thoughts on api 5500

[mike vee]

I had the BAX EQ for a while, and then changed to the API 5500 (which i had to sell when my car got messed up)

Anyway, I like the 5500 heaps more. Everything that went through it just sounded better. I was using it with the .5DB steps to bring out flattering freqs on the 2 bus. The high end did NOT sound crispy or harsh at all, it sounded great.

However, if ALL you wanted was a shimmering high, the bax is probably better, but its VERY subtle. i found that when i boosted the low and high some with the bax, i also wanted to peak out some mids a bit which you cannot do with the BAX.

Also check the clarphonic EQ..but it's not stepped so that kinda sucks.

[SoSueMe]

Don't use it for mastering but I wouldn't call the highs harsh, and I sometimes do some heavy boosts/cuts.

[Night Stalker]

thanks for the replies guys,

more, are of coarse, always welcome here

[SoSueMe]

Originally Posted by Night Stalker

thanks for the replies guys,

more, are of coarse, always welcome here

If you post some short wav files here that are 9.5 megs or less each, I can post back some examples.

[TonyBelmont]

I like the 5500 a lot. It's a much more versatile EQ than any other API unit..

[matteo_mp]

I had only good results from my 5500.
10-12 k can be harsh, but I think it's the same with every EQ.
To add shimmering and brightness usually I work on 15k and 20k.
Anyway the lows are really tight, and everything is going there comes out better.

[evilrocker]

Its a multi machine, i use it for both tracking and mixing. Not harsh at all.

[Doc Mixwell]

Originally Posted by Night Stalker

Thinking of buying an api 5500 for 2 buss/multi purpose duties. I have noticed that these units often pop up for sale so does it mean that there are mixed thoughts on these units?

I like the stepped features etc but I'm concerned about some comments about the highs being a bit spiky/harsh. Do any of you use the 5500 for mastering applications especially the 10-12k region and how do you like it?

Alternatives may be A-designs eq's or the dangerous bax eq....so many out there actually. Any thoughts would be kindly appreciated.

I can't say I find the top on the API 5500 "spikey", or harsh in any way. API gear is pretty "pointy" sounding in the mid's to me in general, but its got a really cool thicker appeal, and forward moving mojo/density in the low regions of the spectrum. Awesome mid range detail with all the API gear across the board. But I think the top on the 5500 is natural and airy to me, with a easy on the ears tone/opaqueness. It allows you to really open up the windows on a mix nicely.

The 5500 is a proportional equalizer design, so the degree of boost and cut narrow or widen the Q shape. It gets narrower as you increase the boost and cut. To my ear, it has a very atmospheric, "3D" sound to it, with a great weight and heft that feels really nice. It has what I would consider a "tightening" quality, a sort of "wrenching" where you can "grip" and "screw" things into place extremely well, without losing the punch and tone on the sound.

I would also suggest checking out the Great River EQ2NV, because that unit is another classy beast for a lotta things. It has a great range, and offers great tone shaping, but is super awesome on the clarity/focus/detail thing, and also warm and inviting too. I would say this equalizer can handle pretty much anything you throw its way. I love it for bass, but would patch any mid range instrument into it, anywhere anytime for any style of music. It kills me on bass though. The Bottom Depth and image is scary. If you want an "all duties workhorse", the EQ2NV is sick.

[Night Stalker]

Thanks heaps to all
I appreciate the time taken and suggestion of me posting audio examples. Also, very much appreciate the lengthy reply and yes, the great river is one on my list perhaps soon but the API is cheaper atm.

[KennyS]

I love mine. I use it while tracking because the 5500 has the percentage selector so you can tame it down a bit if you want. Usually mine just sits on my mix buss adding a little air, and no I have never heard it sound anywhere near harsh. It's an awesome unit that can bring a little to every track your working on.

Cheers,
KennyS

[toys4noise]

The 5500 is the most flexible API eq, the standalone unit having the function to increase the point on the curve or make it really broad really helps with the usability of the unit.

I think it's great.

[Night Stalker]

Cool thanks heaps to all that chimed in,
I have narrowed it down to two units, the a-designs hammer and the api 5500 and hopefully comparing the two soon, if anyone has both then what are the strengths/weaknesses of either.

many more thanks and hugs

[Helge]

Hi,

wanna give this one a bump with a probably stupid question, but since I don´t know anything about circuitry:

Do the Q-curves change with the different (1- 0,5- 0,25-)modes ?

Means - if you boost one band 4dB in mode 1 (2 clicks) is it the very same thing q-wise as boosting 4dB in mode 0,5 (4 clicks) ?
Or is the Q more narrow in mode 0,5 ?
Hope this makes any sense to somebody.

BTW which one did you get in the end Night Stalker ?
cheers helge

[SoSueMe]

Originally Posted by Helge

Hi,

wanna give this one a bump with a probably stupid question, but since I don´t know anything about circuitry:

Do the Q-curves change with the different (1- 0,5- 0,25-)modes ?

Means - if you boost one band 4dB in mode 1 (2 clicks) is it the very same thing q-wise as boosting 4dB in mode 0,5 (4 clicks) ?
Or is the Q more narrow in mode 0,5 ?
Hope this makes any sense to somebody.

BTW which one did you get in the end Night Stalker ?
cheers helge

AFAIK they do not change. The Q setting follows after the boost/cut, so whatever boost/cut value it sees, the Q will change based on that, not on the range setting. In other words, the dynamic Q "circuit" doesn't see the range; it only sees the actual boost/cut.

[RCM - Ronan]

Originally Posted by Night Stalker

Cool thanks heaps to all that chimed in,
I have narrowed it down to two units, the a-designs hammer and the api 5500 and hopefully comparing the two soon, if anyone has both then what are the strengths/weaknesses of either.

The 5500 is a wonderful EQ. I used it a bunch on two buss duties for a couple months. There are some other things I like a bit better, but would NEVER complain about having the 5500 for stereo EQ duties.

If you are thinking of Hammer vs 5500: The Hammer will have a more open sound and be a much better tool if you want your buss EQ to add air and space and generally sound more lush. If you want the EQ to add punch and balls the API would be a better choice. The API is a tighter sounding EQ, the Hammer is a more open sounding EQ.

[Helge]

Originally Posted by SoSueMe

AFAIK they do not change. The Q setting follows after the boost/cut, so whatever boost/cut value it sees, the Q will change based on that, not on the range setting. In other words, the dynamic Q "circuit" doesn't see the range; it only sees the actual boost/cut.

Thanks alot - good explanation!

[evilrocker]

Originally Posted by RCM - Ronan

The 5500 is a wonderful EQ. I used it a bunch on two buss duties for a couple months. There are some other things I like a bit better, but would NEVER complain about having the 5500 for stereo EQ duties.

If you are thinking of Hammer vs 5500: The Hammer will have a more open sound and be a much better tool if you want your buss EQ to add air and space and generally sound more lush. If you want the EQ to add punch and balls the API would be a better choice. The API is a tighter sounding EQ, the Hammer is a more open sounding EQ.

That's why I use 5500 and Nail on my 2bus, the Api for punch and balls and the Nail for air, depth, wide image etc. :D Best of both worlds.