# Equalizer for orchestral sampling work wanted



## musicpete (Jul 26, 2007)

Hello!

I am searching for a decent equalizer (preferably with spectrum analyser built in) to add to my collection of plugins and would appreciate any suggestions and help. Using the search function I found the other thread, but the information inside was not 100% what I needed. My dream equalizer should have the following qualities:

* Perfectly suited for orchestral sampling works
* Transparent, clear sound with as little distortion as possible
* Spectrum analyser would be great
* Low CPU requirements
* Being usable for mastering AND as a per-track/send plugin
* Preferably many eq bands to work with
* Paragraphic user interface would help me since my monitoring equipment is inferior

I already tried the usual freebies from Voxengo, Kjaerhus and many plugins from KVR. Found them not bad, but unsatisfying. Do you have any suggestions which ones I should take a loot at? I have included these in a preliminary selection:

Voxengo GlissEQ, Marquis, HarmoniEQ, CurveEQ
Waves Q10
Sonalskis SV-517Mk2 Equaliser
Kjaerhus Golden Equaliser (GEQ-7)
Roger Nichols: Frequal-izer, Unique-lizer, Unique-lizer LE
Algorithmix LinearPhase PEQ Orange
ddmf "IIEQ Pro" or "LP10"
Wave Arts Trackplug
Timeworks Equalizer V1
URS various EQs
NuGen SEQ2 Master Edition
Sony Oxford

Did I miss out any good ones? Or are there even better free ones (a daring question..)?

You may ask: Why don't you just try them all and select which sounds best to you? There are 3 reasons why that won't work:
1) My ears are not those of a professional engineer
2) My studio monitors turned out to be greatly inferior and colouring the sound in bad and unpredictable ways (Alesis M1 active Mk2). Money was very short when I bought them and they were the most expensive I could afford 2nd-hand at the time. Buying new ones is out of the question for many months...
3) My music room (or "studio" if you want) is the exact opposite of an acoustic environment suited to music creation. Unfortunately money forbids any changes to this situation during the next few years.

Your input would be most appreciated!


----------



## José Herring (Jul 26, 2007)

Voxengo's gliss is very good with a spectrum analyzer that comes in very handy.

Sony Oxford probably one of the best. Also Wave's SSL collection according to a top engineer I spoke to provides about 95% of the sound of an SSL board which happens to be my favorite board for recording orchestral tracks.

ml,

Jose


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 26, 2007)

If you're using it on strings I'd suggest a FIR equalizer with no phase shift. Regular ones sound great on some things, but on strings they sound synthy very quickly.


----------



## José Herring (Jul 26, 2007)

Nick Batzdorf @ Thu Jul 26 said:


> If you're using it on strings I'd suggest a FIR equalizer with no phase shift. Regular ones sound great on some things, but on strings they sound synthy very quickly.



Yes that's true. I've noticed that even strings recorded live with too much EQ can sound synthy.

What's a FIR EQ? I'm going to have to look into that.

Jose


----------



## Dom (Jul 27, 2007)

Out of all the ones you listed I only know Waves Q10 and Sony Oxford. I did my own personal EQ blind test and found Waves q10 (and also RenEQ) very artificial at the top end. Sony Oxford sounds good and is precise and if you're using the native version you have an interactive graph too. If you're using Logic: I like the built-in Channel EQ and the Linear phase EQ is even better.


----------



## Daryl (Jul 27, 2007)

You can get a 15 day demo for Sony Oxford, so try it out.

D


----------



## mathis (Jul 27, 2007)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Jul 27 said:


> If you're using it on strings I'd suggest a FIR equalizer with no phase shift. Regular ones sound great on some things, but on strings they sound synthy very quickly.



That's a great hint.


----------



## zion15 (Jul 27, 2007)

musicpete @ Fri Jul 27 said:


> You may ask: Why don't you just try them all and select which sounds best to you? There are 3 reasons why that won't work:
> 1) My ears are not those of a professional engineer
> 2) My studio monitors turned out to be greatly inferior and colouring the sound in bad and unpredictable ways (Alesis M1 active Mk2). Money was very short when I bought them and they were the most expensive I could afford 2nd-hand at the time. Buying new ones is out of the question for many months...
> 3) My music room (or "studio" if you want) is the exact opposite of an acoustic environment suited to music creation. Unfortunately money forbids any changes to this situation during the next few years.



If the situation is like that, why are you actually thinking of getting an EQ plugin in the first place? If you claim you can't hear what's best to your material due to untrained ears and monitoring conditions, how do you expect to work with the plugin at all? Using just your eyes when mixing is rarely productive, you really have to hear the results for yourself. 

I mean, obviously there are lots of talented people in here who can give you great suggestions as far as plugins go, but that just isn't enough if you can't confirm and hear that they're good for you. If you don't know what you're doing and can't hear how the particular EQ is working, you could even make things worse by using it.

Since some of the plugins you list aren't exactly free, wouldn't it be a better idea to spend the equal amount of money / time to basic acoustic treatment, save up for better monitors, or whatever? Several good EQ plugins like Electri-Q posihfopit edition (minimum phase, really transparent) and the standard IIEQ (less transparent but still awesome) are freeware and of really high quality though, so you could start by trying them out. Trying different stuff out for yourself is the ticket for learning and training your ears too, since obviously you won't know what the differences are unless you try different plugins out yourself.

Sorry if this sounds a bit harsh but I've been down that road myself more than once, getting all sorts of stuff based on recommendations by people with more knowledge and thinking it's enough. And then realizing I don't have a clue if what I got is the best one for me, or realizing that what I got really wasn't something I wanted... Or, at worst, that what I got I really had no use for in the end.


----------



## Hannes_F (Jul 27, 2007)

Hi Peter,

since I know your work I think you are understating with all that talk about untrained ears etc. 

However no visible spectrum or other feedback will help you if you can not hear what is really going on.

Have you tried to adjust panning and reverb with the monitors that you have and controlling the EQing every now and then with decent headpones? Maybe that would be workeable for a while.

Hannes


----------



## ComposerDude (Jul 27, 2007)

...if you can find a pair of flat-frequency-response headphones...

Most of the ones I've encountered try to 'improve' the music by boosting the bass and treble...so the EQ you add will be compensating for your headphones.

-Peter


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 27, 2007)

"If the situation is like that, why are you actually thinking of getting an EQ plugin in the first place? "

Remember, we're dealing with sample libraries that are recorded out of context. You do need to work them a lot of the time.

But of course I agree that everything else - acoustic treatment, etc. - is important too.


----------



## zion15 (Jul 27, 2007)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Jul 27 said:


> "If the situation is like that, why are you actually thinking of getting an EQ plugin in the first place? "
> 
> Remember, we're dealing with sample libraries that are recorded out of context. You do need to work them a lot of the time.



Yup, in retrospect what I said ended up sounding kind of stupid (note to self: never write posts in a bad mood) and that wasn't my point really. What I meant was more something along the lines of "if you claim you can't really hear what you're doing, wouldn't it be more useful to make your monitoring environment better at first, instead of getting an EQ plugin whose sound you can't really currently properly evaluate yourself?" 

Thing is, I realize that EQ will definitely be useful in this context, I was just questioning whether it would be better to take care of things that prevent evaluating and using plugins properly. And on the other hand, if you don't have a reasonably good idea of what the basic tone is without EQ in reality, you might not be able to make informed decisions about using EQ on it. 

On the other hand, I'm pretty sure you can hear what different EQs or other plugins do to the sound truthfully by some extent just by adapting to your listening environment ... If you have subpar speakers in a completely untreated concrete basement room or something like that, it'll be next to impossible, but I've learned to sort of mentally compensate the worst acoustic weirdnesses in my basically untreated room. Of course nothing beats a killer pair of ears, a good night's sleep and a really well treated room with amazing speakers, but you can get pretty far with anything.

I'm probably the worst kind of person to give this kind of advice though, because I'm always sucker for anything interesting (like: new plugins) and tend to overlook the boring but vital things (like: room acoustics). I have a really good set of monitors though so at least that's covered...

Sorry to have derailed the thread a bit, but also hope this has been of any help.


----------



## musicpete (Jul 28, 2007)

Thank you for all these replies! I already learned a lot!

@Jose: Thank you for the GlissEQ-hint. I have been playing around with the demo for some time and like it. Yet it does seem to color the sound in many situations in undesired ways. For example I sometimes have the impression of muddy bass frequencies and shrill highs. Also the overall tone of the whole mix can be changed unfavorably with only a small frequency band in certain situations. Of course that can be attributed to my lack of skill, room, etc...

@Nick: Thank you! Would you mind spelling out for me what "FIR" means? That way I could do a search and further educate myself. When searching google and wikipedia I learned a lot about fir trees, fire equalization (whatever that is) but not a lot about equalizers.

@zion15: Thank you for both postings. Don't worry, no offense was taken. I am very much able to take criticism, let alone positive and constructive criticism as you kindly offered. In fact, being verbally abused was the least thing I endured during most of my childhood so I went through what we Austrians call "a hard schooling". :lol: 

Your suggestions make a lot of sense. Unfortunately being a hobbyist prohibits the most sensible route of action: Set up room -> Get good monitoring equipment -> Get necessary software. This means that my musician's space can not be rebuilt or changed in necessary ways. Getting new and better monitors is on my to-do list but will take at least half a year (1-1.5 years is more realistic). I spend a great deal of my free time during the last few years learning how to mix my music so that it sounds bad and distorted on the monitors, but will be acceptable on other speakers. Someday I hope that this will no longer be necessary.

You also don't need to worry about me spending money blindly on suggested products. I value all input but will try the demos thoroughly myself. The main point of my initial posting was to get ideas on what I should take a look at, and where to go from my actual (not ideal) position. I think with those responses I have gained a great deal to think about.

Thank you for those replies! Seems that I will have to brainstorm some more on how to improve the acoustics of my working space. There surely is a solution, which I have not found yet.


----------



## ComposerDude (Jul 28, 2007)

FIR = Finite Impulse Response


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 28, 2007)

The point of FIR filters - without a technical explanation that I'm only half able to give without reading up to refresh my memory - is that there's no phase shift around the passbands. They're not "character" EQs (which are also valid), they're transparent.

It's not only strings that benefit from them, by the way, but strings can sound especially bad when you use regular EQ on them. *Can* not will - obviously people have been using standard EQ on strings for years; but again, we're dealing with samples, where you can't just move a mic.


----------



## bryla (Jul 28, 2007)

any examples of EQ's with these FIR filters?


----------



## mathis (Jul 28, 2007)

bryla @ Sat Jul 28 said:


> any examples of EQ's with these FIR filters?



Algorithmix Red and Orange
PSP Neon

These belong to the best.


----------



## musicpete (Jul 31, 2007)

Thank you for those replies! Now I can add knowledge about FIR filters to my newly acquired wisdom about fir trees!  

Seems though that my list of EQs was fairly exhaustive, since you guys won't come up with more. I also fell in love with the sound of the free Electri-Q (suggested earlier in this thread). The GUI needs getting used to, but the sound is transparent like a dream!


----------



## JohnnyMarks (Aug 13, 2007)

Heads up for those of you on Macs as I am: Algorithmix are porting their EQ's to OSX - due in a couple of months. Might want to hold off if you're considering a "golden" EQ purchase.


----------



## esencia (Nov 21, 2016)

but if you want some cool improvement...
...put a Charteroak PEQ-1 on an analog 2-bus processing..

It´s that kind of musical coloring EQ that makes magic ..


----------



## Saxer (Nov 21, 2016)

Nobody mentioned Fabfilter here? Pro Q2 is my favorite EQ.


----------



## utopia (Nov 21, 2016)

I use pro-q for cutting. UAD Massive-passive for boosting on busses if I need to.


----------



## pixel (Nov 22, 2016)

TDR Nova. It's free. Sound brilliant. It's dynamic eq and option to check only compressed material is amazing


----------



## Chandler (Nov 23, 2016)

Melda productions MEqualizer. It has tons of features and it is free. I use the dynamic version too, but 90% of the time I don't need any other EQ.


----------



## nas (Nov 24, 2016)

I highly recommend *DMG Equilibrium.* If there was only one EQ I could ever have this would be it. It has FIR capabilities and can do ultra transparent linear phase for mastering or get vibey and take you into Pultec or API territory... and pretty much everything in between - and it does it very well. Really an incredible EQ.

https://www.dmgaudio.com/products_equilibrium.php


----------



## MartinAlexander (Nov 26, 2016)

Based on how you describe your dream equalizer, i think the FabFilter Pro-Q2 will be a perfect match for you.

It also has a high educational value.


----------



## StevenMcDonald (Nov 28, 2016)

pixel said:


> TDR Nova. It's free. Sound brilliant. It's dynamic eq and option to check only compressed material is amazing



This is awesome. This is the perfect EQ for what I need and for the size of my budget ($0). Thanks!!


----------



## synthpunk (Nov 28, 2016)

When you have the budget down the line check out the UAD Massive Passive


----------



## Kejero (Nov 29, 2016)

Saxer said:


> Nobody mentioned Fabfilter here? Pro Q2 is my favorite EQ.


That's because in 2007 (original post), Fabfilter Pro-Q didn't exist yet  (I'm pretty sure)

That said, today Pro-Q is easily my go-to EQ.

Edit: Pro-Q first release: Nov 16, 2009 (the Archive is awesome. And I'm so procrastinating right now)


----------

