Fabfilter Pro-Q 4!

[jtsterays]

I don't understand why what I'm saying seems bizarre to you guys. What's so unusual about asking for 2-3 EQ curves that would be extremely tedious to match that takes multiple EQ points, which clutter the interface and slow down the workflow significantly. Shouldn't Fabfilter, the company known best for fast workflow plugins prioritizes this? Even Kelvin from Tone Projects have multiple curve types and nobody complained that there are too many for a saturator. How about no per band phase setting so i can have some linear then some minimal phase, now I have to use 2 Pro-Q instead. I actually want to retire Equilibrium and use Fabfilter only, but they're not making it easy, still have to use multiple EQ plugins which I hate doing. And it's not like they're always right, remember Timeless 3? I don't remember a single person in the forums praising it's delay time knob with the outer ring offset that you have to open a tab to choose time divisons instead of some normal knobs like Valhalla and Echoboy.

It’s not bizarre if that helps.

It’s more that it’s not up to us, and it’s up to FF.

Additionally, I don’t need what you want. I’m okay using multiple EQs if that’s what I’m after. Most of the time, I don’t need anything else. And truthfully… I really don’t need any of the other EQs, but it’s fun reading about what was done in the past and being able to recreate it.

And Timeless 3… From the last time this came up, more people disliked the UI changes than those that did like it. Still there are some who say Timeless 3 is their go to. I still prefer Timeless 2’s UI over 3.

Just different takes on things. Nothing wrong with that.

They're not sticking to their motto "Beautiful sound, fantastic workflow". The first part is subjective so I can't argue with that, but for the second part I provided those examples. I hope you understand where i'm coming from.

[Dr.Gunjah]

I don't understand why what I'm saying seems bizarre to you guys. What's so unusual about asking for 2-3 EQ curves that would be extremely tedious to match that takes multiple EQ points, which clutter the interface and slow down the workflow significantly. Shouldn't Fabfilter, the company known best for fast workflow plugins prioritizes this?

In my book it's a much better workflow to draw the curve I want with multiple nodes instead of only using one node and switch "popular" curves in a submenu or something.

And be honest - if they add 3 curves you will ask for 5 other. Or complain because "iT dOeSn'T nUlL"

[Caine123]

only thing annoying is that Pro-G is still not resizable? or do i miss something?

Yeah, that's probably my number one request for FF to address next.

Pro-G and Pro-DS have actually been resizable since a maintenance update released in March 2023.

what the? oh my, thanks have to check it asap, i think cause I still use the VST2 version, afaik VST3 versions should be resizable.

[jtsterays]

I don't understand why what I'm saying seems bizarre to you guys. What's so unusual about asking for 2-3 EQ curves that would be extremely tedious to match that takes multiple EQ points, which clutter the interface and slow down the workflow significantly. Shouldn't Fabfilter, the company known best for fast workflow plugins prioritizes this?

In my book it's a much better workflow to draw the curve I want with multiple nodes instead of only using one node and switch "popular" curves in a submenu or something.

And be honest - if they add 3 curves you will ask for 5 other. Or complain because "iT dOeSn'T nUlL"

Nah, there are only around 4 curves that are actually unique that need multiple nodes to match. If you look at Equilibrium or Kirchoff there are like 10 bells that you can just match with a single fabfilter bell, they're just different Q values. That's bad, I actually hate that.

[Caine123]

I never had any problem with the sound of ProQ3. To me it sounds great. Or better said, it doesn't have a sound.
I don't care about some tiny little differences you can barely hear.

To me there are few things that make ProQ above the crowd :
- workflow
- features
- GUI
- coding !!!! The Fabfilter plugins are the most stable, issues free, CPU friendly, and long term updated plugins I have on my computer. Saturn 1 is still updated (it was released in 2012). It works on an Apple Silicon Mac. You can share presets with Saturn 2...
My session never crashed with ProQ3, or any other Fabfilter plugin. And my CPU loves them.

Working professionnaly with these kind of tools is a blessing. I love DMG Audio stuff, but I'm less confident with them. I have some issues with Equick for exemple (it crashes my session sometimes when I open the GUI). TrackComp is great now but it had some nasty hidden bugs few times in its lifespan (but it's still the best "do-it-all" compressor plugin I know).

It's great to be able to rely on tools like the Fabfilter ones. It may not be the best sounding stuff ever, but yes, it's a "fantastic workflow".

exactly, they are rock solid, i think they never crashed on me! and did i tell the copy protection is awesome?

some DAWs like FL Studio sadly suck with a lot of native plugins, having Fabfilter plugin suite make the basics so much more fun.

[kraster]

I'm so hyped.

Over an equaliser...

[vitocorleone123]

Q3 was very underwhelming for me... I ended up upgrading out of boredom after like 3 years on a black friday sale.
It sure has been my go-to eq plugin, but I've been using it in the exact same way I used Q2.
Not even once I went for the dynamic option for its lack of A/R parameters.

Q4 finally looks much more interesting and it makes me want to buy right now at launch.
Specifically the A/R time constants on the dynamic side and spectral processing are substantial upgrades in my view.

I found the same as Dan Worral said: it generally just works.

More control is welcomed of course.

[MrJubbly]

Heck they didn't even invent the "Pro-Q GUI", Voxengo made it first in 2004 + Spectrum sharing.

Interesting take. I always believed that Fabfilter Pro-Q was an improved version of Image-Line's "Fruity Parametric EQ 2" which released just a couple of years prior to Pro-Q v1.

But I suppose if Voxengo's "Parametric Equalizer" was released as early as you say in 2004, that may have even influenced Image-Line's design first.

Either way, I'm grateful these plugins did improve the workflow for EQ plugins over the more rigid iterations before them.

[jtsterays]

Heck they didn't even invent the "Pro-Q GUI", Voxengo made it first in 2004 + Spectrum sharing.

Interesting take. I always believed that Fabfilter Pro-Q was an improved version of Image-Line's "Fruity Parametric EQ 2" which released just a couple of years prior to Pro-Q v1.

But I suppose if Voxengo's "Parametric Equalizer" was released as early as you say in 2004, that may have even influenced Image-Line's design first.

Either way, I'm grateful these plugins did improve the workflow for EQ plugins over the more rigid iterations before them.

Here you go : https://gearspace.com/board/showpost.ph ... tcount=201

[MrJubbly]

I'm a little flabbergasted that several people don't seem to think this is a worthwhile upgrade.

I feel the amount of features and workflow improvements easily justify the release.

As a Total Bundle customer, I for sure will be instantly upgrading upon its release.

And if I didn't already own Pro-Q, I would definitely purchase this new version outright.

imho, Fabfilter are undoubtedly one of the best audio plugin developers around, by any metric worth its salt.

[MrJubbly]

Heck they didn't even invent the "Pro-Q GUI", Voxengo made it first in 2004 + Spectrum sharing.

Interesting take. I always believed that Fabfilter Pro-Q was an improved version of Image-Line's "Fruity Parametric EQ 2" which released just a couple of years prior to Pro-Q v1.

But I suppose if Voxengo's "Parametric Equalizer" was released as early as you say in 2004, that may have even influenced Image-Line's design first.

Either way, I'm grateful these plugins did improve the workflow for EQ plugins over the more rigid iterations before them.

Here you go : https://gearspace.com/board/showpost.ph ... tcount=201

I didn't doubt what you said. But thanks for the link. Good to see a screen capture of the early version there and straight from the horses' mouth (so to speak).

Circa 2003-2005 certainly does predate both Image-Line's Fruity Parametric EQ 2, which released with FL Studio v7.0.0 on 3rd January 2007 and also v1 of Fabfilter's Pro-Q, which apparently released a couple years after on the 16th November 2009.

[kraster]

Waves Q10 was released in 1992!!

That was the first node based EQ, I believe.

[kraster]

I'm a little flabbergasted that several people don't seem to think this is a worthwhile upgrade.

I feel the amount of features and workflow improvements easily justify the release.

As a Total Bundle customer, I for sure will be instantly upgrading upon its release.

And if I didn't already own Pro-Q, I would definitely purchase this new version outright.

imho, Fabfilter are undoubtedly one of the best audio plugin developers around, by any metric worth its salt.

People love to complain.

Fabfilter are arguably the most solid name in the industry. And the Pro Q is the jewel in the crown.

There's always something that can juggle fireballs or something else but none have the combination of UI, UX, feature set and stability as Pro Q.

By far my most used plugin.

[elxsound]

I'm a little flabbergasted that several people don't seem to think this is a worthwhile upgrade.

I feel the amount of features and workflow improvements easily justify the release.

As a Total Bundle customer, I for sure will be instantly upgrading upon its release.

And if I didn't already own Pro-Q, I would definitely purchase this new version outright.

imho, Fabfilter are undoubtedly one of the best audio plugin developers around, by any metric worth its salt.

I think it’s an extremely small number of complaints. Not worth being flabbergasted about.

I’m gonna enjoy the release

[Caine123]

it is 12.12.2024 !!!! no Fabfilter Pro-Q4 !!!!!!!!!!!! unbelievable!!!!!