Basic EQ questions

[graeme75]

Hi

Ive used reason for a while but have some basic EQ questions, that hopefully people can answer.

1) For EQ a channel is is personal preference as to whether you use the SSL strip or EQs as inserts? A bit like whether using reverb on channel or as a send?

2) Most tutorials I watch are using Live which has Eq8. What is reasons equivalent? Just the Mclass EQ or SSL strip/device since reason 11?

3) Can you use MClass EQ in series? So if there were 3 particulal frequencies you wanted to alter, you could use MClass EQ for 2 of them and then a 2nd instance for final freq?

4) Can the filters/EQ in the kHs toolbox be used in series similar to above?

4) FInally is it CPU overkill to use Synapse GQ7 or RPEQ if just want basic low/hi pass filters? Are these only used if you want more precision?


TIA. I tried searching this forum for answers but I couldnt search on EQ as there were too many hits for the forum to return

Cheers
Graeme

[orthodox]

3) Can you use MClass EQ in series? So if there were 3 particulal frequencies you wanted to alter, you could use MClass EQ for 2 of them and then a 2nd instance for final freq?

Sure, that's OK. Those two frequencies in the first EQ are done in series internally anyway.

[MannequinRaces]

5?) Yes!

[Kalm]

Hi

Ive used reason for a while but have some basic EQ questions, that hopefully people can answer.

1) For EQ a channel is is personal preference as to whether you use the SSL strip or EQs as inserts? A bit like whether using reverb on channel or as a send?

2) Most tutorials I watch are using Live which has Eq8. What is reasons equivalent? Just the Mclass EQ or SSL strip/device since reason 11?

3) Can you use MClass EQ in series? So if there were 3 particulal frequencies you wanted to alter, you could use MClass EQ for 2 of them and then a 2nd instance for final freq?

4) Can the filters/EQ in the kHs toolbox be used in series similar to above?

4) FInally is it CPU overkill to use Synapse GQ7 or RPEQ if just want basic low/hi pass filters? Are these only used if you want more precision?


TIA. I tried searching this forum for answers but I couldnt search on EQ as there were too many hits for the forum to return

Cheers
Graeme

1a. Yes, but keep in mind its position. The EQ on the mixer is still technically an 'insert' on the channel but its a dedicated insert. That's what channel strips really are. Dedicated inserts that cannot be changed. You can reorder the sections (EQ DYN, etc.) but you can't switch it out for something else.
1b. Usually insert sections on a console (like the SSL Mixer) have "external inserts" specifically for processing that IS NOT available on the board. This is where your 3rd party plugins go. If this was a real SSL like the Duality I've mixed on, then I could patch in a real LA-3A Compressor (bad boy) in the signal path.

2. There is no equivalent in terms of 1:1 features and specs.
True Answer: They are DIGITAL EQs. This means the EQ process and precision is functional in the digital domain. The 8 on Ableton's EQ-8 stands for 8 bands. M-Class has 4. You'll spot differences as you use them. Sonically there shouldn't be a difference like anything digital but hey, different coders.

3a. Yes, like any other process, anything can be in series or parallel. It's all mimicking electricity. Can you connect cables together? In real world applications you're moving XLR to XLR to XLR inputs and outputs. No difference here. If there is, that company is doing something special.
3b. Would you want to use separate EQ's for different frequencies? Maybe, it depends on your workflow and the resultant EQ curve shape you're looking for. Best I can tell you is try both ways and use your ears. For me, I try to use as few EQ's as possible.

4. 3rd party company products should make no difference in the order of processing unless its coded for a certain work behavior. As far as EQ's go, it would go against the concept of an EQ to not put it in serial.

5. Refer to #2. Some people get comfortable using a certain EQ because they can dial it in easier. Others like precision of EQs. Most EQs should perform the exact same way unless its analog or analog modeled. If I build a house with a set of resources, people, and plot diagram twice but with a different supervisor, it should come out the same albeit minor differences. usually its preference based. That is digital EQs.

Take a look at this tutorial video I did comparing Studio One's Pro EQ and SSL's X-EQ 2 as an example

[chaosroyale]

I will try to make my answers generalizable to any kind of sound engineering;

1 - You can use an EQ anywhere you like, it will affect everything BEFORE it in the chain directly, and this will feed into the next stage of the chain. It is a common practice to use EQ before AND after effects, for example, because it will have different results on the sound (EQ before distortion will emphasize a fatter or sharper sound, EQ after distortion can remove hi frequency fizziness, etc)

2 - There is (still!!) no surgical EQ in Reason. You will have to use 2X or even 3X Mclass. It's a huge pain in the ass. Just buy a good VST EQ if you have the money. Fabfilter pro-Q is great. EDIT- I should add, almost all DAW and VST EQs sound exactly the same. However, up in the very high frequencies closer to nyquist the EQ "curve" tends to get squashed up with most cheaper EQs. This is usually not a problem but if you need absolutely smooth curves, something like Pro-Q is the answer.

3 & 4 - Yes, no problem at all. You can put any combination of EQ and filters in series. It's fine.

5 - CPU overkill? That depends entirely on your machine. I often use "high CPU" VSTs for simple filtering because most good plugins will only use CPU for the features you have engaged. If you only switch on one band of the filter/EQ, it should only use CPU for that band. I would highly recommend a VST EQ over either of the choices you mentioned, mostly because they are both rather outdated and have iffy/slow GUI's. At least until Reason studios decides to include a proper 7 or 8 band surgical EQ.

Hi

Ive used reason for a while but have some basic EQ questions, that hopefully people can answer.

1) For EQ a channel is is personal preference as to whether you use the SSL strip or EQs as inserts? A bit like whether using reverb on channel or as a send?

2) Most tutorials I watch are using Live which has Eq8. What is reasons equivalent? Just the Mclass EQ or SSL strip/device since reason 11?

3) Can you use MClass EQ in series? So if there were 3 particulal frequencies you wanted to alter, you could use MClass EQ for 2 of them and then a 2nd instance for final freq?

4) Can the filters/EQ in the kHs toolbox be used in series similar to above?

4) FInally is it CPU overkill to use Synapse GQ7 or RPEQ if just want basic low/hi pass filters? Are these only used if you want more precision?


TIA. I tried searching this forum for answers but I couldnt search on EQ as there were too many hits for the forum to return

Cheers
Graeme

[graeme75]

Thanks for all the info very helpful

[graeme75]

Thanks for all the info very helpful

[ShelLuser]

1) For EQ a channel is is personal preference as to whether you use the SSL strip or EQs as inserts? A bit like whether using reverb on channel or as a send?

Nah, it depends on the situation and your setup. For example; if have two instruments going into the same channel and you want to filter both in order to preserve some 'space' then it could make sense to simply use an EQ within the rack. Of course if you have both instruments working well together it could make more sense to simply use the EQ in the mixer section.

As always within this industry there isn't a strong "right" or "wrong" here. Don't forget that most of the standards we have today started out with musicians who played their stuff in the "wrong way", where 'wrong' basically meant going against the common standards.

2) Most tutorials I watch are using Live which has Eq8. What is reasons equivalent? Just the Mclass EQ or SSL strip/device since reason 11?

Yah, this is the main reason I responded... Obviously I don't know which tutorials you're referring to but honestly: most I saw seem to try and overcompensate for things, at least that's my impression. In other words: sometimes I can't help but wonder if the EQ8 wasn't used because eight was higher than three, I've seen plenty of tutorials where an eq3 and/or especially a channel EQ would have made a lot more sense (for various reasons).

Also... be careful with looking for "equivalents" amongst DAW's, it doesn't always work like that. In many cases (standard) devices get optimized for the preferred workflow within said DAW and those don't always correspond. Live's workflow is a lot different than that of Reason and both of their workflows are totally different than that of Maschine. Different workflows: different instruments & effects.

Of course there's also plenty of overlap; an EQ is usually an EQ despite what DAW you're using. But that's also not my main point here: be careful that you don't start treating Reason as if it were Live or the other way around, because that can lead up to plenty of frustrations (and often triggers your common (and IMO plain out boring): "Why isn't DAW x more like DAW y?"). Duh...

But to answer: both the Channel EQ and the MClass EQ are good. They don't necessarily have 8 bands but... you usually don't even need that, and if you do you can just chain 'm together to get those results (patching in the rack FTW!).

3) Can you use MClass EQ in series? So if there were 3 particulal frequencies you wanted to alter, you could use MClass EQ for 2 of them and then a 2nd instance for final freq?

Yah, but you probably want to use them parallel by splitting your signal first. After all: if you set them in series (I'm assuming you're referring to a sequence of EQ's) then the latter EQ's would only process the already filtered material (depending on your setup). Look into the Spider utilities for this. Once again: manual patching FTW.

4) FInally is it CPU overkill to use Synapse GQ7 or RPEQ if just want basic low/hi pass filters? Are these only used if you want more precision?

This was #5

It depends... In the end you should trust your ears (and a good pair of headphones). It also depends on your source material. I've had stuff where the saturator knob made an obvious sounding change (for the better) to my material but I've also experienced situations where it didn't seem to do anything. In the end an EQ is an EQ, it filters frequencies....

Of course there can be some differences with the engine and how the audio is being treated which falls back to... trusting your ears.

I don't think the default EQ effects are seriously better or worse than some of the RE's. Heck, I've even compared the vanilla EQ's with some of Ozone's effects and I still don't think that they're much better or worse, though it does heavily depend on your material. And well, in all fairness, sometimes the Ozone effects can be easier to set up (which is kinda obvious IMO).

[orthodox]

3) Once again on EQs: the vast majority of them implement a linear transfer function, just like a fader. This means you can reshuffle them in a chain together with faders in any order you like, the result will always be the same. But I would avoid using them in parallel, the result will be unpredictable because they also shift the phase at some frequencies, which can lead to unexpected drop-offs in the spectrum after mixing several EQs together.

[DJMaytag]

1) For EQ a channel is is personal preference as to whether you use the SSL strip or EQs as inserts? A bit like whether using reverb on channel or as a send?

I generally prefer plugin EQ's, usually going to FF Pro-Q3. At the start of a track though, I will use the SSL strip EQ a bit until I'm further down the pipeline with a track.

2) Most tutorials I watch are using Live which has Eq8. What is reasons equivalent? Just the Mclass EQ or SSL strip/device since reason 11?

There really isn't one, but EQ8 is about as useful/overkil as Waves Q10. That said, if you need more than what the SSL strip can do, maybe look at the sound source and any other processing done on it first. I find that doing some tweaks to a synths filter settings and maybe anything that produces a resonant peak needs to be tamed first.

3) Can you use MClass EQ in series? So if there were 3 particulal frequencies you wanted to alter, you could use MClass EQ for 2 of them and then a 2nd instance for final freq?
Yes, and in the analog world, it's called feathering... where you use several small boosts close together rather than one big boost (assuming you have one spot to boost a lot). If they're all far apart, then running the EQ's in series is fine. However, any sort of analog modeled EQ plugin could lead to a build up in noise, just like in the analog world.

4) Can the filters/EQ in the kHs toolbox be used in series similar to above?

4) FInally is it CPU overkill to use Synapse GQ7 or RPEQ if just want basic low/hi pass filters? Are these only used if you want more precision?

The SSL mixer HPF and LPF have been pretty sufficient for basic needs. Pro-Q3 and any plugin channel strips I might have are the alternative for me.

[plaamook]

You can switch off the display on the GQ7 to save CPU a bit. Switch is on the back of the thing, which it shoudn't be IMO.
I do. I use the hell out of that thing and if I don't need to see anything I switch it off.
Sure I could use a different EQ but I like the GQ7 a lot. IT's my swiss army filter.

[jlgrimes]

2) Most tutorials I watch are using Live which has Eq8. What is reasons equivalent? Just the Mclass EQ or SSL strip/device since reason 11?

No real equivalent but SSL EQ has the Spectrum functionality of EQ8. Eq8 is more surgical IMO though as it can do deeper and more controlled cuts.

Mclass EQ would be the next best. It is a bit outdated though as it hasn't been updated at all and is 2005 technology.

Ableton "tweak" their stock devices almost every major update or so.

A good digital EQ such as Pro Q3 is a nice tool to have.

Most digital EQs aren't too CPU intensive unless they are doing analog modeling or linear phase. Some will use oversampling which makes cleaner high end boosts/cuts but the added CPU use usually isnt too much in that case unless you are doing 4x or more.