The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Knif Eksa new mastering eq.
Old 10th March 2019
  #151
Lives for gear
 

Feeling good about the outlook.
Old 6th July 2019
  #152
Lives for gear
 
matskull's Avatar
 

Is there no HPF / LPF on the Eksa? I can't seem to see them on the pictures.
Old 6th July 2019
  #153
Lives for gear
 

Stock no, but there is a version for about $1000 more that includes them adding 1u to the height.
Old 7th July 2019
  #154
Lives for gear
 
matskull's Avatar
 

How do you guys deal with mastering an album with an analog eq, and in this case without HPF? Do you find a general settings that works ok for most of the song and then adjust with a digital eq from one song to another without touching the analog EQ or do you do one song, print, take recall notes and then do the next song?

I usually work on most of the song at the same time if you will, I jump from one to another often to make sure they all get really consistent so I'm wondering how you guys do it in the analog world.
Old 8th July 2019
  #155
I always zero the analogue chain for each song, apart from the gain staging. Take recall notes, of course.

I do have a couple of analogue units with HPFs on them but I very rarely use them: personally I think HPFs are massively overused these days, both in mastering and in mixing. Most mixes that come in are already high-passed at a higher frequency than I would have chosen to high-pass them at. When I do use a HPF I generally prefer a digital one to any of my analogue options.
Old 8th July 2019
  #156
Lives for gear
Same here except I'm a big fan of the HPF on the BAX.
Old 8th July 2019
  #157
Lives for gear
 
lowland's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by scraggs View Post
Same here except I'm a big fan of the HPF on the BAX.
As am I.
Old 8th July 2019
  #158
Lives for gear
 
matskull's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hippocratic Mastering View Post
I always zero the analogue chain for each song, apart from the gain staging. Take recall notes, of course.

I do have a couple of analogue units with HPFs on them but I very rarely use them: personally I think HPFs are massively overused these days, both in mastering and in mixing. Most mixes that come in are already high-passed at a higher frequency than I would have chosen to high-pass them at. When I do use a HPF I generally prefer a digital one to any of my analogue options.
The only analog EQ I've used for mastering have been my Bad EQ and Clariphonic, even though the Clariphonic doesn't get much use.

Since they're pretty broad, I usually find one setting that works for most of the songs, nothing too drastic, and leave it as is for the whole album. Any changes that need to be done from song to song are done via digital eq automation.

I'd like to try a more complete eq like the Eksa but having to recall all the songs individually doesn't appeal to me too much...

From what I heard though it seems to sound phenomenal. Would you go with that or a soma first? I really like the detail of this one from the samples I heard. The soma seemed less detailed and a bit fuller in the low mid in comparison
Old 8th July 2019
  #159
Lives for gear
 
matskull's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by scraggs View Post
Same here except I'm a big fan of the HPF on the BAX.
I like how it can make everything feel tighter. Gotta be careful not to overdo it though.
Old 9th July 2019
  #160
mpr
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by matskull View Post
I'd like to try a more complete eq like the Eksa but having to recall all the songs individually doesn't appeal to me too much...
I do mostly EPs and LPs and I've learned to use analog for broad tone shaping and then digital for the deeper corrective moves that will likely encompass later recalls. When one person mixes a record in the same room it is usually easy to find settings that carry over from song to song, but even then little tweaks between songs are usually needed. It becomes more fun knowing that I dont have to document every darn thing I do in the moment.

But if I was jumping thru multiple singles in a day, each with unique analog settings and was expected to recall them at anytime, I think I would be more plugin focused than I am today. Analog recall is a lot of work for the rates most of us make on singles, but album rates make it worth it IMO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by matskull View Post
From what I heard though it seems to sound phenomenal. Would you go with that or a soma first? I really like the detail of this one from the samples I heard. The soma seemed less detailed and a bit fuller in the low mid in comparison
I have a Soma and you are right, less detailed and sharp, but it allows you to make deeper tonal changes with less recall risk because the curves are so musical sounding, and the color / sheen sounds good on everything IMO.

Since it is not as potentially destructive as the Eksa, I would go Soma first, especially since you can get EQuilibrium to sound closer to an Eksa, SPL PQ or Sontec than you can a Soma, Pultec or MA in my experience. But I'm sure some would want the analog scalpel first, so to each their own.
Old 9th July 2019
  #161
I find that 90% of revisions can be done in the digital domain, even if the majority of the processing is analogue. I don't mind the added labour of the very occasional recall, or of recording the settings for every song: the latter can usually be done in the time it takes to capture the processed audio.
Old 9th July 2019
  #162
Lives for gear
 
matskull's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mpr View Post
I do mostly EPs and LPs and I've learned to use analog for broad tone shaping and then digital for the deeper corrective moves that will likely encompass later recalls. When one person mixes a record in the same room it is usually easy to find settings that carry over from song to song, but even then little tweaks between songs are usually needed. It becomes more fun knowing that I dont have to document every darn thing I do in the moment.

But if I was jumping thru multiple singles in a day, each with unique analog settings and was expected to recall them at anytime, I think I would be more plugin focused than I am today. Analog recall is a lot of work for the rates most of us make on singles, but album rates make it worth it IMO.

I have a Soma and you are right, less detailed and sharp, but it allows you to make deeper tonal changes with less recall risk because the curves are so musical sounding, and the color / sheen sounds good on everything IMO.

Since it is not as potentially destructive as the Eksa, I would go Soma first, especially since you can get EQuilibrium to sound closer to an Eksa, SPL PQ or Sontec than you can a Soma, Pultec or MA in my experience. But I'm sure some would want the analog scalpel first, so to each their own.
Good to know I'm not alone feeling that way about recall and effort/rate ratio
That's good to know about the soma, I guess in the end though one might want both, they're a lot of money though.
Old 9th July 2019
  #163
Lives for gear
 
teebaum's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by matskull View Post
How do you guys deal with mastering an album with an analog eq, and in this case without HPF? Do you find a general settings that works ok for most of the song and then adjust with a digital eq from one song to another without touching the analog EQ or do you do one song, print, take recall notes and then do the next song?

I usually work on most of the song at the same time if you will, I jump from one to another often to make sure they all get really consistent so I'm wondering how you guys do it in the analog world.
high pass filters are occasionally useful, but many times a shelf is the better solution.

i always look for the song that is "the center of the album" at the beginning of a production and then check to see which of my hardware devices best match the aesthetics.
very often this is 1 or 2 characterful eqs plus the eksa, which is often used for dipping - sometimes for thickening in the basses and lowmids, rarely for lifting in the upper mids and highs.
for albums that have a certain consistency, i don't put the bands back on the eksa, just turn them off, because the problems can be quite similar from song to song and so i can turn the needed bands back on and fine-adjust them.

Last edited by teebaum; 9th July 2019 at 08:29 PM..
Old 9th July 2019
  #164
Lives for gear
 
matskull's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by teebaum View Post
high pass filters are occasionally useful, but many times a shelf is the better solution.
Like a shelf just a bit higher than the hpf would be?
Old 9th July 2019
  #165
mpr
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by matskull View Post
Like a shelf just a bit higher than the hpf would be?
Not teebaum, but I also shelf a lot more than I HPF and this is one area where soloing the shelf / band in EQuilibrium can help you dial in the low frequency boundary that needs some attenuation (or perhaps a boost). Switching back and forth between the band solo and the broadband you can quickly isolate the low end pressure change and get it right fast.
Old 9th July 2019
  #166
Interesting read here When I started doing Mastering full time 10 years ago, I always choose the more balanced/best sounding mixe of the album to my ears, mastered it, using specific tools (analog and digital) and used it as a reference. Then I zero'ed everything and back to flat before starting the next one. Noting everything on a paper sheet. (I have TON's of recall sheet that I've use just once in a while, but that's great to be able to do a quick "recall than send back" move).

Over the years I've completely changed my workflow on Albums. I'm doing mostly "automated" in the box moves with plugin's for the corrective side, (so using mostly the same tools) and using different analog pieces for the beauty of the sound only. Also now I'm RENDERING a lot more and then move to the next song a lot quicker. Do my thing again, and come back to the previous one. Do some more work on it, more rendering, etc etc.
I'm going back to things within the same sessions whereas before I tried to do my best in the first run.
I find it way more "objective" all in all and I believe my masters have gotten better that way.
Old 9th July 2019
  #167
O and I don't use hpf anymore
Old 10th July 2019
  #168
Lives for gear
 
matskull's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mpr View Post
Not teebaum, but I also shelf a lot more than I HPF and this is one area where soloing the shelf / band in EQuilibrium can help you dial in the low frequency boundary that needs some attenuation (or perhaps a boost). Switching back and forth between the band solo and the broadband you can quickly isolate the low end pressure change and get it right fast.
I really like soloing the bands in equilibrium as well, very useful.

I’ll give the shelf a try instead of a hpf next time.
Old 10th July 2019
  #169
Lives for gear
 
matskull's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by X-Pand Sound Mastering View Post
Interesting read here When I started doing Mastering full time 10 years ago, I always choose the more balanced/best sounding mixe of the album to my ears, mastered it, using specific tools (analog and digital) and used it as a reference. Then I zero'ed everything and back to flat before starting the next one. Noting everything on a paper sheet. (I have TON's of recall sheet that I've use just once in a while, but that's great to be able to do a quick "recall than send back" move).

Over the years I've completely changed my workflow on Albums. I'm doing mostly "automated" in the box moves with plugin's for the corrective side, (so using mostly the same tools) and using different analog pieces for the beauty of the sound only. Also now I'm RENDERING a lot more and then move to the next song a lot quicker. Do my thing again, and come back to the previous one. Do some more work on it, more rendering, etc etc.
I'm going back to things within the same sessions whereas before I tried to do my best in the first run.
I find it way more "objective" all in all and I believe my masters have gotten better that way.
That’s similar to my approach, I was never really good to nail the first past so I ended up waisting a lot of time re-printing with a better setting.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hippocratic Mastering View Post
I always zero the analogue chain for each song, apart from the gain staging. Take recall notes, of course.

I do have a couple of analogue units with HPFs on them but I very rarely use them: personally I think HPFs are massively overused these days, both in mastering and in mixing. Most mixes that come in are already high-passed at a higher frequency than I would have chosen to high-pass them at. When I do use a HPF I generally prefer a digital one to any of my analogue options.
100%
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump