FL Parametric EQ 2 increased db range?

Discussion in 'FL Studio' started by LoveKavi, Feb 10, 2017.

  1. LoveKavi

    LoveKavi Kapellmeister

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    221
    Likes Received:
    72
    Location:
    London, UK.
    So I use the FL Parametric EQ 2 as my main EQ for most things. Simple, light on the CPU and works great.

    I also use Fabfilter Q-2 quite a bit too alongside the FL one.

    It views +18/-18 but on Fabfilter Q-2 I can change up to -30. Is there an option to increase the db range on the Parametric EQ 2?

    I guess I can just use Q-2 more often and my CPU/interface etc can handle many instances of it, but still I like FL's EQ 2 a lot and it's just more convenient for me.

    Thanks in advance!
     
  2.  
  3. SyNtH.

    SyNtH. Platinum Record

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2013
    Messages:
    388
    Likes Received:
    214
    Unfortunatly there isnt a increase view in dB for parametric 2 :( I think if you need an enlargened view, sharper filters & m/s proQ2 is the way to go, but for less precision, less steepness in filters i always use parametric, its so light on CPU and still very effective in most use cases. Lets hope they make a parametric 3 with some of those goodies. What you could also do is just use Voxengo SPAN on the selected channel, then you can zoom in super far, and still use parametric 2.
     
  4. LoveKavi

    LoveKavi Kapellmeister

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    221
    Likes Received:
    72
    Location:
    London, UK.
    Yeah exactly same as me! Pro Q2 is the main EQ but Parametric from IL just works in most cases for easy things.

    Thanks for the advice!
     
  5. solo83

    solo83 Producer

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2015
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    98
    Great post. But question, what sounds are you boosting or cutting past or below -15 to +15db? Seems like anything that high would create some funky resonance, especially with a sharp bell. Maybe that's the goal though, to get a resonance effect and use automation to sweep through the frequencies.
     
  6. superliquidsunshine

    superliquidsunshine Audiosexual

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2011
    Messages:
    2,818
    Likes Received:
    2,041
    Location:
    Everywhere at once but no place in particular
    Here is a tip for you all that don't have experience with hardware gear in comparison to their software counterparts, which of course you all do to some extent, so more so than others.

    This is just my opinion, mind you.

    Without argument the hardware, if at all decent, will boost a chosen group of frequencies with grace and will not damage it's charge with grit, grainyness, squeals or scrapey disrespect. Every vst will if you push them, some much less than others, but still they will. Where you will gain a vantage in the box is by doing something called subtractive equalization, that is, instead of boosting the frequencies that you wish to highlight, subtract everything that you don't. Since you won't be adding extra dBs everywhere it will make it much easier to balance things out in the end because you will inherit nice sweet headroom on your master which will make your production life so much easier. It will take some practice to get the hang of it but it is well worth your time.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
    • List
  7. RedThresh

    RedThresh Producer

    Joined:
    May 26, 2016
    Messages:
    300
    Likes Received:
    121
    Location:
    ITB
    100% agreed, but many people take this "rule" of substractive EQ too seriously and NEVER boost, which is also a mistake in my opinion.
     
  8. RedThresh

    RedThresh Producer

    Joined:
    May 26, 2016
    Messages:
    300
    Likes Received:
    121
    Location:
    ITB
    I might be mistaking but I remember some post on IL forums (not from GoL) about Parametric EQ3, it might be under development right now.

    The post was like "And what about Param EQ3? When?!" and the answer from some red IL dude was something like "Closer than you think ;) "
     
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2017
  9. LoveKavi

    LoveKavi Kapellmeister

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    Messages:
    221
    Likes Received:
    72
    Location:
    London, UK.
    ooo very Interesting. They'll be rivalling with maybe Logic's inbuilt M/S capable EQ.

    top tip!
     
  10. RedThresh

    RedThresh Producer

    Joined:
    May 26, 2016
    Messages:
    300
    Likes Received:
    121
    Location:
    ITB

    Yeah that's what I want first, even more than increased range, I have and love FF Pro-Q2 for M/S but the fact I can throw 52737 instances of Param EQ2 using 3% of my CPU but without M/S processing possibilities is unfortunate :bleh:
     
  11. Triple

    Triple Newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2014
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    2
    Question: Can you compare the sound quality of FF ProQ2 and FruityParametricEQ2 ?
     
    • Interesting Interesting x 1
    • List
  12. RedThresh

    RedThresh Producer

    Joined:
    May 26, 2016
    Messages:
    300
    Likes Received:
    121
    Location:
    ITB
    I'll do some more tests and tell you my hot appreciations when I'll get the time but right now I can tell you Pro Q is more "clean-ish", paramEQ is pure digital but it still adds something to the signal, I can't tell what right now. More concrete, it changes the phase of most signal, very slightly. You can hear it instantly when playing some heavy sub bass, then bypass one paramEQ and one Pro Q, ParamEQ changes the phase, you hear it instantly, you don't even need to check with some correlation meter. Pro Q do this too, but then you swap from Zero Latency Phase to Natural or Linear Phase and the "problem" disappear.

    These are the main differences I can recall. Also, as I need to mention it, Pro-Q is 100x times more precise and filled with tons of monitoring (visual and audio). But... It uses 10x more CPU. So what I do basically is using Param EQ most of the time in a composing/arranging project. For only slight cuts and boosts, then when I need more precise EQ, or M/S, or 32 bands EQ, etc, I go for Pro-Q. In the next steps (mixing project, mastering project), it will always be Pro-Q over Param EQ when wanting digital crystal clear EQ, for any applications.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads - Parametric increased range Forum Date
Sugar Audio releases: Oscarizor - parametric oscillator plugin Software News Feb 4, 2016
Loading...