I'd kinda forgotten about that plugin. TBProAudio makes good stuff, but always seemed kinda underrated. I have this running theory that when a company's full bundle of plugins is consistently released into the wild, people begin to look at them in a lesser light, even if they're quality. I'm not saying that this is everyone's reaction or that it's anything but a subconscious impression, but that's what I've seen over the years. Haha, especially with Voxengo... which, admittedly already has an uphill battle to fight with those generic-looking GUIs. I see where madbuzzin is coming from. Are a FET, Opto, and a VCA the same? It's a matter of one's opinion on the degree of similarity.
I was quite confused when I read the description, honestly. Not sure why or where I would want my tracks to be perfectly flat across the spectrum, that seems like it would ruin the characteristics/dynamics and create a "wall of sound" kind of effect. Gonna try it out though and maybe I'll have a better understanding hands-on.
I love their Trackspacer plugin, but this one looks like a glorified 3-band dynamic EQ. Most of the time I can see it doing a smiley face EQ. Might be useful in a few situations, but it's really disingenuous to imply that you should be mixing like this. UI looks really nice, though. Would take that instead of the usual metal plate with screws.
TEOTE gives tons of control, but I have no freaking clue what each of these ominously named parameters does. It's not the most user-friendly offering in that regard, even though I'm sure it can produce great results, once you get a grasp on how the controls work and interact with one another.
IIRC, a member once showed that Gullfoss works with only three band analysis while this one seem to have some more.
I'm curious too what's the purpose behind it on individual tracks? I understand that sometimes the same concept is used to remove resonances on individual tracks (and of course instrument busses), but I guess this only works if you don't overdo it. I sometimes use a similar approach in TDR Nova GE: using the Smart Ops you can make Nova compare the current signal to pink noise and then suggest a setting that will remove those frequencies poking out too much dynamically. Usuallly the suggestion has to be manually assessed and edited, but it's often a good starting point.
Since almost all the usual suspects for this kind of processing have been already mentioned in the thread, I will make an attempt to add another one. Guys, please check what Toneboosters Sibalance can do. It's more akin to a De-Esser, but ot also identifies and very smoothly removes resonances outside of the Ess-range. It's one of my go to tools for that kind of processing.
Idk guys I've never had better results using "auto EQs" vs just doing it myself. In fact, its worse generally due to pre ringing & general dynamics artifacts.
With maybe 5% of the controls. Although I often feel like the insane customizability matters only to the Melda incels over KVR who will skip sleep for 2 weeks just to prove they can come up with a preset in MTurboDildoizer that recreates exactly Gullfoss/Soothe/Intensity and sounds even better.
I tried it with default settings on several already perfectly EQ-ed files, including classical music. Seems like the developer used all known hidden tricks to make this EQ seem to always sound 'better'. 1. it uses obligatory boost of high and low end no matter the musical content 2. this inevitably boosts the gain (so it sounds 'better' because it is just louder) 3. seems like it uses waveshaping to add some punch and warmth. Its THD is appalling in any case. 4. changes the tilt (with 'Tilt' command set at zero) upwards to sound brighter 5. without any user knowledge or consent removes the DC offset (!) Who could make it up…
That's quite a mouthful... so I'll go with the most vague & subjective bit: clarify what warrants "appalling" THD? Incidentally, I'd bet that the DC offset "issue" isn't as much for auditory correction, as it is to insure accurate metering.
Almost all EQs make the signal sound louder without proper auto gain, which is why it's the most important feature to me in an EQ! As for DC offset removal, this is only an issue if they don't understand the nuances of removing it. Many companies make a highpass filter way too high up to where the phase shift becomes audible, such as 20hz with a steep slope. (Can effect a sub or a low kick) You can get away with having a highpass filter at 1hz with a 6db slope which completely removes DC offset, as shown here: (Meters for some reason have -243.9 as the minimum value after receiving an input signal for the first time) This is the resulting phase shift The phase shift is so minor, so low down that it's below 20hz, below the audible range for humans! I had to make the minimum frequency 10hz to even see it, at 20hz it isn't visible.
Even Neutron 4's Sculptor and Ozone's Stabilizer have more control than this thing. Gullfoss already exists, TEOTE on the same league but different tones. This adds nothing new. I don't see a reason a dev should spend time and effort to create something that already exists, with a very popular demand...
Appalling THD is measured @-40dB (with default settings) in Plugin Doctor. Added harmonic spectrum (includes odd and even harmonics) is @-60dB (typically). DC offset filtering is inbuilt, so the HPF is on whether or not the file has any DC offset at all. In such cases it just brings phase issues and slight sound blurring for no reason. And a decent plug-in should have AGC to compensate for gain changes influencing our perception of sound quality during our work. All in all, this plug-in is 'dirty'. Last edited by a moderator: Jul 8, 2023
I think you people know this already, but it seems like the "target curve" for the plugin is Pink Noise. Adding it to a Pink Noise test tone does close to nothing. So it basically make the tracks fed to it to the Pink Noise balance, dynamically because it doesn't do static EQing.
It is btw. a fallacy to think, that equalizing in a sense of "making the frequency spectrum flat" is going to bring the instruments into a tonal balance. Spectral balancing does not take into account any intrumental-characteristical aspect. It purely is painting by numbers with not taking into account the most important numbers. Last edited: Jul 8, 2023
Very interestingly, I made quite some different measurements: Spoiler: THD, Amount 50%, Autogain on Spoiler: THD, Amount100%, Autogain on Spoiler: Zero waveshaping, Amount 100%, Autogain on (BTW, the level is exactly the same in Bypass) Some audio Spoiler: non linear Fade 0 - 100% Spoiler: non linear Fade 0 - 100% with PerBandAmount correction Yes, it adjusts everything towards pink noise and therefore dialing 100% is useless in almost every case. For some sources I don't find it useful at all (drum room and OH), but with less Amount, Tilt and especially PerBandAmount correction I find it way more useful than Gullfoss. Towards because when you sweep with a bell through a pink noise, it's not compensated by 100% (rather less than 50%). Speaking of autogain, it can't work 100%, it's just in the nature of the beast. This one lowered in most cases the signal a bit.
I checked it in the video briefly, and it sounds good. It brings life to the music and tracks, but it would need to be tested because sometimes it sounds great in the video and then doesn't work well in your own projects. I'm seeing a wave of VSTs that 'automate' the work. I've seen others before, can't remember the name, and they are very good when you want something quick. I agree with other comments that if you want something quick and don't want to spend your time on tasks like equalizing and compressing, these plugins are your best ally. However, if you want to have your own EQ, your own compression, etc., these plugins won't be creative at all because they do the work for you. So I think it depends on each individual's needs and goals. Nevertheless, it seems, and I say 'seems' because I'm not sure, to be something different from other VSTs that perform the same task. It seems to have a different touch, being more precise when it comes to equalizing. We would need to see the price that the CPU pays for those computations
