# Fabfilter EQ Existential Crisis



## storyteller (Nov 25, 2016)

After playing with the demo a bit a few months ago, I reached a startling conclusion (which I must admit is still messing with my mind). At the time, I shelved the thought. But after hearing a recent demo on this site that used it and seeing the black friday sale, I wanted to open up a discussion on it. 

Is it possible that an EQ can sound "too clean?" I used to think it was a matter of opinion on your desired results. I love clean sounds when it is called for. Grace preamps are a great example of a piece of gear I adore. I've always achieved the results I've desired - warm or clean. But now here is my dilemma. After trying out this plugin, I can't decide if I really really love the clean sound, or if it is so clean, it is too sterile...like a surgical knife used to slice steak. Novelty or not? It makes digital sound really really clean... and therein is my existential crisis. Have I heard so many attempts to make digital sound warm and analog, that I have crossed over to the "well, we might as make it as clean as possible" side of the room? I'd never use it on Spitfire libs since they chase the warmth, but others...maybe??

I never would have considered this situation years before. But when @Zhao Shen mentioned he used Fabfilter on his mix, for the 8dio contest I immediately reacted like "_That's_ what I'm hearing." I couldn't put my finger on it before he mentioned it. His mix sounds great on that song. But it has _that something_ that makes me uneasy listening to it. Maybe its the start of a new technology crush...like the butterflies inside or something. I don't know. So I am asking - what are your opinions on Fabfilter EQ?


----------



## Karsten Vogt (Nov 25, 2016)

I use Pro-Q2 for surgical frequency reduction. It sounds absolutely clean indeed and I just want to remove disturbing frequencies without changing the overall sound of the track. That's where Fabfilter's EQ especially excels for me. If you need (bullshit bingo mode on): character, warmth, depth, tube-like, gritty, mojo, shining stuff (bullshit bingo mode off), that EQ is not the first choice.But still: it sounds great to me. I can't hear which EQ plugin is being used in a track.

I think there may be a lot of precognition and expectation in your approach: you know he uses a certain tool and you expect the track to sound a certain way. And if it sounds even a tiny little bit like you expected it, your brain tells you: ha I was right.

This is just my humble opinion.


----------



## tack (Nov 25, 2016)

storyteller said:


> But when @Zhao Shen mentioned he used Fabfilter on his mix, for the 8dio contest I immediately reacted like "_That's_ what I'm hearing."


Be careful. Here lies the trappings of confirmation bias and post hoc rationalization.

You're right that Fabfilter is clean. It's not meant to be coloring EQ. It's the fact that Pro-Q2 is so good at getting out of the way, especially with its natural phase mode, that makes me very much doubt you heard it in any meaningful way.

We all need a transparent EQ in our toolkit. Pro-Q2 is a great choice IMO.


----------



## storyteller (Nov 25, 2016)

Ha. I know what you mean. But really - I fired up the track before reading his post. I was listening to it as I was working on something else at the time. 

Both of you could be right though - part of it could be confirmation bias. However, I am generally very good at identifying gear by ear. Either way, it doesn't sound like I am wrong about how clean the EQ is. I did demo it pretty heavily a few months ago. I'll probably get it. That way I won't be time limited by the demo and I can try putting it to work. I do have some ideas on how I can use it. It's just that surgical sound...I can't get it out of my mind whether I could fully embrace it as an end-product sound or not. Does it have its place in the toolbox? Sure. But I guess what I am getting at is whether using it as a primary EQ on all tracks is a sound I like or loathe. Unsure.


----------



## Living Fossil (Nov 25, 2016)

storyteller said:


> Is it possible that an EQ can sound "too clean?"



No. Not if it works in the way that this EQ works.
Your autosuggestion fools you in implicating that "clean" takes "some dirt" away.
This is not the case.

ps. if you want to make (real) blind tests, be sure that the snippets you compare, are not longer than 2 seconds.
That's more or less the maximum of audio that a brain can really compare.


----------



## Zhao Shen (Nov 25, 2016)

storyteller said:


> But it has _that something_ that makes me uneasy listening to it. Maybe its the start of a new technology crush...like the butterflies inside or something. I don't know.



I'm almost certain that anything that would make you uneasy is not the EQ itself but rather my own choices in applying it. Sounding overly clean probably has very little to do with the EQ's character and more to do with the person who's listened to the same track for a week making choices that alter the wrong frequencies or alter them by too much. I pretty much agree with what was said above about confirmation bias.


----------



## storyteller (Nov 25, 2016)

Zhao Shen said:


> I'm almost certain that anything that would make you uneasy is not the EQ itself but rather my own choices in applying it. Sounding overly clean probably has very little to do with the EQ's character and more to do with the person who's listened to the same track for a week making choices that alter the wrong frequencies or alter them by too much. I pretty much agree with what was said above about confirmation bias.


Just to clarify...uneasy might be the wrong word. Like i said, the mix was great. There is a particular sonic characteristic that i hear that is exceedingly hard to define. It isnt the mix (that sounds great!!) - it is something in the EQ algorithm perhaps. I heard the same characteristic when i demod fabfilter eq a few months ago and decided to hold off from purchasing it at that point in time. Thats why i am not sure if i like the characteristic or not. I know that sounds strange - or maybe difficult to believe because i'm defining the characteristic as "clean"... 

But the more i have thought through it today, the more i think i like this characteristic. If there is word to describe it beyond "sterile" or "clean" i would, since those words seem to indicate "transparent." I guess what i am saying is that it isn't transparent to my ears, but the "color" is non existent. Sounds crazy...i know. Thats why i asked the question.


----------



## storyteller (Nov 25, 2016)

Ahhh!!!  Just figured out how i would describe it. It is like the sonic equivilent of anti-aliasing at the highest level a video card offers. In the end, the goal is to make pixeled lines appear straight and curves to appear more rounded since computers model with lines and triangles. No one would argue that anti-aliasing filters are a bad thing at all - in fact they improve the signal. So it is like that, but with audio. In a pure analog chain, i hear analog sound. When digital is introduced, i hear a digital render. Fabfilter is like an anti-aliasing combing of the digital signal before it gets converted back to analog. It is the only EQ that sounds that way to me.

Whew. Now i at least found words to this characteristic I've (woefully) been trying to describe.


----------



## tack (Nov 25, 2016)

storyteller said:


> It is the only EQ that sounds that way to me.


You need to ask someone sweetly to facilitate a blind test with other non-coloring reverbs to see if you're able to spot Fabfilter from the bunch. I'd put a few bucks saying you can't. 

One two three not it!


----------



## storyteller (Nov 25, 2016)

tack said:


> You need to ask someone sweetly to facilitate a blind test with other non-coloring reverbs to see if you're able to spot Fabfilter from the bunch. I'd put a few bucks saying you can't.
> 
> One two three not it!


Haha. I figured that might be suggested. It isnt much different than picking out reverbs or compressors though. I'd imagine that it is more audible under different circumstances.


----------



## storyteller (Nov 26, 2016)

After doing some reading up on Fabfilter and linear phase EQs tonight, I ran across a user named "ski" on a logic forum who was discussing linear phase eqs back in 2010. I think "ski" is @Peter Schwartz since his signature says "Creator of ARTzID and SkiSwitcher2." He said something similar describing it as making him feel _uncomfortable_. I used the word _uneasy _earlier_._ This is his quote from that site:

To my ears the Channel EQ sounds way more musical than the Linear EQ, although sometimes when EQ'ing high frequencies (boosting), the resonance at fairly narrow Q settings is too prominent and makes things tend to sound a bit "plasticy" -- something that's not always the case with other EQ's. I rarely go for the Linear EQ because it's latency-inducing and dead sounding, but at the same time I'd agree that it sounds "transparent". The few times I've used it it was to surgically remove certain frequencies without adversely affecting the overall sound. And any time I've tried to use it as a general EQ, the sound of it was kind of "uncomfortable". 
Link: http://www.logicprohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=64844

He is certainly describing the same thing I'm saying. I think it may just be the linear phase eq concept that i am hearing. But in fabfilter's description, it also talks about having a special artifact eliminating algorithm in Pro EQ 2, which might be the anti-aliasing characteristic. Anyway....

Just wanted to make sure I wasn't going crazy with what I am hearing. I'm sure I'll still buy it. I have some ideas on how I want to use it. @Zhao Shen - it's not your mix brother at all. Dont think twice about that. And great song, btw! It is this "lack of artifacts" thing that makes me sound like a crazy man talking about it... but it certainly seems to be linear eq related. Almost too perfect and clean.


----------



## tack (Nov 26, 2016)

Ah, yeah, linear phase can do some really interesting things sonically, and not always natural sounding. There are specific times to use it. So I'll have to revise my earlier post: I could probably believe that you could spot out a linear phase EQ adjustment. It didn't even occur to me that it might have been used.

This video from Dan Worrall is a great treatment on the subject:



But note that linear phase is just one of Pro-Q2's modes. Fabfilter has some secret sauce in what it calls its natural phase mode that does a really good job at preventing the typical phase related artifacts from EQs while still maintaining a natural sound at relatively low latency. This is the mode you mentioned that was introduced in Pro-Q2. The older Pro-Q did have a zero latency mode though, which was the default and ideal for most situations.

Maybe Zhao Shen can say whether or not he used any Pro-Q(2) instances in linear phase.


----------



## storyteller (Nov 26, 2016)

tack said:


> Ah, yeah, linear phase can do some really interesting things sonically, and not always natural sounding. There are specific times to use it. So I'll have to revise my earlier post: I could probably believe that you could spot out a linear phase EQ treatment. It didn't even occur to me that it might have been used.
> 
> This video from Dan Worrall is a great treatment on the subject:
> 
> ...



This is a great video. Good find Tack!  I hope Zhao chimes in too. I had not watched any of Dan's videos before, but I will certainly watch a few more before the sun goes down tonight.

There's no doubt Fabfilter will have a place in my toolbox when I add it... I'm still just trying to wrap my brain around the feeling that arises when I hear it being used. Maybe it is also part of that "secret sauce" you alluded to in the normal mode too...


----------



## tack (Nov 26, 2016)

storyteller said:


> I had not watched any of Dan's videos before, but I will certainly watch a few more before the sun goes down tonight.


Dan's videos are like audio nerd porn. The only problem with them is the effect they tend to have on my wallet.

It's not the end of the world if you don't get on with the Pro-Q2. Even if it does end up being a complete fabrication of your head, if you think you hear something you don't like, it's going to disrupt your creative process. The good news is that there are many high quality and reasonably priced choices, both for transparent and coloring EQs.


----------



## Zhao Shen (Nov 26, 2016)

storyteller said:


> @Zhao Shen - it's not your mix brother at all. Dont think twice about that. And great song, btw! It is this "lack of artifacts" thing that makes me sound like a crazy man talking about it... but it certainly seems to be linear eq related. Almost too perfect and clean.



Don't worry, I took no offense


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Nov 26, 2016)

I haven't read this whole thread, so sorry if this is redundant, but there are different kinds of EQ.

The standard EQ you'd find on a traditional console has some phase shift around the corner frequencies. That's part of the color, and you hear it with large boosts. It works well for most things.

There are also linear phase equalizers that don't have that shift. It's the type you'd use for big boosts on (especially sampled) pianos, strings, maybe cymbals - complicated sounds with lots of overtones.

And there are others in between. Of course, lots of EQ variations are designed for different jobs - graphic EQs, surgical ones, etc.


----------



## higgs (Nov 26, 2016)

Nothing wrong with using two EQ's. For example: pristine EQ to carve out/remove unsavory bits, and flavorful EQ to enhance. For even deeper example: sometimes I like a clean EQ so's I can clearly and confidently monitor the removal of offending frequencies without color addition to the track. I've used Waves Renaissance EQ's to do this for years, but now days Pro-Q is taking over.


----------



## Karsten Vogt (Nov 26, 2016)

Pro-Q2 for surgical reduction, for coloring on channels (don't laugh here) I totally love LKJB Luftikus (Maag4 emu, free) and the NI Enhanced EQ and for the Main I like the NI Passive EQ or IKMM 432.


----------



## storyteller (Nov 26, 2016)

higgs said:


> Nothing wrong with using two EQ's. For example: pristine EQ to carve out/remove unsavory bits, and flavorful EQ to enhance. For even deeper example: sometimes I like a clean EQ so's I can clearly and confidently monitor the removal of offending frequencies without color addition to the track. I've used Waves Renaissance EQ's to do this for years, but now days Pro-Q is taking over.


I agree with Reaissance EQ....and comp. They've been workhorses for me and sound stellar. I wish they'd tweak the GUIs though. Super tiny knobs and buttons. But good to hear that you've managed to use fabfilter in these places from time to time. That gives me some more confidence.


----------



## synthpunk (Nov 26, 2016)

Agreed if you want surgical clean EQ fabfilter and the like if you want vibe musical EQ look elsewhere like Uad



Karsten Vogt said:


> I use Pro-Q2 for surgical frequency reduction. It sounds absolutely clean indeed and I just want to remove disturbing frequencies without changing the overall sound of the track. That's where Fabfilter's EQ especially excels for me. If you need (bullshit bingo mode on): character, warmth, depth, tube-like, gritty, mojo, shining stuff (bullshit bingo mode off), that EQ is not the first choice.But still: it sounds great to me. I can't hear which EQ plugin is being used in a track.
> 
> I think there may be a lot of precognition and expectation in your approach: you know he uses a certain tool and you expect the track to sound a certain way. And if it sounds even a tiny little bit like you expected it, your brain tells you: ha I was right.
> 
> This is just my humble opinion.


----------



## WhiteNoiz (Nov 26, 2016)

Dunno about FF, but I think I might have felt the same with the (non-)linear (don't remember; anyway, it was the "clean" one probably, lol) mode of Acon Digital Equalize (its modes felt quite characteristic and interesting at the time I first heard it; I just remembered it now after reading some responses)... Kinda trippy thread, I like it. xD

Edit: Hm, maybe it was that "mixed phase" one... I think there was another one that had numerous modes, but I can't remember it at all now.


----------



## higgs (Nov 26, 2016)

synthpunk said:


> Agreed if you want surgical clean EQ fabfilter and the like if you want vibe musical EQ look elsewhere like Uad


Absolutely! I love the UAD EQ's that I have: Pultec, Manley (though they're hungry hungry Sharc hogs), and Neve 1073. I've also grown to appreciate the Trident A-Range Console EQ which I haven't used as much in the last couple of years but have started to incorporate a bit more as the opportunities for exploration arise.


----------



## higgs (Nov 26, 2016)

The FF EQ might be my new go to soon, but I've used the Renaissance EQ for so many years that I just know how to get what I want really quickly/efficiently. The thing that's got me moving towards the FF EQ is the telling feedback from the plugin's UI. As Frank Black says, "It's educationallll!"


----------



## jsmithsebasto (Nov 26, 2016)

To echo what has been said a few times in this thread, Pro-Q 2 is great for surgical cuts or just simple utility-type EQ moves for cleanup. For the more "analog" alterations, I personally adore the EQs in Slate's VMR. The FG-N model in particular can introduce some beautiful character. The CS series EQ's moves also have their own unique sound that is not entirely "flat". The FG-S is very gentle and definitely encourages more dramatic moves, but it too has its own color to impart. 

While I totally understand your thoughts, @storyteller, on the "sterility" of Pro-Q 2. I don't know that its inherently a bad thing. As long as you are aware of its nature, then you are able to choose when/when not to use it, and how to manipulate it appropriately. 

Pro-Q 2, or any other EQ, is just another tool in your toolbox, another paint on your palette.


----------



## KEnK (Nov 26, 2016)

To add to your dilemma-
Look at DMG's Equilibrium.
FF ProQ was my go to eq til I found DMG.
Best of both worlds imo - (but it doesn't do actual saturation)
It does however have quite a few "modeled curves". These are awesome to me.
You can dial in a freq, then scroll through the "curve" choices- Huge differences!
Imagine- Pultec boost on the low end w/ an SSL or API shelf on top!
There are also some non-modeled curves to chose from (butterworth and elliptic being my favs)

That said, I still use various character eq's.
You really need both character and clean eq's, (and compressors for that matter)

k


----------



## JCmusik08 (Nov 26, 2016)

I get what you're saying here. The fabfilter is definitely a clean EQ, but that doesn't make it bad. I've found I like it best when cutting frequencies. The cuts are super transparent, and I'll usually boost with an EQ that has a bit more vibe, like one of the Slate modeled EQ's. Sometimes you want transparency, and sometimes you want character, it's good to have both. ProQ2 is as good as it gets for a transparent, flexible EQ


----------



## KEnK (Nov 27, 2016)

Out of curiosity I just did some testing on a few of the DMG modeled curves.
Not so scientific as a null test- just used my ear and Voxengo Span.
Used pink noise and a solo ac gtr for source material.
Imo the DMG holds up pretty well.
Even w/o saturation/harmonic distortion, it gets extremely close to other emulations.

Did a comparison of a few Pultecs that I've acquired over the years-
Waves, PSP NobleQ, Nomad, and OverTone.
Of course none of them are exactly alike, but the DMG sounds more like the others than the Overtone.

Also did a comparison of the DMG w/ the Waves API 550 and SSL E Channel.
It gets there too.
And perhaps most interesting-
For one test I used the same settings on the Waves 550 and SSL.
The DMG can get closer to either than they do to each other.
(Hope that makes sense)

Just thought that might be interesting food for thought.
DMG Equilibrium rocks!
Now if only I can get a handle on Compassion.
Still haven't wrapped my head around it.
I'll bet it's every bit as versatile as Equilibrium, but it's a puzzle I haven't solved yet.

k


----------



## storyteller (Nov 27, 2016)

KEnK said:


> Out of curiosity I just did some testing on a few of the DMG modeled curves.
> Not so scientific as a null test- just used my ear and Voxengo Span.
> Used pink noise and a solo ac gtr for source material.
> Imo the DMG holds up pretty well.
> ...


That's really great to know. Good insights! I will definitely have to check it out.


----------



## synthpunk (Nov 27, 2016)

Equilibrium is a good alternative to the fabfilter I just found it very hard to use

Another great musical EQ is the soundtoys sie-q hopefully you grabbed that when it was free



higgs said:


> Absolutely! I love the UAD EQ's that I have: Pultec, Manley (though they're hungry hungry Sharc hogs), and Neve 1073. I've also grown to appreciate the Trident A-Range Console EQ which I haven't used as much in the last couple of years but have started to incorporate a bit more as


----------



## KEnK (Nov 29, 2016)

synthpunk said:


> Equilibrium is a good alternative to the fabfilter I just found it very hard to use


Was that because of the set up? It can be a little confusing at first.
Part of it's design is to let the user decide on the interface. (Knobs, numbers, analyzer, etc)
I have mine set up to behave just like FF- (drawing curves on an analyzer) though I admit it's not quite as pretty


----------

