Mastering EQ
Old 26th April 2004
  #1
1484
Guest
 

Mastering EQ

Ok, I know the Massenberg 8200 and Manley Massive are both great. (Don't mention the Massenberg mastering eq unless you can give me the extra $6,000 bucks)
The problem is, I can't afford both. I have used both, and love both. So my question is which one is used more for music that would be like Eric Claption, Jeff Beck, and Larry Carlton style of music?

2nd question is would you say the Oxford or Cambridge EQ is similar to the 8200? If not how are they different? Yes I know the 8200 is super transparent and one of the best eq's on the planet. I am just talking about the character of the plug in eq's.
Old 26th April 2004
  #2
Lives for gear
 
jazzius II's Avatar
 

Make sure you check out a Cranesong Ibis before you drop your wad.
Old 26th April 2004
  #3
Gear maniac
 

Since you mentioned Larry Carlton, his new album sounds like it has an Ibis on the bottom end. Don't know for certain but it has that pillowy warm bass that has Cranesong like traits. If you're' going to drop some big dollars, I would also take a look at the Weiss digital EQ. That thing gets used on nearly everything that goes out of my place plus it has snapshot recall and a linear phase mode. It's absurdly neutral for a digital eq.

Duaneadam
Old 26th April 2004
  #4
1484
Guest
 

Thanks, I am sure they are great, however I have closed my eyes to everything else besides these two products. They are hand made in the Manley facility, and I love both. There is nothing I don't care for on either on, and every thing about both I give a 10.

Plus when it comes to transparent EQ George is the father of it. I could not even think of using something else.

Also EveAnna has been so helpful when I had questions on the Langevin DVC, as well as her staff, I am too loyal on the Manley gear as well. Not to mention I love the DVC.

One adds color, one does not. Which is used more for the style of music stated above. Note I use the Cambridge EQ for percise fixes and a Pultec for flavor right now.
Old 26th April 2004
  #5
Gear maniac
 

Agreed about Manley being a quality company. Didn't know they were already being built in the same facility, if only they could put both in one box!

Duaneadam
Old 26th April 2004
  #6
Lives for gear
 
jazzius II's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Revelation
Thanks, I am sure they are great, however I have closed my eyes to everything else besides these two products.
Old 26th April 2004
  #7
1484
Guest
 

Thanks Fletch
Old 27th April 2004
  #8
Craneslut
 
Brad Blackwood's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Revelation
Thanks, I am sure they are great, however I have closed my eyes to everything else besides these two products.
?

I agree competely with jazzius. Being closed-minded will rarely (if ever) yield the best results...
Old 27th April 2004
  #9
Lives for gear
 
picksail's Avatar
 

Old 27th April 2004
  #10
Quote:
Originally posted by Revelation
Thanks, I am sure they are great, however I have closed my eyes to everything else besides these two products. They are hand made in the Manley facility, and I love both. There is nothing I don't care for on either on, and every thing about both I give a 10.

Plus when it comes to transparent EQ George is the father of it. I could not even think of using something else.

Also EveAnna has been so helpful when I had questions on the Langevin DVC, as well as her staff, I am too loyal on the Manley gear as well. Not to mention I love the DVC.

One adds color, one does not. Which is used more for the style of music stated above. Note I use the Cambridge EQ for percise fixes and a Pultec for flavor right now.
I would never say that the GMl 8200 is totally transaprent.

It has a hard as "diamond" type quality to me.

If you are on a budget check out the Mil-Media Stereo EQ.

Also a used Sontec (non mastering) can be had for a good price.
Old 27th April 2004
  #11
Gear maniac
 
Mrs. Fairman's Avatar
 

TMEQ Tube Mastering Equalizer "Special Edition".

Check it.
Expensively, but the most transparent and most musical EQ.
Old 27th April 2004
  #12
Lives for gear
 
faeflora's Avatar
 

Mrs. Fairman, STOP SPAMMING. If you don't, then I'm going to spam you.
Old 27th April 2004
  #13
1484
Guest
 

I asked you guys a question regarding two eq units, and also about two software eq plug ins. No one bothers to answer the question, but just tells me buy something else. Why is that? I spent 6 months checking all the units out there, and these are the two that I narrowed down to. I am just looking for some impressions on the units and plug ins that I mentioned.
Old 27th April 2004
  #14
Quote:
Originally posted by Revelation
I asked you guys a question regarding two eq units, and also about two software eq plug ins. No one bothers to answer the question, but just tells me buy something else. Why is that? I spent 6 months checking all the units out there, and these are the two that I narrowed down to. I am just looking for some impressions on the units and plug ins that I mentioned.
Well... It's you who's gonne use this units... It's you who tried them all...
It's your decision... I can't tell you wich unit will help you most in your future...
sorry....
Old 27th April 2004
  #15
Gear maniac
 

Quote:
No one bothers to answer the question, but just tells me buy something else. Why is that?
Probably because you're the only one who has heard all four. I do have the Massive Passive and the Cambridge EQ. The Massive is used often but isn't an eq that fits every sound. As much as I love it, I wouldn't suggest it as someone's only EQ.

The Cambridge is a plugin that sounds like a plugin. When compared to a high end eq its limitations are pretty obvious and I wouldn't recommend it for mastering. It imparts a significant digital signature IMHO.

Just curious, if you've heard all the eq's mentioned on this thread, what is it about the GML you prefer over an Ibis, a Sontec, a Weiss or a Millenia?

Duaneadam
Old 27th April 2004
  #16
Lives for gear
 
WunderBro Flo's Avatar
what about the z-systems digital eq? as far as i can remember they are quite common in mastering studios - am I wrong on this?

rock on!
Pat
Old 28th April 2004
  #17
Quote:
Originally posted by Revelation
I asked you guys a question regarding two eq units, and also about two software eq plug ins. No one bothers to answer the question, but just tells me buy something else. Why is that? I spent 6 months checking all the units out there, and these are the two that I narrowed down to. I am just looking for some impressions on the units and plug ins that I mentioned.
Okay here goes!!!grudge

I own an MP,8200,the Oxford with GML option and the GML Plug.

I have used the Cambridge all but once.

Do the plugs compare to the real deal, in my opinion...no.

The GML plug does come closest to the real thing in certain ways.

In instants where the sound down to its minute detail is critical, i still choose the real thing.

On synths and such where its not as crucial, the plug is fine(same goes for the Oxford).

There is no plug that i have heard that comes even close to the MP.
Old 28th April 2004
  #18
Lives for gear
 
faeflora's Avatar
 

I actually use the massive more when mixing or tracking.

I like the 8200 more for "mastering" because I can fix mix problems somewhat unobtrusively, and it sounds great on the highs. and lows.

massive on the whole mix can be a little muddy unless the mix is quite clean. also, the wierdo way the massive pushes around frequencies is often unwieldy on a whole song.
Old 28th April 2004
  #19
Quote:
Originally posted by faeflora
I actually use the massive more when mixing or tracking.

I like the 8200 more for "mastering" because I can fix mix problems somewhat unobtrusively, and it sounds great on the highs. and lows.

massive on the whole mix can be a little muddy unless the mix is quite clean. also, the wierdo way the massive pushes around frequencies is often unwieldy on a whole song.
Fae,

What i noticed that works well for the MP EQ on the mix, is to use the shelves for the bottomn (2) selections(22-1K,82-3k9) and use the shelf or bell for the 220-10K.

On the (22-1K) selection i rarely ever raise the db past 2(most of the time is at 0 db).

And what i do is i search for the magic freqs(usually its 100 or 150 to tighten up the bass, 33 or 47 to seperate the bottomn end from the mix and 68/100 is a mixture.

I might adjust the slope ever so slightly.

Sometimes i use the high pass filter in conjunction(most of the the time its 22hz).

I rarely ever use the highest knob, i prefer to chain the 8200 after the MP and use the 8200 for the "air freq's"(maybe .5db between 16k-20k).
Old 28th April 2004
  #20
1484
Guest
 

Thanks,

After talking to George Massenberg at the AES last year, he really got me thinking about when to add color and when not to. I also have to admit, I was never as excited on hearing an EQ until I heard the 8200. The Massive Passive reminded me of my Mess/Boogie 400+ head; warm and smooth, and very high quality.

In retrospective, for me, when you get to the mastering stage, all the color should of already been put on the mix. At the mastering stage, it is more fine tuning, and giving that final polish. With that mindset, I have decided the 8200 would be the one I will get. However I would still use a MU compressor so blend the mix a little better. Now I just have to get enough client money coming in so I can call Mercenary and buy it.

I think the Massive Passive would be better for tracking than mastering for my taste. But I know sometimes you may need a little help in mastering when the tracking was not done well. Having both would be great, but in I have to get one, I will go for the 8200.
Old 28th April 2004
  #21
Lives for gear
 
jazzius II's Avatar
 

This is probably banging my head against a brick wall, but have you actually heard an Ibis?......just wondering.....
Old 28th April 2004
  #22
Lives for gear
 
faeflora's Avatar
 

Thanks for the suggestions thrill. I'll mess around with it some more. I've never liked the sound of a "higher q slope" on the mix with the MP. I usually end up with a pretty gentle slope. How about you?


Jazzius II!!!! Shutup please! Now I'm gonna have to pick up an Ibis to see what you're so excited about!

How do you guys calibrate your eqs? I often spend a decent amount of time feeding them pink and white noise, test tones, calibrating to .1db (which I can hear isn't fine enough), and then carefully listening and tweaking. I want an eq with 4 foot wide knobs so I can make finer adjustments! You?
Old 28th April 2004
  #23
Lives for gear
 
jazzius II's Avatar
 

fae'.......you'll love the sound of the Ibis but hate the interface......

.....the Ibis interface sucks (looks nervously round for BB )

That's just my personal opinion......i would have gladly put up with 3u instead of 2u if i could of had some knobs like on a distressor.......i really don't understand why other manufacturers don't think their knobs suck after fiddling with a distressor, but apparently they don't........

The knobs on the MP are pretty nice, and 'cause of the parallel design, a big tweak is actually quite a small one.......compare this with the Ibis.....accidently brush your hand over the top and you could add 5db of gain!
Old 28th April 2004
  #24
Lives for gear
 
faeflora's Avatar
 

Oh that's pooy. Maybe I'll put my own knobs on.
Old 28th April 2004
  #25
1484
Guest
 

The Ibis is a great piece, and I have heard it. The color button adds 2nd and 3rd harmonic distortion if you want it. Or just leave it out and this is a clean mean smoking machine.

But instead of telling you what freq's you are working with, they use letters instead. That would drive me nuts. I have been working with freq's for over 20 years. Now to say, ok I move the knob to the key of G and minus it 3 db. Argh! They have a cheat sheet to help you, but after looking at it on the Crane Song web site I got a headache. You have to know what the key of C is up and down the freq' spectrum, as well as all the letters on the knob.
Old 28th April 2004
  #26
Lives for gear
 
jazzius II's Avatar
 

yup, the note letters suck royally, but i wouldn't let this alone prevent me from buying it......let the smooth hi-end sooth your head-ache!
Old 28th April 2004
  #27
Mastering Moderator
 
Riccardo's Avatar
Use your ears, not your eyes........
Old 28th April 2004
  #28
1484
Guest
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Riccardo
Use your ears, not your eyes........
I agree, but if you know certain freq's to adjust on a bass, guitar, or vocals which you have done for 20 years, switching to the letters is not acceptable.
Old 28th April 2004
  #29
Craneslut
 
Brad Blackwood's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Revelation
I agree, but if you know certain freq's to adjust on a bass, guitar, or vocals which you have done for 20 years, switching to the letters is not acceptable.
You think 52 Hz or 1k8 Hz is the same on all analog EQs?

If the front panel matters more, go for it, but the top end on the 8200 sounds like breaking plates to me. But hey, it does have nice numbers on it...
Old 28th April 2004
  #30
1484
Guest
 

Hi Brad,

I noticed you have the Ibis in your studio. How did you get to learn on working with the letters on the knobs? I know the unit sounds great, but I have learned on all my EQ gear what freq's do what to a song.

The main problem I see is all the channels have C, D, etc. That makes it even more difficult to work with. Yes I know use your ears, but you can usually get to a certain area to work on quickly with the freq's stated on the knob as a starting point. I am not trying to drag this thread on, but want to hear how your work flow is with the unit
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
hutzal / Mastering forum
15
superburtm / Music Computers
18
Bob Boyd / Mastering forum
0

Forum Jump
 
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.