What's the difference between MAutoEqualizer and MAutoDynamicEQ?

[zeep]

Wondering whats the difference between MAutoEqualizer and MAutoDynamicEQ?

MAutoDynamicEQ is the cheaper one and has dynamics.

I want to work with EQ snapshots more and it seems MAutoDynamicEQ can do what MAutoEqualizer does in that department. I would use MAutoDynamicEQ on the master channel.

Thanks

[MeldaProduction]

Well, the difference is the linear-phase version. MAutoEqualizer provides a very very good linear-phase algorithm. That may be necessary for some specific mastering tasks. However if you are not a fan of linear-phase processing, then MAutoDynamicEq is definitely better as it has the dynamic engine (plus quite some goodies such as modulators, global HP/LP etc...).

[zeep]

Thanks for your answer.
I'm surprised though by the price difference, MAutoEqualizer is nearly 2/3rds more expensive than MAutoDynamicEQ. Only for linear-phase?..

[MeldaProduction]

Thanks for your answer.
I'm surprised though by the price difference, MAutoEqualizer is nearly 2/3rds more expensive than MAutoDynamicEQ. Only for linear-phase?..

Yes! HQ linear-phase equalizers are very expensive!

[takaii]

Thanks for your answer.
I'm surprised though by the price difference, MAutoEqualizer is nearly 2/3rds more expensive than MAutoDynamicEQ. Only for linear-phase?..

Yes! HQ linear-phase equalizers are very expensive!

Melda. Am trying demo of mautoequalizer, i am amazed about result when using saturation on the eq, everything that i boost gets much more prominent than without for same volume when used on claps and snares. Except that i know fabfilter pro q2 is a monster easy to use eq and a little less mouse clicks. I am just curious what you would say in favor getting your eq insteed of fabfilters?

[MeldaProduction]

Thank you. First of all they sound different... whether you like that one or the another one is entirely up to you. Our plugins are generally the most versatile ones - for instance, the sonogram/analyzer (check the analyzer settings too), areas, separate feature, AGC, limiter, A-H presets, resizable/stylable GUI etc... Well, I have nothing against FF plugins, but when it comes to versatility & features there's no match for MeldaProduction .

[takaii]

Thank you. First of all they sound different... whether you like that one or the another one is entirely up to you. Our plugins are generally the most versatile ones - for instance, the sonogram/analyzer (check the analyzer settings too), areas, separate feature, AGC, limiter, A-H presets, resizable/stylable GUI etc... Well, I have nothing against FF plugins, but when it comes to versatility & features there's no match for MeldaProduction .

Is it possible to drag cut lower then 20 hz? because using 120db i notice that it cuts a little before 20 hz i would love to cut at 30 or 20 but the cut seems to start earlier or what i hear.
Second question, for mixing, which one would you recommend, autoequalizer or autodynamic?
In what situation would you favour them and what can they do that are the same?

[MeldaProduction]

No cuts below I'm afraid. Don't worry about the frequencies closely above it, these are not audible anyway and you need superhuge reproductors to play them, so removing a few dB is completely irrelevant.

I personally recommend MAutoDynamicEq for everything. But if you need/like linear-phase processing, then MAutoEqualizer is the answer . Generally MAutoDynamicEq knows pretty much everything anyone could ask for plus a lot more and has newer filters, but it is not linear-phase.