# Fab-filter plugins vs stock eq/compressors?



## dannymc (Oct 2, 2015)

hi guys, another novice question sorry. i hear a lot of people raving about the fab-filter plugins eq, compressor, limiter etc. my question is how can one eq plugin sound so vastly different from another? i mean is a cut of 300hz not just that, a cut in that frequency band no matter the eq? or is it that these plugins have additional functionality that stock DAW processing plugins don't have? i can understand how this would be the case in the hardware world but in the software world it baffles me how they could be all so different. thanks

Danny


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Oct 2, 2015)

You're right, a cut at 300 Hz is just that. It really doesn't matter if you're doing it with a stock EQ or a third-party plug-in. If the amount of reduction and the filter slope is the same, of course.

What makes plugins different from another is additional functionality or what people call "character". The FabFilter stuff is great for its extra functionality and expert operations. It's useful if you know what you're doing and why you need it. If you don't exactly know what mid-side compression is and why you would use it, you don't need it. For the "standard" user, it might be overkill.

And then there's the whole "character" thing, which is what all the analog emulation craze is about. It's basically when EQs and compressors introduce noise to the signal. The native EQ inside the DAW won't do that, because it's not supposed to. It's a tool that is designed to work cleanly and accurately. Character plug-ins on the other hand are trying to replicate the interesting (originally undesired) side-effects that the hardware circuitry from the year dot introduced to the signal - phasing, distortion, saturation etc. It's dirt, but kind of pleasing anyway. Or at least it can be.

IMO when you hear people raving about plug-ins etc., they often do it because they think they're supposed to, or that it will make them sound expert, or whatever ... there's a lot of voodoo and placebo about the whole audio gear thing. Sometimes ears start to hear a difference because the brain tells them that they should. Sometimes people are convinced that something suddenly sounds better because they're using a plug-in with a nice GUI ... and it's all propelled by marketing that takes advantage of the musician's never-ending search for the one little thing that will bring them one step closer to realizing their artistic vision.

I like some of the character stuff - tube compression, tape saturation etc. But there's also stuff I don't care about, because I don't hear it anyway. For example, I never understood why anyone would make this huge fuss about limiting. When I look at FabFilters limiter - I wouldn't know what to do with it. All I want from a limiter is to make sure that nothing clips when I'm done, and perhaps let me push the overall loudness by 2-3 dB without making everything sound abrasive. The stuff that's inside Cubase is absolutely sufficient for me. I also get by with the native EQ most of the time. I just sometimes wish it had more bands so I wouldn't have to insert an extra instance of EQ when I need more than 4 bands.


----------



## John Judd (Oct 2, 2015)

Here is my advice: get REALLY good with stock plugins. And I mean, spend years with them and learn them really well. Only then would I buy FF ProQ2, and you will hear the difference (assuming you have done enough mixing work). The comment above this one was valuable.


----------



## Spip (Oct 2, 2015)

In the case of Fabfilter EQ, the real difference comes from the User Interface. Without going into any other consideration, the UI only justifies this Plugin.
And you also have to think about what you want to do with a plugin. Is it for cutting some low end frequency or for some more advanced sound design ? Is it for saving an average guitar recording or to make something new out of a complex audio files ?
Stock plugins are a good starting point for knowing what you're looking for. 
Another thing to keep in mind. If you use several DAWs, it's easier/quicker to use your external plugins that you know by heart.


----------



## bryla (Oct 2, 2015)

No. A cut is not just a cut. Try taking your stock EQ and some and some white noise at 0dBFS. Now take the steepest low cut it has (fx 48dB/octave) and cut at 20Hz. Now your level meter has gone over 0dBFS.

Fabfilter doesn't have this quantization noise that results in overs, which makes it better than stock EQ's.

The first post here albeit in Danish have screenshots of 1) a 1kHz testtone 2) a low cut with Logic stock EQ and the resulting noise in SPAN 3) the same cut in Pro-Q
http://www.lydmaskinen.dk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=67202
Later in the thread, Holger (Lagerfeldt from Gearslutz) explains more in English about his own Bifrost filter.


----------



## GULL (Oct 2, 2015)

dannymc said:


> hi guys, another novice question sorry. i hear a lot of people raving about the fab-filter plugins eq, compressor, limiter etc. my question is how can one eq plugin sound so vastly different from another? i mean is a cut of 300hz not just that, a cut in that frequency band no matter the eq? or is it that these plugins have additional functionality that stock DAW processing plugins don't have? i can understand how this would be the case in the hardware world but in the software world it baffles me how they could be all so different. thanks
> 
> Danny



I understand what you say. I think the way you think. 

One day I was EQing with my stock plugin. It has everything an EQ needs. I wanted cut a region. When I tried to clearly see how the portion that I want to remove sounds, I boosted that region to check it. I moved the boost here and there to see if I got the right region covered. My stock EQ allows all these. But, when I wanted see on what dB the peak happens, I could not see it. Because my plugin only display the spectrum. Not wave form. It is true that there exist alternate tools, and my plugin have many other features.

But I thought, a plugin like fab filter could have been desinged to support adapting certain approaches in EQing. It may have the ability to intutively guide the engineer. Especially by UI. 
Then I thought if I keep EQing, refining my ears and my methods, one day I will know myself if I need fabfilter or something else. Because I will know what I want.

Until then, I'm good with my stock EQ. I believe you should ask the question yourself and should be polishing your EQing skills with your stock plugin unless you find it not supporting your method


----------



## dannymc (Oct 2, 2015)

> You're right, a cut at 300 Hz is just that. It really doesn't matter if you're doing it with a stock EQ or a third-party plug-in. If the amount of reduction and the filter slope is the same, of course.
> 
> What makes plugins different from another is additional functionality or what people call "character". The FabFilter stuff is great for its extra functionality and expert operations. It's useful if you know what you're doing and why you need it. If you don't exactly know what mid-side compression is and why you would use it, you don't need it. For the "standard" user, it might be overkill.
> 
> ...



Jimmy great reply thanks for this.  thanks to everyone else who replied too. i use logic pro x and to be honest i think the new revamped EQ is pretty great. lovely colorful GUI allowing one to really visually see the waves and frequencies. gonna just stick with my stocks now until i get a lot more experience under my belt. 

Danny


----------



## Guffy (Oct 2, 2015)

I purchased some expensive plugins a few months ago, but i still mostly use the stock plugins in Studio One.
I think it's mostly because they're really light on the CPU, i really know how to use them, they give good results, and there's no flashy fancy knobs or unnecessary graphic distractions.


----------



## woodsdenis (Oct 2, 2015)

There is a quantifiable difference between any stock plugin I have used and Fabfilter, however the difference between so called hi end eq plugins is very subjective.


----------



## KEnK (Oct 2, 2015)

I have a "plug test template" that I use to check out new plugs.
In it are various reference tracks, solo acoustic guitar, drums,
and a pink noise file- that's the one I use most actually.
So just for kicks I used the same settings on the stock Logic eq
and FabfilterQ

Just set them both for a an 8bB boost @ 500Hz
and a hipass @ 100Hz w/ a 24dB slope

They're not the same.
Try it and see.

k

p.s. woodsdenis- the effect of any eq curve can be measured.
It is as you say quantifiable. 
The difference between various "high end" EQs is also hard science.
Only whether or not you like "A" more than "B" is subjective.


----------



## Bulb (Oct 2, 2015)

KEnK said:


> I have a "plug test template" that I use to check out new plugs.
> In it are various reference tracks, solo acoustic guitar, drums,
> and a pink noise file- that's the one I use most actually.
> So just for kicks I used the same settings on the stock Logic eq
> ...



This is fantastic way to visually see how different plugins can do the "same" job differently. If you do it with a sine wave you can see even and odd harmonics and how the different modes affect those, you can also see how much the plugin and different modes may or may not suffer from aliasing. Ultimately every plugin has it's "sound" and the fun is finding what works for you.

For the OP:
I personally LOVE the Fabfilter stuff. The Pro Q2 is my goto Eq if I want a nice, precise and clean eq. My other goto ones are the Slate SSL and Neve Eqs. The neve has so much character to it, and requires very subtle moves, and the SSL is a lot more subtle by comparison, but still has its own vibe. Keep in mind those are working very hard to model the nuances and sound of their hardware counterparts. 

Perhaps a good analogy would be how technically all guitar amps operate under the same principals and yet different amps can sound drastically different even with similar settings.

FWIW: Pretty much all the Fabfilter plugins are just top notch, I love their Compressor, Limiter and Multiband Compressor/Expander and use those on most mixes.


----------



## Vastman (Oct 2, 2015)

I have virtually all IK and Fab stuff plus a lot of others... don't use much but Fab anymore, beyond IK's Stealth...the sound is great, the visual linkage to my brain just resonates and...all the other stuff is just collecting dust... and mixes have never been this good, sans my lousy playing!

don't really care about "testing"... my ears are the "word" in my book... music is an emotional experience. Fab just gets me there quicker without getting in the way with a bunch of gobblygook...


----------



## KEnK (Oct 3, 2015)

Vastman said:


> don't really care about "testing"... my ears are the "word" in my book... music is an emotional experience.


Music is emotional. Mixing is science. Mastering is Voodoo. 
Composition is all three.
Personally, I use a lot of emulation/character plugs.
Saturation is the key to getting the sound I'm after.
Things seem richer because of it. It's adding harmonics.
It is in fact what was going on with sound in the pre digital era.
So now that we can do that in digital, well to my ear, things have greatly improved.

Fabfilter was my go to EQ for the longest time.
Then I discovered DMG's Equilibrium.
Wouldn't recommend it to a beginner though-
You have to set it up to get it to be the eq you want.
You only need to that once, but you do need to know how you want to work.
It is great though- tons of different curves and options.
I love that "butterworth" curve- It's a combination of a a shelf and a peak.
So useful (when I need it) 
But I still use my "vintage emulations" cause of the saturation factor.

k


----------



## jononotbono (Dec 17, 2015)

My next purchase is going to be a Fabfilter bundle. I am curious. How do they compare with UAD-2 plugins bearing in mind that UAD use DSP hardware? I just wonder what the CPU hit is with Fabfilter.

The Pro Q2 EQ looks amazing and the point that Spip makes about using a 3rd party plugin if you use multiple DAWS/Apps is great. One plugin to rule them all etc... haha!


----------



## tack (Dec 17, 2015)

jononotbono said:


> I just wonder what the CPU hit is with Fabfilter.


I've not done any serious measurements, but I've never had any issues or concerns. A quick look right now and the Pro-Q2 instance on my mix bus with 2 bells, a low cut, and a high shelf uses about 0.03% CPU with zero latency, and 0.09% with linear phase. CPU is an i7 6700K clocked at 4.5GHz. Unsurprisingly, impact to RT performance is about 10x that (with an ASIO buffer of 512 samples). It's good enough that I certainly have no reservations about slapping on an instance when I think I need some EQ.


----------



## Vastman (Dec 18, 2015)

jononotbono said:


> My next purchase is going to be a Fabfilter bundle. I am curious. How do they compare with UAD-2 plugins bearing in mind that UAD use DSP hardware? I just wonder what the CPU hit is with Fabfilter.
> 
> The Pro Q2 EQ looks amazing and the point that Spip makes about using a 3rd party plugin if you use multiple DAWS/Apps is great. One plugin to rule them all etc... haha!


From all that I've heard, FF plugs are among the most efficient/low cpu hit you can buy...Lots of talk on this perpetually over at the Cakewalk forum and everyone pretty much agrees.

I don't discern any noticeable hit and FF is about all I use for most things; recently picked up the iZotope loyalty bundle upgrade and while I haven't spent much time with it yet, Ozone definately chews a lot more cpu cycles.

use proQ2 on lots of channels, their deesser is in a league of it's own and goes on all vocals... C2 is just rad and the latest upgrades to Pro-L are lovely. The only thing I don't have is the gate.

Plan on selling my large inventory of IK and others as I just don't go there anymore. Their Stealth Limiter is great but slams the cpu...like one of Airwaves Omnisphere 2 patches!

All can be demoed... load um up... you'll see! But don't miss the holiday bundle deals. They rarely do sales. Bottom line... FF plugs are Elegant, intuitive, effective, versatile and efficient. What more can you ask for?

After you get the bundle, any others you want will be highly discounted in your account... great "loyalty" discount year round... in this regard, definately try Timeless2... if you can get ur head around it (very unique... watch the vid) great... and it just sounds lovely...

KeNK noted that while music is emotional, mixing is a science... In that I agree, and to the extent that FF gives you wonderful visual feedback, it helps a lot in that regard


----------



## Tatu (Dec 18, 2015)

KEnK said:


> They're not the same.
> Try it and see.


Can you do the same, but with Logic's LinearPhaseEQ? How do they differ?


----------



## KEnK (Dec 18, 2015)

Tatu said:


> Can you do the same, but with Logic's LinearPhaseEQ? How do they differ?


Hi Tatu-
My posts in this thread were from 2 1/2 months ago- I don't remember exactly what I saw-
except that the resulting curve of the 2 eq's w/ the same settings were different.
I think I got the idea of running pink noise tests from reading Ian Shepherd's mastering blog-
Possibly even got the pink noise file from his site.

I've also run tests of various Pultec emulations, they're not the same either-
but most people who use vintage hardware gear report that no 2 units are exactly alike.
This seems especially true of the beloved Fairchild 670.

I'm personally just coming to terms w/ the science of what's going on w/ linear phase eq's.
Here is an excellent Dan Worall tut about linear phase.
After watching that I felt I had to be really carefully about what I was doing w/ linear phase eqs.


These days, since we're all expected to be Composer/Instrumentalist/Producer/Mixer, and Mastering Engineer, 
it's incumbent upon us to learn as much as we can.

k


----------



## lumcas (Dec 18, 2015)

Hope I'm not derailing this thread much by mentioning that FabFilter is currently running a Christmas sale on all bundles - 25% off - just bought one


----------



## tack (Dec 18, 2015)

And if any users here are looking to buy their first Fabfilter plugin, PM me your email address and I'll shoot you a 10% referral discount.

Edit: ah, unfortunately the referral discount can't be combined with the holiday discount. So if you're reading this in January, offer still stands.


----------



## jononotbono (Dec 18, 2015)

I am just waiting till Christmas day has come and gone and I will have the money to buy some FF stuff. I actually get 50% off being a student which is overwhelmingly splendiferous. 

Can't wait to try out the De esser. I was having a real slag of a time trying to sort out a voice over a few weeks back and so I shall try the FF de esser out.


----------



## Vastman (Dec 18, 2015)

jononotbono said:


> I am just waiting till Christmas day has come and gone and I will have the money to buy some FF stuff. I actually get 50% off being a student which is overwhelmingly splendiferous.
> 
> Can't wait to try out the De esser. I was having a real slag of a time trying to sort out a voice over a few weeks back and so I shall try the FF de esser out.


it's a full on working demo, jono... use it /30 days free! I checked out every De esser before getting it... no one's in the same universe. U'll love it.


----------



## jononotbono (Dec 19, 2015)

Vastman said:


> it's a full on working demo, jono... use it /30 days free! I checked out every De esser before getting it... no one's in the same universe. U'll love it.



Music to my ears. I end up sitting in the lab for hours, days in fact, going insane listening to sssssssstuff and trying to fix it without destroying the sound and figuring out whether it's still there or it's just my brain playing tricks on me! Haha!


----------



## gsilbers (Dec 19, 2015)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> You're right, a cut at 300 Hz is just that. It really doesn't matter if you're doing it with a stock EQ or a third-party plug-in. If the amount of reduction and the filter slope is the same, of course.
> 
> What makes plugins different from another is additional functionality or what people call "character". The FabFilter stuff is great for its extra functionality and expert operations. It's useful if you know what you're doing and why you need it. If you don't exactly know what mid-side compression is and why you would use it, you don't need it. For the "standard" user, it might be overkill.
> 
> ...



I agree with the extra hoopla and raving that goes on in the marketing side. an EQ is an EQ. you can make great mixes with them. I also see the trending items and since those are being said that are cool then they have to be good and we should follow.

It is a double edge sword. is a neumann u87 a good mic or better than another one thats $1000? and why so many recreations/clones? same with plugins and other gear. sometimes it is not that its better but because they have been in so many hits, then it means its good and to make those hits i need to get it. have you ever listen to NS-10s?
its also not about what others are using, but also what the audience has grown accustomed. a certain type of record made millions = more people listen to it = the gear/sound gets embedded in the peoples brains. so a type of mic/compressor for hiphop because X artist used it that his engenner said so. pop/rock is X gear because X so if we are doing that style then we go with X gear first and go with what works... since at the end of the day... whem making music or mixing it is work.

I do hear the difference with fabfilter and logic stock eq. I also do know how many mix engineers in LA that mix top 40 multi platinum albums mix and they use the stock pro tools plugins on many of the tracks.
But how they justify using stock plugin and not all those external racks at those prices? or whatching deadmau5 compose live in front of 1 million worth of synth behind him and you see him only using serum plugin synth.
but oh man , he knows about synths right? he has to.. there is a lot of euroracks behind him.
several studios ive been in i notices just random rack gear on the control room just for show. and IT WORKS!. clients are buying into it!

so its not a black and white, stock plugins vs commerical ones or this gear is good that gear is bad type of thing. it is more of a grey area of taste, fads, marketing, difference in sound which you desire or not. and also ease of workflow.
I could go with the flow and say some technical jargon and finish off saying its a matter of personal tatse and experience and the regular generic view of these same type of topics.., but since i am biz grad and also engineer grad and worked in LA/NYC in studios with many engineers for 15+ years , plus seeing the way the market has changed form analog to digital i wanted add an extra thought to this and echo the part of raving about gear. which now has come to be what musicians and bands were back in the day. musicians and bands barley can pay but yet, the marketplace is filled with WAY to many products for engineers/musicians-producers. we have come to revere these tools as more than just tools. so i want to write it down, make sure people can undertsand this and understand its part of the game. not good but also not bad. 

Anyways, fabilters are good and stock plugins as well. they have a demo and judging by yourself without buying the marketing hoopla is the best. if you dont listen the $100+ difference then dont get it.
I'd like to also add that stock plugins might ave a negative conotation but they are made by programers who also can buy the commerical ones and make a better stock pluign. you can see the logic compressor how they added the different characters models and now it revered as "good" when before it sucked. well, not "good" or "bad" just tools.


----------



## jononotbono (Dec 19, 2015)

Just the GUI of Fabfilter is worth the money. We stare at screens all day so anything that makes that experience better is money well spent.


----------



## tack (Dec 19, 2015)

jononotbono said:


> Just the GUI of Fabfilter is worth the money. We stare at screens all day so anything that makes that experience better is money well spent.


I have to say, I'm a sucker for the eye candy too. Especially in Pro-MB. 

But Fabfilter's fullscreen mode has been massively helpful to train my ears. Sometimes I first need to _see_ something before I can be sure that I actually _am_ hearing it. I put an instance of Pro-Q2 on the mix bus, set the analyzer to the highest resolution and speed, and fullscreen it. Then I can do the band sweep-audition trick to cement the understanding of what I'm seeing to what I'm hearing.

Obviously this can be done with an old school graphic EQ and no analyzer. But these little (or big) UI nuances are time savers.


----------



## jononotbono (Dec 19, 2015)

tack said:


> I have to say, I'm a sucker for the eye candy too. Especially in Pro-MB.
> 
> But Fabfilter's fullscreen mode has been massively helpful to train my ears. Sometimes I first need to _see_ something before I can be sure that I actually _am_ hearing it. I put an instance of Pro-Q2 on the mix bus, set the analyzer to the highest resolution and speed, and fullscreen it. Then I can do the band sweep-audition trick to cement the understanding of what I'm seeing to what I'm hearing.
> 
> Obviously this can be done with an old school graphical EQ and no analyzer. But these little (or big) UI nuances are time savers.


Yeah definitely. Its very welcome. I actually used to use all the EQs on my Allen and Heath analogue desk but the "in the box" thing has started becoming awesome over the past few years. Recall is just wonderful!


----------



## bryla (Dec 19, 2015)

Holger Lagerfeldt is doing some serious tests on the FF Pro-C2 here to compare the different styles and their harmonic distortion and internal sedition filtering. These great differences happen within Pro-C2, so obviously that should bust the myth that Stock Plug-ins are the same as 3rd party
http://lydmaskinen.dk/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=68451&p=583970#p583970 (in Danish though but with lots of pictures


----------



## tack (Dec 19, 2015)

bryla said:


> (in Danish though but with lots of pictures


Cool! Looks like running this through Google translate gets close enough. Thanks!


----------



## PJMorgan (Dec 26, 2015)

This thread got me interested in checking out Pro Q. Demoed it & loved it, lucky enough I already have Twin 2 so was able to buy Pro Q for £35 off thanks to my user & holiday discount. I't has a lot of the same features that I already have in some of my other EQ's but they're so much more refined in Pro Q. The GUI is very pleasant, I especially love editing in fullscreen mode & most importantly it does sound great too.

If your on a budget though do yourself a favour & check out DDMF's IIEQ Pro. It's £25, comes with a lot of different filter types, sounds really good & with a recent update the GUI is much smoother & nicer to work in than previous versions.


----------



## EC2 (Dec 27, 2015)

Gents, 1+1 will always be two. No matter what brand your calculator is.

There is a lot of word of mouth mythology and self deception involved when audio pros and aficionados talk about gear. Pro-Q is outstanding from a usability point of view, no doubt about that. It is my go to weapon of choice for surgical cuts because of its superb ui design, which lets me get the job done faster without fatiguing my ears. But does it sound "better"? And can/do we really trust our ears? I suppose you have a look at these sources before you make a call.

http://ericbeam.com/?p=361
http://www.rane.com/note115.html


----------



## GULL (Dec 27, 2015)

This thread is still active !!
A pro plugin can make EQing (experience) better by features. But can not make a better sound. That is against science.


----------



## bryla (Dec 27, 2015)

Guys, please read my posts here. They prove, that there is a difference in the sound


----------



## KEnK (Dec 27, 2015)

EC2 said:


> Gents, 1+1 will always be two. No matter what brand your calculator is.
> 
> There is a lot of word of mouth mythology and self deception involved when audio pros and aficionados talk about gear.



EC2- I checked the links you posted-
from Digital EQ Fact & Myth:
_"You can’t compare EQ’s by matching dials & numbers, You will get different results. If you use an analyzer & match signals/curves you will unveil “the magic”. 

Digital emulations for the most part are marketing hype in my opinion. If you use a variable PEQ like the one that comes native with your host & saturation tools, you will be able to recreate just about any classic console EQ aesthetic you have heard."_

In response to that, I have to say simply, "So what?"_-_
The effort it would take to get the Logic EQ to sound like the Waves SSL Channel
is not worth the time. Besides the elusive curves of various vintage emulations,
there is also saturation and harmonic distortion involved-
The fact is even if you get the stock plugs to sound the same as an emulation,
which is doubtful, you'd need 2 or 3 to do it- 
Why waste the time when one Pultech, SSL EQ or Neve emulation will do the trick?

There is a difference between EQs- it's quite clear, and no myth

k


----------



## EC2 (Dec 28, 2015)

KEnK said:


> There is a difference between EQs- it's quite clear, and no myth
> k



Hello k, I didn´t say that there is no difference between EQs. There clearly is. BTW: You still could emulate a pultec-style boost/attend filter by plugging in two filters serially and try to match the curve - even including non-linear saturation and harmonic distortion. But that was not my point. 

All I am saying that there is a lot of bulls*** voodoo talk in the audio community going on. We too often rely on marketing phrases, fancy GUIs and get used to certain comfort-zone-workflows instead of relying on ears in the first place. You don´t HAVE to buy plugin x or plugin y in order to come close or even simulate a particular sound, especially when you are on a tight budget.

And in the case of FF - it is a superb product, and I love it dearly. As I said in my above statement I am a friend of solutions that help me to get the job done quickly and without hassling around. But does it have a special and unique sound? Nope.

Cheers
Emre


----------



## tack (Dec 28, 2015)

EC2 said:


> But does it have a special and unique sound? Nope.


I think Pro-C2 has some unique sounds in the new compression types, but Pro-Q2 doesn't sound unique to me either, agreed, which is why I like it. Some part of my brain just connects better with uncoloring, transparent EQs that I can slap wherever I need to address some frequencies without worrying about coloration. If I want character, there are other plugins for that (e.g. saturation).


----------



## GULL (Dec 28, 2015)

bryla said:


> Guys, please read my posts here. They prove, that there is a difference in the sound


I was referring to EQing. Just EQing. Compressors have different tones. And, if we find different sounds from two EQs, then, the plugins must be doing something additional to EQing. And as said, that is more of individual preference IMO


----------



## bryla (Dec 28, 2015)

GULL said:


> I was referring to EQing. Just EQing. Compressors have different tones. And, if we find different sounds from two EQs, then, the plugins must be doing something additional to EQing. And as said, that is more of individual preference IMO


On page 1 of this thread I link to how different eq's introduce different kind of distortion. Most noticeable boosts by cutting.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Dec 28, 2015)

bryla said:


> On page 1 of this thread I link to how different eq's introduce different kind of distortion. Most noticeable boosts by cutting.



Well that's exactly missing the point. It's precisely what doesn't matter and isn't interesting in practice.

Of course different programs and specific algorithms will look differently when one goes out of their way to do these "scientific" measurements of it and print graphs of it and all that. The question that should be asked if it does anything noticeably different to your music in "normal", everday applications. No it doesn't.

Remember, the thing that a lot of guys who are starting out are wondering is why some people swear by certain plug-ins and ask themselves if they're making some terrible mistake by EQing their tracks with a stock EQ. They wonder if a more expensive 3rd party plugin will make all the difference and make that 250 Hz cut suddenly sound like a million dollars.

Again, let's not lose sight of the initial question, and I'm not talking about some specialized and scientific applications, professional mastering, audio forensics or whatever, but your plain old standard corrective music EQing. And I stand by it: a clean EQ cut is a clean EQ cut. Doesn't matter one bit if you're doing it with Cubase EQ, Logic EQ, FabFilter or whatever. Doesn't matter if it looks somewhat different on some graph. That's the whole point - do you have to look at things to hear the difference?


----------



## PJMorgan (Dec 28, 2015)

As is always the case with these types of threads, it all seems to have turned into a never ending back & forth of _"well scientifically EQ bladdy Bloo bloo should null with bladdy blah blah"........... _

This *FOCUS* on one aspect of the initial question is counter productive to the question as a whole in the original post.



dannymc said:


> i mean is a cut of 300hz not just that, a cut in that frequency band no matter the eq? or is it that these plugins have additional functionality that stock DAW processing plugins don't have? i
> Danny



So Yes 3rd party plugins like Pro Q 2 do offer additional functionality that most stock processing plugins do not. So therefore with these added features they are indeed better than the stock EQ's, Compressors, etc. (although I really like Logics compressor especially after the update)

Do they sound better?........... I'm gonna have to go with my ears here & saaaaaay....*YES *Some processing plugins do indeed sound better than the stock ones. At the end of the day I care much more about what I can hear rather than focus on scientific charts & tests.

Science be damned Bring back the days of yore, whichcraft & sorcery _"Twas the magical tears of Ionus that endowed yon Fabulous Filtration Pro Q with the power to enhance any audio track it is instantiated upon" _*EEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEH!!!! *


----------



## MusicGuru13?! (Aug 30, 2020)

Every forum I have found says something about a the sale percentage of 25% off etc. but what is the “Original Price” cost versus the “sale price.” Are the fabfilter products on sale now? Also I am considering buying the FX bundle vs the total bundle, but I’m not sure it would be worth the cost difference. What do you all recommend?


----------

