The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Weiss EQ1 is now a plugin
Old 19th May 2020
  #121
Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Pand Sound Mastering View Post
Ok here you go, I did a test and it's just the perfect exemple for me.

This is a quick "loop" from a problematic song that I am going to master this week (part of an album in stem Mastering, this is the instrumental track).
I like short loops for this kind of comparison, this way one isn't distracted by too many changes in the song.

Link : https://we.tl/t-01jAn7uYs6

Here I want to control the kick and put it back in the mix a bit, while lowering a resonnant frequency at 123,50hz. While doing that I want to give a bit more "bottom" to the track in the subass area, this way it also compensate for the loss coming from the previous cutting.
I used 2 bands in mid/large Bell curve configuration. Very simple.

Contender are my usual suspect, the Apeq (Apulsoft) and the Weiss.

Settings are :

Band 1 : + 5db at 50hz / 1.5 Q
Band 2 : - 2db at 123.5 / 1.5 Q

Same numbers on both Eqs, AND I took another band and "sweep" gently along the curves to be sure they matched. From what I can see they are spot on.
MP mode on the Weiss, as the Apeq doesn't have the LP mode option.

For me the difference is just... amazingly obvious.
Let me know what you guys think.

I also included the Flat version of the loop so you can try your own eqs if you wish to.

Did you use plugin doctor to match them ?

If you just entered the same numbers it doesn’t necessarily mean the same EQ curves and frequencies are applied

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robb Robinson View Post
Come on, at least take a listen to EQ1

I did today ! I like the EQ1
Old 19th May 2020
  #122
Gear Maniac
 
wheever's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by msmucr View Post
Generally, if perceived difference is so obvious, then you have also vastly different curves of both EQs.
It's not really possible to compare plugins that way (or it is, but conclusion will be flawed). You have to match curves as close as possible and have both EQs in comparable processing modes (if that's switchable).



Hopefully I'll also get into some more detailed listening and comparisons this week in studio. However after rather brief checking of EQ1 at the other rig..
To compare Crave to EQ1 at (dynamic/min-phase mode), you should switch the Crave to analog mode.
With regards to shelves, there are different slopes.. So for example hi shelf filter has to be set to lower frequency at most of other EQs to have similar response (like EQ1 to 8k and other eq to say 4.8k). For low shelf, that's other way around.
Also EQ1 has Q to gain dependency. So shelf curves become resonant with over and undershoot, as you increase gain.
Bells has such dependency also, but in rather interesting way compared to most of standard EQs. Bells at EQ1 gets wider with higher gains. Usually there's either no such dependency, or when it is, it's actually in a reverse way, so bell gets tighter with increased gain (a la API proportional style of EQ).
Not that either way is right and wrong (and you can compensate for that in comparison), but it's certainly interesting twist there.

Michal
I did indeed match curves. I also tried Crave in all 3 modes, and while there were pretty clear tonal differences between the 3, it was still *remarkably* harsher than the EQ1. I posit no reasons for this difference, just stating an observation.
Old 19th May 2020
  #123
Lives for gear
 
X-Pand Sound Mastering's Avatar
 

Verified Member
1 Review written
Quote:
Originally Posted by TanTan View Post
Did you use plugin doctor to match them ?

If you just entered the same numbers it doesn’t necessarily mean the same EQ curves and frequencies are applied
Yes of course I didn' just entered the numbers, as I described I "matched" them manually by carefully checking that they were at the same exact Db / freq points, by taking another band and "sweeping" along the curve. This way the sound differences CANNOT come from diffrent curves.
My boost at 50hz was 5db with a Q of 1.5, and for exemple both showed an exact boost of 4.5 db at 60hz, an exact boost of 1.7db at 100hz, etc etc.
But take a listen and you'll hear that it has nothing to do with different bell shapes anyway. It's so obvious that the result jumped to my ear.
So then I nulled them, and really confirmed what I was hearing. But I want to see other people comments on this before giving my impressions.
Hopefully some slutz here will take 5 minutes to do this


EDIT here is that link again : Link : https://we.tl/t-01jAn7uYs6
Old 19th May 2020
  #124
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by wheever View Post
I did indeed match curves. I also tried Crave in all 3 modes, and while there were pretty clear tonal differences between the 3, it was still *remarkably* harsher than the EQ1. I posit no reasons for this difference, just stating an observation.
So that's fine, you've matched curves. Testing other modes of Crave is pretty much irrelevant the correct to oversampled EQ1 is analog.
If it was remarkably different with matched curves, I'm of course curious about that.
Can you share entered numeric parameters of that shelve boost for both EQs? Or just screenshot, where that's visible.

Michal
Old 19th May 2020
  #125
Gear Addict
 
Robb Robinson's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by TanTan View Post
I did today ! I like the EQ1
Trippy sound right?

But I hear you (and msmucr and others), IIR is IIR all day long, so again I think Thermos' theory that there is 'something else' going on is 100% correct.

I think that when we boost the top end in EQ1 that 'extra' processing (that I doubt Daniel will divulge here) is exaggerated. I clearly hear the same engine in both DS1 and EQ1, and it is most audible in the top end. It's the Weiss sound and what a pretty sound it is, particularly for digital.

And yes I also love their De Esser. It gets in and out beautifully and the controls are intuitive. There is always sonic compromise with any DSP (one of Bob O's tenets), but in this case it is far outweighed by the benefits.
Old 19th May 2020
  #126
Lives for gear
 
thermos's Avatar
Trying the demo today on a record that had some suspect src going on, and the smoothing effect is quite useful. Damn it.
Old 19th May 2020
  #127
Here for the gear
 
Mindtree's Avatar
The DS1-MK3 plug-in was probably the best $500 investment I've made, as I tend to use it on virtually every master. I am starting to get the feeling that I will feel the same way when I spring for the EQ1.

Last edited by Mindtree; 19th May 2020 at 05:13 PM.. Reason: duplicate word
Old 20th May 2020
  #128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mindtree View Post
The DS1-MK3 plug-in was probably the best $500 investment I've made, as I tend to use it on virtually every master. I am starting to get the feeling that I will feel the same way when I spring for the EQ1.
I was expecting the same since I feel similarly regarding DS1-MK3. But the EQ1 didn’t really brought anything new to my rig, I don’t feel it's better than the EQuilibrium/Multiplicity duo.
Old 22nd May 2020
  #129
Has anyone tested the Console 1 plugin or the Console 1 EQ1 module?
I have the demo for both and I can't find a way to change the Q value of the high and low shelves. They both are set to very high Q values which creates an opposite boost or cut before the frequency.
Old 22nd May 2020
  #130
Gear Head
 
OTRM's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mandolin View Post
Has anyone tested the Console 1 plugin or the Console 1 EQ1 module?
I have the demo for both and I can't find a way to change the Q value of the high and low shelves. They both are set to very high Q values which creates an opposite boost or cut before the frequency.
I've been contemplating trying a Console 1 out specifically to use to control the Weiss DS1 and EQ1 plugs (or their Console 1 equivalents).

How well are they implemented by the Console 1?
What functions are lost (if any) by using the Console 1 vs operating them as straight plugins?
Do you notice any difference in sound?
What DAW are you using the Console 1 with?
The Console 1 manual states that audio is routed to the unit via the USB connection. Is the audio really running thru the Console 1 or is it just a control surface? How does that work when the DAW is set to use ASIO drivers with a PCI card (Lynx AES16e in my case)?

Thanks for any input you can give.
OTRM
Old 22nd May 2020
  #131
Lives for gear
 
X-Pand Sound Mastering's Avatar
 

Verified Member
1 Review written
So I don't know if some of you guyz had the time to check those file I shared ?

(here it is again just in case lol : https://we.tl/t-01jAn7uYs6 )

Here my intention was to reduce a peaky 123.5 hz Frequency while also pushing back the kick into the mix. So I did a cut with a Bell curve there (at 123.5hz).
And then add some weight in the lowend, and also to compensate a bit for the loss due to the previous cutting. So that was a Boost with a second bell curve at 50hz.

2 Eq's were used, Apulsoft Apeq and the Weiss EQ1. Closely matched by hand on the settings.

Well you can clearly hear that one of the Eq did get rid of the resonnant frequency while pushing back the kick, as intended, where the other just pushed back the kick, but the peaky frequency is almost still there.
And on the lows at 50hz, one Eq seemed to "add" something new, where the other sounds straight and tight, not adding anything unwanted. If you null the 2 files it's amazing to hear what's left...
I'm also hearing something about transient response. Clearly that's what makes the Weiss sounds so good and natural. The transients clearly stays untouched.
It's clearly not just a question of different curve shape between the 2, but more of how the code is implemented I believe.
Honestly I'm not a plugin fan in general, but here it is great to hear a sound processor with such respect for the original signal.
(Last plugins that gave me the same impression were Unisum, amazing thing, and the DS1.)

I will try other eqs on the same session, very interesting work.
Old 22nd May 2020
  #132
Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Pand Sound Mastering View Post

If you null the 2 files it's amazing to hear what's left...
I'm also hearing something about transient response. Clearly that's what makes the Weiss sounds so good and natural. The transients clearly stays untouched.
It's clearly not just a question of different curve shape between the 2, but more of how the code is implemented I believe.
As Mr. Weiss has explained in this thread,
The code is similar for IIR filters working on a 64 Bit modern CPU.

Null test results means absolutely nothing if upsampling is involved

If you’ll try to null two passes of the same converter which uses ASRC they would never null even if they are absolutely identical sonic wise, the delta between them means nothing related to audio.

The difference between the EQ’s is probably coming from a different (or lack of) upsampling
Old 22nd May 2020
  #133
Gear Nut
 
yorgos's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Pand Sound Mastering View Post
Well you can clearly hear that one of the Eq did get rid of the resonnant frequency while pushing back the kick, as intended, where the other just pushed back the kick, but the peaky frequency is almost still there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TanTan View Post
The difference between the EQ’s is probably coming from a different (or lack of) upsampling

X-Pand Sound Mastering
describes an audible difference that is not explained by the view that the only difference should be because of upsampling
Old 22nd May 2020
  #134
Lives for gear
 
X-Pand Sound Mastering's Avatar
 

Verified Member
1 Review written
@ TanTan You seem like someone that has a lot to say, when I'm quite sure you actually didn't even bother donload and listen to my files, NOR even downloaded the demo of the very Eq we are talking about, the Weiss EQ1 plugin.
So, maybe do this first don't you think ?
Old 22nd May 2020
  #135
Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Pand Sound Mastering View Post
@ TanTan You seem like someone that has a lot to say, when I'm quite sure you actually didn't even bother donload and listen to my files, NOR even downloaded the demo of the very Eq we are talking about, the Weiss EQ1 plugin.
So, maybe do this first don't you think ?
Sorry, I don’t have the time to listen to your demo at the moment but appreciate your effort anyway.

I did however install the EQ1 and used it on over 40 masters I did this week.
It’s very good.
Old 22nd May 2020
  #136
Quote:
Originally Posted by yorgos View Post

X-Pand Sound Mastering
describes an audible difference that is not explained by the view that the only difference should be because of upsampling
Maybe, my point is that the null test is irrelevant when upsampling is involved.

There’s a theoretical possibility that the EQ1 won’t even null with itself under some conditions if upsampling is involved
Old 24th May 2020
  #137
Quote:
Originally Posted by OTRM View Post
I've been contemplating trying a Console 1 out specifically to use to control the Weiss DS1 and EQ1 plugs (or their Console 1 equivalents).

How well are they implemented by the Console 1?
What functions are lost (if any) by using the Console 1 vs operating them as straight plugins?
Do you notice any difference in sound?
What DAW are you using the Console 1 with?
The Console 1 manual states that audio is routed to the unit via the USB connection. Is the audio really running thru the Console 1 or is it just a control surface? How does that work when the DAW is set to use ASIO drivers with a PCI card (Lynx AES16e in my case)?

Thanks for any input you can give.
OTRM
-I have not spent enough time with the demo yet but not being able to change the Q of the shelves seems like a big limitation.

-Lots of functions are lost form the EQ1 but other functions from other Weiss plugins are gained but in much more limited form. Check out the product page and manual (Softube Console 1 manual) for more info:https://cdn.softube.com/storage/7F56...r%20Manual.pdf

-Studio One for mixing with Console 1, it's too limited for me in Pro Tools or Digital Performer.

-It's just a control surface, nothing to do with audio drivers.
Old 29th May 2020
  #138
Lives for gear
X-pand sound mastering, I'm a bit late to the game ...
Was trying to download your files, but the link is dead. Any chance you could upload them again?

My favorite transparent eq for corrective work is the old mdw so far. Never compared it to equilibrium, theqorange or eq1.

Any opinions on that?
Old 29th May 2020
  #139
Lives for gear
 
X-Pand Sound Mastering's Avatar
 

Verified Member
1 Review written
Quote:
Originally Posted by soundgeezer View Post
X-pand sound mastering, I'm a bit late to the game ...
Was trying to download your files, but the link is dead. Any chance you could upload them again?

My favorite transparent eq for corrective work is the old mdw so far. Never compared it to equilibrium, theqorange or eq1.

Any opinions on that?
Hey there, here's the link : https://we.tl/t-Ahf20Fyng9

Yeah I like the MDW too, great tool for cutting (using the MDW5 on UAD here).
The Weiss has something really "truthfull" to the source, wich is a must in any Mastering situation. But I need to do a comparison between the two on the same exemple, as the MDW is really really good too.
Old 29th May 2020
  #140
Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Pand Sound Mastering View Post
The Weiss has something really "truthfull" to the source, wich is a must in any Mastering situation.
In comparison to equilibrium or MDW which are not as “truthful to the source” ?

Transparent, yes, but not as truthful ?

My English is not good enough to understand the differences or maybe I’m missing something .

Is it like, you can’t always see the true source of the picture behind a totally transparent lane Because a totally transparent lane is not necessarily truthful to the source ?
Old 29th May 2020
  #141
Lives for gear
 
X-Pand Sound Mastering's Avatar
 

Verified Member
1 Review written
Quote:
Originally Posted by TanTan View Post
In comparison to equilibrium or MDW which are not as “truthful to the source” ?

Transparent, yes, but not as truthful ?

My English is not good enough to understand the differences or maybe I’m missing something .

Is it like, you can’t always see the true source of the picture behind a totally transparent lane Because a totally transparent lane is not necessarily truthful to the source ?
I wrote: "The Weiss has something really "truthfull" to the source, wich is a must in any Mastering situation".

I didn't wrote : "In comparison to the Massenburg or the DMG, The Weiss has something really "truthfull" to the source, wich is a must in any Mastering situation".

Old 4 weeks ago
  #142
I've used the EQ1 today on a track that had one bass note which was over 6dB louder than the other notes,
I couldn't make it work with the Pro-Q3 or Sonnox Dyn Eq and could perfectly tame it with the Weiss.

The classic compressor layout is exactly what's needed for this task which the FF or Sonnox don't have, but the GUI is not user friendly at all..it's very hard to work with it, I hope Softube will come up with a "plugin format" for this EQ, but it's a keeper since it solved a problem for me today I couldn't solve otherwise
Old 4 weeks ago
  #143
Gear Addict
 
01010110's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by TanTan View Post
but the GUI is not user friendly at all..it's very hard to work with it, I hope Softube will come up with a "plugin format" for this EQ
I think the "large screen" layout feels very much like a "plugin format". I find it easy to use. It would, however, be nice if it was possible to increase the height of the plugin in this mode.
Attached Thumbnails
Weiss EQ1 is now a plugin-3.jpg  
Old 4 weeks ago
  #144
Gear Addict
 
Robb Robinson's Avatar
 

Verified Member
I keep right clicking expecting the band to solo. Seems like this should be a universal behavior nowadays?

Also the GUI bands dont reflect changes to Q and gain unless audio is running thru the plugin (in Reaper). It might be intentional, but it comes across like a bug.

Also please fix the zoom, both literally and literally. It needs to stay at whatever zoom level we select.

Right now the zoom state snaps back to +-7dB every time the window is reopened. This EQ sounds so good with even half a dB that I imagine most MEs can permanently operate in the +-3dB range.

fwiw I ended up upgrading the DS1 bundle in order to get the EQ1. I find it offers something unique.
Old 1 week ago
  #145
Here for the gear
 

I just sent the following message to Softube's support:-

I have upgraded to the Weiss Complete Collection to complete my Weiss plugins with the EQ1 which I have been very impressed with. The only downside for me is the lack of fine control when using the mouse and the small size of the GUI. I have had times where:-

A) it has been very difficult to click on a particular band using the large screen mode (my preferred method) because they are too close together

B) it has been difficult to accurately locate problem frequencies because very small movements of the mouse can create large jumps in frequency selection.

C) it has been difficult to adjust gain because very small movements of the mouse can create large jumps in gain adjustment.

The problem with the small GUI also carries across to the large screen's context menu where a small movement can quite easily cause a too large a jump in value. As far as I am aware, there is no option (such as holding a key whilst moving the mouse) to allow for very fine adjustments with a mouse. I have read of other users having the same experience and really feel that the overall user experience could be greatly improved with a combination of a larger GUI and finer mouse control.


After sending the above message and reading some more posts I realized the zoom option would have solved my issue with it being very difficult to click on a particular band but having to zoom in on a GUI should not really be necessary in 2020.
Old 1 week ago
  #146
Gear Head
 
OTRM's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by hesnotthemessiah View Post
I just sent the following message to Softube's support:-

I have upgraded to the Weiss Complete Collection to complete my Weiss plugins with the EQ1 which I have been very impressed with. The only downside for me is the lack of fine control when using the mouse and the small size of the GUI. I have had times where:-

A) it has been very difficult to click on a particular band using the large screen mode (my preferred method) because they are too close together

B) it has been difficult to accurately locate problem frequencies because very small movements of the mouse can create large jumps in frequency selection.

C) it has been difficult to adjust gain because very small movements of the mouse can create large jumps in gain adjustment.

The problem with the small GUI also carries across to the large screen's context menu where a small movement can quite easily cause a too large a jump in value. As far as I am aware, there is no option (such as holding a key whilst moving the mouse) to allow for very fine adjustments with a mouse. I have read of other users having the same experience and really feel that the overall user experience could be greatly improved with a combination of a larger GUI and finer mouse control.


After sending the above message and reading some more posts I realized the zoom option would have solved my issue with it being very difficult to click on a particular band but having to zoom in on a GUI should not really be necessary in 2020.
I have experienced some of these issues as well.

However, if you rt click on a band "handle" in Large Screen mode, it opens up the detailed band parameter box. In Windows, holding Ctrl while using the mouse wheel to make adjustments to the parameters in the box allows for fine adjustments. I also discovered that this box can be moved "out of the way" to anywhere within the GUI by left clicking and dragging it which allows one to see the EQ curve and RTA better in the area where making an adjustment.

Another discovery is that, in Large Screen mode, holding Shift while dragging a band handle locks the Freq in place while allowing for only amplitude adjustments. Haven't yet found if there's any provision for locking the amplitude while adjusting the freq.

I would like to see the ability to hold various keys down while dragging a handle or using the mouse wheel to make fine adjustments w/o having to open the parameter box. Other than the Shift key method mentioned above, I have only found that the mouse wheel works for course Q adjustments while hovering over a handle.

Anyone else found any tricks/shortcuts?

To me, these are really only minor nuisances as I've gotten fairly adept at moving around on the GUI. Definitely nothing here to make me not want to use the EQ though 'cause it really sounds GOOD!!!
📝 Reply
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…
🖨️ Show Printable Version
✉️ Email this Page
🔍 Search thread
♾️ Similar Threads
🎙️ View mentioned gear
Forum Jump
Forum Jump