btw, plug-in I mentioned is updated (with phase slider) now and price is higher MeldaProduction MFreeformEqualizer, curve linear-phase equalizer it was a good deal though current price still isn't super high.

I am not a ME, just an audiophile, but I listen to the music very intently/critically, in the dark, with my eyes closed and during my struggle with room bass resonances I have tried many VST EQ plugins (including plpar, ePure I, algorithmix, etc.) and I have found Oxford Sonnex to be the best. It's the most transparent EQ, which brings those nasty bass peaks down without damaging the stereo imaging, highs, soundstage depth and width.

With all due respect Safe & Sound. I find it bizarre to say the least that you advertise your presets from a Liquid Mix (Fairchild, Massive Passive etc) on your website and then have the nerve to say you don't mention all your gear on your website.
If you've got some dope sounding EQ surely you want to let your punters know about it. tutt

@safeandsound

I used to be impressed with the liquid mix... I bought one about a year ago simply for mixing and loved it for about 2 months, then after about that I stopped using it, I eventually just gave it to a mate who was thinking of buying one.

I think I got caught up in thinking that it sounded good, but when I "blind tested myself" sometimes I couldn't actually hear any difference or I didn't like the difference.

For me what this comes down to is lack of distortion. You can use convolution all day long... but even if you run IRs on a distortion pedal, you won't pick up a single hint of distortion. And subtle distortion characteristics are, for me at least, the whole point of why I like analogue gear over digital. And if you exclude that from you digital emulations, you've failed.
dfegad

I'm sure you know you can't eq your room? You're just applying eq to your speakers.

I tried it, and it was nothing special - I could get other cheaper eq:s to null out DDMF really fast.

I should clarify more... I'm a mastering engineer and nearly always attempt to perform my processing as transparently as possible. So the liquidmix would be excellent for this if it has nice sounding transparent compression. Well, having auditioned all of the stock emus extensively, I found none that outdo even Logic's in-built compressor (which is ostensibly sh*t but I think it's actually not that bad) therefore I just wouldn't use the LM [or logic compressor!] for mastering.

But I do believe the best transparent sounding compressors for mixing and mastering are plugins actually, just not the LM. I think the best characteristic/desirable-distortion-producing compressors are analogue, I actually even prefer many solid state models over valve compressors too.



I gave/long-term-lent it to my mate, didn't sell it, so could get it back, but I'm pretty sure I had used it extensively enough to decide it wasn't for me. I was using it for mixing, but nothing sounded aggressive enough or characteristic enough for me to like over my TG1, and as I said, I like other plugins better for transparent work.

IMHO not all the EQs were bad, I liked the neve one but it seemed to add a homogeneous sheen which annoyed me after a while.

+1 for Brainworx M/S Eq (bx_digital).

Gonna have to try the DDMF stuff. Licenses starting at .50 cents? Crazy.

Matt

I love the PLPar EQ -- I just wish it was a bit more affordable. Even if it was say, 600 bucks I'm sure they'd shift a lot more licences. There's not a lot in it between the PLPar and Algo Orange, but the PLPar's GUI is so much more usable for me, and the built-in M/S features are gold.

But in the mean time I've been making do with UAD-1 PEQ, but as a min-phase EQ it's simply not flexible if you need that extra transparency and clarity that a good lin-EQ will give you.

Cosign about Flux Epure II.

The only other one that kept my attention as a super precise tool that respects the signal is Brainworx digital_v2.

ha ha yeah man.

I used it in the context of mixing vocals etc as it has a nice air to it sometimes but as I say, this quality gets a bit old after a while. Anyhow, the way I mix is pretty bizarre at times.

But glad LM works for you man, it would save me some $$$ on upgrades if I shared your taste. So I'll just have to save the $$$ with the power of a soldering iron instead.

LOL!!! Damn True!!

Are you sure? I seem to remember you saying how awesome LP10 was and now you only use apEQ.

I think I paid about 10 bucks for the DDMF LP10. Could you name which 'cheaper' EQ's nulled it out?

My opinion on Flux ePure vs oZone EQ in LP mode:

I found the Flux ePure to sound nearly identical to the oZone EQ in LP mode. Both kinda dry up and "cardboardize" the sound if you do too much. I really like the high-Q/high-gain settings on the Flux for creating subtle resonant peak effects. OZone doesn't seem to like boosting unless its in the 3khz range or the more boomy side of the 200hz area. The low rolloff on oZone is really good, the high, not so much... you can hear the crossover point too distinctly it seems. High shelf on ePure is NICE! Really preserves the time coherenchy and definitely adds a little candy whether you boost or cut (even though its not supposed to). Don't like the highpass or lowpass simply because they are not adjustable in bandwidth, they do seem to do their job, but the curves are a little steep for most of the material I tried. They sound really good for how steep they are I suppose, with no bump above the x-over. Both have their place, however limited it may be. Both tend to shine in different areas of cleaning up lower quality source material without damaging the good parts. Both are great in situations when EQ is used to touch up any artefacts from a previous bout of processing, etc.

Using digital EQ, generally it seems best to use just enough to fix the problem, but not enough to be noticeable. I like to "underprocess," because in the end I find that it is clarity and a certain precise focus (or purposeful un-focus) on the pleasant sounding aspects of the source that makes things sound loud and punchy on a GOOD playback system. Generally I find mastering to have a lot in common with restoring an antique of some sort. If it ain't broke don't fix it. If it is, make sure you don't break anything else when you fix it. In the end, you didn't design the source material, so there really is no miracle. Some things are simply unrepairable and/or undisplayable to anyone but the artist...though they will never let you tell them that. Just smile, turn knobs, accept payment, and forget to put your name on it. I've definitely made the mistake of putting my name on crap before... the artist will go around telling everyone how much you suck when its really them that sucks. Then you have to go on a campaign, bashing them because they got everyone thinking you suck and you have to prove that it's really them that sucks... all because you put your name on something that you knew sucked to begin with. What, did you think someone would actually take the blame for something that was clearly and painfully obviously their fault? Of course not.

PS: I just had to keep typing until this post turned into a rant. It took a lot longer this time than my last post. I'm getting better doctor, I swear...

I mostly only use my own developed EQ's.

Tried Melda in a friends studio a while back and it is kind of good. thumbsup

Tried the Algorithmix Orange demo a while back and it was kind of good, but not what I was looking for.

Looking forward to try the MP on UAD soon.

I've already used the UAD Massivo on about 3 masters since I got it and really am liking what it does, I am really liking it in tandem with the Precision EQ.

Waiting for equality

The way you put things clearly shows you have an interest in DDMF whic hI never used ... but I just don't like when people throw the truth too obviously at my face ...

Ozone 4 is very good for the price considering all you can do with it and all the modes available. Linear Broadband Eq from waves is also very precise and linear. The Massenburg plugin is very nice too, Magix Spectrum from Duy is a sharp one (too clear to my taste) ... I have to try algorythix ... i wish they lower the price a bit.

Of course Brainworx plugs are nice too. If I have only one slot available and don't need MS I would use the Waves Linear.

After comparing several Eqs.

I think we are all a bit confused. Sorry do not take too seriously.

Certain Eqs have frequency fixed attenuate or cut, normally vintage stuff. Saturation which gives its own character etc...

Other offer less limits or less coloring by not adding any saturation. More transparent.

At the end you could get exactly or almost same color if you get rid of the saturation with almost any professional plugin. They all sound similar they just differ in the Q curve, some need more to push or attenuate despite Db representation in number. You cannot test Eqs by just setting parameters identically in numbers.

Not to create controversy but I indeed think that with a less limited Eq such as Fabfilter or apEQ you can tweak as much as you need to recreate Vintage stuff. The only thing left is saturation. That's why some ppl prefer Vintage replicas. Interface quality also have an important role on the market.

Logic stuff is as good as many brands ask millions for their stuff.

Anyway I prefer to invest more time and less money.

I don't agree. If enough coloration is in the mix then yes usually there won't be a need for eq plug-ins that carry saturation. If the mix is sterile or clean eq's sound harsh when mastering then "some" plug-in eq's with saturation can help.

Besides coloration here's something I noticed3 days ago, I finished eq'ing and tryed different modes with eQuality. Since there's no saturation no huge differences should be expected but I preferred the analog mode on the song I was working as it made a nice difference.

With something like apeq you can sort of draw any impulse curve of any eq but its time consuming and I'm not sure if it will sound good. Emulation plug-ins make things faster and better. I don't think eq plug-ins with saturation is a must but its always good to have them when needed.

By the way, I really liked eQuality with Nebula and the melda eq I mentioned here I think I'm all covered for itb eq'ing (though I'm always interested for new nebula eq's heh ).

You are pretty right mate. Not everyone could recreate every character and is time consuming. I just wanted to state that ears training is more important than a thousand Eqs. Many ppl tend to follow what the mass say but at the end even if there is better eqs than others you will be lost with one or the other.

If something has a lot of character is even more problematic in some cases when not used properly.

I just downloaded the demo of DMG Audio EQuality. I really like it. I may still miss a bit of weight in the low-end, but overall - I'm pretty impressed. Don't have the DDMF but will get it tomorrow.

How's the brainworx stuff in the very low end?

How do you guys like the EQuality?

DDMF lover here. Got the EQuality aswell and I must say I LOVE THIS THING! For me this is the best UI ever made. It's so much fun to use it.
The sound is fantastic for me. Even if I almost never used analyzers I find this one usefull and somehow better than others I've seen or used before (esp. the low end seems very accurate)

10/10 points for EQuality!

As for UI ... isn't there some with full screen UI ?
I fund that having 5 or more channel eq in a small window very anoying ....

wow.

just seen the eQuality. I've been waiting for someone to make an eq with a similar 'range' scaler slider for a long time now. and a great price. looks promising.

Totally agree for each single word