Speck EQ vs Midas Venice EQ

[rids]

This might be for the Low end, but I was wondering how the EQs compare between the onboard Midas Venice mixer EQs to Speck's ASC-T. I was thinking about getting a Venice for the EQ. I've heard the pres are really nice, but I'll have my higher end outboard pres to use instead. (Comment on the Venice pres if so inclined, I'd still like to hear about those too)

Do you think buying a lower end mixer like the Mackie Onyx or Allen Heath WZ3 + a couple Speck ASC-Ts would be better than a Midas Venice? I was thinking the former would be a decent setup and give me money left over to spend on something else (but let's not focus on the something else now). Any opinions?

[rids]

No one's used them both? What about the Venice Eqs? Anyone?

[indie]

I've not heard the Specks, but I have a Venice which I love. The eq's are NOT subtle....turn it a little and you hear it. Great eq's on drums and electric gtrs.

[squeegybug]

I've not used the Venice, they are specified as having the Klark-Teknik/Midas XL3 equalizer and preamp. I have had the stereo rackmount version of Midas XL4 EQ/Preamp here for quite a while, as well as a couple of Speck ASC-T.

These KT/Midas products are very robust, easy to get a clear, powerful sound. A little goes a long way, the tonal changes are easy to hear and do not get edgy. Compared directly to Speck, I find the XL4 eq sometimes can be a little "rounder". Whereas I usually prefer the way the Speck keeps more of the original texture and detail of the music. Depends on what you are mixing I guess.

IMO the Specks also sound better when boosting than the Midas, especially with the simulated inductor bands. But the ASC doesn't have a high shelf and this XL4 version EQ does (switchable to bell). I find the ASC treble filter is broad enough that I don't miss having it as pure shelving, in fact I've come to prefer it. For detailed cuts, Midas has finer resolution available with a bandwidth down to .1 octave. Speck minimum is .25 octave.

They both can be nice. Based strictly on purity of sound and speed of getting the tone control I want, I choose Speck. But if I needed a mixer or channel strips I wouldn't hesitate to get KT/Midas.

Steve

[el cochino]

Another major difference is the lack of bandwidth control on the mid bands of the Venice eq and it has fixed hi and lo shelf frequencies. It's a very musical, although agressive sounding eq, but it's not surgical.

[Clueless]

I bought a Venice because nothing coming through the Mackie sounded good to me. Venice was night-and-day better. I bought a pair of Speck EQs to give me more EQ control than the Venice offered. I wound up hardly using them. My lesson:

1. Your first $ should go to getting the overall sound right. Venice will do that. Others? Nosomuch.

2. Your second $ should go to augmenting what your first dollars missed.

If you get the Speck first and try to control the Mackie, it's like trying to put a wine charm on a soaking wet paper towel. Get a glass first, drink it down, then get the charm.

[kurtr2]

i own a midas venice and also a speck ASC-T eq. although i have not compared them directly, i would comment that the speck is more surgical, the midas perhaps a bit more musical, although limited. i find the speck to excel in the lows and low mids, but the highs are a bit brittle to my ears. the midas has excellent mids, like someone said for electric guitars its good, very meaty mids, a good rock eq. but for things like horns or vocals or bass the midas eq is lacking in a certain maturity, or depth and control. and lacks the flexibility in the bass and highs since they are shelved.
if i were to buy an outboard eq to work with the midas (which is actually what i just did) i would get an api 550a. that thing just blows away both the midas and the speck, beautiful highs, beautiful lows, punchy baeutiful mids. a real marked improvement in sound. amazing. the speck doesnt get you much farther than the midas. save your money and get the high quality stuff, you'll be much happier.

[rids]

So as for budget, what do you guys think about getting a Allen and Heath Mixwizard with a high end EQ like the API or the new Chandler EQ? (That is, if the Midas and Speck are kind of mid level EQs) I know some people have reservations about getting really nice mixers, but for the budget minded, I'm wondering if I could get away with having a decent mixer and really nice outboard pres and EQs. The mixer would just be for summing. I just brought up the Midas question to get a ballpark of where the pres and EQs lie with the competion.

[soupking]

Hi rids,

Personally, I own a Midas Venice 160. I'm what would probably be considered a serious prosumer luddite converted gearslut so my opinion probably isn't that exact of a science.

However, I can tell you that I am very satisfied with the 5-band EQ's on the Venice. There's practically more than I can handle. I can't imagine buying an EQ at this stage. This thing has a lot of ins/outs for mixing outside the box, and I'm thrilled it gives me 48v pre's on each channel.

I'm not dissatisfied with my purchase at all. If I upgrade to another console, I'll consider the 320.

Peace,
-soupking

[squeegybug]

Originally Posted by rids

if the Midas and Speck are kind of mid level EQs

I've had plenty of "mid-level" equalizers -- Rane, Alesis, ART, Ashly, dbx, Focusrite, Mackie, Allen & Heath, etc. Speck is far above these.

I've had Speck side by side with Midas/KT XL4 and DN410, Vintech X73i, Drawmer 1961, Pendulum Quartet II and SPS-1, Manley Massive Passive. Speck holds its own, and was better in many cases to me.

I've made sample comparisons between Speck and Great River, Fearn, and ISA 110. Here are a couple, as originally posted on Lynn's 3DAudio site:

Great_River_Vocal
Speck_Vocal

Fearn_Guitar
Speck_Guitar

And these are not trivial curves. The GR/Speck vocal samples were set as:
+6 @ 180 Hz
+12 @ 10 kHz

The Fearn/Speck guitar samples were:
+6 @ 100 Hz
-6 @ 500 Hz
+10 @ 12 kHz

I've said before, how can an EQ be "surgical" if the tightest bandwidth setting is 1/4 octave? That is where the ASC is. I think it is a nice, pure device that allows the music to keep the hair, instead of polishing it up beyond recognition.

Steve

[Jim vanBergen]

Yeah, this is low end, but it's gear and eq philosophy as well.

I own two Speck ASCs and a T. I often use Venice, Verona, and H3000 consoles by Midas. I know them all quite well.

Personally, I think the Speck blows away the Venice and Verona, but the H3000 EQ has more flexibility than the Speck ASC, the Speck TRANSFORMER has a nicer vibe to it.

With practive, you can easily find what you need on either a Venice or Speck EQ. Both are valueable, useful EQs. The Venice is too limited for my taste, but can do the job much of the time.

You can make any of these tools work to your ends, IMHO. I like the Speck's sweepable outer bands as aopposed to fixed frequencies on the Venice. But you can often make it work anyway, just not always. Ergo, a matter of taste.

[Pohaku]

Originally Posted by squeegybug

I've not used the Venice, they are specified as having the Klark-Teknik/Midas XL3 equalizer and preamp. I have had the stereo rackmount version of Midas XL4 EQ/Preamp here for quite a while, as well as a couple of Speck ASC-T.

These KT/Midas products are very robust, easy to get a clear, powerful sound. A little goes a long way, the tonal changes are easy to hear and do not get edgy. Compared directly to Speck, I find the XL4 eq sometimes can be a little "rounder". Whereas I usually prefer the way the Speck keeps more of the original texture and detail of the music. Depends on what you are mixing I guess.

IMO the Specks also sound better when boosting than the Midas, especially with the simulated inductor bands. But the ASC doesn't have a high shelf and this XL4 version EQ does (switchable to bell). I find the ASC treble filter is broad enough that I don't miss having it as pure shelving, in fact I've come to prefer it. For detailed cuts, Midas has finer resolution available with a bandwidth down to .1 octave. Speck minimum is .25 octave.

They both can be nice. Based strictly on purity of sound and speed of getting the tone control I want, I choose Speck. But if I needed a mixer or channel strips I wouldn't hesitate to get KT/Midas.

Steve

My memory may be failing me (and I'm too lazy to look), but doesn't the new 500 form factor ASC-T have high shelf? If that is important to you, you might want to look at this version of the ASC.