I asked this in the effects forum, but haven;t had any luck there (wrong room?)
A quick fire round of "help me outs" is possible. These questions relate to EQ and frequency filtering.

1. For completely cutting a feq range (say everything below 50Hz), would I be better to use a filter or an EQ? It seems to me that a high pass filter (from a dedicated filtering unit) is more effective at precise cuts, wheres an EQ allows you to make more subtle adjustments to ranges of frequencies. Is that fair?

2. Is boosting a small frequency range on an EQ the same thing as cutting all other frequencies above and below, and then pushing up the overall gain on the track? Or does a boost do something different to a "reverse-cut" followed by an overall gain increase. Here's what I mean in illustraive form - are these two EQ settings the same?

3. I really only use Ableton's inbuilt EQ-8. It seems to be good enough, but I find I have to be quite aggressive with it to get noticeable results (it might be my monitoring environment though). Are there suggestions for cheap/free EQs that people recommend which I can use as comparison tools, just to see if its me, or the VST?

Thanks everyone.

Hey dude,

Filters are components of eqs so it's swings and roundabouts really. For annihilating anything below/above a certain frequency try Rubberfilter, go easy though. I like Simplon myself.

The theory is it's always better to cut than boost, there's always going to be phase distortions so again it's not that critical but something to bear in mind. There's the old adage, 'if it sounds good it is good' and to a point that's true so I'd advise picking up something like IIEQ and have a play.

Hope that helps

1. Like scoobz wrote, a "band" in an EQ actually IS a filter. It's just not a cut/pass filter, but a peak/bell filter. Or a notch. Or a shelf. Or whatever.

Usually single-filter plugins have only one purpose, that is cutting off something, so they're more dedicated and offer steeper slopes. (-24dB/octave, -48dB/octave, or even more, like Rubberfilter)

EQs are usually just "equalizers", that is making it all sound even, so most of them have not-so-steep filter slopes (-6db/oct. or -12dB/oct.) because their intention is to only "form" the sound, not cut it up.

Of course, there are also EQs that also offer steep or even variable slopes, like the ReaEQ and others like it. (Pro-Q, EQuality, etc.)
So if you choose the right EQ, you don't need a dedicated filter.


2.) I believe that cutting has no effect on the phase but boosting has, but I'm not sure about that. Just thought I picked that up somewhere.
Also, boosting brings stuff into the signal that wasn't there before, it's like MINI MINI MINI distortion, so I believe boosting will introduce harmonics. Cutting on the other hand should not produce harmonics, as it only "squashes" what's already there.


3.) Try the ReaEQ from the free ReaPlugs that I mentioned above. It might look a little old-fashioned, but it can do everything from subtle to aggressive.
Other than that, I usually go for the EQ that's included in the SSL Duende Channel, or the one in WA's TrackPlug.
I also have IK's Pultec emu, but I hardly ever use it. Not because it sounds bad, but because it's so limited in what it can do. Get some hiss in the guitars, make the drums snappy, get that voice some more presence... works, but if you've done the job right while recording and setting up the channel strip, I find you don't actually need a Shine&Thump plugin like the Pultec.

1. It depends on the application.

2. Yes it is different, because every minimum phase EQ adds delay to the signal.

3. Yeah, try PLParEQ.

great questions OP...with great answers, However I would like to add something...

For cutting out all the lows in a sound (as mentioned above) which type of EQ is best? Is a linear EQ a good idea? any recommendations on the "right" slope for eliminating the low end rumble? does it matter at all?

bump ^

Try the one which sounds good. I usually use Ableton Live's built-in Autofilter or Vengeance Philta CM. However, I might as well use EQ8, or if I'm also EQing the sound, whatever EQ I use for that track.
In fact for me it's rarely important what to use to cut lows, unless it also serves sound design purposes.

1. Yes
2. Close enough
3. It's you, not your gear.

-Kim.

2.: depends on the implementation of your EQ. It's definitely not 100 % identical.

love you man

Depends on the material, if its musical i will try to be as gentle as possible with a 6db hi pass filter to gently remove any excess low freq. I always listen and try different EQs because even with this minor adjustment some will still color the sound. Sometimes this is in a good way, sometimes not. Recently Ive been looking at EQs which are the most transparent so as not to harm the original tone and sound of the content Im EQing. When engineers use proper mixers without all the fancy digital analyzers and thousands of software Eqs to choose from, they have to rely on what they hear with their ears to make the decisions. The Mixers are specially designed with all this in mind and so come with dedicated Lo pass and Hi pass filters with different EQ freq settings to which they decide are the most appropriate for the engineer. When I thought about all this, i decided to stop relying on all the technology and simplify the mix process so as to set up a way like Ive described above. Sticking to 12/24db shelving and using the same EQ on every channel and applying different ones on the mixbus akin to hardware rack for the final touches really changes the way you mix. Ive noticed that when I tried this you gain consistency in the sound and a lot more clarity. I Like to try many Eqs and dynamics as it adds to the interest of mixing to find the most suitable and best ones, even if its one just for adding air or the one with the best hi pass filter. I know this sounds basically minimal, but Ive spent many hours watching the eq slopes on many EQ emulations to find out which slopes they are set at in order to broaden my palette of understanding in this area. The point being when I used different EQs with different dynamics they all impart their own individual uniqueness to the audio and it soon accumulates and changes the tone and depth of the original, to the point where when it sounded good in the mix to begin with it now has a distinct tone which just doesnt gel with the other stuff. Hence the need to find the most musical and transparent EQ to solve the problem. Its a bit like when people search for the most appropriate amp sim or preamp because of its certain magical qualities for which they impart. When i first started I cared nothing for what phase shift, phase distortion or linear filters really were for until you learn about just how drastic these miniscule things really change and alter the sound. Try this out for yourself, pick a mixer and try to set up a signal chain the same as the original and work from there. Its hard to imagine that this is how the professionals really work, knowing a console inside out and understanding just how much low and hi pass shelving or filtering a sound needs in order to either dampen its high frequencies or cut a little mud in the lo end so it will sit behind the most prominent sounds in the mix where they will then apply the emphasizing boosts such as air, body weight and depth to the kickdrums, guitar lead solos and so on and so forth. The morale of the story is search out the best, most musically transparent EQ and dynamics tools you can muster, and once in a while, mix with your ears and sound judgement's and give yourself a break from all the mind boggling studio technology that is currently doing the rounds. Get good with these and then move on to more. Good luck with your mixing!

Cheap free "Good" Eqs:
http://www.vst4free.com/free_vst.php?plugin=Classic_EQ&id=48 2
http://www.vst4free.com/free_vst.php?plugin=BootEQ_mkII&id=6 58
http://www.vst4free.com/free_vst.php?plugin=Blue_Cat's_Tripl e_EQ&id=618
http://www.vst4free.com/free_vst.php?plugin=NastyHF&id=667
http://www.vst4free.com/free_vst.php?plugin=NastyLF&id=666
http://www.vst4free.com/free_vst.php?plugin=Pushtec_5+1A&id= 483http://
www.kvraudio.com/product/baxtereq-by-variety-of-
http://www.kvraudio.com/product/free_ranger_by_spl
http://www.kvraudio.com/product/marvel_geq_by_voxengo
http://www.kvraudio.com/product/soneq_by_sonimus
Ive specifically chose ones above which are transparent and some are warm and musical. Ive left out most of the ones with lots of bands and graph displays to keep it simple. Now its your turn to find the ones you like and use them. If you want some suggestions for dynamics write below. Also, if you head over to stillwell audio, the 1973 EQ is a very transparent EQ with excellent air boost, while the vibe EQ is great for imparting warmth and depth. the vibe EQ has wide Q gain structures like a neve based EQ and so is great for musical elements such as piano and instruments. Try sticking the 1973 just as the main eq on every track with what i described above and i think you will be pleasently surprised, its more of a transparent surgical EQ that works great on individual drum hits such as kicks and snares. Anyhows, see what you think and make your own mind up.
PS_ the SonEQ from sonimus adds as much warmth and depth as the IK pulteq emulation with the added benefit of extra bands and certain features, I have both so try it out on a drum Submix for adding wartmh and air to Gel them together. Another thing is find a good mastering compressor with really snappy attack and release times, if you find the material too squashed, they work wonders at restoring transient response and detail to the audio. very low threshold with ratio at about 1.5 just so as to coax about 3-4 db gain reduction. Try sticking it on a busmix or master and test it out, this type of compression just catches the transient peaks of your mix and with the low threshold raises the main volume up and adds proper glue and consistency, rather than it being over squashed material or flabby dynamics material

-Kim.