![softube tape vs waves gearsslutz softube tape vs waves gearsslutz](https://www.gearnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/01-tape-echoes-render.jpg)
- Softube tape vs waves gearsslutz pro#
- Softube tape vs waves gearsslutz software#
- Softube tape vs waves gearsslutz free#
I've found several free ones that have cool sounds Nothing wrong with any of the others mentioned above including logicsīeen a long time since i've heard a completely awful eq plugin, so i agree with MPZ's premise - though not sure i want to spend time rolling my own with so many proven musical models being done Several of the neve things i've heard are nice - uad's are great
![softube tape vs waves gearsslutz softube tape vs waves gearsslutz](https://img.youtube.com/vi/llbMoLC2Bn8/maxresdefault.jpg)
Mcdsp filterbank is great -worth a demo for sure I prefer to think in terms of which eq for the job and music style rather than one eq for all - why not given the options out there and a great way to create distinction in a mix Of course ideally you track stuff so well you don't need any eq If you feel like you need "warmth" or what have you when you're done, then look at saturation, enhancers, ANALOG GEAR, etc. if the saturation on the expensive EQ's doesn't tickle your fancy, don't use them and stick with logic's EQ. I think you really have to trust your ears and workflow on this one. The big name EQs don't have magic dust- just saturation algorithms and other DSP. because (imo) analog (transistor especially) saturation > digitally emulated saturation.
![softube tape vs waves gearsslutz softube tape vs waves gearsslutz](https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/54d696e5e4b05ca7b54cff5c/1496839872102-8CQ2U3EN45IWIWU0M617/Softube+Tape+Plug-in+Review.jpg)
Softube tape vs waves gearsslutz software#
though, honestly, I also agree with Robert Babicz- who says software EQs are fine for cutting, but a no-no for boosting. Honestly, I'm with Algorithmix on this one- choose a quality parametric EQ, then a saturator if you want that as well. granted they probably have some uniquenesses coded in, but I don't know how often those slight details will be significantly beneficial You can get very close to the results of the big-name EQ's on your own, if you have the knowledge and spend the time. Basically it becomes an issue of workflow, money, and time. Of course, it takes significant time to do this emulation work- which is why you'll hear about big producers just using a few of the expensive ones that they like. For controlled generation of distortions (if you really need any), we recommend using enhancers or any other specialized processors with proper built-in anti-aliasing technology." Therefore our policy in PEQ design has always been to make the equalizer filters as precise and clean as possible. Usually, however, ‘bad’ non linear distortions and other deficiencies like limited dynamic range are surely not responsible for a ‘magic’ sound. If the distortions are ‘good’, they may make certain applications sound better.
![softube tape vs waves gearsslutz softube tape vs waves gearsslutz](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/49t_gAXHqeY/hqdefault.jpg)
Of course, the contribution of distortions to the specific sound of a particular analog equalizer caused by the respective electronics has to be considered. "The truth is that with a properly designed, fully parametric analytic PEQ, every amplitude and phase characteristic of any other equalizer setup can be recreated. This is also the stance of Algorithmix- from their site: The gearslutz forum especially- someone managed to emulate one of the big API eqs with ableton's EQ8 and saturator on there.īasically the conclusion people came to there is with a well- designed, powerful EQ and saturation/enhancement plugins, you can recreate any eq almost perfectly.
Softube tape vs waves gearsslutz pro#
When I do want to EQ by numbers I use Apulsoft's ApEQ because it's display is AWESOME! (sorry) I generally use URS' Channel Strip Pro when I need some character or saturation.Īs far "sounding that good." I don't think I've ever used an EQ that I'd be afraid to use on a commercial recording.Īs Babaluma said, people have been questining whether software Eqs are actually different. I also like Eiosis' AirEQ because sometimes I don't want to EQ by numbers. I really like DMG Audio's EQuality, because I can predict how it will sound when I do something and the interface is very intuitive. Their bundles have always seemed to be quantity over quality to me. Of the Waves EQs I kinda like the API one, I liked how it sounded on drums but other than that I'm not really into Waves stuff. It seems like most modeling EQs start with the same standard filter models then add saturation and tailor the bandwidth curves to emulate the behavior of other EQs. The renaissance EQ and Q10 have always struck me as pretty bog standard digital bi-quad filters, the same as pretty much any EQ that comes standard in a DAW.