Passive EQ shoot out...

[Silvertone]

Well Gang I ended up Buying this Buzz REQ 2.2.

After hearing it against the king daddy EQ's out there I decided (in my mind anyway) that this is the new King Daddy EQ of them all.

I'll link to some comments that others have said about this EQ in another post...
PSW Recording Forums: Brad Blackwood => New Eq

I'm also writing the review for this EQ this weekend. I guess by me buying it that pretty much says how I feel. Good thing because writing about the sound of an EQ is a bitch!!!

[Riccardo]

Originally Posted by Silvertone

Well Gang I ended up Buying this Buzz REQ 2.2.

After hearing it against the king daddy EQ's out there I decided (in my mind anyway) that this is the new King Daddy EQ of them all.

I'll link to some comments that others have said about this EQ in another post...
PSW Recording Forums: Brad Blackwood => New Eq

I'm also writing the review for this EQ this weekend. I guess by me buying it that pretty much says how I feel. Good thing because writing about the sound of an EQ is a bitch!!!

Congrats for the new addition!

[MattGray]

Originally Posted by Silvertone

Well Gang I ended up Buying this Buzz REQ 2.2.

After hearing it against the king daddy EQ's out there I decided (in my mind anyway) that this is the new King Daddy EQ of them all.

I'll link to some comments that others have said about this EQ in another post...
PSW Recording Forums: Brad Blackwood => New Eq

I'm also writing the review for this EQ this weekend. I guess by me buying it that pretty much says how I feel. Good thing because writing about the sound of an EQ is a bitch!!!

Congrats Larry, I guess you struck a good deal with Tim & the distro...

I am also thinking about the NSEQ2 FF but Fred supposedly has another mastering EQ in the pipeline, so perhaps that will be the one to wait for instead of springing for a FF modded NSEQ-2 now. Perhaps it will address the NSEQ2's ergonomic issues, with more frequency choices & more of a traditional layout?? who knows...

In the meantime I think the Buzz could be the one to beat currently. Dave M did say that he would choose the REQ-2.2 over a Sontec 430 or 432 in a heartbeat & your statement also coincides with this as well. So it looks like it could very well be a Sontec beater...

Matt

[dave-G]

Originally Posted by Silvertone

Well Gang I ended up Buying this Buzz REQ 2.2.

After hearing it against the king daddy EQ's out there I decided (in my mind anyway) that this is the new King Daddy EQ of them all.

You came very close to never seeing that particular EQ!

Congrats, Larry. I think I'll be making my contribution to the Flight of the Conchords' homeland economy sometime later this year.

-dave

[Silvertone]

Thanks guys... for those of you who have not hear this EQ, do yourself a favor and get one in to try. It is well worth your time.

Dave, I don't know how you let this EQ go... but I am so glad you did. Thank you. btw.... the new website , room and gear look great!

[Studio 13]

Finally used the Pullet for mastering and it works well with the Earlybird.

Just used the top lift and some attitude from the fat bustard and it sounded cleaner/clear.

[the unik]

Hi there, nearly first time posting

I find this thread very promising, cause I'm in the same situation, looking for another EQ round 3500 euros.

By the way I have the SPL Passeq, so I did some test for you Matt.

Suite to this post (where you can find the other sound exemple) :

G14 vs. Massive vs. GML 8200 test

by Yarek I took His exemple trying to achieve the same kind of with my Passeq compared to G14, GML, MASSIVE etc..and it's definitively GOOD, différent, but DAMN GOOD knowing that I only have 3 band boost (and cut per channel) with BROOOAAAD stroke

I took two exemple : test 1 and test 3.

Here they are, tell me what you think

test1_PASSEQ_04.wav

test3_PASSEQ_00.wav


PS : SOME différence anyway, Convertors is a UA 2192, against a Lavry blue for Yareck

[yareck]

Thanks for posting that

I hear a little bit more mid coloration, which comes with bringing mid frequency to the front. It doesn't actually sound bad at all, I like this kind of coloration.... however it's overally darker. I wonder if this is difference in converters or just equalization...
Maselec sounds close...

[the unik]

Yes Yarek, effectively in exemple 3 it's really darker than the GML 8200, And I was actually boosting about 15 DB at 10khz !!!!! And yes I by the way also noticed that I was closer to Masselec sound (but I still prefer Masselec mid) than to the 8200, which is great too for a box half the price of the Masselec !

But your right, I suspect my UAD 2192 converter to be a little darker than the Lavry..don't know really..

I was wondering, What was your setting on the GML ? I mean, were them extreme ?

[yareck]

Originally Posted by the unik

I was wondering, What was your setting on the GML ? I mean, were them extreme ?

I don't remember. But on 8200 every everything sounds "extreme" even with small turn of the knob. It has 18 dB boosts and cuts...

[sabian]

So Matt, did you end up buying / trying anything ?
Interested in the Buzz box.....

[ed littman]

I've had the Buzz mastering version in for two weeks...
Got to tell you this eq is amazing. The best way to describe it is that I hear more of the quality of the instrument in a given frequency range. It gives the mix more of a dimension from front to back kinda jumps out at you. I got blown away when boosting a mid fq to warm up an acoustic guitar. It was almost as if the guitar changed mic position to bring out the better tone.
Great investment.
Ed

[mcsnare]

SWEEEET!

Dave

[Riccardo]

thumbsup

[wagz]

based on what you're saying,that req 2.2 sounds cool.

[MattGray]

Originally Posted by sabian

So Matt, did you end up buying / trying anything ?
Interested in the Buzz box.....

Good to hear Ed's report, I'm still waiting on a ME version with Elma switches to be built. I've essentially agreed to buy it & if it does happen to disappoint (doubt it) I'll return the unit. It's taking longer than I'd hoped though.

Once it lands the other boxes will be coming in for a shootout as well. I'll also be able to put it up against my Sontec MES-432 & a modified API 550M. Can't wait to try the Buzz box the most though.

Sorry it's taken a long time, it's not as easy organizing this sort of gear for a shoot out in Australia.

I'll re-visit this thread when I have them in front of me.

Matt

[OurDarkness]

I was about to pull the trigger on a Massive Passive but then I saw this EAR 825Q and it got me thinking. I am into electronic music, heavy Moog stuff and stuff, and I am primarily interested in getting something to sculpt the sound - although other applications might appear from time to time. I have heard that the MP is awesome in low-mid, mid, high-mid, but it's kinda weak in low and high registers? So, is the EAR 825Q the opposite of what the Manley is, i.e. tight and defined bass and silk highs but a little weak in the mids?

Anyone?

Anyone who would suggest that I buy both?

[Ben F]

The Manleys top end is is great...i'd say it's weakness is tightness in the low end.

[Table Of Tone]

Hey Matt

I know I've arrived pretty late on this thread but I just wanted to give you some Massive Passive feedback.
It took mine around two months to bed in.

We are both using the same AD converter and the Mass Pass really works well with the Lavry.
I do have an MLA-2 in between them though!

The best way for me to describe what it does is to say that it takes away some of the digital non-character of a mix and gives it a real fatness.

If you have a very precise mix with lots of space, the Manley really hits the spot and sounds like it's never been out of the analog domain.

If you have a very dense and non-defined mix, there are probably better EQ's to use on em, which you already have!
I'm looking at an MLA-3 for for that.

Hope this helps

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by Ben F

The Manleys top end is is great...i'd say it's weakness is tightness in the low end.

Do you mainly use the maselec EQ for the bottom and the Mass Pass for the mids and top?

I had the MEA-2 for a couple weeks and found it great for the bottom but did not like the mids or the top!
Do you run em in series and if so, which one sees the signal first?

Just curious

[Silvertone]

Originally Posted by ed littman

I've had the Buzz mastering version in for two weeks...
Got to tell you this eq is amazing. The best way to describe it is that I hear more of the quality of the instrument in a given frequency range. It gives the mix more of a dimension from front to back kinda jumps out at you. I got blown away when boosting a mid fq to warm up an acoustic guitar. It was almost as if the guitar changed mic position to bring out the better tone.
Great investment.
Ed

Hey Ed, I was waiting to hear what you thought. I thought you might like the unit. I must say I've owned a lot of EQ's over the last 15 years and this one really makes an improvement with whatever you throw at it... even when I don't want to leave the digital side I always have to see what I can come up with on the REQ 2.2 and it's always an improvement.... smiles all the way with the Buzz.

One last thing, Tim went out of his way to send me a new REQ 2.2 as he had shielded a few things differently and got about a 10dB quieter noise floor than the demo unit that I had purchased. He didn't have to do this but it was the right thing to do, so he did it. This is what I love about the boutique guys, they usually go way "above and beyond" and Buzz is no different.

[sabian]

Originally Posted by OurDarkness

I was about to pull the trigger on a Massive Passive but then I saw this EAR 825Q and it got me thinking. I am into electronic music, heavy Moog stuff and stuff, and I am primarily interested in getting something to sculpt the sound - although other applications might appear from time to time. I have heard that the MP is awesome in low-mid, mid, high-mid, but it's kinda weak in low and high registers? So, is the EAR 825Q the opposite of what the Manley is, i.e. tight and defined bass and silk highs but a little weak in the mids?

Anyone?

Anyone who would suggest that I buy both?

Hi Yannis,
in response to your p.m. , a lot has been said here already, to sum it up I didn't rate MP too highly, even when flat it acted like a bandpass filter, screwing up top AND bottom. Depending on your setup and application it can of course work, probably best for mids and then you'd need other eqs to rescue top and bottom....
EAR 825 does not screw anything up to start with and is IMO in a different league. I like EAR gear because it is tube but NOT "tubey" and muddy - it is truly hi - fi transparent and full bandwidth yet warm etc etc. The 825 has the sweetest highs I've heard, rich and creamy bass / mids, overall absolutely gorgeous sounding eq. It just isn't surgical so best suited for broad strokes. Bear in mind I am approaching this subject from an ME point of view.
You might want to check out the Gyraf as well, no personal experience with it.
I'm personally very interested in the Buzz unit which seems to be creating a lot of buzz around here...

Hope this helps

best

Sabian

[Ben F]

Originally Posted by Table Of Tone

Do you mainly use the maselec EQ for the bottom and the Mass Pass for the mids and top?

I had the MEA-2 for a couple weeks and found it great for the bottom but did not like the mids or the top!
Do you run em in series and if so, which one sees the signal first?

Just curious

The Maselec has been replaced with a Sontec 432C/9, and we also have the Neve 2087. I still rate the Maselec though, and could easily use it instead of the Sontec if I had too- the shelving options are really useful.

I find the massive passive to be just the ticket on certain projects. Mainly dark analogue mixes and some electronic music. It's still a unique EQ regardless of what people say, if you can't get a decent sound out of the MP then find another occupation. I've never heard any 'bandpass' filter effect unless the tubes were not working properly, which can happen, or the load impedance is incorrect. Good enough for Bob Ludwig to use!

The Neve is in another league. Different sound again- probably closer to an ITI 230 than anything else, but more precise. The Sontec is the main weapon of choice on most decent mixes though.

Regardless, I've always been thought to get the best out of what you have. The 'engineering' part of being a mastering engineer I suppose.

[OurDarkness]

Originally Posted by sabian

Hi Yannis,
in response to your p.m. , a lot has been said here already, to sum it up I didn't rate MP too highly, even when flat it acted like a bandpass filter, screwing up top AND bottom. Depending on your setup and application it can of course work, probably best for mids and then you'd need other eqs to rescue top and bottom....
EAR 825 does not screw anything up to start with and is IMO in a different league. I like EAR gear because it is tube but NOT "tubey" and muddy - it is truly hi - fi transparent and full bandwidth yet warm etc etc. The 825 has the sweetest highs I've heard, rich and creamy bass / mids, overall absolutely gorgeous sounding eq. It just isn't surgical so best suited for broad strokes. Bear in mind I am approaching this subject from an ME point of view.
You might want to check out the Gyraf as well, no personal experience with it.
I'm personally very interested in the Buzz unit which seems to be creating a lot of buzz around here...

Hope this helps

best

Sabian

Sabian,

thanks for the reply. Gee, was the MP that bad??

I wouldn't mind spending the extra cash for the EAR 825Q or maybe a Gyraf (if I ever find one). Thing is I got a good deal on the MP (with the master gain option added) but I don't want it to sound like a bandpass filter. If it's really that bad on tops and highs, then maybe I should buy something else.

Sabian, are you sure your MP was not a lemon? Maybe a whacky tube or something?

[sabian]

I don't think it was a lemon and I don't think MP is "that bad". It's just not "that good" next to some other options in my opinion, but hey, people make great records with them , so ... I used to own a Manley mixer for a while and clearly remember similar loss of air and midrangey character as with the MP demo, but people also like it for that I suppose... I guess it could be just great on a smiley curve ITB mix that might benefit from fattening up or whatever... Not so great on a decent high resolution acoustic recording that I tried it on IMO. There was a good thread from Yareck I believe with MP, Gyraf, Maselec, GML 8200 samples, see if you can find it, very informative. I believe that might be enough to see what I mean, subject to your listening environment.
The only way you'll know if it suits you is as usual, trying it for yourself. Can you get a demo or sale or return? What exactly would be the main application?

Good luck

[inlinenl]

Originally Posted by Table Of Tone

Do you mainly use the maselec EQ for the bottom and the Mass Pass for the mids and top?

I had the MEA-2 for a couple weeks and found it great for the bottom but did not like the mids or the top!
Do you run em in series and if so, which one sees the signal first?

Just curious

Yep I really agree with that statement ... I have the MEA-2 almost two years now, next to my weiss and nseq-2-FF ...

the mea-2 sounds a bit like my weiss, does the trick on the low-end pretty nice and in some cases very good, but it just does not trigger my senses like the nseq-2 which has such a beautifull sonic print ...
controls and recallability are very nice on the mea-2 .. I just wished, and I really gave it some time, just to sound better/more exciting .....
well the combo is doing it for me for the moment ... :-)

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by OurDarkness

Sabian,

thanks for the reply. Gee, was the MP that bad??

I wouldn't mind spending the extra cash for the EAR 825Q or maybe a Gyraf (if I ever find one). Thing is I got a good deal on the MP (with the master gain option added) but I don't want it to sound like a bandpass filter. If it's really that bad on tops and highs, then maybe I should buy something else.

Sabian, are you sure your MP was not a lemon? Maybe a whacky tube or something?

Must have been a bad outboard combination in the chain, a bad set of tubes or a jittery clock or something.
Or maybe you were working on some really dense mixes that didn't suit it?

I know that Manley used EH tubes in some positions for a while and believe me, that would explain it!
Those tubes had some real problems around two years ago.

My mastering version MP has Jan NOS 12AU7's and 6414's in it and it sounds killer!

[sabian]

Originally Posted by Table Of Tone

Must have been a bad outboard combination in the chain, a bad set of tubes or a jittery clock or something.
Or maybe you were working on some really dense mixes that didn't suit it?

I know that Manley used EH tubes in some positions for a while and believe me, that would explain it!
Those tubes had some real problems around two years ago.

My mastering version MP has Jan NOS 12AU7's and 6414's in it and it sounds killer!

Well, I didn't go as far as playing with tubes on the demo unit ... I wasn't even close enough interested in the box to do that.
What I was hearing was the familiar "Manley" sound that I know pretty well and long time ago I thought sounded great ... well, in the midrange at least... Until I discovered EAR and such... BTW, EAR is the only tube gear I left alone, never felt I wanted to change anything there. I know people who have played with tubes though.
To sum it up, I'm not saying MP or any Manley is bad or anything, or that I couldn't work with it - it is just not my personal choice of tone (any more), at least for mastering. Neither is API for example and a lot of other things , which doesn't mean they don't work great for a lot of people. A matter of choice... and obviously the rest of the chain. One MUST try ALL of the available options in their own place at the same time if at all possible and decide for themselves! Which is what Matt is trying to do here and why I'm interested in his and other people's findings.

"Must have been a bad outboard combination in the chain" - I start without a chain and from the "flat" setting when demoing

"a bad set of tubes" - hmm, not noisy or microphonic, otherwise why were they there in the first place if not good ? Honestly, it wasn't faulty "BAD"... I know how much can sometimes be improved with re-valving though...

"or a jittery clock or something. Or maybe you were working on some really dense mixes that didn't suit it?" - any other ideas why I didn't like it? Maybe because
I had EAR 822s, 825, SPL Passeq and the Pullet next to it?
I admit I might have otherwise even bought it ....

Who knows what will happen after I get to demo the Buzz unit... it's never ending as you know.

[Table Of Tone]

Yep!
It certainly is never ending with equipment!

[syra]

Originally Posted by sabian

I was definitely not planing to spend this kind of money on a comp at that time. Got all usual suspects in for a demo (Fearn, Manley, Pendulum, Phoenix, TG Zener, owned STC8 and Trakkers...) and without a shed of a doubt made an order for 660s.... It was an easy decision.

Had I not heard 660s in the first place I would not have any of the above.
Which is why you don't see many of these around. Know anyone who has them?
Try to get a demo.

Amen! I have a ton of comps and I've heard probably everything out there. It took me 5 minutes ordering a second EAR 660 when I heard 2 on the buss. Magic.

Same as you, based on those I'm trying to get a 825 to check out.

EAR gear is definitely not cheap but it takes only one listen. Then you pick up your jaw off the floor and order!