Hi all,
OK I know there is sonic differences between different hardware/software EQs and that its a matter of taste as to which of them you prefer. I have yet to purchase the UAD-1 but will be getting the CAMBRIDGE EQ when I do.
At the moment, I prefer Waves for notch boosting but as its so CPU light and accessible, I use SONAR's SONITUS as my bread and butter \"Subtractive\" EQing. Mainly for hi/low passing tracks and sometimes taking out particular frequencies but for sure its mostly used for subtracting and not boosting.
I have tried hi/low passing with Waves also and I don't notice any sonic differences between them when used in this way. Slight differences when boosting though. So my question is that once you are using \"Subtractively\" rather then \"Boosting\" is there any (noticeable) difference between the more Pro (expensive i.e. CAMBRIDGE) EQs and the lesser praised (using the same Q, freq, db levels of course)
Please share your thoughts...
Thanks for your time....
OK I know there is sonic differences between different hardware/software EQs and that its a matter of taste as to which of them you prefer. I have yet to purchase the UAD-1 but will be getting the CAMBRIDGE EQ when I do.
At the moment, I prefer Waves for notch boosting but as its so CPU light and accessible, I use SONAR's SONITUS as my bread and butter \"Subtractive\" EQing. Mainly for hi/low passing tracks and sometimes taking out particular frequencies but for sure its mostly used for subtracting and not boosting.
I have tried hi/low passing with Waves also and I don't notice any sonic differences between them when used in this way. Slight differences when boosting though. So my question is that once you are using \"Subtractively\" rather then \"Boosting\" is there any (noticeable) difference between the more Pro (expensive i.e. CAMBRIDGE) EQs and the lesser praised (using the same Q, freq, db levels of course)
Please share your thoughts...
Thanks for your time....