Good all around analog EQ for tracking?

[RIZ Records]

Whats up guys, ive gotton some great help in my other thread about tube boxes, and i wanted to see if i can get some opinions on a great all around outboard EQ for tracking on the way in. Something that would be good on everything like synths, drums,bass,ect, and good in all the frequency ranges. The gear i've decided on is pretty much the following


Vintech 273 or Aurora Audio GTQmkIII - Solid State Pre-Amp/DI for tracking/recording drums, synths,guitar,ect,



Universal Audio 2-610 - Tube Pre-Amp/DI for tracking/recording drums, synths,guitar,ect, when i want the tube flavor instead of solid state.


Distressor Stereo Pair w Brit Mod - Compression/saturation,ect



I know that the Vintech, Aurora Audio, and UA 2-610 have some EQ on them, but i want a seperate analog 4 band EQ that saturates,ect. Ive read that the Manley Massive Passive is great, the API's are great, ect, but i havent really gotton that may opinions. Im leaning towards the Massive Passive, but im not sure. I dont want to spend more than about $3500 for a used model, and it has to be a stereo pair. I plan on mixing with the new SSL plug-ins once my stuff is tracked and recorded.


What would you guys recommend? Thanks a lot!

[RIZ Records]

Any recommendations?

Should i post this in the "High End" section?

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Any recommendations?

Should i post this in the "High End" section?

Get the Massive Passive EQ.thumbsup

Pass on the Vintech and UA 2-610.

If you really need a Tube pre for synths look into the Tubetech Mic pre.

(Message sent from the Hi End section).

[RIZ Records]

Thanks Thrill, why pass on the Vintech? Is Aurora Audio better? I want a neve based solid state DI, and tube DI,


So the Tube Tech MP 1A is definetly more phatter/tubey, than the UA- 2-610? I want it for synths, keyboards, drums, guitar, bass,ect, an all around unit. As you can tell im producing commercial hip-hop

Thanks Thrill!

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Thanks Thrill, why pass on the Vintech? Is Aurora Audio better? I want a neve based solid state DI, and tube DI,

Yes its better.

Or look at one of the Brent Averill Neve clones.

The Vintech always leaves me lacking.

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

So the Tube Tech MP 1A is definetly more phatter/tubey, than the UA- 2-610? I want it for synths, keyboards, drums, guitar, bass,ect, an all around unit. As you can tell im producing commercial hip-hop

Thanks Thrill!

Yes its butterry.

Sometimes a little too much for my taste but it never sounds like its not enough.

[RIZ Records]

Thanks Thrill,


Would you be able to exaplain the difference in sound of the UA 2-610 and the Tube Tech MP1A? Like which one has a bigger sound, more colour/saturation, more low end bass,ect? Which would give me more options,ect?


Im definetly going to pick up an Aurora Audio, Distressors, and Massive Passive.


Thx!

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Thanks Thrill,


Would you be able to exaplain the difference in sound of the UA 2-610 and the Tube Tech MP1A? Like which one has a bigger sound, more colour/saturation, more low end bass,ect? Which would give me more options,ect?


Im definetly going to pick up an Aurora Audio, Distressors, and Massive Passive.


Thx!

With the UA 610 you have to be careful how hard you hit it.

I've used it maybe 2 times and wasn't impressed.

The MP1A i've used a ton over the years and it has a strong vibe.

You definitely hear the "toobiness".

It sounds good for direct bass, guitars and keys.

On vocals with the wrong mic its too much with the right mic its butter.

[RIZ Records]

Thanks Thrill, would the tube tech work well on drums if i didnt want to go solid state?



Also, are you familiar with the Fender Twin Reverb original silverface from 1973 with the master volume? There is a guy in my area selling one, and i was thinking about getting the new fender 65' reissue, but im guessing the vintage one would sound a lot better. I want to run guitars, rhodes, clavs, organs, ethnic plucks, thorugh it and record it with a Royer R 121 Mic. What do you think Thrill?

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Thanks Thrill, would the tube tech work well on drums if i didnt want to go solid state?

Its a nice option.

You can also look into a Telefunken mic pre as well.

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Also, are you familiar with the Fender Twin Reverb original silverface from 1973 with the master volume? There is a guy in my area selling one, and i was thinking about getting the new fender 65' reissue, but im guessing the vintage one would sound a lot better. I want to run guitars, rhodes, clavs, organs, ethnic plucks, thorugh it and record it with a Royer R 121 Mic. What do you think Thrill?

I think this question you should post in the So much gear forumn.

You would get more and better opinions, but off the bat i can tell you that it sounds like a great idea.

I love the sound of keys micd through amps.thumbsup

I wish people would do it more often these days.

It gives the keys sounds much more depth than just recording direct.

[RIZ Records]

Thanks a TON Thrill! I will post that amp question in that section of the forum.


I have my eye on a used Tube Tech MP1A, but its 9 years old. Would this be a bad idea, and would the tubes need to be replaced or something? I need at least 5 years out of this thing. Thanks!

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Thanks a TON Thrill! I will post that amp question in that section of the forum.


I have my eye on a used Tube Tech MP1A, but its 9 years old. Would this be a bad idea, and would the tubes need to be replaced or something? I need at least 5 years out of this thing. Thanks!

Personally i wouldn't sweat it as long as it was well looked after.

I've switched the tubes on a CL1B(which i highly recommend with Mullards) but have never tried it on the mic pre.

It maybe worth a shot though.

I would look at some NOS Mullards and or Tele.

[RIZ Records]

Okay great, Thx a lot for your help! I just didnt want the tubes to go bad, or need replacing for a while, since the unit it about 9 years old.


Since were talking can i ask you another question?


I was researching kick drum mics that really catch the low end bass, and i read the AKG D12 and D112, are good for this. Which is the best model in your opinion for this? And would i need a couple of mics for different areas of the kick?


P.S. Thrill, do you mind if i ask this question? Massive Passive VS Great River EQ-1NV?






Thx!

[Sirocco]

Great River EQ-1NV thumbsup

[RIZ Records]

Just pushing this up for Thrill.


I was doing tons of reading and im going to get a Mini Massive when it comes out, possibly, or mabye a Massive Passive later to compliment the EQ im going to buy now.



But for now i think im going to go with either the Great River EQ-2NV, or a pair of LIL FREQ's. Most likely the Great River because ive read it will work best on most things.


Would the Great River EQ-2NV sound good with the Aurora Audio GTQmkIII and the Distressors?


Thx for the help.

[lucey]

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Would the Great River EQ-2NV sound good with the Aurora Audio GTQmkIII and the Distressors?


Thx for the help.

Sure it will be 'good'. Will it be 'great' is up to you.

Are you using a dynamic mic or a condenser? Do you want a clean vocal or some color?



There is a glut of great gear out there ... have fun thumbsup

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Just pushing this up for Thrill.


I was doing tons of reading and im going to get a Mini Massive when it comes out, possibly, or mabye a Massive Passive later to compliment the EQ im going to buy now.

Personally i wouldn't.

Its the mids on the Massive Passive that makes it such a great EQ.

The min Massive is the hi's and lows which to me are the MP weakest pont.

Also it was originally designed for the mastering guys who complained about what i said above.

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

But for now i think im going to go with either the Great River EQ-2NV, or a pair of LIL FREQ's. Most likely the Great River because ive read it will work best on most things.

I've tried both(i own a Great River EQ and will buy a Lil Freq later this year).


I would still lean toward the Massive Passive though.


These EQ's are good but the Massive P is unique.


But i own one already so its easy for me to say that.

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Would the Great River EQ-2NV sound good with the Aurora Audio GTQmkIII and the Distressors?


Thx for the help.

I am sure it would sound great.


As long as the music is happening.

[RIZ Records]

Hey Lucey, i'll be using a Royer R-121 ribbon mic, SM57,ect, but im not recording vocals. Im recording through an Fender amp, like running organs, keys, guitars,ect, though it and miking it up.


But im mosly using this EQ for tracking/ tweaking on the way in, like drums, synths, bass,ect. I want to definetly add some nice colour and saturation with it aswell.



Thanks Thrill, I'll definetly pick up a Massive Passive in the future, but from what ive read the Great River EQ might be better suited for an everything tracking EQ, and its about half the price.


I know alot of people like Distressors, but do they sound as phat as everybody says? Better than a UA 1176? for phatness and saturation/colour?

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Thanks Thrill, I'll definetly pick up a Massive Passive in the future, but from what ive read the Great River EQ might be better suited for an everything tracking EQ.

Well i own both and you didn't hear it from me.

I think its a little redundant if you are getting the Aurora Audio to have similar EQ's.

Also without the trannies in the Great River micpre the EQ by itself is a little too clean sometimes.

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

I know alot of people like Distressors, but do they sound as phat as everybody says?

The Distressors sound as fat as the fat sounds put through it.

[RIZ Records]

Thrill, well i definetly dont want to sound underground or sound too dirty or too clean, i want to sound clean and clear, but vintage at the same time, and have some warmness,but not too much. I dont want bite others people style, but i love the sound of Dre and Storch mixes. I want to create my own sound, but based on that vibe. I know they mix on SSL boards. Im going to get that new SSL Duende as thats probabbly the closest thing SSL im goign to get other than the real thing. But i want the tracking gear to be nice and phat, and really colour, saturate, and change the sound, in a nice big, phat, beefy, warmish, vintage, clear, detaled way, where im not lacking in subs, lows, mids, highs,ect.


Ive read that the Massive Passive isnt that great on lows and highs, but great on mids. Is this true? Wouldnt the Great River EQ be better for the lows and highs? I cant afford both at the moment. I like a nice fat low end, but i dont want to be lacking in the mids or highs either. I agree that its kind of redundent having similar EQ's, but i dont want the Msssive to have me lacking on the lows or highs. I start off with good sounds, but i really want to take them over the top. Ive heard before and after records that were mixed on SSL,'s and the SSL's didnt really change the sound too much. So i want the outboard gear that will.


You said the Distressor is only as phat as the sounds you put in it. So it doesnt sound like it really beefs up and phattens you drums, synths, bass ect.. What would be the compressor that would do this job?

Thanks for the help Thrill!

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Thrill, well i definetly dont want to sound underground or sound too dirty or too clean, i want to sound clean and clear, but vintage at the same time. I dont want bite others people style, but i love the sound of Dre and Storch mixes.

So does everyone.

But there is alot involved there besides the gear.

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Ive read that the Massive Passive isnt that great on lows and highs, but great on mids. Is this true? Wouldnt the Great River EQ be better for the lows and highs? I cant afford both at the moment. I like a nice fat low end, but i dont want to be lacking in the mids or highs either.

Well i typed above that its considered its weakpoints.

But i will tell you that my go to EQ when mixing bass these days is the Massive Passive.

And its my first choice for mixing vocals.


Again if you are getting the Aurora Audio mic pre that has an EQ, i would suggest to by the MP EQ to go with it.

But what do i know?

Its just one opinion.

My best advice is to check them out for yourself or buy from someone that will let you do that and return the one you don't want.

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

You said the Distressor is only as phat as the sounds you put in it. So it doesnt sound like it really beefs up and phattens you drums, synths, bass ect.. What would be the compressor that would do this job?

No compressor does that.


And i've just about heard and tried them all.


Again my opinion.


What you hear on a record as a fat tone is a combination of things, the compressor sometimes being part of it.


If you really want something unique and want fatter tones buy an analog multitrack.


My 2 cents.

[RIZ Records]

Thanks a lot Thrill.


So im probabbly going to go with the Massive Passive then, since it great for mids, and your using it on bass so it must be great on the lows right for phat low end bass on a kick drum or bass sound?


Would the EQ on the Aurora Audio be good for the high's?


If i had only one choice for a multi-purpose compressor when tracking, would the Distressor be your recommendation?



Lastely, what would be a good Analog MultiTrack thats not too expensive? If i had one of these would i still record into Cubase SX3?


Thanks for helping me out and answering all my questions.

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Thanks a lot Thrill.

thumbsup

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

So im probabbly going to go with the Massive Passive then, since it great for mids, and your using it on bass so it must be great on the lows right for phat low end bass on a kick drum or bass sound?

Yes but i rarely use it for kicks.

I got a feeling the Aurora EQ will be good enough though.

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Would the EQ on the Aurora Audio be good for the high's?

I don't see why not.

On the MP EQ hi's thing, up to 10K- 12K its really nice.

Its just the air freqs that get tricky.

And you rarely go that hi.

On most records these days the hi's are not the problem.

To me its the mids and lows.

One takes a great approach the other takes great monitoring and taste.

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

If i had only one choice for a multi-purpose compressor when tracking, would the Distressor be your recommendation?.

The Distressor is a good choice even though its rarely my first choice for anything.

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Lastely, what would be a good Analog MultiTrack thats not too expensive? If i had one of these would i still record into Cubase SX3?


Thanks for helping me out and answering all my questions.

Look around.

I've seen alot of Studers, Ampex MM1200 and Otaris for sale lately.

I think between $2K and $3.5K you can find a professional and great sounding machine.

[RIZ Records]

Thanks Thrill i appreciate all your help, one last question. What is your EQ for kicks?

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Thanks Thrill i appreciate all your help, one last question. What is your EQ for kicks?

My favorite answer:

It depends.

I don't have just one.

I rarely mix a Kick or snare with one EQ anyway.

But that works for me.

I would say the usual suspects: API's, SSL Black EQ, Langs and Pultecs, GML 8200, once in a while a Neve EQ(in the future the Lil Freq).

You know for the longest i've been wanting to try the Great River EQ for this but its always used in the mix for me on acoustic guitars.

[RIZ Records]

Thanks a lot Thrill, can i hear one of your new hip-hop mixes?

[lucey]

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Hey Lucey, i'll be using a Royer R-121 ribbon mic, SM57,ect, but im not recording vocals. Im recording through an Fender amp, like running organs, keys, guitars,ect, though it and miking it up.

okay ...

But im mosly using this EQ for tracking/ tweaking on the way in, like drums, synths, bass,ect. I want to definetly add some nice colour and saturation with it aswell.

Chandler TG2 = brown, Germanium = vox/hiwatt with a fuzz pedal (if driven)

Thanks Thrill, I'll definetly pick up a Massive Passive in the future, but from what ive read the Great River EQ might be better suited for an everything tracking EQ, and its about half the price.

Chandler Germ eq with TG2

I know alot of people like Distressors, but do they sound as phat as everybody says? Better than a UA 1176? for phatness and saturation/colour?

Purple MC76 (MC77)

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

Thanks a lot Thrill, can i hear one of your new hip-hop mixes?

New Hiphop/rap?

Are you nuts?

I've mixed this year maybe 2 hiphop projects and they were mix CD's which is more like mastering.

This year its been mostly all rock and a little R&B/pop thrown here and there.

Unless its something revolutionary or really interesting i doubt if i will be doing any hiphop/rap soon.

Its too static and boring these days.

[RIZ Records]

LOL, thanks for the reply Thrill.


I just wanted to ask you a question because Lucey mentioned a Purple Audio MC67/MC77.


First off which one is better the 67 or 77?


And how do they compare to the Distressors? Whats the difference?


The Distressor is going to be my first choice most likely, but im prob going to pick up some Purple Audio's as my second compressor, so i figure i'll ask about it now. Hope you dont mind, and thanks!

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

LOL, thanks for the reply Thrill.


I just wanted to ask you a question because Lucey mentioned a Purple Audio MC67/MC77.


First off which one is better the 67 or 77?

That's 76 or 77.

Same sound with the exception of a true stereo link switch and side chain i believe.

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

And how do they compare to the Distressors? Whats the difference?

These are designed after the 1176 and its a compressor that definitely has a certain sonic signature.

I have one and a pair of Distressors with the brit mods.

They each have their place in a production.

I would say the MC76/77 is a piece i would definitely reach for first, but when it doesn't work it is not as versatile as a Distressor.

The Distressor can be described as a great second choice when your first are taken.

If versatility is desired than go with the Distressor.

If you need a definite signature than the MC76/77 is a good choice.

Originally Posted by RIZ Records

The Distressor is going to be my first choice most likely, but im prob going to pick up some Purple Audio's as my second compressor, so i figure i'll ask about it now. Hope you dont mind, and thanks!

If the Distressor or MC76/77 is your first choice i would go something totally the opposite as my second such as a UA LA2A or Tubetech CL1B(change the tubes).

You'll cover more bases and you'll have more distinctive sounds this way.

[RIZ Records]

Thx Thrill for the help and advice. I wish i was able to hear what the Purple Audio sounds like, and how it colurs/saturates the sound. Basically i'll only have one multi-purpose compressor for tracking/saturation on the way in, and i dont know what th Purple Audio sounds like to tell if its something i would want to use all the time. Ive read good and bad about the Distressors, like it lacks tone,ect, and some people go elsewhere for a phat kick,ect. I want my tracks to be very clear, detailed, saturated, and phat. Kinda vintage and warm sounding. I know its all in the user, but i want the ability to do that. From what ive heard and read tracking makes the bigger difference in sound than mixing, since a lot of hip-hop guys just use the SSL for mixing mostly, and the SSL doesnt really change your sound too much.


Thx again for the help Thrill!