KVR Audio

fese · Post by **fese** » Fri Mar 12, 2021 11:10 am

RobinWood wrote: Thu Mar 11, 2021 5:32 pm
4damind wrote: Thu Mar 11, 2021 5:15 pm The question also makes sense the other way round. Do you need Pro-Q3 if you already have some EQs, especially the ones in your DAW?
If your stock EQ has phase modes, all the filter types, offers an analyzer, adaptive eq, dynamic eq, collision detection, the solo listening mode, m/s and such I guess you're right

Actually, Cubase’s Frequency does cover a lot of that, maybe not everything, but then it can do stuff that proQ cannot do (like multiple external sidechains in the newest version). And then there is also Voxengo’s CurveEQ, a freeform spline and matching EQ.
You don’t get the fancy UI, just the standard Cubase bland-ugly one (personally i never liked Fabfilter GUIs, though).

Skyfall72 · Post by **Skyfall72** » Thu Mar 25, 2021 6:04 pm

In short Yes

If you want to make your music comes to life You will need a more musical EQ
Pultec style
Tube style
SSL style
and a mastering grade LP

Hardware is the best thing if you can get them

plexuss · Post by **plexuss** » Thu Mar 25, 2021 9:19 pm

Yes you can justify having multiple EQs if you own ProQ3. I own ProQ3 and probably have 100's of other EQ plugins. Each EQ design will have a different take on the nature of the curves, phase and harmonics. ProQ3 covers a lot of ground but not enough to provide other over-all EQ tones and characteristics. The various analogue EQ's out there (hardware) all have their quirks based on their circuit design and hence gives each their own sound. For example specific manufacturer models can have numerous digitally modelled products each with a different take on the base sound (eg. Pultecs, Neves etc). However it comes down to what you find useful. Some people just use ProQ3 and don't think about it otherwise. Others, like myself, are EQ junkies and have more EQs than they can shake a stick at.

MogwaiBoy · Post by **MogwaiBoy** » Fri Mar 26, 2021 10:21 pm

I thought the same thing... got Pro-Q 3 - no more "digital" EQs for me. Then I downloaded a demo of Crave...

marzelli · Post by **marzelli** » Fri Mar 26, 2021 10:29 pm

Need? No. Does it hurt to have alternatives? No either. As the others I'd go for a coloring EQ.

KYes · Post by **KYes** » Fri Mar 26, 2021 11:07 pm

audioloco · Post by **audioloco** » Sat Mar 27, 2021 9:07 am

Everybody needs a Pultec....

The ProQ3 will certainly perform tasks well, but The Noise Ash Rule Tec EQ1A will make you smile more often

Raddler1 · Post by **Raddler1** » Sat Mar 27, 2021 4:00 pm

himalaya wrote: Thu Mar 11, 2021 9:51 am OP, I'd be looking to boost my EQ plugin folder with some carefully chosen offerings from the Acustica Audio catalogue. There is something special about those AA EQs that I can't get from my Pro-Q. Ever since I discovered AA EQs, I tend to use Pro-Q only for cutting. I have a few go-to AA EQs for mix duties, and a few for mastering. The CPU hit can be huge, and there are workflow issues but I'm fine with that as the sound is definitely worth it. The only thing is, if you haven't been exposed to AA plugins, it can be overwhelming at first due to the sheer number of products on offer.

So which AA eq's do you recommend?

keyman_sam · Post by **keyman_sam** » Sat Mar 27, 2021 4:16 pm

There are other takes on EQs - like NI's Massive EQ. I love the air that it adds and that it has fixed frequency bands, forcing you to make decisions based on hearing than seeing. Even if the same result were to be achievable by a graphical EQ, I'd prefer NI.

andymcbain · Post by **andymcbain** » Sun Mar 28, 2021 4:02 pm

Raddler1 wrote: Sat Mar 27, 2021 4:00 pm
himalaya wrote: Thu Mar 11, 2021 9:51 am OP, I'd be looking to boost my EQ plugin folder with some carefully chosen offerings from the Acustica Audio catalogue. There is something special about those AA EQs that I can't get from my Pro-Q. Ever since I discovered AA EQs, I tend to use Pro-Q only for cutting. I have a few go-to AA EQs for mix duties, and a few for mastering. The CPU hit can be huge, and there are workflow issues but I'm fine with that as the sound is definitely worth it. The only thing is, if you haven't been exposed to AA plugins, it can be overwhelming at first due to the sheer number of products on offer.
So which AA eq's do you recommend?

Diamond EQ might be worth a demo. I have it and I agree that it sounds very different to Pro-Q and similar... though admittedly I don't find myself using it that often due to the CPU hit. It does well at sculpting very dull sources into something shiny.

adl · Post by **adl** » Sun Mar 28, 2021 5:34 pm

+1 for Diamond EQ as nice addition to Pro-Q3. The Pre is great and really adds something to the sound.
Pemsado EQ is very nice as well (also Acustica Audio).

himalaya · Post by **himalaya** » Sun Mar 28, 2021 10:54 pm

Raddler1 wrote: Sat Mar 27, 2021 4:00 pm
himalaya wrote: Thu Mar 11, 2021 9:51 am OP, I'd be looking to boost my EQ plugin folder with some carefully chosen offerings from the Acustica Audio catalogue. There is something special about those AA EQs that I can't get from my Pro-Q. Ever since I discovered AA EQs, I tend to use Pro-Q only for cutting. I have a few go-to AA EQs for mix duties, and a few for mastering. The CPU hit can be huge, and there are workflow issues but I'm fine with that as the sound is definitely worth it. The only thing is, if you haven't been exposed to AA plugins, it can be overwhelming at first due to the sheer number of products on offer.
So which AA eq's do you recommend?

For general mixing duties, my go-to AA EQs are Gold and Pink. I also reach for Viridian, Ruby. I have more AA EQ plugins, they are all great sounding, but I really aim to limit how many I use and Gold + Pink + Diamond EQ see the most action of all of them.

Sometimes I will try Diamond EQ on individual sources, but I mostly use it during mastering. The sound of Diamond EQ is so powerful, so immediately useful. Although, care is needed as it's easy to overdo things. So for mastering I alternate between Azure, Scarlet, Magenta, Ivory and Diamond EQ.

I don't have any of the latest releases. There are many that I haven't tried like Jade, Coffee, Blond, Camel, Cola, Erin, etc. Coffee is next on my list. Apparently it's the Chandler collection which includes the Chandler Limited Germanium Tone Control and the Curve Bender.

What I would also say is that all those EQs work depending on your program material, and as I have found out, there are instances where something like Pro-Q works just perfectly. Other times, on a different track, AA EQs will be preferred. The thing is, I don't want to waste time endlessly comparing which EQ is better for any given track/instrument, so I will automatically use certain AA EQs to 'boost' and Pro-Q to 'cut'.

But to summarise, at this point I wouldn't want to be without Gold (Neve), Pink (API) and Diamond EQ.

Jafo · Post by **Jafo** » Sun Mar 28, 2021 11:04 pm

Only one EQ? Around here, that sentence is inherently nonsensical. I'm not even sure what it means!

digitalboytn · Post by **digitalboytn** » Sun Mar 28, 2021 11:10 pm

The KVR rule is that we always need one more plugin

lmprrjs · Post by **lmprrjs** » Mon Mar 29, 2021 1:45 am

NO.

just kidding but, I've just installed pro-q 3 and it's amazing.

If one has FF ProQ3, does one really need other EQs?