Old 05-01-2012, 09:36 AM   #1
afaik
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 79
Default Are there any good free parametric EQs?

I'm not having much luck finding a simple, regular old parametric eq for use on a track by track basis; not for master bus.

I use digitalfish's blockfish and spitfish plugins so I wish they had an eq, but, alas, they don't.

I know there are some cheaper (priced) ones like Stillwell's VibeEQ and 1973, on one of which I am close to purchasing, just can't decide which.

How about free ones though, like the simple one that comes bundled with Pro Tools (for example)?
afaik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 09:39 AM   #2
Argle
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,140
Default

ReaEQ??
Argle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 09:43 AM   #3
afaik
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 79
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Argle View Post
ReaEQ??
Is ReaEQ parametric? I thought that was considered graphical. Am I just confused in my EQ terminology?
afaik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 09:44 AM   #4
Argle
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,140
Default

ReaEQ is parametric with as many bands as you want. Can't think of anything more you would need.
Argle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 09:48 AM   #5
afaik
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 79
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Argle View Post
ReaEQ is parametric with as many bands as you want. Can't think of anything more you would need.
Thanks for the clarification. I have read that a parametric eq is more useful on an individual track basis and I thought that ReaEQ was considered graphical. Now I know that I was wrong. Dead wrong.
afaik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 09:50 AM   #6
Argle
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,140
Default

Yep, you got a great free EQ already at your disposal.
Argle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 04:07 PM   #7
Ras Keita
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 90
Default

BootEQ mkII
http://varietyofsound.wordpress.com/vst-effects/

Pushtec 5+1A
http://www.leftoverlasagne.com/plug-ins.html

SonEQ
http://sonimus.com/site/page/downloads/

NCL Phase EQ
http://rekkerd.org/matthew-lindsay-ncl-phase-eq/
Ras Keita is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 04:28 PM   #8
Tod
Human being with feelings
 
Tod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,517
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by afaik View Post
Thanks for the clarification. I have read that a parametric eq is more useful on an individual track basis and I thought that ReaEQ was considered graphical. Now I know that I was wrong. Dead wrong.
For an EQ ReaEQ basically gives you everything. I'm not sure what the limit might be for bands, I've never reached it.

You've got Low/High Shelf, High/Low Pass, Band, Notch, and more. Many will say it don't sound as good and that might be the case but it works for me.
Tod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 05:56 PM   #9
ObiK
Human being with feelings
 
ObiK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 1,095
Default

Definitely try ReaEQ before looking at others. Reaper has some great built in FX, just got to try them out.
__________________
IKMultimedia.com
Musicians first. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter & Tumblr!
ObiK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 06:07 PM   #10
Smurf
Human being with feelings
 
Smurf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,151
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by afaik View Post
I thought that ReaEQ was considered graphical.
I am not sure what this means....are you talking about the Waveform being visible while you adjust the bands?

Not being a smart-a$$, I guess I am just dense at the moment......
__________________
Yep's First 3 Years in PDF's
Smurf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 06:07 PM   #11
JHughes
Human being with feelings
 
JHughes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Too close to Charlotte, NC
Posts: 2,182
Default

ReaEQ doesn't have a linear phase mode, so a linear phase EQ is a nice supplement. But it sure does everything else.
__________________
Reverse polarity, not phase
JHughes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2012, 06:28 PM   #12
BenK-msx
Human being with feelings
 
BenK-msx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 2,596
Default

I liked reaeq alot more when i unticked 'show tabs' - and when it got the analyser:


for everyday fixing its fab.
BenK-msx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 10:09 PM   #13
psingman
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 477
Default

HI, the Analyzer, mine doesn't have that. Is that standard in newer versions of Reaper or can you get it to work somehow? I use Glisseq, but wouldn't bother if ReaEQ had it, like you said. Anyway, if I do need to update, can I get it in version 3 and not go to 4? The last time I updated it ruined my whole Reapering but maybe it was just one of those computer woe is mes, OK, thanks, psingman
psingman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 10:23 PM   #14
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 5,042
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by psingman View Post
HI, the Analyzer, mine doesn't have that. Is that standard in newer versions of Reaper or can you get it to work somehow? I use Glisseq, but wouldn't bother if ReaEQ had it, like you said. Anyway, if I do need to update, can I get it in version 3 and not go to 4? The last time I updated it ruined my whole Reapering but maybe it was just one of those computer woe is mes, OK, thanks, psingman
It was an update in v4 Psingman. You might be able to get the VST version for other DAWs working in v3 I suppose.

You need to look at the migration (v3 to v4) thread to save you REAPER settings and then go for v4


>
__________________
Nathan, Lincoln, UK.

dB marks on MCP faders FR: http://forum.cockos.com/project.php?issueid=3059
planetnine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2012, 03:35 AM   #15
Cosmic
Human being with feelings
 
Cosmic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Online
Posts: 3,874
Default

Version 4 is the best.
Cosmic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2014, 11:45 AM   #16
Narayan
Human being with feelings
 
Narayan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 200
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BenK-msx View Post
I liked reaeq alot more when i unticked 'show tabs' - and when it got the analyser:


for everyday fixing its fab.
This is a great little tip. Wish we could make it bigger for precision.
__________________
http://Soundcloud.com/Barsetter/
...free VST...Midi Drum Kit-Independence Free, Normal Synths- see http://www.vstwarehouse.com/
Narayan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2014, 01:53 PM   #17
PooFox
Human being with feelings
 
PooFox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Posts: 1,875
Default

i think this is a common misconception, esp nowadays when many parametric eq's have a spectrum analyzer in the gui (suggest something "graphical"). i used to confuse the two as well, but yea, fixed frequency eq (like graphic eq) are more useful for shaping everything in a consistent way; parametric is more surgical, and offer much more control.

if you want something fancier than reaq you can try spline eq. i think it's linear phase as well (if that means anything to you). pushtec 5+1a is my favorite fixed band eq (adds some color which i like), but i usually have those on the bus and reaq on individual tracks (most often acting as simple hi-pass filters).

also, a good resource for free plugs (bedroomproducersblog):

free parametric eq's:
http://bedroomproducersblog.com/2011...r-vst-plugins/

free graphic eq's
http://bedroomproducersblog.com/2011...r-vst-plugins/

@Narayan - for precision just hold alt, ctrl, or shift key.
__________________
| Twilight Mystery School |
Surrealist Electronic Music

Last edited by PooFox; 04-19-2014 at 02:08 PM.
PooFox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2014, 02:06 PM   #18
Tim Ragnur
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Denmark
Posts: 91
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by afaik View Post
Is ReaEQ parametric? I thought that was considered graphical. Am I just confused in my EQ terminology?
Parametric eq means having the three parameters pr. band: center frequency, amplitude and Q/bandwidth.
On a graphic eq the frequency and bandwidth is fixed and only amplitude is adjustable. Often it has alot of bands.
Anything in between is usually refered to as semi-parametric.

EDIT: PooFox was faster
Tim Ragnur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2014, 05:17 PM   #19
AmmoniumNitrate
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 493
Default

Unless I'm overlooking something, ReaEQ has no option for oversampling, so when you EQ at the high end, the bells get warped:



With oversampling, the bell doesn't get squished:



2nd image is an EQ I have handy for illustration, but I've never programmed it, it only provides 2 band filters, and it's not free.

Squished bells are easier on your CPU but they don't sound as good. At some point I'll search for free EQ's that do oversampling, but this information here in the meantime.

Last edited by AmmoniumNitrate; 04-19-2014 at 05:23 PM.
AmmoniumNitrate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2014, 12:29 AM   #20
Giano
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 428
Default

ReaEQ is great, the only Feature I miss sometimes is M/S, but there is VOS Slick EQ now available, Eqilibre and BlueCatEQ ///

Last edited by Giano; 04-20-2014 at 01:07 PM.
Giano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2014, 02:49 PM   #21
stee1e
Human being with feelings
 
stee1e's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Chilterns, UK
Posts: 33
Default

Favourite EQ ever, so easy to use, learn more of ReaEQ!
stee1e is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2014, 02:54 PM   #22
JHughes
Human being with feelings
 
JHughes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Too close to Charlotte, NC
Posts: 2,182
Default

I searched "parametric eq vst with oversampling" and the first hit was http://rekkerd.org/matthew-lindsay-ncl-eq/. Synthedit made, but there are more out there.
__________________
Reverse polarity, not phase
JHughes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2014, 03:09 PM   #23
AmmoniumNitrate
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 493
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by afaik View Post
I'm not having much luck finding a simple, regular old parametric eq for use on a track by track basis; not for master bus.

I use digitalfish's blockfish and spitfish plugins so I wish they had an eq, but, alas, they don't.

I know there are some cheaper (priced) ones like Stillwell's VibeEQ and 1973, on one of which I am close to purchasing, just can't decide which.

How about free ones though, like the simple one that comes bundled with Pro Tools (for example)?
If you want to adjust for possible bias in the answers, ask the same question on Pro Tools, Cubase, and Sonar forums.
AmmoniumNitrate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2014, 03:22 PM   #24
AmmoniumNitrate
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 493
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JHughes View Post
I searched "parametric eq vst with oversampling" and the first hit was http://rekkerd.org/matthew-lindsay-ncl-eq/. Synthedit made, but there are more out there.
The oversampling EQ I used to use (haven't done music for a few years) was either (don't remember which) Electri-Q (not free) or posihfopit (free), both here:

http://www.savioursofsoul.de/Christi...ers/electri-q/

When I did listening tests between oversampling and regular EQ's, the difference was clear. At some point I'll try to post audio samples to demonstrate the difference. Until then, I'll seem like a fanatic hooked on a gimmick, I know. But if you Google 'oversampling', you'll find others who think it's important.

The squished bell shown above shows that without oversampling, the sound does something unusual as it approaches 20 kHz. That's not good. 20 kHz is special to human ears, in that it's approximately the highest frequency humans can hear; but 20 kHz is just another frequency as far as nature is concerned, so audio shouldn't act unusually at that frequency, or else the result sounds unnatural, not in a good way.
AmmoniumNitrate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2014, 03:25 PM   #25
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,252
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AmmoniumNitrate View Post
The oversampling EQ I used to use (haven't done music for a few years) was either (don't remember which) Electri-Q (not free) or posihfopit (free), both here:

http://www.savioursofsoul.de/Christi...ers/electri-q/

When I did listening tests between oversampling and regular EQ's, the difference was clear. At some point I'll try to post audio samples to demonstrate the difference. Until then, I'll seem like a fanatic hooked on a gimmick, I know. But if you Google 'oversampling', you'll find others who think it's important.

The squished bell shown above shows that without oversampling, the sound does something unusual as it approaches 20 kHz. That's not good. 20 kHz is special to human ears, in that it's approximately the highest frequency humans can hear; but 20 kHz is just another frequency as far as nature is concerned, so audio shouldn't act unusually at that frequency, or else the result sounds unnatural, not in a good way.
Clepsey's ABXYZ tester should clear that up for all you guys and put any doubts to bed for good.
__________________
Massaging electrons sure is a lot of fun.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2014, 03:30 PM   #26
AmmoniumNitrate
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 493
Default

here's someone's short blog about oversampling and squished bells:

http://vladgsound.wordpress.com/2013...d-distortions/
AmmoniumNitrate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2014, 03:31 PM   #27
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,252
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AmmoniumNitrate View Post
here's someone's short blog about oversampling and squished bells:

http://vladgsound.wordpress.com/2013...d-distortions/
http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=138238

Just helping you guys out, that's all. If someone hears it or doesn't, that should clear it up. I'm a little burnt on reading about stuff sounding different, better to properly experience it with the right test and be done with it.
__________________
Massaging electrons sure is a lot of fun.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2014, 03:55 PM   #28
AmmoniumNitrate
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 493
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=138238

... I'm a little burnt on reading about stuff sounding different....
you're on a forum about audio.
AmmoniumNitrate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2014, 04:42 PM   #29
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,252
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AmmoniumNitrate View Post
you're on a forum about audio.
Right, audio, about hearing these fine details we all stress over; after 30-40 years of it, I've read about it until I'm blue in the face (though I get the irony). I'd prefer to hear and that mean's I shouldn't even trust myself because bias is a very, very real thing. If you don't find use in it, I have no dog it the fight; it was an offer to help, nothing more, carry on.
__________________
Massaging electrons sure is a lot of fun.

Last edited by karbomusic; 04-21-2014 at 04:58 PM.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2014, 04:58 PM   #30
AmmoniumNitrate
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 493
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Right, audio, about hearing, not reading about hearing; after 30-40 years of it, I've read about it until I'm blue in the face. I'd prefer to hear it than read someone else try to prove I do and that mean's I shouldn't even trust myself because bias is a very, very real thing. If you don't find use in it, I have no dog it the fight; it was an offer to help, nothing more, carry on.
I'm all for a double-blind trial to resolve this controversy. But how would we even wonder to hearing-test oversampling if it weren't for someone writing about it in the first place? I just want you to find peace with the choice you are making of your own free will to read writing about audio.

In my case, I'd already shelled out an arm and a leg for a Waves EQ which didn't do oversampling, and when I eventually tried out some oversampling EQ's which were much cheaper, if not free, I retired my expensive Waves EQ; whatever that says about bias.
AmmoniumNitrate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2014, 05:02 PM   #31
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,252
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AmmoniumNitrate View Post
I'm all for a double-blind trial to resolve this controversy. But how would we even wonder to hearing-test oversampling if it weren't for someone writing about it in the first place? I just want you to find peace with the choice you are making of your own free will to read writing about audio.

In my case, I'd already shelled out an arm and a leg for a Waves EQ which didn't do oversampling, and when I eventually tried out some oversampling EQ's which were much cheaper, if not free, I retired my expensive Waves EQ; whatever that says about bias.
Understood, I posted too quickly. I've just found myself a bit jaded lately with the "see that 19.9k dip @ 1 dB? Drives me nuts!" That's not about your post at all, it was just timing and nothing to do with your search for a parametric. So, I thought I'd post clepsey's tool in case it helped. Personally, it's when you hear B after two weeks of hearing A that I think is more important to me which these tests can't really address easily.
__________________
Massaging electrons sure is a lot of fun.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2014, 05:47 PM   #32
serr
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,608
Default

For a general channel eq for cuts where you need them (and maybe a slight boost somewhere) the ReaEQ is just fine. I'm sensitive to that 'digital cloudy' sound you get with cheap processing and the ReaEQ has no such problems. I use it all the time now for general channel eq. (I used to use the Waves Renaissance eq a lot and it was also only good enough for general cutting.)


Now if you need a good eq that allows you to turn up a healthy amount of high frequency, that would be the UA Pultec EQP1A and not much else.

Don't want to spend on that but still need an eq boost?
Mult the track in question, band pass what you want to boost with a ReaEQ, and boost away with that tracks volume fader.

But of course everyone knows to only cut with an eq 99% of the time.
__________________
Mac Pro 8x3.33GHz i7, 16GB, 256GB SSD(OS, apps), 3x2TB 7200 HD(data); MacBook Pro 2.8GHz, 6GB, 128GB SSD HD(OS, apps), 750GB 7200 HD(data); 2xTrue Precision 8; Apogee AD-16; 2xMOTU 828mk3, Evolution UC-33e; Faderport; WiRanger, iPad & the analog mixer has retired
serr is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.