Gullfoss vs TEOTE

VST, AU, AAX, CLAP, etc. Plugin Virtual Effects Discussion
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

Alex Voellmer wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 5:28 pm From what i have heard teote is More of an eq balanciNg Tool (Similar to Smart:eq) whereas gullfoss‘ strenght seems to be unmasking and resonance taming (although teote claims to do the same).
Can anyone confirm this?
In my experience: no. Gullfoss doesn't do well removing resonsances because it doesn't do surgical cuts - it does wider band real-time processing. It's Soothe that does the de-resonance. I have both Teote (demo) and Gullfoss (own) (and I also have these other similar products: MSpectralDynamics, Unfilter, DSM, Trackspacer and Sugar). Gullfoss and Teote are actually similar in their top-line functionality but different the way they achieve it and their over-all sound. This has actually been covered in this and other threads.

Post

what plexuss said
Image

Post

Gullfoss to me works best as an exciter mentality. So you don't place it to fix stuff but enhance something already ok sounding.

Post

can TEOTE be used to tame resonances? is there a specific algorithm in there somewhere?

I can't afford Soothe, and zero latency is very attractive, also the current 30% off sale at Plugin Boutique.
cheers

Post

sqigls wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 2:21 am can TEOTE be used to tame resonances? is there a specific algorithm in there somewhere?
I can't afford Soothe, and zero latency is very attractive, also the current 30% off sale at Plugin Boutique.
cheers
Kind of not really. It can but in broad strokes, much broader than soothe. But if you are willing to accept it's wider range of function in exchange for not as good resonsnace control, then it's a good tool to get. I opted to buy from Vonengo directly to take advantage of the multi-product discount and flash sale - ended up being 40-ish% off. I opted to get Shinechilla as well. If you only want Teote then yes PB is the best price I've been able to find.

Post

plexuss wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 2:52 am
sqigls wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 2:21 am can TEOTE be used to tame resonances? is there a specific algorithm in there somewhere?
I can't afford Soothe, and zero latency is very attractive, also the current 30% off sale at Plugin Boutique.
cheers
Kind of not really. It can but in broad strokes, much broader than soothe.
Do you feel that using the "apply to range" function with the high- and lowpass filters, in conjunction with setting boost all the way off (i.e. to the right), doesn't give as much resonance control precision as you'd like?

Not trolling - genuinely curious. :D

Post

andrelafosse wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 7:13 am
Do you feel that using the "apply to range" function with the high- and lowpass filters, in conjunction with setting boost all the way off (i.e. to the right), doesn't give as much resonance control precision as you'd like?

Not trolling - genuinely curious. :D
It does, but it's inherently more broad than FFT based dynamic EQs.

It has 3-64 fixed frequency bands that are much more broad than FFT that are likely 512-4096 bands.

So it's not surgical, but still wide enough to take care of controlling resonance within reasonable scope (i.e. something like a voice with pretty equally spaced harmonics - it will tame fundamentals just fine)
Image

Post

I have Toete and I find it very good but I use it only as a reference if my track need more highs or low end.

Post

teote taxes my computer as well😭

i think teote is somewhere in between those other tools alex, it really depends on how you play or tinker with them settings to make it behave how you want it to..it’s a great tool to have for checking the condition of your mix/master

Post

Ploki wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 8:53 am
andrelafosse wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 7:13 am
Do you feel that using the "apply to range" function with the high- and lowpass filters, in conjunction with setting boost all the way off (i.e. to the right), doesn't give as much resonance control precision as you'd like?

Not trolling - genuinely curious. :D
It does, but it's inherently more broad than FFT based dynamic EQs.

It has 3-64 fixed frequency bands that are much more broad than FFT that are likely 512-4096 bands.

So it's not surgical, but still wide enough to take care of controlling resonance within reasonable scope (i.e. something like a voice with pretty equally spaced harmonics - it will tame fundamentals just fine)
I would see that rather as an advantage. In my experience, FFT-based EQs do not really sound good (or let's say: best). Thus, I would any time trade overall sound quality for more precision (which is useless if it does not sound good).

Post

I used Gullfoss for quite some time but haven't used it on the recent month as I just feel it kills transients too much. Sure, I can limit the operating range but it won't balance and de-resonate/de-mask then in the bass region. So, I demoed TEOTE last night on a track and the punch was all there (no transient killing!) and the balancing was really noticeable (the whole bass frequency range was better integrated in the overall track. Literally bought it after some minutes of testing / comparing to Gullfoss. I do bass heavy music (Trap) btw.
proud to produce warezless!
my Trap beatz:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4J14A ... -FzS9TNa2w

Post

AKJ wrote: Sat Jun 19, 2021 12:49 pm

I would see that rather as an advantage. In my experience, FFT-based EQs do not really sound good (or let's say: best). Thus, I would any time trade overall sound quality for more precision (which is useless if it does not sound good).
yeah i agree - that's why i sold gullfoss after getting TEOTE. imo doing multi-multiband dynamics vs FFT based deconstruction is better suited for a balancer.
Image

Post

Gullfoss is interesting, but didn't really convince me. Teote has a slightly different concept and also uses a different reference, but I liked the result better. In the end, Teote and Gullfoss can be used as a guide to get a well balanced mix. I would not use either as a dynamic EQ to fix a broken mix.

Post

Ploki wrote: Sat Jun 19, 2021 4:39 pm
AKJ wrote: Sat Jun 19, 2021 12:49 pm

I would see that rather as an advantage. In my experience, FFT-based EQs do not really sound good (or let's say: best). Thus, I would any time trade overall sound quality for more precision (which is useless if it does not sound good).
yeah i agree - that's why i sold gullfoss after getting TEOTE. imo doing multi-multiband dynamics vs FFT based deconstruction is better suited for a balancer.
I, on the hand, have and use both. I haven't heard any issues with transiets with Gullfoss and my music usually transient rich. I think Gullfoss generally does a good job as a first-pass "cleaner-upper" on the master buss. Teote is also nice but I don't find I use it for mastering, more-so for mixing work and primarily where I might use Gullfoss but would prefer more control over the banding and band dynamics.

Post Reply

Return to “Effects”