I'm wondering what is the definition of a good Hardware Emulation EQ plugin to each of you here. Of course it's important for the plugin to sound as close as possible to their hardware counterpart, and ALL of us want them to be CPU friendly (Usage and Latency) so we can abuse it on every track.

1. Do you like it with the added features that most digital EQs have, (ie, Auto gain compensation, graphic visual) or it has to be 100% the same like the hardware with all the limitation, so it will give the feelings of using a real one.

2. GUI - is it important to look the same as the hardware ? faceplate, color, knobs. 100MB of graphic, 2Mb of code. A 1U rack design has to be one long horizontal plugin as long as it looks like the hardware.

3. Analog EQs are known to add harmonic content if boosted. The THD, is it important to you that an emulation get it right ? or you just want the frequency response, the EQ curve and realistic interaction between filters, phase etc but as clean (THD level) as possible ?

4. Passive EQ design sound highly characterized by the (tube) gain stage after the EQ stage which is done passively at unbalanced signal level, is it important for the emulation to excel at both stage ? or the final result is what truly important not how you get there ? ie, a plugin that sounds 100% like a Pultec even at flat setting but the EQ stage isn't capable of doing a Pultec at the extremes but do fairly well at normal settings.

5. Noise - Waves "Analog" that adds that 50/60Hz hum, is that necessary ? or it is good to have that choice ? or you think it is the main ingredient for the analog sound.

6. VU meter and calibration control - Not all EQ plugin out there has calibration feature. I like this one. Most of us like it -18db for hybrid mixing, some like the color RED.

7. Headroom control. Most of the emulations by brainworx have this. Also count as added feature.

8. It has to be able to produce something that it is impossible to null it down with Pro-Q3.

9. A good EQ must be something that improves the hardware designs, an updated version, better sounding. On steroid, not so much but a little.

10. There are EQs that use the IR of the hardware it emulates and doing the equalization digitally (not component modeling). And there's Acustica Audio doing their thing. Are this way of doing it acceptable if it produces good results ? or it has to be modeled component by component to stay true to the circuit and also get the good final result before it can be considered a good emulation ?

11. Or you'll open your wallet for anything Acustica Audio throw at you because you trust the brand.

12. Anything else I've missed, please share it with us.

I think all of the above are somehow important, but most of us can tolerate not having all but there are few that we think is a MUST for a EQ plugin to be considered as good. Good enough we would do unpaid promotion and suggest it to friends.

I hope I can learn something from this. Thanks in advance.


Edit : Corrected the grammar of the tittle. I've just noticed it had entirely different meaning. My native language is the upside-down/backward of English, so it's a little tricky. My bad.

 

Last edited: Mar 7, 2021

I practice scientific approach, use FabFilter and learn frequencies, everything else is snake oil

 

That seems a good approach, considering the amount of high-quality EQs out + coloration FX there are.
Using surgical EQ and then you can switch the mojo on and off and be sure it is not just your expectations, and if it sounds good, you can add it to your favorites.
Some may claim they need to be involved in the EQ process, because they are putting a spell on the Q-factor or it has to do with fibonacci sequences, or harmonics associated with Cardi B's birth date... With those you just have to close your eyes and trust.

But for EMULATIONS, which is the actual topic, I think clear controls are very important regardless of how well they image the originals. That, and smooth movement.

I also think they may have additional OPTIONS but should have nothing additional that can not be bypassed or turned off.

Often, emulation GUIs have wasted space and better knobs & sliders, along with additional feature switches is a good way to make use of real estate.

To me, dirty fingerprints and nicotine stains are unnecessary.

 

Last edited: Mar 6, 2021

the latest r2r gift: TRIDENT eqs are really nice too.

 

Personally, I would prefer no GUI at all, Airwindows style, that way I fully have to use my ears. Not even any meters, often times no Hz number, just a slider that goes from 0 to 1. That I know if I hear something good, it's because I hear it, not see it. I especially like that for compressors. If I can null it with Pro Q, get it out of here. It's got to add some harmonic content, or have an interesting way the bands and phases play with each other. If it doesn't have at least some digital quality of life improvements (at least an output gain knob I mean c'mon Trident), it's annoying but not a deal breaker. Don't really mind the method used to get there, as long as the end result is good. I don't even particularly care if it sounds exactly like the hardware they modelled, as long as it produced a good result. Every 1176 emulation sounds different anyways. The Waves noise thing is dumb as hell. The noise floor was the bane of analog existence, and now they want to introduce it back? Hard pass. The "deficit" of analog gear I really like, is the Brainworx TMT to add slight variance between instances. Ideally, the plugin would sound like the hardware, at moderate to extreme settings. But if it only sounds good at one, then that's fine and I'll just use it when that's what I need.

TL;DR, if it sounds good to me, I'm happy, regardless of the tech used, or the GUI. As long as I can't null with Pro Q, (or I can but it takes like 15 bands) I'm happy. Digital quality of life improvement are a huge plus, but not a deal breaker.

 

i really like the 2098 from brainworx. it sounds good in my opinion and between the thd and the m/s controls, it gives you a lot of possibilities

 

why would you emulate EQ when you can just EQ? ;) ;) ;) ;)

 

Clariphonic, Maag, Pultec & SSL emulations are pretty spiffy.

McDSP 6020 EQ, NI Solid Eq, Kuassa EVE, IK Mixbox are also cooh.

 

Waves H-EQ is a surprisingly good one,
ofc it cannot get anywhere close to DMG EQuilibrium in terms of Depth, Cleanness and overall Perfection.

But it has a sound of its own, adding some of that "Analog thing" in a very Correct/Polite way.
Also it's got a nice performance as it uses AVX CPU instructions.


Another interesting one is the Elysia Museq,
it's Subtle, not the most apparent/in your face thing, but it's got a Warm and very Musical sound.

In terms of Mastering, it could have been a little bit more Featured however (not too much bands),
but you could use another EQ/Process just for the Cuts, and let Museq do its thing..

 

Last edited: Mar 6, 2021

Solid State Logic (SSL) Native X-EQ 2 or just use the SSL Native Channelstrip v6....without a doubt!

 

An eq is used to filter or amplify different frequency bands of an audio signal.

But do you know the influences that this eq can have on the transients? the color, the saturation on the stereo, the width or the depth of this same signal?
Take 2 different eqs, apply the same treatment to the same loop (don't forget to the match the gain) and listen carefully, you will certainly be very surprised with the result.

Its not question of "which one is better", they are just different.
The 2 EQ will do the job but in a different way

 

So, you don't really use any of these EQ plugins that emulates hardware ? not even the MAAG ? (someone told me, everyone uses it, lol).

I agree about that one. I think the Lindell's are good EQs but the Analog switch somehow turns off everything, not just the noise. I'd rather have each switch, one for "noise" or another maybe for "mojo" all that black magic stuff.

 

Last edited: Mar 6, 2021

okay, this is the first time I hear this. Interesting. The stocks plugins in Reaper (such as the Stillwell that I like) are kinda buzzkill for some people for this exact reason and I don't know why they aren't bother to make a nice simple GUI for it, now I know that some like it to be like that.

I have no idea what they are thinking there, I mean those kind of EQs are best used for boosting and everyone would want a output knob. Sigh.

yeah, I sometimes use the analog noise for synth or digitally synthesized sound but prefer the TMT for those sort of purpose.

 

2 things I love about it, its extreme/flexible Q controls and all those options for shaping the high end in M/S.

 

Never really use H-EQ in a real project but I've tried it. It got some nice curve choices plus that one that look like a "Z" that I don't know its name. So it has some kind of analog mojo to it ? Didn't know that, gotta check back later.

 

Anything from IK Multimedia, from their 1173 to the pg one... if you ask me? top notch and they're my go to.

 

I agree, the interaction between these filters and how it responds differently when fed with the same signals at different level is sometimes what determines a character of certain famous EQ. These days, people like to run it STATIC through the Plugin Doctor and try to null it. If they manage to get it low enough to -60db or something, the EQ becomes invalid and snake oils. I'm having trouble understanding this really.

 

Last edited: Mar 6, 2021

I like the Master EQ-432 - I have no idea the sound of a real Sontec, but this one is so sweet it will do for me. The compressors, Precision and Dyna-Mu sound really good to me, I don't care if they don't sound like the hardware really, but it's good to me, and that's enough.

 

I'll also go to Clariphonic first before thinking of using any exciter. It feels a lot like it. The high-end tone is soooo goood.
Maag is industry/bedroom standard, everyone uses it! and they should.

 

Yeah, I heard good thing about the Elysia Museq but I don't know why I never use it, the GUI too small and looks like it have too many small knobs, guess GUI is important after all.