![why does everyone use fabfilter pro q why does everyone use fabfilter pro q](https://resoundsound.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/screenshot_pro-q_full.jpg)
Why does everyone use fabfilter pro q update#
And from the time I update my machine, all my projects that used v1 will (unbeknownst to me) no longer recall correctly because v1 won't install. The other factor here - and I have seen this with other manufacturers - that over time there will be new OS versions - High Mojave or whatever comes next - and at a certain point the developer will decide that v1 or v2 is not worth updating any more because it's not worth their time because barely anyone is using it. If I open a old session in the future and the old version of Pro-Q is no longer installed (or worse, no longer compatible) with my current computer, then I have to start from scratch with all my EQ'ing, which is a very substantial amount of work.Īll the other plug-in families I use do ensure forward compatibility, and I have to confess that ever since FF started the Q2 and Q3 and L2 systems, I've subconsciously been thinking about this question: would I rather use FF where I don't know if it'll still be compatible in 5 years, or another plug-in which has never given me these kinds of issues? I hesitate today to commit serious work to a plug-in that might not still be available several years from now. However, from a user perspective, I would *rather* have imperfect compatibility and guaranteed upgradeability than no upgradeability at all. I do understand what you're saying about wanting the freedom to change the plug-in architecture, and that identical settings in Pro-Q 1, 2, and 3 may sound different because you changed things under the hood. But with Kontakt 6 they've finally changed that: Kontakt 6 is known as plug-in "Kontakt" - and that strongly implies that if they decide to come out with Kontakt 7.0 in the future (which I'm sure they'll charge for) there won't be a need for users to replace older versions of the plug-in, since it will automatically upgrade. Kontakt 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 were completely separate products, with separate authorizations, and separate plug-in ID's. NI used to have the same approach as FF with Kontakt. Hopefully this explains our thoughts a bit! Since we typically only release new major versions every four, five years, I'm not too worried about the growth of old versions that we need to support. In short, the current approach allows us to start "fresh" with each new major plug-in version which has very real benefits. For Pro-Q 2, we moved to an entirely different EQ engine which creates subtly different curves: again we wouldn't have been able to do that if we had needed to remain 100% compatible.
![why does everyone use fabfilter pro q why does everyone use fabfilter pro q](https://d29rinwu2hi5i3.cloudfront.net/article_media/a2e4bfab-79c6-4c60-a0d5-5862df5409da/1.jpg)
![why does everyone use fabfilter pro q why does everyone use fabfilter pro q](https://media.wwbw.com/is/image/MMGS7/FabFilter-Pro-Q-3/L46581000000000-00-1400x1400.jpg)
We wouldn't have been able to do that otherwise. That created problems for people controlling these parameters with a MIDI controller or a Pro Tools control surface, so in Pro-Q 3, we split these into separate "used" and "enabled" parameters. That means you can't change anything to the sound, which is really limiting, and you can't reorder or change parameters.įor example, in Pro-Q 2 there is a "state" parameter for each band with three options: unused, enabled, or disabled. I personally, however, don't think the current way of handling the issue is an elegant solution.īelieve me, we have thought about this a lot! The problem is that if you don't rename the plug-in and use a new plug-in identifier, you really need to be 100% backwards compatible. It's just when looking at Fabfilter's "additional downloads" page for legacy installers, I wonder what it will look like in a few years.Īgain, some people may not mind installing 10+ additional legacy installers if they need to recall an older project a few years down the line.
Why does everyone use fabfilter pro q upgrade#
Then again, it may not be a huge issue - Pro-Q2 is still working prefectly fine and nothing keeps me from skipping the current upgrade and just continue using version 2. In addition, if it is supposedly possible to load presets from Q2 into Q3 - why not call the plugin "Pro-Q", keep the version number inside the plugin and transfer the settings automatically from older versions upon loading a project in your DAW? I also understand when developers stop supporting 32-bit versions or an outdated OS.īut I had the impression Pro-Q3 added mainly new features and filter types, but did not make any changes to the basic sound? Now, of course I agree with you that one can not demand 100% backwards compatiblity when there are fundamental changes to plugin algorithms, such as the filter model. My experience and a quick google search seem to suggest otherwise: Plugins from Waves, Soundtoys, Melda, Sonnox, Celemony and HOFA are supposedly at least backwards compatible to the previous version and should load upon opening an older project, or am I mistaken?