The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
mastering eq comparison test Dynamics Processors (HW)
Old 4 weeks ago
  #1
Lives for gear
 
teebaum's Avatar
mastering eq comparison test

thom wettstein and I have compared a few eq's to each other.

next to my eq's

knif soma
knif eksa
gyraf g23-s
tube tech hlt2am
api 5500 (with inward connection and scott liebers red dot opamps)

we also had the tegeler creme and the fredenstein f610.

we focused on high- and lowshelfs - so it was quite difficult to match, because the eq's have quite different shelf curves.

click here for the report in german

High-End Mastering Equalizer im Vergleich. Dicke Basse & seidige Hohen

(try DeepL Translator
the result is surprisingly useful)

and here is the youtube video

YouTube

90% are sound samples, you can skip our spoken parts without problems, the exciting ones are the sound samples, which you can also download in high resolution here

Dropbox - EQ Files Echochamber-Mondstein 2018.zip Moonstone%202018.zip?dl=1

for me, each of my eq's has its own strengths, but they don't always show up on this material - you have different ones to choose the right one according to the source material.
the two guests tegeler creme and especially the f610 in my opinion don't play in the same league.

have fun listening!
Old 4 weeks ago
  #2
Gear Maniac
 
B Elgin's Avatar
 

Thanks to you both for making the effort for this nice comparison. The F610 without color immediately sounded the most flat and different, despite relatively close visual curve matching. With color sounded nicer to me but still lacking. The Creme also felt kind of boring and the low end size/thunder was underwhelming for a Pultec-inspired filter. Maybe I didn't give them a fair chance since I'm going off the YouTube video amd headphones...will check the audio in the studio another time. Anyway this is no revelation but a nice reminder about the degree of feeling, depth and dynamics that remain untold by frequency plots.

The TubeTech low shelf was nice in this example with a good balance of size and punch, and a definite lack of softness overall. The highs remind me a bit of a nicer Massive Passive, maybe with more sparkle. Interesting sound that could be magic on dull mixes.

I'm looking forward to getting my G23-S. It's really something to have those two sounds available from the same box, plus the unique tilt.

Your 5500 with opamps swapped is certainly nice. It's great to hear how it still holds its own against EQs costing 2-3x as much. I'm actually really happy with Nebula programs when I want that type of more forward, direct and tight sound.

Eksa seems interesting for precision work or bringing forward details, would like to hear more - especially tidying up mids or with air or deep low boosting. Or perhaps not since I can't afford one yet.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #3
Lives for gear
 
JP__'s Avatar
 

Verified Member
The F610 with and without color (which obvious much too much for most mastering duties imho) is not the class of the others, unfortunately. As is the Cream.
The Soma is king here, best compromise of definition and body.
The G23-T isnt my cup of tea here (once again) and feels quite colored in this comparisson. The G23-S fits better, but still lacks what makes the Soma such as great here. It shares some similarities with the Eksa here (which seems to need a great tube EQ as a counterpart to me).
The 5500 is cool as always, but even with the smoother Opamps a kind of too "rockish" with a something strange behaviour in the lowest octave (must be the transformers).
The TT does not really shines here to me; a bit glassy/hard in the highs, but strangely also lacking definition/sounding a tidy bit cloudy in a way.

Thanks for uploading those files. Such comparisons are never easy to do and always just shows a small window, of course.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #4
Gear Addict
 

Thank you for this.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #5
Lives for gear
 
teebaum's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by JP__ View Post
The F610 with and without color (which obvious much too much for most mastering duties imho) is not the class of the others, unfortunately. As is the Cream.
The Soma is king here, best compromise of definition and body.
The G23-T isnt my cup of tea here (once again) and feels quite colored in this comparisson. The G23-S fits better, but still lacks what makes the Soma such as great here. It shares some similarities with the Eksa here (which seems to need a great tube EQ as a counterpart to me).
The 5500 is cool as always, but even with the smoother Opamps a kind of too "rockish" with a something strange behaviour in the lowest octave (must be the transformers).
The TT does not really shines here to me; a bit glassy/hard in the highs, but strangely also lacking definition/sounding a tidy bit cloudy in a way.

Thanks for uploading those files. Such comparisons are never easy to do and always just shows a small window, of course.
i share your impressions to a large extent, but since i work with the eq's on a daily basis, i of course have another view and see strengths that are not valid on this song now.

the two gyraf-files only show a small aspect of the eq, which is first of all a tilt-eq and for me has the most incredible midband control of all times.
butter-soft 2k - who can do that? but also general lowering of the middle of the g23 can be extremely helpful.
but it's true, he doesn't have the magic of knif devices on "s" and "t" is often a bit too much of a good thing, can also make it spongy - which is sometimes also good for too hard, digital material.
the sum of these features makes the g23 so good.
sometimes the gyraf on "t" is something like a tape machine for me and he even "replaced" the tape machine on a mix that i had both digitally and on tape (studer a80 mark2), bringing the good aspects to the digital mix, but looking better in other aspects - of course this can also be the other way round.

the knifs are almost unreachable, great devices, i love them - and the eksa hasn't even been able to play out its strengths here yet.

an api is an api and only an api can be an api - that's why I love him.

that the tubetech doesn't shine that way here is also clear to me, but who has one knows why he has this eq and when he fits.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #6
Lives for gear
 
teebaum's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by B Elgin View Post
Thanks to you both for making the effort for this nice comparison. The F610 without color immediately sounded the most flat and different, despite relatively close visual curve matching. With color sounded nicer to me but still lacking. The Creme also felt kind of boring and the low end size/thunder was underwhelming for a Pultec-inspired filter. Maybe I didn't give them a fair chance since I'm going off the YouTube video amd headphones...will check the audio in the studio another time. Anyway this is no revelation but a nice reminder about the degree of feeling, depth and dynamics that remain untold by frequency plots.

The TubeTech low shelf was nice in this example with a good balance of size and punch, and a definite lack of softness overall. The highs remind me a bit of a nicer Massive Passive, maybe with more sparkle. Interesting sound that could be magic on dull mixes.

I'm looking forward to getting my G23-S. It's really something to have those two sounds available from the same box, plus the unique tilt.

Your 5500 with opamps swapped is certainly nice. It's great to hear how it still holds its own against EQs costing 2-3x as much. I'm actually really happy with Nebula programs when I want that type of more forward, direct and tight sound.

Eksa seems interesting for precision work or bringing forward details, would like to hear more - especially tidying up mids or with air or deep low boosting. Or perhaps not since I can't afford one yet.
i come to very similar conclusions as you.

of course this comparison shows only a small part of the eq's and eksa as well as tubetech couldn't really show their strengths here - the eksa because it is also an excellent surgical knife & the tubetech because it is simply the wrong eq for this mix - on the other hand it can fit very well on other material.

the api also surprised me - but this eq surprises me again and again anyway, it is a really charismatic eq with its own note and sometimes there is nothing better for a mix.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #7
Lives for gear
 
JSilver's Avatar
 

Hi, which material do you think the TT really shine with?
Is the Eksa great mainly for cutting?
Thx

Quote:
Originally Posted by teebaum View Post
i come to very similar conclusions as you.

of course this comparison shows only a small part of the eq's and eksa as well as tubetech couldn't really show their strengths here - the eksa because it is also an excellent surgical knife & the tubetech because it is simply the wrong eq for this mix - on the other hand it can fit very well on other material.

the api also surprised me - but this eq surprises me again and again anyway, it is a really charismatic eq with its own note and sometimes there is nothing better for a mix.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #8
Lives for gear
 
teebaum's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSilver View Post
Hi, which material do you think the TT really shine with?
Is the Eksa great mainly for cutting?
Thx
i love the eksa for cutting and giving in bass and low midrange.

the tubetech is a pop-machine and brings mixes up front, furthermore the highs can really bring light into a mix. but if the mixes are too hard, you should leave the machine switched off.

i try to equip it with philipps nos tubes, maybe this will make it even more universal.
but it may well be that I go back to the original tubes - we will see.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #9
Lives for gear
 
b0se's Avatar
Big thanks for these @teebaum, will have a listen this evening. Interested to test these against Magpha, Equilibrium etc.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #10
Lives for gear
 
SmoothTone's Avatar
 

Thanks for this Dan. Great choice of program for this test and great write-up of your methodology. It's nice to hear all these EQs through the same converter and matched settings.

The Soma was the standout on this material for me. It just sounded more part of the music than the others.

The G23-T was my 2nd favourite here. But it's my favourite EQ of all time for a reason. I just love the sound and versatility and fluidity of use. I agree 100% with everything you said about it above. And having that tilt now available in SS has made it much more usable.

Good to hear the 5500 in comparison to the others. There really is nothing else like it for lows.

I didn't relate to the Eksa or TT on this material. I didn't mind the boxtone of the Creme but the filters sounded a bit grainy to me. The Fredenstein sounded like an emulation.

This has also provided a nice reference for testing my EQs here. I matched your settings on my G23 then matched those curves on my PQ, which sounded somewhere between the 5500 and Eksa for lows and maybe somewhere between Eksa and Soma for highs. Nice to check out Magpha and some other digi options too.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #11
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmoothTone View Post
Thanks for this Dan. Great choice of program for this test and great write-up of your methodology. It's nice to hear all these EQs through the same converter and matched settings.

The Soma was the standout on this material for me. It just sounded more part of the music than the others.

The G23-T was my 2nd favourite here. But it's my favourite EQ of all time for a reason. I just love the sound and versatility and fluidity of use. I agree 100% with everything you said about it above. And having that tilt now available in SS has made it much more usable.

Good to hear the 5500 in comparison to the others. There really is nothing else like it for lows.

I didn't relate to the Eksa or TT on this material. I didn't mind the boxtone of the Creme but the filters sounded a bit grainy to me. The Fredenstein sounded like an emulation.

This has also provided a nice reference for testing my EQs here. I matched your settings on my G23 then matched those curves on my PQ, which sounded somewhere between the 5500 and Eksa for lows and maybe somewhere between Eksa and Soma for highs. Nice to check out Magpha and some other digi options too.
Would love to hear that PQ over this! Which version of the PQ do you have?

Thanks dan, I really enjoyed this comparison.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #12
Lives for gear
 
SmoothTone's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxtone View Post
Would love to hear that PQ over this! Which version of the PQ do you have?
Hey Boxtone, so you never got to demo one? I have a new one. My converter is playing up at the moment but once I get it sorted I will post something here.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #13
Lives for gear
 
the unik's Avatar
I'm off Gearslutz a couple of busy days, and back to see an amazing new thread

Thanks Dan for this, heading right away to the video
Old 3 weeks ago
  #14
Lives for gear
 
the unik's Avatar
OK super video, again well done guys

First impressions are :

I need to work on my German.

The Gyraf SS is actually very nice, relaxed and precise, very musical overall. Not a big fan of the Tube eq on the other hand (for that mix at least)

Man that Eksa is SO articulate !.. It's not you're sweetening box obviously, and it must be amazing at clearing up blurry mixes, wow.

The Soma is very good. Buy this as your main Mastering Eq and your clients will be happy. Now I hear a little "loss" of definition in the top high region. It's suttle but its there.

I don't know about The F610. It's interesting. It's a bit "too much", but I'd say too much for that mix wich seems to be a well balanced mix anyway. Needs more listening.

The creme is "the worst" for me, on another level but at the opposite of the Soma.

The Api is an amazing eq. It's colored, but it's still very detailed. It has that "class" of a sound to it. Would love someone to do a pass with the stock opamps. Maybe my favorite of the bunch.

The Tubetech is VERY forward. (seems almost a tad louder then the rest) But it's also a "classy" forwardness. There's a nice touch of tube tone to it, but not in a "vintage" way so to speak. Very interesting

Although almost impossible to really compare, as it doesn't have Shelves, I'll do a pass with my PQ Silver edition, doing the baxandall imitation trick.

(PS : speaking of Baxandall, a Bax could be nice to hear aswell, seems to be the perfect test for it)
Old 3 weeks ago
  #15
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmoothTone View Post
Hey Boxtone, so you never got to demo one? I have a new one. My converter is playing up at the moment but once I get it sorted I will post something here.
Still in the long process of getting one, drawn out story! Thanks!
Old 3 weeks ago
  #16
Lives for gear
 
SmoothTone's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by the unik View Post
Although almost impossible to really compare, as it doesn't have Shelves, I'll do a pass with my PQ Silver edition, doing the baxandall imitation trick.
I got pretty close with mine.



Here is the G23 curve in SPAN for you or others to match with.

And here are the Magpha settings in case anyone wants to try that and use it to match their other EQs.

+5.81 @ 50.96Hz 0.25Q (bell)
+4.87 @ 20kHz 0.19Q (bell)
OUT -2.62dB

Attached Thumbnails
mastering eq comparison test-pq.png   mastering eq comparison test-magpha.png  
Old 3 weeks ago
  #17
Lives for gear
 

Thank you Teebaum for putting together this comparison ... also for sharing files !

The SOMA and API get used often ... but I'm always interested in hearing different processors.

Old 3 weeks ago
  #18
Lives for gear
 
JP__'s Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by the unik View Post
OK super video, again well done guys

First impressions are :

I need to work on my German.

The Gyraf SS is actually very nice, relaxed and precise, very musical overall. Not a big fan of the Tube eq on the other hand (for that mix at least)

Man that Eksa is SO articulate !.. It's not you're sweetening box obviously, and it must be amazing at clearing up blurry mixes, wow.

The Soma is very good. Buy this as your main Mastering Eq and your clients will be happy. Now I hear a little "loss" of definition in the top high region. It's suttle but its there.

I don't know about The F610. It's interesting. It's a bit "too much", but I'd say too much for that mix wich seems to be a well balanced mix anyway. Needs more listening.

The creme is "the worst" for me, on another level but at the opposite of the Soma.

The Api is an amazing eq. It's colored, but it's still very detailed. It has that "class" of a sound to it. Would love someone to do a pass with the stock opamps. Maybe my favorite of the bunch.

The Tubetech is VERY forward. (seems almost a tad louder then the rest) But it's also a "classy" forwardness. There's a nice touch of tube tone to it, but not in a "vintage" way so to speak. Very interesting

Although almost impossible to really compare, as it doesn't have Shelves, I'll do a pass with my PQ Silver edition, doing the baxandall imitation trick.

(PS : speaking of Baxandall, a Bax could be nice to hear aswell, seems to be the perfect test for it)
I had another listen yesterday afternoon and now share your thoughts about the Soma: even with this big boost some high freq transients clearly gets lost. G23-S and Eksa are more precise here, but lacking the body of the Soma and unfortunately enhancing that metallic "zing" in vocals and hihats too much for my taste. Both need a hq tube device or some transformers (man, the Eksa with some Lundahl ACs might be something, @B Elgin.. ) in the chain to even that out in my impression (diff impedance mismatch and other gains might lead to diff results here too). Most other EQs were either much to colored or too harsh in that area.

From my first impression levels between all files were matched, but when Im running reapers loudness normalisation it shows slight diffs at around 0.3dB from one to another (which obviously changed some impressions). I think it might be the diff between short term and integrated?

What I really like about this comparisson is that its done within the same setup. The sound of a diff studio might not lead to a comparable result therefore. As nice as the good old big Mastering EQ thread is, I dont see the need for another. This comparisson is what it is, and its good this way.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #19
Lives for gear
 
the unik's Avatar
Yes actually I already had this impression about the Soma on the monster Mastering Eq thread. I love what it does to the music as a whole, one of the most musical Eq out there with a very "euphonic" midrange, but the very top end seems to "loose", or let say "even out" some of the information up there. It's not huge of course, but still there. Speaking of Knif Audio gear, the Eksa in this exemple sounds extremely articulate and clear, but still not edgy or "boring", a very special unit. It's a tad "dry" sounding aswell, so I guess it must compliment marvellously well with the Soma

Quote:
Originally Posted by JP__ View Post
I had another listen yesterday afternoon and now share your thoughts about the Soma: even with this big boost some high freq transients clearly gets lost. G23-S and Eksa are more precise here, but lacking the body of the Soma and unfortunately enhancing that metallic "zing" in vocals and hihats too much for my taste. Both need a hq tube device or some transformers (man, the Eksa with some Lundahl ACs might be something, @B Elgin.. ) in the chain to even that out in my impression (diff impedance mismatch and other gains might lead to diff results here too). Most other EQs were either much to colored or too harsh in that area.

From my first impression levels between all files were matched, but when Im running reapers loudness normalisation it shows slight diffs at around 0.3dB from one to another (which obviously changed some impressions). I think it might be the diff between short term and integrated?

What I really like about this comparisson is that its done within the same setup. The sound of a diff studio might not lead to a comparable result therefore. As nice as the good old big Mastering EQ thread is, I dont see the need for another. This comparisson is what it is, and its good this way.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #20
Lives for gear
 
the unik's Avatar
Thanks for this smoothie !

Also never heard about that Magpha Eq before, seems pretty interesting Going to check that out

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmoothTone View Post
I got pretty close with mine.



Here is the G23 curve in SPAN for you or others to match with.

And here are the Magpha settings in case anyone wants to try that and use it to match their other EQs.

+5.81 @ 50.96Hz 0.25Q (bell)
+4.87 @ 20kHz 0.19Q (bell)
OUT -2.62dB

Old 3 weeks ago
  #21
Lives for gear
 
teebaum's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by JP__ View Post
I had another listen yesterday afternoon and now share your thoughts about the Soma: even with this big boost some high freq transients clearly gets lost. G23-S and Eksa are more precise here, but lacking the body of the Soma and unfortunately enhancing that metallic "zing" in vocals and hihats too much for my taste. Both need a hq tube device or some transformers (man, the Eksa with some Lundahl ACs might be something, @B Elgin.. ) in the chain to even that out in my impression (diff impedance mismatch and other gains might lead to diff results here too). Most other EQs were either much to colored or too harsh in that area.

From my first impression levels between all files were matched, but when Im running reapers loudness normalisation it shows slight diffs at around 0.3dB from one to another (which obviously changed some impressions). I think it might be the diff between short term and integrated?

What I really like about this comparisson is that its done within the same setup. The sound of a diff studio might not lead to a comparable result therefore. As nice as the good old big Mastering EQ thread is, I dont see the need for another. This comparisson is what it is, and its good this way.

the curves of the eq's are not 100% identical, the soma has a little more bass-shelf and a little less high-shelf than the reference gyraf 23s, the 5500 goes in the same direction.
sometimes it is easy to mistake level for resolution (not that I'm saying this happened to you).

the files are short term matched (reaper).
Attached Thumbnails
mastering eq comparison test-matched.jpg  

Last edited by teebaum; 3 weeks ago at 05:47 PM..
Old 3 weeks ago
  #22
Lives for gear
 
JP__'s Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by teebaum View Post
the curves of the eq's are not 100% identical, the soma has a little more bass-shelf and a little less high-shelf than the reference gyraf 23s, the 5500 goes in the same direction.
sometimes it is easy to mistake resolution for level (not that I'm saying this happened to you).
Definitly!
One reason I love to hear pure boxtone settings within those tests, also.

Quote:
the files are short term matched (reaper).
Thanks.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #23
Lives for gear
 
the unik's Avatar
After a few more listening sessions (headphones, hi fi system etc), I'm wondering, isn't there a mistake between the two Fredenstein files ? Or I largely prefer the "Color" version, instead of the non colored, wich seems weird to me ? And yes it is not playing in the same league as the others, along with the Creme.

The Api still sounds beautifull, but a little bit too much "ompph" in the low end, It has that Api attitude, so not for everything.

I definitely like the G23s, and the tubetech, but would choose the G23 over the Tubetech for that mix.

But man that Eksa REALLY impresses me here
It is very "fast". That the word I would employ here. Fast, dry, yet musical.
The Low end is killer. Really really good
Old 3 weeks ago
  #24
Lives for gear
 
teebaum's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by the unik View Post
After a few more listening sessions (headphones, hi fi system etc), I'm wondering, isn't there a mistake between the two Fredenstein files ? Or I largely prefer the "Color" version, instead of the non colored, wich seems weird to me ? And yes it is not playing in the same league as the others, along with the Creme.

The Api still sounds beautifull, but a little bit too much "ompph" in the low end, It has that Api attitude, so not for everything.

I definitely like the G23s, and the tubetech, but would choose the G23 over the Tubetech for that mix.

But man that Eksa REALLY impresses me here
It is very "fast". That the word I would employ here. Fast, dry, yet musical.
The Low end is killer. Really really good
also check the eq curves, it was not possible to match these 100%.
api and soma have a little more lowend than g23, that allows sometimes some wrong conclusions.
with the fredenstein there is nothing wrong in the files, you simply hear the limitation of this device and unfortunately you have to admit that quality has its price.

the lowend of eksa is divine, I must agree with you.
a great product, like the soma too - knif is uncompromising and the two eqs complement each other perfectly.
I'm a lucky man to be able to work with these devices.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #25
Lives for gear
 
the unik's Avatar
Mmm I see...so strange that it sounds MORE colored in NON colored mod..

But as you say quality as its price, indeed...

And yes it's quite hard to "match" all this eq's, but it's great to be able to hear wich one "serves" the music and follows it, and wich one "gets in the way"

I'll post some K&H UE 400 and PQ Silver face files tomorrow. AND some secret new eq very soon, but I need to finish designing it first

Now it's time to
Old 3 weeks ago
  #26
Lives for gear
 
teebaum's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by JP__ View Post
Definitly!
One reason I love to hear pure boxtone settings within those tests, also.
that would have been interesting!
it's not uncommon that you just loop in a device because of the boxtone or just don't use it because of the boxtone.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #27
Lives for gear
 
JP__'s Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by the unik View Post
Mmm I see...so strange that it sounds MORE colored in NON colored mode
To be true I justhad a very short listen to the Fredenstein (and Cream) files as Im simply not interested in those devices, but I remember to even heard a kind of pumping effect from the strong saturation. From a pure tonality perspective the colored file might sound more complete indeed, but theres something very odd going from a dynamic perspective.
As we all know every EQ is also a dynamic processor, as every comp is also a frequency based process, so you cannot devide one from the other of course.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #28
Lives for gear
 
Ben F's Avatar
 

Verified Member
It's an interesting test. The tone of the EQ is going to affect how much boost you would use, and I think a test like this just points to the tone that worked with this curve, that I don't think really worked that well with the music in many examples.

Kind of like racing a car with the wrong tyres for the track conditions.

So for example, the Eksa is cleaner so less boost would be used on the tops and perhaps more on the low end than say a putec type EQ that will just sound bloated in the low end with the same boost, and perhaps nicer in the tops being warmer. You would use the frequencies that highlighted the strength of the EQ rather than one size fits all. The soma is very organic, the Eksa less so, probably the best EQ between these would be a Sontec MES series.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #29
Lives for gear
 
SmoothTone's Avatar
 

I kinda felt that matching the curve helped highlight the different tone of the various boxes, which was interesting.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #30
Gear Head
 
Sargon's Avatar
 

Thanks for the interesting video, definitely one of the best gear videos on Youtube! Nice hats by the way.

As a user of three of these EQ's I can confirm the reviews. I would also prefer the Soma or the G23 for this track. The TubeTech is also very, very good. It has that typical TT "tube sheen" which is very beautiful and noble. Not as obvious as on other TubeTech units, so better suited for mastering. But I also hear some kind of hardness or stiffness that I don´t like very much. Yes, it could a bit softer and rounder. Teebaum, please let us know the results with the NOS tubes at the HLT2M. The G23 has this beautiful roundness and silky highs, but on the other hand, sounds a bit cloudy at the top and undefined in the lows. Maybe some better tubes could help here as well?

The Eksa is nearly the only "audiophile" (sorry for the terrible word) EQ in my arsenal. It doesn´t degrade the audio material in any way, and it allows a wide range of corrections without leaving an obvious footprint. And compared with the best digital EQ´s, it always sounds natural, relaxed and elegant. Sober, clear, and beyond any doubt.. In my opinion, the Eksa is the best correction EQ on the market right now. The lows and low mids are maybe a bit colored, but in a very nice way, it can give some authority and weight to a track, if needed. Otherwise, the Eksa isn´t the EQ for overpainting or "cheating" on poor mixes.
The Soma also a class of its own, uncompromise design/signal path as with all Knif gear = high-end sound, more "earthy" and forgiving than Eksa, a broad stroke EQ which is a perfect companion to the Eksa. With the two Knif EQ´s you can cover almost all EQ duties in mastering - (except if you´re a true slut, then you need everything!!).

The Tegeler and Fredenstein are a bit in the wrong contest here, defenitely not in the same league as the others.. Conclusion as always, you`ll get what you pay for.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben F View Post
The soma is very organic, the Eksa less so, probably the best EQ between these would be a Sontec MES series.
Yes that's right, the MES is soundwise somewhere between these two Knif EQ's. But on the other hand, it's not that easy. The color of the high band at the Sontecs is somehow unique. None of the Knif EQ has that. And vice versa, the Sontec doesn´t have the nice punchy lows of Eksa or Soma. So rather these EQ´s complement each other. Although the Eksa is a Sontec-inspired design, the MES sounds completely different (have compared them side by side). Knif Eksa + Soma is defenitely a very powerful combo with lot of sound options from very clean to slightly colored. In reality, it is hardly more needed than these two Knif EQ´s. Maybe one or two additional smaller boxes with nice colored high shelfs, that´s it..

If someone want to hear it, I can render a quick file with a 432 with the Eksa settings.

My 0.2 cents

Last edited by Sargon; 3 weeks ago at 03:40 PM.. Reason: typo
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