New N**e is nice, but something strange about him. It's like that his not FAT eq.. Just don't know how to say it. Should try another sources. And about 88RS, well, i like UAD channel and want to compare this eqs head to head.)
If G, Enrique and Michael release their new EQP-1A, then i'll make comparison)
So, this is strange. I've made a test, and somehow (with standart Q and same amount of gain) MFQ got more low freqs, than UAD. I've normalized files and here you go. Anyway, i'm quite impressed. For me MFQ sounds more open, than UAD.
Jack do you find the 88RS seems to make the audio smoother in some way when you insert it? I hear its something maybe to do with the oversampling - but its something I liked about that plugin...however - the EQ has fiddly knobs and just ok sound if I remember correctly...
thanks for the audio - best to match via ear past a certain point with EQ...important thing is the sound as opposed to calibration...
I imported the files into Cubase and ran Audio > Statistics and found that there is a difference between the two files of ca 1,85 dB 'average RMS power'. When I lowered the MFQ-file with -1,85 dB, it's quite similar in 'average RMS power' to the UAD88RS.
Then I did a "blind test" to check if I could hear the difference, and I think the difference could be described as listening to a real kit with the MFQ-file compared to the same groove coming from a drum plugin. The UAD88RS is kind of flat sounding compared to the "minor dynamics" and depth in the MFQ-file.
The difference is significant on a file to file comparison, but I think the difference will be even more pronounced using this MFQ on several tracks - as it always is with Nebula!
Thanks again, this test made me want this MFQ even more - but I already have a bunch of Nebula EQs...!