KVR Audio

Fabriciom · Post by **Fabriciom** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 6:38 am

Hello,

Anyone own all these an can explain what they would choose if the only had one to choose.

My top priorities are audio quality and resource usage.

Thanks!

-Cheers

Gamma-UT · Post by **Gamma-UT** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 9:25 am

Equilibrium is the most complete and most tunable of all three. If you're prepared to spend some time listening to the differences between IIR and FIR modes and tuning the window sizes for different material, you'll wonder why you would need any other EQ. But, the high-quality modes will consume more CPU. So you do need a clear idea of when and where to use those modes and that doesn't come easily or quickly.

Pro Q2 has the better interface and gets good results quickly. If you need to EQ a lot of tracks with small fiddly adjustments, Pro Q2 is probably the better choice. But...I'd be inclined to use the DAW's built-in EQ in many of those cases as that can often been quicker, and switch to a different EQ later like Equilibrium if it seems necessary for certain tracks.

I've not used bx_digital2 but I have used bx_hybrid2, which is more or less a non-MS version without the de-esser intended for mix work rather than the mastering that bx_digital is aimed at. They were originally set up for use with a Eucon controller, so you get those 'joystick' bands at the top and bottom. They are are really well thought out. But those boosts and cuts you can do by hand in the other two once you've got an idea of how they interact. Sound quality is very good.

Krzysztof Oktalski · Post by **Krzysztof Oktalski** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 9:34 am

Gamma-UT wrote:the high-quality modes will consume more CPU. So you do need a clear idea of when and where to use those modes and that doesn't come easily or quickly.

You can use the offline render settings to deal with high CPU usage whilst working.

There is a Youtube video that explains this a bit, I think we just forgot to tell anyone it existed :

4damind · Post by **4damind** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 9:35 am

bx_digital is primarily a mastering EQ. It has some features you don't need for single tracks and I wouldn't use it as a track EQ.
For Pro-Q a similar EQ from DMGAudio is EQuick (or the big brother EQuality).

Robmobius · Post by **Robmobius** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 10:47 am

For a work horse and high quality EQ (for the mix) I'd always use FF Pro Q2. It's fast, low cpu, and very high quality.

DMG's EQuilibrium is also a good choice too, but it a tad more cumbersome than the FF (imo). Is it better quality then Pro Q? Possibly... If so, there is very little in it.

So for me, I'd take the FF. To be honest, I don't regret selling EQuilibrium (I sold it when after I tried the demo of ProQ II).

Try a demo, all three are very good. I have the bx V2 as well, but that is a mastering processor.

Krzysztof Oktalski · Post by **Krzysztof Oktalski** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 11:11 am

Robmobius wrote: DMG's EQuilibrium is also a good choice too, but it a tad more cumbersome than the FF (imo).

Hey Rob,

Out of interest, what makes you say this? We've spent a lot of time UX testing EQuilibrium to make sure, when properly configured, it's the fastest tool we could make it for each user. We'd be interested to hear if there's any way we could improve but we get very few suggestions in this area now, which led us to believe users are predominantly satisfied. If there's something that slowed you down, we'll endeavour to fix it asap.

Twrogstudio · Post by **Twrogstudio** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 11:24 am

Equilibrium ended my search for the perfect eq. I think it's stunningly good. FF is great, and if you use want a great, easy to use high quality eq. I used to have it, but Equilibrium is 100 eq's and any combination you can think of, plus the quality settings can be pushed to CPU melting levels. If you're not going to use its capability maybe look elsewhere, but if you are then it's perfect.

Fabriciom · Post by **Fabriciom** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 11:30 am

Going a bit off track. So, Equick for simple tracking and EQulibrium for the rest? Or ProQ2 for tracking and Equilibrium for the rest?

Robmobius · Post by **Robmobius** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 11:32 am

Krzysztof Oktalski wrote:
Robmobius wrote: DMG's EQuilibrium is also a good choice too, but it a tad more cumbersome than the FF (imo).
Hey Rob,

Out of interest, what makes you say this? We've spent a lot of time UX testing EQuilibrium to make sure, when properly configured, it's the fastest tool we could make it for each user. We'd be interested to hear if there's any way we could improve but we get very few suggestions in this area now, which led us to believe users are predominantly satisfied. If there's something that slowed you down, we'll endeavour to fix it asap.

There's northing wrong with EQuilibrium per se it's pretty quick to use also (or it was when I owned it). But, for me anyway, it's not as quick or smooth to use as Fabfilter's Pro Q II (plus it's got a low cpu hit too).

I guess it's just a case of, I prefer FabFilter's products. Their new compressor is just sublime, their at the top of their game (for me anyway).

Robmobius · Post by **Robmobius** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 11:37 am

Fabriciom wrote:Going a bit off track. So, Equick for simple tracking and EQulibrium for the rest? Or ProQ2 for tracking and Equilibrium for the rest?

Not really... There's no real need for Equick if you have the FF or EQulibrium. Unless your CPU is straining. FF has a low cpu foot print and you can adjust the quality settings.

The Pro-Q is great for simple EQing and it's very good for anywhere in the mix. You can use it for mastering as well. Just like you could with EQulibrium.

To clarify, when I use the term 'mastering' I'm just referring to FX on the master bus (I'm not a mastering engineer by any means).

Have a gander at this Pro Q vid:

Fabriciom · Post by **Fabriciom** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 11:41 am

Thanks for the feedback guys!

Twrogstudio · Post by **Twrogstudio** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 12:00 pm

Just to clarify, equilibrium at low CPU settings is virtually invisible, it's just that it can be pushed extremely far.

4damind · Post by **4damind** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 12:17 pm

It's only a question of the personal taste. Both developers providing excellent quality plugins. Some people like the Fabfilter GUI more and this is IMO also the main difference.
I use EQuick a lot and have no usage for Pro-Q for other users it's the opposite

Robmobius · Post by **Robmobius** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 12:58 pm

Twrogstudio wrote:Just to clarify, equilibrium at low CPU settings is virtually invisible, it's just that it can be pushed extremely far.

That's why I think EQuick is kinda' redundant (for the way I work anyway). Even, when I had EQuilibrium I'd just use it for quick cuts too (I sold EQuick).

Then when I got Pro Q II it was the best of both worlds - Again that's just down to personal preference.

AIR EQ from Eiosis is another beautiful EQ, and it can add some really nice musical character with it's 'Fire and Water' settings. Although it can sound totally transparent as well.

Pretty cheap as well at $149 and has a low cpu hit. Probably one my favorite sounding EQs of all time to be honest - Programmed by the legendary Fabrice Gabriel too. 'Nuff said!

Den* · Post by Den* » Wed Sep 23, 2015 1:14 pm

BX Digital V2 is simulation of the hardware while two others are clean eq for cuts.

The best way is to take all demos and create same settings on all three. Blind shootout...
Everybody will choose different..

This is what it is:
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/bxDigitalV2/

ProQ 2 vs Equilibrium vs bx_digital v2