2+ year sub here. Your heart is absolutely in the right place, as you want to help consumers make good decisions in a marketplace almost entirely built on dishonest marketing, but your repeated lack of research and good-faith effort to understand products as best you can has made me feel like your reviews are at as great a risk of being snake oil as the products themselves. Audio Engineering takes immense time, discipline, and self-reflection to get good at, so why would this not also be true of getting good with the tools we use? Why is it not snake oil to throw on a demo without reading the manual, casually fuck around with it for however long, and then declare a verdict? People consistently school you in the comments with information and context you should have already put the effort into learning, like the D and the P being separate products entirely. I was truly floored when you said the Plugin Alliance HG2MS was hard "IMPOSSIBLE TO USE!" Others found it wildly easy to use, and there's a manual that totally clarifies some of your critiques. It being "IMPOSSIBLE TO USE" for you is your fault, then, and it's my job as a consumer trying to be educated to hold that against you. Your mission with this channel is noble, honest, and truly helpful, so I wish you'd do your best to fulfill it instead of confusing the mediocrity of the review for the mediocrity of the product. This channel is close to being the best it can be. I encourage you to push yourself into living up to it.
He's catering to the crowd that dive in and dont read manuals, of which we are many. If he read the manual and became more than a novice user or took a more scientific approach then his videos wouldnt be unique, would miss his target audience (which was untapped hence why hes gathererd a large following) and would compete with a zillion other reviewers. This way he is in his own lane. Hes also testing UI intuitives...which be definition is only good if you dont need the manual. Its counter intuitive to a lot of techies who take their time to learn things but many bedroom producers dont do that and many producers like myself value workflow over sonic perfection becuase we know that good decision velocity is a huge factor in sonic quality. He won't always get it right but thats the sacrifice he makes in the name of the values hes promoting and catering to his target audience. He is the opposite of snake oil. Snake oil is disingenuous selling of a product you either don't need or that is oversold. He deliberately detaches himself from software company marketing discourse and even free licences (prefers to.use demo) all in an effort to remain impartial and empathise with the user experience as much as possible. Its the opposite to snake oil. If you want an alternative experience then supplement your viewing with the in depth reviews out there including from the developers. These hit the spot for me. I dont always agree with him (eg i loved the transient shaper he didnt like last week) but his episode production quality is trustworthy, i can skip to the testing and within 5mins decide if i like it or not. Not many other vids offer that ease of use.
I just think that all the bullshit this industry gives us repeatedly for eating with no shame at all, largely deserves such treatment. Even if he can sometimes lack in-depth knowledge of the plugin, he is fair with his concept. In-depth reviews or tutorials are not the purpose of these videos, precisely.
the 232D is not emulating the Bettermaker Mastering EQ, it is emulating the long discontinued 232P. The Mastering Equalizer has some similarities but is not the same. Part of what makes the pultec section on this EQ nice is the Passive filter circuitry with solid state make-up gain. The biggest draw of this box was the total package, the way all the filters work together has a sound of its own. It's clean and punchy with a lot of flexibility. I used to own it until I bought the Mastering EQ, and this plugin recreation has basically achieved very close to the hardware sound, if not a bit better because i found the analog 232p's filters a bit noisy.
@@alfredgrupstra Because it's a digital replication of an analog circuit as opposed to just digital. Everyone and their cat understands that, why can't you? Obsessed much?
@@zizjaturtle2703 As I said, I just wondered, not that I didn't understand it. But when you think about it it stays digital, how many saturators you use to create an analog vibe doesn't maka it analog. My DAW still has to convert it to analog sound.
It's interesting to see a guy like Michael Brauer when he moved his whole stepup in the box. He doesn't feel like he's missing ANYTHING from his outboard gear and it radically simplifies his job. But it's interesting to see that he often has to rig together two, three, five completely unrelated plugins to get the exact flavor of the analog gear he's replacing. An analog EQ is also a compressor, and an analog compressor is also an EQ, and they're both also adding saturation, and if you want to EXACTLY match the behavior of that equipment you have to get all of those individual details right too.
Brauer has like a wall of outboards thou. He switched his 9000 console to a Avid mixer and PA 9000 channel strip. He still uses his very own hardware bus style on everything. And those racks are insane. Like my girlfriends. 😁🤚🏻🎤
@@joaoandre_bass pretty sure that that was because of what the industry has become more than he prefers software sonically. Today mixers get 1/15 of that they got even a few years ago, it has to be done fast and be recallabe without any cost. But I’m sure his itb Template sounds amazing. I would never hire a mixer because of his or hers gear, only the ears and experience. And perhaps racks, as my girlfriends. 🤚🏻🎤
@@christianschneiderphoto it’s easier and sonically competitive. Cheaper, consumes less electricity, and of course for a mixer to get his kind of gear in this day and age and still make a profit would be near to impossible. If a lot of the classics made it into the box, why would I go the opposite route. He now mixes in his house, doesn’t need a tech on staff and one assistant is enough. It is what it is.
I like the plugin very much. I only use hardware synths & drum machines for my music and I have specific saturation plugins with every synth and even with some of my favourite handcrafted sounds and for me that's where the magic is. The combination of the EQ curves with my own chosen saturation types is what makes this plugin the perfect tool. I feel this is more of a producers sound shaping tool then a mix engineers tool, but it can be used both ways.
As a dance music producer who cooks the the shit out of every channel and bus way before it gets summed at the master. It's actually pretty cool to have a clean Pultec for shaping.
@@mysteriousstranger9496 not with Kirchhoff EQ, it has filter shapes from outboard eq’s pre set you can choose from. So your tracks look like a block waveform since everything is so hot?
I’ve got this plug-in and really enjoy it.on a master. It gives me a clean pultec style with all 4 bands in one plug-in. It’s great for making big, broad tonal changes by ear only after I’ve used Pro-Q3 for corrective EQ. The quirky interface works for me in this context. I think it forces me into a different brain space. It also just sounds good.
I use the Bettermaker, this are just tools. After years of mixing all analog, i am glad to have good tools and so many good options to tackle a complex or simple mix ITB. Thank you programers & companies that make this tools. They make my job easier, make my clients happier , Lets me provide for my family and spend more time with them! it's all about the music and the end goal.
I been using this for over a year and it lives on my master buss. Here the thing, I have so many analog saturation style plugins that add color to my tracks... maybe to many analog things adding flavor. So for me a clean eq that is doing m/s on overall mix in a clean way adding that has bold bass on the bottom and a pristine highon top is needed. I used to use a pultec on master with everything sounded like the 70's over saturated thick goop. Modern music needs to have clarity and punch with warmth. unless your looking for that old fart rock and disco sound of the 70's then by all means a real pultec is in order. But if your rockin modern music then mixing up clean tones like grace, gulfoss, avalon and bettermaker help keep a balance
It’s about interaction with each curve that is unique. I’m far from a PA fanboy, but this is a cool plugin. Picked it up for 15 bucks on a sale. If you’re going to test, do some actual testing instead of rushing out videos for more views.
Its funny you mention Dan Worall - I was actually going to mention him. He actually did have something to say about this. He has an analog one. Essentially, the magic is in the curves…and more specifically how easy it is to arrive at the curves with the interface. I’ll try to sum up his point: programming a similar curve in FF ProQ3 or equivalent will likely lead to second guessing oneself. “Are you SURE you want to add X DB of gain to that frequency?” Since the frequency response can actually look really haphazard on a modern graphical user interface. I can remember him saying something like, “meanwhile, the bettermaker congratulates you on a job well done, and tells you want a fantastic engineer you are”. Also about the tubes: there are some people who prefer solid state pultec style eqs to the tube ones…they claim the tube versions dull the transients and can do certain things to low end. I suppose an option would be nice
there we go, i thought it sounded special. in same time it sounds very clean, i especially got a short wow, mhh moment with the bass bost knob. i ususally need to sleep over it to conclude.
I listened to a video of Andrew Scheps explaining that he likes the clean version of the UAD Pultec (no tube emulation) because the tube version (hardware) was negatively impacting the low end for some material. So there is an advantage.
Especially when I’m recording analog tracks, using Softube’s Console1, the Weiss (digital) EQ always surprises me (compared with the console Drive on the other strips) with what a breath of fresh air it is.
I literally used this plugin a piano track 20 minutes ago. It gave it fantastic width, depth and clarity. I think Edmund Catlin (below) may have hit the nail on the head.
i tend to grab the bettermaker occasionally for the airband, even though i can match the curves anytime with fabfilter. but sometimes it's just faster to hit the bettermaker.
In many cases I receive tracks that have the right amount (or too much) saturation and does not need any more....but I do want the Pultec curve. That's where I use it.
As someone who works only in the box, this comes in handy when I work on dense and impactful mixes (modern metal with various layers of synths and samples). I was never able to make other pultec emulations work as I needed them to work in my mixbus, meanwhile, this always did the job (to be fair Softube's tube tech one made it too sometimes). Funny enough I blamed for years the fact that most pultec vst do not get close to the sound of the UAD one (which was the first one I saw used many years ago in the studio with my band) and I didn't have access to it, but now I had Spark for a while and guess what? I simped UAD too much for nothing because their pultec never made it in my mixes to this date, not even on a simple channel. Is it squeaky clean and without character? Yes Do I care? No, and probably this is the reason why it actually works perfectly for my ears. If it sounds good it's good for me and considering that you pay 29/39€ for it if you are patient enough I would not ask for more from it. Yeah, surely the UX is questionable and this kind of UI has no sense or justification in the digital domain except for marketing purposes... but I am happy with it anyway.
The tube style pultecs can leave the bass feeling wooly and insubstantial. The bettermaker version can do the pultec bass boost and attenuation trick without losing the solid sub. It may be a bit of a one trick pony, but at €24.99 it’s not a bad trick.
I love this plugin I don't think they make the hardware version anymore, which hails from Poland, the hardware came with its own software which controlled the hardware settings, similar to the Tegeler. You've been really busy uploading these videos, nice one.
I love this thing so much, I've considered getting the hardware secondhand, but the plugin works perfectly in most cases. It's best in my opinion in M/S mode, with a little bit of a low cut and presence boost on the side channels to add a gentle amount of width and volume. How do you use it?
@@maddietourmaline46 Wow! go for it, I wish I could afford even a 2nd version of the Bettermaker. I use the software version to tighten up the bottom end of my mix by attenuating and boosting the PEQ section. I still use the Pultec EQ by Waves sometimes, one which the Bettermaker was based on.
I actually use this plugin, sometimes on kick drums, most of the times on synth bass. I think the curves can be a bit weird, but I didn't check with the doctor.
I got the chance to try in an educators session this EQ & honestly except for the GUI I really like it. It brings a lot to my in the box processing. Since I haven't been able to invest in hardware. The interesting thing for me is that we have the Active & Passive circuits. Prob the magic is that you can push it without the distortion, that let's us take advantage of the several stages of selecting your distortion or saturation. So pushing into your preferred saturation? That's what I've been doing, since I still don't think digital should be thought as analog. Always interesting videos. ❣️
I tested this a long time ago as a Pultec on the mixbus and it suited the material i was working with so well i bought it. It's about the only EQ plugin i have or will buy that doesn't model harmonics. It models the older 232P model not the new mastering eq. They actually got it real close, it's just the soundstage is a tiny bit smaller (typical of plugins), but i really like the soft but tight sounding curves when used subtlely. It has an air, openess and sheen to it. I did try to get close with a normal digital eq, but it was too much messing about at the time. I do appreciate accurately modelled curves, but there is no way i am going to keep paying for that when i can just make a preset on a good digital eq. This one slipped the net a while back, and that's also because of PluginAlliance's sales and vouchers.
I think the reason /rationale is that it has the interactive pultec styled eq bands where the neighbouring bands interact with each other in that pultec way but they've not modelled the tube saturation. The lack of these harmonics is a benefit as "they" see it. Not everyone wants to hear additional harmonics. Sometimes that aesthetic can sound overcooked. I don't always like the analog treatments on my work. I do agree with your assessment that this is not the correct interface for this kind of plugin. It would be better to have graphical controls and the option to dial in the harmonics to taste. That would be the best of both worlds. Great observations as usual. I agree they've missed the point with this one.
Great video , but the plug is different from the hardware you compared it to, they no longer make the hardware version of the plugin which is why I think they made it into a plugin , nevertheless you brought up great points about the plugin!
From what I understand, the transformers are actually where most of the Pultec's sound comes from (other than the actual EQ section, obviously), and the tube makeup stage is actually very clean. A well designed, clean gain stage is going to be pretty much the same whether it's tube or solid state, the differences don't really show unless you're overdriving it and unless I'm wrong the pultec sound isn't really coming from overdriving anything, it's mostly about the topology of the EQ and the sonic footprint of the inductors and transformers. I could definitely be off base on that, though.
I think in the end there is no magic or sauce in the machine. It exists because the hardware was discontinued, and it's liked because the workflow just clicked for the people who used the hardware or who like procedure. After all, it's predictable - not a lot of options to choose from for curves and frequencies. My favorite thing about it is probably also the most tedious thing about it, which is adjusting each section in order, A/Bing it, and moving to the next one.
Honestly I think the 232 sounds way better than the analog one (in this case). I'd rather have the cleaner EQ (I don't think it's sluggish, it just doesn't sound compressed more true to the original actually) and add another saturation of my choice and have total flexibility. Actually I think that is one of the main weaknesses of hardware, it works or it doesn't, and I've seen mastering engineers switch through five different expensive analog EQ's to see what works (spending like 10+ minutes on that alone) and I just don't see the reason for that anymore. Honestly IF I was to get me some hardware it would be a very flexible piece of gear like the SPL Iron. I agree with some points though, I think it should have the option of adding some unique saturation that also compresses a little, and yeah the original is very clean, but not as clean as their "emulation".
I would imagine the argument for a plugin like this would be if you want a clean EQ that "suggests" Pultec style curves which you might not as easily gravitate towards on the complete freedom of a graphical EQ like fabfilter? I believe if that is the intention, it still completely shoots itself in the foot with the poor UI design, as well as being awkward to click around it is also hard to read the knob "positions" at a glance because of the stupid choice of emulating the look of white LEDs against a black and silver background. But you've got to remember these plugins from PA are really only worth at most $25 anyway with the pricing/sales tactic of PA, any prices shown higher than that only really exist to drive up interest when it is inevitably on sale. Really we know what's going on here is that "Bettermaker" is a good name to cash in on with the "analogue plugin in the box" hype, right?
I have the two 500 series of these EQs and they are so good and clean sounding that now I own the actual full hardware unit. I can say it is a unique eq that sounds amazing, that is why plugin alliance decided to do a recreation. I tried the plugin and although it is cool, it does not come close to the sound capabilities of the hardware. That is why it was in the mastering chain of Luca Pretolesi for a while. You can see videos of him using it. One thing bro, is that the hardware unit you showed at the beginning is not the same EQ. 🤙
What about all the Weiss gear from Softube that literally uses the same digital algorithms as the outboard gear but doesn‘t use AD/DA converters? So if you use digital in and outs the plugins and the hardware should exactly sound the same with an almost 20 times price difference. Weiss even promotes the plugin on their website.
Perhaps using your ears instead and you might just get it at the end 🙂. I've had the hardware unit (old 232P) and now have the plugin... love the sound signature of this plugin @96kHz -64bit float ... and to my ears it sounds great. Super thanks for the review but I think you need to do more research into the stuff you're talking about in give it some time in use so to really get the vibe... and as with the analog gear there is a sweet spot in the plugins but sometimes much more narrower comparing to HW so extensive use is the only way, otherwise you might end-up by just ''not getting it'' 🙂. Love from Finlandia🤍.
Unexpected results in your video, to be sure! I agree the true-to-the-hardware options can feel restrictive in the modern mixing environment (though I myself love the GUI's knobs and buttons) but the filters do sound different to me from other EQ's (including the Kirchoff, which is one of the brightest-sounding EQ's I have), particularly at the low end -- in fact, this is one of various EQ's I use almost exclusively when working at the low frequencies. Additionally, like others commenting here, I've found the broad bell settings to be very 'flattering' and 'creamy' when pushing thin-sounding mids, and compliments more surgical work with a fully parametric EQ. Now I feel like mixing something, ha ha 😊
I'm trying it now and like it. I wanted it for the low end and wasn't getting the results I wanted from the Pultec section until I used the eq1 section in conjunction with it. This works for me and I am sold. Going to buy it...
I agree with the carpal tunnel problem. I think the the place where this differs from fab filter and other ‘clean’ ones is better maker is using complex curves achieved by boosting and cutting the same band. Accurately emulating pultec curves is a stunt if they have done it.
I dunno on PA stuff. A lot of people who know more than me like some of the plugins emulating analog effects and tools. I just like the synth emulations (besides the guitar ones, never even tried because everyone hates those and I'm more interested in synthesizers anyways) and the Unfiltered Audio plugins, which focus on doing weird, creative things instead of copying any sort of physical gear. And have more simple and practical names than most plugins I have encountered. Tails is a reverb, G8 is a gate, Byome is a multi-effect that can do some really complex things. And Lion is their synth that true to the name can make all kinds of angry, loud, terrible sounds when you're outside of a musical sweet spot.
You are wrong, they doesnt made EQ Hardware unit anymore, that ones in xyour video its different unit as plugin bro ;) On Bettermaker website is only Mastering EQ and no other, just a plugin
If you dig into the interface of the Bettermaker, it's an excellent-sounding tool but, In the "pultec war plugins", Acustica audio - purple 3.5 has by far the edge, but it's CPU-hungry
PA has never once made a comparison on ANY of the hardware they have modeled, I think that’s hilarious. That people still are buying in to it. Just buying different graphics. Over and over again. I still use the old Waves SSL strip and like r-Compressor. Sounds amazing. The software companies that do A/B and null stuff with hardware I believe. Can’t wait for the first one.
There are some videos of people shooting out the BX Console plugins with the real gear and it's usually the closest to the gear than many of the other emulations, but they all sound so close, that you can use any one of them. The Waves SSL G Bus compressor sounds really close to the console G bus compressor, crazy since it is the oldest plugin version of the G bus compressor, and it gets the job done.
I use this on drum buss sometimes, if I want to subtly shape the overall character of the drums to fit the song. Or sometimes to bend a clean-sounding female vocal in to shape. But yes - the controls are just weird and confusing. I keep accidentally changing the wrong band.
Not even 5 mins into the video yet, but for the ppl watching/reading comments who get here within enough time, I’d say the value is in the analog emulation being done. Obviously every price of analog equipment has circuitry that can be emulated - so with that being said, if this hardware has something worthwhile/different In it’s hardware design, I’d say that’s where the value is.
Disabling normalization - when and why (1/4): - while listening to whole albums (never met with a case when I listened to the whole album on streaming service that enabling normalization gave me better listening experience, actually always worse - Tidal user here) - when using lots of sound enhancers due to low quality headphones/DACs in phones (that way the sound gets very sensitive on any subtle changes in chain and normalization is like another plugin in the chain which is not fully "transparent" - so it doesn't affect only volume, but sound as well to some extent)
2/4 This specific limiter applied by streaming service is not hardcoded in the file by sound engineer. He cannot the final sound result. It always sounds random to some extent from an engineer perspective, because every service have it implemented a bit different, though with the same goal, but still, ilufs values for various services are different. But engineer doesn't have a preview of the final result of such normalization. You can only cause the service to increase or decrease volume by changing volume on your side, but you cannot hear the final result on every single service after normalization. It differs, and not only from a volume perspective - it also affects the sound.
3/4 Loudness is more or less equal for the whole album for most tracks, so they do not require further normalization by streaming services. It almost always degrades sound quality. It's good that they at least take for consideration, that we listen to album and normalization is less aggressive.
4/4 Normalization is only useful for people who listen various tracks from various albums one by one, and here with normalization, most music "should" sound the same in matter of loudness, to not stand out. I can imagine very specific case of using normalization for whole albums when it really sounds better for you in specific case of configuring EQ, enhancers on specific sound system. Nothing more
Lol. You can be such a silly sausage. Try moving the mouse wheel over the buttons (!). When i need a pultec i often reach for this. It sounds very good, and the extra para bands make it handy to zone in on other requencies, once all the mud is cleared and sparkle added.
Thank you for the review! I appreciate your alternative reviews of Gear and Plugins because mostly(but not always) each new Do-Dad receives 4 1/2 to 5 stars on the company websites(again it's a free World rate freely as well!). A little grit in the "review machinery" makes Life interesting. I may or may not agree with everything presented but I'm glad you're there. I do read manuals, but initial impressions without a manual are also valid(for me). Quality and getting the Job done in a timely manner are important. Best wishes.
What do you mean by color? Usually people refer to saturation as color, but this plugin has absolutely no saturation, it adds no harmonics. The only "special" thing it does do is to use Pultec like curves (if you use the P-EQ section of course), the other EQ bands are calssic bell shapes.
@@jensoettrich762 I know, I have the plugin, bought it some time ago. Precisely because I wanted a pulltec eq, without the distorsion. Those curves are very useful in some case, regardless if you can replicate them pro q3 for example, you reach those results faster with this.
I didn't measure it. It still gets results I couldn't shape with Fab. Not that Fab can't do it, bettermaker just did it. And I did screw up some mixes with it badly, well, because it makes things that are hard to do with Fab.... Good thing: if you don't like what it's doing.... dump it. There is Fab for most of the rest.
I got this after a year of PA MEGA sub, and despite all listed in the video I've done a lot of good mixes with this thing. UI is not the best, but I use it for 1-2 cases, which are my presets.
Because we can all use Plugin Doctor, and if you don't have money for it, you can use Bertom EQ Curve Analyzer. Boring content to sit on too long, I imagine he tries.
so i didnt got, why you dont like the design of it? i find it great to watch at and clear to understand. i hate it, when people talk something down, but cant explain why. lol ... well i use the bettermaker for some time, this thing is awesome.
Love your videos bruv! You know your shizz and are super funny speaking truths and poking holes in some of these advertisements! Love your side by side comparisons too my dude, keep em coming! Would love to know how you'd go about mastering Drum'N'Bass/Dubstep style music and what plugins or hardware you'd think to reach for automatically considering all the heavy bass frequencies you'd want to delicately control and enhance... in my dreams haha!
you should review the mag eq from plug in alliance and use a 4k display just to show how ridiculous the non scaling plug in is. its hilarious they still haven't updated it.
I don't get stuff like this. Why should I get this? What does this do that a fully parametric EQ can't do? I like some of the PA's stuff but they make all these knob EQ's that are totally unappealing in the digital realm. Why do I want to turn knobs with a mouse on a computer screen? Help me understand.
I am a fan of the channel... but I have to say that it is becoming a bit ridiculous pointing out how a plugin has a stupid GUI, when it is an exact replica of an original. Most users, me included, want that, I want it to look like and have controls like the original because it is what I expect. I want the clinical/flat look of my daw and, software in general, to have at least that bit of "real world" feeling and bring some of that "analog" feel at least aesthetically. It's much more fun than just having everything in plain sliders and buttons.
I think PA need to think a bit more about what they emulate, it shows they are more about selling the idea of having some unattainable gear in the box & that alone will make your music better rather than well designed products. I guess its their thing to mirror the hardware visually sometimes that works ok but in this case it translates poorly.
I really like the analog version in my mastering chain, since it's midi controllable and makes recalling super easy. Also the hardware is really solid. It's clean, but I like shaping the bottom end with it. But I also don't understand why you need to copy the controls to the plugin. I have the plugin from the PA subscription, but I never use it.
There are few things wrong with this video. - the plug-in is a recreation of an old hardware unit. So you should not compare it with the Bettermaker Mastering Eq. It is not the same! - also do not compare it with a random analog pultec-style equalizer because it is not the same. - the rant on the bad UI is not right. It is just a reproduction of the original hardware. So all the background info of this video is incorrect and leads to wrong conclusions! But what is correct: There is not much to like about this plug-in even tough there are a number of mix-gurus out there that really love the hardware. Please correct this video because the actual newer hardware of Bettermaker is excellent!! Just let’s say this plug-in is a mistake on its own.
I really don't understand why you think that the fact that 90% of top mastering and mixing engineers don't look at the -1dBTP recommendation is a symptom of people wanting everything to be louder. That's not the case. -1dBTP is to compensate for crappy lossy codecs, so it doesn't make sense in the long run, as we are seeing how we are moving towards better codecs and even lossless audio streaming. I think that any good engineer would agree that our goal is to make the best possible sounding music, and we find that in some genres that's -10 LUFS and in others it's -6, and then the job of making everything sound at similar level is on the provider side, hence the -14/16 LUFS normalization.
I have been watching your video's for a very long time. I agree with you on the marketing aspect but we all know that marketing is and will always be nessesary to make profit. It is not going to change. So the plugin companies will continue to advertise things like "exact emulation of the hardware", will continue to create virtual interfaces as close to the HW, etc in order to sell more. I know that you are a smart person and HW lover, and that you understand that marketing approach for p/i's is not going to change. So I don't the point to continue to bring this forth in your video's. Big name engineers that went completely in the box, use all kind of plugins in certain combination to get the result they want to achieve. I think it's all about how to use what you have, what you can afford, to get the result you want. Great benefit of p/I is that you can have it (even this better maker emulation) on all tracks in you session. This is never possible with HW, unless you have a lot of money (or debt). I do appreciate the fact that companies like Plugin-Alliance and other plugin companies provide a period of trial for their plugins where you can use them without any restrictions. People who doesn't have the HW, doesn't even know how these sounds and will get great result with their plugins. I think it's time for you to challenge yourself (in a positive way). Mix a song completely in the box, use all plugins you want, EVEN the HW emulation you don't like [incl this better maker p/I], and show us that as a professional, you can achieve the result you want even with what you don't like. Two final questions: 1. are you building your own hardware to put on the market one day? 2. will you ever have your own plugin? In the past, you have even showed us that some plugins are better than some clone HW.
It’s just a normal clean Pultec simulation, like the UAD Pultec legacy version, no THD, only the curve. Somehow I like the clean Pultec better when it comes to plugins, cuz no plugins come close to the real Tube Pultec yet, they always sounded too dirty, so the clean ones are actually more useful.
I was testing out the plugin just yesterday. Backstory... Wanted something different for my mixbus eq, since I wasn't too happy with what my IK Multimedia Pultec did there (on other places I really like this plugin and think it's one of the better Pultec plugins out there). To compare I also did something similar with TDR Nova just to compare to the Bettermaker... Low Bell with a Q of 0.1 and centered at 60hz and high Bell with a Q of 0.2 and centered at 10kHz. Matched to gain on each band. With a blind test I preferred Nova to the Bettermaker and both to the Pultec plugin. Nova seemed to have way more punch and clarity in the low end. Highend sounded good on either. Saved me some money and now Nova is in my Template on my MixBus :)
I think what I often think about (not only) PAs plugins, it's mainly here to make money. Big names sell better than 'hey, this is our own xyz eq plugin'.
Tubes. Real secret of tube sound is that tube amp is so simple, there is no tons of components, just what is necessary. There is NOT any warmth on tubes, just simple and clear circuit (and some nice distortion). Speaking of warm sound of tube amps is real snake oil.
The Mastering EQ you're looking at on their website is not what this is based off of. This is in the legacy products, Bettermaker 232P MK II. This looks exactly like the hardware unit, that's the reason for the shitty interface. Not defending it, just that's why it's like this.
I don’t really get why your first thought is to dis something that you apparently don’t understand (checking Thomann for the wrong unit).You can keep comparing plugins to hardware, but they will never be the same. Heck, not even two analog units will ever be the same. However, this plugin is a very good approach of the original hardware unit and they put a lot of effort in making it as good as and maybe even better than the original. The interface is just like the unit also. I would like a more positive approach, the people from plugin alliance aren’t pannenkoeken.
The explanation for any hardware EQ emulation is not to be found in its sound. Not primarily, at least. It is (snare roll, please): pure workflow. (Easy, breath Wytse, I know such plugins won't give you the best possible workflow. You'll see what I mean in a minute) Seriously, any EQ curve can be replicated in your DAW with a regular digital EQ (as long as it doesn't cramp), any EQ band saturation can be replicated and I think it is safe to agree that the input and/or output saturation is the easiest saturation to be replicated, but with the advantage that you can even choose which character you want to get. Let me butcher the holy cow: It doesn't matter if it is a 1073, an SSL 4K, Pultec, Altec, Manley, whatever. You can get it all. BUT!☝️🤓 it very often takes a whole, complex chain of FX to achieve that. And expertise how to get there. Some EQs demand more, some less. Sometimes the shelf filters need some parameter linking (REAPER shines at that task) to imitate the behaviour of a particular hardware shelf. *This is work that costs time*, and this lost time wasn't used for actual mixing. That is why such plugins exist. Somebody else made the job for you and prepared that special EQ band behaviour for you so that you just have to turn a knob. Now one could say: What do I need that for? I can dial in any sound I need by ear with my ProQ3. That's true, you could. So let us see specific EQ band behaviours like a friend proposing a sound you perhaps didn't think of and hence wouldn't dial in on your ProQ3. Another aspect is: That signature sound. No, I'm not talking about saturation here. I'm talking about limitations. If you want to make your mix sound like it was mixed on a vintage Neve, you NEED the exact same limitations the hardware gave you. Otherwise you wouldn't make the same decisions when dialing in settings. That's why I don't like all those digital extra gimmicks that haven't been there on the hardware. I like stepped controls. I like frequency limits. It forces me to make a decision just like the hardware the plugin emulates. Otherwise it would be just another quirky digital EQ with a vintage GUI. As I mentioned above: The essence of such plugins is its workflow it forces upon you. That is why such plugins exist. They are pure decision assistants. The "sound" can be achieved by other means, too. Back then, when we used to record on tape, when we had to use what we could afford, we had to choose which set of limitation we should get. And if a given set of limitation didn't get the job done we had to go on the quest for another set of limitation that would fill the notches we were given with our last setup. That's why there are so many EQs out there and that's why the SSL 4K became such a hit. It expanded your possibilities.
I have it and use it for stem mastering, on the mix bus - it honestly does the job fine! The interface is a bit confusing I'll admit, but nothing to Ultrabeat lol - anyway I like it, just as well because I've got it already ;-) Yes I'm back ;-)
The analog hardware units don't process digitally. They can simply be controlled digitally for extra precision and some of the other creature comforts of the digital realm. Like A/B listening or saving presets. I can't say if the analog EQ has a tube stage, but we know that the technology used in analog signal paths introduce specific types of imperfections that are hard to replicate digitally and that's not different from say a distressor, La-2a or even the pultec. Of which there are many digital recreations that fail to emulate the hardware well enough for people familiar with the units not to notice the difference. Ik weet niet zeker of die laatste zin compleet logisch was. Het punt is eigenlijk alleen maar dat de hardware gewoon een analoge pultec stijl EQ is met de voordelen die daarbij horen en daarnaast heeft het ook digitale controls. Zou het dan 3000 euro moeten kosten? Ik denk dat dat vooral ligt aan hoe goed de hardware EQ klinkt.
Well.... Same thing happens with the Weiss Mastering compressor /limiter and EQ. Which is the EXACTLY same code cause the hardware is digital. And the gear cost $5k and the plugin $300.
2+ year sub here. Your heart is absolutely in the right place, as you want to help consumers make good decisions in a marketplace almost entirely built on dishonest marketing, but your repeated lack of research and good-faith effort to understand products as best you can has made me feel like your reviews are at as great a risk of being snake oil as the products themselves. Audio Engineering takes immense time, discipline, and self-reflection to get good at, so why would this not also be true of getting good with the tools we use? Why is it not snake oil to throw on a demo without reading the manual, casually fuck around with it for however long, and then declare a verdict? People consistently school you in the comments with information and context you should have already put the effort into learning, like the D and the P being separate products entirely. I was truly floored when you said the Plugin Alliance HG2MS was hard "IMPOSSIBLE TO USE!" Others found it wildly easy to use, and there's a manual that totally clarifies some of your critiques. It being "IMPOSSIBLE TO USE" for you is your fault, then, and it's my job as a consumer trying to be educated to hold that against you. Your mission with this channel is noble, honest, and truly helpful, so I wish you'd do your best to fulfill it instead of confusing the mediocrity of the review for the mediocrity of the product. This channel is close to being the best it can be. I encourage you to push yourself into living up to it.
I enjoy watching WhireSea’s videos but they just one perspective on products that I’m curious about.
This.
Totally agree.
He's catering to the crowd that dive in and dont read manuals, of which we are many. If he read the manual and became more than a novice user or took a more scientific approach then his videos wouldnt be unique, would miss his target audience (which was untapped hence why hes gathererd a large following) and would compete with a zillion other reviewers. This way he is in his own lane. Hes also testing UI intuitives...which be definition is only good if you dont need the manual.
Its counter intuitive to a lot of techies who take their time to learn things but many bedroom producers dont do that and many producers like myself value workflow over sonic perfection becuase we know that good decision velocity is a huge factor in sonic quality.
He won't always get it right but thats the sacrifice he makes in the name of the values hes promoting and catering to his target audience.
He is the opposite of snake oil. Snake oil is disingenuous selling of a product you either don't need or that is oversold. He deliberately detaches himself from software company marketing discourse and even free licences (prefers to.use demo) all in an effort to remain impartial and empathise with the user experience as much as possible. Its the opposite to snake oil.
If you want an alternative experience then supplement your viewing with the in depth reviews out there including from the developers.
These hit the spot for me. I dont always agree with him (eg i loved the transient shaper he didnt like last week) but his episode production quality is trustworthy, i can skip to the testing and within 5mins decide if i like it or not. Not many other vids offer that ease of use.
I just think that all the bullshit this industry gives us repeatedly for eating with no shame at all, largely deserves such treatment. Even if he can sometimes lack in-depth knowledge of the plugin, he is fair with his concept. In-depth reviews or tutorials are not the purpose of these videos, precisely.
the 232D is not emulating the Bettermaker Mastering EQ, it is emulating the long discontinued 232P. The Mastering Equalizer has some similarities but is not the same. Part of what makes the pultec section on this EQ nice is the Passive filter circuitry with solid state make-up gain. The biggest draw of this box was the total package, the way all the filters work together has a sound of its own. It's clean and punchy with a lot of flexibility. I used to own it until I bought the Mastering EQ, and this plugin recreation has basically achieved very close to the hardware sound, if not a bit better because i found the analog 232p's filters a bit noisy.
I always wonder like people talk about circuits like in analog gear, but you can call it any name, it stays digital!
@@alfredgrupstra I was describing the circuit in the hardware.
@@alfredgrupstra Because it's a digital replication of an analog circuit as opposed to just digital. Everyone and their cat understands that, why can't you? Obsessed much?
@@zizjaturtle2703 As I said, I just wondered, not that I didn't understand it. But when you think about it it stays digital, how many saturators you use to create an analog vibe doesn't maka it analog. My DAW still has to convert it to analog sound.
well lets hope Dirk watches this and now releases the mastering eq and dynamics!
It's interesting to see a guy like Michael Brauer when he moved his whole stepup in the box. He doesn't feel like he's missing ANYTHING from his outboard gear and it radically simplifies his job. But it's interesting to see that he often has to rig together two, three, five completely unrelated plugins to get the exact flavor of the analog gear he's replacing. An analog EQ is also a compressor, and an analog compressor is also an EQ, and they're both also adding saturation, and if you want to EXACTLY match the behavior of that equipment you have to get all of those individual details right too.
Brauer has like a wall of outboards thou. He switched his 9000 console to a Avid mixer and PA 9000 channel strip. He still uses his very own hardware bus style on everything. And those racks are insane. Like my girlfriends. 😁🤚🏻🎤
@@christianschneiderphoto not anymore, he has sold most of it m. Check pure mix tutorial whit his explanation.
@@joaoandre_bass pretty sure that that was because of what the industry has become more than he prefers software sonically. Today mixers get 1/15 of that they got even a few years ago, it has to be done fast and be recallabe without any cost.
But I’m sure his itb Template sounds amazing. I would never hire a mixer because of his or hers gear, only the ears and experience. And perhaps racks, as my girlfriends. 🤚🏻🎤
@@christianschneiderphoto it’s easier and sonically competitive. Cheaper, consumes less electricity, and of course for a mixer to get his kind of gear in this day and age and still make a profit would be near to impossible. If a lot of the classics made it into the box, why would I go the opposite route. He now mixes in his house, doesn’t need a tech on staff and one assistant is enough. It is what it is.
@@christianschneiderphoto
Yeah.. I keep my girlfriends on racks also.
I like the plugin very much. I only use hardware synths & drum machines for my music and I have specific saturation plugins with every synth and even with some of my favourite handcrafted sounds and for me that's where the magic is. The combination of the EQ curves with my own chosen saturation types is what makes this plugin the perfect tool. I feel this is more of a producers sound shaping tool then a mix engineers tool, but it can be used both ways.
As a dance music producer who cooks the the shit out of every channel and bus way before it gets summed at the master. It's actually pretty cool to have a clean Pultec for shaping.
@@MDMvision not necessarily... all these concepts are relative and I'm talking about dance music records, which need to be hot as hell.
But you have the same opportunities doing the same with Pro-Q3 or any other digital parametric eq, or am I missing something?
@@andreasveith6681 Sure if you want to take the extra time to finesse the eq curves, but that's a lot of faff when I can just use this.
@@mysteriousstranger9496 not with Kirchhoff EQ, it has filter shapes from outboard eq’s pre set you can choose from. So your tracks look like a block waveform since everything is so hot?
@@cassetteo Is that the new PA one? No don't be ridiculous. No doubt pushed more that the average viewer here though.
I’ve got this plug-in and really enjoy it.on a master. It gives me a clean pultec style with all 4 bands in one plug-in.
It’s great for making big, broad tonal changes by ear only after I’ve used Pro-Q3 for corrective EQ.
The quirky interface works for me in this context. I think it forces me into a different brain space.
It also just sounds good.
I use the Bettermaker, this are just tools. After years of mixing all analog, i am glad to have good tools and so many good options to tackle a complex or simple mix ITB. Thank you programers & companies that make this tools. They make my job easier, make my clients happier , Lets me provide for my family and spend more time with them! it's all about the music and the end goal.
My reason to use it: It sounds good. :)
Yeah, you can boost a lot with this EQ without it sounding harsh
Just started using this plugin today. Love it 👌
I been using this for over a year and it lives on my master buss. Here the thing, I have so many analog saturation style plugins that add color to my tracks... maybe to many analog things adding flavor. So for me a clean eq that is doing m/s on overall mix in a clean way adding that has bold bass on the bottom and a pristine highon top is needed. I used to use a pultec on master with everything sounded like the 70's over saturated thick goop. Modern music needs to have clarity and punch with warmth. unless your looking for that old fart rock and disco sound of the 70's then by all means a real pultec is in order. But if your rockin modern music then mixing up clean tones like grace, gulfoss, avalon and bettermaker help keep a balance
You took the words right out of my mouth.
It's a great EQ, regardless.
Same here
But, can't you just do the same with Fab Filter?
Then use your stock DAW eq
It’s about interaction with each curve that is unique. I’m far from a PA fanboy, but this is a cool plugin. Picked it up for 15 bucks on a sale. If you’re going to test, do some actual testing instead of rushing out videos for more views.
The hardware version is clean as well. That’s the point of it. Pultec curves without the color.
Its funny you mention Dan Worall - I was actually going to mention him. He actually did have something to say about this. He has an analog one.
Essentially, the magic is in the curves…and more specifically how easy it is to arrive at the curves with the interface.
I’ll try to sum up his point: programming a similar curve in FF ProQ3 or equivalent will likely lead to second guessing oneself. “Are you SURE you want to add X DB of gain to that frequency?” Since the frequency response can actually look really haphazard on a modern graphical user interface. I can remember him saying something like, “meanwhile, the bettermaker congratulates you on a job well done, and tells you want a fantastic engineer you are”.
Also about the tubes: there are some people who prefer solid state pultec style eqs to the tube ones…they claim the tube versions dull the transients and can do certain things to low end. I suppose an option would be nice
I think I heard Andrew Scheps saying that he likes transistor-based pultecs better than the originals.
there we go, i thought it sounded special. in same time it sounds very clean, i especially got a short wow, mhh moment with the bass bost knob.
i ususally need to sleep over it to conclude.
I listened to a video of Andrew Scheps explaining that he likes the clean version of the UAD Pultec (no tube emulation) because the tube version (hardware) was negatively impacting the low end for some material. So there is an advantage.
Yeah ofc… you dont always want coloration
Especially when I’m recording analog tracks, using Softube’s Console1, the Weiss (digital) EQ always surprises me (compared with the console Drive on the other strips) with what a breath of fresh air it is.
👇 slate's FGX-2
“You listening Harrison?” I’m dead 💀
I literally used this plugin a piano track 20 minutes ago. It gave it fantastic width, depth and clarity. I think Edmund Catlin (below) may have hit the nail on the head.
i tend to grab the bettermaker occasionally for the airband, even though i can match the curves anytime with fabfilter. but sometimes it's just faster to hit the bettermaker.
So it's a digital EQ with a cool backstory.
Just like the founding fathers at Waves intended.
"You get all the finicky control of our analogue setup without ANY of the character!"
Sign me up
In many cases I receive tracks that have the right amount (or too much) saturation and does not need any more....but I do want the Pultec curve. That's where I use it.
I’m going to record you saying “Lush, supple bottom” and use it as my text tone. Thanks 👍🏼
As someone who works only in the box, this comes in handy when I work on dense and impactful mixes (modern metal with various layers of synths and samples).
I was never able to make other pultec emulations work as I needed them to work in my mixbus, meanwhile, this always did the job (to be fair Softube's tube tech one made it too sometimes).
Funny enough I blamed for years the fact that most pultec vst do not get close to the sound of the UAD one (which was the first one I saw used many years ago in the studio with my band) and I didn't have access to it, but now I had Spark for a while and guess what? I simped UAD too much for nothing because their pultec never made it in my mixes to this date, not even on a simple channel.
Is it squeaky clean and without character?
Yes
Do I care?
No, and probably this is the reason why it actually works perfectly for my ears.
If it sounds good it's good for me and considering that you pay 29/39€ for it if you are patient enough I would not ask for more from it.
Yeah, surely the UX is questionable and this kind of UI has no sense or justification in the digital domain except for marketing purposes... but I am happy with it anyway.
nice, i also didnt like most other pultec emus.
Bettermaker no longer manufactures the EQ232P it’s since been replaced by a newer model. So the plugin makes since.
The tube style pultecs can leave the bass feeling wooly and insubstantial. The bettermaker version can do the pultec bass boost and attenuation trick without losing the solid sub. It may be a bit of a one trick pony, but at €24.99 it’s not a bad trick.
I love this plugin I don't think they make the hardware version anymore, which hails from Poland, the hardware came with its own software which controlled the hardware settings, similar to the Tegeler. You've been really busy uploading these videos, nice one.
I love this thing so much, I've considered getting the hardware secondhand, but the plugin works perfectly in most cases. It's best in my opinion in M/S mode, with a little bit of a low cut and presence boost on the side channels to add a gentle amount of width and volume. How do you use it?
@@maddietourmaline46 Wow! go for it, I wish I could afford even a 2nd version of the Bettermaker. I use the software version to tighten up the bottom end of my mix by attenuating and boosting the PEQ section. I still use the Pultec EQ by Waves sometimes, one which the Bettermaker was based on.
I actually use this plugin, sometimes on kick drums, most of the times on synth bass. I think the curves can be a bit weird, but I didn't check with the doctor.
I got the chance to try in an educators session this EQ & honestly except for the GUI I really like it. It brings a lot to my in the box processing. Since I haven't been able to invest in hardware. The interesting thing for me is that we have the Active & Passive circuits. Prob the magic is that you can push it without the distortion, that let's us take advantage of the several stages of selecting your distortion or saturation. So pushing into your preferred saturation? That's what I've been doing, since I still don't think digital should be thought as analog. Always interesting videos. ❣️
I tested this a long time ago as a Pultec on the mixbus and it suited the material i was working with so well i bought it. It's about the only EQ plugin i have or will buy that doesn't model harmonics. It models the older 232P model not the new mastering eq. They actually got it real close, it's just the soundstage is a tiny bit smaller (typical of plugins), but i really like the soft but tight sounding curves when used subtlely. It has an air, openess and sheen to it.
I did try to get close with a normal digital eq, but it was too much messing about at the time. I do appreciate accurately modelled curves, but there is no way i am going to keep paying for that when i can just make a preset on a good digital eq. This one slipped the net a while back, and that's also because of PluginAlliance's sales and vouchers.
I think the reason /rationale is that it has the interactive pultec styled eq bands where the neighbouring bands interact with each other in that pultec way but they've not modelled the tube saturation. The lack of these harmonics is a benefit as "they" see it. Not everyone wants to hear additional harmonics. Sometimes that aesthetic can sound overcooked. I don't always like the analog treatments on my work. I do agree with your assessment that this is not the correct interface for this kind of plugin. It would be better to have graphical controls and the option to dial in the harmonics to taste. That would be the best of both worlds. Great observations as usual.
I agree they've missed the point with this one.
Great video , but the plug is different from the hardware you compared it to, they no longer make the hardware version of the plugin which is why I think they made it into a plugin , nevertheless you brought up great points about the plugin!
I already have a supple bottom and classic curves.
Touché
Any cramping? 😳
@@mthomas1091 Once a month 😉
I like this plugin it’s pretty much a pultec ....with a few extra features ..... it’s got a nice high pass filter as well
From what I understand, the transformers are actually where most of the Pultec's sound comes from (other than the actual EQ section, obviously), and the tube makeup stage is actually very clean. A well designed, clean gain stage is going to be pretty much the same whether it's tube or solid state, the differences don't really show unless you're overdriving it and unless I'm wrong the pultec sound isn't really coming from overdriving anything, it's mostly about the topology of the EQ and the sonic footprint of the inductors and transformers.
I could definitely be off base on that, though.
I think in the end there is no magic or sauce in the machine. It exists because the hardware was discontinued, and it's liked because the workflow just clicked for the people who used the hardware or who like procedure. After all, it's predictable - not a lot of options to choose from for curves and frequencies.
My favorite thing about it is probably also the most tedious thing about it, which is adjusting each section in order, A/Bing it, and moving to the next one.
Yikes. Do your research. It’s a plug-in from an old discontinued model. It’s a killer plugin too.
Honestly I think the 232 sounds way better than the analog one (in this case). I'd rather have the cleaner EQ (I don't think it's sluggish, it just doesn't sound compressed more true to the original actually) and add another saturation of my choice and have total flexibility. Actually I think that is one of the main weaknesses of hardware, it works or it doesn't, and I've seen mastering engineers switch through five different expensive analog EQ's to see what works (spending like 10+ minutes on that alone) and I just don't see the reason for that anymore. Honestly IF I was to get me some hardware it would be a very flexible piece of gear like the SPL Iron. I agree with some points though, I think it should have the option of adding some unique saturation that also compresses a little, and yeah the original is very clean, but not as clean as their "emulation".
You have to say Dan Worrall's name three times before he will appear. 😅
I was delayed, sorry.
Thank you Harrison for making yourselves public enemy #1 of the ITB audio community. 😂
this one is not from harrison i believe
@@erewrw1906 That's not the point, he mentions Harrison in the video.
@@Arkayem Yes, he did that before. I love it each time he does it😄
I would imagine the argument for a plugin like this would be if you want a clean EQ that "suggests" Pultec style curves which you might not as easily gravitate towards on the complete freedom of a graphical EQ like fabfilter? I believe if that is the intention, it still completely shoots itself in the foot with the poor UI design, as well as being awkward to click around it is also hard to read the knob "positions" at a glance because of the stupid choice of emulating the look of white LEDs against a black and silver background. But you've got to remember these plugins from PA are really only worth at most $25 anyway with the pricing/sales tactic of PA, any prices shown higher than that only really exist to drive up interest when it is inevitably on sale. Really we know what's going on here is that "Bettermaker" is a good name to cash in on with the "analogue plugin in the box" hype, right?
9:38 when you have the video playing on your iPad while looking at your phone and you name is actually Harrison 😅
🤣🤣
I have the two 500 series of these EQs and they are so good and clean sounding that now I own the actual full hardware unit. I can say it is a unique eq that sounds amazing, that is why plugin alliance decided to do a recreation. I tried the plugin and although it is cool, it does not come close to the sound capabilities of the hardware. That is why it was in the mastering chain of Luca Pretolesi for a while. You can see videos of him using it. One thing bro, is that the hardware unit you showed at the beginning is not the same EQ. 🤙
It does sounds very similar just a tad bit smaller soundstage but it does sounds very much alike
What about all the Weiss gear from Softube that literally uses the same digital algorithms as the outboard gear but doesn‘t use AD/DA converters? So if you use digital in and outs the plugins and the hardware should exactly sound the same with an almost 20 times price difference. Weiss even promotes the plugin on their website.
Perhaps using your ears instead and you might just get it at the end 🙂. I've had the hardware unit (old 232P) and now have the plugin... love the sound signature of this plugin @96kHz -64bit float ... and to my ears it sounds great. Super thanks for the review but I think you need to do more research into the stuff you're talking about in give it some time in use so to really get the vibe... and as with the analog gear there is a sweet spot in the plugins but sometimes much more narrower comparing to HW so extensive use is the only way, otherwise you might end-up by just ''not getting it'' 🙂. Love from Finlandia🤍.
Unexpected results in your video, to be sure! I agree the true-to-the-hardware options can feel restrictive in the modern mixing environment (though I myself love the GUI's knobs and buttons) but the filters do sound different to me from other EQ's (including the Kirchoff, which is one of the brightest-sounding EQ's I have), particularly at the low end -- in fact, this is one of various EQ's I use almost exclusively when working at the low frequencies. Additionally, like others commenting here, I've found the broad bell settings to be very 'flattering' and 'creamy' when pushing thin-sounding mids, and compliments more surgical work with a fully parametric EQ. Now I feel like mixing something, ha ha 😊
I'm trying it now and like it. I wanted it for the low end and wasn't getting the results I wanted from the Pultec section until I used the eq1 section in conjunction with it. This works for me and I am sold. Going to buy it...
I agree with the carpal tunnel problem. I think the the place where this differs from fab filter and other ‘clean’ ones is better maker is using complex curves achieved by boosting and cutting the same band. Accurately emulating pultec curves is a stunt if they have done it.
I dunno on PA stuff. A lot of people who know more than me like some of the plugins emulating analog effects and tools. I just like the synth emulations (besides the guitar ones, never even tried because everyone hates those and I'm more interested in synthesizers anyways) and the Unfiltered Audio plugins, which focus on doing weird, creative things instead of copying any sort of physical gear. And have more simple and practical names than most plugins I have encountered. Tails is a reverb, G8 is a gate, Byome is a multi-effect that can do some really complex things. And Lion is their synth that true to the name can make all kinds of angry, loud, terrible sounds when you're outside of a musical sweet spot.
You are wrong, they doesnt made EQ Hardware unit anymore, that ones in xyour video its different unit as plugin bro ;)
On Bettermaker website is only Mastering EQ and no other, just a plugin
Dude you’re looking at the wrong hardware counterpart! That’s like trying a sontec 250 plugin and looking at a sontec 432.
You compared it to the wrong model Bettermaker.
It's the best sounding pultec style plugin anyway.
If you dig into the interface of the Bettermaker, it's an excellent-sounding tool but, In the "pultec war plugins", Acustica audio - purple 3.5 has by far the edge, but it's CPU-hungry
PA has never once made a comparison on ANY of the hardware they have modeled, I think that’s hilarious. That people still are buying in to it. Just buying different graphics. Over and over again. I still use the old Waves SSL strip and like r-Compressor. Sounds amazing. The software companies that do A/B and null stuff with hardware I believe. Can’t wait for the first one.
This one actually is like its hardware counterpart, though, which was a clean Pultec-style EQ.
There are some videos of people shooting out the BX Console plugins with the real gear and it's usually the closest to the gear than many of the other emulations, but they all sound so close, that you can use any one of them. The Waves SSL G Bus compressor sounds really close to the console G bus compressor, crazy since it is the oldest plugin version of the G bus compressor, and it gets the job done.
I use this on drum buss sometimes, if I want to subtly shape the overall character of the drums to fit the song. Or sometimes to bend a clean-sounding female vocal in to shape. But yes - the controls are just weird and confusing. I keep accidentally changing the wrong band.
I agree 4:36 a plugin that wastes your time figuring out how it works (we are talking about an EQ) is practically useless IMHO!
WEISS DID THE SAME THING WITH THERE HARDWARE MASTERING UNITS, MADE ACCURATE REPRODUCTIONS IN PLUGIN FORM FOR A FRACTION OF THE COST. I APPRECIATED IT.
Not even 5 mins into the video yet, but for the ppl watching/reading comments who get here within enough time, I’d say the value is in the analog emulation being done. Obviously every price of analog equipment has circuitry that can be emulated - so with that being said, if this hardware has something worthwhile/different In it’s hardware design, I’d say that’s where the value is.
Where is the link to Sweetwater, I can’t find it on the video, home page, or your website. I want you to get something for my purchases. Thanks
You do not know the difference in sound of digital plugin and analog hardware?
Disabling normalization - when and why (1/4):
- while listening to whole albums
(never met with a case when I listened to the whole album on streaming service that enabling normalization gave me better listening experience, actually always worse - Tidal user here)
- when using lots of sound enhancers due to low quality headphones/DACs in phones
(that way the sound gets very sensitive on any subtle changes in chain and normalization is like another plugin in the chain which is not fully "transparent" - so it doesn't affect only volume, but sound as well to some extent)
2/4 This specific limiter applied by streaming service is not hardcoded in the file by sound engineer. He cannot the final sound result. It always sounds random to some extent from an engineer perspective, because every service have it implemented a bit different, though with the same goal, but still, ilufs values for various services are different.
But engineer doesn't have a preview of the final result of such normalization. You can only cause the service to increase or decrease volume by changing volume on your side, but you cannot hear the final result on every single service after normalization. It differs, and not only from a volume perspective - it also affects the sound.
3/4 Loudness is more or less equal for the whole album for most tracks, so they do not require further normalization by streaming services. It almost always degrades sound quality. It's good that they at least take for consideration, that we listen to album and normalization is less aggressive.
4/4 Normalization is only useful for people who listen various tracks from various albums one by one, and here with normalization, most music "should" sound the same in matter of loudness, to not stand out.
I can imagine very specific case of using normalization for whole albums when it really sounds better for you in specific case of configuring EQ, enhancers on specific sound system. Nothing more
Lol. You can be such a silly sausage. Try moving the mouse wheel over the buttons (!). When i need a pultec i often reach for this. It sounds very good, and the extra para bands make it handy to zone in on other requencies, once all the mud is cleared and sparkle added.
Thank you for the review! I appreciate your alternative reviews of Gear and Plugins because mostly(but not always) each new Do-Dad receives 4 1/2 to 5 stars on the company websites(again it's a free World rate freely as well!). A little grit in the "review machinery" makes Life interesting. I may or may not agree with everything presented but I'm glad you're there. I do read manuals, but initial impressions without a manual are also valid(for me). Quality and getting the Job done in a timely manner are important. Best wishes.
The Plugin just sounds good… not on any source, but on most pop/Electronic tracks it adds some nice colour to the signal …
What do you mean by color? Usually people refer to saturation as color, but this plugin has absolutely no saturation, it adds no harmonics. The only "special" thing it does do is to use Pultec like curves (if you use the P-EQ section of course), the other EQ bands are calssic bell shapes.
@@AlexLapugean ja I know all this. But whatever … it just sounds good on certain material.
@@jensoettrich762 I know, I have the plugin, bought it some time ago. Precisely because I wanted a pulltec eq, without the distorsion. Those curves are very useful in some case, regardless if you can replicate them pro q3 for example, you reach those results faster with this.
It adds no colour 😂
Customers nowadays need a Pro-Q3 and a "Pro-Q3 with an analog UI and lesser features". I know it's ridiculous but they're ready to pay for it.
I didn't measure it. It still gets results I couldn't shape with Fab. Not that Fab can't do it, bettermaker just did it.
And I did screw up some mixes with it badly, well, because it makes things that are hard to do with Fab....
Good thing: if you don't like what it's doing.... dump it. There is Fab for most of the rest.
I got this after a year of PA MEGA sub, and despite all listed in the video I've done a lot of good mixes with this thing. UI is not the best, but I use it for 1-2 cases, which are my presets.
Yes it's a quick way to get the filter shapes. That's why i bought it
Why don't you use Plug-in Doctor these plugins?
hey there time traveller
Because we can all use Plugin Doctor, and if you don't have money for it, you can use Bertom EQ Curve Analyzer.
Boring content to sit on too long, I imagine he tries.
I did and I can tell you this plug-in is crap it does nothing a basic EQ cannot
@@richertz the pultec section is where it shines.
Would be nice if you did more in depth reviews using plugindoctor to see what it actually does
so i didnt got, why you dont like the design of it? i find it great to watch at and clear to understand. i hate it, when people talk something down, but cant explain why. lol ... well i use the bettermaker for some time, this thing is awesome.
Love your videos bruv! You know your shizz and are super funny speaking truths and poking holes in some of these advertisements! Love your side by side comparisons too my dude, keep em coming! Would love to know how you'd go about mastering Drum'N'Bass/Dubstep style music and what plugins or hardware you'd think to reach for automatically considering all the heavy bass frequencies you'd want to delicately control and enhance... in my dreams haha!
you should review the mag eq from plug in alliance and use a 4k display just to show how ridiculous the non scaling plug in is. its hilarious they still haven't updated it.
I don't get stuff like this. Why should I get this? What does this do that a fully parametric EQ can't do? I like some of the PA's stuff but they make all these knob EQ's that are totally unappealing in the digital realm. Why do I want to turn knobs with a mouse on a computer screen? Help me understand.
It’s very subtle, but the plug-in has a deadness to it. The plug-in Doesn’t sound bad, just not really grabbing the frequencies in the same way.
I am a fan of the channel... but I have to say that it is becoming a bit ridiculous pointing out how a plugin has a stupid GUI, when it is an exact replica of an original. Most users, me included, want that, I want it to look like and have controls like the original because it is what I expect. I want the clinical/flat look of my daw and, software in general, to have at least that bit of "real world" feeling and bring some of that "analog" feel at least aesthetically. It's much more fun than just having everything in plain sliders and buttons.
I think PA need to think a bit more about what they emulate, it shows they are more about selling the idea of having some unattainable gear in the box & that alone will make your music better rather than well designed products. I guess its their thing to mirror the hardware visually sometimes that works ok but in this case it translates poorly.
I really like the analog version in my mastering chain, since it's midi controllable and makes recalling super easy. Also the hardware is really solid. It's clean, but I like shaping the bottom end with it. But I also don't understand why you need to copy the controls to the plugin. I have the plugin from the PA subscription, but I never use it.
There are few things wrong with this video.
- the plug-in is a recreation of an old hardware unit. So you should not compare it with the Bettermaker Mastering Eq. It is not the same!
- also do not compare it with a random analog pultec-style equalizer because it is not the same.
- the rant on the bad UI is not right. It is just a reproduction of the original hardware.
So all the background info of this video is incorrect and leads to wrong conclusions!
But what is correct: There is not much to like about this plug-in even tough there are a number of mix-gurus out there that really love the hardware.
Please correct this video because the actual newer hardware of Bettermaker is excellent!! Just let’s say this plug-in is a mistake on its own.
I really don't understand why you think that the fact that 90% of top mastering and mixing engineers don't look at the -1dBTP recommendation is a symptom of people wanting everything to be louder. That's not the case. -1dBTP is to compensate for crappy lossy codecs, so it doesn't make sense in the long run, as we are seeing how we are moving towards better codecs and even lossless audio streaming. I think that any good engineer would agree that our goal is to make the best possible sounding music, and we find that in some genres that's -10 LUFS and in others it's -6, and then the job of making everything sound at similar level is on the provider side, hence the -14/16 LUFS normalization.
I have been watching your video's for a very long time. I agree with you on the marketing aspect but we all know that marketing is and will always be nessesary to make profit. It is not going to change. So the plugin companies will continue to advertise things like "exact emulation of the hardware", will continue to create virtual interfaces as close to the HW, etc in order to sell more.
I know that you are a smart person and HW lover, and that you understand that marketing approach for p/i's is not going to change. So I don't the point to continue to bring this forth in your video's. Big name engineers that went completely in the box, use all kind of plugins in certain combination to get the result they want to achieve. I think it's all about how to use what you have, what you can afford, to get the result you want. Great benefit of p/I is that you can have it (even this better maker emulation) on all tracks in you session. This is never possible with HW, unless you have a lot of money (or debt).
I do appreciate the fact that companies like Plugin-Alliance and other plugin companies provide a period of trial for their plugins where you can use them without any restrictions. People who doesn't have the HW, doesn't even know how these sounds and will get great result with their plugins.
I think it's time for you to challenge yourself (in a positive way). Mix a song completely in the box, use all plugins you want, EVEN the HW emulation you don't like [incl this better maker p/I], and show us that as a professional, you can achieve the result you want even with what you don't like.
Two final questions:
1. are you building your own hardware to put on the market one day?
2. will you ever have your own plugin? In the past, you have even showed us that some plugins are better than some clone HW.
It’s just a normal clean Pultec simulation, like the UAD Pultec legacy version, no THD, only the curve. Somehow I like the clean Pultec better when it comes to plugins, cuz no plugins come close to the real Tube Pultec yet, they always sounded too dirty, so the clean ones are actually more useful.
I was testing out the plugin just yesterday.
Backstory... Wanted something different for my mixbus eq, since I wasn't too happy with what my IK Multimedia Pultec did there (on other places I really like this plugin and think it's one of the better Pultec plugins out there).
To compare I also did something similar with TDR Nova just to compare to the Bettermaker... Low Bell with a Q of 0.1 and centered at 60hz and high Bell with a Q of 0.2 and centered at 10kHz.
Matched to gain on each band. With a blind test I preferred Nova to the Bettermaker and both to the Pultec plugin.
Nova seemed to have way more punch and clarity in the low end. Highend sounded good on either.
Saved me some money and now Nova is in my Template on my MixBus :)
I think what I often think about (not only) PAs plugins, it's mainly here to make money. Big names sell better than 'hey, this is our own xyz eq plugin'.
Mike Dean loved it :D
Was looking for a stab at Harrison, not disappointed lmao
Tubes. Real secret of tube sound is that tube amp is so simple, there is no tons of components, just what is necessary. There is NOT any warmth on tubes, just simple and clear circuit (and some nice distortion). Speaking of warm sound of tube amps is real snake oil.
For mastering, engineers like lurssen are using modified gear to get the least amount of distortion...
The Mastering EQ you're looking at on their website is not what this is based off of. This is in the legacy products, Bettermaker 232P MK II. This looks exactly like the hardware unit, that's the reason for the shitty interface. Not defending it, just that's why it's like this.
Wow, another Empress happy user ! Did you plan to post a review of this marvelous unit ?
It sounds amazing, it's got a very pretty top end and damn the bass is thick. If your source is great of course haha
The instrumental is dope
It's really good eq
I don’t really get why your first thought is to dis something that you apparently don’t understand (checking Thomann for the wrong unit).You can keep comparing plugins to hardware, but they will never be the same. Heck, not even two analog units will ever be the same. However, this plugin is a very good approach of the original hardware unit and they put a lot of effort in making it as good as and maybe even better than the original. The interface is just like the unit also. I would like a more positive approach, the people from plugin alliance aren’t pannenkoeken.
The explanation for any hardware EQ emulation is not to be found in its sound. Not primarily, at least.
It is (snare roll, please): pure workflow. (Easy, breath Wytse, I know such plugins won't give you the best possible workflow. You'll see what I mean in a minute)
Seriously, any EQ curve can be replicated in your DAW with a regular digital EQ (as long as it doesn't cramp), any EQ band saturation can be replicated and I think it is safe to agree that the input and/or output saturation is the easiest saturation to be replicated, but with the advantage that you can even choose which character you want to get.
Let me butcher the holy cow:
It doesn't matter if it is a 1073, an SSL 4K, Pultec, Altec, Manley, whatever. You can get it all.
BUT!☝️🤓 it very often takes a whole, complex chain of FX to achieve that. And expertise how to get there. Some EQs demand more, some less. Sometimes the shelf filters need some parameter linking (REAPER shines at that task) to imitate the behaviour of a particular hardware shelf. *This is work that costs time*, and this lost time wasn't used for actual mixing. That is why such plugins exist. Somebody else made the job for you and prepared that special EQ band behaviour for you so that you just have to turn a knob.
Now one could say: What do I need that for? I can dial in any sound I need by ear with my ProQ3.
That's true, you could. So let us see specific EQ band behaviours like a friend proposing a sound you perhaps didn't think of and hence wouldn't dial in on your ProQ3.
Another aspect is:
That signature sound.
No, I'm not talking about saturation here. I'm talking about limitations. If you want to make your mix sound like it was mixed on a vintage Neve, you NEED the exact same limitations the hardware gave you. Otherwise you wouldn't make the same decisions when dialing in settings. That's why I don't like all those digital extra gimmicks that haven't been there on the hardware. I like stepped controls. I like frequency limits. It forces me to make a decision just like the hardware the plugin emulates. Otherwise it would be just another quirky digital EQ with a vintage GUI. As I mentioned above: The essence of such plugins is its workflow it forces upon you.
That is why such plugins exist. They are pure decision assistants. The "sound" can be achieved by other means, too.
Back then, when we used to record on tape, when we had to use what we could afford, we had to choose which set of limitation we should get. And if a given set of limitation didn't get the job done we had to go on the quest for another set of limitation that would fill the notches we were given with our last setup. That's why there are so many EQs out there and that's why the SSL 4K became such a hit. It expanded your possibilities.
I have it and use it for stem mastering, on the mix bus - it honestly does the job fine! The interface is a bit confusing I'll admit, but nothing to Ultrabeat lol - anyway I like it, just as well because I've got it already ;-) Yes I'm back ;-)
Plugins produce Saturday evening Gezelligheid and talk together in front of your video. Bucket Coke, pizza or popcorn ? 🌭🍟🍕
The analog hardware units don't process digitally. They can simply be controlled digitally for extra precision and some of the other creature comforts of the digital realm. Like A/B listening or saving presets.
I can't say if the analog EQ has a tube stage, but we know that the technology used in analog signal paths introduce specific types of imperfections that are hard to replicate digitally and that's not different from say a distressor, La-2a or even the pultec. Of which there are many digital recreations that fail to emulate the hardware well enough for people familiar with the units not to notice the difference.
Ik weet niet zeker of die laatste zin compleet logisch was. Het punt is eigenlijk alleen maar dat de hardware gewoon een analoge pultec stijl EQ is met de voordelen die daarbij horen en daarnaast heeft het ook digitale controls.
Zou het dan 3000 euro moeten kosten? Ik denk dat dat vooral ligt aan hoe goed de hardware EQ klinkt.
Well.... Same thing happens with the Weiss Mastering compressor /limiter and EQ. Which is the EXACTLY same code cause the hardware is digital. And the gear cost $5k and the plugin $300.
It's hit or miss on certain material. It's a good option to have for adding weight or smooth highs. Again, it's hit or miss.
You need merch with "What's The Sauce" now.