Old 05-08-2016, 02:37 AM   #1
ReaperBoy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 92
Default Rea EQ vs FabFilter Pro-Q 2

Ok, maybe an unfair comparison, but I would like to understand something, especially from engineers who are used to using higher end products like the Pro-Q

As a relativer Noobie in digital music creation, I would like to hear views of what to expect in terms of sonic difference when using for example the standard Reaper EQ plugin (which seems to work well) and a high end EQ.

If the rest of our studio is pretty standard home recording level .. affordable nearfields for mixing etc, will we appreciate the difference in investing in a higher end eq like this?

Maybe my question is a little vague, but I'd just like to hear whatever comments people with experience feel like adding. Thanks for your thoughts ..
__________________
I love Reaper, and love this community. Thanks and respect to the developers who made this so great.
ReaperBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 03:46 AM   #2
Gass n Klang
Human being with feelings
 
Gass n Klang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Detmold - Germany
Posts: 350
Default

I never made a comparison but I haven't bought Pro-Q (and V2) for sonic reasons. It has a wonderful GUI that makes really fun to work with. This is an important fact for me. I wanna have fun when doing an 8 hours mix. The more important reason was the stunning flexibility and the user comfort. Many different filter types, easy m/s access (!) with a good visual discriminability of the m and s channel, a good analyzer, different phase options and so on. It definitly is my go to EQ.
Gass n Klang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 05:06 AM   #3
bazsound
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 223
Default

Ive never compared them, as its not really a fair comparison.

ReaEQ is a good standard EQ.

fab filter pro q has way more features. a bigger display and mid side options plus linear phase mode .

The different latency modes (low latency threw to min phase) is probably where your going to hear sonic differences, but as far as i know this is not going to make things better in all circumstances.

there both tools, both more than capable in the right situations.
bazsound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 05:09 AM   #4
Mordi
Human being with feelings
 
Mordi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Norway
Posts: 312
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gass n Klang View Post
I never made a comparison but I haven't bought Pro-Q (and V2) for sonic reasons. It has a wonderful GUI that makes really fun to work with.
I agree with this. I have no idea which sounds better, but Pro-Q 2 has a wonderful GUI.
Mordi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 06:15 AM   #5
brainwreck
Human being with feelings
 
brainwreck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The 90's
Posts: 18,222
Default

I have monkeyed around with a bunch of other eq's, but I always end up back at reaeq. I never heard anything that wowed me in eq plugins, but I like the reaeq gui and flexibility over anything else I have used.
__________________
The media are misleading the public about...pretty much everything.
brainwreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 06:21 AM   #6
bazsound
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 223
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brainwreck View Post
I have monkeyed around with a bunch of other eq's, but I always end up back at reaeq. I never heard anything that wowed me in eq plugins, but I like the reaeq gui and flexibility over anything else I have used.
http://myvst.com/vst-effects/luftikus-freeware

bit of a favourite of mine on a vocal bus after all processing.
bazsound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 06:30 AM   #7
brainwreck
Human being with feelings
 
brainwreck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The 90's
Posts: 18,222
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bazsound View Post
http://myvst.com/vst-effects/luftikus-freeware

bit of a favourite of mine on a vocal bus after all processing.
I think that I could never get along with a fixed-band eq plugin after using reaeq for so long (I have tried quite a few).
__________________
The media are misleading the public about...pretty much everything.
brainwreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 06:43 AM   #8
OPI
Human being with feelings
 
OPI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,741
Default

I think a more fair comparison would be iieq pro vs pro q. With a few tweaks, iieq pro does just about everything the pro q does.
OPI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 07:11 AM   #9
ReaperBoy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 92
Default UPDATE

I think I was a bit unclear about my question.
I was trying to get an idea of whether it was worth spending big cash on high end eq, in a basic home studio. Would it be a case of "WOW this is a whole new world and Im never going back? Or would the difference be likely more subtle than that? I don't rally understand why different eqs sound different, when they basically do the same thing. If you apply a 10k shelf with a cheaper or more expensive eq, what would be different about it? What would you be parting with the extra bucks for?

I only picked the FF example cos the reviews were so gushy, but Im wondering what the gush is about?
__________________
I love Reaper, and love this community. Thanks and respect to the developers who made this so great.

Last edited by ReaperBoy; 05-08-2016 at 07:16 AM.
ReaperBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 07:25 AM   #10
Reno.thestraws
Human being with feelings
 
Reno.thestraws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 8,598
Default

Quote:
If you apply a 10k shelf with a cheaper or more expensive eq, what would be different about it? What would you be parting with the extra bucks for?
harmoonics distortion emulation or not
oversampling or not
phase shifting difference
Q resonance

there's a lot a things but you can achieve good results with ANY EQ. know your tool and forget everything else
Reno.thestraws is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 08:37 AM   #11
zappsunzorn
Human being with feelings
 
zappsunzorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Virginia Beach VA
Posts: 2,249
Default

With the right source, room, and microphone you will not need any EQ. With a poor source, and poor room, no amount of EQ will make is sound as good as it would sound in better conditions.

In the past most people working in audio either started off working with very basic equipment that got more advanced as their skills grew, or they worked and as apprentice under someone.

Today we have flexibility unheard of in the past that is very easy to get your hands on, but the principles are still the same.
zappsunzorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 08:47 AM   #12
bladerunner
Human being with feelings
 
bladerunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Kent, UK
Posts: 3,910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperBoy View Post
As a relativer Noobie..
...don't go wasting your money. For what you will gain it really isn't worth it in the slightest. If you're new to all this learn as much as you can with the tools Reaper already has and THEN decide if something like Pro Q wil help you achieve what you want to quicker/easier/better.

There is no sonic difference in 'real life scenario' terms- there MAY be in certain modes, in certain circumstances but it really will be absolutely miniscule.
bladerunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 08:50 AM   #13
bladerunner
Human being with feelings
 
bladerunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Kent, UK
Posts: 3,910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bazsound View Post
http://myvst.com/vst-effects/luftikus-freeware

bit of a favourite of mine on a vocal bus after all processing.
I used to use this until I realised it's dB amounts were way off (it's boosting/cutting way more than it says basically) - and when I matched it with other eq's it was nothing special at all.
bladerunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 09:02 AM   #14
sostenuto
Human being with feelings
 
sostenuto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,330
Default

I react/relate to OP's Thread in terms of his point about 'sonic' differences. While dealing only with serious home studio work, there is reasonable concern about plugins detracting from quality of input content .... apart from settings/adjustments used.

Are responders suggesting this is not the case with EQs ?? Sure there is similar concern with other mainstream tools as well, but this Thread is about EQs and keeps it simpler.

Am I hearing that it makes no difference whether free/inexpensive/expensive, in terms of EQs passing my audio content ... assuming all Settings are identical ?

I wonder about this, and posting to learn/act accordingly.

Last edited by sostenuto; 05-08-2016 at 09:24 AM.
sostenuto is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 09:04 AM   #15
Futur8me
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 177
Default

What about linear phase guys???.., Reapers EQ doesn't have that?.., sometimes a Linear EQ is needed.

.

.
.
__________________
5K Imac - 4.2Ghz i7 Skylake, 8GB Ram, AMD R9 M395X, 256 SSD, Apogee Duet USB, macOS 10.13.1.
Futur8me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 09:11 AM   #16
bladerunner
Human being with feelings
 
bladerunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Kent, UK
Posts: 3,910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Futur8me View Post
What about linear phase guys???.., Reapers EQ doesn't have that?.., sometimes a Linear EQ is needed.

.

.
.
It's all a matter of taste as much as anything else. I hate the sound of linear phase eq's - whenever I side-by-side test for when I'm curious or think I'm messing with phase too much I always prefer the minimum phase.
bladerunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 10:41 AM   #17
tack
Human being with feelings
 
tack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 278
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bladerunner View Post
It's all a matter of taste as much as anything else. I hate the sound of linear phase eq's - whenever I side-by-side test for when I'm curious or think I'm messing with phase too much I always prefer the minimum phase.
It's not really just about taste. There are very good reasons to use linear phase in certain circumstances.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efKabAQQsPQ
tack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 10:44 AM   #18
bladerunner
Human being with feelings
 
bladerunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Kent, UK
Posts: 3,910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tack View Post
It's not really just about taste. There are very good reasons to use linear phase in certain circumstances.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efKabAQQsPQ
I'm well aware of this I just don't like the sound of linear phase full stop basically.
bladerunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 10:53 AM   #19
Timothy Lawler
Human being with feelings
 
Timothy Lawler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,420
Default

I suggest you decide for yourself by trying them back to back and trusting your own ear. FabFilter has a demo. An interesting thread would be your comments on what you hear when comparing them, and how each fits your way of working. Maybe you'd hear no difference and that would give you an answer as well.
__________________
Website
Youtube page
Timothy Lawler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 11:03 AM   #20
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 820
Default

Digital EQs don't sound different. It's the GUI you're paying for (which, IMO, Fabfilter is the absolute king of).

Obviously linear phase is different and ReaEQ doesn't have this. FWIW, it's not standard practice to use linear phase EQs even in big studios.

The only time an EQ sounds different is if it's emulating the distortion of a hardware unit.

I remember some article where a guy nulled various EQs with a standard one. Might even have been ReaEQ.
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 12:05 PM   #21
bladerunner
Human being with feelings
 
bladerunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Kent, UK
Posts: 3,910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
FWIW, it's not standard practice to use linear phase EQs even in big studios.
And it's only a very recent digital only development afaik. When analog studios were the norm no one used them!
bladerunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 12:07 PM   #22
bladerunner
Human being with feelings
 
bladerunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Kent, UK
Posts: 3,910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
Digital EQs don't sound different. It's the GUI you're paying for (which, IMO, Fabfilter is the absolute king of).
Yes, which is why I said 'quicker/easier/better' in terms of the advantages. The advantage won't be sound - it will be simply be whether you like using it and whether it helps you to get the results you want.
bladerunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 12:55 PM   #23
X-Tech
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 442
Default

I tested more and more - my conclusions:

REAEQ

Peak is -24db with tabs display off. With displayer - 12db.
-120 db - i cant see really effect ot that peak (even when i see that amount at gain.
So for strong peak cut or boost - make more tabs. I'm not sure really how strong can be peak here on this eq - when i go lower it resets at -60db - resets bw so probably -60db at single band.




Curves for HP/LP not to much sharp but use more (tabs for hp/lp) and
curve gets more sharp.

I used 6x HP at one point for make very strong hi pass filter. Each tab gives extra +/- 12 db power. So logic tells 4x HP tab give 48db HP power.




Option for stronger HP/LP points (which does more cpu) 24/48/96/120db COULD make things faster.

Quality is very good. I dont know only what to say about this audio analyser. I would like to see analyser with 24/48db/60db view (down) too (as option - button or something) - to be able to visualise quiet sounds. Audio is very good. Analyser should display more low in db sounds 24,48 options at least.
__________________
nonononononono

Last edited by X-Tech; 05-08-2016 at 01:48 PM.
X-Tech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 01:50 PM   #24
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 820
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Tech View Post
I tested more and more - my conclusions:

REAEQ

Peak is -24db with tabs display off. With displayer - 12db.
-120 db - i cant see really effect ot that peak (even when i see that amount at gain.
So for strong peak cut or boost - make more tabs. I'm not sure really how strong can be peak here on this eq - when i go lower it resets at -60db - resets bw so probably -60db at single band.
Don't really understand this post. Are you talking about cutting 60db from a frequency?
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 01:52 PM   #25
esosotericmetal
Human being with feelings
 
esosotericmetal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 358
Default

Pro-Q is awesome, but not at all necessary for beginners. There are probably better ways you can spend your money.

If you engineer or mix music in a any serious fashion it's a really great tool to have, but it's only really worth the price if you get it as part of a bundle though. Their dynamics and FX plugins are probably a bigger step up from Reaper's stock stuff than Pro-Q is.
esosotericmetal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 01:56 PM   #26
bladerunner
Human being with feelings
 
bladerunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Kent, UK
Posts: 3,910
Default

For what it's worth to the op - my favourite eq - by which I mean, gets done what I want to get done the quickest, is IK's classic EQ - free to boot. I can switch it into Mid/Side mode at any time (and it completely preserves any current setting for both mid and side) which is extremely handy to me. I use it both for mixing and most of my mastering eq'ing too - awesome tool to me.
bladerunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 02:36 PM   #27
X-Tech
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 442
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
Don't really understand this post. Are you talking about cutting 60db from a frequency?
Yes. Seems to be -60db. When i go lower - band-width will reset.
__________________
nonononononono
X-Tech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 03:09 PM   #28
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 820
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Tech View Post
Yes. Seems to be -60db. When i go lower - band-width will reset.
When are you ever EQing 60db? lol
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 03:20 PM   #29
X-Tech
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 442
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
When are you ever EQing 60db? lol
Frequency/1 Note range cut.
I described how eq behaves.
__________________
nonononononono

Last edited by X-Tech; 05-08-2016 at 03:55 PM.
X-Tech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 04:17 PM   #30
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 4,483
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
Digital EQs don't sound different. It's the GUI you're paying for (which, IMO, Fabfilter is the absolute king of).

Obviously linear phase is different and ReaEQ doesn't have this. FWIW, it's not standard practice to use linear phase EQs even in big studios.

The only time an EQ sounds different is if it's emulating the distortion of a hardware unit.

I remember some article where a guy nulled various EQs with a standard one. Might even have been ReaEQ.
That's not true.

Different filters sound different, and affect phase differently (something that would only be audible when dealing with multiple sources), also de-cramping around Nyquist is handled in a variety of ways.

Here's an article about digital equalizers: https://vladgsound.wordpress.com/201...alizers-draft/

Quote:
Originally Posted by bladerunner View Post
And it's only a very recent digital only development afaik. When analog studios were the norm no one used them!
Yup. Linear phase is a digital only deal.

I can't actually remember the last time I used a linear phase EQ. I used to use them in parallel processing, but I don't even bother with that any more. I guess if I was using parallel processing in mastering I might.
Judders is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 05:25 PM   #31
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 820
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
That's not true.

Different filters sound different, and affect phase differently (something that would only be audible when dealing with multiple sources), also de-cramping around Nyquist is handled in a variety of ways.
Interesting. Do you doubt that it's possible to null any EQ plugin with ReaEQ?
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 05:33 PM   #32
Magicbuss
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,448
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
That's not true.

Different filters sound different, and affect phase differently (something that would only be audible when dealing with multiple sources), also de-cramping around Nyquist is handled in a variety of ways.

Here's an article about digital equalizers: https://vladgsound.wordpress.com/201...alizers-draft/



Yup. Linear phase is a digital only deal.

I can't actually remember the last time I used a linear phase EQ. I used to use them in parallel processing, but I don't even bother with that any more. I guess if I was using parallel processing in mastering I might.
+1 on VladG's detailed assessment of digital EQ's. Its is MUCH more accurate than that old blog post claiming all digital EQ's are the same.

As for linear phase...I like using Acon Equalize in mixed phase mode for drums. You get the benefits of linear phase on a multi-mic'd instrument where phase is always an issue and it essentialy makes the pre-ring unnoticeable. Win-win.
Magicbuss is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 05:33 PM   #33
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 4,483
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
Interesting. Do you doubt that it's possible to null any EQ plugin with ReaEQ?
Yes.

It is impossible to make one type of filter act as another, especially if you are using it for a multi-mic setup and wanting the same phase response as the filter you are trying to emulate.
Judders is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 05:34 PM   #34
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 4,483
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magicbuss View Post
As for linear phase...I like using Acon Equalize in mixed phase mode for drums. You get the benefits of linear phase on a multi-mic'd instrument where phase is always an issue and it essentialy makes the pre-ring unnoticeable. Win-win.
Interesting, I'll have to check that plugin out.
Judders is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 05:47 PM   #35
Magicbuss
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,448
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
Interesting, I'll have to check that plugin out.
Check out page 8-10 in the manual for a description of what mixed mode does.

http://acondigital.com/docs/Equalize_en.pdf
Magicbuss is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 05:48 PM   #36
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 4,483
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magicbuss View Post
Check out page 8-10 in the manual for a description of what mixed mode does.

http://acondigital.com/docs/Equalize_en.pdf
Thanks!
Judders is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 07:15 PM   #37
sostenuto
Human being with feelings
 
sostenuto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,330
Default

Acon Equalizer ($100.) pages 8-10 describe what is covered in FabFilter ProQ2 ($179.) video by Dan Worrall.
sostenuto is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 07:49 PM   #38
Fergler
Human being with feelings
 
Fergler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperBoy View Post
I think I was a bit unclear about my question.
I was trying to get an idea of whether it was worth spending big cash on high end eq, in a basic home studio. Would it be a case of "WOW this is a whole new world and Im never going back? Or would the difference be likely more subtle than that? I don't rally understand why different eqs sound different, when they basically do the same thing. If you apply a 10k shelf with a cheaper or more expensive eq, what would be different about it? What would you be parting with the extra bucks for?
In that case, no, it's not worth the money. Btw, there is a demo available. Try it yourself.

For me I use it because of the GUI also. However I was given an NFR version and did not have to purchase it. I probably would not ever have bought it because of the steep price.

It gives great feedback as to what is going on, is easy to use, and for the most part it's features are well laid out on the one-window design. There are other EQs that go for less money that rival it's features, and some free ones. The best free one I've used for features + GUI is Melda MEqualizer, which comes in the Melda Free pack.

It's got saturation as well, if that interests you.

https://www.meldaproduction.com/MEqualizer

Here's the bottom line for me. I don't do serious paid work very often with any equalizers, let alone the whole DAW, so for me it is not worth spending 200+ on a single plugin when the free stuff can get there (or the insanely cheap, like Reaper). If I were doing things faster and under more stress, I'd probably start noticing the small details that would infuriate me about X product, and eventually consider spending money to make those problems go away. That is what products like FabFilter Pro Q 2 are for. Nitpicky dudes.

Even so, in my review of Pro Q 2 I still had several nitpicks. Here's the run down:

Quote:
There is some missed opportunity, I felt. Do any of these things make me reach for another plug-in? No. They just struck me as surprising that they weren't in the plug-in already.
Double-clicking frequency zones to add new bands of different types is very cool, but there is an untapped potential for even faster and more intuitive interaction. Placing notch filters in the stratosphere of 10k and up or really low down in 30hz and below is arguably a very rare occurrence. Clicking low in these zones could create cut and shelf filters and set the db/octave of the cut and shelf filters by how low on the graph you click.
A visual indication that Enable MIDI is not on would be an easy addition. A red X or slash in place of the MIDI indicator light would suffice.
Shortcuts like delete for removing a band and holding down S for soloing a band could improve workflow.
Middle mouse drag anywhere on graph could move and scale the frequency display.

Some minor gripes:

CTRL click resets all plugin parameters, and double click allows you to enter values. It was therefor not intuitive that double click resets the frequency scale and CTRL click has no effect at all.

I was also struck by the redundancy of the Channel Mode button in contrast to the rest of the plug-in's quick interaction. Clicking it brings up a list of just two options. The button should just toggle it's state rather than bring up a list. It's in a location that would make it very hard to accidentally click, and besides, the bands change colour depending on what channel mode you are in so you'd know pretty quick if you did. I'd go even further to say that the phase modes could use this, too.
__________________
Check out my hip-hop, funk-rock band Theatre Crisp

Last edited by Fergler; 05-08-2016 at 08:03 PM.
Fergler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 12:02 AM   #39
DigiDis
Human being with feelings
 
DigiDis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 285
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fergler View Post
There are other EQs that go for less money that rival it's features, and some free ones. The best free one I've used for features + GUI is Melda MEqualizer, which comes in the Melda Free pack.

It's got saturation as well, if that interests you.

https://www.meldaproduction.com/MEqualizer
+1 for the Melda Free Pack. I own pretty much every FabFilter plugin except for the synths, and they are easy to use and sound great, but the free EQ and compressor from Melda are very high quality and easily rival the big boys.

Also lately I have been looking at free and inexpensive plugins and came across the TDR plugins (tokyodawn.net) and am seriously impressed with the musicality of their free stuff. DDMF is another.

I think I am going to stop buying expensive plugins from now on as the quality of the free and inexpensive plugins is becoming more than I realistically need.
DigiDis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 02:58 AM   #40
X-Tech
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 442
Default

Of course. MEqualizer.

Anyway my power of EQ order is different. Reafir is most powerfull and comes with Reaper. ReaFir is atom bomb equalizer - only cpu usage...

1 ReaFIR (AMAZING)
2 PTEQ / SONEQ / PUSHTEC
3 ReaEQ
4 Mequalizer



Reaeq beats totally mequalizer at day when there will be added more strong hp/lp points options like 24/48/60/96/120. Anyway still with extra points in REAEQ which can be done even now (meq have only 6) Reaeq is even better than MEQ with multiple bands options and powerfull filtering. More points - more strong filtering even stronger than in MEQ.
__________________
nonononononono

Last edited by X-Tech; 05-09-2016 at 03:34 AM.
X-Tech is offline   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 10:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.