A Totally Biased Review of the Kirchhoff EQ

[@MrBitflipper]

No one but Dan could entice me to spend 45 minutes watching a detailed comparison of two practically identical EQs.

[@off1off1]

You still should question your self, in summer out there...

[@benbenzon]

Pro Q3 really doesnt sound like Kirchoff, both during boosting and cutting. Im a daily user of both EQ .

[@CesarMalacon]

haha same here.... :-@)

[@diegodeltoro5190]

And watch it several times...

[@Arcessitor]

@@benbenzonHow is it different if it nulls?

[@banterbanter]

Previously, I was using soundtoys decapitator for surgical eq and waves tune for dynamic eq but was getting mixed results. Having watched this, I'll now be using waves Abbey Road Plate.

[@TheAlburp]

What in the actual…

[@facelessmule]

Word!

[@stevedoesnt]

Finally. Someone able to creatively think outside the box.

[@jamesgrant3343]

‘Mixed’ results - top pun

[@gorillagorilla111]

When I finish my mixes, I then bounce them down into the trash bin.

[@immtonmischer]

I really wonder what will happen first: - Kirchoff developers implement the changes Dan suggested - Pro-Q 4 comes out, having all the extra features of the Kirchoff implemented in a way Dan suggested I wonders what ya'll think 🤔

[@Mansardian]

Fabfilter, saying that as a non- Fabfilter customer. Considering the fact that Dan is the voice of Fabfilter ...

[@firmans12]

I love the sound of kirchoff. But i hate the interface so much

[@vadimmartynyuk]

Cubase’s Frequency 2 has the best dynamic eq and sidechain section. But the big limitation is 8 frequency bands

[@Breakbeat90s]

so you get two identical plugins?

[@Maradnus]

I wont be taking any bets!!! but I will enjoy the race

[@db4ks]

The only review that matters is the Dan Worrall review

[@siondudley]

“Two L’s in ‘Worrall,’ please”

[@db4ks]

@@siondudley my apologies fellow commenter! I was in a hurry to write my comment due to my desire to immediately view this much anticipated review.

[@jeramiahrossnz]

That moment when a Review of EQ is better than anything on Netflix...Yep!

[@Tryggvasson]

everything is better than anything on netflix.

[@jeramiahrossnz]

@@Tryggvasson true but this EQ review, great 👍

[@Orrinton]

Well except maybe Stranger Things and Breaking Bad

[@jeramiahrossnz]

@@Orrinton true. Breaking bad was awesome, haven’t got around to stranger things yet. But thanks for reminding me.

[@oleksiysytnik]

3:24 - You can add an HPF or an LPF by clicking near the ends of the spectrum, but you need to set it up to do so in settings. I don't know why they didn't make the EQ behave like this by default.

[@sub-jec-tiv]

Probably because they want to be able to say ‘see ours doesn’t perform identically.’

[@oleksiysytnik]

@@sub-jec-tiv maybe! It is still a good alternative to Pro-Q, especially for the price, but it feels a little rough on the edges.

[@iainmcguire7190]

@@oleksiysytnik how so?

[@oleksiysytnik]

@@iainmcguire7190 sorry, "how so" what exactly?

[@iainmcguire7190]

@@oleksiysytnik how does it feel a little rough around the edges?

[@Googahgee]

What a wonderful video to wake up to. we’re eatin good today, folks! regardless of whether Dan likes the plugin or not, I’m definitely excited to hear a fresh perspective on it

[@bakharandi]

Amen ! Dan is Brilliant ! After watching the latest news dramas of Adolpho McTwitLer/Adolphus McDRumphy, and seeing flashes of Lord Hildemort, in the online news cycles . . . I was Saved by this New Dan Worrall Episode . . . Yet another Riveting Thriller from the Sherlock Holmes of Audio Engineering! (-;

[@Rhuggins]

Watching Dan’s reviews are akin to watching a thrilling murder mystery. Plot Twists and excitement throughout. Well done 🙏🏽

[@BigMTBrain]

Indeed! He's truly a master at creating compelling... ANYTHING. I was going to say "tutorials", but how captivating it would be to hear audiobooks of any genre delivered by Dan.

[@bakharandi]

He is the Sherlock Holmes of audio engineering ! (-;

[@steveshadforth]

better than valium

[@chamboyette853]

As a proud American, the problem I have with Dan Worall is that he doesn't speak English and has that stupid foreign accent. He should learn English before giving any advice. Oh, before someone starts calling me a racist, I support Ukraine.

[@61636]

that 117 bit null test... hilarious!

[@AVDRE]

I know right lol

[@AutPen38]

This sets a good example of what KZbin reviews should be like: If you state your known biases, remain aware of unconscious biases, keep your bullshit detector running at all times, and actually know what you're talking about, viewers will grant you the respect and admiration you deserve. For now at least, Dan, you own my trust. I hope you continue to keep producing authoritative video reviews and tutorials.

[@TeddyLeppard]

Pro-Q 3 is $169 as of this post. Kirchoff EQ is $99. If they're measurably identical in most respects, this point is won by Kirchoff.

[@niklassilen4313]

Hi Dan. You can actually configure Kirchoff to add HPF and LPF in the extensive menu. You can make it work almost exactly like pro-q does, even setting the ranges for the area where these are added.

[@antoineportes.composer]

The Q value is only 0.7071..... - actually: 1/(2*cos(pi/4)) - for 2nd order filters. Fabfilter offers higher order filters, which is why they came out with the clever idea of normalising the Q to its Butterworth value and multiplying or dividing the Q value of one of the biquads in the chain by up to 40. Tree-Body-Tech. did the same for the same reason. Yes they stole the idea, but in a way they had to! I've never talked to anyone from those companies, I only know the Q Butterworth-normalisation thing by having reproduced it in JSFX with RBJ filters (call it reverse engineering if you will).

[@lussyl1642]

whats this Butterworth thing? and when did both plugins start using it? Thank

[@antoineportes.composer]

@@lussyl1642 Butterworth filters are a type of (theoretical, then analogue, then digital) IIR filters (LP, HP and all the usual derivative) with no ripple in either the pass- or the stop-band, no resonance and a gain of 1/sqrt(2) = ~ 0.7071... (or ~ -3.01 dB) at the cutoff frequency. Their slope gets steeper as their order grows; a very high-order Butterworth filters comes very close to what is referred to as an "ideal filter" (vertical slope; pass-band-gain=1; stop-band-gain=0) - Elliptic filters with negligible ripple and sufficient attenuation come closer faster but they're considerably heavier on both brain and CPU. For all the reasons above, Butterworth filters are considered the smoothest and most transparent filters. And because their digital implementation can be easily achieved with a very small impact on CPU usage, they've pretty much become regarded as the most basic (as in "basis", i.e. "starting point") filters by plugin developers and advanced users. I tried not to get too nerdy but if you want more, maybe start here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterworth_filter off-topic: As I was writing the first paragraph, I realised that this mysterious dimension-less "Q" is just the gain at cutoff... (I checked in Desmos: www.desmos.com/calculator/q8jm8c5efb ) Which means that it could easily be expressed in dB: QdB=20*log(Q)/log(10); hence: Q=10^(QdB*.05); It would make so much more sense for the user that I wonder why it's not standard practice. It could still be easily normalised to its Butterworth value, for instance a 2nd-order filter would have Qnorm=(10^(QdB*.05))/sqrt(2); which gives 1/sqrt(2) when QdB=0 dB, and 1 (i.e. 0 dB) when QdB=20*log(sqrt(2))/log(10) = ~ 3.0103 dB. I'll admit that a bidirectional log taper on the Q knob makes it just as usable, but the numbers displayed hardly make sense to most people (and even if you're familiar with linear gain, I bet you'll find yourself spontaneously replacing the numbers by 6*n every 2^n step). The only reason I see not to deal with the Q as prescribed above is that if you see a resonance peak on a plot and a value in dB on a knob, you might mistake the value for the peak's maximum gain and misuse the knob or assume the code is faulty or broken. Maybe this is all obvious to everyone but me... if so sorry for the noise.

[@parentteachernight]

Other reasons I'll stick with Pro-Q3: • Many of my clients and collaborators also use it, making session-swapping painless. • UI conventions are consistent from one FF tool to another. I look at the total bundle as an integrative whole. • A proven record of backward compatibility from one plug-in iteration to the next. • Years and years of compatibility upgrades and customer support from FF have ingrained a sense of trust in the developers. I'm happy to pay a higher sticker price for a perpetual license knowing that the product will receive the necessary support going forward, and that FF are always developing something exciting in the meantime. Maybe I could do the same things but cheaper with Kirchoff but FF is reasonably priced already for what they offer and the added cost doesn't just get pissed away. FF deserve to profit so they can pay themselves and reinvest in their product line. It's good for the long-term stability of the toolset they offer.

[@venericanone]

Why not both? 🤷🏽‍♂️

[@parentteachernight]

@@venericanone Why both?

[@sub-jec-tiv]

- already own ProQ and fully happy with it for transparent EQ

[@MrTunes333]

@@parentteachernight Because if you are worried about not having the same plugins as others, having both would increase the likeliness seeing as Kirchhoff is also becoming more popular and is now apart of the plugin alliance bundle. Also would it not be likely that even if others have Q3, they may not have a number of other plugins in your list, which is the likely scenario for all.

[@ismailerencetinkaya336]

i'll watch this till the end and return to ReEq

[@MrJC1]

ReEq is no slouch.

[@hingeslevers]

I assume you mean ReaEq? Or am I missing something?

[@DanWorrall]

ReEQ is a different plugin, confusingly. It's a Reaper JS build.

[@AlayliDracula]

Expecting a Fuchhoff EQ from Fabfilter soon.

[@BleuNoirProductions]

i was expecting this plugin to be called the Knochoff

[@DanWorrall]

I nearly made that joke myself...

[@AlayliDracula]

@@DanWorrall I can imagine

[@PedroGerardo]

In preferences you can choose what is the default action for the double click on the left and right sides, doing shelf or high/low pass :D

[@redcraft31]

Thanks ! That's a point to consider indeed :)

[@ollieknight1221]

Yup, came here to say this. Mine is set so I can double click in different areas to get shelf or filter and get different shapes by dragging vs double clicking. The menu is as tweakable as the EQ. 😅

[@tommyottobisdee]

Also came here to say this too Lol!😂🤣

[@RoryButler]

Interesting that Kirchoff has caused crashes. I use it as my main EQ now (forever 29 voucher with PA, couldn't grumble!) and I find it very stable and not particularly cpu intensive (I never touch that placebo button though 😜). Reaper user here too. I think Kirchoff wanted to be an upgraded ProQ3 and so crammed a lot of features in. Some are winners, others fall by the wayside a bit. But I've had no grumbles. For a digital EQ it works great for me and cost very little because of handy voucher use.

[@ProudSausage]

Supporting a rip-off company... tsk

[@RoryButler]

@ProudSausage Many companies are a rip off unfortunately 😬 did the forever 29 thing purely for Kirchoff then canned it. I don't have a problem with PA plugins. Don't think they have good support from what I see online, but they work for me and work well. Similar to the few Waves plugs I use.

[@ProudSausage]

@@RoryButler I suppose that it's very subjective when someone perceives something as a rip-off. In tech as in music (or any art form for that matter) taking inspiration from existing stuff and then pushing it a bit further is common practice. But when it's done so blatantly it annoys me. The other thing that annoys me is BS marketing. Ranging from using buzzwords and made up claims that have no scientific base, to putting a high price tag to appear valuable, but then being on sale all the time (like PA and Waves). As you can probably tell, I am quite fed up with the plug-in industry. Who needs the 500th iteration of a compressor/eq/etc that simply has a shinier GUI and different marketing...

[@RoryButler]

@ProudSausage aah I misunderstood, I thought you were against PA specifically. Kirchoff is a bit of a clone, but I will give them their due in that they've attempted to "one up", where many ProQ knock offs I've seen are barely as capable as a standard stock EQ but with a ProQ looking skin. The plugin market is rife with copies, buzz words, and swindles for sure. It's frustrating, but I can guarantee that Fabfilter will come out on top in the annals of history. You can skin an EQ a bunch of ways, but everyone still goes nuts for the original. For me, I could justify the cost of Kirchoff given the ridiculous sale price it had. As much as the complete Fabfilter bundle would be nice. Who knows, maybe Kirchoff will be a bit more original if they update in future (tho PA don't seem to put updating their existing plugins at a very high priority 😬)

[@BrunodeSouzaLino]

Kirchhoff is a textbook example of "more controls doesn't necessarily mean more control." While Pro-Q, may not have all the features from Kirchhoff, it does put the more important controls immediately in front of you, so you don't have to click menus and figure what obscure buttons like "117-bit" do.

[@dspguy628]

The analog phase mode in Kirchhoff only works for bell and shelf filter types. If you use a low or high pass filter for example, the phase in analog mode is exactly the same as in minimum phase mode. The only difference is that it increases CPU usage. Surprisingly, there is no mention of this in the manual or on their website. On the other hand, Pro-Q's natural phase mode works for all filter types.

[@xnewerx]

UVI Shade has continuous filter slopes on some filter types up to 2000 db/o. But it's not really an EQ, it's more like a complex filter system like FabFilter Volcano

[@DanielPestanaTranslations]

Just bought it after watching your video. It seems to suit my needs. Thank you for your high quality work, Dan.

[@davidharrison5873]

Slate Infinity EQ has continually variable slopes, as well as continually variable flatness of bell filters (which I find more useful).

[@SibzProductions]

Yes! While this feature hasn't necessarily made a difference for me, Slate did in fact implement it before Kirchhoff

[@gh0stransist0r]

do you need to subs to try it ?

[@SibzProductions]

@@TheJohnsofDoes Regardless, somebody implemented it before Kirchhoff

[@bakharandi]

So does the Kirchhoff ! I chose the Infinity EQ over the Pro Q3, and I Love the Infinity EQ ! Yet, Kirchhoff gobbles them both up for Lunch and Dinner., respectively. i have rarely used the Infinity EQ since, and I will never need the Pro Q3 (-;

[@bakharandi]

@David Harrison Yes, indeed. Yet the Range of the slopes and the shapes in the Kirchhoff EQ is Oceans Beyond . . . And I Love the Infinity EQ ! (-;

[@Harrysound]

Your spoiling us with your long form content. I’m also really interested in this plugin.

[@bluematrix5001]

Perfect video Tittle, "Totally Biased Video" DW found so many excuses to don't like so much this plugin, so many extra features that maybe you can use in certain opportunities and are way better to have than not, but for me in the most straight fwd features this EQ is better than Fabfilter PRO Q3, even tho there are few features in Fabfilter that are not in Kirchhoff

[@Am6-9]

13:15 Acon Digital Equalize has had continuously variable filter slopes for years. One of the few modern, “graphic” equalizers that isn’t “inspired” by ProQ… Fabfilter sure have set the GUI standard for those types of EQs.

[@KevinOchoa10]

Considering Dan has used Acon Digital's Acoustica before I'm indeed surprised he never noticed the variable filter slope on Equalize. Even more impressive, is the fact Equalize had a 120dB slope way before other commercially available filter's did!

[@StellarWorks2023]

Before you hit the 96k mark, let me say that my name is Elijah but people call me Steve.

[@ebraheemrana]

This might just the most candid and honest disclaimer I've ever seen in my life lmao

[@_allcap]

Owning both, for me it comes down to what i'm after. If I want a quick easy EQ, I always go ProQ. whether it be dynamics or static, nothing beats the workflow and intuitiveness of ProQ. It's my "stock" EQ and by far the most used eq on every project. If I want to tinker with different curves or really fine tune the dynamics I go Kirchhoff. If I could only choose one, it would be ProQ. Side note, I prefer the liner curves. This allows me to add my own favorite saturation pre/post. And I've had very few crashes in Kirch. I can't remember the last time ProQ crashed

[@themastroiannis]

totally agree. own both and fabfilter is a joy to use. kirchhoff is also more CPU demanding.

[@sub-jec-tiv]

Just added ‘dog’s breakfast’ to my vocabulary 😂

[@keithferris9574]

I know everyone worships Dan on these reviews, but I am gonna trust David Gnozzi that the Kirchoff is verifiably better in the hands of someone as his level.

[@cometogether420]

Kirchhoff is better in almost every regard: - Has much better phase integrity on linear mode. - Has no noticeble pre-ring even on the most extreme configurations. - Has a tigther punch on linear mode. - Has oversampling, which is essential. - Has various compression parameters, which are essential. - Has continuous slope, which is really useful on highpasses and lowpasses. - Has more filter types, even if not considering the analog ones. - Has much more custom options to set. Downsides: - Can't combine frequency spectrums with other instances. - Interface is very CPU heavy once visible, and doesn't like other instances open at the same time. - Worse brickwall phase impact compared to Pro-Q (but better on every other slope value). - 117bit is a waste.

[@jeff92k7]

Excellent video and I love the detail with which the Kirchoff was compared to the Fabfilter. I use the Kirchoff for the main reason that I got it on sale at PA, where the FabFilter is at least 3x the price, depending on the PA sale. The Kirchoff is my main surgical EQ now and I love the dynamics options in it. For flavor EQ, I use my SSL native plugins, where I mix by ear. Haven't had any reliability issues with the Kirchoff so far; and I use it on both Windows (Cubase) and Mac (LiveProfessor... yes, I run it live). Been trimming my plugin stable down to what is actually useful since I started dumping Waves after their licensing debacle. The Kirchoff is in my top 5 most used plugins and is on at least a handful of tracks in every project/show, having replaced my previous Waves F6/C6 plugins.

[@ezrashanti]

Excellent tool choices.

[@BTTRSWYT]

I'm a college student so I'm stuck with whatever I can get at a bare minimum price. Someday... someday.

[@iansmith3261]

welll the kirch is OUR choice for something real sweet and cheap...pro q is 169...kirch is a buck...fits my student budget...i just wanted to see if there was any "oh thats stupid, why would they do that" specs and from the lil I heard and @jeff92k7 personal review, im sold...key word was "surgical" i know the Q when I used the trial was absolutely awesome in that respect...and that alone sold me on it...but im hearing kirch is the same and can be slightly even more detailed in surgery. As im not that good yet, what my ears here, the better the tool for me to take it out, as opposed to be doin this for 50 yrs and being able to do it with PT stock EQ7@@BTTRSWYT

[@BTTRSWYT]

@@iansmith3261kirch looks solid to me. ATM I’m using waves f6 since I got it for 30 bucks. Kirch looks solid once I’m looking to spend more than that.

[@mikechad27]

First time coming across this channel; is your voice actually this shaky, or it's just the EQ?

[@SophiesName]

dan worrall saying shit jumpscared me

[@54LZ]

Kirchhoff is pronounced like "Keer Shoff". The "ch" is a voiceless palatal fricative. :)

[@Am6-9]

Sicher sicher!

[@budgreenwood9359]

Dan Worrall, the only real reason for being on KZbin 😀

[@ordinarymonster1187]

Amazing test, but I honestly think CraveEQ is one of the best.

[@edwardkenemorales]

Amen to that! Another CraveEQ fan here.

[@ordinarymonster1187]

@@edwardkenemorales the most trustworthy 59 euros that i spent on digital audio plugins. No "that looks not bad but totally useless when I'm doing my mixing" functions, great UI, sharp response, amazing sound and cozy workflow. wish him could add a dynamic EQ function and take another 40 euros from me, I'm all good with that, even beg.

[@edwardkenemorales]

@@ordinarymonster1187 true, I got Kirchhoff when it came out for the dynamic function and the eq curves but sold the license 2 weeks after I tried to love it but it didnt gel well with me. I went back to Crave and whenever I need dynamic EQ, I use nova. I am not sure Keith from Crave is going to add a dynamics function in Crave though based on his comments in GS but I can only hope for the best.

[@anteshell]

I did not subscribe to your channel due to your cynicism. That's not what I asked for. ...but I definitely would If I weren't subbed already.

[@edwardrivera7690]

I can double click for HPF / LPF just fine on Kirchhoff

[@ThePaulknightmalciak]

I've been using the Kirchoff on nearly every channel of 200+ channel mixes for several months. No crashes yet. Pro Q-3 is an almost perfect surgical eq, Kirchhoff takes it a bit further, while blatently copying all of Pro Q3's groundbreaking and wonderful UI. It's a case of "standing on the shoulders of giants" I suppose. Kirchoff's dynamics section is sooo powerful for sorting out problems while mixing. Dan's example of the dull snare is a perfect example. I agree, though, that the hardware-emulation curves are a waste of time.

[@v0nreagan]

Windows or Mac?

[@ThePaulknightmalciak]

@@v0nreagan windows

[@bakharandi]

I actually Love the analog emulations ! I often pop in a Blue High shelf node to get some of that Maag 40k goodness . . . then I pop in a Neve Bell node at 3,2 K to get that special Neve 3.2 K secret sauce . . . All of analog modeling curves sound different than the Kirchhoff curves, and they give a different flavour.

[@michaelguardenti2253]

​@@bakharandi but they nulled by his own "Clean" settings ...no non linéarité or harmonics ...

[@TheJonHolstein]

@@bakharandi They are just curves, they don't do the non-linear behavior of a modelled EQ. The only real use, like he suggested is for someone that is very used to a specific hardwares EQ curves and want to be able to expect what will happen when "turning the dial". There is no special sauce, using the specific curves, is sort of like using a preset. If you know how to EQ, you can achieve the same thing with the standard selection. But if you don't know how to EQ, they may accidentally give you a better result, than you already have... but in such cases, EQ presets are more likely to do that. There is no modelling, no emulation in this EQ, it is just a preset curve.

[@jt-music-media]

Love your videos Dan you have really helped me transition into the world of audio from being mainly an instrumentalist.

[@tryingtotryistrying]

well I for one am glad you've been able to finally produce some audio from those instruments of yours! congrats! 😜

[@DBrown_XD]

" I don't believe in magic... except in the music itself." Glorious....

[@somedood6621]

That title alone… ooft!

[@gffg387]

Fabfilter won. Congrats to everyone at Fabfilter. The definitive digital eq. It's over.

[@AlexReidStudios]

Just starting the video, but you can change the behavior to be able to double click for a low pass and high pass filters on settings

[@DVNT]

Fabfilter are the most overrated plugins, they sound digital AF. Even in your tests here the highs sound SO plastic-y, clean out your ears. The Kirchoff handles the boost with no digital artifacts. And no, I'm not a shill for Kirchoff, I don't even use that plugin. Best ITB EQ plugin right now is Make Believe's Sontec & it's not even close

[@Bluelagoonstudios]

It's also my main EQ, but only because I bought the entire PA suite, and it includes this EQ, but I never use the modeling features, if I want an SSL sound, I just load a console plugin from SSL, or if I want a Pultec, I load a Pultec plugin. This is a no brainer, also Reaper nerd here. The 117bit button, to be honest I did never used that one, why such an amount blowing away your CPU power? It makes no sense.

[@Teeh0]

A biased review, just like it says on the tin - more useful than an unbiased review, in my opinion. I'll stick with Q3. Excellent video as always

[@Taylor370z]

In the settings you can make it so if you drag from the low or high range it defaults to a high or low pass filter instead of shelf. You can change the default for multiple ranges. Edit: If you go to settings, it's on the right side. Under "lower (or higher) freq default by dragging", then you can select the type, and what frequency area you want considered "lower/higher" Edit 2: Watched more. It seems as though you found it. lol.

[@derekmidgley]

Thank you for demystifying this. Love Fab. They're most honest in pricing and support, effortless to install and use thanks to the best interfaces. What more could one want.

[@nkozi]

Stunning review. I hope the people at TBTech takes notes! I made Kirchoff my first "professional EQ" purchase and haven't regretted it, but I certainly share your feedback on the behavior and organization of analog-modeled EQ curves.

[@watsonstudios]

I'd say the Q3 is more of an ABS type plastic and the Kirchhoff is more towards the styrene/phenolic family of plastics. 🤣

[@SteveGietz]

Thanks for this Dan! I would love to see you test the Lisa EQ from Plugin Alliance. Another dynamic EQ, but on steroids. We need you to dissect it 😊

[@dream.cast.studios]

Only Dan can make me watch a 46mins plus video without skipping,... U are legendary, thanks

[@mwintersteinsmith]

Love it (as always). And in particular, I love the "Would you like a "WOULD YOU LIKE TO WASTE YOUR RESOURCES BUTTON???"" Brilliant as always Dan Worrall 😎👍

[@matthewbcarter]

Any discussion of Price/Value? You can get Kirchoff EQ for $50 right now with a monthly loyalty coupon. Has Pro Q3 ever been offered at that price?

[@fuzzypancake123]

While I don't disagree with your criticisms, I have to say it's very refreshing to see an EQ plugin that doesn't immediately fail because of cramping. I think we should commend them for getting this right as opposed to pretty much everyone else!! 😁

[@DisconnectedAutomaton]

Lirst ✨️👽💜🔥👌💯 Always here to learn from these lovely elaborately well-explained plugin videos ! Keep it up !

[@TheJonHolstein]

It could be argued that perhaps Pro Q should have an advanced tab, to make it a more flexible tool, and in doing so, perhaps better implementing the useful features, when it comes to advanced dynamics processing. They both lack pitch-tracking feature of Surfeq and Auto Tune Vocal EQ. And the Transient split of SplitEQ. And the multiband sideband dynamics processing of Soothe 2 and Smart:comp and some others. And the smart EQ features found in several of products. And the boost EQ saturator in spectre (though fabfilter would point you to another of their products for that). All of that baked in to one, would be an extremely complex EQ though, but with the advantage that you would be able to use a single plugin for all your EQ related features, except for a perfectly modelled behavior, but then you would probably prefer it to mostly look like the hardware, but with possibly an visual mode that shows a spectrum display above the hardware copied UI. the kirchhoff EQ hardware curve features, while interesting for the right use-case scenario, will not be that common today, when few people would actually be that used to a specific hardware only, and one would probably also be looking for a bit of emulation of the sound, otherwise it will still not behave like the hardware unit.

[@jacksolleguitar]

I would love to know what Colt Capperune has to say about this comparrison 😃 Nailed it Dan 🤘

[@slamcrank]

LOL ... I stopped paying any attention to that dude a long time ago, but especially after his video about how you MUST start mixing in Atmos. Just wtf.

[@jacksolleguitar]

@@slamcrank Yeah I saw that too 😅 I guess gear shilling pays better than only Mixing & Mastering these days.

[@yoyoyayu]

I think the point of the 117bit option is to give you absurdly good dynamics, you could boost crazily some frequencies and still be able to here the quietest ones without ever saturating internally, even though since it goes back in a 64 bit summing bus in most cases (a part from sequoia maybe) I don't see it mattering most of the time and I never use it but I think you'd see a difference if you boosted way more... But all in all I still prefer the kirchhoff, it's got everything the ff has and more; I love the ff don't get me wrong, but this is just EVEN better, and I have no loyalty concerning plugins, if it's better, I'm just a gearslut ^^

[@djGreenALERT]

I didn't detect ANY bios towards Pro Q3 whatsoever.. Ok maybe a little..:)) ......er maybe a little bit more than a little.. oh ok a lot.. but from what I heard with my ears, OR saw with my eyes? none of the bias was unwarranted! All in all.. a great video from the legend himself. I stuck with Pro Q before, and nothing I've seen or heard here will make me want to change! Thanks Dan!

[@MrJC1]

Pro Q is still my go to. Kirchoff has some cool features but most of the time, i just dont need them. Thats just the top and bottom of it.

[@djGreenALERT]

@@MrJC1 That's the same for me, only I used several more unnecessary words lol

[@kirkegodfrey414]

Im ALWAYS here for the SNARK!!!

[@matthewbcarter]

Interesting. Never had a crash with either EQ plugin. Sometimes running 20-30 Kirchoffs on a project with no issues. I use it on both Mac (Mojave/Catalina) and PC (Win 10) In Logic Pro, Ableton, Reaper, Resolve and occasionally Studio One. Never a crash. Wonder what's causing that behavior on your computer.

[@ragismrotzrochen5776]

Though I have not tested it as in-depth as Dan would, I am using Toneboosters Equalizer 4 in basically all projects atm. It is heavily inspired by Pro-Q 3, but a bit less surgical. It has neat saturation or dynamic options. It is dirt cheap, updated every month (often adding new features), and is very low on CPU. Toneboosters plugins rarely get the attention they deserve, mainly because they put no money into advertising. But that's the main reason their plugins are super affordable. Also Barricade, Compressor, and Reverb are excellent bang for your buck.

[@Pummelfay]

Their tape and mbc are insane

[@ragismrotzrochen5776]

@@Pummelfay MBC is excellent, yes! Guess I'll have to check out ReelBus next... That one dutch main developer is also quite responsive and loves explaining his approaches. Long before Dan Worrall, he made a post explaining why he did not add linear phase to his EQ, and why it makes not as much sense as people think. EQ4 is designed so linearity is not needed, as far as I have understood ♥️

[@MrTunes333]

I agree, the best value for money out there and in many ways I love the workflow more in E4, so simple and fluent. I also like how it has input and output meters along the right. Thumbs up to the MBC too.

[@Pummelfay]

@@ragismrotzrochen5776 that sounds interestesting how do i find that video?

[@ragismrotzrochen5776]

@@Pummelfay He does not make videos, AFAIK. His name is Jeoren Breebaart, and he is quite active at Gearspace and other forums.

[@Frozen_Smoke1972]

I haven't used Pro-Q3 but I also imagine that side-chaining it to another channel is way simpler that it is with Kirchhoff, which seems unnecessarily faffy.

[@wadebay]

Thank you for the admittedly biased and clear review. I've also struggled with crashes in Cubase-- and know it may just be my system. Fab Filter plugins are rock solid in my case at the same time, and I use many instances on complex mixes with no issues-- regularly. I have enjoyed some of the dynamic features of Kirch., And will use it more if the stability improves.

[@lopp3]

Regarding the fully variable filter slope, the only plugin I'm aware of with any similar setting is TDR Kotelnikov, which has a fully variable filter slope on the sidechain HPF. No idea how this is implemented though, and I'm sure it's quite different from how the one in this plugin works.

[@CaptainChu]

Coming back to this video just for 13:10 Pro-MB actually has the same continuous filter slope on their crossovers. Crossover filters are exactly the same as high/low pass filters, right? The values are written in db/oct so I assume it's just slope without any q value shenanigans. Surprisingly I think it's pretty useful to have the continuous control (at least for a crossover). Not like I'd perish without it, but it's just nice when I can't decide between 18 and 24 and just go at 21. Edit: I just realized you might be talking about only the shelves and bells... my dsp knowledge is still lacking... I can't say for certain if the ability for continuous control for high/low pass filters would transfer to shelves or bells

[@JamesJones-th3ml]

Have to say after a year of watching all the comparisons of both EQs. I don't like the Kirchhoff EQ. It's complex for no reason. Music was never meant to be Rocket Science LOL I have the Fab filter, and I use it quick and decisive. Why add so many bells and whistles to an EQ?

[@fortheoneswhocare]

I honestly didn't expect to spend 45 min on a review of this EQ but I'm glad I did. Thanks for the (as usual) amazing work Dan!

[@AironExTv]

Thanks for this detailed comparison. I've yet to find an application for the free filter mode in my line of work(dialogue mixing), though I'll probably find one in time. I'm pretty happy with Pro-Q3 for now. It's my most dependable workhorse plugin. The only DAW I could manage to crash with Pro-Q3 was Davinci Resolve v17 or v16(not tested in v18). Its automation was a bit flimsy with VST plugins when I was working it though, in December 2021/January2022. In Reaper Pro-Q3 has been nothing but dependable.

[@arileopold923]

I had it causing freezes on reaper in m1 native too! Sent a support ticket to PA and they claimed "they couldn't reproduce the problem" but I bet a future update addresses this even if they don't admit it! (Not a problem in Rosetta, which I've been using more and more for a bunch of plugins' sake, def just a band aid but ok for now)

[@adsm6464]

I almost bought Kirchoff based on all the nice things said about it and it was cheaper than Q3 at the time but the little DW inside my brain told me to stop until the null test was completed. I'm glad I have no choice but to listen. Solid review as always.

[@mattd2001]

Also notable: The spectrum analyzer portion of the Pro Q3 is also great. With the freeze, external spectrum, show collision and spectrum grab. Can’t find that in the Kirchhoff EQ. The eq match i Pro Q3 also work if you go for such things. Thank you Dan for sharing your knowledge and cutting through the general KZbin BS.

[@MrVleker]

(Halfway though) I get why you're biased but as someone who didn’t own Q3 yet, I was able to get this for $29. It has a dynamic EQ with attack and release settings and has everything I'd ever need. Yes, they kind of copied (and improved) on Fabfilter. But for anyone who doesn't have Q3 yet, $29 for Kirchoff is the better option. I'll probably get other FF plugins in the future though!

[@jacksolleguitar]

That price should tell you everything about how much they truly value this plugin. Right now it's $99 on their website with $299 crossed off. I smell Waves here and that's not good. As far as I know FF has been consistent with their pricing for a long time so I'll keep using their EQ.

[@MrVleker]

@@jacksolleguitar PA or TBT? TBT is a different company and I'm betting they value the product. It's plugin alliance who is kinda pulling a waves. I know that all of their plugins will be 29,99 or 39,99 at some point so I don't buy anything until they are. I don't mind though. As long as I don't have to pay for a WUP.

[@TyQuinn]

I would love to see a video from you specifically on Q, and where 1/sqrt(2) comes from? I understand that quality factor is an engineering term, but would really love a nerdy deep dive

[@cajuncrackerranch7990]

Sometimes… new and improved tools create new and improved problems which just set’s a trap for the craftsman to buy more band-aids. You will only come to the conclusion that both valuable time and money has been lost in trying to reinvent the wheel. In addition, when you leave the room to find peace of mind, a brief walk, sone fresh air, prepare a good cup of coffee, or prepare a well mixed cocktail of choice… only to return and find the crash test dummy grinnig, in freeze response murmuring … “go ahead! Press any button! Any button!” When the only option is to power down and unplug. Be sure instantly remove that new tool from your production suite of choice immediately upon reboot…then proceed to chauffeur the crash test dummy to the most populated vehicular traveled route… strategically release it from the appropriate elevated transient and see how wonderful its impact is at ground zero in its new mix affixed into the grill of an 18 wheeler traveling 80 mph. It is then and there you find the unique tonal frequency of that sub, rumble, woof, and mud that you were looking or listening to rid of now producing such rich clarity. There is nothing wrong with the old standard tools and traditions of the past… those tools just don’t bring in the wagons of gold as the new snake oil salesman create “new and improved” tools. Dan… thank you 🙏 for being you and all of the content on your channel. You sir… are a diamond in the rough world of sound engineering and yet with resonating clarity. Peace ✌️

[@BlackenedNL]

There actually is a way to double click and make a high or low pass, it can be changed in the settings of Kirchhoff. Don't know why this isn't selected as default tho..

[@jeremylarue4503]

I'm surprised by the kirchhoff crashes. I've never had an issue, and I've loaded plenty of instances some with dynamics processing. Either way, I've used both pro q and kirchhoff and like them both. Fabfilter is generally my favorite no matter the plug. I do like Kirchoff's dynamics features quite a bit, and it's the main reason I use it. I'll be watching out for crashes though. I'm a bit disappointed to hear that.

[@malcolmfrancis4543]

That was the most enjoyable "no matter what, I'm gonna hate this plug in review" that I have had the pleasure of sitting through (ever.. ever) and, whilst I didn't necessarily agree with all your points, I did agree with many. So we are, as we say in America: Even - Steven. I know engineers and producers with walls of gold and platinum who love raving about their latest 'Taylor blah blah blah Swift song's" that sound more reasoned and self-effacing than this TBTech VS ProQ wrestling ring circus barker blow out of an over view. At one poignant moment of reversal, I thought you were going to just end it with, "I see you can select a default curve; but honestly at this point, I couldn't really be assed". 🤣 So it was right then......... I subscribed - and! Am now enjoying several more diatribe adjacent - pedagogically supposed romps through what some like to call audio engineering ( 😏) and others call "a school for nerds who can't play guitar so good" informal tutorial's on this here KZbin channel. Keep up the fantastic work Sir! I really did enjoy this! PS. I use both EQ's and delight in them equally. So thank you! Also: I liked the thorough Cubase native EQ comparison over view along with your scathing insights into the Amek emulation EQ release. (Agreed). You can't have your 96k cake and eat it over Rupert's 1980's "grab the bags" console too. Stunning. Absolutely stunning. Bell was rung be!ore that software owner could cry. Sincerely: Malcolm Francis.

[@heinzmandala6601]

Hi, I would really like to see your review of UVI Shade, which I personally find the most comfortable graphical EQ. Of course in comparison to Pro Q3 :) Thanks for consideration.

[@ramspencer5492]

Finally tried it...I like it, because of its implementation of dynamic EQ. Being able to dial up traditional EQ curves easily, isn't too bad either... Mostly it's about the dynamic EQ... The mid-side processing isn't bad either

[@patovega]

Fantastic video!! I was considering getting a PA Mega L to be able to keep Kirchhoff, BX mastering desk pro and another one, after this video I might go for buying Q3 and maybe Saturn 3, thank you!!

[@thefakeguitarplayer4124]

Could the differences at the high frequencies in the null test might appear due to differences in the internal bit depth? I think they would appear if you’re working with Reaper set up at 64 bits since ProQ works with 32 bits.

[@richertz]

This is a great example of why we need to be very careful of KZbinrs some like Dan are very informed others are not so - I didn’t bother with this EQ as I hated the interface. I like fabfilter. I tend to use logics classic EQ and dive harder with another eq when I need something more

[@chaddonal4331]

I don't understand how ProQ3 users "hate" the Kirchhoff interface, when it is so similar.

[@DrayClay]

I’ve been waiting to hear your thoughts on this EQ compadres to Q3. 👍🏿👍🏿 Well done and thanks you.

[@danmillward3480]

There is a difference in sound to my ears....there is just something there....fabfiltersounds more...well plasticy

[@bakharandi]

Sir Dan, As Iron Sharpens Iron, I must Challenge Your Sword for the Sake of the Brotherhood, in this one specific instance, lest I be unworthy of my seat at the Round Table . . . !?@y@?! . . . At 8:47 , You made the statement . . . "Anyway, the point is, they're nulling again" . . . "Really amazingly perfectly, in fact." . . . Yet, there is clearly still some fuzzy green stuff at the bottom right end of your high end analyzer . . . which clearly means that this is naught a "Perfect null", and therefore means they do naught sound exactly the same in the high end . . . point blank, end of story. (-;

[@fredscallietsoundman9701]

13:000 You can find continuously adjustable slopes on Acon's Equalize 2

[@discobeatsrock8720]

To nullify your intentional bias, I’ll state how exceptional Kirshhoff EQ is. Just amazing!!!

[@domgirard4095]

i can't believe how much you are minimizing the difference of EQs, like API has dynamic Qs, and the Pultec EQ ... It's a passive EQ !

[@79Daver]

Indeed a too biased review lol. This one probably shouldnt have been put out. Im loving the Kirchhoff in my PA subscription. Gets the job done perfectly. Never used the fabfilter but if they are that close im good with this one

[@0e0]

Hey Dan.. do you have any thoughts on DMGaudio's Equilibrium ?

[@diegooro8780]

What about DMG Audio EQuilibrium phase options? Can you make a review?

[@isaacjohnklein]

So Kirchhoff is simply a Pro-Q3 knock off with killer Dynamic EQ settings and analog console style EQ curves minus what makes them sound the way that they do lol.

[@kontemplatemusic2189]

Props to Fabfilter for setting industry standards, which are beeing copied. Kirkhoff should build their own identity and stop reverse engineering other companies' products.

[@PMKCStudio]

What a fantastic detailed video, again. #22.32 "Future Dan here jumping in with an edit". Made me laugh. Goes to show he thinks out of the box that is in a box. Questioning oneself is often the best way to get better at something. Thanks Dan. Great great video.

[@ariam6168]

Can you please post the math equation for Q ratio null converting? I’m trying to do it myself. 0.71 or more exact number?

[@DanWorrall]

1/✓2

[@DanWorrall]

0.707 is pretty close

[@ariam6168]

@@DanWorrall Thank you!

[@thirdhemisphere]

The "Mix" mode is probably inspired by the "Transparent" mode of the CraveDSP EQ.