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
Hardware EQs even remotely worth it?
Old 27th September 2018
  #151
Lives for gear
Btw I felt UAD actually came closest to hardware. Sweeping through the bands the UAD seemed to most closely match the hardware. The AlexB N73 was also great though not in the original test. I'm waiting to get my stam 1073 and rent a real neve 1073 for more testing.
Old 7th October 2018
  #152
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diegel View Post
Btw I felt UAD actually came closest to hardware. Sweeping through the bands the UAD seemed to most closely match the hardware. The AlexB N73 was also great though not in the original test. I'm waiting to get my stam 1073 and rent a real neve 1073 for more testing.
interested in the comparison, please keep us updated. i'm also waiting for my stam 1073 for a long, long time now... -_-
Old 5th December 2018
  #153
roc
Lives for gear
 
roc's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ionian View Post
I have an Elysia Museq I bought a few years ago and that thing just does something to audio that I can't explain. I haven't mixed without it since I bought it. If I'm in the honeymoon phase still, then I've been in it a few years. I use plugs here and there to fix things, but with the Museq, it just enhances everything that goes through it.
Please elaborate further I'm interested in the Elysia Museq ?
Ever since I hear the Mpressor it made me wonder what else can these guys at Elysia do because it seems so amazing specially for what I do mostly dance music . I hear people describe it as a clean EQ and my thoughts are that clean can be a color , so is it a beautiful clean color or just bland clean ?

Theres not much info on it or user reviews but for some reason it stands
out of the crowd of high end hardware EQs to me or maybe it's just gas lust because it does look sexy .

Can you tell me what the museq looks like in the dark (pic would be nice of it in the dark ) , I saw a picture where it looks like the red lights on the front panel made it glow red on the inside and it shined with a red glow though the vents on top , is this accurate , does it glow red though the vents on top of the unit or maybe that was just marketing ?

Would Museq be good for stereo bus EQ ?
Old 5th December 2018
  #154
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diegel View Post
Btw I felt UAD actually came closest to hardware. Sweeping through the bands the UAD seemed to most closely match the hardware. The AlexB N73 was also great though not in the original test. I'm waiting to get my stam 1073 and rent a real neve 1073 for more testing.
Would love to hear that comparison!

Daniel.
Old 5th December 2018
  #155
Lives for gear
 
RedBaaron's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by kojak View Post
...Or certainly, that $1,000 is ridiculous to pay for one channel of EQ?
Oh god no! If you've only dropped 1k per channel on hardware eq, you got off easy!

Trust me, a week with a selection of good hardware eq's will change that impression entirely...

I for one will never part with my Lil Freq's, and it's very unlikely I'd let go of the e27's, or Pultecs either. Also, before Balance Magpha EQ came along, I would have been hard-pressed to name any plug-in that measured up to the top-shelf hardware.

But the difference, I think , is really more about where it's used in the recording chain. The hardware eq's (and comps for that matter) help to get the best possible sound for the track coming in, whereas plugins are primarily about preventing sound masking between tracks after they're recorded.

At the tracking stage, there is a complex relationship between transients, frequency spectrum, saturation, and gain level that is tough to describe, but essential to get right. Hardware eq is often a huge part of getting that right , as is moderate compression/limiting. On occasion, one can get by going straight in, but usually there is some price to be paid in the end result. I don't think I've heard it end up sounding as good after "fixing it in the mix" as if each track sounded its very best coming in.

Just my observations. YMMV.
Old 6th December 2018
  #156
Hardware eq’ing means a lot more now
than it did in tape era. Nearly all lack of precision can be caught back itb...
whilst software never get hold of signal, especially for 2ndary tracks.
One could state it brings too much editing ... but this sounds like a 90´s debate isn’t it? At a time most studios laid tracks over mixer channels -what is no longer main paradigm.

Even with linear, midrange eq’s, benefit lies in the sense of separation it deals to the mix. But this is still 90’s talk.

As written on this thread, buss’ing or grouping gives plenty of texture, set apart from tracks processed in other ways. Most often time prevents us from mixing along this more 3D-like path.
Old 7th December 2018
  #157
Lives for gear
 
Wiggy Neve Slut's Avatar
 

For me if there’s a plug that does what my pulse eq does show me, prove it and I’ll sell it!
Old 7th December 2018
  #158
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwh1192 View Post
what he said !!! ... thats why i still have 1073, 1081, focusrite 215, avalon 2055, and SSL 502 EQ's ...


Hi there!!

What do you think of the SSL 502 eqs? Good for boosting ?

Very different from the other ssl eqs?

Thanks
Regards
Francisco
Old 8th December 2018
  #159
Gear Guru
 
jwh1192's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by easymixstudio View Post
Hi there!!

What do you think of the SSL 502 eqs? Good for boosting ?

Very different from the other ssl eqs?

Thanks
Regards
Francisco
i like them a lot - good for boosting or cutting .. but i am selling them because i need to money .. :(
Old 13th December 2018
  #160
Lives for gear
 
ionian's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by roc View Post
Please elaborate further I'm interested in the Elysia Museq ?
Ever since I hear the Mpressor it made me wonder what else can these guys at Elysia do because it seems so amazing specially for what I do mostly dance music . I hear people describe it as a clean EQ and my thoughts are that clean can be a color , so is it a beautiful clean color or just bland clean ?

Theres not much info on it or user reviews but for some reason it stands
out of the crowd of high end hardware EQs to me or maybe it's just gas lust because it does look sexy .

Can you tell me what the museq looks like in the dark (pic would be nice of it in the dark ) , I saw a picture where it looks like the red lights on the front panel made it glow red on the inside and it shined with a red glow though the vents on top , is this accurate , does it glow red though the vents on top of the unit or maybe that was just marketing ?

Would Museq be good for stereo bus EQ ?
Hey Roc! Sorry for the late reply...I'm on a tour at the moment playing keys on a celtic christmas show so I haven't been home for the past few weeks and won't be back until the end of the tour next week.

Not sure if you saw my review here on GS. I used to have pictures with it but photobucket bombed and the pictures all disappeared and I can't edit the review to put them back. I'm working on reprinting my review on my own blog with the photos again but until then, it's here with no photos.

It's definitely clean but it's amazing and it blows my mind. I'm not even exaggerating. I state this publically - if I had to sell every piece of gear I had, the museq would be the last to go. I'd go to plug in compressors before I'd sell the museq.

I have a crap ton of compressors here (Xpressor, Buzz DBC-M, Obsidian, Dynamaxx, 525, Alter, DBX 560a, Brute II, etc) but I have a SINGLE EQ. The Museq. I have zero desire to own any other EQs and I haven't bought any - even for color! No 550a, no Electrodyne, no pultec, etc. None of the regular "color EQs". I'm sure they're nice, but to be honest, I have no desire for any others after using the Museq. And if I could save enough for another EQ, I'd just buy another Museq. I'm sure I'm on record somewhere around this forum saying that already.

With the Museq, I can carve stuff and it never sounds bad. I feel like it's my secret weapon. The frequency ranges on each knob are huge so there's a lot of room to shape things. It also has a "warm" mode like the Xpressor (although it's a somewhat different character) so there is a more colored sound from it, if that's what you want, but it's not really an extreme color. And yes, it's clean but even without using it, everything that goes through it sounds better. I don't even have to EQ. I thought I was nuts but after discussing everything with Elysia, it turns out that the Museq runs at a higher voltage than normal audio equipment and this does make a difference to the sound going through it.

And yes, with the high headroom, it definitely makes an amazing buss eq.

Also, because the Museq does use higher voltage than normal it runs very hot. Super hot. Because of that, you really should leave a space above and below it. I see photos of people's museq's here, shoved in a rack with gear on top and under, with no space and I cringe so bad. That thing runs very hot and it's vented on top and on bottom because of that. I can't imagine how people are wearing down their gear when they shoehorn it in a rack with no air space.

As far as the red light - there's a very faint red glow coming through the upper vents. It's from the red lights between the two knobs for choosing the cut/boost and the Q. It's not really bright because it's not decorative - as in, it's not there to shine though the vents. It only shows because there are vents there so it leaks out. It does look cool though. I'm on tour until next week but when I get back I can take a photo for you.

You'll find me all over this forum over the years consistently raving about the museq. My opinion hasn't changed. Like I said, I have a crap ton of compressors, yet I have a single hardware EQ.

I'll try to post a photo next week.
Old 13th December 2018
  #161
Lives for gear
 
Seamus TM's Avatar
 

I honestly don't think about it too much, but I tend to do cuts and very small, wide boosts in the box (with UAD stuff).
Big boosts I do with hardware.
Old 13th December 2018
  #162
+1 over Museq.

Perhaps this debate is biased
since most of us know how bad sound Eq embedded in prosumer mixers
whilst recording studio format Eq’s are -I mean original 24v elaborated eq’s- more scarce
[this, because so many clones only get close to the sound -yet not the gain staging, etc. of the legendary ones].

For sure one also can get good results with mid-range eq’s : for example you can shape curves with a TC electronics analog eq. Yet it’s not close to aforementioned equalizers.
Old 13th December 2018
  #163
Lives for gear
 
bowzin's Avatar
Got a great deal on a BAE B15 but unfortunately I'm not sure it would fall into the category of "hardware EQ's that are worth it" considering it's something like $990 new.

The boost/cut is 16db each way, so the tiny little knob has 32db (!) of travel and realistically it should be at least half that. My favorite sounds I've gotten out of it so far have been very small boosts/cuts, like millimeters on the gain knob... It's so finnicky to use with that insanely wide swing. Also the boost/cut gain knob does not have a zero-indent so it's very difficult to zero out and hear differences easily, especially since I'm making such small adjustments anyway. Kind of frustrating. It has transformers in and out, but they're Jensen which are great clean transformers but I'm not really picking up much color, which I prefer in hardware EQ's. It's clean and tight/hard sounding EQ. Kind of a bust for what I was looking for, oh well. Went back to the Klark Teknik EQP-KT on the same source, and instantly found what I was looking for. Juicier. Had high hopes but the search continues. I'll stick to inductor EQ's and probably more Pultec style after this experiment.
Old 15th December 2018
  #164
@ bowzin :

Fine if you obtained desired stance with a pultec-like eq.
The other one still holds interest [depending on what stage it comes into play]. For there are chances you’ll re-wind the same content in later stages of production process. This is the drawback of using Pultec’s all the way up : their boosts tend not to stack well, especially with prosumer Pultec [notwithstanding the revolution consisting in having this topology more affordable].
Best wishes for your sound.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #165
Lives for gear
 
ionian's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadPoet View Post
Q-clone is great but unfortunately doesn't model/capture the non-EQ stuff going on (forms of distortion introduced by in/output transfo's or tubes)


Herwig
Sorry to bump an old thread but this missed me originally and I wanted to correct the misinformation in this post.

Actually, yes, Q-clone does. I assume you're not familiar with it but I have used it tons.

What Q-clone is, is essentially an impulse EQ, much in the way that impulse reverbs work, as opposed to algorithmic. What happens is, you use a real EQ, and what Q-clone does, is send a chirp out to the EQ and it captures an impulse of the EQ at that moment. Because the chirp is audio, it captures everything, not only the curve but the distortions, etc.

In other tests, Q-clone is virtually indistinguishable to the EQ it's cloning, but the problem is, is that it works best in the way it was intended - to be used with a real hardware EQ.

For example, you have a very expensive pultec and you want to use it on every channel. With Q-clone, you set up the "send" module to send the chirp to the pultec, then you insert the "capture" module on the track and tweak your real hardware pultec until you get the EQ setting you want. Then the capture module captures the impulse and applies it to the plug in. Voila - you can use your pultec on every single track by inserting the plug on every track, setting your pultec and capturing the impulse.

The downside is that if you want to change something on a track, you have to recall your settings on the hardware, make your changes, and then recapture the impulse.

It's very cumbersome to use just as a EQ plug in, as you have to recall impulses one at a time to check them (you can save impulses in a menu or import impulses other people have captured) so if you're using already saved impulses, it's a pain to check. But if you're using it to capture impulses from already attached hardware that you're setting at that moment, then it works very, very well.

If you're familiar with impulse reverbs versus algorithmic reverbs, it's very similar in how it acts versus say, a plug in EQ. Algorithmic reverbs are very easy to adjust on the fly, but while impulse reverbs are a lot more difficult and limited to work with, a really good impulse capture can be magic or indistinguishable from the real space.

Another thing that Q-clone lets you do, that's pretty cool, is stack your captures. For example, if you have an EQ with limited bands, the Electrodyne 511, for instance. Two bands, that's it. So you use it to make your boosts, then capture the impulse with Q-clone. Then after it captures it, you can then make cuts with the two bands, and Q-clone can "add" that to its current capture, thereby letting you use your 511 as a 4 band EQ (or as many bands as you want) if you keep stacking. Also, the impulse is mono but the plug can be mono or stereo so if you have an stereo EQ with variable pots and stereo matching is fiddly on it, you only need to capture one channel and the stereo version of the plug applies it in stereo. Boom! Perfect stereo match. Also, if you only have one channel of an expensive EQ - say an API 550a - so in the hardware realm, you can only use it on mono tracks, with Q-clone, you can capture it and use it on stereo tracks, so now you can use your single 550a on stereo tracks as well.

It's also a godsend in letting you use your hardware on mixes that might be difficult to. For example, I was asked to mix a two hour performance recorded on 24 tracks. I could either use plug in EQs, or my hardware. Hardware in this case was impossible because I'm not going to use my Museq on each track one at a time and then do a two hour live bounce for each track. Using Q-clone, I was able to use my Museq on every track like a plug in.

Anyway, I just wanted to clear up the misinformation. Q-clone is a plug that seems to fly under the radar and a lot of people I feel aren't quite sure what to make of it or what its actual point is.

Last edited by ionian; 3 weeks ago at 11:45 PM..
Old 3 weeks ago
  #166
Never thought to use Q Clone this way, awesome idea.
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