We need an eq matching plugin in Cubase...

Hey all, We need an Eq matching plugin built in to Cubase. This would be such a useful tool. This is my request for Cubase. Any thoughts? What are most people using? I have Har-Bal. I know about Ozone and a few others…

nexis

Steinberg used to have a plugin called FreeFilter that matched eqs.

I don´t know, who “we” is, but I don´t…

I can’t see why we need one. We had one, never missed it for one second. (FreeFilter)

And nor do I.

… Thoughts, yes. What “we need” is far fewer plugins bundled with Cubase. “We need” all the development effort to go into Cubase itself, and none into VIs or FX. … Well … except that, also, “we need” there to be plenty of sales of Cubase, and have to recognise that bundled stuff probably helps to sell it. So I suppose “we need” to just carry on putting up with development time being spent on other things to the detriment of Cubase (per se). :cry:

I tried FreeFilter a long time ago. A friend of mine used it. I thought it was great. I’m sure by now, it’s “out of print” I just think it would be a useful tool. It would be nice to be able to create an Eq profile (store it) and be able to apply it to another source so that one sounds like the other. This would be a VERY useful tool …especially if you are working in a room that is not properly tuned. This would be useful when tracking on different days. Maybe something sounds different today. This would also be useful when mastering (trying to make all your songs flow together and sound uniform when you listen from song to song). This would also be great if you are mastering using commercial songs as references to your own. It would make mastering much easier. It would help with those days where you can’t get the low end to sound right when mastering …and so on. Well, just my 2 cents. :slight_smile: :slight_smile: :slight_smile:

LOL

In the meantime, what you can do, is Save Selected Channels. This way, if you have some eq applied to a specific ch (op bus, group, audio ch, VST Instr ch, etc), be it via the Cubase ch eq, and/or a plug, you can easily recall those settings at any given time, and in any project, new or old. It’s surprising how many people do not know of this feature.

Cheers.

That would be fine if your sources sound the same. Just as an example, I am mixing a song right that was recorded at 2 different studios. For one, the main vocal tracks sound VERY different …same microphone used, same mic preamp, and same person singing yet different recording equipment and different room is making a world of difference in how they sound. So applying one setting to another will not yield the result I am looking for. :wink:

  • 1

Hell no, we don’t.
We need to learn how to mix properly…

Ah, I misunderstood. So, you are looking for a plug that will automatically tell you ch a has x, so apply that to ch b - do I have that right?

If so,

That gets a big +1

Cheers.

And why does anyone who uses any DAW with a three year learning curve need toys? Har-bal is a toy. WE know how to mix. There’s houses full of doorstop hardware and boxes of toy software that reads great on the box and seemed very handy but somehow we stopped using it after two weeks because we could do it better and faster.
Using “Ears v.1.00”. Mostly, Some of us (not me) have “Ears v.2.0”.
Apologies but I’m only on version 2 of “Tact” although most here have “Tact 5” :mrgreen:

I think we all agree on that one. :unamused: :slight_smile: If no one else here is needing this, and I myself have no need for one as of yet, that’s why its not included. Nothing stopping you from buying one, though; since this is a special part of your workflow.

I’ve upgraded to tact 100. :stuck_out_tongue: :mrgreen:

Are you talking about plugins like Assimilator?

Same here. I only have v.1.00 too, but trying to do my best with the ones given to me. That’s the FUN part of this game! The day someone finally implements “de-sucker” plugin, I’ll sell all my gear and instruments and start painting (in which I suck even harder than in making music).

Back to the topic. Yes … I remember Free Filter. My friend had Steinberg Mastering Suite (or whatever it was called) and at first look I thought Free Filter was greatest invention since sliced bread: Hey … you can fit vocal tracks recorded at different days together … you can make your master sound like XXX … etc … etc. Brought some tracks and mixes to FF for processing. And FF did the job. Matched the frequency responce. Result: completely useless.

So … NO! WE (me and my studio dog) don’t need an eq matching plugin. Period.

And FF did the job. Matched the frequency responce. Result: completely useless.

Have to disagree here. I found it to be a useful tool back in the day.

What it did do (and rather well, I might add) was match up vocal EQ’s for comping…particularly when some of the vocal tracks had been recorded in different studios…which was not an uncommon occurrence for mixing engineers given master tapes sight unseen. MAy have not been perfect…but it got real close and saved tons of time.

The amusing thing is that Steinberg used to advertise it’s functionality along the lines of “Make your mixes sound just like Bob Clearmountain’s” …which was utterly ridiculous.

Well … maybe my observations were premature then. FF didn’t make my mixes to sound Eagles as advertised (no surprise there), but for those couple of vocal tracks I tried, it didn’t work either. I really wanted to believe to the consept, but got dissapointed. But as said … my personal experience was only with couple of tracks which I brought to my friend’s place. Maybe I just had a bad luck.

Maybe I just had a bad luck.

Could be. I don’t doubt you. If the vocals were recorded in two different rooms, ambience differences would be tough to match (but not altogether impossible)…and certainly something this tool wasn’t designed for.

The tapes I used to get were usually done by the same tracking engineers and back then, documentation (track sheets, mics used, efx used) were commonly in the boxes, so the chances of the same mic (and processing, if any) being used across the takes was pretty good. Even so, there were still fair amounts of EQ disparities across these tracks. So, EQ matching became the process that consumed the most time . In those situations, that’s where Freefilter became a timesaving tool. Again, not perfect but close enough to glue 'em all together with overall comp processing, so no one could tell when takes were switching.

On the whole, it wouldn’t be the worst addition they could add to the present stock plug-in roster.

This plug-in may have the features you are looking for.

http://www.meldaproduction.com/mautodynamiceq/

Here’s a vote to add a Free Filter eq plug-in to Cubase.

And why not?
The digital domain is about being masters of manipulation whether for corrective or creative purposes.

One could argue that the need for pitch correction is foolish, a gimmick… Heck, if the singer can’t sing in tune, then maybe they should pursue a different career.

Wait a minute, there was a time that a recording had to be made in one take. If one instrumentalist made one mistake, then the entire band or orchestra would have to perform the whole piece again in order to produce a marketable recording.

I wonder if punch-in capability was ever considered a gimmick only used by incompetent musicians?

Going back to the early days of MIDI sequencing:

  • being able to select notes and transpose them- who needs that. Real musicians can play in any key.
  • slowing down the tempo to play a complex part…
  • individuals creating powerful orchestral MIDI mockups via step input?
  • etc

Why be limited???
Steinberg recently revived Neon and Karlette.
I’d like to seem them revive Free Filter. Who cares if it’s used as a gimmick, for corrective or creative applications???
Having it would simply be one more useful tool in the digital arsenal.

My 2¢.