Login / Register
 
TK Audio TK-lizer eq VS Dangerous Bax eq
New Reply
Subscribe
gramophonedzie
Thread Starter
#1
15th November 2012
Old 15th November 2012
  #1
Gear interested
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 28

Thread Starter
gramophonedzie is offline
TK Audio TK-lizer eq VS Dangerous Bax eq

I'm thinking of getting one of these.

I know BAX is very respected EQ but TK-lizer is cheaper. TK-audio products are top quality build and I love their BC-1 that I just got.

As I understand they are both Baxandall style EQ.

So if there is a chance to have a word from someone who used both. Or one of these EQ.

I know it would be the best thing to try them but in my country there is no option for testing.

Tnx
#2
15th November 2012
Old 15th November 2012
  #2
Gear nut
 
dangerousben's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 103

dangerousben is offline
Got the TK & I love it. Haven't used the Bax yet. Hit me up with questions!
MASSIVE Master
Verified Member
#3
16th November 2012
Old 16th November 2012
  #3
Lives for gear
 
MASSIVE Master's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Chicago (Schaumburg / Hoffman Est.) IL
Posts: 3,024
My Recordings/Credits

Verified Member
Send a message via AIM to MASSIVE Master
MASSIVE Master is offline
All I can say about the BAX is that I bought it as a "secondary" unit and I'd bet a dollar it's on nearly everything I've worked on in the past couple years.

That said -- I'm tempted to demo the TKL just for the M/S function...
__________________
John Scrip - Massive Mastering, LLC - www.massivemastering.com

Spoon-feed a newb some answer and he'll mix for a day -
Get him to *think* about it and figure it out for himself and he'll mix for a lifetime --- JS
da goose
Verified Member
#4
16th November 2012
Old 16th November 2012
  #4
Lives for gear
 
da goose's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: HI Ambacht, the Netherlands

Verified Member
da goose is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by MASSIVE Master View Post
All I can say about the BAX is that I bought it as a "secondary" unit and I'd bet a dollar it's on nearly everything I've worked on in the past couple years.

That said -- I'm tempted to demo the TKL just for the M/S function...
From their site: We like to thank Wayne Kirkwood at KA Electronics for letting us use his genius M/S circuit!!
The MS encoder/decoder from Wayne is REALLY good! I also use it in my masteringconsole and it's simply brilliant.
__________________

Da Goose Music Mastering | Jeffrey de Gans
www.dagoosemusic.nl
Dedicated Analog mastering running on Solarpower
#5
16th November 2012
Old 16th November 2012
  #5
Gear nut
 
dangerousben's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 103

dangerousben is offline
Jap, the M/S circuit is really a gift combined with that easy-to-modify HPF. Too bad it doesn't have separate outputs for M/S, but I'm sure TK will build one with additional outputs up on request.
gramophonedzie
Thread Starter
#6
18th November 2012
Old 18th November 2012
  #6
Gear interested
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 28

Thread Starter
gramophonedzie is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by dangerousben View Post
Got the TK & I love it. Haven't used the Bax yet. Hit me up with questions!
How do you use it? In any particular situation or it is somewhere locked in your chain?

What are the good things and what you don't like about it, if there is any.

Is that M/S internal? Beacuse you mentioned it doesn't have separate outputs for M/S?

Tnx
#7
18th November 2012
Old 18th November 2012
  #7
Gear nut
 
dangerousben's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 103

dangerousben is offline
Right now, I use it mainly to get the mix balance straight without leaving a too colorful footprint. Usually it sits right behind the comp in my chain.
I often use the HPF in M/S to mono out unwanted rumble in the S-channel as well as in the M-Channel, because I can apply different cutoffs to M and S.
For the rest it's mostly about broad stroke boosts, I do apply cuts digitally with ProQ. The HiShelf is great for bringing out some air in duller mixes. The separate gain controls per channel can be used to edit stereo wideness.

I'd love to have 0.5 dB steps above +-1dB and more overlapping between the bands. If the unit had additional M/S outputs it could be used as a M/S-decoder for the chain. But this can be done very easily in the digital domain.

I'm looking forward to have the TK team up with my Gyraf G14, which should arrive in a few days. This should give a powerful combination of tools for my needs.
gramophonedzie
Thread Starter
#8
18th November 2012
Old 18th November 2012
  #8
Gear interested
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 28

Thread Starter
gramophonedzie is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by dangerousben View Post
Right now, I use it mainly to get the mix balance straight without leaving a too colorful footprint. Usually it sits right behind the comp in my chain.
I often use the HPF in M/S to mono out unwanted rumble in the S-channel as well as in the M-Channel, because I can apply different cutoffs to M and S.
For the rest it's mostly about broad stroke boosts, I do apply cuts digitally with ProQ. The HiShelf is great for bringing out some air in duller mixes. The separate gain controls per channel can be used to edit stereo wideness.

I'd love to have 0.5 dB steps above +-1dB and more overlapping between the bands. If the unit had additional M/S outputs it could be used as a M/S-decoder for the chain. But this can be done very easily in the digital domain.

I'm looking forward to have the TK team up with my Gyraf G14, which should arrive in a few days. This should give a powerful combination of tools for my needs.
Tnx very much
#9
20th June 2013
Old 20th June 2013
  #9
Lives for gear
 
jackbraglia's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2010
Location: NYC

jackbraglia is offline
Resurrecting this thread since no one was able to answer the OP's question, and I am also looking at both the bax and the tk-lizer. So now that some time has passed, has anyone been able to use both? Any thoughts? I would really love a good convincing reason to go for the tk-lizer, since its cheaper and has M/S
__________________
Jack Braglia
Vital Mastering
#10
20th June 2013
Old 20th June 2013
  #10
Gear nut
 
paintitblack's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 139

paintitblack is offline
Never used the tk. But I love my bax always always always.
#11
20th June 2013
Old 20th June 2013
  #11
Lives for gear
 
jackbraglia's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2010
Location: NYC

jackbraglia is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by paintitblack View Post
Never used the tk. But I love my bax always always always.
that seems to be the consensus. everyone loves the bax, but no one has used the tk-lizer. Is anybody out there???!!!!
#12
20th June 2013
Old 20th June 2013
  #12
Gear nut
 
dangerousben's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 103

dangerousben is offline
Well, as mentioned above I still use it and am fine doing it. But I didn't have my hands on the Bax.
#13
20th June 2013
Old 20th June 2013
  #13
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Location: long beach california
Posts: 511

Umulamahri is offline
The tk-lizer is a very attractive price, I am also interested if anybody can give some insight on the sonics of the unit . Is it surgical??
da goose
Verified Member
#14
20th June 2013
Old 20th June 2013
  #14
Lives for gear
 
da goose's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: HI Ambacht, the Netherlands

Verified Member
da goose is offline
#15
20th June 2013
Old 20th June 2013
  #15
Gear Head
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 70

snax_box is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umulamahri View Post
The tk-lizer is a very attractive price, I am also interested if anybody can give some insight on the sonics of the unit . Is it surgical??
I'll chime in since I've owned both. I'm not a pro engineer so take that for what you will.
The Baxandall circuit was never meant to be surgical. It was originally designed as a tone control for home HiFi setups in the 50's. A fantastic sounding circuit that was never intended for the pro studio.
Anywho, the BAX has fewer freq choices but "better" freq choices. I found myself wishing the TK had more "in between" frequencies. With more freq to choose from, the TK has more control than your typical baxandall EQ, but still falls short in the pinpoint accuracy department. For sound quality the BAX takes the day. Although just barely. The BAX has a reaaally sweet top end that shimmers and shines when the right signal is passed through it. More of a set-it and forget kind of deal. On the negative side, the BAX can sound very glassy and uninteresting. A very "electronic" sound that can work very well for some things, but fail for others. Often you will forget the BAX is there, hit bypass and go, "Dafuq?". It's a very subtle, very sweet sound.
The TK is incredibly similar. The only difference is that (forgive my awful hyperbole here) the TK doesn't sound as "expensive". Perhaps it uses cheaper OP amps? lower quality PCB or caps? I'm not sure. The top end doesn't glisten as much in the TK. But if the difference is worth the cost will be for you to decide. Used BAX turn up pretty often and are very close in price to the TK. Also of note is the TK M/S is great, but you'll have to de code it somehow as you may already know.
I hope this helps. Good luck in your search.
#16
21st June 2013
Old 21st June 2013
  #16
Gear nut
 
Joined: Jun 2010
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 87

talon is offline
I don't have either but from what I've read regarding the BAX, the high shelf control is subtle due to the fact that the scale for the control doesn't boost the same way the low shelf does. At 1.6kHz the shoulder frequency boosted is actually at ~3.2kHz, at 1.8kHz it's boosted at ~3.6kHz, etc. This is probably why the high end is very subtle.

Some other things to note; the BAX uses relays for the frequency controls which may contribute to the cleaner sound. I believe it uses OPA2134 op-amps if I'm not mistaken.
__________________
Massive Dynamik - http://www.massivedynamik.net
#17
23rd June 2013
Old 23rd June 2013
  #17
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Location: long beach california
Posts: 511

Umulamahri is offline
thanks
#18
24th June 2013
Old 24th June 2013
  #18
Lives for gear
 
Slug1's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 700

Slug1 is offline
Only have bax. Great box. One is bax shelves with filters, the other is bax shelves with some parametric bands. When I built my system, I went for several eqs with great parametric bands (Sontec, Millennium), but didn't have filters. So I chose bax, although I do use the shelves too. TK looks great though. But I like my bax and plan to keep it. Probably wont add it.
#19
24th June 2013
Old 24th June 2013
  #19
Gear interested
 
alemass's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Location: Italy
Posts: 28

alemass is offline
I had both for a pair of months side by side.I had the bax for one year
but after two months with the TK I would keep the bax just for the logo.
I sold the bax and kept the TK and sincerely I don't miss the bax especially
the high shelf dep. where TK is far superior.
Just my opinion and I'm not a pro mastering engineer.
Alessandro-roma
Quote
2
#20
24th June 2013
Old 24th June 2013
  #20
Lives for gear
 
sat159p1's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: Europe
Posts: 807

sat159p1 is online now
I love the bax EQ from Regular John design. Using it almost on every master.
__________________
"This is Gearslutz, it's all about paying for sh*t you can hardly hear, don't really need and few other people actually care about."
#21
6th January 2014
Old 6th January 2014
  #21
Gear nut
 
jondoe1972's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 98

jondoe1972 is offline
Any more comparisons between the Dangerous Bax vs the TK-lizer?

Is the TK harsh in anyway? What are its shortcomings sonically?
#22
6th January 2014
Old 6th January 2014
  #22
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Location: A big island - i am an Island
Posts: 2,583

dogma is online now
Quote:
Originally Posted by sat159p1 View Post
I love the bax EQ from Regular John design. Using it almost on every master.
My opinion is that itb eq is so good that for an otb eq you really need a colour piece or something like a bax circuit - I asked dustin if he could replicate the freq choices on the bax and I think he said he could but said most of the freq where uneccassry and could actually be detrimental - dunno I stopped investigating - he does a base version for $800 from memory for a stereo unit. He's really approachable so email him and ask if he can do the bax freq if you want them
__________________
You're entitled to your own opinion but you are not entitled to your own facts
#23
8th January 2014
Old 8th January 2014
  #23
Gear nut
 
jondoe1972's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 98

jondoe1972 is offline
Any more comments on the TK-lizer? Is it more or less transparent than the Bax?
#24
8th January 2014
Old 8th January 2014
  #24
Lives for gear
 
Earcatcher's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,061

Earcatcher is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by jondoe1972 View Post
Any more comparisons between the Dangerous Bax vs the TK-lizer?

Is the TK harsh in anyway? What are its shortcomings sonically?
I can't compare the TK to the Dangerous, but the TK is very smooth and natural sounding (and very transparent; I use it for classical music). As ever I would have liked a little more in-between frequency bands. The HPF has nothing between 45Hz and 100Hz. I really miss 60 and 80 there, but fortunately I have other stuff to go there. The M/S function is what I end up using most. It really helps shaping the sound stage.

Overall I love the TK-lizer. It sits on the master buss of every mix. It has hard bypass, so it can sit there safely, just in case it is not needed. Built quality is superb. It's the kind of equipment I like to have in my rack, for its sober and utilitarian appearance. Mine has engraved lettering (my favorite), but a BC2-ME compressor I recently acquired from TK has printed legends (while their product photos still show engraved), so I'm not sure this level of beauty is still available.
#25
8th January 2014
Old 8th January 2014
  #25
Gear nut
 
jondoe1972's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 98

jondoe1972 is offline
I'm glad to hear its transparent. All the examples of the Bax seem to show a slight (but pleasant) tone to it.

If the TK-lizer didn't have the M/S function would you have still bought it?

How is it as just a straight EQ?
#26
8th January 2014
Old 8th January 2014
  #26
Lives for gear
 
Earcatcher's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,061

Earcatcher is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by jondoe1972 View Post
If the TK-lizer didn't have the M/S function would you have still bought it?

How is it as just a straight EQ?
It wouldn't work well as an M/S EQ if it weren't a great straight one. I would have bought it when no M/S was on board, but the M/S is a great addition to its versatility. To pull the same trick with a standard stereo EQ calls for quite some inventivity.
#27
9th January 2014
Old 9th January 2014
  #27
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Location: long beach california
Posts: 511

Umulamahri is offline
Dose this eq have a M/S encoder and decoder? so back out its l/r again..
#28
9th January 2014
Old 9th January 2014
  #28
Gear nut
 
Tekay's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 136

Tekay is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umulamahri View Post
Dose this eq have a M/S encoder and decoder? so back out its l/r again..
Yes! You can demo it at VKLA
#29
9th January 2014
Old 9th January 2014
  #29
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Location: long beach california
Posts: 511

Umulamahri is offline
Right on!
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Topic:
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Marrone / So much gear, so little time!
15
Stanley Cole / High end
0
salatspinatra / So much gear, so little time!
2
everyday / So much gear, so little time!
0

Forum Jump

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.