Why seperate channels on mastering eq?

[huejahfink]

Flexibility

[sat159p1]

It's probably done that because you have slightly better quality doing two separate controls for channels. That has something to do with the pots, someone was talking here that you can't have that precision in moving stereo pots and getting equal signal on each side. I'm not an expert, but this is probably the main issue.

I once had hi-end Pultec copy, stereo version and one set of knobs. It was very precise, I tested it at high boosting and cutting and the mismatch was under 0,2dB at the maximum levels, so mostly unnoticeable.

[MASSIVE Master]

A lot of the time, the guitar with way too much 2.5kHz is on one side.

[Pschelfh]

Interesting, thanks for the replies guys!

Peter.

[aleatoric]

I see the ability to work in M/S as the real advantage of having separate stereo controls. Pretty rare that I ever EQ left and right differently.

That being said there are some mastering EQ's that have ganged stereo controls; Sontec MES-482, Gyraf G14, etc.

[jdg]

we have two hands (most of us)

[Joe_caithness]

Originally Posted by jdg

we have two hands (most of us)

I actually find that really annoying, but I guess you get used to it, the double hand ninja clicking action.

My "sontec" clone is ganged stereo, but my next eq is not only fully stepped with two channels, the channels can be LR or MS, so I have the option of doing both styles if needs be.. I'm very much looking forward to making tilts overall with ganged stereo, then doing some specific boosts on the M and S after that in my workflow.

[bendermastering]

It also makes a mastering equalizer look big and with so many knobs clients just go WOW

[Ecktronic]

Imagine you were sent a Mix and the left channels guitar was sounding a tad harsh and the right channel guitar was just right.
Instead of say cutting the high mids on both left and right channels you can cut just the left channel thus preserving the goodness of the right channel and getting rid of the harshness of the left channel.

G

[Ecktronic]

Originally Posted by MASSIVE Master

A lot of the time, the guitar with way too much 2.5kHz is on one side.

Just read your post.

G

[IIIrd]

Originally Posted by huejahfink

Flexibility

exactly..try eqing a 60's track with the silly panning they had...possiblities...you can never have enough

[dcollins]

Originally Posted by IIIrd

exactly..try eqing a 60's track with the silly panning they had...possiblities...you can never have enough

While 90% of the time I'm doing stereo EQ, I can't think of any reason to lock yourself into a ganged design. Your panning example is exactly why mastering eq (well, all eq's really) have separate L/R controls.


DC

[Greg Reierson]

I'm a fan of ganged controls simply because they allow me to forget about counting clicks so I can just focus on the sound. Both of my main analog EQs are ganged. It's a small thing but it's definitely my preference. I have a couple great sounding plug-in EQs for that 10% of the time when I need separate L/R or M/S so I don't feel it limits my options at all.

GR

[IIIrd]

Originally Posted by dcollins

While 90% of the time I'm doing stereo EQ, I can't think of any reason to lock yourself into a ganged design. Your panning example is exactly why mastering eq (well, all eq's really) have separate L/R controls.


DC

Classical music can also need this as the tonality is different either side

[24-96 Mastering]

Originally Posted by Greg Reierson

I'm a fan of ganged controls simply because they allow me to forget about counting clicks so I can just focus on the sound.

GR

Same here. The ganged Sontec gets the most use out of all equalizers here. EQing with one hand, without looking, wthout matching/counting clicks, lets you dial in things so quickly and intuitively. It's a revelation.

There are of course good reasons to have another unganged EQ available, like everyone says. So... in a true gearslut fashion: get yourself two EQs, get one ganged and one with individual channel controls.