anyone else played with one?

ETA?


heh

anybody?

I haven't seen one yet.

I twiddled with it briefly at AES, and was very impressed.

yep


yep

you guys are reading my mind.
I must get one of these 3 to be friends with api 2500.

Yeah, I got to play with both the prototype and the production model down at Chris Muths house a month or so back. Very powerful and right now there are about 6 mastering engineers on tap to do a review of this thing for Tape-Op... He was in the middle of mastering The Figgs newest release and so I got to try it using their songs... btw, great songs, production and an overall great album!

Once you use it and see the real "problem solver" it can be, you just have to have one... for mixes where the overall balance of highs, mids and lows are off this EQ can correct the problem in about two seconds.

Should be shipping any day now from what Chris told me then.

btw, anybody who has used the EQ on a stereo system has probably used a Baxandal equalizer since most of them are based on this EQ curve.

Anybody know if the gain controls are real switches, or detented pots?

This is like a glorified hi-fi tone control, right? - just what i've been looking for!

I have a Clariphonic and I'm interested in adding this thing, particularly for some of the quotes I have read about the low-end. I have a very high opinion of Chris Muth.

I try not to form opinions based on the internet, though.

- c

Chris used the same type detented switches that is on the Master and Monitor for the production model.... the prototypes are not detented.

Funny thing about the prototype and the production model, they sound slightly different from one another (I explained what was different in another thread somewhere) and the only thing (according to Chris) that makes them sound different is the detented switches vs. the non detented switches... everything else is exactly the same... go figure!

Yes, basically a very powerful hi-fi tone control... can't wait to get one... or two!

Oh, here is what I said in the other post... forgot about some of the EQ points being different...

They just finished production on the first batch. Bob is out of the country but will be back next week at which time I'm to contact him for one for review. They should be shipping shortly.

It's funny as I like the prototype for certain applications and I like the production models for others. Chris feels the same way. The only thing different about the design (besides the production model having more features... love the hi and low cut filters) is the stepped attenuators on the production model as a opposed to the variable on the prototype. That feature alone makes the two units sound different from one another. Not being a gear designer I would never think this to make such a difference in the sound... but it does.

The production model is more accurate and "true" to the sound source... the prototype is a tad warmer and adds a bit of musicality to the source. I could hear the distortion in the guitars easier with the production model, loved how it handled drums and low end in general. However I prefer the top end on the prototype, more smooth. In the end (like Chris) I decided I needed both!

I have had a BAX for a couple of weeks now + have put it to use on a few masters.
The first task was a 9 song album by a HEAVY, SLOW sorta metal band. Picture crows, zombies and lots of black.
After a couple different setups, I settled on:

PLAY-> Great River MAQ2NV -> Aurora GTC-2 FET mode -> BAX -> capture -> Sony limiter.

I like the way the stuff sounds hitting the MAQ first.

Having the BAX in the chain really opened up a lot of options for me. I found myself using bells on the MAQ at different frequency points than I have been able to get away with before - using the BAX to straighten out the over all tone once the "warts" were removed.

I also had a lot of success with using shelves in the MAQ and opposing shelves in the BAX - like cutting some bass before the compression and adding it back after... same thing with high end maybe the inverse though..

Mostly the BAX did like 1/2DB boost on the lows and highs. A it of filtering too... everything came out HUGE before the Sony. I ended up using much less digital limiter to achieve the kind of presence I am looking for..
=================
I also mastered 7" of some dance music. similar chain, but with an API2500 doing compression.
It was easy to tighten up a flabby low end with the HPF and some boosting.

I have been ignoring the frequency markings - they trip me out. It is pretty straight ahead finding the right frequency position. You can "feel" the change as you move closer to the meat of the spectrum. Lifting everything from 1K+ is very predictable. Same with a turnover of around 200hz for the low end..
=====================
This thing is really useful - like the best car stereo tone controls ever.
the knobs are the tallest I've seen! I had to leav a space above the unit to allow me to reach over it to the next piece of gear above it! the knobs are really tall.
===========
I used it last night on (damn sexy) female vocals. The chain was: Bock 151->API 312->BAX->GTC2. I cut a 1/2 DB from 100 something and added a half way up top. I was able to get where I wanted within a 1 pass on the tune + the vocals sounded "finished".
===========
One of my main clients is a latin jazz musician. I am waiting for our next session to try the BAX on a pair of congas. He's always looking for more top on things (prolly because he's been playin percussion for 30 years!) - I suspect this will become part of our default tracking chain.
===========
It is tough to find gear that will do "double duty" especially stuff that works for mastering. The BAX does exactly what I was hoping it would. I thought that it might be funny with a single frequency control for both sides, but I actually like it a lot. I use the Great River MAQ in linked mode all the time - essentially the same thing.
==========
I have a remix compilation to finish up over the next two days - I suspect it will be mostly BAX and AP! for this.
BAX BAX BAX!!

Here, I changed it for you.

Looking forward to checking out a BAX.

Please keep us posted Adam.

It's goonA be BAX or Mini passive (though pretty curious abouut tonelux equalux)

Now if I could just add another 3k or so the equasion the.prettiest red box made in Pocopsin PA with the initials DW would be in my room

There is a BAX EQ Inside the MEth Lab, along with some others.

Wow. This thing is special. I'm just getting into it, but at first glance I can see this product making people extremely happy. I would note that the BAX is built like TANK, and has some palpable weight, physically. Its probably the heaviest Dangerous Product I have held in my hand. Anyway, this equalizer has virtually NO residual phase lag/distortion, using it in any direction; to my ears. The gradual BAX filters, can really target the broad spectrum with an extraordinary musical tightening/balancing effect that doesn't change the tones, and depth going on before the equalizer. The effect of boosting can really bring the "atmosphere" factor into play and embolden the source very gracefully. I find that the HP/LP Filters are radically transparent, and overall the "blooming" quality and balancing agility of this thing for broad stroke work is rocking. I will be using this thing with the S&M box's insert point. Oh yea.

FWIW; here is a little more opinion.

The BAX is SUPER transparent. Has +/- 5 DB of Control at MAX with both High and Low Band. That's Not much in the scheme of life, but is absolutely Perfect for mastering. You have a single Stereo Center FREQ Control for both bands, meaning you cannot use this equalizer as a true Dual Mono box, but I think you will probably decide to track your stereo setups through it because of what it sounds like. At face value the BAX really applies to mastering though I am sure there are interesting possibilities for tracking given the musical slope and thus radically invisible broad enhancement. It seems to really enhance the lower level detail of your program in a DANGEROUS kind of way, without any weight, color or tonal shift. Certainly 2-bus app's where you just want to touch the mix to bring forward high and low ranges, its going to be killer, but its a very out of the way kind of fairy dust that is MORE THAN LIKLEY complimented by other devices in the mastering chain. At least in mine it would.

I think this processor is going to be highly sought after for treating M/S processing because of the type of slope that it is, and that it doesn't create any ringing or granular artifacts commonly associated with equalizing. Instead it is INSANELY PRESERVING OF REVERB AND L/R DEPTH. Hanging this over the Sum and Difference insert point of the S&M is silly cool. Its got a squeaky clean response, and when bypassed the audio seemed to lose the cool focus it had going, so that the sound sat back into its chair. Its definitely more about clean balance in mastering and WAY more subtle of a processor than the MM really is in my experience. The HP/LP are STUPIDLY INVISIBLE, as is the rest of the audio path on this unit, but the way the BAX filters interact with the HP/LP Filters is pretty useful as it seems to lend interesting effects to the quality of the slope. In the end; the BAX EQ has a totally different slope than a shelving filter in that has less aggression and is more broad, even with a wider Q of a shelf, the slope is much more gradual.

The MM has a custom Hutch designed "Rapture" Op amp w/ the SAME input and output transformers as the Massivo. AND is based upon the H/L Shelving Filters, but with Hutch tweaking the filters. The filter slopes are pretty damn musical for 2-buss work. There are 11 frequency selections on each High and Low band, per channel which are both also switchable to Bell Curves. There is also a "#2" bell curve filter position on the High bands, which applies to the last four positions, and have different characteristics and different overlap with the Low Band. Basically, the Overlap of Shelf and bell selections from low to high on this equalizer lets you create very radical effects, and dramatic tone shaping, as you can set the Boost/Cut as you see fit for the Selection and vary the Q of the filter.

When you switch GAIN to Cut instead of boost, turing the knob to the right, "cuts more". Its confusing at first, but once you use it, its layout is igneous for versatility depending on what you are doing with the low bands. When doing 2-bus shaping and balancing, this thing adds air and amazing feel the audio that is only described are silky dense and full, and radically "atmospheric" or open in the top. The Character of the Filter Reaction is RIGHT in line with the Massive, but with EVEN MORE weight and density to the audio path because of the iron and op amp. AND You can also switch the transformers depending!!!

I just got a Dangerous Bax EQ in a few days ago. I took some old mixes that were done straight into a soundcraft spirit console. I had no good preamps back then and only one good condenser AKG 414. I ran the two track mix into pro tools then out into an Otari 32 Status console through an API 2500 compressor then into the Dangerous Bax EQ back into protools. You can listen to the results at www.wasprecording.com. Go to the Mastering page. It will take a little while to load, but there are 5 songs with mastering and 5 without. It will give some people an idea of what it sounds like. These are low quality mp3's, but you can hear what the Bax does on these.

Bud Wasser
www.wasprecording.com

Sounds quite drastic - that change... is this 2 compressors in a chain? (Otari & API) and the BAX EQ?

Thanks for the various examples.

I had the compressor and eq bypassed on the channel strip on the Otari Console. The Otari does add some smooth analog to the chain, but I pushed the gain up pretty good on the API 2500. I ran the API at 2:1 compression and really did not compress the signal very much (barely moved the needles). The API is a very loud box and I just love the way it sounds. It will go quite a bit louder than those tracks if you compress the audio more. On the Bax, I have the LPF and HPF engaged and have 84 HZ at 3db boost and 1.6 KHZ at 2db boost. When the Bax is in bypass mode, it sounds like there is a blanket over the speakers. It's that drastic. Engaged brings everything to life. It's hard to hear the detail difference on computer speakers, but on my Adams, It's absolutely huge. I'm really impressed with the filters on this thing. You can tighten the bottom while making it bigger. I really think the API and Bax are a great combination.

Bud Wasser
www.wasprecording.com

My fellow BAX owners, i got this lovely unit in yesterday and works fine. My only issue is, Im having trouble with routing as I am unable to monitor my final print.

connection:
dbox summing output >>
bax eq input and bax output >>
into aurora's 7&8 inputs to print.

Can someone please help me with the routing, so i can monitor the adjustments im making with the Bax Eq in realtime, not just after its already done on the print.

Thanks in advance.

just wondering if the Mini Massive is recommended over the BAX EQ for mixing
and mastering? which is easier to use?

Hey oxmyn, if you are working in protools arm your stereo track and use the input only monitoring, or press option - k.

the BAX is a VERY different EQ than the Mini Massive.

I demoed the Mini Massive and thought it sounded a bit boring and sterile.

just my 2c.



i have not tried out the BAX.

Does anyone have an opinion on how the BAX stacks up with the XQP 535 which also uses Baxandall curve filters? The XQP is less money, so hence my interest!

Just saw this question on an old thread and wanted to answer, now having both. They're complimentary. I'd say the BAX does its one thing and does it really, really well. I can do more with the MM and it sounds great, too. The MM seems to get mixes sounding great and the BAX just puts that extra little something on top (and bottom). The MM gets lots of use on tracking, usually overheads or vocals if only for a bit of HPF. I haven't found a groove for using the BAX during any tracking.

Recently I've tested BAX EQ. This is a good solution from modern devices but if compare it with vintage Neumann W495, Neumann's sound is much richer and more correct. Moreover, the price for W495 pair is twice lower than BAX EQ price.
Yes, W495 has a slightly different functional but effectiveness of its work is much bigger.
Generally, Dangerous Music products are rather doubtful from forming prices point of view. Bob Muller invents interesting devices but technical implementation of his ideas is not high-level (they use cheap components, impulse power modules, etc.). If you know a good engineer you can make BAX EQ modding but this is a quite expensive procedure.

ummm.. ahhhh .. how do I put this...............uhh....eghhh...

Ha-ha what a joke... get real and talk to Chris Muth... you might just learn a thing or two.

NASA spec detent attenuators at 300.00 each are not what I would call cheap and the Master and Monitor are loaded with them!

As for the "more real" comment... more real to you that is. What is truth? (look it up, as I already know)... you find your "more real" comment holds no value whatsoever (except to you... which is fine).

Everyone needs to listen for themselves and decide for themselves... it's the only way you, as an individual, can truly make an informed decision.

Good luck everyone!

Mixer guy kind of nailed it (although boring isn't quite the right term). We have both and the Bax is going to be much easier to use. The mini massive is very powerful and going to be more complicated. At first I didn't like the MM at all. It sounded biting & harsh to my ears (I tried it first across a drum buss). I usually put it across the guitars now. It gives them a beautiful lift & shine. Or BVs for the same effect.

The Bax is a nice piece. As to build quality? Seems pretty solid.

If it sounds "biting and harsh", then that's just the way the SOURCE material sounds when certain frequencies are accurately boosted / accentuated. It's not the sound of that eq itself.

An $11,000 GML mastering eq will also yield "biting, harsh" results when applied in a specific way to certain source material. It's all about the content of the SOURCE and how you are altering it, not necessarily the tool itself. Any accurate eq can bring out "harshness" in almost any content, depending on how it's adjusted.

Of course if you have specifically biting, harsh material and are hoping for a "fix", there are eqs of course that will specifically "round off" some "edge". And there are eqs that might have broad, gentle curves with limited control that do not allow the user to focus on the harshness. Different tools for different jobs.

agreed, i wouldn't call the mini massive biting or harsh, it can sound silky smooth. the filters are really great, however, i didn't really care for the so-called 'rapture amps', which they (manley) made a hoopla about when they first came out. i felt a reduction in sound quality every time it was in the signal path.

Long time ago post. But so helpful!!!!!
Are you still using the Bax?
If so how
I’m thinking of getting one. Esp for the filters for my analog 2bus
Thanks!