The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Mastering Eq Comparison Test
Old 4th November 2018 | Show parent
  #61
Lives for gear
 
SmoothTone's Avatar
 
Verified Member
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riccardo ➡️
Quick question just trying to understand. Am I correct to assume there was an original silver version available as a Recording or Mastering PQ then a newer one a couple of years ago and now a revised one? In other words three different versions since its original appearance?

p.s. and two for the Passeq so far?
Just the 2. By 'new' I meant the 2016 model. I edited my post to prevent further confusion.
Old 5th November 2018 | Show parent
  #62
Lives for gear
 
X-Pand Sound Mastering's Avatar
 
Verified Member
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Well about the Spl PQ, at the beginning it was the model 2050, with motorized pots and presets/recall function. Then they released a "recording version" wich was basically the same without the motorized pots and all the logic circuitry etc.
Now they released an updated version of the PQ with an updated design wich "cut down" the production cost overall.
I did listen to the newer model and, if I remember correctly, it was a bit more "open" or let say "present" in the midrange, and "less" warm in the low / high area. The power supply is quite different from the original design aswell, so that can change a lot of things about how the unit sounds etc.
I'll do a shoot out with smoothtone files to see if I hear the same thing
Old 11th November 2018
  #63
i was curious how the Tube Tech HLT2A would sound if I only replace
the two nr.1 tubes, as the developer is of the mind that only these
two would provoke a tonal alteration (ref. Teebaum's earlier posts).

So I replaced the two 1st Tubes (L/R) with
Mullard M8137, as I had great experiences with Mullard,
when I had the Thermionic Phoenix "11th anniversary edition".
(although it uses another Mullard M-Tubes).

- Converter: Hapi

Self-Service (I also upload a picture of settings):

Original File (24/96)
http://mixofon.com/tube_tech_hlt2a/N...ORIGINAL2).wav

Original Tubes of TT HLT2A
http://mixofon.com/tube_tech_hlt2a/T...inal_Tubes.wav

Mullard M8137 Tubes
http://mixofon.com/tube_tech_hlt2a/TT_M8137_Tubes.wav
Attached Thumbnails
Mastering Eq Comparison Test-4.jpg  
Old 12th November 2018 | Show parent
  #64
Lives for gear
 
teebaum's Avatar
 
Verified Member
5 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by shamelesssounds ➡️
i was curious how the Tube Tech HLT2A would sound if I only replace
the two nr.1 tubes, as the developer is of the mind that only these
two would provoke a tonal alteration (ref. Teebaum's earlier posts).

So I replaced the two 1st Tubes (L/R) with
Mullard M8137, as I had great experiences with Mullard,
when I had the Thermionic Phoenix "11th anniversary edition".
(although it uses another Mullard M-Tubes).

- Converter: Hapi

Self-Service (I also upload a picture of settings):

Original File (24/96)
http://mixofon.com/tube_tech_hlt2a/N...ORIGINAL2).wav

Original Tubes of TT HLT2A
http://mixofon.com/tube_tech_hlt2a/T...inal_Tubes.wav

Mullard M8137 Tubes
http://mixofon.com/tube_tech_hlt2a/TT_M8137_Tubes.wav
interesting!

the sound difference is huge, you can't imagine that you used the same setting.
the original tubes sound snuffy, the mullard much more open, whereby I would like to listen in again tomorrow with fresh ears, the brightness could also come from more saturation.
the version with the mullards also seems to be much louder, something that is not confirmed by the measurements, but rather by the brightness and possibly by saturation.

your sound sample makes it a bit difficult for me to clearly recognize saturation, moreover, it is difficult for me to estimate the punch and lowend range of your sample.

i ordered the same mullards after your mail and now these new cryo-tubes from jj.
i will make a comparison of all diveser tubes to find the optimal combination for me!
Old 12th November 2018 | Show parent
  #65
Quote:
Originally Posted by teebaum ➡️
interesting!

the sound difference is huge, you can't imagine that you used the same setting.
yes I'm really amazed!

With the Mullards, the hammer acts more like that huge Steinway that I've recorded ;- ) : more weighty, with a bigger body, more open. But you're right the punch is not that obvious as it would be with drums or even bass guitars etc... so I am looking forward to listen to your test results.

And the Mullards reproduce the dynamic, spatial and tonal complexities better in busy/congested musical moments: better resolution specially in the mids.
Or maybe the original Tubes are not just the right ones for this device!

I just can say, it was a great investment to buy both the TubeTech and these new Tubes, thanks to you Teebaum.

* update: the mullards sound even better after a short break in (4-5 hours only).
** update 2 after several days: the already very good tt stepped a new level of quality with the M8137 (or maybe will with any other good tubes as well, except the original ones). Besides other improvements in the mids and basses, the Highs are now like a sweet dream.
Old 13th March 2019 | Show parent
  #66
Lives for gear
 
X-Pand Sound Mastering's Avatar
 
Verified Member
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Hey Guyz, I thought I'll post this here, I'm selling this baby :

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/gear...l#post13862742

Old 14th March 2019 | Show parent
  #67
Lives for gear
 
tymish's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by teebaum ➡️
interesting!

the sound difference is huge, you can't imagine that you used the same setting.
the original tubes sound snuffy, the mullard much more open, whereby I would like to listen in again tomorrow with fresh ears, the brightness could also come from more saturation.
the version with the mullards also seems to be much louder, something that is not confirmed by the measurements, but rather by the brightness and possibly by saturation.

your sound sample makes it a bit difficult for me to clearly recognize saturation, moreover, it is difficult for me to estimate the punch and lowend range of your sample.

i ordered the same mullards after your mail and now these new cryo-tubes from jj.
i will make a comparison of all diveser tubes to find the optimal combination for me!
Are the tubes true NOS British Mullards or current production Russian tubes?
Old 16th March 2019
  #68
Lives for gear
 
eternalsound's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Nice thing to do teebaum, but wouldn't it be more fun to actually use the same EQ, then watch magic ears hear the nuances of the mentioned brands?
Old 16th March 2019 | Show parent
  #69
Lives for gear
 
teebaum's Avatar
 
Verified Member
5 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by eternalsound ➡️
Nice thing to do teebaum, but wouldn't it be more fun to actually use the same EQ, then watch magic ears hear the nuances of the mentioned brands?
I leave such games to the politicians
Old 16th March 2019
  #70
Gear Maniac
 
fccmt's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
What a great thread, thank you for that Teebaum!
The G23 in the solid state mode was quite a surprise...very nice! The Eksa is a splendid unit. In this conditions, it was the one I liked the most (Maselec VS Eksa would be great though).
I, immediately recognised the sound of the TT: the slightly muddy bass that it adds to the song and the shiny upfront highs...comparing it to the new G23, it makes me wonder if the G23 isn't a better option/investment...the new unit seems a little more versatile...the API is also a great eq, for sure, full of character...I'm glad that I didn't sell mine

Thank you for the fun!
Old 17th March 2019
  #71
Lives for gear
 
teebaum's Avatar
 
Verified Member
5 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
you should hear the TT with the new tubes - is a new device, incredible what you can get out of it!
the g23s is a marvelous device, but in both modes far away from the TT, not better or worse, just different.

the elksa is unbelievable useful for me.
i never had a mea-2 rev6 or rev7, compared to the rev5 i would prefer the eksa a lot - but there seems to be a lot going on since rev5.

a really good aspect of this test for me was that i realized again how great an api5500 can be (especially if the opamps are replaced according to its needs).
i am really very happy with my eq's, i find in every situation a combination that excites me.
Old 18th March 2019 | Show parent
  #72
Gear Maniac
 
fccmt's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by teebaum ➡️
you should hear the TT with the new tubes - is a new device, incredible what you can get out of it!
the g23s is a marvelous device, but in both modes far away from the TT, not better or worse, just different.

the elksa is unbelievable useful for me.
i never had a mea-2 rev6 or rev7, compared to the rev5 i would prefer the eksa a lot - but there seems to be a lot going on since rev5.

a really good aspect of this test for me was that i realized again how great an api5500 can be (especially if the opamps are replaced according to its needs).
i am really very happy with my eq's, i find in every situation a combination that excites me.
oh, I'm sure you are. you've got a wonderful pallet

I'm curious about your tube selection for the TT. Did you change only the lows or the highs too?

Regarding what Leif said to me, between the revisions, there is not a big difference...the major difference is the bass curve. What I know and from my experience, is that, it's great to have other options but, I could depend only on this eq.

It's better for me to not listen/demo the Eksa. That way I can keep the illusion that MEA was the best option eheh
Old 7th May 2019
  #73
Gear Maniac
The Eksa seems to be my favorite here. It seems to be the most balanced and natural. For some time, I thought the F610's actually sounded good but after all the comments to the contrary here, I seemed to have changed my mind with some critical listening. There seems to be something strange going on with the dynamics and a lot of the individual elements started to sound pokey and unglued. It does seem to impart a sheen in the color mode but maybe its more of a visqueem plastic type sheen? Lol.
Old 17th November 2019 | Show parent
  #74
mmn
Here for the gear
 
mmn's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by shamelesssounds ➡️
So I replaced the two 1st Tubes (L/R) with
Mullard M8137, as I had great experiences with Mullard,
Sorry for bumping up this thread.

Did you use the ECC 83 Mullard CV4004 M8137 ones ?

Looking forward to upgrade my hlt2am as well.
Old 17th November 2019 | Show parent
  #75
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmn ➡️
Sorry for bumping up this thread.
Did you use the ECC 83 Mullard CV4004 M8137 ones ?
Looking forward to upgrade my hlt2am as well.
yes
CV4004 - M8137 / 12AX7 (matched pair)
Old 21st November 2019 | Show parent
  #76
Lives for gear
 
X-Pand Sound Mastering's Avatar
 
Verified Member
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Hey guyz,

As a lot of people asked me for my PQ files of the monster thread "shooting Mastering eq's" (wich I can't find with the search function ??) , I'm posting it here :

https://we.tl/t-EOAHkP3ISu

The link will last a week I believe, so go grab them now

Best

Adrien
Old 15th February 2020 | Show parent
  #77
Just to say I first saw your vid on Youtube and made an opinion about those Eqs
And I just found the thread and downloaded the files and listened
Total different results !
We all know Youtube audio is not the best but it confirms that shootouts must be imported in your Daw where you can switch back and forth easily
The Eksa is simply above for my ears
Old 27th August 2020
  #78
Lives for gear
 
ionian's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
I just picked up a HLT-2AM about a week ago and I swapped out the tubes for the JJ Gold ones that Teebaum had done and this EQ is blowing me away. I did test before the tube change and had the same change that Teebaum had as well - the bottom got tighter and the mids opened up and a dimensional way. I can't get over the shelves, or how the cut filters, especially the high cut, can just "calm" high freqs without making it sound like I high cut the mix. And I'm really amazed at how useful the tilt is so far.

The only peculiarity is that the high cut filter is tied to the T-filter's bypass yet the low cut filter is all by itself. Strange, but must be a part of the circuit topology. Nonetheless, I'm really amazed at the sound and what it does so far. I know I'm in the honeymoon phase still but I haven't had any "what was I thinking?!" moments yet the next morning as I have with other gear when I've first gotten carried away with it the night before.
Old 6th January 2021 | Show parent
  #79
Lives for gear
 
X-Pand Sound Mastering's Avatar
 
Verified Member
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
1951 on Valentine

Hello Dan & everybody

Ok I thought I should do this Eq comparison test with 1951 Mastering Equalizer, as it is a "Lows & Highs" type of eq.

So here you go, 4 files in a single ZIP file : https://we.tl/t-Ili9BkxmxJ

To match the curves (with Span) I used 69hz on the lows and 16khz on the
highs.

1) Capacitive lowend color, High shelf only
2) Capacitive lowend color, High shelf + Aircap (full)
3) Inductive lowend color, High shelf only
4) Inductive lowend color, High shelf + Aircap (full)

It demonstrate pretty well the different characters this eq can achieve by the flick of a switch.

And here's a bit of tube glow inside 1951 to warm up your souls on this cold winter .

Old 29th January 2021 | Show parent
  #80
Gear Nut
 
Оpinions on the 1951 ... !? Come oon !
Old 29th January 2021 | Show parent
  #81
Gear Guru
 
thethrillfactor's Avatar
 
4 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by hool15 ➡️
Оpinions on the 1951 ... !? Come oon !
From the zip files, it seemed to work the best on the Hiphop C and Jungle A mix.
On the other ones it had a similar problems that alot of the newer EQ's have and that is in the Hi mids and air frequencies the difference between presence/brilliance/clarity is a real fine balance, especially in mixed material.

Alot of the newer EQ's just struggle in bringing this range out in a non fatiguing way and at times this EQ had the same issue. Maybe its because of the conversion used, but its hard to tell without trying it yourself. Being that this EQ takes up 3 spaces in the rack, it has to justify itself for that much real estate and I hate to say i am not completely convinced yet from what i am hearing so far.

(These days i am personally on the search for more great stereo EQs for buss work and welcome any new offerings into the fold).
Old 29th January 2021 | Show parent
  #82
Gear Nut
 
Do you think the KYTE or Michelangelo do it better (i mean coloring, low end and AIR especially) ? tnx
Old 29th January 2021 | Show parent
  #83
Gear Nut
 
AudiotalesDesign's Avatar
 
Verified Member
Thanks for your feedback on this In the Zip file I provided the "flat" sample for each style, so everybody could compare with their own Eq's. It would be great if you could provide us with a sample of what you describe as non fatiguing, just as an exemple, on one that you found 1951 to have this fatiguing issue. I would also love to have other members feedback by the way

Conversion used for all samples is a Lynx Hilo with Mogami cables throughout, nothing else in the signal path.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor ➡️
From the zip files, it seemed to work the best on the Hiphop C and Jungle A mix.
On the other ones it had a similar problems that alot of the newer EQ's have and that is in the Hi mids and air frequencies the difference between presence/brilliance/clarity is a real fine balance, especially in mixed material.

Alot of the newer EQ's just struggle in bringing this range out in a non fatiguing way and at times this EQ had the same issue. Maybe its because of the conversion used, but its hard to tell without trying it yourself. Being that this EQ takes up 3 spaces in the rack, it has to justify itself for that much real estate and I hate to say i am not completely convinced yet from what i am hearing so far.

(These days i am personally on the search for more great stereo EQs for buss work and welcome any new offerings into the fold).
Old 2nd February 2021 | Show parent
  #84
Gear Nut
 
AudiotalesDesign's Avatar
 
Verified Member
When I did the Valentine sample test, I was actually surprised that 1951 didn't sounded as bright as some other Eqs involvded in this experiment. I designed it to be an "efficient" Eq, with a lively sound. This is what I hear (and I'd love to have other people feedback on this )

So there is that aswell, maybe the settings I did on those exemple were a bit "too much" for your taste @ thethrillfactor .

Here are ALL the samples of 1951 ME directly via Dropbox :

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/9xy9dohpw...jsZR0Avya?dl=0

With this link you can either listen to them directly, or download the one you want. This is more convenient than the wetransfer file, as you can listen to ALL the samples directly via dropbox
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 28186 views: 2964070
Avatar for RJHollins
RJHollins 16 minutes ago
replies: 72 views: 17672
Avatar for Slug1
Slug1 7th January 2021
replies: 175 views: 40281
Avatar for Saxnscratch
Saxnscratch 7th August 2020
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace 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…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump