EdGrip wrote:Is there anything special that these super EQs do that couldn't be achieved by putting a couple of MClass on top of each other and sticking them in a combinator? I've always assumed that the "colour" comes from an EQ attenuating certain frequencies when it boosts others, and vice versa.
Assuming common EQ architectures and not linear phase EQs…
In most if not all cases, if you can match the curve you will match the sound. Sometimes I see folks matching the values between two EQs and noticing it doesn't sound the same at all. This is because the "values" can mean different things in different devices - when you look at the analysis of the response, you'll see it is indeed quite different in many cases even when the settings match. SO the only way to really match curves is using something precise like FuzzMeasure (or any software using a swept sine technique). Once the curves match, I've not been able to tell any two EQs apart (unless there is saturation involved). This includes any of the coveted "air" bands, which are easy to match once you can clearly see what they're doing.
The question for me when choosing which EQ to use is typically more about choosing the EQ that makes sense for the job at hand, which is often the EQ that gives me the best and quickest results.
But matching the curve isn't always possible with every EQ - you have to be able to go as high/low and as narrow/wide as the device you're matching, and that's not possible with every EQ. That is to say, if two EQs cannot be curve-matched, it's more a limit of the controls and ranges that are available to you on the device in question than because of any lack of sonic abilities. And while you can certainly curve-match any EQ given enough bands and parameters, it's much more difficult to match the INTERACTIONS of bands (as you adjust them) on such classics as those from Trident, Maag, and Pultec.
