FabFilter

Hi Nils,

We never announce any release in advance, but I don't think you should expect a new version of Pro-Q in the very near future.

Hi Nils,

Please elaborate on the features you'd like to see in Pro-Q 4... and the quantization noise that you're seeing.

Cheers,

Hey Frederik,

as you guys probably have seen the team of three-body Technologie have basically copied Pro-Q3, but they also added a lot of great features.

A few of the features they added:

- Different Bell Curves
- Attack / Release for Dynamic Eqing
- Filter curves of iconic eq´s
- Fluent curve for cutting
- 117bit Processing
- 2x Oversampling

and also the Eq causes only very low quantization noise (when analyzed with PD).

All is listed on the landing page.. www.threebodytech.com/en/products/kirchhoffeq

All in all they analyzed all Eq´s and made some kind of best of (no spectral comparison tho, yet)

Its state of the art but yet the Eq´s is not as intuitive to use as Pro Q.
The developers are still working a lot on updates and integrate the majority of feature requests they get.

Would love to see a new Pro Q that can keep up with Kirchhoff in near future but can of course understand if that's not on the agenda.

Besides all mentioned features, it would be cool to see some kind of side chained eqing like trackspacer but with superior filters.

Thats it for now.. cheers!

Hi Nils,

We try to keep our plug-ins, and especially Pro-Q 3, very easy to use while also giving a lot of flexibility. However, adding too much options can also easily distract from what really matters, which is just a good sounding bread and butter EQ.

At the moment we feel that 64bit float processing, which as a noise floor lower than -180dBFS, is sufficient for Pro-Q 3's processing.

Dan Worrall made a cool video on why the lack of attack and release settings might even be beneficial in a lot of cases:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=9F1oLwf4b3M

Some other EQ's might have features that Pro-Q 3 do not have. We will always try to make Pro-Q sound better and get some cool new features when we release a new version, and we do listen to what our customers think. However, we will not implement features simply because another plug-in has it as well. We really have to think that it will improve the plug-in and benefit the users and the end result. More is not always simply better :-)

Hey Frederik,

I totally understand and I love that you focus on usability. I don't know exactly what makes Kirchhoff sounding better than Pro Q3 but certainly Kirchhoff does sound better and adds features that are quite useful and give more control over frequency's. Pro Q3 will become 4 years old this year, wich is in time of software "old".

As I like Fabfilter software, I just reach out to point out that the others developers haven't been sleeping the last years. Pro Q3 got to a kind of standard for a lot and in many cases this position brings comfort.
Lately I been comparing a lot of plugins and at least sound wise FF is not making the cut, for me, anymore. Usability/ Workflow is still extremely important to me, that's why I would love to stay with FF but with upgraded version that address sonics and adds (hidden) expert menus. So the interface is still clean but its possible to tweak more if desired.

Pro Q, Pro L, Pro C, Pro MB used to be in my template.. none of them is still in there anymore because of superior equivalents of other developers. This all sounds pretty straight forward but because I didn't just exchanged one plugin, I though some constructive criticism might be helpful to you guys.

Have a great day und grüße aus Berlin!

PS: The host of the video "one of the biggest FFFanboy" exchanged at least to my knowledge 2 of the above mentioned plugins out for others.

On a similar note about usability, is it possible to lock the gain range range of the GUI in Pro 3? It is nice that is has +/-30dB of gain, but it becomes frustrating when working with dialogue all day. I would love to be able to lock it to +/-12dB so I can quickly sweep a notch without the GUI suddenly changing size and the notch jumping to +/-30dB.

Nathan - "It is possible to turn off the automatic adjustment of the display range via the Auto-Adjust Display Range option on the Help menu."

I've already proposed this idea on here before, but I won't ever be able to update to ProQ4 unless the filter types and drive control from Volcano 3 is built in. Volcano 3 is an absolutely terrible EQ, and even though I am blown away with the sound, I only ever use one or two bands because it is has such limited eqing controls. Either allow ProQ3+ the new filter/drive features, or stick the Pro Q knobs on Volcano3 and allow more than 4 bands. Seems so strange to have literally built all the tools to make the best EQ on the market but you refuse to put them together to supposedly save us from your complexity. Make it a choice whether you use the added features or not. Trust me, we won't hurt ourselves.

F&%k yeah! Thanks Casey.

The help menu seems like a strange place to be putting plugins options though...

„.. We will always try to make Pro-Q sound better..“

Than please make Pro Q3 as good sounding as Kirchhoff or better.

Pro Q3 sounds digital and aggressive when compared (same phase mode) to the new generation of Eq‘s. For smoothe sound the new Pulsar Massive could be a reference also.

Please Pro Q4 as soon as possible.

"Pro Q3 sounds digital and aggressive"

I am not feeling this, though. I quite like how Pro-Q3 sounds to me.

I’m cool with Pro Q3 as is. But it’s great that there are so many new tools out there for people to use. Although when I hear “circuit modeled” I’m out.

This Kirchhoff EQ is hot mess Chinese Pro Q ripoff. Go chase your shiny objects and good luck with the company who have their meters at like +39dB in the promo vid. Why even bother with meters 😵‍💫. Clearly they know what’s up.

„"Pro Q3 sounds digital and aggressive"

I am not feeling this, though. I quite like how Pro-Q3 sounds to me.“

I do not hear when it that much when using pro q on its own but when you compare it to Kirchhoff or equilibrium, you will notice..

And yes Kirchhoff is a rip off but they improved so much that it’s still way better than the Orginal so what’s your point?

That it is from china?

hate the fact that a knock-off at the moment is indeed sounding cleaner and umm, less resonant than pro-q 3 - at least from blind AB'ing i did with matching phase modes

don't feel like supporting a company that clones original software, so i feel like waiting

but, pro-q 4 with improved sound quality, and some extra tools like proportional q and some other small convenience improvements people listed above, would literally make my year, since that's the #1 tool i'm on daily

(i like the idea of customizable colors, but FF gui design is already great, so it's whatever)

It would be great to add frequency octave smoothing to the spectrum analyzer in Pro-Q4.

It isn't easy to find broader resonances in the higher frequencies because it doesn't have any octave smoothing options.

This isn't necessarily "copying" any other manufacturer, it's just a very basic function of a spectrum analyzer.

Adding something like 1/3, 1/6, and 1/9 octave smoothing for the analyzer view would be amazing..just for a visual option to help users get broader visuals on resonance "humps". (Right now, it's like resonance 'needle points', vs response 'humps' as you approach the higher end of the spectrum...visually at least.

Thanks for all the feedback so far!

Cheers,

You are heartily welcome!
I am really looking forward for the next version of Pro Q, I am sure you guys will nail it.

Cheers

Personally I'm glad that FF doesn't push out updates that often. They provide comprehensive support and compatibility upgrades for software far longer than most developers and continue to push updates as needed to deprecated releases. I don't want to pay to upgrade my license every other year just to match features with other products on the market. I value stability and recall with old systems, old sessions and other studios.

Major update releases require that I also update my Pro Tools preferences and session templates and keep the previous version of the plugin in my active folder until older sessions are out of rotation. Furthermore, I have no qualms whatsoever with Pro-Q 3's sonic character. I hear it as entirely neutral.

All that being said, I heartily agree with the above commentors regarding feature overlap with Volcano. Either Volcano should be fleshed out or spun-out as a more robust 'character EQ' or Pro-Q should evolve to include some of the drive/saturation options from Volcano. I hope the team will consider this for future releases.

So something like UVI Shade?

I don't know that the Kirchhoff EQ sounds that much better than the ProQ3, but if you want to just copy the features that are in that plugin, I don't think that would be an issue. It certianly was not an issue for the company that launched Kirchhoff EQ!

I'm a BIG FAN of FF products! ProQ3 my one and only digital EQ in my everyday work!

But lately I started seeking for extra features that are missing in Q3. In particular - adjustable slope. Having only 24B slope next to 12dB, with nothing in between really limits my creative options.

Which made me look at Kirchhoff. Not the best polished GUI, Q3 is still cleaner and easier to read. But I consider making the compromise for the sake of better flexibility in shaping sound.

Though I wouldn't hesitate a minute to upgrade to Q4 that has smoothly adjustable bell slopes.

I'm considering in investing in Soothe but I really wish for an implementation into my daily working horse which is Pro Q.
Is there any slight hint something is on the horizon here or is Soothe the way to go at this point ? :)

The criticism on some of the posts is a chuckle. PRO-Q3 is a phenomenal EQ, both sonically and in its ease-of-use. What we have here is a bunch of crows distracted by all the shiny bells and whistles. if you can't make FF Pro Eq work, then you're probably not cut out for this line of work.

Being able to add some saturation in addition to gain in the treated areas might be fun. Instead of just a straightforward amplitude increase, something to pep things up like Saturn 2 at the specific frequencies being altered. Saturn 2 sounds great, and I love the bandpass feature, just Pro-Q with saturation would be one more even better. :)

So, basically, Volcano 3? :)

Probably somebody mentioned this already, but it would be also great to be able to make LP/HP filters in Pro Q dynamic -> e.g. reduce / increase filter frequency with input/side chain signal. THX!

Something that wold be a killer feature for me is on the Dynamic EQ is adding a two-way dynamics processing so we can apply all four: Downward Compression and Expansion and Upper Compression and Expansion on one band depending on the threshold. Basically giving a two-way ratio to the same single band. It would make some dynamics processing much easier instead of copying the plugin, tweaking the gains and moving the range and threshold and to warp some surgical frequencies.

Another could be interesting EQ curves like Fletcher-Munson curve to add gain but compensating the natural ear frequency increase, maybe making it dynamic to "natural-tame" some resonances above the curve. For me that would be two killer features without making the plugin hard to use

I second the request for more fully-fledged dynamic equalization that covers all four types (upward and downward compression and expansion).

Enough with this gimmicky Kirchoff EQ already.

Go watch Andrew Zeleno’s video where he shows how they didn’t even properly model constant vs proportional EQ curves for SSL E vs G emulations. And I wonder if what people are saying is true - that the manual states they modeled the hardware look but not the curves.

Seconded.

However, knowing Fabfilter i seriously doubt they'd do a clusterfuck such as kirchoff

one feature that i really would love in a future pro-q4 would be a list of all used filters present in the frequency spectrum.
maybe this area could be toggled between visible and hidden, for the people who dont need it?
i miss this since i use fabfilter eq, especially when there are two dots in the gui very close to each other.

I believe the addition of an "advanced button" on the dynamic EQ side would greatly enhance the functionality. Specifically, I require features such as lookahead, maximum range, ratio, threshold, attack, and release for compression and expansion. These features are crucial in almost every mix, and there's often a situation where I find myself missing them. For instance, there are times when I wish I could fine-tune the release time of the low-mid band for a particular vocal, and having such control would be incredibly valuable.

@mx: You can use the < and > arrow buttons at the top right of the band controls to go through all bands, maybe that helps?

@Casper: Duly noted! :)

Cheers,

Casper, you're describing a multiband compressor. Why not use that?

My only wish for Pro-Q 4:

So I really like the simplicity of Wavesfactory Trackspacer. But I find myself adding 2 or 3 instances of it onto a track. Why? Because I can only select one sidechain source per instance.

Pro-Q 3 is the same. I may only choose 1 source for SC. It would be tremendously nifty if I could specify a SC source per user-created band in a single instance of the plugin.

So, if I have a synth pad in the background, but I want it to "duck" the kick in a low band, duck the lead guitar in a high band, and duck a lead vocal in a mid-high band, AND do it all with one instance of Pro-Q 4, that would open my wallet faster than flies on poop.

-De-masking bands. (Used by selecting other open instances of pro q 4 or a side chain input. Could be used to cut or boost the opposite of the sidechain / other instrument instance. Similar to track spacer or Soothe's side chain. Would be super useful if this could be active or locked / frozen.)

-Delta signal listening (3 modes). Option to hear what is being added to the signal if there are boosting bands. Or what is being subtracted. Or both.

-Transient / sustain band option - It seems like all the fuss recently but it honestly would be useful to have this all in one place.

-Pitch tracking bands.
(Similar to something like what Autotune EQ does or UVI shade. Ideal for bass lines that have moving harmonics the need to be notched.)

-Scale tracking bands that can bell out of key content.
(Similar to Scaler eq. Giving this the ability to go into Color bass territory could be also really fun. But this could be super useful for notching in mud areas of an instrument to improve tone subtly)

One note on the Scale tracking band idea. If it had midi input option then it could actually be chord aware (not just scale aware) in the case that someone is building a synth patch for example. One thing I've noticed with with the plugin "Scaler Eq" is that not all notes of the scale are good sounding for specific chords of a song. It can transform things into a massive scale sounding drone but that is only so musical.. Real musical movement doesn't have all harmonics from a scale in every chord. Some harmonics that are in key are not great sounding in every chord.