The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
DMG Equlibrium - your favorite filter algos Equalizer Plugins
Old 26th March 2017
  #1
Lives for gear
 
Kimotei's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
DMG Equlibrium - your favorite filter algos

So I recently started using Equlibrium. Ive been researching and reading a bit about it and aparently the DMG filters are the most transparent and often prefered in mastering. However there are a lot of other algos there. So far I havent had time to research them all though I found the Butterworth algo interesting and helpfull when working on bass. Because the q is so wide but also flat its a great way to lift a range of bass notes in one go. It does not always work and sometimes it colors more then id like, but its pretty handy when it works.

If you have other handy or fun discoveries with any of those filter algos id love to hear about it!
Old 27th March 2017
  #2
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimotei View Post
aparently the DMG filters are the most transparent and often prefered in mastering.
Have you compared to SlickEQ M?
Old 27th March 2017
  #3
Lives for gear
 
Kimotei's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by MogwaiBoy View Post
Have you compared to SlickEQ M?
No? I havent tried it, thought or guesed it was more of a color eq?
Old 27th March 2017
  #4
Gear Addict
 

I haven't compared either. Would like to. I have a few of the other high-end software EQs (Pro-Q 2, IQ-EQ 3) and can vouch for SlickEQ Mastering's pass filters being very transparent. I have Cleansweep Pro aswell which specialises in some funky filter shapes, even elliptical.

I do really like the high pass filter built into DMG's Limitless, which I'm sure is well expaded upon in Equilibrium.

Anyway... sorry to derail the thread! On the subject of Butterworth vs Bessel, it's Butterworth for me - more precise which I think you need for finalising. I believe there is a difference in phase response between these types, and one of the forum audio scientists can chirp in on that
Old 27th March 2017
  #5
Lives for gear
 
Hermetech Mastering's Avatar
 

Verified Member
I just stick to the DMG curves and Butterworth or Bessel filters here for the most part, always in IIR. I use EQuilibrium and TDR SlickEQ M about equally. SlickEQ M if I need to work fast, EQuilibrium if I have the time to get tweaky. They are both excellent sounding.
Old 27th March 2017
  #6
Old 27th March 2017
  #7
Lives for gear
 
Kimotei's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermetech Mastering View Post
I just stick to the DMG curves and Butterworth or Bessel filters here for the most part, always in IIR. I use EQuilibrium and TDR SlickEQ M about equally. SlickEQ M if I need to work fast, EQuilibrium if I have the time to get tweaky. They are both excellent sounding.
Cool, I will try SlickEQ M. Its very afordable also.

Can I ask what it is that you like with the Bessel filter on Equlibrium?

SmoothTone: thanks for the link! I will check it out.

MogwaiBoy: ProQ2 is cool but I prefer Equlibrium for the most part. One cool thing ProQ does that Equlibrium cant is to copy the eq curve of an audio file. One track I had mastered for me I managed to "steal" the eq curve he used so I could study it. :D Because I had the mix file both from before and after the mastering it was easy for ProQ to figure it out. Pretty cool.

Btw I find it hard to boost highs more then a couple of db in mastering (with Equlibrium DMG curves) before it sounds harsh to my ears, ofc dependent on how the mix is. And compared to hardware eqs which I feel I can push much harder before the highs cuts my ears of. Are there some techniques or filter algorithms you guys use with Equlibrium, or other soft eq, to make boosting highs less harsh?
Old 27th March 2017
  #8
Lives for gear
 
Hermetech Mastering's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimotei View Post
Cool, I will try SlickEQ M. Its very afordable also.

Can I ask what it is that you like with the Bessel filter on Equlibrium?

SmoothTone: thanks for the link! I will check it out.

MogwaiBoy: ProQ2 is cool but I prefer Equlibrium for the most part. One cool thing ProQ does that Equlibrium cant is to copy the eq curve of an audio file. One track I had mastered for me I managed to "steal" the eq curve he used so I could study it. :D Because I had the mix file both from before and after the mastering it was easy for ProQ to figure it out. Pretty cool.

Btw I find it hard to boost highs more then a couple of db in mastering (with Equlibrium DMG curves) before it sounds harsh to my ears, ofc dependent on how the mix is. And compared to hardware eqs which I feel I can push much harder before the highs cuts my ears of. Are there some techniques or filter algorithms you guys use with Equlibrium, or other soft eq, to make boosting highs less harsh?
I usually try Bessel and Butterworth, and chose which sounds best for a given application. I've no idea what shapes they are (never have the bling turned on), or why they are scientifically relevant (except for the info in the EQuiliobrum manual). I just use my ears.

SlickEQ M can work out the EQ curve of a file (either by loading it or listening in real time), and save that as a "reference" to use again, impose on other audio, get closer to a "pink noise" distribution, or auto adjust the HPF and LPF etc. Very clever workflow/time saving stuff stuff.

Are you running EQuilibrium in Series? Try it in Parallel for subtler high end boosts. Slick EQ M runs in Parallel all the time. And for ultimate transparency I'd stick to the IIR mode (which will probably save you a tonne of CPU too). The "Tilt" option can also be really subtle.
Old 27th March 2017
  #9
I could be wrong, but isn't parallel vs series only relavent when running more than one band? They should be identical if only one band is engaged, right?
Old 27th March 2017
  #10
Lives for gear
try the 250 curves on the DMG for boosting high end.
Old 27th March 2017
  #11
Without any intent to derail the thread, I think it helps mentioning that Bessel, Butterworth, Chebychev, Linkwitz Riley and a few more are not different filter types in the sense of having a different algorithm. Instead, they are specification methods typically for one and the same algorithm. Specification such as:

Do we want the cutof point to be specified at -3dB or -6dB (Linkwitz Riley vs the others. Only interesting in crossovers)
Do we want to prioritize phase flatness over filter steepness (Bessel)
Do we want to prioritize filter steepness at all cost (Chebychev)
Or do we prefer the middle way between all extremes (Butterworth)

They are really just a way of specifying filters beyond order one. First order filters are all Bessel, Butterworth, Chebychev and Linkwitz Riley at once (!).

These specification types primarily specify Q (with exceptions here and there) to fit a certain behaviour. With regard to musical tasks, differing between them is of limited value, but their names sound great of course

Point is, a simple variable Q, the parametric EQ, covers them all: From Bessel (simply a low Q) over Butterworth (moderate Q) to Chebychev (a high Q).
Old 29th March 2017
  #12
Here for the gear
 

Old 1st April 2017
  #13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermetech Mastering View Post
I just stick to the DMG curves and Butterworth or Bessel filters here for the most part, always in IIR. I use EQuilibrium and TDR SlickEQ M about equally. SlickEQ M if I need to work fast, EQuilibrium if I have the time to get tweaky. They are both excellent sounding.
nearly the same way to use equilibrium and slickeq-m here

i the slick-m-tilt & the equilibrium butterworth 18dB :-)

digital-eq-lows can be great, highs i'm nearly never 100% happy with.

Last edited by teebaum; 2nd April 2017 at 11:13 AM..
Old 2nd April 2017
  #14
Lives for gear
 
lowland's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by teebaum View Post

digital-eq-lows can be great, highs i'm nearly never 100% happy with.
+1.
Old 3rd April 2017
  #15
mpr
Lives for gear
 
mpr's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by teebaum View Post
nearly the same way to use equilibrium and slickeq-m here

i the slick-m-tilt & the equilibrium butterworth 18dB :-)

digital-eq-lows can be great, highs i'm nearly never 100% happy with.
+1 A firm and thunderous low end can be achieved with EQuilibrium far more effectively than a smooth and open sounding top end. 5dB on the Soma shelf feels like 1.5-2dB on any plugin I have heard, including EQuilibrium in serial.

That said, lately I have been adding more low end in analog because its much easier to control digitally as you are preparing for the limiter. Top end as well.

As a tangent: Is anyone else getting spoiled by creating punchy sustain on the bottom octave using a multiband near the end? This seems to be a more modern sonic trend, and one reason I have been printing with a lot of low end lately. I'd need to go to rehab to stop this behavior as its very rewarding, and clients almost always interpret it as 'bigger' sounding.
Old 3rd April 2017
  #16
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpr View Post
+1 A firm and thunderous low end can be achieved with EQuilibrium far more effectively than a smooth and open sounding top end. 5dB on the Soma shelf feels like 1.5-2dB on any plugin I have heard, including EQuilibrium in serial.

That said, lately I have been adding more low end in analog because its much easier to control digitally as you are preparing for the limiter. Top end as well.

As a tangent: Is anyone else getting spoiled by creating punchy sustain on the bottom octave using a multiband near the end? This seems to be a more modern sonic trend, and one reason I have been printing with a lot of low end lately. I'd need to go to rehab to stop this behavior as its very rewarding, and clients almost always interpret it as 'bigger' sounding.
adding sustain and bigness analog and clean and control digital is IMHO a very typical way to get a big, but contured lowend.
on the other side it's possible to get more contur in the lows with adding digital and dipping analog.
mb's can help to, but working with different eq's result IMHO often in a more musical and organic result.
Old 3rd April 2017
  #17
Lives for gear
 
Kimotei's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Going slightly off the main topic, but: Back to software solutions for high boosts. Satin can be very nice for high boosts, but I would want to filter out everything its doing from low mids and down. Im not sure how to solve that. If I somehow could only use it on the sides, the low freq in my masters living only in center/mono so that part would not be affected.. The best would be to have it in some sort of sidechain filter though, but I dont know how to create that in a clean way.

I also find the HiFi boost on the Mjuk compressor can work sometimes to create more smooth high boosts, and it has a sidechain filter too.
Old 3rd April 2017
  #18
qwe
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimotei View Post
Going slightly off the main topic, but: Back to software solutions for high boosts. Satin can be very nice for high boosts, but I would want to filter out everything its doing from low mids and down.
I have no idea why you'd want to do that, but here's one way of doing it:

https://www.bluecataudio.com/Products/Product_MB7Mixer/
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump