If you don't have the ear training yet, I think these are great. They seem tastefully judged as not to over do things like a beginner would, so if you want to be fast I think they would be fine to lean on.
I actually like that it is not doing too much, my fear with these plugins is that they will make everything sound the same. Like shaping it he 'correct sound' based on the average of all the fed data. I wonder is if it would work well with a more coloring EQ in front of it, just cleaning up after you've creatively wet all out so to speak.
Great video and COOL plugin. This plugin (and others like it) to my ears are great 'helpers'. For me as a creator/composer... it takes a LOT of steps out of my work. And I noticed with this one, in the end... it makes 'smarter' EQ moves than I tend to comprehend. Specifically, I noticed that it added clarity to certain sonic aspects of a master... without adding harshness or unpleasantness. 🙂
I just got the demo after hearing about it on RUclips and I tried it out over a guitar clean lead I had some processing on already and sure enough it grabbed what I was trying to get rid of with 3 plugins and made it go away....I'm astonished.
I thought immediately this seems exactly like their Balancer EQ, and it also sounds the same and has the same warm/bright options. The only functional difference is the highpass and lowpass effect to change the frequencies its affecting.
This sounds like a plugin that would help speed up the process when mixing less than optimal tracks. However I think the smart options are a better Alternative
It seems like what people want is to not have to mix music? Is that what all of these tools are for? I get it if you’re not a mixer, but as a mixer, do people just want to turn a knob and have it be done?
Also, thanks for acknowledging the importance of tools like this for producers, beat makers and musicians that usually have limited time, tools, expertise and budgets. 🙏🏾
From what I could understand, clarity is something that they are both aiming at; but they do it in different ways. The Wavesfactory one aims to equalise the levels across the frequency spectrum (so, bass to treble, say), with some tweaking options. Sonible is listening to the input and assessing it via the instrument type to provide a suggested EQ to achieve the result you've selected. It is focused on clarity and dynamic range, I think. You'd have to demo them to see what works on your music and with your workflow. There might be cases where you like what one gives you and not the other, like both differently, or don't like either! But they are both likely to give you something most of the time that sounds pretty slick without much work.
for non-engineers it's probably a cool simple and fast tool. The eq to end our SSL or API Og ProQ.. well.. not even close. but for producers and artists thwt just focus on creating MUSIC, I'm sure they could be useful.
Oh no, does it still use Linear Phase ? this thing might destroy many mixes with its hard to hear Linearphase artifacts. It happend to me that i used the first Version of this AutoEq, and carefully set it right (so i thought) . Months later i realized that Linear Phase over the whole Signal destroys the Vibe.. Absolutely dangerous this thing.. THATS JUST MY OPPINION. IF you think you feel diffeent about Linear Phase, ok..
I think these plugins are much more useful on guitar chords and thick piano chords; I've noticed they can usually get you clarity more easily than traditional methods if the music itself is dynamic and has more range.
Hey Wytse, I don't know if you read and reply to all comments, but since you are in contact with sonible I wanted to ask something. Sonible trains their AI (or Machine Learning Model) with a lot of very well curated kicks/snares/..., so the model learns what the average of a sonic spectrum looks like for a kick and then adjusts the target curve in the plugin to it. But imagine one day i mix a techno kick with rootkey A and the next day a rock kick in another key. At what point does the model realize, "Oh okay, this is techno in key A so the curve has to look like this and ah wait this is a rock kick it has to be like this." So at what point does the model infer the genre or key? Because that's how I mix the kick (at least that's how I do it). At least when I try to explain "scientifically" why I do the mixing so or differently. Does this happen during the "record" phase? I guess that will be a bit of the corporate secret of Sonible ^^. As I am training neural networks (machine learning a.k.a. AI) at my research group to classify/segment medical image data (3d and 2d) I know how complex it is to find data to learn. However, I would really like to know how specifically the target curves are adapted to the genre/key or how and if differences play a role at all. Best regards well that was a long one...
I got the Fast bundle after watching your video and it's great. Funny thing I use the Reveal one for sidechain ducking the most because it's so quick to pick the percentage of ducking you want and Boom!
Ozone 11 just got out. and i gotta say the stabilizer and the clarity module can do similar things to this but much better. not to take a dump on sonible. but sonibles auto EQs aren't too great.
@@GadesChannel and then there are tools like gullfoss among others. doesn't matter which came first. what matters is which is the best tool for the job in the present.
i have used smart EQ2 and smart comp which ever number it is now. the one good thing about smart comp is the adjustable attack and release curves. the smart EQ is not neutral sounding enough so it never replaced regular EQs for me in any way. Gullfoss was the first one which sounded good to me. but now i use ozone stabilizer in cut mode to keep resonances in check and clarity for well clarity on more difficult sounds where i need dynamic EQing and then i use a normal EQ for the broad strokes. But sure this sonible tool is targeting specific instruments instead where the curves it tries to match to are based on an average. which rarely gets the result you need. It can help a beginner sure, but it doesn't help to just clean a sound up to make it ready for the creative EQ which comes after. @@GadesChannel
In principle, it doesnt seem very different to the waves factory equilizer that got a bad review on this channel. It's applying a dynamic eq adjustment to certain bands based on the content its listening to. The only difference is the waves factory plugin seems to adjust around a pink noise curve (fletcher munson) where this is going off adjustments that appears to come from a your old college "cheat sheet" EQ settings.
What a birthday present =] Yeah, I think of the pure line as getting something "quick and dirty" or getting a professional result quickly. In fact, I use the pure:limit in my work-in-progress mixes just to get it at a "normal volume" or "close to master" level. And yeah, if I need something specific, then I use other tools including the smart line. I remember the thing you liked about smart:comp2 was more tweaking options for the compressors, especially in the knee shape. And yeah, that is a great trade-off where you are not spending hours and hours "getting the sound" and you can either work on more material or enhance material that's already there with other things.
It doesn't take hours to slap on a channel plugin like sheps and actually do your job right. More like 30 seconds. This is for amateurs who want to stay amateurs.
@@PeterSavad Yes, seasoned professionals and people who are not particular about their sound don't take very long to set up an EQ. But even if you are in that category, there is something to be said about saving any time when working on a project, even if it is seconds =]
As you say Wytse the sonible Pure: range is great for writing/'producing' , getting a decent sound on the fly while 'trying ro be creative' ... The nice people at Sonible sent me a 'Loyalty Discount' this morning. Difficult to refuse with G.A.S. like mine ...
I’m super curious how this compares to all the other auto eq stuff out there, gullfoss and TEOTE and equalizer by wavesfactory. They each approach autoeqing slightly differently and this one seems more focused on giving you a musically useful curve for creative use where the others focus on pushing your frequency balance closer to noise or a flat response. How would pure eq, gullfoss and equalizer all compare on a mix bus? In individual tracks? On speech? Are different ones better for different uses? Is one clearly superior in all ways? Do they disagree about how to fix something like a muddy snare? Super curious
I’m wondering if this new pure eq didn’t come out with the other “pure series” plugins a few months ago because they’ve been working on a new eq algorithm or learning model, and it’s not the same one that’s in smart eq3. Is smart eq4 around the corner? Offering a more hands on, “big boy” approach to the limited nature of this plug-in, like pure eq is a beta test for the new learning model, allowing them to collect data and fix bugs before fusing it with smart eq and then releasing an eventual update to that? And while I’m on the subject, anyone hear anything about a fabfilter pro-q 4? I imagine most of this will be irrelevant when favfilter reveals that their next eq will also have an ai-trained auto-eq function that blows all the rest out of the water and makes every other brand l irrelevant again for a few years like pro-q 3 did.
For me, this is more like a toy. I can see that it may be cool for producers who don't want to spend too much effort into eqing/mixing. But then still, in my point of view it's just lazyness at the end, wanting fast results with minimal effort. Even for beginners I would recommend a real eq, to learn things and frequencies. this also helps in producing.
We don’t mix in solo. Right? We know what we “can” do to a kick. I’m into plugins like Fuser by Mastering the Mix that do this kind of thing but also use the AI to align phase with kick samples and potential volume and dynamic ducking with bass etc… Cheers!
Im not a audio engineer many things go far beond my understanding, Ive been tinkering with audio recording in the past but never really seriously enough. The thing is audioengineers are like magicians to me, im to dumb to understand even when its explained well. Sound is complicated because of many things , like f.e. Loudness curves depend on frequency, deci-bells are non liniar and tons more. But the special sauce is the personal side as well, the feel of a mix is highly down to personal preferences of the SE. Its complicated, but im intrigued to try understand the magic of SE/ AE.
it's interesting. but I still think you'd still need to use another eq with it (or not use the sonible one at all). But I don't think this plug in would be useful for me.
What I don't hear anyone talking about is if you need pure:eq if you own smart:eq. It seems to me they do the same thing, but pure has a simpler interface.
This looks to be pretty much identical to that module that's in Ozone (I can't remember what it's called, I don't have Ozone). Like the Ozone module, it looks the refresh rate on this isn't very fast compared to something like Gullfoss, which when I was trying Ozone made me really not like it very much as it's constantly flipping between different EQ curves in an annoyingly audible way making it sound pretty weird. Great in theory, not so great in practice.
How far are we of an AI EQ that can analyze several instruments at the same time to find the “perfect” spot and balance for each one of them within the mix?…
AI is making our job obsolete. I do a lot of live capture recording so this EQ would be a tremendous time saver for getting performance evaluations out to clients. The most recent event was over 3 hours long with a 10 piece swing jazz ensemble. I find the sonible plugins to be great time savers for getting the mixes to the client.
This isn't Ai. This is just dynamic EQ matching to predetermined reference curves based on the average of bunch of a category of sounds. Not too different from spectral compression.
It isn't just audio. I am a hardware development engineer and AI can already do a lot. It isn't ready for prime time yet, but I could see a scenario in 10 years or so where big parts of my job can be done by an AI trained software. I already use it some to generate code rather than look through a 500 page technical manual for a specific thing.
@@Fastvoice Everyone that makes a plugin that has an automated process is calling it AI. It's marketing. Some actually use Ai but this is not ai, this is making spectrum grabs similar to eq matching and making it dynamic and multiband with a whole lot of bands. it doesn't take ai to do this. It's like saying eq matching is ai. It's just reading the level of each frequency band and adapting it to a reference target which comes from an average of lets say, a bunch of snare drums. or a bunch of vocals. it helps to give you a starting point so to speak. but it may not match your particular song unless you can load a referense sample of your own into it for it to match to. when its matching dynamically it retains more of the original sound which usually sounds better than a static eq matching.
Listening on Magnepan LRS the kick wasn't impressive, snare was better, hihat wasn't good, full drumkit okay, but I prefer izotope neutron... 🤔 (Spectral shape)
It's a cool little eq plugin that precisely and instantly enhance frequency for both bus or individual tracks. BUT, cpu usage and latency are just MASSIVE.... I think it's because of the dynamic eq mechanism, but it's just too much to use more than 2-3 instances within my capacity. I wish youtube reviewers point out this issue so Sonible can improve on its cpu usage.
Год назад
I don't trust this bundle. I use it on my vocal and it worked. But i add one more and guess what, it do the samething a gain
I guess another problem is if they helped focusrite, it would be a bad move to give the same as them... an insult to the union. It's probably a business thing.
tbh i dont get this one, it's aimed at producers but generates about 150ms of latency without a ZL mode. devs if you aim to serve producers make sure plugins dont generate more than 1ms latency
I fully hated smart:eq, I bought pure:comp after watching MixbusTV’s video, loved it for a one knob comp. Bit the bullet on the full smart bundle, they lasted a week on my machine. Sonible gets so much praise but those plugins didn’t sit right with me whatsoever, buggy, the AI stuff was meh, and I didn’t find a single instance where I preferred the EQ, not a single source I preferred with it. The one knob ones seem cool though, and the true:balance stuff is very handy, but ironically their bigger brothers really aren’t for me.
yea that's why demos are important. might look and seem cool but only trying it for real you'll be able to tell if it's worth the money. i guess i'm too used to doing weird stuff on my music cause all these AI plugins don't really do what i have in mind for a sound, that or my bias is showing
Seems pretty cool, but for beginners using this they would never learn to EQ properly. A great video would be to take a song you already mixed, then use these AI tools for EQ, comp, limiting and mix/master it again and compare.
For god's sake !! . . . turn tool tips off when demoing a plugin, it's really hard to follow what you're doing when there are random text boxes constantly popping up in the UI.
Mix Engineer feedback: put it in the bin. This isn't Mixing. Mixing is an Artform. If you went to see a band and the guitarist and singer pressed a button and a bot played back bland garbage, you would not buy that record. This sort of rubbish is like saying you won Duke Nukem with cheat codes. Ya didn't win nuttin'. You still can't really play the game, you can just fool yourself.
Yes, it does add latency. But unlike pure:limit (which I only add and use as one of the mastering tools after everything is recorded and mixed) you can get rid of it by simply deactivating the plugin without removing it completely from the track. So you can let it sit on the track and just activate it when you start a control replay.
Isn't really a viable option in projects with a large track count. Having to remember to engage/disengage 30 or more instances is at best cumbersome, and introduces lots of chances for errors. I don't understan why this has so much latency, and its big brother SmartEQ - with more features - has none@@Fastvoice
Yep, i was going to buy this but since i only record and mix real drums, and there were only demo's from Sonible using crappy fake drums and computerbleebs-dj-rubbish i was waiting for a decent review! So i just spend € 19,15 for this baby:). Thanks! Wietse doet altijd zinnige dingen;).
If you don't have the ear training yet, I think these are great. They seem tastefully judged as not to over do things like a beginner would, so if you want to be fast I think they would be fine to lean on.
I actually like that it is not doing too much, my fear with these plugins is that they will make everything sound the same. Like shaping it he 'correct sound' based on the average of all the fed data. I wonder is if it would work well with a more coloring EQ in front of it, just cleaning up after you've creatively wet all out so to speak.
Great video and COOL plugin. This plugin (and others like it) to my ears are great 'helpers'. For me as a creator/composer... it takes a LOT of steps out of my work. And I noticed with this one, in the end... it makes 'smarter' EQ moves than I tend to comprehend. Specifically, I noticed that it added clarity to certain sonic aspects of a master... without adding harshness or unpleasantness. 🙂
I just got the demo after hearing about it on RUclips and I tried it out over a guitar clean lead I had some processing on already and sure enough it grabbed what I was trying to get rid of with 3 plugins and made it go away....I'm astonished.
I thought immediately this seems exactly like their Balancer EQ, and it also sounds the same and has the same warm/bright options. The only functional difference is the highpass and lowpass effect to change the frequencies its affecting.
Yep i thought so too. The pure EQ also has the dynamic option. But the processing might be exactly the same?!
@@cal1music65 According to sonible it's a further development of balancer.
i am curious how a full song mixed by the smart function wil sound like
This sounds like a plugin that would help speed up the process when mixing less than optimal tracks. However I think the smart options are a better Alternative
It seems like what people want is to not have to mix music? Is that what all of these tools are for? I get it if you’re not a mixer, but as a mixer, do people just want to turn a knob and have it be done?
conclusion was funny, loved this vid gives me much more confidence in sonible as ive not tested them yet ! thank you !
Thanks for your videos. What is the difference between Smart and pure?
What is this one doing differently than Wavesfactory Equalizer? Is there an advantage in combining them?
Also, thanks for acknowledging the importance of tools like this for producers, beat makers and musicians that usually have limited time, tools, expertise and budgets. 🙏🏾
From what I could understand, clarity is something that they are both aiming at; but they do it in different ways. The Wavesfactory one aims to equalise the levels across the frequency spectrum (so, bass to treble, say), with some tweaking options. Sonible is listening to the input and assessing it via the instrument type to provide a suggested EQ to achieve the result you've selected. It is focused on clarity and dynamic range, I think.
You'd have to demo them to see what works on your music and with your workflow. There might be cases where you like what one gives you and not the other, like both differently, or don't like either! But they are both likely to give you something most of the time that sounds pretty slick without much work.
Trying out both together now :) @@BF-up5xw
Why would I use this over gulfoss? All these auto EQs just seem to be all gulfoss clones. I'd love to see a video that compares them all vs. gulfoss.
Mooie video, ik heb de Focusrite fast bundel. Volgens mij is dit dan geen toegevoegde waarde denk ik. Misschien dat ik ze wel even ga uitproberen😊
for non-engineers it's probably a cool simple and fast tool.
The eq to end our SSL or API Og ProQ.. well.. not even close.
but for producers and artists thwt just focus on creating MUSIC, I'm sure they could be useful.
You make me happy because of you’re royal and honest
can these show up in the group view in the smart eq 3?
where can we listen to the projects you worked on?
Do I need it if I have smartEQ 3 already ?
No
Definitely you don't need pure:EQ - smart:EQ3 has the same features and much more.
Great, so why did I purchuse smart EQ 4 for?
For the way it can process multiple tracks together to complement each other.
I am guessing the style options do different amounts depending on what the signal type is. The "drums" signal type did a lot more for each option.
Same curve than Smart: Eq. You can make it dynamic with TDR Nova GE.
Oh no, does it still use Linear Phase ? this thing might destroy many mixes with its hard to hear Linearphase artifacts. It happend to me that i used the first Version of this AutoEq, and carefully set it right (so i thought) . Months later i realized that Linear Phase over the whole Signal destroys the Vibe.. Absolutely dangerous this thing.. THATS JUST MY OPPINION. IF you think you feel diffeent about Linear Phase, ok..
Question: If I own the Smart bundle what capability / value would I get from getting the Pure tools?
Simplicity - and maybe more latency. 😉
@@FastvoiceMore latency? I’ve seen people saying it has less latency which would make sense. Did you meant to say less latency?
@@greedokenobi3855 Pure:EQ has more latency than Smart:EQ - that's at least one user verdict here in the comments. And that's why I wrote "maybe".
I think these plugins are much more useful on guitar chords and thick piano chords; I've noticed they can usually get you clarity more easily than traditional methods if the music itself is dynamic and has more range.
Hey Wytse, I don't know if you read and reply to all comments, but since you are in contact with sonible I wanted to ask something. Sonible trains their AI (or Machine Learning Model) with a lot of very well curated kicks/snares/..., so the model learns what the average of a sonic spectrum looks like for a kick and then adjusts the target curve in the plugin to it. But imagine one day i mix a techno kick with rootkey A and the next day a rock kick in another key. At what point does the model realize, "Oh okay, this is techno in key A so the curve has to look like this and ah wait this is a rock kick it has to be like this." So at what point does the model infer the genre or key? Because that's how I mix the kick (at least that's how I do it). At least when I try to explain "scientifically" why I do the mixing so or differently. Does this happen during the "record" phase? I guess that will be a bit of the corporate secret of Sonible ^^. As I am training neural networks (machine learning a.k.a. AI) at my research group to classify/segment medical image data (3d and 2d) I know how complex it is to find data to learn. However, I would really like to know how specifically the target curves are adapted to the genre/key or how and if differences play a role at all.
Best regards
well that was a long one...
is it worth it? because i have the gullfoss eq
Sonible EQ ! Cant wait to check that out with the limiter... Nice !
I suspect your recent time off was spent attending a thumbnail-face-making bootcamp. You've really upped your game and I'm here for it.
great idea the export settings to the smart version !
does the AI process happen locally or online? is anything from your daw transmitted?
Everything is processed locally. You can (if you wish) share some statistics to improve next versions.
I got the Fast bundle after watching your video and it's great. Funny thing I use the Reveal one for sidechain ducking the most because it's so quick to pick the percentage of ducking you want and Boom!
Is a fast balancer with some more controls
How is the cpu usage ? On a static like. I'd like to use it in live performance situation
Isn't it improved Tonal Balance by sonible and focusrite?
It's not usable as a live performance plugin due to the latency.
@@Fastvoice Thatnks for letting me know. And thanks for tge review🤙
Ozone 11 just got out. and i gotta say the stabilizer and the clarity module can do similar things to this but much better. not to take a dump on sonible. but sonibles auto EQs aren't too great.
Probably Ozone 11 is better, but sonible had smart:EQ3 three years ago and smart:EQ3 is also much better than pure:EQ ;)
@@GadesChannel and then there are tools like gullfoss among others. doesn't matter which came first. what matters is which is the best tool for the job in the present.
i have used smart EQ2 and smart comp which ever number it is now. the one good thing about smart comp is the adjustable attack and release curves. the smart EQ is not neutral sounding enough so it never replaced regular EQs for me in any way. Gullfoss was the first one which sounded good to me. but now i use ozone stabilizer in cut mode to keep resonances in check and clarity for well clarity on more difficult sounds where i need dynamic EQing and then i use a normal EQ for the broad strokes. But sure this sonible tool is targeting specific instruments instead where the curves it tries to match to are based on an average. which rarely gets the result you need. It can help a beginner sure, but it doesn't help to just clean a sound up to make it ready for the creative EQ which comes after. @@GadesChannel
In principle, it doesnt seem very different to the waves factory equilizer that got a bad review on this channel.
It's applying a dynamic eq adjustment to certain bands based on the content its listening to.
The only difference is the waves factory plugin seems to adjust around a pink noise curve (fletcher munson) where this is going off adjustments that appears to come from a your old college "cheat sheet" EQ settings.
Do headphones go bad over time?
I tend to run away when I see the "Analyse" button on a plugin. But now I realise the importance of it.
What a birthday present =]
Yeah, I think of the pure line as getting something "quick and dirty" or getting a professional result quickly. In fact, I use the pure:limit in my work-in-progress mixes just to get it at a "normal volume" or "close to master" level. And yeah, if I need something specific, then I use other tools including the smart line. I remember the thing you liked about smart:comp2 was more tweaking options for the compressors, especially in the knee shape.
And yeah, that is a great trade-off where you are not spending hours and hours "getting the sound" and you can either work on more material or enhance material that's already there with other things.
It doesn't take hours to slap on a channel plugin like sheps and actually do your job right. More like 30 seconds. This is for amateurs who want to stay amateurs.
@@PeterSavad Yes, seasoned professionals and people who are not particular about their sound don't take very long to set up an EQ. But even if you are in that category, there is something to be said about saving any time when working on a project, even if it is seconds =]
As you say Wytse the sonible Pure: range is great for writing/'producing' , getting a decent sound on the fly while 'trying ro be creative' ...
The nice people at Sonible sent me a 'Loyalty Discount' this morning.
Difficult to refuse with G.A.S. like mine ...
Wood it be in ours audio system
I’m super curious how this compares to all the other auto eq stuff out there, gullfoss and TEOTE and equalizer by wavesfactory. They each approach autoeqing slightly differently and this one seems more focused on giving you a musically useful curve for creative use where the others focus on pushing your frequency balance closer to noise or a flat response. How would pure eq, gullfoss and equalizer all compare on a mix bus? In individual tracks? On speech? Are different ones better for different uses? Is one clearly superior in all ways? Do they disagree about how to fix something like a muddy snare? Super curious
is this basically just the smart part of the smartEQ?
What about voiceovers?
Of course not a human replacement, but can lead to a random but good sounding possibilities !
I’m wondering if this new pure eq didn’t come out with the other “pure series” plugins a few months ago because they’ve been working on a new eq algorithm or learning model, and it’s not the same one that’s in smart eq3. Is smart eq4 around the corner? Offering a more hands on, “big boy” approach to the limited nature of this plug-in, like pure eq is a beta test for the new learning model, allowing them to collect data and fix bugs before fusing it with smart eq and then releasing an eventual update to that? And while I’m on the subject, anyone hear anything about a fabfilter pro-q 4? I imagine most of this will be irrelevant when favfilter reveals that their next eq will also have an ai-trained auto-eq function that blows all the rest out of the water and makes every other brand l irrelevant again for a few years like pro-q 3 did.
For me, this is more like a toy. I can see that it may be cool for producers who don't want to spend too much effort into eqing/mixing. But then still, in my point of view it's just lazyness at the end, wanting fast results with minimal effort. Even for beginners I would recommend a real eq, to learn things and frequencies. this also helps in producing.
We don’t mix in solo. Right? We know what we “can” do to a kick. I’m into plugins like Fuser by Mastering the Mix that do this kind of thing but also use the AI to align phase with kick samples and potential volume and dynamic ducking with bass etc… Cheers!
Im not a audio engineer many things go far beond my understanding, Ive been tinkering with audio recording in the past but never really seriously enough. The thing is audioengineers are like magicians to me, im to dumb to understand even when its explained well. Sound is complicated because of many things , like f.e. Loudness curves depend on frequency, deci-bells are non liniar and tons more. But the special sauce is the personal side as well, the feel of a mix is highly down to personal preferences of the SE. Its complicated, but im intrigued to try understand the magic of SE/ AE.
Genre matters quite a bit; what if it's a jazz tune? How about R&B? The plugin might work in some scenarios, but it definitely seems limited.
it's interesting. but I still think you'd still need to use another eq with it (or not use the sonible one at all). But I don't think this plug in would be useful for me.
SONIBLE ! He is right about feature request. A very potential good move.
What I don't hear anyone talking about is if you need pure:eq if you own smart:eq. It seems to me they do the same thing, but pure has a simpler interface.
It has already been discussed in previous comments.
@@Fastvoice Where? I searched for Smart:EQ and didn't see anything.
@@abrotherinchrist Repeat the search without the ":" - just "SmartEQ".
This looks to be pretty much identical to that module that's in Ozone (I can't remember what it's called, I don't have Ozone). Like the Ozone module, it looks the refresh rate on this isn't very fast compared to something like Gullfoss, which when I was trying Ozone made me really not like it very much as it's constantly flipping between different EQ curves in an annoyingly audible way making it sound pretty weird. Great in theory, not so great in practice.
Ozone Sculptor I think?
Oh my god, this really works.
How far are we of an AI EQ that can analyze several instruments at the same time to find the “perfect” spot and balance for each one of them within the mix?…
AI is making our job obsolete. I do a lot of live capture recording so this EQ would be a tremendous time saver for getting performance evaluations out to clients. The most recent event was over 3 hours long with a 10 piece swing jazz ensemble. I find the sonible plugins to be great time savers for getting the mixes to the client.
This isn't Ai. This is just dynamic EQ matching to predetermined reference curves based on the average of bunch of a category of sounds. Not too different from spectral compression.
@@DJayFreeDoo Then you say sonible is lying? Because they call it an AI based plugin.
It isn't just audio. I am a hardware development engineer and AI can already do a lot. It isn't ready for prime time yet, but I could see a scenario in 10 years or so where big parts of my job can be done by an AI trained software. I already use it some to generate code rather than look through a 500 page technical manual for a specific thing.
@@Fastvoice Everyone that makes a plugin that has an automated process is calling it AI. It's marketing. Some actually use Ai but this is not ai, this is making spectrum grabs similar to eq matching and making it dynamic and multiband with a whole lot of bands. it doesn't take ai to do this. It's like saying eq matching is ai. It's just reading the level of each frequency band and adapting it to a reference target which comes from an average of lets say, a bunch of snare drums. or a bunch of vocals. it helps to give you a starting point so to speak. but it may not match your particular song unless you can load a referense sample of your own into it for it to match to. when its matching dynamically it retains more of the original sound which usually sounds better than a static eq matching.
@@jacobseal So far Ai seem to have an exponential growth. so i have a feeling it will be at that point a lot sooner than you think.
Listening on Magnepan LRS the kick wasn't impressive, snare was better, hihat wasn't good, full drumkit okay, but I prefer izotope neutron... 🤔
(Spectral shape)
Yes, but how does this help me when I wanna eq my hurdy-gurdy or my theremin. I don’t even wanna ask how it’s gonna work on my hydraulophone… smh 😂
It's a cool little eq plugin that precisely and instantly enhance frequency for both bus or individual tracks. BUT, cpu usage and latency are just MASSIVE.... I think it's because of the dynamic eq mechanism, but it's just too much to use more than 2-3 instances within my capacity. I wish youtube reviewers point out this issue so Sonible can improve on its cpu usage.
I don't trust this bundle. I use it on my vocal and it worked. But i add one more and guess what, it do the samething a gain
It's just fine, but smart:EQ3 is much better of course. I like sonible products a lot :) nice review, Wytse!
About 110 Euros difference. You get what you pay for I guess.
I guess another problem is if they helped focusrite, it would be a bad move to give the same as them... an insult to the union.
It's probably a business thing.
The collab was only temporary and is only history at this point. No need for Sonible to hold anything back to its own customers.
Great, let's make everything sound the same. Like we didn't have that problem already.
tbh i dont get this one, it's aimed at producers but generates about 150ms of latency without a ZL mode. devs if you aim to serve producers make sure plugins dont generate more than 1ms latency
The magic behind these EQs is pretty simple. I should make a video showing how anyone can do this.
Go on then!
Dude, please use bypass button at least once a year.
No autogain, and you don't yell on it ?
Is it a clue for find the sponsorized reviewes ?
Wytse generally doesn't think that autogain is useful in EQ plugins.
go try the plugin, it add 3-5db easy on your track after the IA calibrate it, so a gain compensation will be super useful@@Fastvoice
first time I've heard 'ashilliate link' haha
Sonible plugins are for lazy people but that's ok I'm lazy, however I've found them buggy with high cpu problems.
Don't buy this if you already have smart EQ 3
But smart eq isn't dynamic isn't it ?
@@charlesumani366it is dynamic yes
I fully hated smart:eq, I bought pure:comp after watching MixbusTV’s video, loved it for a one knob comp. Bit the bullet on the full smart bundle, they lasted a week on my machine. Sonible gets so much praise but those plugins didn’t sit right with me whatsoever, buggy, the AI stuff was meh, and I didn’t find a single instance where I preferred the EQ, not a single source I preferred with it. The one knob ones seem cool though, and the true:balance stuff is very handy, but ironically their bigger brothers really aren’t for me.
yea that's why demos are important. might look and seem cool but only trying it for real you'll be able to tell if it's worth the money.
i guess i'm too used to doing weird stuff on my music cause all these AI plugins don't really do what i have in mind for a sound, that or my bias is showing
I was sort of hoping it would fix Smart EQ's urge to add a thousand db to the bass frequencies on every bass guitar and vocal.
big like from ISRAEL !!
Seems pretty cool, but for beginners using this they would never learn to EQ properly. A great video would be to take a song you already mixed, then use these AI tools for EQ, comp, limiting and mix/master it again and compare.
Ik vind het griezelig maar misschien is het iets. Thanks Wytse
For god's sake !! . . . turn tool tips off when demoing a plugin, it's really hard to follow what you're doing when there are random text boxes constantly popping up in the UI.
wow! I did never think about that! I'll do that in the future! Thanks!
Mix Engineer feedback: put it in the bin.
This isn't Mixing. Mixing is an Artform. If you went to see a band and the guitarist and singer pressed a button and a bot played back bland garbage, you would not buy that record.
This sort of rubbish is like saying you won Duke Nukem with cheat codes. Ya didn't win nuttin'. You still can't really play the game, you can just fool yourself.
Like digital but not digital it's stereo sound
Except it introduces a LOT of latency. Useless in the production phase of a song.
Yes, it does add latency. But unlike pure:limit (which I only add and use as one of the mastering tools after everything is recorded and mixed) you can get rid of it by simply deactivating the plugin without removing it completely from the track. So you can let it sit on the track and just activate it when you start a control replay.
Isn't really a viable option in projects with a large track count. Having to remember to engage/disengage 30 or more instances is at best cumbersome, and introduces lots of chances for errors. I don't understan why this has so much latency, and its big brother SmartEQ - with more features - has none@@Fastvoice
@@dutnakke Maybe they want us to buy the more expensive plugin. 😉
I already own that one. I think it might a bit overkill for simple tasks, and wanted PureEQ for that, hoping for a lower CPU hit. @@Fastvoice
Comment for da algorithm
Streak count: 182
If you cant even do minimal eq things like this plugin is doing i would recommend you to find a different job lol
Ever thought of people that are getting started?
Wouldn’t this be faster?
@@Whiteseastudio sure, but even then this would be something even a starter should learn since every daw comes with an build in equalizer.
@@glowaves might be a sec faster, but adding or removing in a normal eq should also take only a couple seconds anyways.
It could actually help beginners as they could use it and see what it does and then they can learn how to replicate it and then experiment from that.
funny what toke hours we now moan about because it takes seconds .. no woder teens have ansiaty. appreciate your videos wietse . bedankt ..
Anxiety
Robo Oil.
🙂👍
Those nails tho
Sonible should stop offering the same thing on diferent products
This seems like a paid promotion. Aren't you obligated to inform viewers about that?
If it was a paid promotion, I would indeed be obligated to inform my viewers... but it isn't.
You shout too loud from the beginning.
So what?
@@Whiteseastudio You are screaming!!
SO KNOB DJ???
666th like here hahaha
8:05 "A-shill-iate link , below" lol
Brother how have you been doing
Yep, i was going to buy this but since i only record and mix real drums, and there were only demo's from Sonible using crappy fake drums and computerbleebs-dj-rubbish i was waiting for a decent review! So i just spend € 19,15 for this baby:). Thanks! Wietse doet altijd zinnige dingen;).
Are my ears failing me or did he say check out my a-SHILL-iate link?
There's a special way people from the Netherlands pronounce "F". 😁