@@FoliaSoundI think Pro-Q3 and Kirchhoff have no difference in sound. When I null tested them, there was no sound on the meter. I wouldn't be surprised, if someone did so as well and made a video about it.
@@marvinrockon Yes, Dan is the Sherlock Holmes, Eckhardt Tolle, and the George Carlin of plugin reviews, All in One . . . ! . . . & His "A Very Biased Review" is as entertaining and thought provoking as always . . . !?@y@?! (-;
Hi there! I have both Kirchhoff and the MaatEQ Blue with the FiDef Algorithm. As I can see, you have the Fidef Algorithm switched on in the EQOrange which could explain the distortion. On their Website the FiDef Algorithm is explained as follows: "Think of a common, non-harmonic, sub-audible signal all good engineers use to linearize digital audio; dither. The FiDef system also generates an anharmonic, sub-audible broadband signal." I recommend that you switch off the algorithm and test it again 😊. YOURS SINCERELY from Germany.
@@FoliaSound Ah, sorry my fault!! I was sure it is the little dot on the upper right, but it is not. In the MaatEQ Blue there is a special FiDef Logo on the upper Right. Sory for the misunderstanding. Yours Sincerely
1. The phase shift at 5Hz on the Kirchhoff is DC cutoff. 2. The Kirchhoff is set at 117bit making its noise floor lower. The MAAT is on the usual 32 bit which is more than enough so the noise floor is higher. Still it doesnt really matter much. 3. The MAAT EQs price tag comes from the original 32bit EQ they originated from, the Algorithmix which is ridiculous by today's standard but all Mastering digital EQ back in the days are priced like that. It's part of the agreement so MAAT can't do anything about it, it's understandable huge portion of the sale goes to Algorithmix.
I remember around 2017 or 2018 when this orange eq was introduced and if i am not mistaking it cost around 1000 dollars….. no further comment. Now you NEED to make a shoot out between kirchhof and the weiss eq 1 please.
EQ orange was reintroduced as you said round 2017. The original developer is algorithmix and the still charge 1100 for their version that looks like windows 95. Again maybe round early 2000's this was the best linear eq compared to waves and tracks 1 from ik.
I use Kirchoff presently, It does what it's needs to do as a studio tool, I love it. I'm also I'm looking forward to the Fabfilter Pro Q3 update (Q4), that said, on all the songs released this decade using either kirchoff or proQ3 or hardware EQ's Not sure what MAAT are doing tbh. Have a great week =o)
Having to set up 2 lowpass filters to get a steeper slope is ridiculous in 2023. They should step up their game a bit if they wanna keep the price tag. The filters being nonlinear is actually a good thing imo. Too many transparent EQs out there that sound completely the same. I want more ones like Volcano, where adding a filter also drives around its frequency.
Hm, to be honest, for me the difference in sound is unnoticeable, maybe because of YT compression. Kirchhoff EQ and FabFilter Pro-EQ3 are definitely good enough for my home studio, so MAAT theEQorange would be a waste of money :)
@@Robert_Babicz , what I can tell you is that my adventure with MAAT is over after this. I'll never test anything they make, no matter what they say. Their practices are dishonest at best.
ps kirchoff has two different settings for low-end if you missed that- new one for "tighter" low end, old one is "bigger." neber pulled them up in plugin doctor to see what was what
Thanks for nerding out. Kirchoff is my go to percision eq. The Kirchhof you easily get around 50 to 70 dollars if you sign up to plugin Alliance newsletter or buy any of their other plugins. I paid $30 for my Kirchhof which is a ridiclous deal. I remember when Maat plugins came along, many people were falling for the hype. I don't know anyone that has Maat as their go to for anything anymore . Like you say the prices from Maat are absurd and their products are at best nothing special.
Ok I am dumb. Yes, it IS in fact supposedly a port of the original Algorithmix! Remarkably, it looks like the original cost even more than this. Crazay.
Honestly I don't care what it sounds like cause the original price of this EQ was $800+ Not paying hardware prices for plugins!!!! Love the video & Kirchoff Eq😊
Good video, honestly own a lot of hw eq's and a lot of simulations. But for surgical and clean digital eq, in Kirchoff all the way. And sorry ridiculous price tag...very good review!
Paul, can you justify cramping in any modern digital EQ that is fixed only through oversampling? Especially if it's $600 EQ Btw, there is this button in PluginDoctor "1|2" that shows the difference between two curves, so it's easier to match them, have you tried that?
MAAT think we're stupid haha, the reality is that u can have a professional result using DAW stock EQ. but actually i use kirchhoff por a reason, cos i can create a boilerpalte where i can have a ssl lowcut, a lowboost from pultec, a couple of bell in mids from ssl, a high bell from neve, and another from soundetck and the highself from maag, all of those curves in the same plugin, and that, for me, is gold.
apparently orange it good for high pass/lp. and blue better for analog vibe, red I think good for cuts. Please someone correct me. I too prefer the erganomics or Kirchhoff eq, maybe meat in the future could add slopes on the hp lp. Great shootout Paul :) I think the meat eq has zero phase so a more solid low end ? Anyway, very interesting video Paul... :)
Would be carefull with the linear phase settings on kirchoff, there is no point to have that activated on full mix, that will introduce pre ringing a bit and smear the transients, so the comparsion then is not much objective afaik. Dont know about the maat phase response tho
Hey, Vojtech! What I presented in the vid is only a test material and should not be treated as full mix :) What's interesting is that the low end response of Kirchhoff... changes when switching to linear phase. Seriously!
I wanted to like maat but maybe my ears don’t work or my monitoring isn’t good enough, but it was impossible for me to properly test because the latency on the maat is outrageous. I swear I’d make a move and 3 seconds later “think” I hear something.
Would have been nice, if you'd have shown the transient behaviour difference by a phase invert with (null-test) matched curves, so we could actually hear the difference and be sure to not fall into bias. I'm not sure, if the rest of your tests are sound (bedum-tss), but if not Dan Worrall is coming for you... Also what about the workflow? - That's arguably even more important than it's cleanliness. (Since that is more or less in the inaudible spectrum) Edit: You did mention that Kirchhoff has the superior workflow, though no specifics. - Next time I will also watch the end of the video before starting to type my comment... XD Edit 2: You also can show the validity of non-pre-ringing Linear-Phase statement and compare it easily by bouncing a one-sample-peak (or how you call it). Would have been cool to see how it is affected differently. Also bringing the issue of natural phase into perspective would be nice, since it is painted as this ominous force, that can ruin your whole mix... which it most of the time really isn't.
@@FoliaSound Yeah I glossed over it the first time, since you said it in one sentence, but even if it wasn't the focus of the video, a bit more evaluation could have helped imo - Since a faster mix tends to be a better mix. (But of course I don't get to choose the focus of the video - I just whine about it XD, will correct my comment though)
Here is another view on this: Those settings are plain bad both for thEQorange and the settings used on the Kirchhoff. The fact that Kirchhoff "puked less"/had less ringing has more to do with that they work in different ways than "one of them is clearly better than the other". The wonderful world of EQs are not that black and white. Both of them were used in the wrong way. I use both of these almost daily, for different things. I have also compared them to most other good digital EQs, and thEQorange is still my first choice for solving one certain very common issue. I still clearly think that Kirchhoff is an EQ that would be a much better choice for most, even if they would cost the same. However, for those who already went through most of the best plugins and hardware for mastering (like me), then thEQorange can be a nice addition to the rest of the setup.
Hehe kolejny mit runął ja Kocham mojego Kirchofa oraz ProQ do tego pasywki i jest jak chce ale to cudeńko w cenie dobrego DAW technicznie to trabant w budzie Jaguara trochę słabo czy mistrzostwo polegające na magii ceny
@@FoliaSoundDMG EQUILIBRIUM Is way Better than kirchoff and pro-q3 and also SSL x-eq 2 I garantee you try It on low end and do a comparison and you Will see. The only downside It doesn't have Dynamic eq so ai use pro-q 3 as deesser or as ringing freq remover but for static surgical eq equilibrium Is the best imo
That's hilarious. For those who only want the best possible in digital processing....I have the world's very best Dither available for you.... Only $700 🙃🤣 I'm not even a fan of using linier phase EQ in the vast majority of situations..... Unless you like subtle ringing.... Natural EQ in the real world involves some phase
$588 for a plug-in?!!!!!!! I thought it was inexpensive hardware when I clicked on the video! That's the kind of money for a fully fledged professional DAW! How??... Why???.... No, no, no, just NO! No way!
If Maat is in the position of covering salaries by asking insane money for standard plug-ins things get out of hand. If they would sell it at 15% of its current price they world definitely make more money out of it.
that is exactly what Maat want, dirtier sound, just like old time, vintage sound with modern GUI... Kirchoff in the other hand, actually give vintage tube, etc, but i think it's too clean, no harmonic whatsoever, just a simple Q things... i actually disappointed with Kirchoff about that. But don't get me wrong, maat should make a better more informative GUI and feature for that price tag...
Excuse me, are you serious? Maat claims this is the cleanest, best linear phase digital EQ and they didn't aim at introducing any "dirt". Read the product description on their website. What you hear with MAAT is probably quantization noise and artifacts coming from aliasing. There's no "character" to it or any special "flavor". These are simply digital artifacts done in the programming process. Kirchhoff avoided repeating them.
@@FoliaSound hmm, then it is weird.. I dont get it why this is so pricey, well i need to try also. Btw, do you ever try Infinity eq by Slate Digital? What do you think about that one compare to kirchoff?
Hello Paweł, Couple of things… 1) As it says on the product page and user docs, thEQorange is a remedial equalizer. thEQorange is designed for low and mid frequency cuts. It’s not a general purpose equalizer. thEQred (linear phase), thEQblue (minimum phase) are our general purpose thEQs. All three sound different and all three were designed for different purposes and uses. 2) Sorry, but your approach in this particular video is not , ahem, scientific. It is an “apples to oranges” comparison because Quality Factor or Q is derived from a simple mathematical calculation; resonant or center frequency divided by bandwidth. Q is Q is Q. So, you should set all parameters, including Q, in both products to the _same_ values and then do your comparisons. They will _not_ match, because the two products are built differently.
Hey, Oliver! If your EQ is meant to cut only mids, why don't you set it up the way I can't tweak and use anything else? :D I understand that you don't recommend to make a low cut, using ThEQ Orange? Only low mids and mids? Well, in your price point, this is indeed more than interesting! Oliver, I think that the best thing I can do for you is to skip your plugins from now on. My goal here is not to discredit anything and anyone, I'm not looking for enemies, too, I'm just staying honest. We gave it a try, you encouraged me personally to try ThEQ Orange, I did it, I said what I think. That's it. Thanks, take care, no hard feelings on my side, seriously!
@@FoliaSound “I understand that you don't recommend to make a low cut, using ThEQ Orange?” Hey Paweł, The opposite actually: As I said, thEQorange is designed for low and mid frequency cuts. That’s what it was optimized for. No hard feelings, man. We let our products “speak for themselves,” and your statement that, “…this (is) a terrific, terrific sounding EQ. It’s really, really amazing,” does align with our customer’s and other reviewer’s opinions as well. As with any gear, if it doesn’t suit your taste or budget, then simply don’t use it. That said, thanks for taking the time to actually listen rather than having an opinion about audio equipment you’ve never actually heard in real life or only in lossy compressed quality. Bravo!
I think maat stock in time, like other developers. I remember seeing OrangeEQ in a dvd mastering tutorial with Fridemann Tischmeyer from 2007. Now he works with maat I think. Maybe at that time orange Eq was the finest, but now we have the Kirchhoff and Fabfilter and other players.
what's this? Orange EQ is a Phase linear EQ with absolutely no sound and a brilliant very helpful user interface. If you have this or the Red EQ you will never need another EQ. Orange is way better and the whole track doesn't show its capabilities.
kirchoff has linear phase and no sound as well though? most of the complaints I've seen about kirchoff are BECAUSE it has no sound, and the analog eq curves are just that. it's seems the main point of contention here is 600 euro vs 150 for.... a better UI? I will say if I spent 600 on a MAAT EQ I would be literally invested in believing it to be the best.
Every Eq has it sound but if MAAT say is the best Eq for his sound for $600 when the sound still very similar to Kirchhoff or any other good digital EQ , I think is no sense to buy it
MAAT should make their slogan.. “Sounds so good you can’t even hear it!”
At that price you might as well just start saving up for a hardware EQ. Or better yet, buy ALL the Fabfilter plugins for 675 euro.
Ridiculous.
Exactly! This is the price for a complete FabFilter bundle...
MAAT are scam artists, they are using a scam marketing tactic.
So true.
Heeey! What do you think about my test? Owning thEQorange? Or msybe Kirchhoff? Lemme know down below!
You could also include Ozone 10 EQ and Pro-Q3 just to see if they outperform MATT eq as well haha! Nice vid Paul, as always :)
Thanks, Hubert! I believe no other EQ outperforms Kirchhoff right now. I'll check it all out anyway, thanks fir an idea!
@@FoliaSoundI think Pro-Q3 and Kirchhoff have no difference in sound. When I null tested them, there was no sound on the meter.
I wouldn't be surprised, if someone did so as well and made a video about it.
@@marvinrockonDan Worrell
@@CharlesK441 ah would you look at that. Not only someone, but the wizard of plugin review himself. Will check it out later. Thanks.
@@marvinrockon
Yes, Dan is the Sherlock Holmes, Eckhardt Tolle, and the George Carlin of plugin reviews, All in One . . . ! . . . & His "A Very Biased Review" is as entertaining and thought provoking as always . . . !?@y@?!
(-;
Thanks! Very good review!
Thank you!
hey Paul !! love your videos !!
Thanks, man. Good to see you here!
Hi there! I have both Kirchhoff and the MaatEQ Blue with the FiDef Algorithm. As I can see, you have the Fidef Algorithm switched on in the EQOrange which could explain the distortion. On their Website the FiDef Algorithm is explained as follows: "Think of a common, non-harmonic, sub-audible signal all good engineers use to linearize digital audio; dither. The FiDef system also generates an anharmonic, sub-audible broadband signal." I recommend that you switch off the algorithm and test it again 😊. YOURS SINCERELY from Germany.
Hello! I'm afraid there's nothing like "Fidef Algorithm" in thEQorange... Manual says nothing about it, where do you see it on my screen?
@@FoliaSound Ah, sorry my fault!! I was sure it is the little dot on the upper right, but it is not. In the MaatEQ Blue there is a special FiDef Logo on the upper Right. Sory for the misunderstanding. Yours Sincerely
1. The phase shift at 5Hz on the Kirchhoff is DC cutoff.
2. The Kirchhoff is set at 117bit making its noise floor lower. The MAAT is on the usual 32 bit which is more than enough so the noise floor is higher. Still it doesnt really matter much.
3. The MAAT EQs price tag comes from the original 32bit EQ they originated from, the Algorithmix which is ridiculous by today's standard but all Mastering digital EQ back in the days are priced like that. It's part of the agreement so MAAT can't do anything about it, it's understandable huge portion of the sale goes to Algorithmix.
"I don't get the marketing policies of MAAT." What a polite way to say it...
I'm, not looking for enemies, I'm trying to put my critics in a moderate, cultured way. Cheers!
I remember around 2017 or 2018 when this orange eq was introduced and if i am not mistaking it cost around 1000 dollars….. no further comment.
Now you NEED to make a shoot out between kirchhof and the weiss eq 1 please.
Good idea, thanks!
EQ orange was reintroduced as you said round 2017. The original developer is algorithmix and the still charge 1100 for their version that looks like windows 95. Again maybe round early 2000's this was the best linear eq compared to waves and tracks 1 from ik.
I use Kirchoff presently, It does what it's needs to do as a studio tool, I love it. I'm also I'm looking forward to the Fabfilter Pro Q3 update (Q4), that said, on all the songs released this decade using either kirchoff or proQ3 or hardware EQ's Not sure what MAAT are doing tbh. Have a great week =o)
Thanks! Looking for Pro-Q4, too!
Having to set up 2 lowpass filters to get a steeper slope is ridiculous in 2023. They should step up their game a bit if they wanna keep the price tag. The filters being nonlinear is actually a good thing imo. Too many transparent EQs out there that sound completely the same. I want more ones like Volcano, where adding a filter also drives around its frequency.
Hm, to be honest, for me the difference in sound is unnoticeable, maybe because of YT compression. Kirchhoff EQ and FabFilter Pro-EQ3 are definitely good enough for my home studio, so MAAT theEQorange would be a waste of money :)
Hope MAAT does something with the price tag one day...
@@FoliaSound It should be done :)
Beyond a waste of money. It also smeared the transients. It's snake oil.
I wld def take the proq3 and promb over either of these! Sorry but $100 is about as high as I cld go on any digital eq or plug in!
interesting
Right? Cheers!
@@FoliaSound the difference was really clear , i was really wondering
@@Robert_Babicz , what I can tell you is that my adventure with MAAT is over after this. I'll never test anything they make, no matter what they say. Their practices are dishonest at best.
ps kirchoff has two different settings for low-end if you missed that- new one for "tighter" low end, old one is "bigger." neber pulled them up in plugin doctor to see what was what
Yep, I didn't miss it, I didn't touch it. Sounds tighter indeed!
Could you compare Kirchhoff EQ vs FabFilter ProQ3?
I'll gladly wait for Pro-Q4 :)
Thanks for nerding out. Kirchoff is my go to percision eq. The Kirchhof you easily get around 50 to 70 dollars if you sign up to plugin Alliance newsletter or buy any of their other plugins. I paid $30 for my Kirchhof which is a ridiclous deal. I remember when Maat plugins came along, many people were falling for the hype. I don't know anyone that has Maat as their go to for anything anymore . Like you say the prices from Maat are absurd and their products are at best nothing special.
30?! Holy molly, got no idea you can have it at this price. It's a steal!
I truly believe that companies like Maat encourage piracy.
How does Kirchoff compete with Algorithmix Orange?
I got no idea, but isn't MAAT EQ just Algorithmix Orange ported to 64-bit and to VST3?
Ok I am dumb. Yes, it IS in fact supposedly a port of the original Algorithmix! Remarkably, it looks like the original cost even more than this. Crazay.
Transients and bass are better on Kirchhoff. We can lisent pre ringing on Orange, that why kick seam washy.🙃
Exactly! More preringing on Orange, better transient response on Kirchhoff!
Honestly I don't care what it sounds like cause the original price of this EQ was $800+ Not paying hardware prices for plugins!!!! Love the video & Kirchoff Eq😊
Thanks, Vince!
Thanks for the video very interesting, can you please compare it with the Massenburg Eq 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
Another cool idea, I'll think about it!
And what about smarteq 3 in this comparison ?
SmartEQ3 seems to be quite a different tool. Plus there are more linear phase EQs, not possible to test them all at once...
Good video, honestly own a lot of hw eq's and a lot of simulations. But for surgical and clean digital eq, in Kirchoff all the way. And sorry ridiculous price tag...very good review!
Paul, can you justify cramping in any modern digital EQ that is fixed only through oversampling? Especially if it's $600 EQ
Btw, there is this button in PluginDoctor "1|2" that shows the difference between two curves, so it's easier to match them, have you tried that?
Yep, I know this feature, I didn't need it in my test. Cheers!
Hey Folia... if you read this. What is that track you played at the end with the piano and mechanical textures? I want to listen to it.
Hey, man! The track is called "Fat Banana", written by Kicktracks. You'll find it on Artlist. Cheers!
the MAAT one has more pre-ringing
Yes!
MAAT think we're stupid haha, the reality is that u can have a professional result using DAW stock EQ. but actually i use kirchhoff por a reason, cos i can create a boilerpalte where i can have a ssl lowcut, a lowboost from pultec, a couple of bell in mids from ssl, a high bell from neve, and another from soundetck and the highself from maag, all of those curves in the same plugin, and that, for me, is gold.
Agreed!
Kirchhoff definitely has more ‘knock’ to the transients, MAAT seems a bit softer like an SSL
MAAT has got more preringing. This element simply works better with Kirchhoff!
Doesn't MAAT eq's use some proprietary form of dithering? Which might explain it not being a clean eq.
I found nothing about it, but even if - claims it's the "cleanest" one out there aren't fully true. Also, I got way less preringing with Kirchhoff.
MDWEQ6 could be another nice comparison.
Nice idea, I'll write it down!
Oh yea is love to see it agains the massenburg eq 6. I have the UAD one but didn't buy the v6 because I love Kirchoff
12:29 this is DC-Filtering to not f* up your converters and speakers.
apparently orange it good for high pass/lp. and blue better for analog vibe, red I think good for cuts. Please someone correct me. I too prefer the erganomics or Kirchhoff eq, maybe meat in the future could add slopes on the hp lp. Great shootout Paul :) I think the meat eq has zero phase so a more solid low end ? Anyway, very interesting video Paul... :)
Sure it is, but Kirchhoff gave me less preringing...
I love your vids. They feel very close
Yes The Kirchhoff seem to retain the bass energy better
Would be carefull with the linear phase settings on kirchoff, there is no point to have that activated on full mix, that will introduce pre ringing a bit and smear the transients, so the comparsion then is not much objective afaik. Dont know about the maat phase response tho
Hey, Vojtech! What I presented in the vid is only a test material and should not be treated as full mix :) What's interesting is that the low end response of Kirchhoff... changes when switching to linear phase. Seriously!
The q factor is based on music intervals..so i think you should be useing same Q
I believe, that low- and hi-pass Q in Kirchoff are non standard and they behave different. Serious about it.
I wanted to like maat but maybe my ears don’t work or my monitoring isn’t good enough, but it was impossible for me to properly test because the latency on the maat is outrageous. I swear I’d make a move and 3 seconds later “think” I hear something.
Would have been nice, if you'd have shown the transient behaviour difference by a phase invert with (null-test) matched curves, so we could actually hear the difference and be sure to not fall into bias.
I'm not sure, if the rest of your tests are sound (bedum-tss), but if not Dan Worrall is coming for you...
Also what about the workflow? - That's arguably even more important than it's cleanliness. (Since that is more or less in the inaudible spectrum)
Edit: You did mention that Kirchhoff has the superior workflow, though no specifics. - Next time I will also watch the end of the video before starting to type my comment... XD
Edit 2: You also can show the validity of non-pre-ringing Linear-Phase statement and compare it easily by bouncing a one-sample-peak (or how you call it).
Would have been cool to see how it is affected differently.
Also bringing the issue of natural phase into perspective would be nice, since it is painted as this ominous force, that can ruin your whole mix... which it most of the time really isn't.
I said a couple of words about it, I think - I choose Kirchhoff all the way!
@@FoliaSound Yeah I glossed over it the first time, since you said it in one sentence, but even if it wasn't the focus of the video, a bit more evaluation could have helped imo - Since a faster mix tends to be a better mix. (But of course I don't get to choose the focus of the video - I just whine about it XD, will correct my comment though)
Sounds the almost the same, you should compare the waveforms... would be interesting. 600 bucks for an eq is insane.
Good idea, I'll check on that!
Here is another view on this:
Those settings are plain bad both for thEQorange and the settings used on the Kirchhoff. The fact that Kirchhoff "puked less"/had less ringing has more to do with that they work in different ways than "one of them is clearly better than the other". The wonderful world of EQs are not that black and white. Both of them were used in the wrong way.
I use both of these almost daily, for different things. I have also compared them to most other good digital EQs, and thEQorange is still my first choice for solving one certain very common issue. I still clearly think that Kirchhoff is an EQ that would be a much better choice for most, even if they would cost the same. However, for those who already went through most of the best plugins and hardware for mastering (like me), then thEQorange can be a nice addition to the rest of the setup.
Hehe kolejny mit runął ja Kocham mojego Kirchofa oraz ProQ do tego pasywki i jest jak chce ale to cudeńko w cenie dobrego DAW technicznie to trabant w budzie Jaguara trochę słabo czy mistrzostwo polegające na magii ceny
Tak, magia ceny robi swoje. Dobrze powiedziane.
DMG Equillibrium is still one of the finest digital eq's out there, but Kirchhoff is still right up there imo
I have to try Equilibrium once. Never touched it.
@@FoliaSound I think the best digital eq plugins rigth now are Massenburg eq, kirchhoff and melda
@@FoliaSoundDMG EQUILIBRIUM Is way Better than kirchoff and pro-q3 and also SSL x-eq 2 I garantee you try It on low end and do a comparison and you Will see. The only downside It doesn't have Dynamic eq so ai use pro-q 3 as deesser or as ringing freq remover but for static surgical eq equilibrium Is the best imo
A company charging 600 bucks for a digital clean eq software would be suspicious right off the bat befor any test already.
But this is bad.
That's hilarious. For those who only want the best possible in digital processing....I have the world's very best Dither available for you.... Only $700
🙃🤣
I'm not even a fan of using linier phase EQ in the vast majority of situations..... Unless you like subtle ringing.... Natural EQ in the real world involves some phase
MAAT is made by the daughters of Zeus!
It is beyond poor mortal souls!!
Only the chosen ones can appreciate what it can really do!!! LOL
Don't see the point of kirchhoff , pro Q is the best one ...
i don't like maat i've tried all of their stuff .........great show my friend!!!!
Thanks, James!
It's funny people think a digital eq is better than other digital eq. If we talk workflow yes but quality is complete BS .
Well said!
$588 for a plug-in?!!!!!!! I thought it was inexpensive hardware when I clicked on the video! That's the kind of money for a fully fledged professional DAW! How??... Why???.... No, no, no, just NO! No way!
If Maat is in the position of covering salaries by asking insane money for standard plug-ins things get out of hand. If they would sell it at 15% of its current price they world definitely make more money out of it.
that is exactly what Maat want, dirtier sound, just like old time, vintage sound with modern GUI... Kirchoff in the other hand, actually give vintage tube, etc, but i think it's too clean, no harmonic whatsoever, just a simple Q things... i actually disappointed with Kirchoff about that. But don't get me wrong, maat should make a better more informative GUI and feature for that price tag...
Excuse me, are you serious? Maat claims this is the cleanest, best linear phase digital EQ and they didn't aim at introducing any "dirt". Read the product description on their website.
What you hear with MAAT is probably quantization noise and artifacts coming from aliasing. There's no "character" to it or any special "flavor". These are simply digital artifacts done in the programming process. Kirchhoff avoided repeating them.
@@FoliaSound hmm, then it is weird.. I dont get it why this is so pricey, well i need to try also. Btw, do you ever try Infinity eq by Slate Digital? What do you think about that one compare to kirchoff?
Hello Paweł,
Couple of things…
1) As it says on the product page and user docs, thEQorange is a remedial equalizer. thEQorange is designed for low and mid frequency cuts.
It’s not a general purpose equalizer. thEQred (linear phase), thEQblue (minimum phase) are our general purpose thEQs. All three sound different and all three were designed for different purposes and uses.
2) Sorry, but your approach in this particular video is not , ahem, scientific. It is an “apples to oranges” comparison because Quality Factor or Q is derived from a simple mathematical calculation; resonant or center frequency divided by bandwidth. Q is Q is Q. So, you should set all parameters, including Q, in both products to the _same_ values and then do your comparisons. They will _not_ match, because the two products are built differently.
Hey, Oliver! If your EQ is meant to cut only mids, why don't you set it up the way I can't tweak and use anything else? :D I understand that you don't recommend to make a low cut, using ThEQ Orange? Only low mids and mids? Well, in your price point, this is indeed more than interesting!
Oliver, I think that the best thing I can do for you is to skip your plugins from now on. My goal here is not to discredit anything and anyone, I'm not looking for enemies, too, I'm just staying honest. We gave it a try, you encouraged me personally to try ThEQ Orange, I did it, I said what I think. That's it. Thanks, take care, no hard feelings on my side, seriously!
@@FoliaSound “I understand that you don't recommend to make a low cut, using ThEQ Orange?”
Hey Paweł, The opposite actually: As I said, thEQorange is designed for low and mid frequency cuts. That’s what it was optimized for.
No hard feelings, man. We let our products “speak for themselves,” and your statement that, “…this (is) a terrific, terrific sounding EQ. It’s really, really amazing,” does align with our customer’s and other reviewer’s opinions as well. As with any gear, if it doesn’t suit your taste or budget, then simply don’t use it.
That said, thanks for taking the time to actually listen rather than having an opinion about audio equipment you’ve never actually heard in real life or only in lossy compressed quality. Bravo!
I think that sometimes you just have to write something when you live near Warsaw
What do you mean?
@@FoliaSound he means he is from near Warsaw, and mainly is saying hello to you
@@FoliaSound I think you know, zasięgi for you
$600 FOR A PLUGIN EQ IS WILD.
Lol…$589 for this??//. It’s completely Ridiculous
Yep, looks like it :)
I think maat stock in time, like other developers. I remember seeing OrangeEQ in a dvd mastering tutorial with Fridemann Tischmeyer from 2007. Now he works with maat I think. Maybe at that time orange Eq was the finest, but now we have the Kirchhoff and Fabfilter and other players.
Original Orange EQ dates back then, sure. But the MAAT 64-bit reissue is 2018, I believe...
Maat sounds very thumpy
It colors. I actually liked it more for the sound, not for linear pure eqing.
QRange by lkjb
They are terrible! I would never Recommend too anyone!! Money hungry and bad experience where I purchased their product.
what's this? Orange EQ is a Phase linear EQ with absolutely no sound and a brilliant very helpful user interface. If you have this or the Red EQ you will never need another EQ. Orange is way better and the whole track doesn't show its capabilities.
How is Orange better? Can you explain it to me a bit? Serious question!
kirchoff has linear phase and no sound as well though? most of the complaints I've seen about kirchoff are BECAUSE it has no sound, and the analog eq curves are just that. it's seems the main point of contention here is 600 euro vs 150 for.... a better UI?
I will say if I spent 600 on a MAAT EQ I would be literally invested in believing it to be the best.
😆🤡
Every Eq has it sound but if MAAT say is the best Eq for his sound for $600 when the sound still very similar to Kirchhoff or any other good digital EQ , I think is no sense to buy it