I recently spent five minutes in Pro Tools - my audio workstation - counting through the list of equaliser (EQ) plugins I have installed. The current total is… drum roll please… over 50! 😬
Ironically, despite having all these top-of-the-line plugins at my digital fingertips, the only EQ I use during mixing is the FabFilter Pro-Q 4.
This article won’t be a tutorial or explainer about how EQ works - there are plenty of fantastic free resources for that (such as this video from In The Mix and this video from Audio University). Instead, I’ll explain my thought process and reasoning as to why I only use this one particular EQ when I mix.
Many of these are quality EQs, including some of the best hardware emulations available - plugins designed to have almost identical sonic characteristics as the famous, and extremely expensive, pieces of equipment found in the best studios around the world. I’ve got all the Universal Audio plugins, and their hardware emulations of gear from brands such as Neve, SSL, Manley, API, and Chandler are incredibly accurate. My younger audio engineer self would have been fizzing!
Knobs Were Made for Hands
Most software EQs still mimic the way analogue EQs work, with a bunch of fixed knobs that you turn to change the settings. Knobs make perfect sense in the physical world because hands can turn them with controlled precision. On a computer, however, we usually use a mouse. With most plugins, you click and drag up and down to ‘turn’ digital knobs, or hover over the knob and turn the mouse scroll wheel. While this works ok, the reason plugins have these knobs is generally because that’s what the analogue EQs had, not because it’s the best interface for a software plugin.
Knobs also work well on analogue gear because you can turn two knobs at once (such as the gain and the frequency) - you can’t accurately turn two knobs at once with a mouse. To make things worse, pictures of knobs also take up space on the screen, even when you’re not using them. Wouldn’t that screen real estate be better utilised in some other way?
For example, take a look at the Waves Puigtech EQ, which is based on the much-revered hardware Pultec EQ. Aside from the little meter needle bouncing around, this software EQ always looks the same, whether there’s sound going through it or not. The ten knobs are always there occupying screen space, and the slightly rusty-looking metal plate behind the knobs, complete with screws and shadows, serves no purpose aside from aesthetics.
Let me be clear - I’m not criticising this particular plugin or how well it processes sound (lots of people like it!). I’m simply pointing out how mimicking an analogue workflow in a software plugin doesn’t necessarily make a lot of functional sense.
Taking Advantage of Screens
FabFilter, on the other hand, did an incredible job of rethinking how a software EQ should look and function, making the most of the fact that we have a screen to work with. The content on the screen can change depending on what you’re doing.
Below are two pictures. The first is the Pro-Q 4 in its default state with no audio passing through. It's a big, empty square of potential, a blank canvas. There’s almost nothing permanently taking up space.
The next picture shows the same plugin with audio passing through it, with a number of different EQ bands set up. The background displays visual information of the audio before and after being EQ’d, and the floating dials only appear when you need them. It looks totally different now! Heaps of relevant information appears, then gets out of the way when you don’t need it.
The workflow within the plugin is very well designed, allowing you to shape your sound quickly. Usually, you just click and drag to set a frequency band and gain, and turn the scroll wheel to adjust the Q factor, then you’re done; but the plugin also lets you customise further if needed. What's more, for those wanting “analogue warmth” in their EQ, FabFilter added in options for that with version 4, so you can get the benefits of subtle saturation without the analogue interface.
My Creative Approach: Prioritising Flow Over Fiddling
I use an EQ on almost every vocal and instrument track in a session, sometimes more than once, so a single song may have upward of forty instances of EQ. When I reach for an EQ, I want to open the plugin, quickly shape the sound to match what I envision, and move on.
So why stick to just one EQ when I have access to dozens? It comes down to prioritising creative flow over technical tasks. Every time I use a different EQ plugin, I face a new interface, different controls, and maybe a slightly different sonic character. This makes me think technically about how to achieve the sound I want, which distracts from the creative process. I also don’t want to stop and wonder, “which EQ should I use?”, when I have a go-to that I know can do the job. I can skip that decision altogether.
My aim isn't to find the 'perfect' sound with the ideal vintage hardware emulation EQ for each specific task; it’s to quickly achieve the tone-shaping I can already picture in my mind. If a particular plugin allows me to do that 30% faster than other options, and I use it dozens of times per song, that efficiency really adds up and makes a difference. When I reach for the Pro-Q 4, I don't need to think about the interface or workflow because I’m very familiar with it. That lets me focus on the music itself, not the mechanics of how to get there. It handles the technical side quickly so I can get back to being creative.
The Value of Limiting Your Choices
This approach of using just one EQ plugin isn't about avoiding other options but about being intentional. It's a deliberate decision to streamline my workflow and reduce creative friction. The vast number of options available to us as producers can be overwhelming, but by consciously limiting my choices, I've found a way to work faster, more efficiently, and ultimately more creatively. The FabFilter Pro-Q 4 is the first plugin I'd recommend someone invest in once they want to upgrade from their DAW's stock options.
💬 Do you have a go-to tool that's become a core part of your workflow? Comment below and share your reasons why!
