Love this, and your videos. This is the spiritual successor to my beloved Air EQ (I wrote the manual for that). To have the EQ they used on Thriller. Yum!
@White Noise Studio Just a tip when analyzing aliasing in Plugin Dr, you'll want to make sure the plugin output isn't clipping, so lower the gain of the signal feeding it from PD and also 400Hz won't show you aliasing, you need to be up closer to nyquist to see the aliasing harmonics bouncing back down.
400 hz works perfectly fine as long as it hits the nyquest frequency in the end and feeds back. Closer to that frequency is obviously easier, but for full frequency display lower works excellent.
It would by interesting to listen to TDR Nova in comparison, because it is also a parallel EQ. There is even an EQ out there where can be switched between serial and parallel: IIEQ from DDMF.
The Pulsar Audio 8200 sits on my 2 bus, running mid side. Adding small corrections with it. Added features like De-esser, tilt, sub, air, and the M/S ability make it great for me. It expands the usefulness. I have almost every Pulsar Audio plug-in, and they've not let me down in quality. I did have to put Mu on the shelf as I got the UAD Manley Vari-Mu on sale.
Eiosis AirEQ Premium has the option to label frequency however it looks like Pulsar 8200 is more affordable, better looking and has more functionalities. I already own two of their plugins and maybe this will be the third 🤞
Th eAirEQ is also with the Slate subscription for those who are interested. Thanks for mentioning that one! But i don't think it's a parallel eq, right?
🧐 One would not think that EQ plug-ins would still be “a thing” anymore, yet somehow developers are indeed finding a way to create things that actually justify the effort. Fascinating. 🤷♂️
Sorry but they need take it beyond the hardware and offer things like steeper cut filters and frequency solo, especially for 150 bucks. The analog style interface with every knob at a glance would actually make it a great every day EQ but it needs more features.
🍀🎶 Every few days a new "Non plus ultra" plugin comes onto the market along with a "nicely laid out" RU-vid tutorial. Most of us, for whom home recording is "just" a very committed hobby, easily fall into the belief that this or that new "super plugin" will take our music or production to another level. But that works basically also with the stock plugins of Cubase Pro. I suspect that most users underestimate Cubase Pro plugins or, lacking the necessary know-how, do not know how to use these plugins "correctly". But hope for this through the plugins from third parties. I now see it with a "healthy distance". Quite apart from that: In no time at all you have 500 or more plugins on your SSD - and which plugins do you really use?! Maybe a tenth. Or? 😅
This is plugin 1401 on my system ;-) You are absolutely right. It's very easy to get FOMO with all these new plugins. You do need some distance and keep a clear head and know what you use and why. That said, I also think it's very OK to learn about the latest and newest, otherwise I wouldn't have started this channel at all. But you don't need those to get work done for sure.
I wouldn't say that this EQ has more detail/focus. If you look under the hood you will see that this plugin has a natural hi pass cut already set in the algorithm at around 20hz. This is a hard-coded cut therefore it gives the illusion that it is sharper in detail/focus. The other EQs are leaving simply leaving the low-end untouched which is fooling our perception of the high-end. Much respect though because it would take some level of great ears to notice the difference in the first place. I dare say, that if you had matches the soft hi pass filter along with the Bell EQ curves for your illustration, the EQs would fairly sound more or less the same (regarding detail/focus). In my honest opinion, for specific reasons), I think it's the perfect EQ for bass synth or bass guitar tracks (if you are looking for a cleaner sound). It's pretty amazing as a cleaner all-arounder mono EQ where you would be cutting the lows anyway.
@@whitenoisestudio I do understand that three plugins are coded to process definitely and I'm not trying to be argumentative at all. I have have high regard and much respect for your Channel. Thank you for replying back by the way!!! All I am saying is that you can match the 🔔 curves & gain to be exact; which would put you at deviating gains and Q's of either EQ to get an exact match, 8200 will always sound sharper & more focused because it has a hard-coded high pass in its permanent EQ curve. The other two EQs used in this demonstration do not have this same hard-coded high pass cut. Therefore, no matter how much you match the 🔔s gain & Q of any EQ, they will always sound flabby compared to 8200; unless you incorporate a high-pass filter to match the hard-coded EQ curve 8200 on the EQ you are comparing. This is simply because the other EQs are leaving the low end untouched. Bertom or Plugin Doctor will show you this.
I don't mind a little talk about this at all :-) I won't argue the hardcoded highpass of the 8200, it's below 20Hz. But my point is, that even if you match eq curves, there will also be the difference between having eq in series or in parallel. The way those are summed is different which causes different behavior and with that a different sound. With a regular serial eq, each eq band will influence the other band to an extent. With a parallel eq, they do not. You can hear that in action on the synths I showed, they do not have anything going below basically 50 or even 80hz. And I fully agree that this EQ will be great on bass instruments, even in mastering.
@@whitenoisestudio I totally get it. However, I think you would get just about the same results or affect regarding focus and sharpness, if you compare the two serial EQs, and engaged a low pass filter at its lowest setting (say around 10 to 15hz) 6-18dB Octave, and then A/B the differences.
@@whitenoisestudio I get that but how can you be sure that even the bandwidth values match? I've found differences in Q values between different digital EQ's, so when doing an A/B comparison, you'd want to be sure that when you're comparing each band in isolation that the gain and curves are matching. Of course there will be differences due to the parallel and serial nature of each EQ when the bands are all in together.
Hey man please I beg u make a tutorial on the exact vocal mixing chain used in this video. I can’t explain u this is that electronic sound That Im trying to achieve from years but can’t. 🙏
Acustica has a very strong devoted fanbase. i usually take it with a grain of salt. Also, green really is a different unit than just a pulsar 8200 emulation , it adds a ton upon the clean sound of a 8200 - acustica style.
@@whitenoisestudio I see. I actually own every plugin from Pulsar, though. Mixing with Mike, on the other hand, praises the 8200. I'll buy it anyway coz I do like Pulsar.
@@cardpuller17 I haven't demoed it yet. I love their Pulsar Massive. You should try to demo it first before listening to a random guy on the internet like me. Haha. Anyway, TDR products are high quality , good choice!
Dirk Ulrich stated that the Amek 200 is inspired by his own 8200 but not a 1:1 emulation! Tonight I'm gonna use bertom eq curve analyzer to create the same exact curve with all three Eq's to see if this is worth buying for me. Also gonna add Acustica Audio Green to the list as well.
The big ''issue'' with the Mmek 200/250 is the TMT they have on it. It really randomizes curve shapes, the actual frequency ( !), and q width. I did a shootout between the 200 and 250 and could get eq curves so close that they as well could have been 1 plugin instead of 2.
I haven't tried it yet but I've been waiting for a discount price. But I love Amek 200, 250. Sontec 432, Soma, Massive. Do I need another? Yes, I think so 😅😅😅
I will explain the problem to you and everyone.The equalizer absolutely copies fabfilter proq3 and at the same time there is no overlap of spectra and the graphical interface is more loaded and visually works poorly, and finally the strongest minus when loading 5-10 instances, your CPU will not thank you, which fabfilter does not have.Just compare and everything will become clear.Most of the equalizers are just marketing.Even!If they emulate hardware for you in the modern world, it's not so important anymore!
Wow, Pulsar really have gone all out and paid a lot of content creators/youtubes to do paid promo's on launch of their new plugin. Try the plugins, don't take any paid youtubers word for anything. They often will not disclose that it's a paid review/content video.
Wow, I have never seen so much false assumptions in a comment on a video of a channel who disclosed its sponsorships on all of its videos. Stop your conspiracies and go do something useful with your time. I’ll leave your comment up for everyone to laugh at.
i would laugh at how triggered you are about that comment... i am pro pulsar audio, but the commenter has a point, a really good one too looking at the state of RU-vid reviewers nowadays. its not a conspiracy at this point.@@whitenoisestudio
i dont think this is a good aproach for a comparisson, you shouldn't try to match the settings, instead you should try to match the eq curves or do it by ear and find if you can match the sound.
It's good to do both I think. Good to know how the curves and frequencies react differently to the same settings as the labels aren't always accurate. But also good to know if it's necessary to get a new plugin as you can usually get very close to null, even though it might take slightly different settings.
Don't forget that part of the utility of an EQ plugin is how good the curves sound by default, without needing to spend 5 minutes fiddling with the Q and adding extra bell filters to customize the shape every time you want to set a boost or cut.
