@White Noise Studio Just a tip when analyzing aliasing in Plugin Dr, you'll want to make sure the plugin output isn't clipping, so lower the gain of the signal feeding it from PD and also 400Hz won't show you aliasing, you need to be up closer to nyquist to see the aliasing harmonics bouncing back down.
400 hz works perfectly fine as long as it hits the nyquest frequency in the end and feeds back. Closer to that frequency is obviously easier, but for full frequency display lower works excellent.
It would by interesting to listen to TDR Nova in comparison, because it is also a parallel EQ. There is even an EQ out there where can be switched between serial and parallel: IIEQ from DDMF.
Love this, and your videos. This is the spiritual successor to my beloved Air EQ (I wrote the manual for that). To have the EQ they used on Thriller. Yum!
The Pulsar Audio 8200 sits on my 2 bus, running mid side. Adding small corrections with it. Added features like De-esser, tilt, sub, air, and the M/S ability make it great for me. It expands the usefulness. I have almost every Pulsar Audio plug-in, and they've not let me down in quality. I did have to put Mu on the shelf as I got the UAD Manley Vari-Mu on sale.
Eiosis AirEQ Premium has the option to label frequency however it looks like Pulsar 8200 is more affordable, better looking and has more functionalities. I already own two of their plugins and maybe this will be the third 🤞
Th eAirEQ is also with the Slate subscription for those who are interested. Thanks for mentioning that one! But i don't think it's a parallel eq, right?
🧐 One would not think that EQ plug-ins would still be “a thing” anymore, yet somehow developers are indeed finding a way to create things that actually justify the effort. Fascinating. 🤷♂️
Sorry but they need take it beyond the hardware and offer things like steeper cut filters and frequency solo, especially for 150 bucks. The analog style interface with every knob at a glance would actually make it a great every day EQ but it needs more features.
Hey man please I beg u make a tutorial on the exact vocal mixing chain used in this video. I can’t explain u this is that electronic sound That Im trying to achieve from years but can’t. 🙏
🍀🎶 Every few days a new "Non plus ultra" plugin comes onto the market along with a "nicely laid out" RUclips tutorial. Most of us, for whom home recording is "just" a very committed hobby, easily fall into the belief that this or that new "super plugin" will take our music or production to another level. But that works basically also with the stock plugins of Cubase Pro. I suspect that most users underestimate Cubase Pro plugins or, lacking the necessary know-how, do not know how to use these plugins "correctly". But hope for this through the plugins from third parties. I now see it with a "healthy distance". Quite apart from that: In no time at all you have 500 or more plugins on your SSD - and which plugins do you really use?! Maybe a tenth. Or? 😅
This is plugin 1401 on my system ;-) You are absolutely right. It's very easy to get FOMO with all these new plugins. You do need some distance and keep a clear head and know what you use and why. That said, I also think it's very OK to learn about the latest and newest, otherwise I wouldn't have started this channel at all. But you don't need those to get work done for sure.
@@audiotoolshed I get that but how can you be sure that even the bandwidth values match? I've found differences in Q values between different digital EQ's, so when doing an A/B comparison, you'd want to be sure that when you're comparing each band in isolation that the gain and curves are matching. Of course there will be differences due to the parallel and serial nature of each EQ when the bands are all in together.
I wouldn't say that this EQ has more detail/focus. If you look under the hood you will see that this plugin has a natural hi pass cut already set in the algorithm at around 20hz. This is a hard-coded cut therefore it gives the illusion that it is sharper in detail/focus. The other EQs are leaving simply leaving the low-end untouched which is fooling our perception of the high-end. Much respect though because it would take some level of great ears to notice the difference in the first place. I dare say, that if you had matches the soft hi pass filter along with the Bell EQ curves for your illustration, the EQs would fairly sound more or less the same (regarding detail/focus). In my honest opinion, for specific reasons), I think it's the perfect EQ for bass synth or bass guitar tracks (if you are looking for a cleaner sound). It's pretty amazing as a cleaner all-arounder mono EQ where you would be cutting the lows anyway.
@@audiotoolshed I do understand that three plugins are coded to process definitely and I'm not trying to be argumentative at all. I have have high regard and much respect for your Channel. Thank you for replying back by the way!!! All I am saying is that you can match the 🔔 curves & gain to be exact; which would put you at deviating gains and Q's of either EQ to get an exact match, 8200 will always sound sharper & more focused because it has a hard-coded high pass in its permanent EQ curve. The other two EQs used in this demonstration do not have this same hard-coded high pass cut. Therefore, no matter how much you match the 🔔s gain & Q of any EQ, they will always sound flabby compared to 8200; unless you incorporate a high-pass filter to match the hard-coded EQ curve 8200 on the EQ you are comparing. This is simply because the other EQs are leaving the low end untouched. Bertom or Plugin Doctor will show you this.
I don't mind a little talk about this at all :-) I won't argue the hardcoded highpass of the 8200, it's below 20Hz. But my point is, that even if you match eq curves, there will also be the difference between having eq in series or in parallel. The way those are summed is different which causes different behavior and with that a different sound. With a regular serial eq, each eq band will influence the other band to an extent. With a parallel eq, they do not. You can hear that in action on the synths I showed, they do not have anything going below basically 50 or even 80hz. And I fully agree that this EQ will be great on bass instruments, even in mastering.
@@audiotoolshed I totally get it. However, I think you would get just about the same results or affect regarding focus and sharpness, if you compare the two serial EQs, and engaged a low pass filter at its lowest setting (say around 10 to 15hz) 6-18dB Octave, and then A/B the differences.
@@cardpuller17 I haven't demoed it yet. I love their Pulsar Massive. You should try to demo it first before listening to a random guy on the internet like me. Haha. Anyway, TDR products are high quality , good choice!
Acustica has a very strong devoted fanbase. i usually take it with a grain of salt. Also, green really is a different unit than just a pulsar 8200 emulation , it adds a ton upon the clean sound of a 8200 - acustica style.
@@audiotoolshed I see. I actually own every plugin from Pulsar, though. Mixing with Mike, on the other hand, praises the 8200. I'll buy it anyway coz I do like Pulsar.
Dirk Ulrich stated that the Amek 200 is inspired by his own 8200 but not a 1:1 emulation! Tonight I'm gonna use bertom eq curve analyzer to create the same exact curve with all three Eq's to see if this is worth buying for me. Also gonna add Acustica Audio Green to the list as well.
The big ''issue'' with the Mmek 200/250 is the TMT they have on it. It really randomizes curve shapes, the actual frequency ( !), and q width. I did a shootout between the 200 and 250 and could get eq curves so close that they as well could have been 1 plugin instead of 2.
Wow, Pulsar really have gone all out and paid a lot of content creators/youtubes to do paid promo's on launch of their new plugin. Try the plugins, don't take any paid youtubers word for anything. They often will not disclose that it's a paid review/content video.
Wow, I have never seen so much false assumptions in a comment on a video of a channel who disclosed its sponsorships on all of its videos. Stop your conspiracies and go do something useful with your time. I’ll leave your comment up for everyone to laugh at.
i would laugh at how triggered you are about that comment... i am pro pulsar audio, but the commenter has a point, a really good one too looking at the state of RUclips reviewers nowadays. its not a conspiracy at this point.@@audiotoolshed
i dont think this is a good aproach for a comparisson, you shouldn't try to match the settings, instead you should try to match the eq curves or do it by ear and find if you can match the sound.
It's good to do both I think. Good to know how the curves and frequencies react differently to the same settings as the labels aren't always accurate. But also good to know if it's necessary to get a new plugin as you can usually get very close to null, even though it might take slightly different settings.
Don't forget that part of the utility of an EQ plugin is how good the curves sound by default, without needing to spend 5 minutes fiddling with the Q and adding extra bell filters to customize the shape every time you want to set a boost or cut.
I haven't tried it yet but I've been waiting for a discount price. But I love Amek 200, 250. Sontec 432, Soma, Massive. Do I need another? Yes, I think so 😅😅😅
I will explain the problem to you and everyone.The equalizer absolutely copies fabfilter proq3 and at the same time there is no overlap of spectra and the graphical interface is more loaded and visually works poorly, and finally the strongest minus when loading 5-10 instances, your CPU will not thank you, which fabfilter does not have.Just compare and everything will become clear.Most of the equalizers are just marketing.Even!If they emulate hardware for you in the modern world, it's not so important anymore!
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
What is your favorite EQ this year?
I swear this baby is amazing but Pulsar Modular P440 is not from this world 🙏
Acustica Audio Gold Equalizer
@@blackorangegraphite Acustica's Green is modelled on this Eq unit, so a shootout between them would make more sense to me..
dspplug boardstation every year. graphic equalizers for the win
Acustica's green...Kirchhoff...
@White Noise Studio Just a tip when analyzing aliasing in Plugin Dr, you'll want to make sure the plugin output isn't clipping, so lower the gain of the signal feeding it from PD and also 400Hz won't show you aliasing, you need to be up closer to nyquist to see the aliasing harmonics bouncing back down.
400 hz works perfectly fine as long as it hits the nyquest frequency in the end and feeds back. Closer to that frequency is obviously easier, but for full frequency display lower works excellent.
It would by interesting to listen to TDR Nova in comparison, because it is also a parallel EQ. There is even an EQ out there where can be switched between serial and parallel: IIEQ from DDMF.
It absolutely would make sense, the ameks of plugin alliance are parallel as well.
DDMF always makes plugins which are clever.
Equilibrium too, parallel/serial choice and even 8200 modeled curves.
Love this, and your videos. This is the spiritual successor to my beloved Air EQ (I wrote the manual for that). To have the EQ they used on Thriller. Yum!
Fabfilter and pulsar audio are pretty much my top brands for digital eqs and compresors
The Pulsar Audio 8200 sits on my 2 bus, running mid side. Adding small corrections with it. Added features like De-esser, tilt, sub, air, and the M/S ability make it great for me. It expands the usefulness.
I have almost every Pulsar Audio plug-in, and they've not let me down in quality.
I did have to put Mu on the shelf as I got the UAD Manley Vari-Mu on sale.
The TDR Nova dynamic EQ (which can be operated in non-dynamic mode) also does parallel EQ (the bands are not in series).
Thanks!
How about the cpu usage?
about 3-4% on my pc with low latency settings.
Eiosis AirEQ Premium has the option to label frequency however it looks like Pulsar 8200 is more affordable, better looking and has more functionalities. I already own two of their plugins and maybe this will be the third 🤞
Th eAirEQ is also with the Slate subscription for those who are interested. Thanks for mentioning that one! But i don't think it's a parallel eq, right?
@@audiotoolshed it's not
🧐 One would not think that EQ plug-ins would still be “a thing” anymore, yet somehow developers are indeed finding a way to create things that actually justify the effort. Fascinating. 🤷♂️
I think it will never be done :-)
Great stuff - thanks for this one... subscribed, thought I had before...!
the GML 8200 was such a staple in studios back in the 90s when I got started, I didn't know it at the time as a green assistant...
Yeah it has been. Parallel Clean EQ back in the day was quite something.
Really nice comparison !
Thanks!
I love that song push me away what remix is this one?
Sorry but they need take it beyond the hardware and offer things like steeper cut filters and frequency solo, especially for 150 bucks. The analog style interface with every knob at a glance would actually make it a great every day EQ but it needs more features.
Great points!
Good review man
Thanks dude!
Hey man please I beg u make a tutorial on the exact vocal mixing chain used in this video. I can’t explain u this is that electronic sound That Im trying to achieve from years but can’t. 🙏
You mean the female singer part?
@@audiotoolshed YESSS 😭😭😮💨
🍀🎶
Every few days a new "Non plus ultra" plugin comes onto the market along with a "nicely laid out" RUclips tutorial.
Most of us, for whom home recording is "just" a very committed hobby, easily fall into the belief that this or that new "super plugin" will take our music or production to another level. But that works basically also with the stock plugins of Cubase Pro.
I suspect that most users underestimate Cubase Pro plugins or, lacking the necessary know-how, do not know how to use these plugins "correctly". But hope for this through the plugins from third parties. I now see it with a "healthy distance". Quite apart from that: In no time at all you have 500 or more plugins on your SSD - and which plugins do you really use?! Maybe a tenth. Or? 😅
This is plugin 1401 on my system ;-)
You are absolutely right. It's very easy to get FOMO with all these new plugins. You do need some distance and keep a clear head and know what you use and why.
That said, I also think it's very OK to learn about the latest and newest, otherwise I wouldn't have started this channel at all.
But you don't need those to get work done for sure.
@@audiotoolshed Thank you, that's right, I understand you and your vision, your intention.🍀🎶
$59 loyalty offer yeah it is worth it. SMASHER!
On vocals , i use Plugin alliance maag eq4. Do you say this one is better ?
Not necessarily no. Maag eq 4 is a good one.
@White Noise Studio how did you match the settings between each EQ? Was it by values only or did you match the curves and gain in Plugin Dr?
It’s not about matching but showing the differences between parallel and serial eq in this video.
@@audiotoolshed I get that but how can you be sure that even the bandwidth values match? I've found differences in Q values between different digital EQ's, so when doing an A/B comparison, you'd want to be sure that when you're comparing each band in isolation that the gain and curves are matching. Of course there will be differences due to the parallel and serial nature of each EQ when the bands are all in together.
Just bought Kirchoff Eq last week, no more room at the Inn for this fella
And probably broke as well ;-)
@@audiotoolshed Absolutely 💯 😂
I wouldn't say that this EQ has more detail/focus. If you look under the hood you will see that this plugin has a natural hi pass cut already set in the algorithm at around 20hz. This is a hard-coded cut therefore it gives the illusion that it is sharper in detail/focus. The other EQs are leaving simply leaving the low-end untouched which is fooling our perception of the high-end. Much respect though because it would take some level of great ears to notice the difference in the first place.
I dare say, that if you had matches the soft hi pass filter along with the Bell EQ curves for your illustration, the EQs would fairly sound more or less the same (regarding detail/focus).
In my honest opinion, for specific reasons), I think it's the perfect EQ for bass synth or bass guitar tracks (if you are looking for a cleaner sound). It's pretty amazing as a cleaner all-arounder mono EQ where you would be cutting the lows anyway.
No the detail some from the parallel
Vs serial eq. That’s what I point out in the video.
@@audiotoolshed I do understand that three plugins are coded to process definitely and I'm not trying to be argumentative at all. I have have high regard and much respect for your Channel. Thank you for replying back by the way!!!
All I am saying is that you can match the 🔔 curves & gain to be exact; which would put you at deviating gains and Q's of either EQ to get an exact match, 8200 will always sound sharper & more focused because it has a hard-coded high pass in its permanent EQ curve. The other two EQs used in this demonstration do not have this same hard-coded high pass cut. Therefore, no matter how much you match the 🔔s gain & Q of any EQ, they will always sound flabby compared to 8200; unless you incorporate a high-pass filter to match the hard-coded EQ curve 8200 on the EQ you are comparing. This is simply because the other EQs are leaving the low end untouched.
Bertom or Plugin Doctor will show you this.
I don't mind a little talk about this at all :-) I won't argue the hardcoded highpass of the 8200, it's below 20Hz.
But my point is, that even if you match eq curves, there will also be the difference between having eq in series or in parallel. The way those are summed is different which causes different behavior and with that a different sound. With a regular serial eq, each eq band will influence the other band to an extent. With a parallel eq, they do not.
You can hear that in action on the synths I showed, they do not have anything going below basically 50 or even 80hz.
And I fully agree that this EQ will be great on bass instruments, even in mastering.
@@audiotoolshed I totally get it. However, I think you would get just about the same results or affect regarding focus and sharpness, if you compare the two serial EQs, and engaged a low pass filter at its lowest setting (say around 10 to 15hz) 6-18dB Octave, and then A/B the differences.
I'm a little skeptical that you can hear below 20 Hz, with your monitoring setup and with your ears.
Great plugin 🙂
I agree!
6:49 Eiosis Air Eq
Thanks!
AirEQ has had that type in your own band names feature years ago.
bro, you could compare it with TDR Nova but you chose to compare it with serial EQ. 😥
Yeah to show the difference between serial and parallel eqs. That's the whole point.
@@audiotoolshed alright, got it. It will look bad against the Nova GE though.
@gh0stransist0r I just bought Nova and Slick M.
Thanks for sharing your knowledge before I bought this too.
@@cardpuller17 I haven't demoed it yet. I love their Pulsar Massive. You should try to demo it first before listening to a random guy on the internet like me. Haha. Anyway, TDR products are high quality , good choice!
@@audiotoolshed🤣
The other RUclipsr compared pulsar 8200 vs. AA Green 4 and Green 4 won in public opinion. That made me think twice before buying this.
Acustica has a very strong devoted fanbase. i usually take it with a grain of salt.
Also, green really is a different unit than just a pulsar 8200 emulation , it adds a ton upon the clean sound of a 8200 - acustica style.
@@audiotoolshed I see. I actually own every plugin from Pulsar, though. Mixing with Mike, on the other hand, praises the 8200. I'll buy it anyway coz I do like Pulsar.
I want some new Fx plugins
They'll come !
The most important compare Is with Amek 250 and 200, birn as clone of gml8200 and its hw clone by Sontec
Yeah probably. Wasn’t the intention of this video.
Dirk Ulrich stated that the Amek 200 is inspired by his own 8200 but not a 1:1 emulation! Tonight I'm gonna use bertom eq curve analyzer to create the same exact curve with all three Eq's to see if this is worth buying for me. Also gonna add Acustica Audio Green to the list as well.
The big ''issue'' with the Mmek 200/250 is the TMT they have on it. It really randomizes curve shapes, the actual frequency ( !), and q width. I did a shootout between the 200 and 250 and could get eq curves so close that they as well could have been 1 plugin instead of 2.
@@audiotoolshed also came to the same conclusion. Harmonics are also the same. Not sure why they are two plugins- probably for $$
Wow, Pulsar really have gone all out and paid a lot of content creators/youtubes to do paid promo's on launch of their new plugin. Try the plugins, don't take any paid youtubers word for anything. They often will not disclose that it's a paid review/content video.
Wow,
I have never seen so much false assumptions in a comment on a video of a channel who disclosed its sponsorships on all of its videos. Stop your conspiracies and go do something useful with your time. I’ll leave your comment up for everyone to laugh at.
i would laugh at how triggered you are about that comment... i am pro pulsar audio, but the commenter has a point, a really good one too looking at the state of RUclips reviewers nowadays. its not a conspiracy at this point.@@audiotoolshed
Its not the tool its your ear !
Always.
i dont think this is a good aproach for a comparisson, you shouldn't try to match the settings, instead you should try to match the eq curves or do it by ear and find if you can match the sound.
Looking forward to see your video on it!
@@audiotoolshed sorry i didn't pretend to disparage your work, i think it is a good video!
:-) No worries man!
It's good to do both I think. Good to know how the curves and frequencies react differently to the same settings as the labels aren't always accurate. But also good to know if it's necessary to get a new plugin as you can usually get very close to null, even though it might take slightly different settings.
Don't forget that part of the utility of an EQ plugin is how good the curves sound by default, without needing to spend 5 minutes fiddling with the Q and adding extra bell filters to customize the shape every time you want to set a boost or cut.
kirchhoff is the King 🕺💃
Kinda true..
I haven't tried it yet but I've been waiting for a discount price. But I love Amek 200, 250. Sontec 432, Soma, Massive. Do I need another? Yes, I think so 😅😅😅
Nope. There's a reason why everything is compared to fabfilter pro-q. Just copying the interface and adding a few more analog curves won't cut it.
I will explain the problem to you and everyone.The equalizer absolutely copies fabfilter proq3 and at the same time there is no overlap of spectra and the graphical interface is more loaded and visually works poorly, and finally the strongest minus when loading 5-10 instances, your CPU will not thank you, which fabfilter does not have.Just compare and everything will become clear.Most of the equalizers are just marketing.Even!If they emulate hardware for you in the modern world, it's not so important anymore!
I heard no difference between proq3 and 8200.
It's there. Listen to the smearing of the higher frequencies and how the pro-q3 has more 4 to 6khz presence.
Meh. ProQ 3 is still king.
definitely not
ruclips.net/video/wnd1NzV51Zk/видео.html
kirchhoff is the new king. long live the old king