I always see that lot's of different Eq,Compression,... vst plugins is released everyday on sister site or other places.
Which one is the best?
What are their real differences ? Sound or Just tools ?
About tools, Which is most complete?
About sound, which one sounds best?
Is one vst enough for doing great job or different vsts is needed for different instruments (metal guitars , drums,...)?

I'm not a mix expert. I'm a metal and rock songwriter that usually mix and master my own songs.

 

Best is subjective

2) All Digital Parametric EQ’s [sound mostly] the same.

http://ericbeam.com/?p=361

If you're talking about amount of controls, try Izotope Ozone 5 advanced EQ. Lots of filters, change phase too.

see 2)

Just change the EQ curve

Compressors differ a bit.

 

Preamps are not the same
Compressors are not the same
And
Eq are not the same

Basically you could have those 3 actions combined in each single category.
A preamp could introduce a filter, an eq could introduce harmonic distortion, a compressor is doing maybe all of them.
Even speaking about the eq category alone the phase could be varying and depending on bells and settings. The different approach could lead to different workarounds around nyquist. Band interaction could lead to specific phase results, very difficult to replicate using a generic approach. Even a proportional q approach could lead to huge impact on workflow, just read how musical an api eq could be.

 

Treat every plugin as a tool and color, sometimes you might want to create a certain sound when mixing (vintage type plugins work well), other times, you want to keep the music as clean as possible (Stock EQ's). As mentioned above, certain EQ's are built for utility like mastering, others are built and emulated because they add a certain character to the mix.

We're lucky to have so many VST's out but it can also become a crutch, some people make hits with standard plugins too!
Watch some SSL/API/Neve mixing console videos and you'll start to appreciate the sound and character the machines can bring.

 

In all seriousness, if you audition let's say two eq's (a digital vs a vintage emulation) and can't tell the difference, you ear is not trained enough to sense subtleties - this is normal for beginners. Even if you had "the best" tools you could only mix as best as your ears will allow. So do more mixes with what you have, until you develop the skill to hear diffrences between plugins. It's kind of like buying a rally car for your grandma'.

 

zizi, you probs realise that what you've asked has many answers, but as far as a mix eq goes I find FabFilter Pro Q2 "can" cover about 75% of my mixing needs, though a lot of the time I'll use somethine else.
But I've never really found a compressor that covers my mixing needs in the same way, so I spend a lot of time A B ing.

Drum Busswise I'm liking Neuron more and more.

If you find "the one" lemmie know.

 

Waves C1 Sadly no ' color ' option to make it sound gritty.

 

best eqs : tranQuilizr , CS3301
comps : Drawmer 1973, MJUC, The Glue, VLA-2A, VLA-3A

 

EQs have different Q curves - sometimes self adapting like the API - different phase options, different interfaces which contributes to usability, etc.

Compressors have different knee shapes, different helping parameters like internal sidechains, mid-side, stereo/dual-mono, fixed attack/release times, auto-release, self-adapting ratios, negative ratios, added analog saturation, etc.

The "best" is subjective. You just have to study and learn what you like and need and try a lot of different things.

 

You have to know the eqs and comps. Than you can choose what is the best for the job and what you want to achieve.

You can train your ear or hear the differences of vintage eqs and comps the easiest way with 2 Melda production plugins. Theese plugins are not bad and definatly show the characteristics of the different models. You can easy switch between them and comapre them ...

 

Agree with a lot of what's being said here. I match up EQ's to the task I'm trying to accomplish. For example to help a vocal come up front, I'd go to a Pultech MEQ-5 emulation. Works good on guitars too. This is a very musical EQ that adds good character for those particular applications. For surgical EQ'ing, I go to Ozone 7 usually. I use it for hi pass, lo pass, and cuts for resonances, etc.
This is also what I look at when choosing which compressor to use. Some track quickly and are great to use on drums and percussion. Some track slower and really do magical things to vocals or bass guitar.
There's tons of reading out there on suggested uses of different compressors and eq's. I have learned that you should check out different vendors emulations because they can vary between themselves as well. For example I have found myself turning to the T-Racks 1176 emulation. It just sounds better to my ears. Does it sound "exactly" like an 1176? Don't know. Don't really care. I like what it does to the tracks I use it with.
I'd suggest looking at which EQ's/compressors are recommended for the track you are working with, and experiment with different vendors emulations until you find something you like. The differences between them can be very subtle so it all is dependent on your ear.
Also, with metal and rock guitars, one way to compress without really using a compressor is tape emulation. My ITB guitar tone really took a substantial leap forward after I started using tape. It took away a lot of the digital bite/fizz that I was having trouble with. I ended up using a Wollensak emulation in Nebula, but there are others to choose from like Slate VTM or Waves.

 

Thanks for all of the answers. I appreciate all of them and also the future answers

 

Well, the best plugin EQs measurement wise are the Algorithmix Blue as well as the Algorithmix Red. The Red is a linear phase equalizer on the same level as the Weiss EQ and does even exceed it in terms of filter quality but has more phase anomalys. Bob Katz has done some interesting measurements comparing the two in his 2nd edition book.

I use Algorithmix Blue for mixing while to my subjective ear Flux Epure is definitely the best sounding EQ after Blue.

 

The Algorithmix EQs cost something like 1200 bucks so they better be up there with the Weiss Eq. They use a dongle, so hope.you have plenty of ports on your machine.

 

its not individual plugins that matter so much but understanding what compression is and does having references where you know the ratios threshold attack and release very well the differences in technology of the compressor will alter drastically , i never use a compressor to alter the fine grain detail of the sound only the general broad strokes this means i never exceed 2:1 ratio , middle of the road attach and decay or release settings and i pick the technology based on the usage if drums 1176 maybe if bass or vocals fair-child , how transparent do you need it? so in the end in depends on the particular usage for that exact track in that exact stage that it is in regarding harmonic complexity, how even the transients through the frequency response etc.

 

More than half of the eq plugins are emulations of analog gear and as such, they mimic the imperfections of their analog counterpart they cannot possibly sound the same. I went to the page junh1024 posted about eqs all sounding the same, there is no harmonic/color spectrum representation. Sound as we conceive it, is much more than a hz/volume curve on an XY axis. Therefore every eq may seem of just a slight difference when compared to other similar eqs. But for instance Waves REQ vs Waves QClone or a Nebula EQ sounds quite different no matter how much you try to match the settings. REQ is an algorithmic EQ but Qclone and Nebula use a convolution process, simply put they use samples of various other devices.
Funny enough, one could argue that in the past mixes were better, because the people used more their ears rather than the eyes as they do now, to determine various parameters which at the end do not solely affect sound as the human ear understands it. And while i do not stand behind this argument 100% you gotta admit it is some food for thought hehehe.
Cheers guys

 

Last edited: Mar 13, 2017

"....re emulations of analog gear and as such, they mimic the imperfections of their analog counterpart they cannot possibly sound the same....."


they are not mimicing imperfections they are modeling signal flow of analog components that add up to be a signal flow , many times that means a preamp which would be its own vst, a transformer, would be its own vst then the eq , so its not the eq that is so dramatically different it is these others that would be and are vst in their own right


"....Sound as we conceive it, is much more than a hz/volume curve on an XY axis. Therefore every eq may seem of just a slight difference when compared to other similar eqs..."


if they have different frequencies ,slope and Q that accounts for tiny difference

"...But for instance Waves REQ vs Waves QClone or a Nebula EQ sounds quite different no matter how much you try to match the settings. REQ is an algorithmic EQ but Qclone and Nebula use a convolution process, simply put they use samples of various other devices...."


of course you are comparing apples to oranges yes apples are not the same as oranges

"Funny enough, one could argue that in the past mixes were better, because the people used more their ears rather than the eyes as they do now, to determine various parameters which at the end do not solely affect sound as the human ear understands it. And while i do not stand behind this argument 100% you gotta admit it is some food for thought hehehe."

does not compute. are you saying that using your ears with a blindfold on so you cannot see yields better results than using both eyes AND ears?

 

if I want to talk about metal and rock , The mixes are much much better than before
I think It's all of using dsp vst plugins. Just listen and comparison 80s metal and now

 

Jesus, what a joke. $1000 for a parametric EQ. How are they even still in business? I find it practically impossible to believe that Red EQ could possibly be $800 better than Pro Q 2. In fact I know it's not, because the people in the world who could possibly hear a difference are so few that paying that much for a parametric EQ is (or seems to me) a purely masturbatory exercise.

And what a shit interface. For $1000 they could at least get a designer to give it a makeover from the basic Windows 95 grey window.

Sorry. I just get mad when I see stuff like this. These people are insane.

 

which is better? may because of graphic design, the workflow, and the price,
who was a programmer has reverse engineered every plugin you tried? to found that which has best algorithm
anyway I still believe there must have procedure to test the plug in technical ways,