This EQ CRUSHES FabFilter?!

[@JonathanGalle]

Opinions on sonic quality differences are bunk, Dan Worralls video proves that, do a null test and see. very cool plug-in and the dynamic section is very cool, but definitely not better than proQ3 just different.

[@stevenroach2296]

People hear what they want to hear.

[@claudemanning6578]

The TDR Nova has similar features to the Kirchhoff in relation to the dynamic eq and I use it mainly for that purpose.

[@alex_ayers]

LOVE The TDR Nova!!

[@ASJerrell]

Nova is also a parallel EQ. It’s a subtle difference, but I enjoy it.

[@marinbalkandjiev2967]

According to me, neither is better or worse in sonic quality. Experiment in PluginDoctor shows that the Q curve is a bit different for the same number. Q of 1 in Kirchhoff EQ corresponds to Q of ~1.4 in Pro-Q3. In my opinion, if Q curve is matched, they both sound the same (using the basic settings - not speaking for the additional features). For me this is the reason for the audible differences.

[@NicStride]

That'd make sense

[@fescolfaro]

Nope. An eq is not just one filter, the routing does a world of difference inside the plugin. Fabfilter doesn't do parallel (all filters are chained), and there are other factors in coding which make up the sound of a plugin. No matter how "clean" they say it is, clean doesn't exist, there's always a sound.

[@ColtCapperrune]

While I have not tested the Q curves, regardless of the settings, shelf, or Bell, or what Q the band was set at. I preferred the sound of the Kirchhoff 100% of the time. There’s also something to be said, for the speed of not having to change the queue to get equal results (if they are, in fact, equal ). Certainly, to each their own. Thanks for watching!

[@jorykevinberger7047]

@@ColtCapperrune Okee. “Something to be said for the speed of not having to change the Q factor?” You preferred Kirchhoff because it didn’t show you resonances like FF did. Think about that for a moment. Wouldn’t you want a clean clinical eq to show you resonances in program material as you boost? Flip that sentence and now it’s the speed of not having to change the Q factor in pro q3 to hear immediate resonances in program material where as in Kirchhoff one evidently doesn’t notice it unless you adjust the q to match pro q. Cheers!

[@maddietourmaline46]

I'm wondering if what I'm hearing isn't slightly better phase coherence in the Kirchoff EQ. Most of the times things sound mysteriously but noticably more or less pleasant to me it comes down to that. The bottom line for me is now I know that the Kirchoff is an EQ I can use for swooping 10+ dB adjustments with less negative impact than the Pro-Q, in addition to all its really useful features.

[@MarveyMuzique]

Try setting the Kirchhoff EQ to tight mode in the settings and comparing to FF again, I would love to see that. These little things actually make a difference.

[@IntheDAW]

Love this eq. I've owned it for about 4 months and it's amazing

[@DanielStaff_]

Switched from Fabfilter EQ to Kirchoff last year and never looked back. Sat down and gave it a good test sonically and it sounds so much better that fabfilter.. plus all the extra features is a no brainer.

[@ColtCapperrune]

The only downside is, it’s double the price. But definitely sounds better, and a great one and done option for people.

[@NatureSleepSerenity]

@@ColtCapperrune It goes on sale frequently thankfully, including 99 right now.

[@googleuser318]

Sorry dude I generally enjoy and appreciate your content but after watching Dan Worrall's recent video comparing these two EQs with a simple null test I'm inclined to call BS here. It seems the difference you're hearing is because the Q values are actually different, but when set the same they null near perfectly. It's also interesting that you're hearing a narrower band width as more "natural" too. And the deceptively named "analog" mode is just a minimum phase mode and doesn't add some kind of magic "analog" secret sauce. There are some features in the Kirchhoff that I would like to see on the Q3. Like a simple way to select a more analog style curve and a way to add more analog style saturation. But, I know fabfilter will do it better when they do and the Kirchhoff just seems unnecessarily cluttered with every possible bell and whistle.

[@AlonsoJoaquinComposer]

Finally someone making sense in this comment section

[@LoveRaptor]

Was just about to post the same exact thing

[@R01499-y]

This just shows how many clowns we have in the industry pretending they know what they are talking about :D

[@googleuser318]

@@R01499-y Audio placebo is a real thing that we are all vulnerable to whether we know what we are doing or not. But yeah, null tests are a pretty easy and definitive way of knowing. Dan Worral also compared Ableton Live's EQ Eight and Pro Q3 and they null. I'm pretty convinced that unless an EQ is adding saturation or something like this, it's just another EQ. But, workflow does matter too.

[@claymillsmusic]

I've been using the Kirchhoff for the last year. It's awesome.

[@ColtCapperrune]

I love it!

[@OQOQOQ]

​@@ColtCapperruneAfter a couple of months, are you still a Pro-Q user or have you switched completely to Kirchhoff ?

[@RicardoTolbert]

I have been using this EQ since PA picked up their plugin. My favorite part about the plugin is that you can hear a 1db boost/cut. It doesn't take a lot for this plugin to do what you need it to do. Ive been less heavy handed with with EQ-ing.

[@ColtCapperrune]

Completely agree!

[@CreativeMindsAudio]

as soon as you said something is better than fabfilter i knew exactly which plugin you were talking about. i have it in the mega bundle, but i really gotta play with it and experience it for myself.

[@ShonTseng]

The Q value in the Kirchhoff EQ of the bell shape should be set to 0.707 to equal the width of the Q value of 1 in Pro Q3 tho.

[@owlmuso]

I don't own the pro q3 but do own the kirchhof and it's a beast of a plugin. I love what it can do

[@dustinpaintersound]

I'm going to be honest...I never liked boosting with Pro Q 3. After switching to Kirchhoff a few months ago, my suspicions were confirmed. My go to now!

[@dwightdeon2421]

I was waiting for my PA voucher to buy the Kirchhoff, then realized it was already in my plugin bundle. lmao. it's such a great EQ

[@ColtCapperrune]

Sounds like Christmas morning! Lol

[@nkozi]

Pronounced "Kear-hoff" ☺️ And yeah it's amazing. I have a few EQs I use for 'color' but as just an EQ to grab w/ all the options this is 100% my pick. Just need them to model API curves now 😈 Waiting on TBTech to roll out a multi-model compressor, too. Would love to reduce my processing to just 2 plugins.

[@fallenleaf24]

I came to say the same thing! thanks :D

[@kowloonbroadcast]

man, there’s ToneBoosters’ Equalizer plugin which has 95% of features what this one has, and it‘s existed for ages. its price is ~30 usd and there are versions for both desktop OSs and mobile ones - iOS/Android. i mean ProQ 3 is a good EQ, but not that it’s news that there are more versatile & reasonably priced options out there

[@NikolausBrocke]

I was skeptical with your announcement. But you are right, the Kirchhoff sounds much better in these extrem settings. I am convinced.

[@xmun2450]

Yep sounds much better but honestly I use pro q3 for cutting and using multi band eq/compression with the side chain I find the fab filter very transparent almost like a SSL or focus rite console. Im boosting with parallels and or channel strips .

[@jhardindrums]

I’ve used Plugin Alliance’s subscription service for a number of years now as it’s relatively cheap and the amount of plugs you get for it is ALOT. That said - Plugin Alliance does sales all the time, so if subscription isn’t your cup of tea, chances are you can get this EQ for much cheaper than what I’ve ever seen fab filter go on sale for.

[@ColtCapperrune]

Great point! I’m always waiting for their sales to scoop up new plug-ins

[@DaftFader]

If you want to buy the plugin without a subscription they charge $150 *OVER* what you can get this plugin for elsewhere though!

[@JoeyFTL]

I just found there's a 60 fps option under the GUI settings that helps smooth things out a great deal, I thought I'd share!

[@CraddyMusic]

That’s crazy. I was thinking about doing the same comparison yesterday 😭 lol

[@avationmusic]

Kirchhoff is definitely my new go to but there is just something about the way bands move in Pro Q3 that I’ll miss 2:56 this is the snare of my dreams

[@chizzulwinduh1941]

There's a lot of people out there, like me, that bought this plugin when 3body Tech were selling it themselves, way before PA came along and took over distribution. That army of people have been raving about it for a long time.

[@mjhicksjr]

Crazy that you can even hear the difference in phone speakers and after KZbin compression

[@palebluedotstudios]

I just picked this up. Definitely time to review this on my channel. Thanks for the great review, as always!

[@gregglen-hoodedratmedia]

I've got the complete bundle released in 2022, very happy with the results in my mixes since then!

[@StevePaulSounds]

Yay! I have a plug-in alliance subscription. Thanks for lmk!!!!!🎉

[@ColtCapperrune]

Thanks for watching!

[@francobuzzetti9424]

they have different Q values by default ,fabfilter is know for having it's own Q value , 1 in fab is 0.72 or the other way around i don't remember which one. both eqs are totally transparent they don't have resonances or harmonics you're just listening to a different Q, i read somewhere that kirchoff is a bit lighter on cpu and has more features so it's a matter of preference. still, IMO if you have one you don't need the other

[@bwall615]

I’ve been using this it came out. And, I find myself using more and more. Great video.

[@eshortsax]

I love this eq; however, I've never used the Fabfilter pro q3 (or any Fabfilter products on a constant/consistent basis). The only thing I wish Kirchoff had is the eq match---but I don't see or hear people talk about it (I if I need to eq match for whatever reason, I use Ozone's). Love that it's in PA subscription (in my opinion the only plugin subscription plan that's worth it for me). Now to finishing the video lol

[@levondarratt787]

You need to get over to the professional-grade mastering EQ and compressors they have. PQ and Oven..chef's kiss...not for the base mixer guy tho... Much better.... stock plugins like waves and fabfilter...boooooring ...

[@eshortsax]

@@levondarratt787 love The Oven and PQ…I was using elysia museq for a while, tried PQ and it quickly became one of my favorites 😊

[@electguitarz]

I was lucky enough to get this at $25 using a $75 voucher someone had gifted me. This EQ is just amazing. It's my go to over fab filter for any kind of transparent EQing needed. I love it. It may be a bit rough around the edges, but, it's worth it.

[@Itseightysix]

say what ? 25 dollars , damn the price now is 150 wtf , where do i get that discount

[@tommymai3062]

A lot features are being held back on pro q3 to not make pro MB obsolete. I’m already used to Fabfilter workflow so I’m staying with them.

[@thesideyardstudio]

welcome on to the Kirchhoff train my friend!!!!

[@thesideyardstudio]

and its in the plugin alliance subscription!!!!

[@DanBires]

The Kirckoff high end treble is way more transient and less harsh. You should try it.

[@philippgrunert8776]

I aim in awe for the mix mode. I have no idea what is happening code/math wise in the background there. My favourite eq plugin. I have yet scratched the surface of its dynamic capabilities.

[@bakharandi]

"Mix" mode gives linear phase in the high end, and something different in the low end, as far as phase. Kirchhoff is like Rocket Science . . . They are really breaking new ground and moving things forward..

[@philippgrunert8776]

@@bakharandi i know that there is linear phase and regular EQ blended, but how they achieve it, I am puzzled.

[@danceb4nine]

Yo you should try the ToneBoosters Eq as well. I’ve been using it in my mixes and that thing is a beast

[@danceb4nine]

@ColtCapperrune thank you I texted you underneath my real name not my dj name

[@sealinski]

PA has been doing some flash sales, and If you are a PA subscriber you can sometimes get emails with extra bonus deals, and you have monthly vouchers if you pay for other stuff that they sometimes get you, so it *might* be possible to get quite a lower price on the KO EQ.

[@TheCatGoesRawrMusik]

The only thing that I would like to know, is if it has matching capibilities- Absolutly agree, that it sound better, but for example for shaping a sound to be as close to one previously recorded is something that the fabfilter really is amazing at (for example for Post production)

[@fredtimothy940]

Hmmm. You know, I always appreciated that anything I boosted with waves F6 sounded nasty, so that way I knew what I needed to cut! But the Fabfilter never gave me the nastiness - had softer edges or something. And so I think this is why I need both. The fab makes more stealthful changes. But it doesn’t add any character.

[@raphexe]

Spectre from Wavesfactory is one of my favorites, EQ meets saturation, great sound, very efficient.

[@lawinter1949]

I woud love to see you do a video checking out Tone Boosters TBEqualizer4. It is an EQ similar to these in functionality but it is a faction of the price. I have been reaching for it lately instead if Kirchhoff EQ becuase it has a really cool autogain compinsation that you can toggle per band and you can add saturation to each band as well. I love turning on the saturation when I'm boosting. It also has the same mid/side splits and it can be dynamic.

[@cwilliammusic]

Hey Colt, I trust your judgement. But Dan Worrall made comparison Kirchhoff vs Pro-Q3 and to be honest I couldn't hear a difference with my eyes close. I was using my HD 650 cans when listening to the comparison

[@glennloopez]

I agree with your opionions. I switched once Plugin Alliance released it last year, really good EQ to me and I will be sticking with the Kirchhoff until further notice :)

[@SteveGietz]

The Kirchoff uses a different Q standard for bell filters. A Q of 0.7 would match FF's 1.0. That would make a notable difference on large boosts :)

[@vinsonkz]

Though I'm not a Kirchhoff EQ user myself (cuz the UI is a bit ugly and the functions are too complicated...), as a Chinese, I'm so glad to see you using a plugin developed by Chinese! Thanks Colt!! BTW, just want you to know that you do have fans in China as well lol!

[@ColtCapperrune]

Much appreciated! Thank you for watching!

[@jorgedejesustejedavaldez5283]

I didn’t know a Chinese make this plugins. Okay that’s interesting. There is a super DAW that only Chinese use that we didn’t know about?

[@vinsonkz]

@@jorgedejesustejedavaldez5283 Haha no we don’t have DAWs yet.

[@jtrjammer]

So was the Q-3 set to Zero Latency, Natural Phase or Linear Phase? Does the Kirchhoff have similar options? If so, how was it set?

[@jtrjammer]

Never mind I see it set to Natural Phase, but curious what the other two settings would sound like

[@DaftFader]

The kirch can use a mix of both at the same time ... it will "seamlessly" switch between both across one instance, EQing one sound, depending on how you use the EQ and how hard you push each band (there's probably settings regarding this too, but this is it's unique way of functioning and is part of it's sales material). The way I read it is that you could have one boost applying linear phase EQ and one boost on the same instance applying ZL EQ.

[@STOLGUITARS]

yeah Colt what i thought also had the fab pro3 and switched and still havent found all this does YET!

[@sgfdancecompany]

Amazing EQ!!! is my go-to in transparent EQ when I mix and mastering. Totally recomended

[@ExecutorHideo]

you can hear the difference on vocals. it seems as if the Q value on FF is larger and has a narrower band, although the values are similar or even the same.

[@jorykevinberger7047]

A 1 to 1 match is this: Kirchhoff at 1q is FF at 1.4q. / Kirchhoff at .7q is FF at 1q.

[@Thirsty_Deer_Studio]

Plugin Alliance is great. I have a bunch of their stuff. The only ones I don't care for are the amp sims but I only have one. I like Neural if I have to use a sim

[@dougleydorite]

Thanks for this. This one of those videos I’ll probably watch several times

[@brandonwilliams966]

This EQ is KILLER!!!!!

[@Awrange]

Maybe I'm not seeing it right, but although both plugins are set to a Q of 1 the Kirchoffs bell looks a lot more narrow

[@ColtCapperrune]

It’s just how the plug-in renders the visual aspect of it. They were both on the same settings.

[@steelhousemastering]

​@@ColtCapperrune The same settings on the plugins may not actually correlate with being the same.

[@ColtCapperrune]

I get your point, but that sort of stuff doesn’t concern me. I put the plug-in on, I use my ears to dial in settings, and I choose the tools that sound best to me.

[@DaftFader]

Pro Q filter width set at a Q value of 1.5 is roughly equal to the Kirch filter width with a Q value of 1. So the Kirch *IS* a thinner band at the same settings.

[@louderthangod]

I don’t use either one but I also would a 12db boost to test them since if I need that much boost or cut, I should probably just retrack it with a better mic or mic placement and I only mix things I’ve recorded so I guess if retracking isn’t an option I guess this would be one way to fix an issue. I’d still probably try cutting something else competing at the same frequency, some saturation or a different eq altogether. I’ve just found big boosts like that inherently cause other problems. I did hear the difference and I know the fab filter stuff has a lot of settings so maybe one of those would mitigate that issue but I go for simpler eq’s like the modeled UAD stuff, API, Pultec, Chandler etc…

[@bakharandi]

I find the Kirchhoff very useful , especially with my Live Performance audio restoration projects . . . You know . . .the ones recorded with many random factors involved.

[@fabriziof5466]

Pro Q3 q is different. For proper comparison you need to set it at 0.76. That's the same as Kirchoff's 1.

[@mrmorpheus9707]

watching this,, when you did vocals, you had a boost on the stock eq on the track with the fabfilter. dunno if you missed that

[@googleuser318]

Audio placebo is real folks!!

[@ronson795]

I discovered the same but with a different eq. The Sonible SmartEQ also sounds better, especially on transient material like drums. Smart eq curves sound horrible but as a static eq it´s better in comparison. Unfortunately the SmartEQ isn´t that flexible so I still use Pro-Q3 for surgical and dynamic stuff. I should try my DMG Multiplicity as well although I don´t use it for surgical stuff but it also has the ability to address dynamic and transient material separately.

[@ColtCapperrune]

I’ll check it out, thanks!

[@huberttorzewski]

I hate the UI on Sonible SmartEq for normal eqing. Very slow workflow. For AI stuff it's faster but I don't use that.

[@ronson795]

@@huberttorzewski Yes, it can be improved a lot. Also there´s no phase switch. But speed isn´t everything so I grab it from time to time for drum tracks. Everything else is Multiplicity because it sounds better and has the ability to to address body and transient material in a dynamic way. Like SpiltEQ on steroids and better sounding.

[@Waldo_Ilowiecki]

the [Kirchoff] filter (you're pronouncing the word Kirchoff wrong) is much better because it has much better algorithms. First, the algorithms that convert "digital analog" to digital data use the very fast Vinograd algorithm in Fourier transformation, which only needs 1.2 multiplications per sample. Secondly, in the spectral analysis, the Hamming window is several times more levels than the fabfilter. That's why everything is clearer, and the spectrum analysis graph works faster graphically. The quality of the Kirchhoff filter blows my mind.

[@ColtCapperrune]

I pronounce everything wrong so it’s not surprising lol

[@Waldo_Ilowiecki]

@@ColtCapperrune 😀

[@JoeyFTL]

And you misspelled it so now you guys are even

[@Waldo_Ilowiecki]

@@JoeyFTL colored bear, I wrote phonetically - as it should be pronounced.

[@brandenwilson4378]

Yeah, it’s pronounced “keark off”

[@Millerboy]

I think you should watch the Dan Worrall video and realize you didn’t match the Q before doing the sound comparison. It’s really easy (even visually) to tell that the Qs are not matched. The two EQs sound the same when setting are set the same. You shouldn’t make reviews about stuff like this if you don’t fully understand how to do proper comparisons :/

[@zagkalidor7146]

fabfilter didn't put the release/attack features to pro-q3 because they put it to pro-mb, pro-mb is fabfilters Nr. 1 dynamic compressor...

[@nukenoly8751]

Been using it over the Fabfilter for a while. The plugin Alliance stuff tends to beat everything else once you dig in

[@CharlyCid]

The kirchhoff the best by far!

[@ColtCapperrune]

It’s so good!

[@jadedsean]

You can resize Pro eq the exact same way, unless this is a Protools issue.

[@coolmind2476]

I like a bit more the Farbfilter UI although Kirchhoff has more features. At the end of the day it does not really matter, both are fine and producers can make no. 1 hit songs with both of them.

[@farrell72563]

I agree with you 100%. I downloaded the trial versions of both Pro Q3 and Kirchhoff having never used either of them in the past. Fab Filter seems to be focused on user experience and getting results easily and quickly, whereas Kirchhoff seemed to be more about how much can we cram into this plugin. They are both fantastic plugins, but for me, I prefer the workflow in Pro Q3 and that's the one I purchased.

[@Anders01]

The Kirchhoff EQ sounded cleaner! I would like to hear it compared to the Ozone EQ on the master track, maybe I will try the demo version.

[@jorykevinberger7047]

Cleaner because... First we need to understand that the "same settings" in both plugins aren't showing the "same q factors". A 1 to 1 match is this: Kirchhoff at 1q is FF at 1.4q. / Kirchhoff at .7q is FF at 1q. Anything that starts tighter is going to sound cleaner.... Right? Yep. Your ear is good. But they weren't 1:1 settings. Cheers.

[@pvalenti]

Bro your Killing Me! 2 days before you put out this video I used a discount coupon for 2 plugins of my choice. I picked up Bax and Mag. I was on the fence with Bax and could easily have gotten this. Currently it's like $225, and I can't go there. But if I can find it for around $30-50...I would have to grab it then!

[@sixto6]

I do hear the difference that he's talking about with the boosts. But, what sold me on the Kirchoff was the dynamic EQ settings... As a Pro-Q guy for years now, that's something that I've always said... "Why can't I control the attack and release of the dynamics???" If I wanted to do so, I'd always have to substitute the Pro-Q with the Ozone Dynamic EQ... which was kind of annoying since I don't really like Ozone's EQs.

[@ChrisCatero]

Thanks for making me aware of this plugin! I downloaded it today in my PA subscription and did a similar comparison except in a rhythm section of a song I'm currently working on. Same eq settings as the Pro Q 3 and it was a marked difference in how much tighter and more present things were. And the fact you can add in Neve, SSL and API curve flavors to the eq bands is pretty damn cool (I really liked high and low passing with the SSL E while keeping everything else neutral). The dynamic eq was great too in having actual control over the compression/expansion. Good call on the analog setting btw, it was the most pleasing to my ears as well. Awesome heads up man!

[@jorykevinberger7047]

It's important to note that the "same settings" in both plugins aren't showing the "same q factors". A 1 to 1 match is this: Kirchhoff at 1q is FF at 1.4q. / Kirchhoff at .7q is FF at 1q. Let us know if you notice a "marked difference" when the q factor is actually equal. :) Cheers.

[@bakharandi]

@ChrisCatero Yes, I like putting a "250" or "Vintage Tube" Low shelf, a Neve bell node at about 3.5k, an SSL E high shelf, and a "Blue" (Maag) high shelf, with just a 1db boost . . . The Blue brings in that Maag 40k whistle tone . . . What a fun eq ! (-;

[@diegooliveirabenjamin]

Believe it or not i vile hear the difference though my little old iPhone speaker

[@samson4272]

Thanks Colt! Appreciate your shares. I absolutely love the Kirchhoff EQ, however I do really miss the frozen spectrum grab (of notable frequencies) that FF does so well. Lastly, I miss the modern and pleasant GUI of FF. If they can do an update to include that frozen spectrum grab of notable frequencies I’d never look back. 😅 The character EQ’s are simply amazing 🤩

[@bakharandi]

Kirchhoff Does have the frozen spectrum grab ! . . . Just click on the Hand Icon at the top of the GUI . . . It has it ! (-;

[@samson4272]

@@bakharandi What! Somehow I overlooked this feature. Thank so much for letting me know! Cheers

[@larryclyman4815]

Try using the mix filters at 4kHz instead of the minimum phase filters...it sounds even better..!!

[@LeChapeauMusic]

It sounded to me like Kirchhoff got rid of some snare boxiness and sounded more bright and open. Especially on the vocals the Kirchhoff sounded way way better. I really wanna try it!

[@jorykevinberger7047]

That's because.... a tighter q would sound less boxy than a wider q, right? If you want to match the "same q factors". A 1 to 1 match is this: Kirchhoff at 1q is FF at 1.4q. / Kirchhoff at .7q is FF at 1q. Cheers.

[@IvanoIcardiOfficial]

have you tried to make the comparison with the pro q3 in linear phase mode?

[@ColtCapperrune]

I have, it beats it in every mode in my opinion.

[@IvanoIcardiOfficial]

@@ColtCapperrune i used kirchhoff eq a lot too, then I went back to pro q3... too many options, in the end they make me lose focus of the mix. Also in my opinion it sounds much better than the pro q3

[@ES60Hz]

About the comparison of the resonances that comes as a consequence of the phase shift - are you sure that the "natural phase" in the Fabfilter is equal to the "minimum" in Kirchhoff?

[@jhevon]

when this EQ first became available on PluginAlliance I thought it was just because it was new that it sounded “better”, the placebo effect of new product… I’m glad to hear another engineer point out that it does in fact sound better than Fab!

[@TheWeazel01]

It doesn't. The Q factor is different.

[@irhedentertainment2622]

Same reason I stopped using pro q two years ago. Try CRAVE EQ for some less complexity.

[@rogerloydmccoy]

Perfect timing for me!!

[@NuclearDeathWalk]

Interesting. When I demo'd it against FF, I used plugin doctor and waves Q-clone to match curves and nulled down to -78dbFS. But then, I didn't do 12dB gain increases when testing. Maybe I'll re-visit to see if they null with 12db boosts.

[@ColtCapperrune]

I didn’t even try a null test because the difference in resonance/ringing seemed so obvious to me

[@zenluiz]

That’s actually the way to scientifically compare both. Not just setting the same values in the GUI and expect they sound the same. The plugin developer might do whatever they do with the value you set on the GUI, including decrease a bit the Q factor so it seems it sounds less ringing.

[@zenluiz]

@@JoeyFTL totally! That must be a known trick by plugin manufacturers. Take Amek 200 for instance, or BetterMaker Eq, and analyze their curves. You boost 3 db of 300 hz, let’s say, but in the analyzer it shows it actually boosted 320 hz (sometimes as high differences as that, other times more modest ones). The plugin developer can do whatever they want with the parameter values users provide. Including some filthy “magic”. So that’s why I always eyeball on plugin shootouts stating something is better than the other subjectively, without using any scientific methodology.

[@NuclearDeathWalk]

@@ColtCapperrune I don't doubt you're hearing a difference and in some EQs that ringing can be very obvious--especially in the upper frequencies. What I like most about this particular EQ is that, if I understand correctly, it's not just a Q/curve of the other types (SSL, Neve etc) but it's circuit modeled as well, which is nice for when I want to push something like 6-8k on guitars. I'd rather have my other bands be clean, then use the SSL model to push it hear what I like about SSL without the need to insert an SSL strip or EQ

[@huberttorzewski]

@@NuclearDeathWalk if that's not a problem for you please write us what you found out after matching the curves using plugin doctor between pro-q3 and Kirchhoff with big 12-15dB boosts

[@Psilocby31358]

I recommend watching with headphones! It’ll help you hear the differences clearer

[@ColtCapperrune]

Appreciate that!

[@Psilocby31358]

@@ColtCapperrune ofc! Also, Colt I had a question. When looking at buying your first piece of hardware, what would you recommend in terms of of a budget piece of gear?

[@ColtCapperrune]

I have a whole video going over that. Hope it helps! kzbin.info/www/bejne/j16UlWyJh7xkkKs

[@Psilocby31358]

@@ColtCapperrune thanks colt! Going to watch it right now!

[@Psilocby31358]

@ColtCapperrune could I give you my email or instagram

[@jazzybeeff]

I still love Fabfilter because when i click the right or left edges it comes with high pass or low pass filters. In Kirchoff it comes with bell curve. But for last days i prefer Kirchoff when i need a dynamic EQ.

[@hbonthetrack]

AND THAT IS ONE REASON WHY I CAN’T LEAVE PRO Q3…IT’S SO INTUITIVE…IT’S EQ FOR DUMMIES SO TO SPEAK

[@imremozsik1012]

You can change the default behaviour of each band in the settings menu of Kirschoff

[@jazzybeeff]

@@imremozsik1012 really? But how? I hope i can figure it out

[@imremozsik1012]

@@jazzybeeff go to settings, he even talks about it in the video

[@jazzybeeff]

@@imremozsik1012 yeah i see thank you

[@DavidGilden]

How does compare to the old Sonnox EQ?

[@DamnCam83]

I think there might be an extra word in your title brother. Lol

[@zaeempathan8356]

I think there 'is' an extra word in your title brother. Lol

[@ColtCapperrune]

F!! Hahaha thanks man!

[@SayajinKanak]

Yes It helps me a lot thank you

[@tradehut2782]

I havent tried Kirchoff, but DMG Equick had better transparency than Q3 from memory.

[@engmix]

When you did the matched snares, in my studio the FF sounded more natural. There was a ring / resonance that was more pronounced with the Kirch. But, with the Kick, I preferred Kirch. On the vocal I hated both, because of how the eq's are being used. That said, the Kirch is undeniably way more flexible. How's the CPU hit in comparison to FF? Whether I agree or not, always appreciate your vlogs, thanks.

[@jorykevinberger7047]

They weren't 1:1 settings. FF sounded more natural to you because its q was actually wider, and the ring/ resonance that seemed more pronounced with the Kirchhoff is because its q was tighter. A 1 to 1 match is this: Kirchhoff at 1q is FF at 1.4q. / Kirchhoff at .7q is FF at 1q. Cheers.

[@engmix]

​@@jorykevinberger7047 I was telling someone yesterday when asked if I saw this. I said yes, but it's highly un-scientific. And if you really want to hear resonance, listen to a vocal, or an electric guitar, versus bleed from a snare drum. But hey, it's his vlog and he gets to do what he wishes, whether I think it's misleading or even pointless. And to be clear, I'm not a CC hater, I enjoy the vlogs. But these A/B demos, which he doesn't do many of, are done so in a vacuum. That's my opinion. I actually demoed this plugin ages ago, prior to PA's release of it. It's excellent, but not enough so that it's retiring my workflow with FF.

[@audioglenngineer]

Yeah, the Kirchoff gets closer to that passive, transformerless, analog EQ sound for me. It reminds me a bit of the transformerless version of the Mini Massive Passive EQ.

[@cryptokingz615]

yeah i love transformers. Especially megan fox boobies.

[@alexdejoncaire]

Let’s snart with the stare drum 👀 🤓 Thanks for this review. Defo an interesting sound.

[@fetusbelt6851]

Its called Frequency 2 in Cubase

[@DaftFader]

Thank you for giving me a reason to update from version 6.5 finally .. I've been putting it off for time, and was just looking for a new EQ ... so might as well drop the 100 on upgrading Cubase to the latest version if it comes with a parametric dynamic EQ!

[@fetusbelt6851]

@@DaftFader check out Steinberg quadrafuz in 12, it is the fab filter Saturn killer

[@adamb4936]

Just remember before you rush out and buy this plug-in, FF is a great EQ that's widely used and respected, and this one video doesn't make it any less capable. Also, every engineer has their own preferences--doesn't make one better or worse just preferred to their ears. Everyone's ears are different. Mixers are different. It's all opinion and preferences. Just listen to several different albums and you'll realize it's all subjective. Once you realize there's no objective rules, you'll mix better because then you will use your ears and do what sounds good to you and refine and build from there!

[@Maksitto]

It just sounds better . For me as a mix engineer it's really important

[@grahamtaylor6883]

Are you sure the Q and real gains are actually the same (regardless of what the settings say)? The Q looks wider on the graphic of the Q3 (if that's anything to go by?) and the boost level sounds greater. Packed with features though.

[@DaftFader]

Pro Q's Q setting 1 is roughly equal width to Kirch Eq's Q setting of 1.5. There's a difference yes.

[@Crossfire2003]

The Kirchhoff EQ is definitely great. However, though I was able to hear the difference between the two EQs, I am not sure if the Kirchhoff sounded "better". I think that they are using different algorithms, so matching parameters doesn't mean that they are on the "same" settings. (The same is if you compare two spectrum analyzers. Even if you match the settings, they will display different spectrograms).

[@DaftFader]

I think the main difference (at least one of them) is the Q values don't mean the same thing. Someone was saying a Q of 1.4 on pro Q is = to roughly a Q of 1 on the Kirch, so in this demo the Kirch is basically using a thinner band filter, so it's picking up less frequencies ... and therefor less resonance around the boost.

[@delmixedit]

Could end up being less expensive if you’re already in the PA ecosystem because they always have great sales and if you subscribe they give you that value right back.

[@DaftFader]

Yeah if you don't have the PA subscription they are charging $150 more than you can get the plugin elsewhere, so only worth it from them if you're already a sub (or want the subscription anyway).

[@observingchanges1070]

Night and Day sonics. Thanks Colt

[@brettjr9521]

What about the F6-rta?

[@arturlins4482]

Great video as always, Colt! I have a question non related to the video: do you consider Audio-Technica ath-m50x a good choice to be used for mastering? I don't have a place able to receive treatment now, so I'll need to use headphones instead of a monitor. Thanks

[@ColtCapperrune]

Thanks! I think the M 50 strength comes in tracking, and the fact that every single studio has a pair. For mastering, I would use something much more high end. Love, my Focal clear MG pro. They are an excellent option for mastering. But really, I would look at a high end, like the most money you can possibly spend, open back headphone for mastering. Hope that helps!

[@fescolfaro]

Never liked Pro-Q, always thought whatever I worked on sounded hollow around 3k with it, after chasing a few shadows I realized the irony in the Fabfilter with bad sounding filters :D that said, sonnox Claro and Ssl-Xeq are my favorite clean eqs. Kirchhoff is also great, but a tad harder around the mid-highs than those two.

[@CLeansaubermann]

What when u hit the natural phasing mode in proQ? Zero Latency mode sounds kinda boxy always

[@King_Arjzna]

Kirchhoff is awesome, hands down!!!

[@MisuAlexandru1]

i stoped when it was compared on the kick drum... I don't hear the "hollow" sound as you say it, and if I close my eyes I really can't hear anything :)) maybe more people should do blind tests. That's my opinion...