500 series EQ shootout

[pieter]

Dear all,

I had the opportunity to spend my Easter weekend in the company of the API 550b, Purple Audio Odd and Avedis 500 series EQs.

As my first venture in 500 module land, I wanted to select two versatile EQs to fill my Sweet 10 rack.

What immediately struck me is that these three EQs were all of very high sonic quality and that I could honestly live with either of them. Please find my subjective experience below:

Build Quality

API: ++
Avedis: +++
Odd: + (one of the two units I received was defective, the other had a LC switch which had not very good action).

Sound

API: +++
Avedis: +++
Odd: +++

Versatility

API: ++
Avedis: +++ (less colored than the API and more frequency options than the Odd)
Odd: ++

Price/quality

API: ++
Avedis: ++
Odd: +++

I made some crude test files on a ProTools HD system with Lynx Aurora conversion:

EQdemo eSnips Folder


In the end, I decided on the API 550b as they had the most character (which admittedly can be a good or a bad thing) and are the most likely to attract clients to my project studio. I'm pretty sure though that I'll add the other two units at a later stage.

Looking forward to hearing other experiences in this field as well.

[ProducerBoy]

First of all, thank you for the clips!

I don't own any of these (yet), so I have no vested interest in defending any of them.
Purely going off of your clips, the API eqs take it. They were all good, without a doubt, but I really, really liked the API, then the Avedis, then the ODD.

Thanks again!

[Brent]

Very cool. I'll check out the clips when I get home.

[undermind]

Thanks for doing this. Always appreciate shootouts. It's much better than reading someone saying "this one sounds better than that one"

Yeah the API is the best to my ears too. But EQ shootouts seem a little bit tougher than say compressors or mic pre's. You can adjust it to the sound you think sounds "best", but this would probably be different (tonally) for each unit. OR you could try to achieve the exact same tone on each, but that tone may not be the sweetest sound for that unit.. If that makes any sense.

Can you tell us what your concept was with these clips?

[edanderson]

hey pieter, thanks for checking out the odd; glad you liked it.

i hope you were able to easily get a replacement for the defective unit. the low cut button being finicky doesn't sound right either, so please let whoever you purchased it from know about that. purple definitely wants you to be happy with your purchases.

ed

[pieter]

I tried to EQ the three sources using frequencies more or less available on the 3 units:

Vocal

Avedis: +4db at 12k; -4db at 1.8k; +4db at 300
Odd: +4db at 12k; -4db at 1.8k; +4db at 300
API: +4db at 12.5k; -4db at 1.5k; +4db at 300

Room

Avedis: +2db at 8.2k; -2db at 680; +2db at 200
Odd: +2db at 8k; -2db at 650; +2db at 150
API: +2db at 8k; -2db at 700; +2db at 200

Guitar

Avedis: -2db at 8.2k; +4db at 800; +2db at 200
Odd: -2db at 8k; +4db at 650; +2db at 1500
API: -2db at 7k; +4db at 800; +2db at 200

I always started with the Avedis first.

[undermind]

Gotcha, so used the same settings across the board, rather than EQ'ing for the "sound" in mind..

[pieter]

Any further experiences with these units

[666666]

Cool shoot-out... thanks

Funny, some folks erroneously consider the 550Bs "too clean" and sometimes even "sterile" (especially when compared to 550As)... the B's are indeed more subtle than the A's... but this test here shows that the 550Bs still very much have a bad-ass color and are NOT in any way "too clean" or "sterile". Thanks for setting that straight pieter.

Now if you really want color, try a 550A.

I consider my B's versatile enough for anything and use them accordingly... they are my "go-to", "workhorse" eqs. My A's are reserved for things that I specifically want to color.

[TonyBelmont]

First, let me say that the two EQ's that I have experience with in this test are both great units (550B & E27). I didn't listen to the clips, but I've always preferred my E27's to API 550B's in most instances... I'm not sure it was a good idea to test them in the manner that you did, because I don't think you were able to really get as good a feel for them, as you would have if you did it by ear (and not sight).

The fact that the E27 has a lot of power behind it (+/- 16db, as opposed to 10db) makes for a difficult time matching up settings between the two (even by ear). Plus, remember that they have different bandwidths at say 4 db of boost, so they will sound different.

Next time try going by ear and see if you get the same results... start with the API, and then try the Avedis.... when I gave them a run, I thought the E27 had a little bit more low end harmonic content and the API's a little more poke to them at lower boost settings (the E27's sounded bigger at lower boost settings). The E27's always just sounded better to my ears, but the 4th band makes the API's more versatile in some ways.

No reason not to have both of them.

[pieter]

Tony,

I must admit I really hesitated between the 550B and the E27 as they certainly both are great units.

Two reasons that made me go for the API:

- the 550B did sound a bit more colored to my ears (whicj I was looking for);
- in Belgium, a lot of people still request Focusrite and Neumann. Now, API gear is more likely going to attract customers (I have a project studio) than an incredibly well made but unkown unit.

This said, I'll probably go for a pair of E 27 as well pretty soon.


Pieter

[drBill]

Originally Posted by TonyBelmont

I'm not sure it was a good idea to test them in the manner that you did, because I don't think you were able to really get as good a feel for them, as you would have if you did it by ear (and not sight).

Plus, remember that they have different bandwidths at say 4 db of boost, so they will sound different.

Next time try going by ear and see if you get the same results... start with the API, and then try the Avedis.... when I gave them a run, I thought the E27 had a little bit more low end harmonic content and the API's a little more poke to them at lower boost settings (the E27's sounded bigger at lower boost sett

Tony - Sorry, but I'm going to have to respectfully say that I disagree with you entirely. It's VERY difficult to compare EQ's without "being there", and I think this test shows the DIFFERENCES in the EQ's. I don't think it shows which is BEST, but shows the differences in what they do. You can get any decent EQ to sound good and going only by "ear" as you suggest would no doubt have settings that were radically different on each EQ. This type of test - held to these constraints - gives me a good idea of what the EQ sounds like. Just going for the best "sound" tells me nothing - UNLESS it's me who's twisting the knobs. Now, if I'm doing the test myself for myself, I'd agree with you completely.

Thanks Pieter!

Cheers,

bp

[TonyBelmont]

Originally Posted by drBill

Tony - Sorry, but I'm going to have to respectfully say that I disagree with you entirely. It's VERY difficult to compare EQ's without "being there", and I think this test shows the DIFFERENCES in the EQ's. I don't think it shows which is BEST, but shows the differences in what they do. You can get any decent EQ to sound good and going only by "ear" as you suggest would no doubt have settings that were radically different on each EQ. This type of test - held to these constraints - gives me a good idea of what the EQ sounds like. Just going for the best "sound" tells me nothing - UNLESS it's me who's twisting the knobs. Now, if I'm doing the test myself for myself, I'd agree with you completely.

Sure, there is something to be gained from putting the same settings on 2 different EQ's and listening... But, that shouldn't be the only way we evaluate these tools in our studios (specifically EQ's).

The point I am trying to get across is: listen as opposed to looking at identical settings and listening....

The settings really don't matter, it's all about the sound and what you are able to get out of the unit. Who cares if the settings are radically different. Are you trying to copy the units or are you trying to evaluate which one is better for how you work. Remember, we aren't talking about mic preamps here... We are talking about EQ's which at the end of the day are tools that we will have to use to make things sound the way we want.... with our ears. It will be up to you to get a good sound with the unit you choose, and in order to really evaluate things properly, you must go beyond the typical matching settings and comparing school of thought (at least I do anyway... everyone else is free to do things how they want).

[drBill]

Originally Posted by TonyBelmont

Sure, there is something to be gained from putting the same settings on 2 different EQ's and listening... But, that shouldn't be the only way we evaluate these tools in our studios (specifically EQ's).

The point I am trying to get across is: listen as opposed to looking at identical settings and listening....

The settings really don't matter, it's all about the sound and what you are able to get out of the unit. Who cares if the settings are radically different. Are you trying to copy the units or are you trying to evaluate which one is better for how you work. Remember, we aren't talking about mic preamps here... We are talking about EQ's which at the end of the day are tools that we will have to use to make things sound the way we want.... with our ears. It will be up to you to get a good sound with the unit you choose, and in order to really evaluate things properly, you must go beyond the typical matching settings and comparing school of thought (at least I do anyway... everyone else is free to do things how they want).

That's all fine if you're doing it yourself and using your own ears. For an "on-line" comparison, I still stand by my observation to keep the EQ's as close as possible to each other to hear their differences. In person, of course, tweak and use your own ears.

[TonyBelmont]

Originally Posted by drBill

That's all fine if you're doing it yourself and using your own ears. For an "on-line" comparison, I still stand by my observation to keep the EQ's as close as possible to each other to hear their differences. In person, of course, tweak and use your own ears.

I agree. I wasn't speaking to any online samples, but rather the in person testing.

I didn't realize there were samples posted.

[dudebrah69]

believe it or not, you can actually use the master q in reason as an EQ on any of the synths, and samplers. i was using the eq-500 for a while, but then i realized i can just use the better one.

it sounds waaaaay better. plus it looks really hot next the the scream distortion. trust me and give it a shot.

[stevetgn]

Originally Posted by dudebrah69

believe it or not, you can actually use the master q in reason as an EQ on any of the synths, and samplers. i was using the eq-500 for a while, but then i realized i can just use the better one.

it sounds waaaaay better. plus it looks really hot next the the scream distortion. trust me and give it a shot.

[undermind]

Originally Posted by stevetgn

Yeah, I know. I almost bit on this one too.

Take a look at his other 8 posts, they're equally relevant. I think this is some kind of April Fools joke. (hope)

[stevetgn]

Originally Posted by undermind

Yeah, I know. I almost bit on this one too.

Take a look at his other 8 posts, they're equally relevant. I think this is some kind of April Fools joke. (hope)

Ah! Not the most humourous of April fools but it would explain the total lack of sence it made!

[undermind]

Originally Posted by stevetgn

Ah! Not the most humourous of April fools but it would explain the total lack of sence it made!

It seems it's more than an April fools joke; he's still posting. 29 useless posts and counting.