ I own that feels and sounds like a high end solid state EQ and can match my Millennia EQ is the amazing DMG Equilibrium.

So I’ll have to compare the Relab EQ to the DMG.

I find it hard to image any DSP EQ can better Equilibrium when it’s using some cpu cycles on a long impulse length.

I call the DMG Equilibrium “analog” digital EQ.
I’ve never bought another separate EQ plugin since I bought it ages ago.

Let’s see.

how it looks is how it sounds. There are digital artifacts, deliberate distortion, unwanted distortion, unwanted phasing and even optional deliberate phase shift to emulate a hardware loop back which is ridiculously because the digital processor cannot even emulate the analog one’s curves correctly.

Just because the digital distortion and artifacts work on one track, does not mean that they will work on most or on any other. Poor attempt at a mastering tool especially when modern productions are all over the place and many mastering jobs are not popular music productions with overt saturation and fx.

This is just distorted eq with more digital artifacts than what psp was putting out 20 years ago. That psp 4 pack had aliased distortion but the filters didn’t cramp. cramping is itself an aliasing artifact where the poles of the filter warp. pre-warped filters to mostly match analog frequency response have existed since 1990s (Oxford and Renaissance eqs) and oversampled eqs to mostly match analog frequency and phase response have existed since the original mdweq in early 2000s

There is no reason for this or any of the make believe pack to exist other than to make money from unsuspecting, naive customers or to have more antiquated processing for metric halo’s onboard dsp.

The ideal digital state variable filters were worked out and published by Simper and Zavalishin in their free papers too. There are zero reasons for any recent digital eq to use filter structures from older text books too. Yet we still see direct form eqs try to present themselves as mastering eqs with oversampling, pre-warping, and or some sort of linear phase warping to try to match an analog phase response claiming that it results in less ringing than the svf filters oversampled and then downsampled on output yet that still has the drawbacks of direct form filters but with a nicer top end.

Dan

Just when I thought, we had moved on !

Depends what you want. It's good for sharp surgical bells without changing the tone. For very broad boosts and cuts, I'd rather use something else designed for those or with more interesting gain:q dependencies.