BAX eq vs. TC 6000/similar shelving plugin

[mixerguy]

p.s. yes I know I could demo it... but I first wanted to get mastering engineers thoughts on it - those who have actually spent quality time with it.... who have compared it to other stuff.

thanks

[lowland]

I have a 6000 and a Bax - true, I don't have the MDW EQ license, but I haven't heard a digital EQ that does quite what the Bax does.

There's a freeware plug-in called Baxter (haven't heard it - no need!) which emulates the Bax, that may be worth a try -

BaxterEQ – released today – Variety Of Sound

You can also get in the ballpark high end-wise by taking a parametric to, say, 20k with a wideish Q for half a bell, sounds different to a standard shelf.

[mixerguy]

Originally Posted by lowland

I have a 6000 and a Bax .... I haven't heard a digital EQ that does quite what the Bax does...

Hey Nigel

and how would you describe exactly what the BAX does, in your own words?



i assume you like it?

cheers

[lowland]

Originally Posted by mixerguy

Hey Nigel

and how would you describe exactly what the BAX does, in your own words?



i assume you like it?

cheers

Yes, I like it. It's all the stuff that's already been well chewed over by others: subtle, clean, a little goes a long way, not for every project etc.

Two points I also like about it are 1. the quality of the L and HPF, the latter gets used quite a bit, and 2. the way the high shelf can address mid frequencies - see Greg Calbi's comments (scroll down) -

Tape Op Magazine > Reviews > BAX EQ

[mixerguy]

Originally Posted by lowland

Yes, I like it. It's all the stuff that's already been well chewed over by others: subtle, clean, a little goes a long way, not for every project etc.

Two points I also like about it are 1. the quality of the L and HPF, the latter gets used quite a bit, and 2. the way the high shelf can address mid frequencies - see Greg Calbi's comments (scroll down) -

Tape Op Magazine > Reviews > BAX EQ

cool - thanks!

and here are Greg's comment about mid frequencies copied directly from Tape Op (the link above)

".....Upper-midrange frequencies (labeled on the BAX as 3.4, 4.8, and 7.1 kHz) are usually problematic, but the BAX handles these better than any equalizer I have heard in 35 years of working on records. Adding in this area is oftentimes a minefield, as things usually get instantly too harsh or focused in a bad way. The BAX is extremely smooth in a usually-not-too-smooth area. I can add a certain musical presence to the mids without adding harshness, and this is extremely important, especially when mixes are done in-the-box and have a grating edge to begin with. On the other hand, the BAX rolls off harshness in these frequencies without killing the attack of those same mid frequencies. All in all, this is my favorite aspect of the BAX...."

[Matt@Oracle.]

I agree with all of the comments so far on the BAX, it really has simplified how much I need to EQ tracks.

When it works, it eliminates what I would need to use two other EQs for. I get a lot of tracks that are either dull or super harsh and usually for me the BAX is great for just setting up the initial balance of the track before digging deeper with the Buzz REQ, Massive Passive or Ibis. It is usually only half or one dB at most. As mentioned earlier, the high pass filter is great. It is usually the BAX or a digital eq when I need to high pass.

I currently use the BAX second in my analog mastering chain, but I think it would be great to have one towards the end, when you just need that little extra lift.

I haven't had the opportunity to use the TC, so I can't comment on it, but I do use the sonoris mastering eq, flux epure and psp neon hr often. I think one of the great things about the BAX is the simplicity of the controls/user interface. You could create a similar effect of what the BAX does using plugins, but it would be tricky and not intuitive to re-create. Generally with the BAX, what I'm looking for is only one or two clicks away.

I hope that helps!

[Strut78]

Originally Posted by Matt@Oracle.

I agree with all of the comments so far on the BAX, it really has simplified how much I need to EQ tracks.

When it works, it eliminates what I would need to use two other EQs for. I get a lot of tracks that are either dull or super harsh and usually for me the BAX is great for just setting up the initial balance of the track before digging deeper with the Buzz REQ, Massive Passive or Ibis. It is usually only half or one dB at most. As mentioned earlier, the high pass filter is great. It is usually the BAX or a digital eq when I need to high pass.

I currently use the BAX second in my analog mastering chain, but I think it would be great to have one towards the end, when you just need that little extra lift.

I haven't had the opportunity to use the TC, so I can't comment on it, but I do use the sonoris mastering eq, flux epure and psp neon hr often. I think one of the great things about the BAX is the simplicity of the controls/user interface. You could create a similar effect of what the BAX does using plugins, but it would be tricky and not intuitive to re-create. Generally with the BAX, what I'm looking for is only one or two clicks away.

I hope that helps!

Oops, I had a client using my iPad today and he has obviously logged into to his own account while I was mastering and i have accidentally posted using his account. I'm sure he feels the same way though, as the BAX is often used on the projects he brings to me! Cheers!

[mixerguy]

Thanks everyone for the thoughts. :-)