The ocean of EQs

All your LV2 and LADSPA goodness and more.

Moderators: MattKingUSA, khz

thebutant
Established Member
Posts: 139
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 12:59 pm

The ocean of EQs

Post by thebutant »

When typing "eq" in my plugin browser, I get an impressive list of choices.
So I'd like to hear what you other Linux musicians / Linux sound people use and prefer and why.
To start with myself:

Calf EQs: Calf Equalizer 8 band is my goto eq. When I don't need anything unusual, I use this one without thinking (sometimes I use the 12 band, rarely the 5 band, but they're basically the same eq anyway). I find it transparent, the analyzer is good and easy to use. I don't think I've ever done any harm with a Calf EQ. It's the standard one for me.
x42 Parametric Equalizer Stereo: Lately I've been using the x42 eq quite a lot (only the stereo, the mono shows no analyzer for me. oh, to get the analyzer running, press the upmost right arrow over at "spectrum" to the right of the eq). Features I like: 1/ Right clicking on a node lets you hear only the sound of that node. Quite useful when there's something unwanted you're trying to fix. 2/ That it analyzes and shows how loud the loudest point (well, the peak) is. 3/ That it sounds good, in my opinion. Nevertheless I find it less subtle than the Calf eq. I more easily mess things up with the x42. I'd really like an "undo" button, as it's feels a bit too quick for me. But that might of course be because I'm more used to the Calf.
LSP Graphic Equalizer x16 LeftRight: Well, I don't really use this one that often. But I find it extremely useful when editing files where one of the channels has an unwanted noise, the other channel has almost all the speech that should be heard and so on. Basically it lets you eq left and right channel differently.
Multiband EQ: This one I hardly use anymore, but I did for years. Every day. It's quite the opposite of subtle - just by adding it to your signal flow, you will hear a boost without doing any eq. It easily distorts, but it also "pushes" the sound, it's a bit insisting. Which can be fun when you need something rough.

These are the ones I'm quite familiar with, but there are so many more. Many I haven't even tried.
So if you like, please tell me (and everyone else) why you like this other eq, which one's your favourite.
I'm looking foward to discover more of them. :)

rghvdberg
Established Member
Posts: 959
Joined: Mon May 12, 2014 7:11 am

Re: The ocean of EQs

Post by rghvdberg »

I like eq10q. Quick and easy. Nice spectrum display.

User avatar
CrocoDuck
Established Member
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 6:12 pm
Contact:

Re: The ocean of EQs

Post by CrocoDuck »

I never used EQs, believe it or not. I normally only apply low pass and high pass filters to the tracks to lock their bandwidth. Then, I use multi-band compression for the master.
Check my Linux audio experiments on my SoundCloud.
Browse my AUR packages.
Fancying a swim in the pond?

User avatar
sysrqer
Established Member
Posts: 1875
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2013 11:47 pm
Contact:

Re: The ocean of EQs

Post by sysrqer »

I use OvertoneDSP's AF210 almost exclusively. I find a lot of linux eqs to be a bit fiddly to use and AF210 is just perfect, click to create a new node, spectrum analyser, and the parameter locking is very handy. I wish it did mid/side though.

I also use their latest one, EQ4000 I think, but it seems to be removed from their line for some reason. Sounds great though and it's refreshing to be forced to eq based on what you hear rather than what a graph looks like.

The x42, LSP, and EQ1010 are all solid choices as well though.

User avatar
sadko4u
Established Member
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: The ocean of EQs

Post by sadko4u »

It's sadly to not to see LSP Parametric Equalizer in your list :).
Last edited by sadko4u on Sun Mar 18, 2018 4:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
LSP (Linux Studio Plugins) Developer and Maintainer.

User avatar
sadko4u
Established Member
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: The ocean of EQs

Post by sadko4u »

CrocoDuck wrote:I never used EQs, believe it or not. I normally only apply low pass and high pass filters to the tracks to lock their bandwidth. Then, I use multi-band compression for the master.
It is very useful to clean up recordings from unwanted resonances to reduce the frequency masking effect.
LSP (Linux Studio Plugins) Developer and Maintainer.

stanlea
Established Member
Posts: 610
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:49 pm

Re: The ocean of EQs

Post by stanlea »

sadko4u wrote:
CrocoDuck wrote:I never used EQs, believe it or not. I normally only apply low pass and high pass filters to the tracks to lock their bandwidth. Then, I use multi-band compression for the master.
It is very useful to clean up recordings from unwanted resonances to reduce the frequency masking effect.
Depends only on your audio tracks, synthezised or recorded.

User avatar
sadko4u
Established Member
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: The ocean of EQs

Post by sadko4u »

stanlea wrote:Depends only on your audio tracks, synthezised or recorded.
Yes, that's true. I almost work with live recordings, that's why I always use resonance filters to cut-off audio resonances. Synthesized sounds may only need timbral correction.
LSP (Linux Studio Plugins) Developer and Maintainer.

thebutant
Established Member
Posts: 139
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 12:59 pm

Re: The ocean of EQs

Post by thebutant »

sadko4u wrote:It's sadly to not to see LSP Parametric Equalizer in your list :).
Haha, I take that as a push to try out your Parametric Equalizer in my upcoming projects! :D

omer666
Established Member
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:57 pm

Re: The ocean of EQs

Post by omer666 »

My go-to EQ is the integrated Mixbus EQ, but whenever I need extra accuracy I use x42, I never found something more efficient. I looks great, sounds great, and it is very straight forward.

I might also experiment with AirWindows from time to time, he's got a real good tilt EQ.

ssj71
Established Member
Posts: 1292
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:36 pm

Re: The ocean of EQs

Post by ssj71 »

I use pretty exclusively parametric Eqs (and lp, hp filters). They just provide the best ability to do exactly what I need. I used to always use Fil4, but now reach for the x42 every time (which is the same DSP + shelves). Its just been plenty good for everything I need. Perhaps I should try some of the others.
_ssj71

music: https://soundcloud.com/ssj71
My plugins are Infamous! http://ssj71.github.io/infamousPlugins
I just want to get back to making music!

User avatar
chaocrator
Established Member
Posts: 306
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2015 8:11 pm
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine
Contact:

Re: The ocean of EQs

Post by chaocrator »

harrison, x42 (parametric), calf (graphic).

User avatar
Scary Hallo
Established Member
Posts: 277
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 2:21 pm
Location: Germany / Pforzheim
Contact:

Re: The ocean of EQs

Post by Scary Hallo »

Calf 5 band

User avatar
CrocoDuck
Established Member
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 6:12 pm
Contact:

Re: The ocean of EQs

Post by CrocoDuck »

stanlea wrote:
sadko4u wrote:
CrocoDuck wrote:I never used EQs, believe it or not. I normally only apply low pass and high pass filters to the tracks to lock their bandwidth. Then, I use multi-band compression for the master.
It is very useful to clean up recordings from unwanted resonances to reduce the frequency masking effect.
Depends only on your audio tracks, synthezised or recorded.
I use that approach with both recorded and synthesized tracks. However, I never record through ambient. I plug my electric instruments directly to the interface. So, i never have to compensate for room acoustics, but only to make the instruments clear in the mix.

Pretty weird that I am using the present tense. It must be years since I last did it...
Check my Linux audio experiments on my SoundCloud.
Browse my AUR packages.
Fancying a swim in the pond?

omer666
Established Member
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:57 pm

Re: The ocean of EQs

Post by omer666 »

42low wrote:Why a quest for something you already have available?
Because there are several differences between DSPs that may have a great impact on the end result.

The fact that the Calf EQ is very versatile is great (and it surely is, it matches the feature-level of many commercial plugins), but on some tunes that are more troublesome I couldn't get to a satisfying result using it.

Post Reply