PLParEQ and Algorithmix EQs

[Frippertronix]

Refined audiometrics mastering limiter....

$/EUR 1000...?

[Frippertronix]

Kingston, there's nothing about likes or dislikes and your aesthetic choices. It is simply stupid to take anyone for granted. On the internet boards everyone is an expert and every piece of software and gear is great in almost any magazine review. Reality is tho - there aren't many good products for pro audio. I may post some audio examples later today/tomorrow and see how it turnes out publicly.

You've got to openly qualify every comparison, though, when you hold digital up to a high-end analog standard. David's opinion is that his EQ can be reasonably held up to a h/w Massenburg, and, while I've never heard one, it seems like a bit of a stretch to me because you're talking about such totally different things.

If you have the money to buy high-end, ultra low noise analog mastering gear then you are in an excellent position to make pro quality recordings, if you know how to use the stuff. But you can't, in fairness, swoop down and question people complimenting the quality of high-end digital because you can name a dozen analog units that sound better.

[omo]

Frippertronix, what's your point? I don't see how your post relates to mine quoted.

[Kingston]

I didn't even want to bring analog into this discussion, it's just too different sound. But I'm going to make a sweeping statement anyway: there just isn't a digital track EQ out there that matches even 'ok' analog hardware (assuming similar feature sets on both). Even the measly track EQ in my mixer generally beats an EQ plugin. I don't want to bother saying why, my left eye is still black from other recent similar discussion as I made the mistake there.

Hydratone is the only one to get in the ballpark and quite the hog it is at that.



But hi-end digital mastering EQs are a different subject entirely. I'm pretty sure PLpar is "nearly there" to weiss.

[omo]

But hi-end digital mastering EQs are a different subject entirely. I'm pretty sure PLpar is "nearly there" to weiss.

Could be. But to be sure it takes a real shotout. "almost sure" or "pretty sure" without actual a/b don't count

[Kingston]

I *wish* I could do that. I've heard weiss used by someone else and her hands were flying too fast (a brilliant ME at chartmakers, finland). There was a massive passive there as well and I couldn't tell what was doing what. Just that everything sounded golden. Similarly there was about 3 compressors in the chain (not including a limiter) and it was impossible to say what compressor did what.

[Frippertronix]

Frippertronix, what's your point? I don't see how your post relates to mine quoted.

True. I was jumping to conlusions by compositing some of your previous posts. You've seemed critical of PLParEQ, which I've inferred is at least in part because of the high price tag for a single digital effect, then in one of your posts you said you try to use only analog gear whenever possible.

I agree, and also in resposnse to Kingston's post above, analog is tonally superior (I argue this point now and again and am taken to the wall by lovers of VSTi's on the Instruments board)...but, the area where digital has analog beat is noise.

I love my Meequalizer stereo 3 band analog EQ. Ted Fletcher designed it with a system of variable phase relationships between the bands to help mitigate some of the inherent phase problems, though it is not linear phase. Problem is, it's not expensive gear and the main way you pay for this is with noise. It is very noisy---almost on the verge of being unuseable unless I want to go back and try to digitally remove the noise later on.

Ted Fletcher has a high-end EQ that incorporates some of the same ideas, but it is about $3000.

[Kingston]

You know,

I actually *want* the noise from analog gear. True that some equipment is notoriously noisy, but a little bit here and there accumulates nicely if it's the right kind of noise.

[Frippertronix]

You know,

I actually *want* the noise from analog gear. True that some equipment is notoriously noisy, but a little bit here and there accumulates nicely if it's the right kind of noise.

Okay, Kingston, I trust your opinion but this you'll have to explain better.

By noise, are you just talking about typical noise floor hiss?

Something tells me you like analog tape...

[Kingston]

Something tells me you like analog tape...

Just a little.

Generally the low noise floor of reasonably good tape (no, not cassettes) combined with reasonably good outboard sounds wonderful. That little tinkle that you can just about hear, or maybe it's only audible in the intro.

There's something about the way analog signal modulates with its hiss, the noise that is caused by component interaction, something extremely nonlinear and difficult to emulate. There hasn't been extensive research about this anywhere in the world (who knows I might take up on it one day).

(excuse the thread hijack people, this thread is just about to interleave with this: http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1487001)

[Frippertronix]

Something tells me you like analog tape...

Just a little.

Generally the low noise floor of reasonably good tape (no, not cassettes) combined with reasonably good outboard sounds wonderful. That little tinkle that you can just about hear, or maybe it's only audible in the intro.

There's something about the way analog signal modulates with its hiss, the noise that is caused by component interaction, something extremely nonlinear and difficult to emulate. There hasn't been extensive research about this anywhere in the world (who knows I might take up on it one day).

But you've still got to have really good (read: expensive) gear, otherwise the accumulation of noise from amp circuits gets to be absurd.

So, what about the now-standard near-silence between notes that is a part of CD production values? Do you not worry about analog noise screaming out in the context of CD audio, which has brought people to expect little or no noise at all?

[Kingston]

That's just fashion. I never ever edit out the noise. Aesthetically I think it sounds better.

[Frippertronix]

That's just fashion. I never ever edit out the noise. Aesthetically I think it sounds better.

Hmmm, I like your principles.

[bmanic]

Kingston, there's nothing about likes or dislikes and your aesthetic choices. It is simply stupid to take anyone for granted.

Indeed.

Qurious: omo, Have you tried the Weiss EQ1 MK2?

- bManic

[bmanic]

You know,

I actually *want* the noise from analog gear. True that some equipment is notoriously noisy, but a little bit here and there accumulates nicely if it's the right kind of noise.

Okay, Kingston, I trust your opinion but this you'll have to explain better.

By noise, are you just talking about typical noise floor hiss?

Something tells me you like analog tape...

The lack of noise is imho one of the reasons why most virtual analogue wannabe synths sound sterile and flat. If you listen real carefully when playing a golden oldie you'll notice that the noise forms a part of the sound and modulates in a complex pattern together with the patch.

I think this same thing applies to outboard eq and compression too. There is a certain very subtle 'smearing' which is pleasing to the ear. This is probably what sonalksis tried to do with their EQ (sometimes it works, most of the times not). They added some dithering kind of noise that modulates with the incoming sound. There's a post on the sonalksis forum somewhere that explains it all.

I too, am one of those "analogue sounds much better, most of the time" guys and have my fair share of experience with various equipment (Millenia TCL-2 compressor being the ultimate example of ".. just run it trough it without any compression, it'll sound better!" and it did). However, there is no denying that digital is finally maturing into something quite usable and there are lots of things that can be done digitally but are impossible to do in the analogue domain (Voxengo Soniformer always comes to mind. One of the most powerful effects ever designed, hardware or software, imho).

There's one more thing, the more experienced I've got the less important accumulation of high end gear has gotten. I'm more confident than ever that it's the man, not the machine (not that I would ever again use say, Nuendo's native plugins only, for mixing, anything, ever.. except for experimentation). Creating songs from scratch ITB does tend to sound somewhat 2D but even that can be remedied by running some of the sounds back trough amps and speakers and getting some of that 'real world' into it.

I have no idea what this post was about but what the hell..
Cheers!
bManic