Hey
 
Just wondering if anyone compared Sonars built-in QuadCurve EQ with 3rd part providers, such as Fabfilter, Nomad Factory, Waves etc. I can't really hear any difference but I've heard that EQs (free etc) often add noise, especially when adding gain to a digital EQ (like QuadCurve EQ). Any feedback would be appreciated:)
 

Ever since X1 was released I've used the QCEQ pretty much exclusively for tracking. I think it is right up there with the best of them. My only issue was that it was relatively small compared to some. That issue was solved with the 'fly-out' in X3.
 
That said if one already owned, say, the offering from FabFilter, and they were used to using it, then I don't see a reason for making a switch. Although I do like having it right in the ProChannel for easy access.
 
You could set up an A/B test with QCEQ and your current fav and see if you can detect in deficiencies or positive aspects of one over the other 
 
Regards,

I think it's very good for a built-in EQ. Having said that, I still prefer using Waves SSL's channel strip to Pro Channel because I can dial in the sound I'm looking for much faster. I purchased several of the Pro Channel addons and really do like them, but the SSL is easier for me to get what I'm looking for.
 
I do still use the Quad Curve EQ when all a track needs is a quick tweak, or I'm just HPF something. The "Gloss" switch also adds a noticeable  airiness to cymbals and other instruments with lots of high frequency information.
 
Regards,
Dan

I agree with Mike.  I really like the quad curve EQ. Its very handy and it sounds great.

When comparing Quad EQ to 3rd party products like Pro-Q the major differences are features. Pro-Q has the ability to mix M/S and L/R EQ bands, pre and post EQ spectrum analyzer, choice of linear phase or 4 other processing modes, undo/redo and A/B comparison. And there is no one EQ per track limit.
 
That said, the Quad EQ is a very nice, useful tool.

I also like QuadEQ and it's my #1 choice for any kind of material.
I also have Waves EQs, NI EQs (Komplete9), all Fabfilters, Voxengo EQs and many more but generally I find no reason not to use QuadEQ - it sounds great and if it doesn't, then problem is in the source audio, not in the plug-in.
 
For resonant filter things I'd use something else but for normal EQing QuadEQ does the job very well.

I think it's great for general all-purpose EQ work, especially if you're using it to make a lot of cuts and/or high and low pass filtering. I do however really like the Waves V-EQ for making high frequency boosts, because it just sounds a little bit sweeter to my ears. In terms of interface and usability, the ProChannel EQ is absolutely excellent. 

The Quad is great.  No real need for 3rd party EQs if you don't have them - unless they are analog.

I have and mostly use Pro-Q and as Scook said, it's really about the features. I don't do a lot of fancy stuff but its workflow is just very nice, I'm not tied to the ProChannel, I can create bands as I want and the analyzer is more customizable. I haven't personally noticed any significant differences in sound between the two. Depending on the mode, the QCEQ can do some vintage curve emulations but I think I can get the same curves/sounds with the FF one.

Thanks guys!
 
Well, I also like that its built into the Pro Channel, ready to use directly...
I mostly use it for cutting low/high pass or gain/reduce frequencies to separate Bass/Kicks for example. The only thing I find a bit annoying is not to be able to move the "fly-out" window around, could be a good feature when comparing frequencies between tracks... Well, its still good:)