Silk EQ
A carefully curve-matched and CPU-optimized Max for Live dev...
- Type
- Audio Effect
- Author
- NyquistLimited
- Version
- 1.1
- License
- Commercial
- Live version
- 12.4
- Max version
- 9.1.4
- Downloads
- 0
- Updated
- 2026-06-01
Description
A carefully curve-matched and CPU-optimized Max for Live device inspired by a classic analog equalizer, model number 73.
Includes 17 presets for mixing and mastering use cases.
Now available as an individual purchase: https://nyquistlimited.gumroad.com/l/silk-eq
You can find the full pack pack of 5 EQ devices at: https://store.nyquistlimited.com/
--- Studio EQs ---
An Ableton Live pack with five studio equalizers accurately modeled with efficient C++ code, leveraging the best open source libraries for filter emulation, saturation, and oversampling.
Air EQ — Transparent equalizer with broad high-frequency band.
Bloom EQ — Passive equalizer with dual boost/cut bands and tube saturation.
Contour EQ — Wide-shelf equalizer with two model variants for broad tonal shaping.
Focus EQ — Solid state equalizer with precise control and console saturation.
Silk EQ — Smooth, musical equalizer with transformer saturation.
Each device comes with a set of presets for common mixing and mastering use cases.
Requires Ableton Live 12 Suite or Ableton Live 12 Standard with the Max for Live add-on. On Apple platforms, we support macOS Tahoe and Sequoia (both on Apple Silicon and Intel processors).
Video overview: https://youtu.be/CGIqLPSuWRE
User manual: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RcBIvHGGyCKrXF4sGtnRqYfHYP_1ntvz
License agreement: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1t8GLObpWbIX2qvQcSBh7Skv-Dea0U9x5
Open-source code: https://github.com/apresta/max-studio-tools
Comments (5)
Unfortunately it's hard for end-users to tell between cobbled-together devices with a fancy UI and ones that were made with care to actually be usable in a serious project.
If you contact me in private, I will send you a 100% discount so you can actually test the device
Add an open source algo as a small part of something larger you build is one thing, but essentially just repackaging the original code? Weak.
Hey, maybe im wrong, and have been too quick to judge. Maybe there was a ton added / reconstructed in the guts, and im just being a brat. If so, my bad, but it appears to me that my original assumption is true.
Have you taken me up on my offer to get the devices for free and report back whether they feel low-effort or little added value?
If you do the above, you might understand why it's not safe for you to assume this is a bunch of sloppy vibe-coded devices. Rather than asking your friend Claude (not mine) "build me an emulation of a Neve EQ" and letting it hallucinate some mess that sounds nothing like it, takes your CPU hostage, and is built off of stolen IP anyway, I studied multiple open source codebases by people who know DSP better than myself. I compared the EQ curves with multiple big-name VST emulations of the same hardware. In one case (in fact, the device you're commenting about) this involved porting the code from a different programming language and in the process fixing a mistake in the original filter equations.
The authors of the code that I adapted all had different reasons to release the source: some used to charge for their plugins before open-sourcing them; others built them for their master's thesis. I've been in touch with them and they've been appreciative and supportive. I feel the same when someone builds on my open source code (I've been doing this since before Github existed and we all used Sourceforge).
I've decided when I built my first M4L device that all my code would be open source, regardless of whether I was legally required to do so. Plenty of companies build on MIT-licensed code without releasing any code, and it's all legal. And there's probably enough out there who are infringing the GPL-3 license, knowingly or not. I love that your response is what I get for doing things transparently.
Curious to hear what apparently reinforced your "original assumption".