R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 3 [All]   Go Down

Author Topic: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins  (Read 8365 times)

jlapointe

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 121
Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« on: February 21, 2005, 02:44:27 pm »

A while back someone mentioned that they would be soon comparing the eq in their Quantum to a Z-Qualizer.  Just wondering how they stack up.  

I ask because I'm looking for some decent digital processing to complement my analog chain.  Something that can do subtle MS stuff mostly - usually just eq but MS compression might be useful once in a while.  

In the past I've used plugins for these (normally infrequent) chores, but honestly I can't stand to look at the damned computer screen any longer.  The moment I see a graphical rendition of the eq "curve", any hope of actually listening and reacting is lost, and I find myself adjusting settings based on the look of the display.  A terrible admission, I know ...

Despite this, I've tried a number of plugin eqs.  While none of them are as instantly gratifying as my analog eqs, I've found the  Waves Linear Phase Eq to be useful at times, and the Sonalksis eq is interesting, but I do find that it narrows the stereo image slightly.  

So, I guess I'm looking for comments re the eqs in the Quantum, vs the Z-Qualizer, vs the above mentions plugs.  Any experiences to share?

Thanks!

J Schroder

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #1 on: February 21, 2005, 09:37:59 pm »

I use the Z-Q for M/S and light eq and I far prefer it to the plugins I have, including the Waves Linear.  No experience with the Quantum, sorry.  Maybe Brad can shed some light on that unit.

John
Logged

mikepecchio

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 231
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #2 on: February 21, 2005, 10:30:09 pm »

Ive been using the z-qualizer for about 2 months now.  In my opinion it really is a killer EQ.  granted I never used a weiss but Ive never heard any other digital EQ that sounds ANYTHING like it. BUT the user interface is kindof crappy.  I hate having to turn the knob 20 times to go from +4 to -2. it really does take considerable time and effort.  but im still loving it!

mike p
Logged

bblackwood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7036
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #3 on: February 22, 2005, 05:00:15 am »

The Quantum EQ isn't bad, especially for small nips and tucks. Though it's not as easy to navigate as a Weiss, it's light years better than navigating the Z-qualizer. I Had the Z-qualizer here for a bit when Glenn first unveiled it and though I thought it sounded fine, simply could not ever imagine actually using it in the mastering room.

If he had some PC interface software with GUI, perhaps, but as it is now is it is unwelcome here due tot he horrific interface.
Logged
Brad Blackwood
euphonic masters

jlapointe

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 121
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #4 on: February 22, 2005, 07:12:37 am »

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 22 February 2005 06:00

The Quantum EQ isn't bad, especially for small nips and tucks. Though it's not as easy to navigate as a Weiss, it's light years better than navigating the Z-qualizer. I Had the Z-qualizer here for a bit when Glenn first unveiled it and though I thought it sounded fine, simply could not ever imagine actually using it in the mastering room.


Interesting. Having used neither, the Z-qualizer looks like it would be the easier one to operate.  

The Weiss is obviously the first choice, but until the budget allows it I'm still searching for a stop gap measure.

I'm trying out the Algorithmix Red and Orange eqs today.  The interface looks daunting, but I'm very interested to see if the sound lives up to the hype.  Perhaps I'll report later.
 
Thanks for your responses.

bblackwood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7036
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #5 on: February 22, 2005, 07:14:18 am »

JLaPointe wrote on Tue, 22 February 2005 06:12

I'm trying out the Algorithmix Red and Orange eqs today.  The interface looks daunting, but I'm very interested to see if the sound lives up to the hype.  Perhaps I'll report later.

Please do report back - I'm interested in these as well...

Are you trying them in Sequoia or have they released standalone versions? Is there a demo available now?

[Edit: I see they now have demos available - click here...]
Logged
Brad Blackwood
euphonic masters

jlapointe

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 121
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #6 on: February 22, 2005, 07:19:13 am »

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 22 February 2005 08:14


Are you trying them in Sequoia or have they released standalone versions? Is there a demo available now?



In Samplitude.  There are DirectX demos available now.  I'm just about to install them, so we'll see how that goes.

lowland

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 575
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #7 on: February 22, 2005, 02:51:47 pm »

I have a Quantum and like the EQ, including the variable-slope shelves. As Brad says, good for touches, plus MS mode can be a lifesaver.

I also like the Sonalksis EQ and use it perhaps 25% of the time in mastering. Strengths for me are the  HPF/LPF and the low end shelf /parametric control though it does nothing badly as far as I can see and the 'styles' can be very handy for more musicality or precision as you require. Price-wise it's hard to fault too.

I had the z-Qualizer on appro. and found the interface to be a deal-breaker - it drove me nuts, and I couldn't entertain having to put up with that all day, every day. Very frustrating as the sound was great and would fit into my setup well for broad strokes. To be fair, z-Systems say they're having manufacturing problems and expect to fix things soon, but ever since the unit came out people have been saying that the encoders are wobbly - if this eventually gets sorted out I'd be prepared to look again as the price is good for a hardware box.
Logged
Nigel Palmer
Lowland Masters
Essex, UK
www.lowlandmasters.com

jlapointe

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 121
Algorithmix EQs (Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins)
« Reply #8 on: February 22, 2005, 03:12:19 pm »

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 22 February 2005 08:14


Please do report back - I'm interested in these as well...



Spent most of the afternoon playing with the Algorithmix RED EQ.  It does live up to the hype.  It sounds really, really good.  Head and shoulders above any other plugin EQ I've used, and definitely up there with the best analog stuff I have here.  

To my ears it exhibits none of the common plugin eq traits, like weird high end edginess or boxy mids.  It's the only digital eq I've ever used that doesn't kill the low end when using it to cut low freq mud.  Very, very smooth and transparent, yet not sterile at all.    

So sonically, it is excellent.  The only drawback as far as I'm concerned, is that it is still a plugin - meaning that you're limited to mousing around a graphic display.  In my case that means looking far off to the side at the monitor, which bothers me to no end.  I feel like I have all this power at my finger tips, yet I can't possibly dial in the settings I want as fast as I want.  That, to me, is very important.

I'm thinking about installing a small monitor into the console in front of me, just to display the EQs.  Argh.  

Anyway, well done, Algorithmix.  I'm sold.    


prozak

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 92
Re: Algorithmix EQs (Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins)
« Reply #9 on: February 23, 2005, 02:12:38 pm »

>Very, very smooth and transparent, yet not sterile at all

Yeah, thats about what I felt. Every other plug-eq I have auditioned since just gets a "nope" the moment I turn up the HF.
Took me 1 second to decide not to buy the UAD Precision EQ plug Very Happy

greets

Tim
Logged
Tim Lengfeld
No-one appreciates a free lunch
(except myself)

Jerry Tubb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2761
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #10 on: March 20, 2007, 03:51:58 am »

lowland wrote on Tue, 22 February 2005 13:51

I had the z-Qualizer on appro. and found the interface to be a deal-breaker - it drove me nuts, and I couldn't entertain having to put up with that all day, every day. Very frustrating as the sound was great and would fit into my setup well for broad strokes. To be fair, z-Systems say they're having manufacturing problems and expect to fix things soon, but ever since the unit came out people have been saying that the encoders are wobbly - if this eventually gets sorted out I'd be prepared to look again as the price is good for a hardware box.


I've been using a Z-Qualizer for about a year. Bought it cheap on eB*y and had Z-Sys repair it & install the latest firmware update. It works and sounds fine... very transparent. The interface is a bit fiddly, but entirely workable, maybe the firmware improved the stability of the knobs. I like using it for occasional surgical repairs, just before the Lavry DAC that feeds my analog path... NSEQ-F - Sontec - Manley...

It sounds far better than any digital plug-in EQ I've tried.

Nick uses a ZQ1 in our B room, gets a lot of mileage out that one as well.

Anyone else... opinions?

JT
Logged
Terra Nova Mastering
Celebrating 20 years of Mastering!

lowland

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 575
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #11 on: March 20, 2007, 05:16:10 am »

I have now bought the Algorithmix Blue EQ. The trouble with being an occasional reviewer is that the item being reviewed may become indipensable, and so it was with this - for my purposes it's proved capable of doing anything I'd have wanted the z-Qualizer to do and is easier to use than the box I had here, though hopefully the z's interface is now sorted as Jerry suggests.

Although it does much else I think the Blue's HPFs are excellent, incredibly musical but precise, and have superceded those in the Sonalksis EQ I kept only for this purpose (and they weren't bad IMO). I'll now be unlikely to use the Quantum's EQ, haven't used it for some time in fact, but it still might come in handy for a little remedial spike here or there if the Blue is doing something broader: you can stack multiple iterations of Blue with different models, but I'm usually happy to use one at a time and keep playback delay to a minimum.

If I need hardware pure digital EQ (as opposed to sampled) the trusty Sintefex still does the trick - its 'pseudo Baxandall' HF curve made by taking a bell to 20k and then applying a gentle boost with a Q of around 1 is still the one to beat here - so far I haven't been able to coax the Blue to do this as effectively, but I'm more than happy with its other star qualities!
Logged
Nigel Palmer
Lowland Masters
Essex, UK
www.lowlandmasters.com

masterhse

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1059
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #12 on: March 20, 2007, 06:43:28 am »

There was a fairly brief thread before, but has anyone else tried the bx-digital EQ?

http://www.brainworx-music.de/index.php?nav=12&um=2& lang=en

I plan on checking it out later in the week.
Logged
Tom Volpicelli
The Mastering House Inc.
CD Mastering and Media Production Services

carlsaff

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 773
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #13 on: March 20, 2007, 07:01:35 am »

I've been demoing the Algorithmix Blue, too. The interface is not as usable as my usual plugin EQs, but the sound alone has me thinking I should try to get used to it.

lowland

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 575
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #14 on: March 20, 2007, 09:39:16 am »

carlsaff wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 11:01

I've been demoing the Algorithmix Blue, too. The interface is not as usable as my usual plugin EQs, but the sound alone has me thinking I should try to get used to it.

On a philosophical note, one of my little soapboxes (and this is not a swipe at you, Carl) is that this is one of many things that weed out the serious from the not-so-serious: the desire to fully understand a valuable tool for its primary (sound quality) values despite secondary (interface and other) niggles. For example I'm sure lots of people have been put off the dbx Quantum because it's not exactly one knob per function, but that doesn't mean it's not great at what does - and I found that with familiarity I could navigate as fast as I needed. Likewise with Blue: if you have an idea where you're going to begin with you hopefully shouldn't find the interface holding you up too much - it seems quite 'learnable' for faster operation.

Having said all that, sometimes the non-sound issue burden is just too much: it was for me with the z-Qualizer which I gave several days before I threw in the towel, despite the very good sound. I suppose it's all about what you're prepared to put up with as you grow and achieve in what you do.
Logged
Nigel Palmer
Lowland Masters
Essex, UK
www.lowlandmasters.com

mcsnare

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 958
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #15 on: March 20, 2007, 10:46:46 am »

What's so hard about the Algo Blue interface? I find it stupid easy.
Dave

present

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 253
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #16 on: March 20, 2007, 11:15:55 am »

mcsnare wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 15:46

What's so hard about the Algo Blue interface? I find it stupid easy.
Dave


...and the dx version is resizeable.

I'm demoing the Blue now after having used the Orange a while back. Now, if I can only find the time...two weeks, fair enough I guess

rogier
Logged

jlapointe

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 121
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #17 on: March 20, 2007, 11:22:10 am »

lowland wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 10:39


Likewise with Blue: if you have an idea where you're going to begin with you hopefully shouldn't find the interface holding you up too much - it seems quite 'learnable' for faster operation.


Part of the problem with a lot of plugins (and to a lesser extent some digital hardware) is that the range of possible adjustments is often much larger than the typical analog piece - and often the typical usable range is quite small in comparison to the available range.  

Quote:

Having said all that, sometimes the non-sound issue burden is just too much: it was for me with the z-Qualizer which I gave several days before I threw in the towel, despite the very good sound. I suppose it's all about what you're prepared to put up with as you grow and achieve in what you do.


It also comes down to expectation as well - ie. does turning that knob give you what you expect?  I know I can dial in a usable high freq boost on the Massive Passive with one turn of the freq switch, and one turn of the gain knob.  To dial in the same eq shape on the Red (for example) takes multiple bands, and a few minutes of fine tuning.

An interesting exercise - load a song and dial in a decent sound on your favourite analog eq, then match that curve with a decent plugin.  But really match it - use pink noise and a long term average FFT analyzer, and overlay the analog eq curve and the plugin curve.   Adjust the plugin to match the analog curve.  You may be shocked at how much work and how many bands it takes to match it exactly. Once you have it matched, apply that plugin curve to the same song.  You may be shocked again at how close the plugin sounds to the analog eq.  In fact, with the Red and Massive Passive matched (for example), I find the Red often sounds better than the MP with identical curves.  However, what takes 30 sec to dial up on the MP takes minutes or more to dial up on the Red - long enough that the listen/react perspective is gone.  So the MP wins because it gives me what I expect quickly.

Best,

- J.  


Phil Demetro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 378
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #18 on: March 20, 2007, 11:26:50 am »

JLaPointe wrote on Mon, 21 February 2005 14:44

Quantum, vs the Z-Qualizer, vs the above mentions plugs.  Any experiences to share?


We've had them all here but the only one that survived the "great digital EQ purge of 2004" was the Zsys-ZQ2. The bottom end is very good. The interface is fine and easy to use. My only gripe is that it feels cheap. Other than that the Zsys is the a great deal and I still use it.

I have the Algorithmix stuff.... never use the orange. Red ocasionally and the Blue fairly often. The interface is great but is just so ugly. Buy the Blue. Way more versatile and great sounding than basically any eq I have used. Graphics aside it's got WAY more potential than my sontec. I wish they would put the Blue into a box with knobs!

(OT: anyone try the EMI curve bender?)
Logged
____________________________________________________
Phil Demetro
Mastering at The Lacquer Channel, Toronto
http://www.lacquerchannel.com/phil-demetro/
____________________________________________________

bblackwood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7036
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #19 on: March 20, 2007, 12:30:08 pm »

Phil Demetro wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 10:26

Graphics aside it's got WAY more potential than my sontec.

You selling it then?

hehehe
Logged
Brad Blackwood
euphonic masters

lowland

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 575
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #20 on: March 20, 2007, 01:17:33 pm »

To clarify: I don't have any great problem with the Blue's interface, it's just that it is, and probably always will be, something you have to control with a mouse. While a hardware EQ is usually going to win in terms of interface and accessibility, the sound of the Blue is exceptional enough to these jaded ears, and at a comparatively modest price compared to hardware, that I'd probably put up with a much more clunky interface in order to use it. I'm happy!

Phil (and indeed anyone who cares to comment): which Blue models do you find yourself favouring?
Logged
Nigel Palmer
Lowland Masters
Essex, UK
www.lowlandmasters.com

Jerry Tubb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2761
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #21 on: March 20, 2007, 01:52:49 pm »

Phil Demetro wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 10:26

 ...the only one that survived the "great digital EQ purge of 2004" was the Zsys-ZQ2. The bottom end is very good. The interface is fine and easy to use. My only gripe is that it feels cheap. Other than that the Zsys is the a great deal and I still use it.


Three Points:

1. From what I've read the Z-Qualizer is the same algorithm/sound as the ZQ2, but in a less ergonomic half rack size.

2. Because of Z's high quality sound, I can't see spending several thousands more on a Weiss... although with Weiss you get that equipment list Bling Factor to attract more gear conscious & scrutinizing clients.

3. Since I'm a Mac head, the Algorithmix Blue isn't an option, unless I wanna bring a PC into the studio to run strictly as an EQ. (but then I'd be stepping onto a slippery slope, tempted to add Sequoia to same machine... next thing you know I'd be schizophrenic, a weird hybrid of both the Mac & Windoze guys : - )

JT
Logged
Terra Nova Mastering
Celebrating 20 years of Mastering!

compasspnt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16266
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #22 on: March 20, 2007, 02:00:59 pm »

You'd be a Wack.
Logged

Tubefreak

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 37
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #23 on: March 20, 2007, 04:19:50 pm »

Have thought about using analog M/S decode and encoding? This would give you the freedom to use any EQ and compressor you want.

Maarten

Phil Demetro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 378
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #24 on: March 20, 2007, 04:56:15 pm »

bblackwood wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 12:30

Phil Demetro wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 10:26

Graphics aside it's got WAY more potential than my sontec.

You selling it then?

hehehe


No one will give me what i want for it (it's a arbitrary figure...)

It looks too cool to sell.
Logged
____________________________________________________
Phil Demetro
Mastering at The Lacquer Channel, Toronto
http://www.lacquerchannel.com/phil-demetro/
____________________________________________________

Phil Demetro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 378
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #25 on: March 20, 2007, 05:00:59 pm »

lowland wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 13:17

Phil (and indeed anyone who cares to comment): which Blue models do you find yourself favouring?


They are not really all that different sounding. I guess it depends how clean I want it (usually very very). So i use the constant Q-New quite a bit. The Constant Q-Ideal, proportional, classic....etc.

Honestly, not all that different from each other. The EQ makes me go "ahhhh" -  not the models.

I will use the Red on med resolution typically. But I don't use the Red that much.
Logged
____________________________________________________
Phil Demetro
Mastering at The Lacquer Channel, Toronto
http://www.lacquerchannel.com/phil-demetro/
____________________________________________________

present

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 253
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #26 on: March 20, 2007, 05:46:41 pm »

Tubefreak wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 21:19

Have thought about using analog M/S decode and encoding? This would give you the freedom to use any EQ and compressor you want.

Maarten


What do you mean Maarten? (In the context of this thread)
Logged

ak

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 73
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #27 on: March 20, 2007, 06:14:36 pm »

Anyone compared the RED , Orange and Blue ???

I own the Orange and Red and tested the Blue for a week.
But i must say the eq curves of the blue are more analog
but the sound is not like the "gadgets" where the curves/characteristics adapted from.

could´t feel that it makes sense to me because i already own
the Blue,Orange and using both as "only"digital eq in my chain.
But maybe if i find time i will ask for another trial of the Blue
again.

greetings

andreas

Logged

present

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 253
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #28 on: March 20, 2007, 06:27:22 pm »

So far I'm very impressed with the Blue I'm demoing.

It has a very interesting LF response, quite powerful.
When boosting, it takes me some time to hear what it's doing exactly. A strange mixture of transparency and er, power.

But it does bring out things nicely.
Wish I could compare it to a Weiss. Or the Z-Qualizer.
Were we talking about the Z-Qualizer?

regards
rogier
Logged

Greg Reierson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 425
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #29 on: March 20, 2007, 07:34:03 pm »

present wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 16:46

Tubefreak wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 21:19

Have thought about using analog M/S decode and encoding? This would give you the freedom to use any EQ and compressor you want.

Maarten


What do you mean Maarten? (In the context of this thread)


I have some slightly dodgy EQs (old Telefunken W395 for example) that don't track all that well but have a sound I like. Using them in M/S mode minimizes the miss-tracking and adds a bit of flexibility. I use a z-Q2 (which rocks on many levels) to encode M/S and a simple passive transformer matrix (Lundahl) to get back to L/R. It actually works pretty well.


GR
Logged

Phil Demetro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 378
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #30 on: March 20, 2007, 08:58:12 pm »

Greg Reierson wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 19:34

passive transformer matrix (Lundahl) to get back to L/R. It actually works pretty well.


I still have my passive Lundahl matrix - works and sounds great.
I just don't use it that much anymore because I'm lazy  - as there is one built into the Dangerous Music console.
Logged
____________________________________________________
Phil Demetro
Mastering at The Lacquer Channel, Toronto
http://www.lacquerchannel.com/phil-demetro/
____________________________________________________

Slip

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 71
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #31 on: March 20, 2007, 10:28:09 pm »

Speaking of EQ's, any of you tried this thing yet?

http://www.nugenaudio.com/SEQ1.php

It uses ridiculously long buffers for the ridiculously accurate linear phase FFT implementation. It also uses 64bit float internal processing and is smart enough to dither down (3 different modes and can be switched off as well).

In non-technical terms: It should sound bloody superb.

It's also got a Mid/Side mode.

I would really like your opinions on this thing as my guts tell me this is the best value for money when it comes to digital EQ (hardware or software). Anybody care to compare this thing with the Weiss?

Bad things about this plugin is that the usability and GUI are not up to par with the sound. Also, the very long buffers means that latency is bordering on ridiculous, though one can always tweak the settings at a less accurate setting and then switch back to maximum quality for rendering/printing.

- Slip
Logged
Niklas Silen @ Good Will Studios, Helsinki, Finland

Jerry Tubb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2761
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #32 on: March 21, 2007, 03:08:35 am »

present wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 17:27

Were we talking about the Z-Qualizer?


Yesss!

So today I used the Z-Qualizer on a few songs, but just a band or two, like -2dB at 2.8k to fix a bright guitar, or -1dB at 8k to tame a hihat... not all 6 bands at once. I can see if someone were considering it for a main EQ the ergonomics would be a little tedious... better to go with the ZQ-2.

The thing I like about the ZQ is it's neutrality, if I want character, I'll reach for the NSEQ or the Sontec.

Apparently the Algo Blue has a very musical character of its' own, hence the great comments.

Cheers - JT
Logged
Terra Nova Mastering
Celebrating 20 years of Mastering!

MT Groove

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 297
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #33 on: March 21, 2007, 03:53:58 am »

Jerry Tubb wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 12:52



3. Since I'm a Mac head, the Algorithmix Blue isn't an option, unless I wanna bring a PC into the studio to run strictly as an EQ. (but then I'd be stepping onto a slippery slope, tempted to add Sequoia to same machine... next thing you know I'd be schizophrenic, a weird hybrid of both the Mac & Windoze guys : - )

JT


Come....come to the darkside!!!   Twisted Evil
Logged

lowland

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 575
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #34 on: March 21, 2007, 04:28:30 am »

Phil Demetro wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 21:00

lowland wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 13:17

Phil (and indeed anyone who cares to comment): which Blue models do you find yourself favouring?


They are not really all that different sounding.[edit] The EQ makes me go "ahhhh" -  not the models.



This is my feeling too at the moment. I often use Classic Symmetrical as it comes up first, and am generally content with with I can do with it - I've found the proportional models a good alternative, though. I'd like to investigate Constant Q New and the two parallels further: next week will be a good opportunity with some varied music passing through.

Just out of curiosity, are Sontec EQs based on the serial or parallel principle?
Logged
Nigel Palmer
Lowland Masters
Essex, UK
www.lowlandmasters.com

livingstone

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 118
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #35 on: March 21, 2007, 04:46:35 am »

MT Groove wrote on Wed, 21 March 2007 02:53

Jerry Tubb wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 12:52



3. Since I'm a Mac head, the Algorithmix Blue isn't an option, unless I wanna bring a PC into the studio to run strictly as an EQ. (but then I'd be stepping onto a slippery slope, tempted to add Sequoia to same machine... next thing you know I'd be schizophrenic, a weird hybrid of both the Mac & Windoze guys : - )

JT


Come....come to the darkside!!!   Twisted Evil



since mac are intel based....
algorythmix told me they will develop a version of their plug ins for mac /intel  Very Happy
but no shedule yet Sad
Logged
frederic alstadt
www.angstrom-mastering.com



__________no time_______no sound_________

Tubefreak

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 37
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #36 on: March 21, 2007, 08:33:19 pm »

present wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 16:46

What do you mean Maarten? (In the context of this thread)


Well he was looking for "Something that can do subtle MS stuff mostly - usually just eq but MS compression might be useful once in a while." and he didn't fancy plugin EQ's.

Using an analog M/S encoder/decoder you can use any type of analog EQ, compression, limiting or clipping (!) you want on either m/s channel. Seems like a valid solution to his question.

As many others I use M/S both ITB and in analog, not all the time, but just when it asks for it. An as mentioned by Greg, it's a great way to add sloppy/character pieces to the music. An EQ mismatch in M/S is quite forgiving.

Maarten van Helden

present

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 253
Re: Z-Qualizer vs DBX Quantum vs plugins
« Reply #37 on: March 22, 2007, 07:31:32 am »

Tubefreak wrote on Thu, 22 March 2007 01:33

present wrote on Tue, 20 March 2007 16:46

What do you mean Maarten? (In the context of this thread)

Using an analog M/S encoder/decoder you can use any type of analog EQ, compression, limiting or clipping (!) you want on either m/s channel. Seems like a valid solution to his question.



Yes, indeed. Guess I missed that bit

regards
rogier
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [All]   Go Up