What do you think of DMG equilibrium ?

[pekbro]

I like Kirchhoff specifically for the customization, beyond that they all sound pretty much the same imo...

[Iva]

DMGAudio EQ has less ringing than the others.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

CraveEQ is another good one. But EQuillibrium has been my go to. Even though, I barely scratch the surface of it.

[solvni_music]

DMGAudio EQ has less ringing than the others.

What do you mean ?

[plexuss]

I have and use it, along with many of the otehr DMG plugins. I consider them top tier but escoteric. Similar tier but much more main stream, and cheaper is FabFilter. I enjoy working with lots of different tools and appreciate some of the unique but escoteric features of EQuilibrium. If that's not important to you, you may want to pass and save some money with something like FabFilter. Just my opinion. YMMV

[solvni_music]

I have and use it, along with many of the otehr DMG plugins. I consider them top tier but escoteric. Similar tier but much more main stream, and cheaper is FabFilter. I enjoy working with lots of different tools and appreciate some of the unique but escoteric features of EQuilibrium. If that's not important to you, you may want to pass and save some money with something like FabFilter. Just my opinion. YMMV

did you notice a difference in the sound ?

[machinesworking]

It's been my main EQ for years now. I think as some have pointed out the interface is better than the rest. I bought it before Pro Q had the keyboard or note function, but obviously they're neck and neck in terms of quality. I'm not a purist for most EQ duties I'll use stock EQs and coloring EQs, but when I need to carve into a sound EQUilibrium is the goto.

[solvni_music]

thank for your advice.

[dionenoid]

Equilibrium is my go-to for many years. Tried many others, i do use Pro-Q4 or Slick Eq M for certain tasks, and i use hardware as well as emulations every now and then. I personally work much quicker with Equilibrium then with other eq's tho.

The strength of Equilibrium is in the phase response. It has perfect phase response meaning less transient smearing and better low-frequency handling. Mind you, in real-life situations these differences are so small that not many even hear it. Quite often ppl also mistake transient smearing for softening, which is why some will even prefer the sound of some cheaper eq's.

It could do with some updates tho, and perhaps look a bit more modern. But soundwise it's never been beaten, and Equilibrium's deep tweaking possibilities always enabled users to null it with every next 'best transparent eq ever'.

[solvni_music]

Equilibrium is my go-to for many years. Tried many others, i do use Pro-Q4 or Slick Eq M for certain tasks, and i use hardware as well as emulations every now and then. I personally work much quicker with Equilibrium then with other eq's tho.

The strength of Equilibrium is in the phase response. It has perfect phase response meaning less transient smearing and better low-frequency handling. Mind you, in real-life situations these differences are so small that not many even hear it. Quite often ppl also mistake transient smearing for softening, which is why some will even prefer the sound of some cheaper eq's.

It could do with some updates tho, and perhaps look a bit more modern. But soundwise it's never been beaten, and Equilibrium's deep tweaking possibilities always enabled users to null it with every next 'best transparent eq ever'.

thank a lot for your advice !

[plexuss]

I have and use it, along with many of the otehr DMG plugins. I consider them top tier but escoteric. Similar tier but much more main stream, and cheaper is FabFilter. I enjoy working with lots of different tools and appreciate some of the unique but escoteric features of EQuilibrium. If that's not important to you, you may want to pass and save some money with something like FabFilter. Just my opinion. YMMV

did you notice a difference in the sound ?

Like any good digital EQ, when it’s flat, no, I do not hear a difference. That’s a good thing! But comparing one EQ to another requires comparing apples to apples, which means using the same EQ curves. I don’t have the time or interest to do that, so I’d have to say that in terms of active bands, I don’t know. I would guess that there won't be much difference in sound between a given band curve on EQuilibrium and one in another digital EQ that emulates the same curve.

However, when it comes to the ability to tweak band phase, yes, I do hear a difference, especially in the low end. But that’s one of EQuilibrium’s esoteric goodies. It doesn’t emulate the full analog signal path of the analog curves it supports - just the curves. For me, its strength lies more in the workflow and features than in being a better-sounding EQ, generally speaking. YMMV.

[solvni_music]

Thank , I really apreciate

[bmanic]

Mind you, in real-life situations these differences are so small that not many even hear it. Quite often ppl also mistake transient smearing for softening, which is why some will even prefer the sound of some cheaper eq's.

Mind you, the smearing can be abused in Equilibrium too. You can set it's windowing size and type to force really heavy smearing, which can sometimes be extremely good. I love using Equilibrium when I need to soften clicky hihats or other drums/percussion. Simply by boosting or cutting at the offending frequencies you can smear it so much that the end result is better.

That's the power of EQuilibrium. You the user have all the choices you could ever need for a digital EQ. It can be the "best" EQ in the whole industry with ridiculous settings and it can also emulate "bad" EQs.. and you have full control over the phase response in the FIR 'free' mode, meaning you can actually exaggerate pre-ring, which again can be a nice little trick (works well on kicks and such when you want them to go "wwwwoooOOOP".

[jtsterays]

Mind you, in real-life situations these differences are so small that not many even hear it. Quite often ppl also mistake transient smearing for softening, which is why some will even prefer the sound of some cheaper eq's.

Mind you, the smearing can be abused in Equilibrium too. You can set it's windowing size and type to force really heavy smearing, which can sometimes be extremely good. I love using Equilibrium when I need to soften clicky hihats or other drums/percussion. Simply by boosting or cutting at the offending frequencies you can smear it so much that the end result is better.

That's the power of EQuilibrium. You the user have all the choices you could ever need for a digital EQ. It can be the "best" EQ in the whole industry with ridiculous settings and it can also emulate "bad" EQs.. and you have full control over the phase response in the FIR 'free' mode, meaning you can actually exaggerate pre-ring, which again can be a nice little trick (works well on kicks and such when you want them to go "wwwwoooOOOP".

Can you recommend me a good setting for this? I personally hate the clickiness of modern musics, always love the smeary high end of low bitrate mp3 but emulation like the Goodhertz doesn't sound like the way I wanted.

[bmanic]

Mind you, in real-life situations these differences are so small that not many even hear it. Quite often ppl also mistake transient smearing for softening, which is why some will even prefer the sound of some cheaper eq's.

Mind you, the smearing can be abused in Equilibrium too. You can set it's windowing size and type to force really heavy smearing, which can sometimes be extremely good. I love using Equilibrium when I need to soften clicky hihats or other drums/percussion. Simply by boosting or cutting at the offending frequencies you can smear it so much that the end result is better.

That's the power of EQuilibrium. You the user have all the choices you could ever need for a digital EQ. It can be the "best" EQ in the whole industry with ridiculous settings and it can also emulate "bad" EQs.. and you have full control over the phase response in the FIR 'free' mode, meaning you can actually exaggerate pre-ring, which again can be a nice little trick (works well on kicks and such when you want them to go "wwwwoooOOOP".

Can you recommend me a good setting for this? I personally hate the clickiness of modern musics, always love the smeary high end of low bitrate mp3 but emulation like the Goodhertz doesn't sound like the way I wanted.

EDIT: Actually you don't need two instances.. no idea why I thought you would need two. You can do everything within a single instance of EQuilibrium, of course. Just have an identical cut and boost then simply set their 'phase dots' in opposite directions. This will cancel out the frequency response but you are left with the 'phase wobble' and impulse ringing which will do the smearing.

Just use EQuilibrium in it's FIR 'free' mode and set 'Impulse length' to 1024 (the lowest possible). You can shape the smearing with the frequency where you are cutting and boosting. If you boost/cut higher up you get shorter impulse lengths but if you do it in the lower frequency regions you get much longer ringing filters.



In the image above you can see that I have two bells, both at exactly 2kHz. One is set to +6dB and the other to -6dB. I've then reversed the phase of one of the bands. This causes a flat frequency response while still causing impulse ringing. You can use this to smear things. The steeper the bells are and the lower in the frequency range you set them the longer and more severe the ringing. Note that at an impulse size of only 1024 the ringing will be "cut off" though.. this can cause some discontinuity and weirdness. You can use the padding setting to mitigate this.

Anyhow, it's worth exploring what kind of smearing you want. For closed clicky hihats I always have two or 3 bells narrow bells quite high up in the frequency range. Between 3 and 10kHz. This causes a really clear smearing ripple and can help take off the edge of the hihat.