sonic comparison of GR EQ-2NV and MAQ-2NV

[jdjustice]

i just discovered this video on YouTube where Dan Kennedy describes his equalisers and preamps.
he mentions that the MAQ-2NV has a more transparent sound than the EQ-2NV.
for those of you that have used both, do you feel that this is an obvious difference or a minor one?

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PTgOYMoSwlY"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PTgOYMoSwlY" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>



thanks,
~j.d.

[Fletcher]

When we worked on the EQ-2NV it was intended to work both with the MP-2NV and as a stand alone unit. There were two major considerations here... first, when used with the MP-2NV the idea was to give the EQ unit a different set of tonal and textural capabilities that would compliment those of the pre-amps... the second was to make a damn good [and very unique] sounding stand alone unit.

One of the hardest decisions [at least from my end, I know that Dan made a whole hell of a lot of exceptionally hard decisions and spared me from the majority of them!!!] was the input transformer for the EQ.

We went back and forth several times with all kinds of different transformers. It was almost like an eye exam at times... a two channel unit would show up with 2 different input transformers... do you like this one better? or that one better? Send it back to Minnesota with comments... a new unit would come through... the transformer I liked from the last round vs. a new one... do you like this one better? or that one better? Round and round we went until we landed on one that got me harder than Chinese Algebra.

Now the EQ, when used with the Pre has the option of using either units input transformers [input circuit] and either unit's output circuit [the pre-amp being transformer based and the EQ having a VERY high headroom transformerless output. When it came to the MAQ-2NV those options wouldn't exist so the unit was designed for the best possible audio through and through... as the tonal option range isn't really part of the mastering process... its part of the production process.

When the EQ-2NV was in development we hit on a set of input transformers that sounded absolutely lovely and musical and opulent on program material. We didn't use those in the EQ-2NV as I wasn't looking for a unit for program material... I was looking for a unit that would have a unique character for tracking and mixing purposes. The input transformers on the EQ-2NV have a wonderful degree of "bite" to them that really brings the audio a bit more forward. Great for tracking, great for mixing... but on overall program material... let's just leave it at "I wouldn't".

So when the thought of the MAQ-2NV came along the obvious choice for input transformers were the ones that sounded amazing on program material. We'd already done the heavy lifting in terms of that "critical component" selection. From there Dan added a lot of the "High Fidelity" [low noise, better headroom, waka, waka, waka] stuff... the switched attenuation for cut and boost [gold contacts and "high end" resistors have less distortion than conductive plastic... go figure].

They have similar lineage... but are meant for different purposes so they possess different tonal/textural capabilities. So, to actually answer the question you asked... "yes", it is a rather large and obvious tonal difference.

Peace

[jdjustice]

Originally Posted by Fletcher

When we worked on the EQ-2NV it was intended to work both with the MP-2NV and as a stand alone unit. There were two major considerations here... first, when used with the MP-2NV the idea was to give the EQ unit a different set of tonal and textural capabilities that would compliment those of the pre-amps... the second was to make a damn good [and very unique] sounding stand alone unit.

One of the hardest decisions [at least from my end, I know that Dan made a whole hell of a lot of exceptionally hard decisions and spared me from the majority of them!!!] was the input transformer for the EQ.

We went back and forth several times with all kinds of different transformers. It was almost like an eye exam at times... a two channel unit would show up with 2 different input transformers... do you like this one better? or that one better? Send it back to Minnesota with comments... a new unit would come through... the transformer I liked from the last round vs. a new one... do you like this one better? or that one better? Round and round we went until we landed on one that got me harder than Chinese Algebra.

Now the EQ, when used with the Pre has the option of using either units input transformers [input circuit] and either unit's output circuit [the pre-amp being transformer based and the EQ having a VERY high headroom transformerless output. When it came to the MAQ-2NV those options wouldn't exist so the unit was designed for the best possible audio through and through... as the tonal option range isn't really part of the mastering process... its part of the production process.

When the EQ-2NV was in development we hit on a set of input transformers that sounded absolutely lovely and musical and opulent on program material. We didn't use those in the EQ-2NV as I wasn't looking for a unit for program material... I was looking for a unit that would have a unique character for tracking and mixing purposes. The input transformers on the EQ-2NV have a wonderful degree of "bite" to them that really brings the audio a bit more forward. Great for tracking, great for mixing... but on overall program material... let's just leave it at "I wouldn't".

So when the thought of the MAQ-2NV came along the obvious choice for input transformers were the ones that sounded amazing on program material. We'd already done the heavy lifting in terms of that "critical component" selection. From there Dan added a lot of the "High Fidelity" [low noise, better headroom, waka, waka, waka] stuff... the switched attenuation for cut and boost [gold contacts and "high end" resistors have less distortion than conductive plastic... go figure].

They have similar lineage... but are meant for different purposes so they possess different tonal/textural capabilities. So, to actually answer the question you asked... "yes", it is a rather large and obvious tonal difference.

Peace

thanks so much, Fletcher, this post was extremely helpful.
now i am sure i need the EQ-2NV for what i want to do and not the MAQ-2NV.


cheers.
~j.d.

[Fletcher]

What is it you're looking to do?