latest 'no brainer' IK Multimedia T-RackS 3 Classic Equalizer & Metering Suite

old gregg

it's only $20 but how do folks around these parts rate the product:

http://www.audiomidi.com/T-RackS-3-Equalizer-No-Brainer-Deal-P13883.aspx

many thanks for your thoughts.

seannash

wouldnt all daws have an eq built in as well as spectral analyzer?

MilanPan!c

seannash wrote: »

wouldnt all daws have an eq built in as well as spectral analyzer?

Well... Yes, but not all of them are great or horrily flexible....

20 = worth a go...

I have about 5 EQs at this point, but why not make it 6.

seannash

MilanPan!c wrote: »

Well... Yes, but not all of them are great or horrily flexible....

20 = worth a go...

I have about 5 EQs at this point, but why not make it 6.

okay but surely most of them would be 5 band.(yes this one is six)

i asked this question before about eq and do the actually colour any part of the sound when there used.

most people said it doesnt.

bit miffed about the flexibility issue.i cant see anything different from what logics eq's do to this dedicated one

but yea i guess if you "need" an eq this one is cheap

old gregg

I've no answers here hence my asking. Again thanks for the opinions.

Sean's point about EQ plugins colouring sound sort of goes to the heart of why I asked. If not then I've got plenty of EQ choice and this is just a distraction.

having spent much of the last year alternating between Ableton and Reaper I'm reasonably sure I'm covered with what I have but just thought it wise to ask

MilanPan!c

seannash wrote: »

okay but surely most of them would be 5 band.(yes this one is six)

i asked this question before about eq and do the actually colour any part of the sound when there used.

most people said it doesnt.

bit miffed about the flexibility issue.i cant see anything different from what logics eq's do to this dedicated one

but yea i guess if you "need" an eq this one is cheap

Google DDMF.

Their ProEQ is pretty spectacular.

I also quite like the Sonalksis 517.

Compare those to say the Presonus EyeQ and it'll be very clear why have a lot if choice is good, if you use your options wisely.

seannash

MilanPan!c wrote: »

Google DDMF.

Their ProEQ is pretty spectacular.

I also quite like the Sonalksis 517.

Compare those to say the Presonus EyeQ and it'll be very clear why have a lot if choice is good, if you use your options wisely.

i actually have the sonalksis one too and it was that one that led me to ask the questions i did.

i found there was no difference to the sound from using the sonalksis eq and my logic one.

now i never really considered that logics eq's could just be really nice also

the explaination that was given to me was that when we boost with an eq the way it attenuates some of the higher frequecies is better on some eq's than others (shouldnt we be cutting rather than boosting?)

again would most users really notice a measurable quality difference from one eq to another(within reason)

ill google that now milan,probably should have before i replied ha ha

MilanPan!c

seannash wrote: »

i actually have the sonalksis one too and it was that one that led me to ask the questions i did.

i found there was no difference to the sound from using the sonalksis eq and my logic one.

now i never really considered that logics eq's could just be really nice also

the explaination that was given to me was that when we boost with an eq the way it attenuates some of the higher frequecies is better on some eq's than others (shouldnt we be cutting rather than boosting?)

again would most users really notice a measurable quality difference from one eq to another(within reason)

ill google that now milan,probably should have before i replied ha ha

I def think EQs can sound pretty different and dif feature sets can really make a second (or third or fourth) EQ worthwhile...

Some cool tricks that the Pro does includes being able to adjust the Q on all bands simultaniously and being able to shift all bands freqs simultaniously... I use both features and would miss them if I had to ditch te Pro, which won't happen I hope.

seannash

MilanPan!c wrote: »

I def think EQs can sound pretty different and dif feature sets can really make a second (or third or fourth) EQ worthwhile...

Some cool tricks that the Pro does includes being able to adjust the Q on all bands simultaniously and being able to shift all bands freqs simultaniously... I use both features and would miss them if I had to ditch te Pro, which won't happen I hope.

cool but is that it really,just easier to use than others.i know there is alot to be said for that but is the sound gonna be that diffrently effected


anyway i checked out that site.the basic eq(the tracking one) is like a normal eq i guess with a good few bells and whistles(probably useful).the others like the colour eq sound cool but they do set out to colour the sound from the start.id look into something like that alright as opposed to a regular eq.

but im not the most experienced person to be talking about these to be honest and there sould be a huge area that im missing which is why these expensive eqs exist

MilanPan!c

Sorry, but occured to me that if we're simply talking about channel EQs then they have one other crucial limitation, which is that you can't choose where in the signal chain to insert them, say after s compressor, but before verb.

seannash

MilanPan!c wrote: »

Sorry, but occured to me that if we're simply talking about channel EQs then they have one other crucial limitation, which is that you can't choose where in the signal chain to insert them, say after s compressor, but before verb.

you can in logic

im presuming its the same in all daw's

MilanPan!c

seannash wrote: »

you can in logic

really?

Been a long time since I used logic...

This is prolly why you don't care so much for EQ plugins...

[rethinks Logic]

Sorry to be fair I think I see what's going on (just went to apple site, btw.). You can do the same thing in every daw that comes with it's own FX. What I meant is that if you have built-in per-channel EQ, you can't move that around in the signal flow.

Sonar has built in EQ (plus more) on EVERY channel, by default, like a mixing desk, but I rarely use it (strangely, I use it all the time on mixing desks). Instead I use inserts.

It looks like Logic only have inserts.... right?

So this:



Compared to this:

seannash

yep thats correct

i never figured that a daw would have eq's by default on a channel strip.

surely you could just leave the eq flat and use the eq insert that comes with sonar?
Slightly OT i know,sorry to old greeg for the diversion

MilanPan!c

seannash wrote: »

yep thats correct

i never figured that a daw would have eq's by default on a channel strip.

surely you could just leave the eq flat and use the eq insert that comes with sonar?
Slightly OT i know,sorry to old greeg for the diversion

Absolutely!

There are a few tricks (pre-,post- stuff) and for pass filters it's processor footprint is almost non-existent, but yeah, it's more about options... Sonar is really pretty flexible...

old gregg

seannash wrote: »

yep thats correct

i never figured that a daw would have eq's by default on a channel strip.

surely you could just leave the eq flat and use the eq insert that comes with sonar?
Slightly OT i know,sorry to old greeg for the diversion

It's all good with me and I don't see it as a diversion, more of an enjoyable arc

seannash

Niall - Dahlia wrote: »

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much-gear-so-little-time/330874-digital-eq-fact-myth-2.html

Some interesting points on that thread, including how EQ's from different companies can be nulled.

In my opinion with EQ plugs it comes down to interface moreso than the "sound" of the EQ; not that the sound of an EQ isn't going to have an effect, but if you work with something you are familiar with and can work fast with, you're going to get better results in a mix than with something you're not familiar with, even if your choice of EQ is regarded as being "worse" at boosting highs or whatever.

If you're using EQs that emulate analogue EQ, that's one thing, but if it's just a clean boost or cut you want, the majority of EQs will do the job.

thats a good link.

so in light of all this chat is it safe to say that the new eq's that dont set out to replicate a vintage hardware unit or add extra dynamics when boosting like the ddmf colour eq are pretty similar to the eq's most people have coupled wit there daw's already.


does it just come down to userfriendly gui's

MilanPan!c

seannash wrote: »

thats a good link.

so in light of all this chat is it safe to say that the new eq's that dont set out to replicate a vintage hardware unit or add extra dynamics when boosting like the ddmf colour eq are pretty similar to the eq's most people have coupled wit there daw's already.


does it just come down to userfriendly gui's

not quite.

A 10-band EQ has a bit more flexablity than a five.

Plus being able to really fine-tune cuves is a major plus (IMO) and isn't even possible with some built in EQs (that I've seen).

Add to that unique functionality and the fact that many EQs are extremely cheap and sure, why not add another trick to your bag?

If the question is, do digital EQs all sound flat, if not modled on a "coloured" piece of gear, well then yes, they should.

If the question is, is there ever reason to invest in a second EQ, the answer is ALSO yes.

Oh and hey, I misspoke, the EQ that allows you to shift bands simultaneously and adjust Qs simultaneously isn't the Pro from DDMF, but DMGs EQuality.

Another very cool EQ.


http://www.dmgaudio.com/index.php?_view=products.product.0

I bought it on sale a while back, and the price has def gone up (!), but man it does some cool stuff!

One cool example is Auto Listen, which is basically an auto solo on the band you're adjusting..

A review:
http://audionewsroom.blogspot.com/2010/04/value-for-money-equality-syntorus.html


Still for the money, nothing beats the DDMF stuff IMO.

http://www.ddmf.eu/

I think you can get the Colour AND the Pro for a total 25e or something.

How can you go wrong... plus I THINK the pro still have the option of REAL stereo EQ (separate EQ for left and right channels) - something I'd never really seen, but something I'd "worked around" in the past. Worth 12e for that alone.

seannash

this one looks very intuitive

http://www.youtube.com/user/fabfilter#p/u/13/f9WdaU6HxzM

MilanPan!c

Niall - Dahlia wrote: »

If I find myself reaching for anything more than a 4-band EQ then the dilemma isn't which EQ plug to use, it's what the hell happened at the source...

Though I do like the sound of the Auto Listen feature, that's interesting.

hahaha...

I totally agree, but you know how it goes...

When you start adding stuff, looking for space in a mix, sometimes the sound you recorded wasn't right for the mix you're trying to make.

The auto-listen thing totally changed my approach to EQing...

For years I always seemed to have one-step-forward-two-steps-back luck with buss EQs... I gradually discovered it was because I was too focus on the sweet spot and not focused enough on getting my Q right.

The auto-listen has made me REALLY focus in on my Q and as such I have been able to EQ complex stuff more quickly...

Plus the ability to shift the entire EQ simultaniously is great! I find I can QUICKLY solve problems caused my tired ears (i.e. the next day I shift around the EQs ever so slightly and to my ears, magic happens).

Anyway, it's def a different sort of EQ than your bog standard DAW EQ.