About the 'soothe' function: from what I understand, it relies on the user to identify problematic frequencies, and the plugin handles them more surgically than a regular dynamic EQ. However, it's still up to the user to decide if those frequencies are actually an issue. In the example you gave, it seems like you just applied spectral dynamics across the board, but it didn’t improve the sound, probably because there wasn’t an issue to fix in the first place. But anyway that's just my humble opinion
Just went down the Airwindows rabbit hole and I remember seeing their plug-in Sweeten that is dedicated for solely making second harmonics, and it’s free.
@@InnerMotionMusic The guy that makes a new version of every single plugin every day haha. Why he doesn;t just make updates i don;t know! Great plugs though
@@MichaelDowComposer Because if you created something with the plugin and it sounds different after updating it, you probably wouldn't be happy. Also, many of the new versions aren't simply updates but are actually variations of the original tool, essentially providing a different plugin. I see this as a benefit. If a major company releases a plugin and later figures out how to make it better or different, they won't do it because they can't sell you two different Pro-Q 4, for example, and they can't drastically change the behavior of a released plugin. So you'll have to wait a few years for a new version with improvements. Chris (from AirWindows) isn't like that. He can be honest about the downsides of his plugins, and he can create a new, improved version next week if he figures out how.
@@joelybarish4618 My understanding is that all Airwindows are designed to run at 96khz. If you run them lower... aliasing, very much, becomes a possibility (as none of them oversample) and if you run them higher you SHOULD be fine, but you're still working outside recommendations.
I have to disagree. I think for utilitarian reasons, as you mentioned, the spectral function is useful. And that’s exactly where my mind went when I first saw it. I thought about using it as a dynamic deesser. I hate pulling up a million deesers trying to target all the harsh spots. This will work perfectly for it. I’ve also dealt with a lot of harsh mid rangy samples from beat makers, and what I ended up doing in the past was using multiple bands of dynamic eq to attenuate the harsh frequencies as they’d pop up. This feature would make that much quicker. So I don’t think the feature itself is bad; I think the marketing is bad. As you said, someone who doesn’t know what they’re doing could get into a lot of trouble with that feature, but for those of us who do know what we’re doing it’s pretty sweet. Honestly though, I think I’m most excited about them adding attack and release times to the dynamic eq. I’ve wanted that for years.
I think what he's trying to get at is that Spectral EQing, much like Autotune or MIDI/Audio quantization, will end up being used in ways that are detrimental to music. It won't just be rookies doing it- Lazy producers and engineers will likely default to using it.
I was anxiously awaiting your video on the Pro-Q4. Sage Audio, don't pay attention to the unfounded criticism. Your nerdiness about audio engineering is very valuable to the community, and to the market. Keep it up! 👏🏼👏🏼
I love proq3 but tbh this year i decided to take away any visual eqs from my work flow. Best decision ever… I used to retouch things all the time and spend hours adjusting. Now its a couple Stock pro tools EQs, Rely on my ears, set it and forget it.
Honestly, I’m enthusiastic about the new features, like the spectral option. It’s definitely a trend many other developers are following (think of Izotope lately inserting that everywhere from delay, to reverb and saturation). As always, it’s all about how you use a certain technology. Not many years ago, Matching EQ was a new thing and became a trend. Of course, many engineers complained it would cause more damage than good to mixes trying to get similar to a target. But used as a sound design tool, it’s immensely powerful. I like that Dan Worrall, when presenting a new Fabfilter plugin, doesn’t forget about sound design and creative applications. Think of the new All Pass filter. That’s definitely there also for creative purposes (I’m blinking to Disperser right now)
@@sageaudio i know what each and every airwindows plugin does best (or at least 80%), so if there's anything else in his bundle interesting you, i can help! I use it for 90% of my mixing plugins (including creative fx), and having learnt how to use the niche ones in combination gives a hugely precise control over "tone" in every way.
It's the FIRST thing I told my son when I installed it for him: Unless you know what you're trying to achieve, don't use the spectral mode. As you say, seems more like wanting to hop on the Soothe bandwagon, something I've already stated most often destroys a mix, kills desired overtones, not only "problematic" frequencies, and on and on. Glad you covered it
Spectral side-chain envelope, great for mixing when two instruments share similar spectrums and occasionally play simultaneously where you will make a mixing decision to side-chain one against the other. Briefly making space in the mix without compromising overall fullness of each instrument. Extremely useful technique when mixing Electronic, specifically House and Techno.
People will misuse the spectral function and overdue it... 100%. Especially the newbies. But they're gonna learn the hard way like we all did😂 everyone has to gro through it
in regards to the spectral functionality of pro-q4, as someone who does a lot of experimental sound design stuff i find this feature quite useful because it’s built into an already powerful eq & means i don’t need to add something like soothe to my processing chain if i need to take care of any harsh or otherwise weird resonance that might be present.
This feature adds 116ms of latency per instance of fsb filter. Multiply that by however many Q4's you added and you have ruined your mix with just an EQ plugin
@@sorenandrews1078 pretty much every DAW has latency compensation. linear phase filters need lookahead by design, so i don't mind it. and if you are recording something... just bypass the plugin like one would do with any plugin that requires lookahead?
Very good point, we typically make most of these videos in the context of more traditional music mixing/mastering applications, but you are totally valid in how it can be a great tool there!
@@sorenandrews1078 it shouldn't have any phase and distortion issue. its a spectral processing unit which only affects the envelopes/transients of the sound.
Honestly I liked the mix better after the processing, but I doubt it has much to do with the "correcting problem frequencies" thing. I think the vocals were just not compressed enough, and the extra (albeit, multiband) compression helped.
Finally a good review covering the major changes for what has become an industry standard EQ plug-in. I'm staying with Pro-Q 3 for now as I don't really need the new "enhancements". The current slope features are more than adequate for my EQ needs. Maybe a future Q-5 update will offer more useful features.
A good and well implemented dynamic EQ (or clip EQ) works better than spectral compression in my opinion. I have found spectral compressors underwhelming (or destructive) while trying to fix nasty overtones.
Ive been using the all instance view as a frequency monitor. Very nice to see what your tracks are doing all in one window. Then i still use the ssl native channel for eq etc. i keep pro q last in my chain to do this.
Personally, im taking with Pro-Q3. I think the more functions we have, the more problems we create. An EQ is an EQ. I think the more "dialed in" you can get and the more surgical you get, youre just going to create more problems in a mix than were actually there to begin with. Mixing, when done for years and years and years - is not an overly complicated process. You balance the mix, you shape the sound of it to your liking, you make sure the more present elements are more upfront while others are further back, you create the stereo image you want and then send it off for mastering. I think the more complicated we make it, the longer you will take trying to mix a track trying to get it ABSOLUTELY PERFECT - when that will never happen...thus creating problems rather than fixing them. I tried alot of these neat plug ins when they first came out like Sooth and I used it two times and never used it again. This is all ofcourse my subjective opinion on approaching mixing so take what I say with a grain of salt - but I think the more complicated we make plug ins, the more complicated we make the entire process.
I agree on the spectrum eq trend. It’s often overkill but I’ve found it extremely helpful on clean guitars and de-essing. Pretty much more surgical things. Anything that pops out sometimes in a mix at varying frequencies depending on the note hit. Especially if you want the instrument to remain behind other things. I also like soothe on my mix bus sometimes to even out things a bit more before hitting a limiter but it’s often doing very small changes like 0-3db and not often. Where the others will be a lot more. My issue is that it takes so much CPU power and some mixes can’t have more than one instances. Hoping pro Q4 can do similar stuff using less CPU power. Haven’t upgraded yet though.
@@CreativeMindsAudio No problem! For me, Stabilizer uses around 1% CPU and Spectral Shaper uses 6%. That's at 48000 sample rate and 192 buffer size. CPU is a Ryzen 7950X.
7:22 listening in my car I actually felt that in the audio example that it sounds better with the plug-in on versus with the plug-in off. When it’s on, it sounds a bit less harsh, a tad bit warmer, and slightly bigger.
I agree, I thought it sounded better with the spectral attenuation. I would have liked a little less on the drums, but overall I thought it sounded clearer and cleaner. Just my opinion.
You were put on this earth to handle audio signals. You're really great at explaining things and bringing certain stuff to light that I wouldn't have considered otherwise.
When you activate the spectral function, you're looking for a solution similar to what you get when you activate the dynamic EQ function. The difference is that spectral is frequency-dependent, while dynamic is band-dependent. You can ruin a mix with dynamic EQ if you use it poorly, so spectral isn't bad-it's just another approach.
Hey Sage Audio 👋 I have a question, Should you always cut unwanted frequencies below the fundamental frequency. Because when you apply Saturation or Upwards Compression the frequencies below fundamental came back. I've always seen in your videos that you only apply lowcut at start of the chain and don't lowcut after even though the frequencies below the fundamental came back after some processing.
Great question! Generally, it's a good practice to cut unwanted frequencies below the fundamental frequency at the start of the chain to prevent muddiness, especially in a dense mix. However, after applying saturation or upward compression, lower frequencies can indeed reappear, as you mentioned. Whether to add a low-cut later in the chain depends on the sound you're going for and the specific processing involved. If those low-end frequencies cause issues after saturation or compression, a gentle low-cut later on could be helpful. Ultimately, it's about following your ears for balancing clarity with the character you're aiming to achieve in the mix!
The mix with the frequency attenuation sounded darker to me, so I could see it having certain applications if that's the effect someone is going for. I also wonder if you could invert the function and use it for some kind of dynamic expansion functions... But in general I've been starting to see how the plugin industry's whole business model is to add superfluous features to up-sell existing customers. All that said, I'll still probably upgrade just for the warm feature depending on how much it will cost. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Spectral EQ is very powerful for mixing. It allows to solve dynamic source issues and masking between tracks, more transparently. Using your analogy, a broader EQ is actually sometimes like using a bulldozer to pin a nail. Yes new tech can be misused, especially if not understood, but this technology is a great addition to our toolbox. 👍 Fixing masking areas with sidechain inputs via spectral EQ provides clarity with unparalleled transparency. I highly recommend trying this for example to make space for vocals over a competing instruments’ bus. It is also super powerful for film or video game audio, with less tonal content.
Melda's free MSaturator has a harmonics generator with a "2nd" control that does the same. Just check that all other controls are set to 0 if you want only 2nd order. (Hint: 0dB is 100% on the Threshold control.) I use MSpectralDynamics for side chain ducking of pads and synths, so I guess it's nice that Fabfilter users can finally do that too.
I have yet to find an instance where spectral improved the sound.. Everything else I'm quite happy with! Soothe & Bloom is far superior in dealing with unwanted frequencies.
Appreciate your videos man, I’m in the middle of mixing my album so they’re a great break. I’ve been producing and mixing for five years or so. Im in the doubt stage of the project at the moment lol
Can you cover the new "All Pass" filter type, and whether that is more useful than it is harmful? Isn't it flipping polarity on a portion of the frequency range?
I’m glad to now have spectral dynamics processing. It will give me the opportunity to learn what it does and what it sounds like, why it would be inappropriate to use and when it might be helpful. Before, I had no understanding about it. I like learning, so I’m glad I have a new tool. Also, regarding the sound sample with off vs on… while I don’t think ON was a good way to change the mix, I do think it was partially helpful, or at least helped to highlight some potential weaknesses in the OFF version. It definitely made the vocals sound much worse, and the whole mix sounded thinner, but it made me wish the OFF version was a little less congested around the lower mids (especially the drums maybe? Maybe there was better separation between the drums and guitars with ON?) and it made me want a little more brightness too.
I made a review the day it got release and felt i was swimming against the flow as everyone was nothing but love for this update. Glad to finally watch yours and see you came to similar conclusions. I felt the adjustable slope is a wonderful update (especially for hpf and the reduced phase shifts and the ability to now dynamically add that 2nd harmonic) but all the rest felt like gimmicks and sales attemps while there could still be some nicer improvements ...
Hi Sage Audio, I really value your great insights in Audio, but I am curious to know your view on Soothe 2 and Is this your opinion about spectral processing in ProQ4 or is it your general view about all spectral processors, very curious to know. Thanks for a nice video.
Thanks for commenting! I'll link our two videos on those topics for you below, hopefully those clear up your questions :) th-cam.com/video/kBML7aBHXk4/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/xEzP42seKZ8/w-d-xo.html
In the comparison, with the "problem" high frequencies attenuated and through my speakers to my ears, I hear more openness. With it off the highs sound stuffy and inside a small cramped room on sounds like it's outside. I think it is cleaning up high end mud, that's my interpretation
I used the spectral EQ on the low-mid of an acoustic guitar where manually EQing it just wasn't precise enough. I spent hours trying until Pro-Q4 came out, and that fixed the issue. I don't think I'd recommend using it in the high-mid or high ranges, however.
The problem with spectral is when it's being used to cut, like, 6dB. It's not meant for that, it's meant to smooth harsh resonances out. You only cut 2.5dB at any given time and adjust attack time and release to taste. Just as Dan Worrall said in the intro video, it's very easy to misuse this feature. It feels like most people dont seem to understand how to use this tool.
I personally never bothered to buy Pro-Q 3 because it always seemed like 'just an EQ' with some dynamic/match features, that's also extremely expensive. However, as soon as I learned about Pro-Q 4, and downloaded the demo - The fact that it is such a versatile tool (you can pretty much use it as a transparent surgical tool, and a whole ass analog channel strip) was what made me pull the trigger on this one. It's incredible. (Protip: try splitting all your bands into L/R and misplacing them a bit, it will give it the feeling that both channels were not perfectly identical, just like in analog gear. It makes the sound get a bit wider and more 'alive') The spectral features: Yes, music nowadays is overusing them all the time. But it is not necessarily a bad feature. A bad mixing engineer will overuse it, yes, but so will they overuse reverb and other stuff, but what do you expect a beginner to know about all this? It's a tool, and in the hands of a skilled engineer it can save a LOT of time and give better results then sculpting, notching and automating things yourself. Also if you do want to go for the 'modern' sound, you can absolutely use it a bit more, just because it is a standard in the music nowadays. I don't say it's good, but it's also not necessarily bad. It's just a stylistic choice/trend that people follow nowadays and it's up to one's preference. Same with the loudness war In the 2000's. It's all about art and being able to express yourself, but also be able to make stuff comparable to other commercially released music, and if this tool does that for you, then why not? go for it. I do not get the 'draw' feature though haha. It is indeed unnecessary and very finicky. I would much rather prefer if you could draw it literally pixel-by-pixel (instead of this weird jumpy rope), and then it would 'round up' the curves you drew into appropriate, smoothened bands. Kinda like when you paint a bad circle in some painting programs, and it turns it into a perfect one afterwards.
I feel like the spectral feature has been helpful for cleaning up poorly recorded vocals and side chaining reverb/delay busses but that’s about it. I tried using it in a guitar yesterday and took it right off.
the attack release feature for dynamic eq is actually really nice in q3 i never used it and instead opted to just modulate an eq with an envolope (i use bitwig) but now i find myself using the dynamic eq a lot more.
On a JBL shit box, I do hear the difference for sure. But I'm surprised because it mostly introduces harshness in the treble, particularly on the HiHats, and the EQ settings don't seem to do that. So that would be the phase thing shown before in the video? that's bad...
5:16 Of course the impulse is altered by the EQ. That's just how EQs work, and it has nothing do with the dynamics. You can't measure anything related to dynamics or distortion, which are non-linear, with something called "linear analysis". An impulse response can only capture the behaviour of a linear, time-invariant system.
Spectral Eq can have its place in improving the audio, but pro q4 is very restricted in this term. That’s why it can rarely solve a problem in audio. Each audio source has to be treated differently to get the best result. Having only a few options to choose from cannot solve most problems. A pro eq of this kind should have more options or keeping it completely out.
the pros (the instance view, especially) still have great value, and the Q4, overall, 'feels' better to work with. so (for me), it's a worthwhile update 👍
The Off version sounds much better to my ears. However, the spectral processing is shaving off 3-6 dB which is quite a lot. A tool, like you say, can be abused, or used deftly. You make a good point with the example, but gives an example closer to the set it and forget approach, with deeper cuts to a wide range of frequencies. Not how most of us would use it.
100% agree with you about cutting resonant frequencies, resonance is good and we want it in our mixes. I am a big fan of things like soothe though, but I feel like they have to be used so so delicately and only exactly where they're needed. When I'm trying to get LUFs from a vocal recorded on a cheaper or midrange mic I usually find a few resonant frequencies that are absolutely unwanted being brought out by all the compression - and then it's a lifesaver to reach for a decibel or two of some kind of spectral reduction. As they say, "The only difference between the medicine and the poison is the dosage" - and tools like soothe are a potent medicine
Most capable engineers will recognize spectral dynamic processing function as a useful way to handle particular peaks. Use the attack and release wisely and in subtle ways and everything will be fine. It is not like you are bricking the signal but it does allow you to handle some of those peaks, similarly to how you could before - but with 3 you had to still individually take care of every little peak.
I don't agree with you either. The Spectral EQ can be very helpful. For example, with heavily distorted guitars in the upper mids. A few mouse clicks and the brizzling and crackling is gone. Or with harsh black metal vocals in a similar range if cheap or the wrong microphones have been used. Much faster and also cleaner than conventional dynamic equalisers. Or with very hard played cymbals. Also with bass guitars, it can help a lot to suppress boomy frequencies in low tones without taking the whole body. And the new saturation modes sound excellent. I'm very happy with the update and for 59€ it's an absolute no-brainer.
The low mids are cleaner with the spectral processing version on. The high-frequency spectral bands were unnecessary, and they seem to be taming the edge that the track needs... but in the end, if this was dialed in better without the spectral processing on the highs, it would be better. Still a net positive, though.
This sums up my first impressions pretty well. I recently re-discovered Soothe2 for unmasking via side-chain, which somewhat lessens the hashing artifacts of spectral processing imho. Pro-Q4 is not quite at the level of Soothe2 for this function. I also like the draw function but agree with you that it's a bit unnecessary; I may use it to quickly draw a standard topology - e.g. high-pass, low-shelf, one bell, low-pass - then adjust like I do with Pro-Q3.
Finally someone is saying this. 🎯👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 Looks like suddenly, since Soothe, everything we record & mix has "unwanted resonances" - not a damn obnoxious occasional' frequency peak or whistle, but hundreds of tiny previously unheard of pesky "resonances" that only that very special magic algorithm can spot and suppress (never mind the phasey side effects of what are basically the virtual sliders of a thousand band graphic eq being pulled down & back up all the time). Eh. 🤷🏼♂️
This! Such this! Like I've been hearing the micropattern spaces around desired frequencies they create which should improve and add crispness, but I couldn't figure out what was off... it's the dynamic phaseyness remnants. Thank you! I will sleep so much better!
well, yeah, you can make the sound worse with any and every tool... or use it were it´s beneficial, and in moderate amounts. i see many people talking about spectral eq´s taking away the character of sounds. sure, if you use it wrong. if you blindly put a compressor on every track and obliterate the dynamic ranges the mix will be down the drain too.
At the end of the day, I will only pay for updates that 1) ultimately improve sound quality and 2) enhance efficiency and workflow. The Q4 updates seem revolutionary and impressive at first, but in the end, they don’t convince me to spend $65 on the upgrade. I think the low cut/high boost/bell shape guessing feature is really useful, the “warm” mode is interesting, and the multi-editing mode is helpful. If you don’t have Soothe 2, it might be nice to have something similar. However, for me, it’s not worth the $65. As for the Soothe-like feature, it’s great for quickly addressing harsh frequencies, especially for trained ears. But for newer engineers, it could cause more problems than it solves. Personally, I still think it’s a must-have for engineers and producers. While multiband compressors, dynamic EQs, de-essers, or EQ automation can also tame harshness-and might even sound better than Soothe in some cases-I really value the fast workflow Soothe provides.
The processed after track sounds like the vocals fit better because the original needed more compression, the snare pops out more from the mix and the tone of the mix sounds more modern, I don’t think it works for the genre, since pop/punk would sound better being glued instead of spaced out like a modern record but the example showed that this new feature isn’t entirely useless.
This “soothe” function, I do enjoy, but as many have said here it’s situational. And btw yes, it does sound different in your example, but IMO it sounds sterile. Like, no character. It’s a great example of abusing this feature, which a lot of people will do. What I like about Pro-Q 4 is being able to see all instances of it on all tracks. That above all else, to me, makes this worthwhile.
Some synths, for example, can have harsh and annoying tones, I'd use the spectral dynamic EQ carefully in those situations. For actual acoustic instruments it can suck life out of them.
IMO the audio sounded far cleaner, and fatter with the spectral bands ON. It appears that it created space in the mix for each various element, that allowed the mix to overall sound more intelligible and cohesive. I think this will be subjective to each person's personal taste, and probably be more relevant to some genres of music than others. It is certainly more useful for dynamically sidechaining competing signals, as opposed to carving out static bands to create space in a mix, and with more granularity than Pro-Q 3 previously allowed using dynamic bands.
4:40 you are totally right, however... if you are working with bad material it definetly will help. If you are working with professionally recorded Vocals and instruments in a well treated room, you probably won't need it for much. But I think it can help for "problematic" elements.
The video is only based on ideal sources. Never a panacea. Still very useful in terms of room resonance of home recordings and some issues from microphone axis, misuses. Also, even professional singers sometimes cannot control their voice and formant properly making some nasal/throat sound. These can’t be natural sounds. Of course we can do that with automation, but too much time and hassle. If you have a good recording studio with ideal room acoustic, not pretty necessary. But otherwise, very useful as long as you can make a proper decision. Only for unwanted resonance with automation! Way Better than normal dynamic EQ.
when mixing vocals, it was insane how every tutorial i see uses Soothe 2. I have the Waves Silk and it is one of the worst plugins I have tried. So when I saw the Q4 has that built in, I bought it immediately. Have never tried the feature yet, usually I get around by using other workarounds. If I see myself not using it, I'm not mad, the 'warm' feature alone makes me happy upgrading from the Q3.
I see both perspectives with the spectral argument. I used it on a very harsh synth piano and it made such a noticeable difference in clarity. It has also taken away the character in the sound with other files. I found it useful in extreme situations with harsh audio files so far.
Often the problem frequencies are wayy lower in amplitude than the highest peaks. I don't know why people like soothe, when everytime I've tried using it it sound awful
Should just call it the life sucker… ridiculous. Plug-ins already mess up your phase… there are well known mixing engineers that won’t even use multiband because of this… and now these things are splitting hairs. Imagine, decades, and decades of all the greatest music never needing to be “soothed”. SMH
that's just one use case, if you have to soothe the hell out of your tracks then yeah it's a bad recording and if you don't kno what you're doing you'll destroy the sound but there are far more exciting possibilities, like harmonic enhancement by maybe bringing out the harmonics in an organ part when the vocals come in or expanding the harmonics of the side signal of a guitar solo to give a really natural and dynamic widening but only to the harmonics. you can also use it like trackspacer, use a low density sidechain the kick while applying the spectral processing on the bass and target the clashing frequencies with a fairly wide bell, tweak the attack and release and you get almost perfect bass and kick cohesion in a couple steps. the reason why some engineers don't use multiband compressors because of the phase is due to those multiband compressors having static crossover filters which if done using minimum phase (IIR) filters can be audible and an issue but this processing using linear phase which only impacts the phase when the filter is compressing or expanding, when its doing nothing it isn't changing the phase, also you have to consider that not all phase change is audible and even if it is it isn't necessarily bad. sure the linear phase filters can cause pre ringing but is that more or less noticeable than the drastic impact it has on improving the clarity of your bass and kick or any other source, point being, audio is a compromise and EVERYTHING you do impacts the fidelity of the audio in some way. lets say you want to do a highpass, guess what you've just rotated the phase 180 degrees through that filter, you've introduced post ringing and if you have any resonance on that filter the ringing is extremely audible, you've also introduced another layer of digital noise due to the nature of digital processing. the thing is that those effects (if used properly) have way less of a negative impact on the sound than the positive impact of cleaning up the low end using the highpass which is why we do it. anything can be used incorrectly, doesn't make the tool bad, I did a test mix using pro q4 and it's incredible for fitting things together but yes you can be too extreme with it, which is why you back it off and go for more sensible settings. this is why the phrase "use your ears" is so used, ALL of your tools have the potential to ruin your source, which is why you must listen to, assess and apply with caution and care. as someone else said in this comment section "you can't blame the hammer if someone smashes their thumb with it" or something similar to that effect.
It does what it is intended to do, with features that make it easier to achive sound design easier and quicker. Just because one don't like it don't mean that it isn't useful.
Its much more helpful to me with true A/B comparisons, like a 2 or 4 bar loop switched in/out on the downbeat of the loop. It's much easier to compare when you're hearing the exact same program material being processed/bypassed.
Downloaded the demo, fixed an otherwise unusable acoustic guitar track that had a weird overtone dancing in and out of the track depending on the chords played. A notch filter in spectral mode took care of that without noticably compromising the sound, in all of 5 minutes. It works great for that, but I agree, it can (and probably will be) used to squeeze out every last bit of life from mixes, esp when used on a (gasp) Mix Bus ...
I agree with your assessment - having said that, functions like the draw tool are awesome for creative experimentation - throwing paint on the canvas as it were. I mean digital music/instruments are by their very nature dull. Isn't that why the last decade or two have seen a 'perfecting' of analogue emulation. The true potential for me, though, lies in how plugins can be creatively designed to enhance sound design and texture etc. I would be very interested in your opinion on the new Arturia Tape J-37! For me it sounds fantastic - but, perhaps my ears are not what they should be!?🐒
I think the spectral function works best for sound design purposes as opposed to mixing. I know you're an engineer so you're going to review it from a mixing lens, but don't forget the other reasons people might use the plugin in the first place.
I already own Soothe so…Im good w ProQ3. Honestly the biggest attraction is the “warm setting” which over multiple sources could help it get that “sound” we are all chasing with digital gear.
The only concrete thing you said re spectral dynamics was a generic "don't misuse it". 1. You are criticizing spectral effects *overall* and not within Q4. No? 2. You chose an example without a particular intent, threw spectral dyn onto *everything* and concluded that it was bad... ... ... Can Q4's spectral be used as a noise gate (only let high amplitude frequencies through, reduce the rest)? That would be very useful, particularly for mic recordings.
Its funny, a while back I was trying to tell someone who was insisting on putting soothe 2 on every single little thing in the mix and their reasoning was "I don't want these frequencies to be poking out and effect the mastering process!". When I mentioned how much of a problem playing with the phase can cause the mastering engineer based on how hard and deep he was attenuating some of the stuff he was trying to say "Its fine, because during mastering they'll just be bringing those frequencies back when they raise floor with their limiter!". I couldn't believe my ears. I've just gotten to the point in the convo that I was mentioning if that's his goal then he's probably just better off just putting a multiband brick wall limiter on all the bands he thinks he's having problems with if he's just blindly attenuating "Bad Frequencies" thinking that its some kind of new way of 'tricking' the mastering engineer to bring his boring spongy mix back to life on the master buss all because he just sucked the timbre and life out of the poor thing LOL
Try a triangle instrument, whistles, bells or something narly with 5 to 10 K of nasty harmonic ringing, then I use this stuff. Or maybe to carve out a kick lowend from a Bass. the key here usually are moving harmonics you cant target with static attenuation. I wouldn't use this on a mix like that. Maybe just one on the master lightly tickling it to even out the mix if it's popping too much. just my 5 cents, but yes it does degrade if not handled with care.
The case about the spectral feature is interesting, like mixing in mono, this argument ignores the real world, the natural harmonics that the sound will create wherever it played. if add the real world in to the equation, attenuating some of the natural harmonics can be a good thing. In relation to the example, I wouldn't say the wet is worse, it just went too far. As always, great video!!
About the 'soothe' function: from what I understand, it relies on the user to identify problematic frequencies, and the plugin handles them more surgically than a regular dynamic EQ. However, it's still up to the user to decide if those frequencies are actually an issue. In the example you gave, it seems like you just applied spectral dynamics across the board, but it didn’t improve the sound, probably because there wasn’t an issue to fix in the first place. But anyway that's just my humble opinion
RIGHT. And it depends on how much you pull down the threshold of the band!
Just went down the Airwindows rabbit hole and I remember seeing their plug-in Sweeten that is dedicated for solely making second harmonics, and it’s free.
Yeah Airwindows is definitely a rabbit hole - but one worth going down. I love the stuff he makes.
@@InnerMotionMusic The guy that makes a new version of every single plugin every day haha. Why he doesn;t just make updates i don;t know! Great plugs though
the harmonics that Airwindows plugins produce are different at different sample rates.. that's what "free" gets you.
@@MichaelDowComposer Because if you created something with the plugin and it sounds different after updating it, you probably wouldn't be happy. Also, many of the new versions aren't simply updates but are actually variations of the original tool, essentially providing a different plugin.
I see this as a benefit. If a major company releases a plugin and later figures out how to make it better or different, they won't do it because they can't sell you two different Pro-Q 4, for example, and they can't drastically change the behavior of a released plugin. So you'll have to wait a few years for a new version with improvements.
Chris (from AirWindows) isn't like that. He can be honest about the downsides of his plugins, and he can create a new, improved version next week if he figures out how.
@@joelybarish4618 My understanding is that all Airwindows are designed to run at 96khz. If you run them lower... aliasing, very much, becomes a possibility (as none of them oversample) and if you run them higher you SHOULD be fine, but you're still working outside recommendations.
I have to disagree. I think for utilitarian reasons, as you mentioned, the spectral function is useful. And that’s exactly where my mind went when I first saw it. I thought about using it as a dynamic deesser. I hate pulling up a million deesers trying to target all the harsh spots. This will work perfectly for it. I’ve also dealt with a lot of harsh mid rangy samples from beat makers, and what I ended up doing in the past was using multiple bands of dynamic eq to attenuate the harsh frequencies as they’d pop up. This feature would make that much quicker. So I don’t think the feature itself is bad; I think the marketing is bad. As you said, someone who doesn’t know what they’re doing could get into a lot of trouble with that feature, but for those of us who do know what we’re doing it’s pretty sweet. Honestly though, I think I’m most excited about them adding attack and release times to the dynamic eq. I’ve wanted that for years.
Very good for samples you are right
I think what he's trying to get at is that Spectral EQing, much like Autotune or MIDI/Audio quantization, will end up being used in ways that are detrimental to music.
It won't just be rookies doing it- Lazy producers and engineers will likely default to using it.
@ I see that as their problem. That’s like outlawing hammers because some idiots will use them in a destructive way.
@@cbrooks0905 how do I like this more than once
I agree. As a mastering engineer I can already see exactly where I'm going to use it.
I was anxiously awaiting your video on the Pro-Q4. Sage Audio, don't pay attention to the unfounded criticism. Your nerdiness about audio engineering is very valuable to the community, and to the market. Keep it up! 👏🏼👏🏼
Appreciate your viewership and comment!
Agreed
I almost refunded my cracked version
😭😭😭😭
What!😆 You already cracked it? Genius..
@@SI3GELthere was already a crack on the day of release lol
"EQ police has entered the chat"
hahaha
I love proq3 but tbh this year i decided to take away any visual eqs from my work flow. Best decision ever… I used to retouch things all the time and spend hours adjusting. Now its a couple Stock pro tools EQs, Rely on my ears, set it and forget it.
Very nice, glad this has been working for you!
I wish I could like your comment twice! Excellent!!
Honestly, I’m enthusiastic about the new features, like the spectral option. It’s definitely a trend many other developers are following (think of Izotope lately inserting that everywhere from delay, to reverb and saturation). As always, it’s all about how you use a certain technology. Not many years ago, Matching EQ was a new thing and became a trend. Of course, many engineers complained it would cause more damage than good to mixes trying to get similar to a target. But used as a sound design tool, it’s immensely powerful. I like that Dan Worrall, when presenting a new Fabfilter plugin, doesn’t forget about sound design and creative applications. Think of the new All Pass filter. That’s definitely there also for creative purposes (I’m blinking to Disperser right now)
Great points here!
There is the plugin Sweeten by Airwindows that does an isolated 2nd harmonic !! He has a lot of niche stuff like that inside his monstrous bundle.
Thanks for sharing this, will check it out!
@@sageaudio i know what each and every airwindows plugin does best (or at least 80%), so if there's anything else in his bundle interesting you, i can help! I use it for 90% of my mixing plugins (including creative fx), and having learnt how to use the niche ones in combination gives a hugely precise control over "tone" in every way.
It's the FIRST thing I told my son when I installed it for him: Unless you know what you're trying to achieve, don't use the spectral mode. As you say, seems more like wanting to hop on the Soothe bandwagon, something I've already stated most often destroys a mix, kills desired overtones, not only "problematic" frequencies, and on and on. Glad you covered it
Spectral side-chain envelope, great for mixing when two instruments share similar spectrums and occasionally play simultaneously where you will make a mixing decision to side-chain one against the other. Briefly making space in the mix without compromising overall fullness of each instrument. Extremely useful technique when mixing Electronic, specifically House and Techno.
People will misuse the spectral function and overdue it... 100%. Especially the newbies. But they're gonna learn the hard way like we all did😂 everyone has to gro through it
It's worrying when people are preferred the ON version. For me it was night and day how much better and less destroyed it sounded OFF
the difference is so small most people wouldnt even notice if there wasnt an ON/OFF text
well yeah because it was a stupid example.
People like this sound because it lets them listen to it louder with less pain. It simulates fatigue
I’m an amateur so that’s prob why it sounded better to me 😭
in regards to the spectral functionality of pro-q4, as someone who does a lot of experimental sound design stuff i find this feature quite useful because it’s built into an already powerful eq & means i don’t need to add something like soothe to my processing chain if i need to take care of any harsh or otherwise weird resonance that might be present.
This feature adds 116ms of latency per instance of fsb filter. Multiply that by however many Q4's you added and you have ruined your mix with just an EQ plugin
@@sorenandrews1078 pretty much every DAW has latency compensation. linear phase filters need lookahead by design, so i don't mind it. and if you are recording something... just bypass the plugin like one would do with any plugin that requires lookahead?
Very good point, we typically make most of these videos in the context of more traditional music mixing/mastering applications, but you are totally valid in how it can be a great tool there!
@@yesthisisdonut it's not about the latency, it's about the phase and distortion each plugin brings into your project
@@sorenandrews1078 it shouldn't have any phase and distortion issue. its a spectral processing unit which only affects the envelopes/transients of the sound.
Honestly I liked the mix better after the processing, but I doubt it has much to do with the "correcting problem frequencies" thing. I think the vocals were just not compressed enough, and the extra (albeit, multiband) compression helped.
Yes. That
Totally understandable, thanks for commenting!
Finally a good review covering the major changes for what has become an industry standard EQ plug-in. I'm staying with Pro-Q 3 for now as I don't really need the new "enhancements". The current slope features are more than adequate for my EQ needs. Maybe a future Q-5 update will offer more useful features.
I been using pro q 3 to dip frequencies and when I want to boost, Spectre. There’s an option to eq harmonics with/without affecting volume
Thanks for watching!
A good and well implemented dynamic EQ (or clip EQ) works better than spectral compression in my opinion. I have found spectral compressors underwhelming (or destructive) while trying to fix nasty overtones.
currently airwindows sweeten is the only other 2nd order harmonic generator like this that I'm aware of!
MSaturator
Airwindows Pafnuty also can do this, but can generate additional isolated harmonics up to the 13th harmonic.
Ive been using the all instance view as a frequency monitor. Very nice to see what your tracks are doing all in one window. Then i still use the ssl native channel for eq etc. i keep pro q last in my chain to do this.
Personally, im taking with Pro-Q3. I think the more functions we have, the more problems we create. An EQ is an EQ. I think the more "dialed in" you can get and the more surgical you get, youre just going to create more problems in a mix than were actually there to begin with. Mixing, when done for years and years and years - is not an overly complicated process. You balance the mix, you shape the sound of it to your liking, you make sure the more present elements are more upfront while others are further back, you create the stereo image you want and then send it off for mastering. I think the more complicated we make it, the longer you will take trying to mix a track trying to get it ABSOLUTELY PERFECT - when that will never happen...thus creating problems rather than fixing them. I tried alot of these neat plug ins when they first came out like Sooth and I used it two times and never used it again. This is all ofcourse my subjective opinion on approaching mixing so take what I say with a grain of salt - but I think the more complicated we make plug ins, the more complicated we make the entire process.
Appreciate you sharing your thoughts on this, definitely a good idea to try and keep things as simple and streamlined as possible!
I agree on the spectrum eq trend. It’s often overkill but I’ve found it extremely helpful on clean guitars and de-essing. Pretty much more surgical things. Anything that pops out sometimes in a mix at varying frequencies depending on the note hit. Especially if you want the instrument to remain behind other things. I also like soothe on my mix bus sometimes to even out things a bit more before hitting a limiter but it’s often doing very small changes like 0-3db and not often. Where the others will be a lot more. My issue is that it takes so much CPU power and some mixes can’t have more than one instances. Hoping pro Q4 can do similar stuff using less CPU power. Haven’t upgraded yet though.
Ozone has the Spectral Shaper and Stabilizer modules which do the same thing as Soothe if you wanna try. Works great for me!
@ thanks! I haven’t delved into izotope’s latest offerings. But in my experience they often use a lot of cpu too.
@@CreativeMindsAudio No problem! For me, Stabilizer uses around 1% CPU and Spectral Shaper uses 6%.
That's at 48000 sample rate and 192 buffer size. CPU is a Ryzen 7950X.
@ nice, way more powerful computer than mine. I have a 2020 intel MacBook Pro.
@@CreativeMindsAudio That should handle these no problem. Especially Stabilizer.
7:22 listening in my car I actually felt that in the audio example that it sounds better with the plug-in on versus with the plug-in off. When it’s on, it sounds a bit less harsh, a tad bit warmer, and slightly bigger.
I agree, I thought it sounded better with the spectral attenuation. I would have liked a little less on the drums, but overall I thought it sounded clearer and cleaner. Just my opinion.
It sounded better even on my phone speakers smh
You were put on this earth to handle audio signals. You're really great at explaining things and bringing certain stuff to light that I wouldn't have considered otherwise.
When you activate the spectral function, you're looking for a solution similar to what you get when you activate the dynamic EQ function. The difference is that spectral is frequency-dependent, while dynamic is band-dependent. You can ruin a mix with dynamic EQ if you use it poorly, so spectral isn't bad-it's just another approach.
Hey Sage Audio 👋
I have a question, Should you always cut unwanted frequencies below the fundamental frequency. Because when you apply Saturation or Upwards Compression the frequencies below fundamental came back.
I've always seen in your videos that you only apply lowcut at start of the chain and don't lowcut after even though the frequencies below the fundamental came back after some processing.
Great question! Generally, it's a good practice to cut unwanted frequencies below the fundamental frequency at the start of the chain to prevent muddiness, especially in a dense mix. However, after applying saturation or upward compression, lower frequencies can indeed reappear, as you mentioned. Whether to add a low-cut later in the chain depends on the sound you're going for and the specific processing involved. If those low-end frequencies cause issues after saturation or compression, a gentle low-cut later on could be helpful. Ultimately, it's about following your ears for balancing clarity with the character you're aiming to achieve in the mix!
Is it possible to boost with the spectral function? It would be kinda interesting to have a plugin that can increase certain resonances
i only use soothe for sidechain cutting out space for vocals over an instrumental. never knew people were using it for evil purposes
The mix with the frequency attenuation sounded darker to me, so I could see it having certain applications if that's the effect someone is going for. I also wonder if you could invert the function and use it for some kind of dynamic expansion functions... But in general I've been starting to see how the plugin industry's whole business model is to add superfluous features to up-sell existing customers. All that said, I'll still probably upgrade just for the warm feature depending on how much it will cost.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Spectral EQ is very powerful for mixing. It allows to solve dynamic source issues and masking between tracks, more transparently.
Using your analogy, a broader EQ is actually sometimes like using a bulldozer to pin a nail.
Yes new tech can be misused, especially if not understood, but this technology is a great addition to our toolbox. 👍 Fixing masking areas with sidechain inputs via spectral EQ provides clarity with unparalleled transparency. I highly recommend trying this for example to make space for vocals over a competing instruments’ bus.
It is also super powerful for film or video game audio, with less tonal content.
I like the off version. Even on a mobile phone the on mix kind of falls apart and it's hard to listen to. The song is great who is it?
It's a past client, so we can't share their info, but the song is called "Summers Night"!
Melda's free MSaturator has a harmonics generator with a "2nd" control that does the same. Just check that all other controls are set to 0 if you want only 2nd order. (Hint: 0dB is 100% on the Threshold control.)
I use MSpectralDynamics for side chain ducking of pads and synths, so I guess it's nice that Fabfilter users can finally do that too.
I've been using toneboosters eq pro and I really like it. No need to spend all that on proq
7:09 8:55 oops? 😅
I have yet to find an instance where spectral improved the sound.. Everything else I'm quite happy with! Soothe & Bloom is far superior in dealing with unwanted frequencies.
Appreciate your videos man, I’m in the middle of mixing my album so they’re a great break. I’ve been producing and mixing for five years or so. Im in the doubt stage of the project at the moment lol
Question: do the saturation modes apply to the whole spectrum, or just the bands that have been created/enabled?
Can you cover the new "All Pass" filter type, and whether that is more useful than it is harmful? Isn't it flipping polarity on a portion of the frequency range?
I’m glad to now have spectral dynamics processing. It will give me the opportunity to learn what it does and what it sounds like, why it would be inappropriate to use and when it might be helpful. Before, I had no understanding about it. I like learning, so I’m glad I have a new tool.
Also, regarding the sound sample with off vs on… while I don’t think ON was a good way to change the mix, I do think it was partially helpful, or at least helped to highlight some potential weaknesses in the OFF version. It definitely made the vocals sound much worse, and the whole mix sounded thinner, but it made me wish the OFF version was a little less congested around the lower mids (especially the drums maybe? Maybe there was better separation between the drums and guitars with ON?) and it made me want a little more brightness too.
The spectral functiopn is a tool like any other, if you use it wrong , yeah it's bad. But it's nice to have the option?
5:05 mmm, good point, shaving the timbre, why is it better?
I made a review the day it got release and felt i was swimming against the flow as everyone was nothing but love for this update. Glad to finally watch yours and see you came to similar conclusions. I felt the adjustable slope is a wonderful update (especially for hpf and the reduced phase shifts and the ability to now dynamically add that 2nd harmonic) but all the rest felt like gimmicks and sales attemps while there could still be some nicer improvements ...
Spectral EQ is good when used correctly. That mix had too much spectral processing.
Hi Sage Audio, I really value your great insights in Audio, but I am curious to know your view on Soothe 2 and Is this your opinion about spectral processing in ProQ4 or is it your general view about all spectral processors, very curious to know. Thanks for a nice video.
Thanks for commenting! I'll link our two videos on those topics for you below, hopefully those clear up your questions :)
th-cam.com/video/kBML7aBHXk4/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/xEzP42seKZ8/w-d-xo.html
@@sageaudio Thank you very much.
In the comparison, with the "problem" high frequencies attenuated and through my speakers to my ears, I hear more openness. With it off the highs sound stuffy and inside a small cramped room on sounds like it's outside. I think it is cleaning up high end mud, that's my interpretation
I tried spectral expanding in stead of compressing, works like magic!
6:28 at that example, if the On is shown, then snare sounds bit more clear, but that's only difference I can find and that's after careful listen
I can pretty clearly hear the guitars lose a lot of body and go further back in the mix.
I used the spectral EQ on the low-mid of an acoustic guitar where manually EQing it just wasn't precise enough. I spent hours trying until Pro-Q4 came out, and that fixed the issue. I don't think I'd recommend using it in the high-mid or high ranges, however.
Definitely a good use case for it, thanks for sharing!
The problem with spectral is when it's being used to cut, like, 6dB. It's not meant for that, it's meant to smooth harsh resonances out. You only cut 2.5dB at any given time and adjust attack time and release to taste. Just as Dan Worrall said in the intro video, it's very easy to misuse this feature. It feels like most people dont seem to understand how to use this tool.
So is this spectral feature the same as soothe?
I think the spectral feature is a lot more interesting / useful when using it side chained from an outside audio source
is the spectral processing basically the same as Izotope Ozone Spectral shaper?
I personally never bothered to buy Pro-Q 3 because it always seemed like 'just an EQ' with some dynamic/match features, that's also extremely expensive.
However, as soon as I learned about Pro-Q 4, and downloaded the demo - The fact that it is such a versatile tool (you can pretty much use it as a transparent surgical tool, and a whole ass analog channel strip) was what made me pull the trigger on this one. It's incredible.
(Protip: try splitting all your bands into L/R and misplacing them a bit, it will give it the feeling that both channels were not perfectly identical, just like in analog gear. It makes the sound get a bit wider and more 'alive')
The spectral features: Yes, music nowadays is overusing them all the time. But it is not necessarily a bad feature. A bad mixing engineer will overuse it, yes, but so will they overuse reverb and other stuff, but what do you expect a beginner to know about all this? It's a tool, and in the hands of a skilled engineer it can save a LOT of time and give better results then sculpting, notching and automating things yourself.
Also if you do want to go for the 'modern' sound, you can absolutely use it a bit more, just because it is a standard in the music nowadays. I don't say it's good, but it's also not necessarily bad. It's just a stylistic choice/trend that people follow nowadays and it's up to one's preference. Same with the loudness war In the 2000's. It's all about art and being able to express yourself, but also be able to make stuff comparable to other commercially released music, and if this tool does that for you, then why not? go for it.
I do not get the 'draw' feature though haha. It is indeed unnecessary and very finicky. I would much rather prefer if you could draw it literally pixel-by-pixel (instead of this weird jumpy rope), and then it would 'round up' the curves you drew into appropriate, smoothened bands. Kinda like when you paint a bad circle in some painting programs, and it turns it into a perfect one afterwards.
I feel like the spectral feature has been helpful for cleaning up poorly recorded vocals and side chaining reverb/delay busses but that’s about it. I tried using it in a guitar yesterday and took it right off.
the attack release feature for dynamic eq is actually really nice in q3 i never used it and instead opted to just modulate an eq with an envolope (i use bitwig) but now i find myself using the dynamic eq a lot more.
i actually do think the processed version sounds better. sounds more polished / professional. Not sure i would use it on a pop punk mix, but yea
@@michaelalexson8359 It sounded terrible ON lol I agree
On a JBL shit box, I do hear the difference for sure. But I'm surprised because it mostly introduces harshness in the treble, particularly on the HiHats, and the EQ settings don't seem to do that. So that would be the phase thing shown before in the video? that's bad...
Pro Q4 is nice. That warm tab is very smooth and subtle!
The effectiveness of the spectral feature is definitely subjective. Both on and off sounded good to me... totally depends on what you're going for.
5:16 Of course the impulse is altered by the EQ. That's just how EQs work, and it has nothing do with the dynamics. You can't measure anything related to dynamics or distortion, which are non-linear, with something called "linear analysis". An impulse response can only capture the behaviour of a linear, time-invariant system.
Spectral Eq can have its place in improving the audio, but pro q4 is very restricted in this term. That’s why it can rarely solve a problem in audio. Each audio source has to be treated differently to get the best result. Having only a few options to choose from cannot solve most problems. A pro eq of this kind should have more options or keeping it completely out.
the pros (the instance view, especially) still have great value, and the Q4, overall, 'feels' better to work with. so (for me), it's a worthwhile update 👍
i was expecting to not like the multiple instances of the frequencies attenuated with Pro Q4 but it actually did enhance the clarity.
I find the 65$ upgrade to be insulting at best, but that's fabfilter for you
The Off version sounds much better to my ears. However, the spectral processing is shaving off 3-6 dB which is quite a lot. A tool, like you say, can be abused, or used deftly. You make a good point with the example, but gives an example closer to the set it and forget approach, with deeper cuts to a wide range of frequencies. Not how most of us would use it.
100% agree with you about cutting resonant frequencies, resonance is good and we want it in our mixes. I am a big fan of things like soothe though, but I feel like they have to be used so so delicately and only exactly where they're needed. When I'm trying to get LUFs from a vocal recorded on a cheaper or midrange mic I usually find a few resonant frequencies that are absolutely unwanted being brought out by all the compression - and then it's a lifesaver to reach for a decibel or two of some kind of spectral reduction. As they say, "The only difference between the medicine and the poison is the dosage" - and tools like soothe are a potent medicine
Most capable engineers will recognize spectral dynamic processing function as a useful way to handle particular peaks. Use the attack and release wisely and in subtle ways and everything will be fine. It is not like you are bricking the signal but it does allow you to handle some of those peaks, similarly to how you could before - but with 3 you had to still individually take care of every little peak.
I don't agree with you either. The Spectral EQ can be very helpful. For example, with heavily distorted guitars in the upper mids. A few mouse clicks and the brizzling and crackling is gone. Or with harsh black metal vocals in a similar range if cheap or the wrong microphones have been used. Much faster and also cleaner than conventional dynamic equalisers. Or with very hard played cymbals. Also with bass guitars, it can help a lot to suppress boomy frequencies in low tones without taking the whole body.
And the new saturation modes sound excellent.
I'm very happy with the update and for 59€ it's an absolute no-brainer.
The low mids are cleaner with the spectral processing version on. The high-frequency spectral bands were unnecessary, and they seem to be taming the edge that the track needs... but in the end, if this was dialed in better without the spectral processing on the highs, it would be better. Still a net positive, though.
The mix lost its glue with the ProQ instances enabled
Seems you have to adjust your ProQ settings, does it?
This sums up my first impressions pretty well. I recently re-discovered Soothe2 for unmasking via side-chain, which somewhat lessens the hashing artifacts of spectral processing imho. Pro-Q4 is not quite at the level of Soothe2 for this function. I also like the draw function but agree with you that it's a bit unnecessary; I may use it to quickly draw a standard topology - e.g. high-pass, low-shelf, one bell, low-pass - then adjust like I do with Pro-Q3.
Finally someone is saying this.
🎯👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Looks like suddenly, since Soothe, everything we record & mix has "unwanted resonances" - not a damn obnoxious occasional' frequency peak or whistle, but hundreds of tiny previously unheard of pesky "resonances" that only that very special magic algorithm can spot and suppress (never mind the phasey side effects of what are basically the virtual sliders of a thousand band graphic eq being pulled down & back up all the time).
Eh.
🤷🏼♂️
This! Such this! Like I've been hearing the micropattern spaces around desired frequencies they create which should improve and add crispness, but I couldn't figure out what was off... it's the dynamic phaseyness remnants. Thank you! I will sleep so much better!
well, yeah, you can make the sound worse with any and every tool... or use it were it´s beneficial, and in moderate amounts. i see many people talking about spectral eq´s taking away the character of sounds. sure, if you use it wrong. if you blindly put a compressor on every track and obliterate the dynamic ranges the mix will be down the drain too.
I think that that "soothe" function probably would work best when used as sidechain. But I've not tried it since I don't need any new plugins 😂
At the end of the day, I will only pay for updates that 1) ultimately improve sound quality and 2) enhance efficiency and workflow. The Q4 updates seem revolutionary and impressive at first, but in the end, they don’t convince me to spend $65 on the upgrade.
I think the low cut/high boost/bell shape guessing feature is really useful, the “warm” mode is interesting, and the multi-editing mode is helpful. If you don’t have Soothe 2, it might be nice to have something similar. However, for me, it’s not worth the $65.
As for the Soothe-like feature, it’s great for quickly addressing harsh frequencies, especially for trained ears. But for newer engineers, it could cause more problems than it solves. Personally, I still think it’s a must-have for engineers and producers. While multiband compressors, dynamic EQs, de-essers, or EQ automation can also tame harshness-and might even sound better than Soothe in some cases-I really value the fast workflow Soothe provides.
The processed after track sounds like the vocals fit better because the original needed more compression, the snare pops out more from the mix and the tone of the mix sounds more modern, I don’t think it works for the genre, since pop/punk would sound better being glued instead of spaced out like a modern record but the example showed that this new feature isn’t entirely useless.
ReaEQ always had continuous high pass slope. I'm pretty sure a ton of other digital EQs as well
This “soothe” function, I do enjoy, but as many have said here it’s situational. And btw yes, it does sound different in your example, but IMO it sounds sterile. Like, no character. It’s a great example of abusing this feature, which a lot of people will do.
What I like about Pro-Q 4 is being able to see all instances of it on all tracks. That above all else, to me, makes this worthwhile.
Thank you for another great video. I agree with everything you said, especially the "unnecessary." I'm going to look into the upgrade.
Some synths, for example, can have harsh and annoying tones, I'd use the spectral dynamic EQ carefully in those situations. For actual acoustic instruments it can suck life out of them.
IMO the audio sounded far cleaner, and fatter with the spectral bands ON. It appears that it created space in the mix for each various element, that allowed the mix to overall sound more intelligible and cohesive. I think this will be subjective to each person's personal taste, and probably be more relevant to some genres of music than others. It is certainly more useful for dynamically sidechaining competing signals, as opposed to carving out static bands to create space in a mix, and with more granularity than Pro-Q 3 previously allowed using dynamic bands.
4:40 you are totally right, however... if you are working with bad material it definetly will help. If you are working with professionally recorded Vocals and instruments in a well treated room, you probably won't need it for much. But I think it can help for "problematic" elements.
The video is only based on ideal sources. Never a panacea. Still very useful in terms of room resonance of home recordings and some issues from microphone axis, misuses. Also, even professional singers sometimes cannot control their voice and formant properly making some nasal/throat sound. These can’t be natural sounds. Of course we can do that with automation, but too much time and hassle.
If you have a good recording studio with ideal room acoustic, not pretty necessary. But otherwise, very useful as long as you can make a proper decision. Only for unwanted resonance with automation! Way Better than normal dynamic EQ.
Valid points, thanks for commenting!
when mixing vocals, it was insane how every tutorial i see uses Soothe 2. I have the Waves Silk and it is one of the worst plugins I have tried. So when I saw the Q4 has that built in, I bought it immediately.
Have never tried the feature yet, usually I get around by using other workarounds.
If I see myself not using it, I'm not mad, the 'warm' feature alone makes me happy upgrading from the Q3.
I see both perspectives with the spectral argument. I used it on a very harsh synth piano and it made such a noticeable difference in clarity. It has also taken away the character in the sound with other files. I found it useful in extreme situations with harsh audio files so far.
Often the problem frequencies are wayy lower in amplitude than the highest peaks. I don't know why people like soothe, when everytime I've tried using it it sound awful
Should just call it the life sucker… ridiculous. Plug-ins already mess up your phase… there are well known mixing engineers that won’t even use multiband because of this… and now these things are splitting hairs.
Imagine, decades, and decades of all the greatest music never needing to be “soothed”. SMH
that's just one use case, if you have to soothe the hell out of your tracks then yeah it's a bad recording and if you don't kno what you're doing you'll destroy the sound but there are far more exciting possibilities, like harmonic enhancement by maybe bringing out the harmonics in an organ part when the vocals come in or expanding the harmonics of the side signal of a guitar solo to give a really natural and dynamic widening but only to the harmonics.
you can also use it like trackspacer, use a low density sidechain the kick while applying the spectral processing on the bass and target the clashing frequencies with a fairly wide bell, tweak the attack and release and you get almost perfect bass and kick cohesion in a couple steps.
the reason why some engineers don't use multiband compressors because of the phase is due to those multiband compressors having static crossover filters which if done using minimum phase (IIR) filters can be audible and an issue but this processing using linear phase which only impacts the phase when the filter is compressing or expanding, when its doing nothing it isn't changing the phase, also you have to consider that not all phase change is audible and even if it is it isn't necessarily bad. sure the linear phase filters can cause pre ringing but is that more or less noticeable than the drastic impact it has on improving the clarity of your bass and kick or any other source, point being, audio is a compromise and EVERYTHING you do impacts the fidelity of the audio in some way.
lets say you want to do a highpass, guess what you've just rotated the phase 180 degrees through that filter, you've introduced post ringing and if you have any resonance on that filter the ringing is extremely audible, you've also introduced another layer of digital noise due to the nature of digital processing. the thing is that those effects (if used properly) have way less of a negative impact on the sound than the positive impact of cleaning up the low end using the highpass which is why we do it.
anything can be used incorrectly, doesn't make the tool bad, I did a test mix using pro q4 and it's incredible for fitting things together but yes you can be too extreme with it, which is why you back it off and go for more sensible settings. this is why the phrase "use your ears" is so used, ALL of your tools have the potential to ruin your source, which is why you must listen to, assess and apply with caution and care.
as someone else said in this comment section "you can't blame the hammer if someone smashes their thumb with it" or something similar to that effect.
It does what it is intended to do, with features that make it easier to achive sound design easier and quicker. Just because one don't like it don't mean that it isn't useful.
Apshaper works in many modes, it can isolate the second order armonic , and other armónics
Its much more helpful to me with true A/B comparisons, like a 2 or 4 bar loop switched in/out on the downbeat of the loop. It's much easier to compare when you're hearing the exact same program material being processed/bypassed.
Instance list is a big new feature and wasn't mentioned at all.
You use soothe to de-harsh 3-5k on overhead mics or 4k on distorted guitars in metal. You don’t just put it on everything.
The only feature that I think I'd need is the attack and release and the warm might be useful.
Downloaded the demo, fixed an otherwise unusable acoustic guitar track that had a weird overtone dancing in and out of the track depending on the chords played. A notch filter in spectral mode took care of that without noticably compromising the sound, in all of 5 minutes. It works great for that, but I agree, it can (and probably will be) used to squeeze out every last bit of life from mixes, esp when used on a (gasp) Mix Bus ...
I agree with your assessment - having said that, functions like the draw tool are awesome for creative experimentation - throwing paint on the canvas as it were. I mean digital music/instruments are by their very nature dull. Isn't that why the last decade or two have seen a 'perfecting' of analogue emulation. The true potential for me, though, lies in how plugins can be creatively designed to enhance sound design and texture etc.
I would be very interested in your opinion on the new Arturia Tape J-37! For me it sounds fantastic - but, perhaps my ears are not what they should be!?🐒
Thanks for commenting, we will definitely take a look at that plugin!
@sageaudio I really look forward to that review!😎👍🏻
I think the spectral function works best for sound design purposes as opposed to mixing. I know you're an engineer so you're going to review it from a mixing lens, but don't forget the other reasons people might use the plugin in the first place.
I already own Soothe so…Im good w ProQ3. Honestly the biggest attraction is the “warm setting” which over multiple sources could help it get that “sound” we are all chasing with digital gear.
Others have mentioned it here, but airwindows has your back. Sweeten is free and sounds like it does the exact same thing.
@ oh I love Airwindows, had no idea. Thanks mate!
Attack and release for dynamics, as well as the spectral dynamics was enough for me! 😁
The only concrete thing you said re spectral dynamics was a generic "don't misuse it".
1. You are criticizing spectral effects *overall* and not within Q4. No?
2. You chose an example without a particular intent, threw spectral dyn onto *everything* and concluded that it was bad... ... ...
Can Q4's spectral be used as a noise gate (only let high amplitude frequencies through, reduce the rest)? That would be very useful, particularly for mic recordings.
Its funny, a while back I was trying to tell someone who was insisting on putting soothe 2 on every single little thing in the mix and their reasoning was "I don't want these frequencies to be poking out and effect the mastering process!". When I mentioned how much of a problem playing with the phase can cause the mastering engineer based on how hard and deep he was attenuating some of the stuff he was trying to say "Its fine, because during mastering they'll just be bringing those frequencies back when they raise floor with their limiter!". I couldn't believe my ears. I've just gotten to the point in the convo that I was mentioning if that's his goal then he's probably just better off just putting a multiband brick wall limiter on all the bands he thinks he's having problems with if he's just blindly attenuating "Bad Frequencies" thinking that its some kind of new way of 'tricking' the mastering engineer to bring his boring spongy mix back to life on the master buss all because he just sucked the timbre and life out of the poor thing LOL
Try a triangle instrument, whistles, bells or something narly with 5 to 10 K of nasty harmonic ringing, then I use this stuff. Or maybe to carve out a kick lowend from a Bass. the key here usually are moving harmonics you cant target with static attenuation. I wouldn't use this on a mix like that. Maybe just one on the master lightly tickling it to even out the mix if it's popping too much. just my 5 cents, but yes it does degrade if not handled with care.
The case about the spectral feature is interesting, like mixing in mono, this argument ignores the real world, the natural harmonics that the sound will create wherever it played. if add the real world in to the equation, attenuating some of the natural harmonics can be a good thing. In relation to the example, I wouldn't say the wet is worse, it just went too far. As always, great video!!
Thanks for watching!