Old 05-09-2016, 03:58 AM   #41
bladerunner
Human being with feelings
 
bladerunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Kent, UK
Posts: 3,716
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Tech View Post
Of course. MEqualizer.
When I tested a lot of eq's way back when, this came out bottom of the pile. It was the only one (I was testing the free version so no oversampling available) that clearly had some kind of distortion in some circumstances that none of the others had. I find all the melda stuff to be sub par to be honest.
__________________
Professional Mastering and Mixing - Web / Facebook
bladerunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 07:07 AM   #42
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 3,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bladerunner View Post
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.
Just to come back to this - yes, IK Classic EQ is solid. I don't like their hardware emulations at all, but when they make original plugins; the Classic series and the Quad plugins, they are usually very good.
Judders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 02:04 PM   #43
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 820
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
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.
What do you say to this article?

http://ericbeam.com/?p=361
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 03:13 PM   #44
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 3,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
What do you say to this article?

http://ericbeam.com/?p=361
I say that if you are comparing the same filter types, then you would expect them to null.

However, you cannot make a Chebyshev filter act as a Butterworth filter, for example, because the maths are different.

Did you read the VladG blog?
Judders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 03:36 PM   #45
gpunk_w
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,130
Default

The biggest sonic difference is how transparent REAEQ is when you use it outside of Reaper on OSX, it is like it is invisible.

All kidding aside, i see little point in using any effects that are not universal and usable elsewhere, so if you are just on Windows great, but no REAplugs on OSX, no use to me.
__________________
Reaper scripters, that is all !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
gpunk_w is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 03:37 PM   #46
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 820
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
I say that if you are comparing the same filter types, then you would expect them to null.

However, you cannot make a Chebyshev filter act as a Butterworth filter, for example, because the maths are different.

Did you read the VladG blog?
Tried to read it but didn't find it readable really.

When you talk about different filter types, how does that relate to ReaEQ vs. Pro-Q for example?
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 03:51 PM   #47
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 3,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
Tried to read it but didn't find it readable really.

When you talk about different filter types, how does that relate to ReaEQ vs. Pro-Q for example?
I've never used Pro-Q, but I do have DDMF's IIEQPro, which has a number of different filter types to choose from.

I used to have a good resource on filter types bookmarked, but I don't anymore. Here is a manual that gives the frequency curves for a few different filter types though, I'll see if I can find that other site: http://www.siraudiotools.com/Standar...al.php#Filters
Judders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 03:55 PM   #48
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 820
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
I've never used Pro-Q, but I do have DDMF's IIEQPro, which has a number of different filter types to choose from.

I used to have a good resource on filter types bookmarked, but I don't anymore. Here is a manual that gives the frequency curves for a few different filter types though, I'll see if I can find that other site: http://www.siraudiotools.com/Standar...al.php#Filters
So is it that most digital EQs do sound the same like mentioned in that article but there are some that use non-standard filter types and those sound different?
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 04:03 PM   #49
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 3,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
So is it that most digital EQs do sound the same like mentioned in that article but there are some that use non-standard filter types and those sound different?
Pretty much, but a choice of filter type is becoming more common nowadays.

There are other things as well, perhaps most importantly the Nyquist de-cramping methods mentioned in VladG's blog that do not involve linear phase oversampling. I have no idea how that is achieved, but I am presuming it is with maths and not pixie dust.

My memory of it is vague, but didn't the thing about making ReaEQ null with other EQ's involve stacking filters to null one filter in some cases? If you are summing the output of several filters to match a single filter, then you will find the phase response to be very different between the two in a multi-mic setup.
Judders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 05:56 PM   #50
The Telenator
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Oud West, NL
Posts: 2,335
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
I've never used Pro-Q, but I do have DDMF's IIEQPro, which has a number of different filter types to choose from.

I used to have a good resource on filter types bookmarked, but I don't anymore. Here is a manual that gives the frequency curves for a few different filter types though, I'll see if I can find that other site: http://www.siraudiotools.com/Standar...al.php#Filters
Pro-Q 2 is a ruiner for those of us who have hunted down and purchased a collection of the finest VST EQs. Oh, and before anything else: all EQs sound somewhat different from each other, although a few are very close. They cover different bands, offer different slopes and Qs, and most of all have different filters.

Beyond all that, I don't think Pro-Q 2 is a very good choice for a beginner. It has some truly outstanding new ways of handling your EQ duties, a couple of which will likely only confuse and give poor results to newbs.

As with some of the more forward-looking of EQ plugins, Pro-Q 2 offers varying latencies and processing, from none to a little bit, from analogue old-school to full linear to a charming mix of both, like iZotope also does, that combines the best qualities of both.

It's simply a killer good EQ, and the addition of a few extra tweaks over the previous, Pro-Q, makes it a real spoiler and sometimes hard to revert to more traditional classic EQ plugins.


Is it worth it? Yes, if you don't have one of the 'Top 10' already and you have a couple hundred quid and you are serious about your music or the music you work with. One of the very best and most cutting edge of EQ plugins available.
The Telenator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 08:03 AM   #51
ReaperBoy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 91
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Timothy Lawler View Post
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.
Thanks .. great points :0)
__________________
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 05-10-2016, 08:06 AM   #52
ReaperBoy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 91
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bladerunner View Post
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.
Thanks @ bladerunner for some really useful input into what I was actually asking. You helped me form a kind of understanding of where I am with this. Thanks for taking the time
__________________
I love Reaper, and love this community. Thanks and respect to the developers who made this so great.

Last edited by ReaperBoy; 05-10-2016 at 08:30 AM.
ReaperBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 08:08 AM   #53
ReaperBoy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 91
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
I say that if you are comparing the same filter types, then you would expect them to null.

However, you cannot make a Chebyshev filter act as a Butterworth filter, for example, because the maths are different.

Did you read the VladG blog?
No .. where is it?
__________________
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 05-10-2016, 08:09 AM   #54
ReaperBoy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 91
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.
thanks brainwreck .. this is helpful
__________________
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 05-10-2016, 08:13 AM   #55
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 3,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperBoy View Post
No .. where is it?
https://vladgsound.wordpress.com/tag...-are-the-same/
Judders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 08:19 AM   #56
ReaperBoy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 91
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by esosotericmetal View Post
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.
Thanks for the input .. helpful
__________________
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 05-10-2016, 08:21 AM   #57
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 18,518
Default

I think ReaDave has somewhat related thread...

http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.p...ighlight=reaeq
__________________
Your whole life people will tell you what you can't do. Getting past them is the first step to actually getting things done.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 08:23 AM   #58
ReaperBoy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 91
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bladerunner View Post
IK's classic EQ - free to boot.
Can you get it without having to have the whole custom shop thing?
__________________
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 05-10-2016, 08:28 AM   #59
ReaperBoy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 91
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fergler View Post
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.
Yhanks for the helpful input Fergler
__________________
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 05-10-2016, 08:28 AM   #60
sostenuto
Human being with feelings
 
sostenuto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,269
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
I think ReaDave has somewhat related thread...

http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.p...ighlight=reaeq
After above Thread ___ 'hardwork-challenged' pretenders may find Pro-Q2 begins to sound like a decent value
sostenuto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 08:31 AM   #61
sostenuto
Human being with feelings
 
sostenuto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,269
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperBoy View Post
Can you get it without having to have the whole custom shop thing?
I don't think so, but just install it; then delete everything but Classic EQ ( and maybe CS Metering ) from .dll list.
sostenuto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 08:39 AM   #62
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 3,774
Default

My suggestion would be to demo this: http://ddmf.eu/iieqpro-equalizer-plugin/

Compare it when using high frequency boosts with ReaEQ. If you hear a difference it is much cheaper than Pro-Q to purchase. If you really feel that the GUI of Pro-Q is worth the money, then buy that instead.
Judders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 08:51 AM   #63
bladerunner
Human being with feelings
 
bladerunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Kent, UK
Posts: 3,716
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperBoy View Post
Can you get it without having to have the whole custom shop thing?
Not 100% sure to be honest. It is a bit of a pain if all you want is a decent eq.. but I happen to like it - the interface and the fact you can switch into M/S mode.
__________________
Professional Mastering and Mixing - Web / Facebook
bladerunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 08:53 AM   #64
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 3,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperBoy View Post
Can you get it without having to have the whole custom shop thing?
No, you have to install the Custom Shop.
Judders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 08:54 AM   #65
bladerunner
Human being with feelings
 
bladerunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Kent, UK
Posts: 3,716
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperBoy View Post
Thanks @ bladerunner for some really useful input into what I was actually asking. You helped me form a kind of understanding of where I am with this. Thanks for taking the time
No worries I happen to not really like interfaces that are too 'clinical' - ProQ is not what I like looking at when I'm eq'ing really. IK's eq is a good compromise between a nice hardware like interface and a decent graph representation too.
__________________
Professional Mastering and Mixing - Web / Facebook
bladerunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 09:00 AM   #66
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 18,518
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sostenuto View Post
After above Thread ___ 'hardwork-challenged' pretenders may find Pro-Q2 begins to sound like a decent value
I have and love FabFilter's EQ (and a number of others) but I don't really get into these type comparisons (usually), a bit of a waste of time for me personally. I just have a number of insert_plugin_here and get work done based on which one let's me do what I need quickest at the time.
__________________
Your whole life people will tell you what you can't do. Getting past them is the first step to actually getting things done.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 09:06 AM   #67
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 3,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
I have and love FabFilter's EQ (and a number of others) but I don't really get into these type comparisons (usually), a bit of a waste of time for me personally. I just have a number of insert_plugin_here and get work done based on which one let's me do what I need quickest at the time.
WHA?!?!?!

But using a DAW is about A/B/X testing and plotting frequency and phase graphs with pink noise! What are you doing, making music or something?
Judders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 09:31 AM   #68
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 18,518
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
WHA?!?!?!

But using a DAW is about A/B/X testing and plotting frequency and phase graphs with pink noise! What are you doing, making music or something?
It's funny really, when I'm bored (not making music) I do tend to sit around and split hairs out of that very boredom (and technical geek interest) but that all seems to fall by the wayside when there is actual music to make.

About the only things I really do care about are the ones that could bite me in the ass. Meaning, no one hears subtle issue 'X' in the ABX tests because it only shows up in certain contexts. Those, I do the supposed technically correct thing regardless of what I hear so that my ass is covered. It's much more efficient to take the right steps instead of trying to evaluate every possibility when working, just cover yourself and get work done. It's like wearing a hard hat at a construction site even though there are no immediate falling objects I can identify.

I do think usability matters, I couldn't care less if someone says you can make EQ A sound just like EQ B if the latter does it in a single click or easier way. /ramble
__________________
Your whole life people will tell you what you can't do. Getting past them is the first step to actually getting things done.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 09:36 AM   #69
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 3,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
It's funny really, when I'm bored (not making music) I do tend to sit around and split hairs out of that very boredom (and technical geek interest) but that all seems to fall by the wayside when there is actual music to make.

About the only things I really do care about are the ones that could bite me in the ass. Meaning, no one hears subtle issue 'X' in the ABX tests because it only shows up in certain contexts. Those, I do the supposed technically correct thing regardless of what I hear so that my ass is covered. It's much more efficient to take the right steps instead of trying to evaluate every possibility when working, just cover yourself and get work done. It's like wearing a hard hat at a construction site even though there are no immediate falling objects I can identify.

I do think usability matters, I couldn't care less if someone says you can make EQ A sound just like EQ B if the latter does it in a single click or easier way. /ramble
Agreed
Judders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 11:48 AM   #70
lolilol1975
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,096
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperBoy View Post
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?
I would say the answer is no in real life situations. There *may* be a difference in extreme situations, where you change a range of frequencies by +/-15 dB with high Q factor, but that kind of situation shouldn't happen anyway.

If you are a beginning studio, I'd say learn to use the standard effects correctly and save your money for good quality virtual (or real) instruments. *That* will make a much bigger difference in your productions.
Personally, I am in a bit the same situation, and my go to EQ is ToneBoosters Equalizer, which is like ReaEQ 's bigger brother. Definitely not as powerful as something like FabFilters, but really, never felt the need for it. The Melda one also looks like a powerful option. Sonic wise, the difference is musch bigger on other types of plugins.

Last edited by lolilol1975; 05-10-2016 at 12:02 PM.
lolilol1975 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 12:11 PM   #71
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 3,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lolilol1975 View Post
I would say the answer is no in real life situations. There *may* be a difference in extreme situations, where you change a range of frequencies by +/-15 dB with high Q factor, but that kind of situation shouldn't happen anyway.

If you are a beginning studio, I'd say learn to use the standard effects correctly and save your money for good quality virtual (or real) instruments. *That* will make a much bigger difference in your productions.
Personally, I am in a bit the same situation, and my go to EQ is ToneBoosters Equalizer, which is like ReaEQ 's bigger brother. Definitely not as powerful as something like FabFilters, but really, never felt the need for it. The Melda one also looks like a powerful option. Sonic wise, the difference is musch bigger on other types of plugins.
This is a very good point.

Hardware trumps software by a long chalk in terms of quality of results. Instruments, rental of a suitable room for recording, monitors, microphones, I/O, preamps etc.
Judders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 12:29 PM   #72
Liquid Fusion
Human being with feelings
 
Liquid Fusion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 384
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
This is a very good point.

Hardware trumps software by a long chalk in terms of quality of results. Instruments, rental of a suitable room for recording, monitors, microphones, I/O, preamps etc.
Agree. Good points. What hardware EQ's do you like? Hardware not to expensive but still good? Thanks.

Reason I ask - I bought Waves Q Clone plugin - one feature is letting hardware EQ control the plugin. Right now any hardware is expensive. FabFilter plugins are great but very expensive. ReaEQ is similar to Adobe Audition 3.01 Parametric EQ - except ReaEQ can add bands.

Wave VST3 plugins I own - VEQ3 - VEQ4 - Scheps m73 - PuigTec EQ1A / MEQ5 - Butch Vig's Vocal EQ. /all bought on rock bottom sale

Last edited by Liquid Fusion; 05-10-2016 at 12:43 PM.
Liquid Fusion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 01:13 PM   #73
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 3,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Fusion View Post
Agree. Good points. What hardware EQ's do you like? Hardware not to expensive but still good? Thanks.

Reason I ask - I bought Waves Q Clone plugin - one feature is letting hardware EQ control the plugin. Right now any hardware is expensive. FabFilter plugins are great but very expensive. ReaEQ is similar to Adobe Audition 3.01 Parametric EQ - except ReaEQ can add bands.

Wave VST3 plugins I own - VEQ3 - VEQ4 - Scheps m73 - PuigTec EQ1A / MEQ5 - Butch Vig's Vocal EQ. /all bought on rock bottom sale
I've not used enough hardware EQ's to give an opinion, and I don't own any.

Personally, hardware EQ would be far down my wish list for gear.

Also, if I wanted something like Q-Clone to emulate real hardware, I'd buy Nebula, which has more advanced sampling technology and lots of inexpensive libraries of top hardware available.
Judders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 01:41 PM   #74
Liquid Fusion
Human being with feelings
 
Liquid Fusion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 384
Default

Thanks. I bought QClone (on steep sale) as a useful tool for the many EQ curves it offers.

Interesting - Nebula Explained Free - Secrets Of Nebula VST Gain Staging Pt 1
Gain Staging / Sampling stages Interpolation - 5 min in

Last edited by Liquid Fusion; 05-10-2016 at 01:57 PM.
Liquid Fusion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 01:43 PM   #75
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 3,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Fusion View Post
Thanks. I bought QClone (on steep sale) as a tool for the many EQ curves it offers.
I'm guessing there is a place where people can share their Q-Clone captures of hardware?
Judders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 02:01 PM   #76
Liquid Fusion
Human being with feelings
 
Liquid Fusion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 384
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
I'm guessing there is a place where people can share their Q-Clone captures of hardware?
Producer Tony Maserati talking about QClone using hardware EQ and also taking hardware EQ curves from one studio to another -

YouTube Link here | Manual - An EQ library - that might be amazing!!

Found this site offering EQ Libraries - if you buy the software from them - Henry Olonga Library / SSL and Daking Library

Q-Clone - already includes a large library of modeled EQs

Last edited by Liquid Fusion; 05-10-2016 at 02:19 PM.
Liquid Fusion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2016, 02:17 PM   #77
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 3,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Fusion View Post
Producer Tony Maserati talking about QClone using hardware EQ and also taking hardware EQ curves from one studio to another -

YouTube Link here | Manual - An EQ library - that might be amazing!!
Here, near the bottom of the page, is a donationware set of Q-Clone presets

http://www.nebulapresets.com/?page_id=6602
Judders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2016, 03:50 AM   #78
ReaperBoy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 91
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sostenuto View Post
I don't think so, but just install it; then delete everything but Classic EQ ( and maybe CS Metering ) from .dll list.
Cool .. thanks for the tip sostenuto
__________________
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 05-11-2016, 03:54 AM   #79
ReaperBoy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 91
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
WHA?!?!?!

But using a DAW is about A/B/X testing and plotting frequency and phase graphs with pink noise! What are you doing, making music or something?
Haha ;0) Yeh! Who the hell started this dumb thread anyway! Oh ...
__________________
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 05-11-2016, 11:02 AM   #80
Magicbuss
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,422
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
My suggestion would be to demo this: http://ddmf.eu/iieqpro-equalizer-plugin/

Compare it when using high frequency boosts with ReaEQ. If you hear a difference it is much cheaper than Pro-Q to purchase. If you really feel that the GUI of Pro-Q is worth the money, then buy that instead.
I agree. IIEq's boosts sound better and its much more versatile than ReaEQ. In fact IIEQ is probably the most affordable top quality digital EQ out there.

It doesnt do everything that Pro-q can but its an upgrade from ReaEQ and if you are a newb you wont need half the functionality of Pro-Q 2
Magicbuss 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 11:31 PM.


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