Looking for a universal go-to EQ plug in.

[Larry Mal]

Hey folks, here's the deal: I'm looking for a great sounding, versatile, linear phase EQ. This will be used on a track by track basis, so low CPU overhead would be a plus, but I am running this on a dual 2.8 GHz eight core Mac Pro with currently 6 GB's of RAM, later to be expanded, so sound quality is more important to me than anything else. Cheaper, of course, is better, but I don't really want to miss out on quality to save a buck either. I already own two UAD-1 cards, and bought the Precision EQ, and while I like it, it's really mainly for mastering and not for finely tuned mixing work. I also own the DDMF EQ's, and enjoy them. I also own T-Racks 3, and use the linear phase EQ's with that, still, I am looking for something else for some reason. I am mainly using Logic Pro 8, and the linear phase EQ with it as my go-to channel EQ at the moment, but I also own Ableton Live 5, Digital Performer 5.13, and Pro Tools M-Powered 8, so I have access to the EQ's in those. But Pro Tools is only just for getting projects and audio out of Pro Tools, I can't use it well with the rest of my system, so that's that. Ableton is great, but not really what I use anymore, although I wish I had more time to get down with it.

Anyway, here is what I'm mainly considering, although I could go with any other idea at this point, so please make any suggestion you feel fit.

1) Ozone 4. (iZotope Ozone 4 Complete Mastering System)

I like the company a lot, and it's going to be inexpensive for me due to a student discount. I probably will buy it sooner or later, my thoughts are though that it largely duplicates what I already have with T-Racks 3, and I can't see using it necessarily as a channel EQ for some reason, although I probably could. I don't know how it sounds really either, I imagine pretty good, though.

2) Nugen Audio SEQ 2 Master Edition (SEQ2 Mix & Mastering EQ – Linear Phase Equalizer plugin VST & AU)

Again, not expensive. I do really like the 10 Hz-30kHz possibilites with this guy. I own their Visualizer and other plug ins and enjoy them. I've downloaded the demo and liked that too, but you can't really measure how much you like the sound in a week or whatever. I mainly didn't hear any sound, which is probably good. The interface is less than beautiful, but then again, I'm not buying art here.

3) RNDigital Unique-lizer. (http://www.rndigitallabs.com/Plug-ins/U ... lizer.html)

I have their D4 compressor and absolutely love it. I have demoed their Inspector XL and loved that. I think they've got some killer plug ins going, and again, will probably get this sooner or later, likely as part of a package with the Inspector XL and the other EQ (the FirEQ), and a limiter or something. I really like the visual aspect of this plug, it would probably be helpful in isolating a troubling frequency in a snare hit, say.

4) The UAD Cambridge EQ. (Universal Audio | UA Online Store ... index.html)

By now you are noticing that I want a more graphically styled modern EQ, and not a vintage emulating plug in. I intend to add some of those at some point (I guess I have some already with T-Racks and whatnot) but for now I want a super clean and versatile modern plug in style EQ that I would feel comfortable using on every track for it's uncolored sound. This is probably my least consideration, I think I would get much more processing power out of my native processing rather than my two UAD-1 cards, frankly, especially if Snow Leopard performs as promised. I am thinking the UAD-1 cards will turn out to be more of a processing liability more than anything else, I'm new to them though, but that's what it's looking like to me. I am unlikely to want to go to UAD-2 at the moment either, and am suspicious of the limitations of it's processing power vs. native as well. And this seems like an older offering of UAD's, and seems to want to be a "classic" console style EQ as well as the more neutral style version I am looking for... but then again, I don't know much about it compared to most.

That's the big ones- I have looked into URS, which seems like more vintage emulating stuff to me, as well as Sonalksis, which seems good. Waves is always there. TC Powercore and the Liquid Mix are possible (well TC Powercore unlikely, that's big time money) but I am sort of unwilling to add another Firewire bus PCIe card and am using a Firewire interface.

If anyone is still awake after this, I'd love to hear your thoughts! I'll be posting this on a few forums so let me know what you think please, thanks, L

[Lagerfeldt]

Start by reading this:

Digital EQ Fact & Myth. - signaltonoize.com

[A440]

Sonnox - Sonalksis - and I was going to say Duende X-EQ ....but it seems you don't want to get any more external processing. These arn't Linear Phase btw...but the X-EQ does have the option of parallel eq which I'm loving.

[redroom]

Ddmf IIeq Pro

[stafs]

PSP Neon!

[hipass]

Flux Epure II

[JPeters86]

Originally Posted by Lagerfeldt

Start by reading this:

Digital EQ Fact & Myth. - signaltonoize.com

Great stuff, the power of placebo explained.

[The MPCist]

Another vote for Sonnox & Sonalksis - the latter being very affordable!

[7rojo7]

Could a multi band compressor be considered?
McDSP MC2000
I use it as an EQ as well as a compressor at the same time
but MDW, Sonnox, even the EQIII work well if you use your ears and not your eyes to EQ

[daverich]

I think you're barking up the wrong tree.

Is there a particular reason you want to use Linear phase EQ as a track eq?

I suspect you're over-using EQ, trying to chase a sound that isn't there.

Try using more Hi-pass (and the DDMF you have will work very well for this purpose) and clear up some mud in your mixes - I'd bet that will bring you the clarity and presence you're chasing right now.

EQ is so easy to over-do, and unless you're doing some clever parallel processing there's no real reason I can see that you'd need to use linear phase eq on a track unless it was really really strange circumstances.

That said, I would recommend the PLParEQ - possibly the X-filter versions which use less overhead than the normal PLParEQ filters - or the T-RacKS linear phase which you already own.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[Larry Mal]

Thanks Dave! You know, so many folks have told me that linear phase is not important for what I'm doing that I've decided to edumacate myself a little more regarding EQ filters- and EQ useage- overall. And truthfully, much of what I use EQ for is as high pass filter to clean up some lower end, and I was just assuming that a linear phase EQ would be good for this as well, but maybe it's just not the right tool.

I'm also rethinking whether or not I'm actually well satisfied with EQ for the moment, and whether or not the vintage EQ emulations that I was dismissive above might not actually be more along the lines of something that I would want rather than a crystal clear linear phase EQ. At the very least I've sort of given up thinking that I would have just one overall go-to EQ, anyway.

And whether or not I overuse EQ, I can't say, the last big thing I mixed and later mastered for a class was a seven piece rock and roll band that had been recorded in less than stellar conditions with Shure 57's and other low end microphones, there was a lot of stuff to clean up with high and low pass filters, and since I could make my machine do it, I used Logic's linear phase EQ and found no problems with it. I try and make a very large majority of any EQ work I do to be reductive EQ, and so it just seems like I wouldn't be well served in that regard by a vintage EQ emulation whose strength would be in boosting, or so it would seem to me. It also seemed to me that I would be wanting the cleanest and most invisible EQ I could get for this, in order to more closely make it seem as if the frequencies that were adding nothing except room noise had simply not been recorded in the first place.

Anyway, I'd like to take this moment for everyone's thoughts, they've given me a lot to think about and learn on. Either way, I'd still love to hear anyone's ideas on EQ's in general, thanks, L

[DeBasement]

Well, for what it's worth my 'go to EQ's' are:

1) URS N-series Don't know why. It's simple to use, and sounds good I guess.

2) Sonnox Oxford EQ - accurate, flexible, precise, powerful

3) Waves SSL Channel EQ - my go to drum channel.

3) UAD Neve, Harrison, Helios, Pultec.... Lots o' mojo and coloration when I want it. Pick the flavor to taste. You can't buy just one.

[daverich]

Originally Posted by Larry Mal

Thanks Dave! You know, so many folks have told me that linear phase is not important for what I'm doing that I've decided to edumacate myself a little more regarding EQ filters- and EQ useage- overall. And truthfully, much of what I use EQ for is as high pass filter to clean up some lower end, and I was just assuming that a linear phase EQ would be good for this as well, but maybe it's just not the right tool.

I'm also rethinking whether or not I'm actually well satisfied with EQ for the moment, and whether or not the vintage EQ emulations that I was dismissive above might not actually be more along the lines of something that I would want rather than a crystal clear linear phase EQ. At the very least I've sort of given up thinking that I would have just one overall go-to EQ, anyway.

And whether or not I overuse EQ, I can't say, the last big thing I mixed and later mastered for a class was a seven piece rock and roll band that had been recorded in less than stellar conditions with Shure 57's and other low end microphones, there was a lot of stuff to clean up with high and low pass filters, and since I could make my machine do it, I used Logic's linear phase EQ and found no problems with it. I try and make a very large majority of any EQ work I do to be reductive EQ, and so it just seems like I wouldn't be well served in that regard by a vintage EQ emulation whose strength would be in boosting, or so it would seem to me. It also seemed to me that I would be wanting the cleanest and most invisible EQ I could get for this, in order to more closely make it seem as if the frequencies that were adding nothing except room noise had simply not been recorded in the first place.

Anyway, I'd like to take this moment for everyone's thoughts, they've given me a lot to think about and learn on. Either way, I'd still love to hear anyone's ideas on EQ's in general, thanks, L

remember that with linear phase eq and steep cuts/boosts you will get ringing from the filter,- a minimum phase filter is probably best for hi-pass.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[DanH]

Originally Posted by DeBasement

Well, for what it's worth my 'go to EQ's' are:

1) URS N-series Don't know why. It's simple to use, and sounds good I guess.

I'm with you on this one. The FullTec brings in some nice character as well.

[smoke]

You know, I always read to not over EQ.

But when I actually see people in action, I notice the knobs usually beyond 70-80% gain, on any given frequency or Q.

When you're reading and writing, you're thinking. When you make music, just make it sound good to you. No matter what.

[daverich]

Originally Posted by smoke

You know, I always read to not over EQ.

But when I actually see people in action, I notice the knobs usually beyond 70-80% gain, on any given frequency or Q.

When you're reading and writing, you're thinking. When you make music, just make it sound good to you. No matter what.

oh sure,- I was just flagging up that there is a danger of chasing your tale, trying to find that "sounds good you" when actually you might be looking in the wrong place.

In my experience a mix with eqs at 80% all over it will sound brittle in the "real world".

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[Firechild]

Originally Posted by Lagerfeldt

Start by reading this:

Digital EQ Fact & Myth. - signaltonoize.com

It is not relevant when working with 44.1 and 48 kHz samplerates. Then it is huge differences how the algorithms are dealing with the hi end.

And now an advice for a good EQ. Duende SSL channelstrip. The only one you need.

[smoke]

Originally Posted by daverich

oh sure,- I was just flagging up that there is a danger of chasing your tale, trying to find that "sounds good you" when actually you might be looking in the wrong place.

In my experience a mix with eqs at 80% all over it will sound brittle in the "real world".

Kind regards

Dave Rich

Not when you know which frequencies to push in the mix.

I tell ya, none of my UAD EQs sound brittle all the way up. They just don't. Unless your source is bad, then you're just boosting the distortion... which goes back to your point.

[daverich]

Originally Posted by smoke

Not when you know which frequencies to push in the mix.

I tell ya, none of my UAD EQs sound brittle all the way up. They just don't. Unless your source is bad, then you're just boosting the distortion... which goes back to your point.

sure, what I mean is when you end up with 4 or 5 tracks with that boost.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[smoke]

Originally Posted by daverich

sure, what I mean is when you end up with 4 or 5 tracks with that boost.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

Yeah thats what I mean, but I should specify that I'm talking about deliberate coloring EQ. I understand the thread is about "universal EQ" which may mean he/she wants something surgical. In that case, I wouldn't apply huge boosts.

For what I do, it's 4 or 5 easily. That's just the parts that comprise the drums! HH, snare, kick, cym, toms, etc. I think you run into trouble if you're boosting all around the same area, but if you're looking for some elements to stand out all around the spectrum, I could easily put a full boost on 6-7 separate elements that need to stand out in a dense mix. Only one narrow band, never 2 or 3 in one channel.

I'm not saying this is my rule, but I will do whatever sounds right. If I notice I have some fully boosted knobs, I won't just dial down because it feels wrong. If it sounds right... then the knobs were boosted for a reason. Again, though, I would only do this with very good plug-ins. The pultec pro for example really only gets going when it's dialed in beyond a fair amount. The Helios as well, the mid range has it's sweet spot, and it's usually beyond center.

[James Lehmann]

Originally Posted by Larry Mal

Hey folks, here's the deal: I'm looking for a great sounding, versatile, linear phase EQ. This will be used on a track by track basis, so low CPU overhead would be a plus, but I am running this on a dual 2.8 GHz eight core Mac Pro with currently 6 GB's of RAM, later to be expanded, so sound quality is more important to me than anything else. Cheaper, of course, is better, but I don't really want to miss out on quality to save a buck either. I already own two UAD-1 cards, and bought the Precision EQ, and while I like it, it's really mainly for mastering and not for finely tuned mixing work. I also own the DDMF EQ's, and enjoy them. I also own T-Racks 3, and use the linear phase EQ's with that, still, I am looking for something else for some reason. I am mainly using Logic Pro 8, and the linear phase EQ with it as my go-to channel EQ at the moment... etc etc etc

~ standby for radical left-field viewpoint that isn't simply "buy this Acme EQ to unlock the secret of eternal happiness" ~

Larry,

In all honesty, judging from the highly detailed, fraught and indecisive way you've written out your post, I think you're just caught in the typical consumer trap of being bewildered by unlimited choice and devoting way too much of your mental resources to something that your mind has made far more complex than it need be. Our brains can't cope with this many variables in a decision like this - in fact studies show we tend to make better decisions based on fewer variables and gut instinct.

So what am I saying? I'm suggesting that spending money on yet another EQ plug-in is not going to make you happy and not going to be the elusive 'universal go-to Holy Grail' you seem to be searching for. The only place this exists is in your mind. You have more EQ's than you probably need already and your creative and emotional energies would be far better being freed up and devoted to other aspects of your music/life. Post up some mixes and tell us what you don't like about them? I'd be willing to bet that comments like: "Oh man, these sound great but if you only had EQ X they'd sound so much better" are likely to be way way down the list of feedback you get.

If you purely need to slake your slutty cravings (don't we all from time to time!) then do so with a really nice hardware EQ - one quality piece of hardware is worth any number of expensively frail plug-ins both in terms of sonics and long-term satisfaction.

[SWAN808]

Originally Posted by James Lehmann

~ standby for radical left-field viewpoint that isn't simply "buy this Acme EQ to unlock the secret of eternal happiness" ~

Larry,

In all honesty, judging from the highly detailed but classically indecisive way you've written out your post, I think you're just caught in the typical consumer trap of being bewildered by choice and devoting way too much of your mental resources to something that your mind has made far more complex than it need be. Our brains can't cope with this many variables in a decision like this - in fact studies show we tend to make better decisions based on fewer variables and gut instinct.

So what am I saying? I'm suggesting that spending money on yet another EQ plug-in is not going to make you happy and not going to be the elusive 'universal go-to Holy Grail' you seem to be searching for. The only place this exists is in your mind. You have more EQ's than you probably need already and that your creative and emotional energies would be far better being freed up and devoted to other aspects of your music/life. Post up some mixes and tell us what you don't like about them? I'd be willing to bet that comments like: "Oh man, these sound great but if you only had EQ X they'd sound so much better" are likely to be way way down the list of feedback you get.

If you purely need to slake your slutty cravings (don't we all from time to time!) then do so with a really nice hardware EQ - one quality piece of hardware is worth any number of expensively frail plug-ins both in terms of sonics and satisfaction.

[JPeters86]

Originally Posted by James Lehmann

~ standby for radical left-field viewpoint that isn't simply "buy this Acme EQ to unlock the secret of eternal happiness" ~

Larry,

In all honesty, judging from the highly detailed, fraught and indecisive way you've written out your post, I think you're just caught in the typical consumer trap of being bewildered by unlimited choice and devoting way too much of your mental resources to something that your mind has made far more complex than it need be. Our brains can't cope with this many variables in a decision like this - in fact studies show we tend to make better decisions based on fewer variables and gut instinct.

So what am I saying? I'm suggesting that spending money on yet another EQ plug-in is not going to make you happy and not going to be the elusive 'universal go-to Holy Grail' you seem to be searching for. The only place this exists is in your mind. You have more EQ's than you probably need already and your creative and emotional energies would be far better being freed up and devoted to other aspects of your music/life. Post up some mixes and tell us what you don't like about them? I'd be willing to bet that comments like: "Oh man, these sound great but if you only had EQ X they'd sound so much better" are likely to be way way down the list of feedback you get.

If you purely need to slake your slutty cravings (don't we all from time to time!) then do so with a really nice hardware EQ - one quality piece of hardware is worth any number of expensively frail plug-ins both in terms of sonics and long-term satisfaction.

You should get the post of the year award for this.

[Tui]

Originally Posted by JPeters86

You should get the post of the year award for this.

+ fu..ing 1!

[jamwerks]

Originally Posted by James Lehmann

your creative and emotional energies would be far better being freed up and devoted to other aspects of your music/life..

Very well said! Use your stock daw eq's and spend that money on hardward. Start with a 2 bus comp, then go from there (comps, eq's, verbs, etc). Be a slut, but be a smart slut !!

[yoshimodular]

My EQ-to-go is ApEQ: you can sculpt your own EQ choosing the bands, realtime FFT, oversampling, clipping options, and it's very cheap!

When I want some EQ with "attitude", I use UAD EQs, mostly the Neve stuff.

[Ian Mac]

Originally Posted by Larry Mal

And truthfully, much of what I use EQ for is as high pass filter to clean up some lower end, and I was just assuming that a linear phase EQ would be good for this as L

i would buy aireq just for its hp and lp filters alone. most musical and quick to please

pre ringing on linear phase eq is often enough reason to not use it.

refinedaudiometrics is as good a linerphase eq as the best, but also has per band ability to switch lp off, plus m/s which a universal eq would need.

some tracks don't always want clean eq.
phase and harmonic distortion are what we want to hear sometimes.

maybe two eqs would cover all bases, the other being something like nebula docfear, or waves VEQ

boot eq has the best tranny distortion i have heard emulated

[Larry Mal]

Originally Posted by James Lehmann

~ standby for radical left-field viewpoint that isn't simply "buy this Acme EQ to unlock the secret of eternal happiness" ~

Larry,

In all honesty, judging from the highly detailed, fraught and indecisive way you've written out your post, I think you're just caught in the typical consumer trap of being bewildered by unlimited choice and devoting way too much of your mental resources to something that your mind has made far more complex than it need be. Our brains can't cope with this many variables in a decision like this - in fact studies show we tend to make better decisions based on fewer variables and gut instinct.

So what am I saying? I'm suggesting that spending money on yet another EQ plug-in is not going to make you happy and not going to be the elusive 'universal go-to Holy Grail' you seem to be searching for. The only place this exists is in your mind. You have more EQ's than you probably need already and your creative and emotional energies would be far better being freed up and devoted to other aspects of your music/life. Post up some mixes and tell us what you don't like about them? I'd be willing to bet that comments like: "Oh man, these sound great but if you only had EQ X they'd sound so much better" are likely to be way way down the list of feedback you get.

If you purely need to slake your slutty cravings (don't we all from time to time!) then do so with a really nice hardware EQ - one quality piece of hardware is worth any number of expensively frail plug-ins both in terms of sonics and long-term satisfaction.

OK, look, there is nothing "fraught" about my post. Defined by my dictionary as:

"adjective
1 [ predic. ] ( fraught with) (of a situation or course of action) filled with or destined to result in (something undesirable) : marketing any new product is fraught with danger.
2 causing or affected by great anxiety or stress : there was a fraught silence | she sounded a bit fraught"

Hardware EQ is out of the budget, and not helpful, since I was asking for a software plug in EQ suggestion. You dig? I tried to describe what I had, and what I was looking for as best I could. That would be the "highly detailed" aspect of it. Suggesting hardware EQ is about as useful as suggesting that I pay more attention to room acoustics or use different microphones, that is, a good idea and all, but not what I was asking for.

I am fully aware that I could have worded the post better, and have acknowledged that. I have also admitted that I could stand to learn some more things about EQ in general. I don't need your patronizing tone regarding my "fraught" and "indecisive" post. I was hoping to hear of some suggestions about EQ's that folks used, and described what I had already, and where I was hoping for improvement and how.

I would not expect that any mix I posted would have comments about the EQ I used either, no matter how lacking it was. Enough. Thanks, sir, L

[A440]

Originally Posted by Larry Mal

OK, look, there is nothing "fraught" about my post. Defined by my dictionary as:

"adjective
1 [ predic. ] ( fraught with) (of a situation or course of action) filled with or destined to result in (something undesirable) : marketing any new product is fraught with danger.
2 causing or affected by great anxiety or stress : there was a fraught silence | she sounded a bit fraught"

Hardware EQ is out of the budget, and not helpful, since I was asking for a software plug in EQ suggestion. You dig? I tried to describe what I had, and what I was looking for as best I could. That would be the "highly detailed" aspect of it. Suggesting hardware EQ is about as useful as suggesting that I pay more attention to room acoustics or use different microphones, that is, a good idea and all, but not what I was asking for.

I am fully aware that I could have worded the post better, and have acknowledged that. I have also admitted that I could stand to learn some more things about EQ in general. I don't need your patronizing tone regarding my "fraught" and "indecisive" post. I was hoping to hear of some suggestions about EQ's that folks used, and described what I had already, and where I was hoping for improvement and how.

I would not expect that any mix I posted would have comments about the EQ I used either, no matter how lacking it was. Enough. Thanks, sir, L

I have sympathy with you here. After all your original post didn't ask whether you should get an EQ plugin or buy some expensive hardware. You wanted an opinion on a good EQ plugin. Of course most of us would like to mix through expensive hardware. Given the choice, I would like to work all the time on a Neve console. But my circumstances dictate that I use a DAW and EQ using software. So it makes perfect sense for me to have the best software EQ I can find. I also don't buy the assertion that all EQ plugins sound the same, and that differences we hear are all placebo & illusion. My ears tell me otherwise. If I use the high pass filter on the logic eq it doesn't sound as good as when I use the hpf on a Sonnox plugin. The Sonnox plugin simply sounds better.

[JPeters86]

Originally Posted by A440

I have sympathy with you here. After all your original post didn't ask whether you should get an EQ plugin or buy some expensive hardware. You wanted an opinion on a good EQ plugin. Of course most of us would like to mix through expensive hardware. Given the choice, I would like to work all the time on a Neve console. But my circumstances dictate that I use a DAW and EQ using software. So it makes perfect sense for me to have the best software EQ I can find. I also don't buy the assertion that all EQ plugins sound the same, and that differences we hear are all placebo & illusion. My ears tell me otherwise. If I use the high pass filter on the logic eq it doesn't sound as good as when I use the hpf on a Sonnox plugin. The Sonnox plugin simply sounds better.

That's true, but the comment earlier was aimed at the people buying software EQs over and over again, hoping to find THE plugin that will make their mixes sound that much better. I don't think it's going to happen. If an EQ plugin costs say 200$, and you buy four of them, you could have bought a very good hardware stereo EQ like the one from Arsenal Audio as well. And it would probably sound better than those four software EQs.