Proper Post EQ

Is it not working at all for you? I just figured it out… and it’s working (and really cool!)


Aleksey has found the bug. It seems to be related to a Voxengo global setting in the VST 2.4 versions of the plugs. I unchecked the built in VST refresh and now it works just as intended.


I still belive, that as long as Nuendo just offers us a 4-band channel EQ for postproduction (which means filtering suboptimal location sound all the time), this tool is just not suitable for a professional mix.

So it is time for a small but emphatic bump.

How about the combination channel EQ and the Postfilter? I really like the postfilter.


For me the idea of the channel EQ is a Tool, which is placed in every channel without using additional plugins in other positions in chain, and with a permanent visual feedback in Mixer and channel overview.

A combination of multiple plugins is not really an option for me (although I like postfilter for offline-processing), not knowing in which plugin I automated what. I want to filter in one single overview, otherwise I propably would get lost in a big project mixing.

And of course there are post-pro filters on the market, so no need to use multiple Nuendo-EQs.
I have to use a third party plugin, which offers me more bands (including cuts/shelves), like OxfordEQ or Fabfilter. And the Channel-EQ is still left out ever since I use Nuendo.

And having a look to competition:
Harrison Consoles offers 8 bands.
Neve DMC: 8 bands
Pro Tools: 7 bands
Semipros like Samplitude: 6 bands
Logic: 8 bands

and on the bottom:
Cubase: 4 bands
Nuendo: 4 bands (although I pay extra for a post-production-tool, compared to cubase)

I don’t understand what they’ve tried to do with those eq…playskool? Toys"R" Us?

Hey, you mean that extra cut-plugin with simply no visual feedback in eq and with a fixed(!!) and unswitchable(!!) Q slope?

I think we agree, that this could not be more than a joke by steinberg, a fixed Q is sth. which I propably could live with in a musicmaker smartphone app, but not in a DAW which is used by pros in a pro business.

I have to hicut an atmosphere in a complete another way than ADR or music! And since I do not have a visual feedback in eq-graph, why - again - shouldn’t I then use a proper third party tool?

I have never seen a fixed slope on any EQ out there, not even on freeware ones. And not in 200$-Logic.
And this (seriously) was promoted in N6 as two more bands…

Well my Norwegian friend :slight_smile:
As the eq isn’t compatible between N5.5 and N6 I very much doubt they had any reason not to change the eq layout between the versions.

I regularly use the Nuendo eq and find it far more useful than the oOford which limits the range of each band. I can get further with 4 unlimited bands than 5 limited ones. Also I find Nuendo’s eq to be better sounding. Oxford’s eq whistles a little more if that description makes sense.

I also regularly use the postfilter in conjunction. It is a powerful combination for me and does the bulk of the heavy lifting. Studio Eq can help if I really need more bands- other eq’s for sweetening.

More bands on the channel eq? Why not. It would come in handy.

What would really be great is postfilter with more bands or (same thing) studio eq with postfilter’s slopes. That would kick a**.


I use the Oxford as my standard EQ in Nuendo since several years now, and never ran into problems concerning the band-limits. If I would need 4 bands higher than for example 6kHz I guess it’s not shaping the sound in the mix, but having soundproblems which I propably would delete offline via restoration-tools or postfilter.
The thing I like with the limited bands: It makes my EQ-midi-controller (perfect for this: BCR2000, I have mapped the Oxford permanently to this one) a precise controller, since each band is split in to 128midi-values. Midi-Controlling the complete bandwidth with just 128steps is crap. But, OK, I admit: Midi-Controlling is of course a bit “yesterday”.

Once again, this means, that you have to use another EQ as an insert-plug, isn’t it? My point is, that if I have to use an additional insert-toy I can directly choose a proper one, from a third party company, which gives me all the options I would like to have in a single post-EQ (and all the options I get in all the other DAWs I know).

But: I really like the idea of having a channel EQ, which is not an insert-plugin, and which gives me full visual feedback in mixer, and in channel overview. That’s a great idea, imo, very much console-like, but just not usable at the moment, since - like you said - you have to EQ on several locations in chain due to the limited actual channel EQ.

I agree. And if the channel eq included proper LF/HF filters, it would be sweet right?



basically… but…OK, I would prefer at least a 5-band + LF/HF.
With 7 bands all incl I can set the frequency-values to the most common ones for male/femal resonance, room-modes, presences, nosysounds, etc, by default, and begin to tune from this standard-setting.
That’s great in Oxford or Pro Tools, or all the other EQs.

So I will revise my wish list (I’m always afraid to ask for too much) in support of you Domilik!

Channel eq with 6 bands plus hi/low pass filters with adjustable Qs and feed back in the channel eq display for those filters, like the postfilter filters.

Can we also get 3 bands on the postfilter? It would be even better to incorporate the postfilter into the channel eq. That would be a great option on each band.

How about it Steinberg?


I almost forgot- please give us back the invert button on the channel eq! It is a drag to have to right click to get a menu and then click. It was there in N5 and before.


Great, so we have a nice wishlist for the channel EQ.

And now I guess we have to wait for the next “large rewrite” which I’m sure will be in N7.
(I am fighting for this special topic since 2006)