Analog EQs

[fazer]

    I once watched Ken push up the faders on the desk - it was a master of an older recording -  make a couple of adjustments re. level and eq., and that was it.  10 minutes.

.

Who was the artist?

I’ve loved his work over the years.  Great artist.  That always helps.

 

[fazer]

I think he (Scott) engineered  Birds of Fire
1973 studio album by Mahavishnu Orchestra.  That album especial “Birds of Fire,  song one. sounded great.

I’ll bet it had few overdubs.  I wish I was home I would look on the album.  Done At CBS New York and Trident London.  Nice rooms.

Maybe back to EQ design now.

 

[fazer]

A lot of these subtleties seems more evident to me when comparing hardware to software on a live signal rather than in the box and looped back through the hardware. 

This is a very important point.  Once it’s captured it seems harder to hear uniqueness in the hardware versions.  It has an affect on the performer in the way they sing.  Or voice over for a spot. 

     

 

[abbey road d enfer]

Dunno?  What stuff do you think is missing that we could do here?

There's not much left to invent in analog audio but I would encourage someone that thinks they would have a custom piece of gear based on what they think they need, instead of a servile copy of  brand X.
I may start working on Gold's request for a multi-band comp because it's exactly that: a new product based on existing building blocks and proven usability. https://groupdiy.com/index.php?topic=73604.msg956667#msg956667

 

[JohnRoberts]

There's not much left to invent in analog audio but I would encourage someone that thinks they would have a custom piece of gear based on what they think they need, instead of a servile copy of  brand X.
I may start working on Gold's request for a multi-band comp because it's exactly that: a new product based on existing building blocks and proven usability. https://groupdiy.com/index.php?topic=73604.msg956667#msg956667

multi-band comps are not exactly new either...

just combine crossovers with dynamics. Pick your tradeoffs.

JR

 

[ruairioflaherty]

I've never been fortunate enough to own a Masselec or GML EQ,  but digital emulations of this type of eq- what I've  considered 'corrective' type rather than 'enhancing' larger-than-life type -  seem to be pretty decent to me.  Others may disagree, dunno?

Owned a Maselec forever (and worked with Leif doing U.S. repairs) and had daily access to a GML for many years too.  I think your broad intuition is right, the closer to the hardware is to ideal (low distortion etc), the easier its behavior is to model. 

In reality both units deviate from the ideal a little, and then of course you have the UI - which is excellent on the Maselec and ....ahem....less so on the GML

Dynamic processes are much more challenging in digital, you're caught in a trade off between aliasing and the sound of mitigating techniques like oversampling (much less benign than vendors would have you believe).

And once we get into transformers and inductors I've yet to hear anything digital that survives detailed comparison.  Useful?  For sure, but the same as the hardware?  I've yet to hear that.

 

[gyraf]

Agreed. It is this effect that we stretch ad absurdum in the G24 - most of what makes it so invisible while working is that variation in transformer loading almost completely mask out the first couple of dB's GR

/Jakob E.

 

[abbey road d enfer]

Forgot: I already agreed earlier on with what Jakob wrote in this thread and wanted to add that, in my humble opinion, you  detect the same on the venerable LA-2A. 
The loading on the input transformer secondary at idle is about spot on for an HA-100 or A-10.  But the loading decreases when it's actively compressing.  This damps the transformer more and the response changes. 

Actually the loading varies from 41kohms to 34k - for an improbable 40dB of GR.
Does this signal a significant change in response?