Klark Teknik DN 360 Graphic EQ for Mastering?

Why would you need a graphic EQ for mastering?
F.



"J_West" <[email protected]> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:765cddc8-5418-4bb5-9a39-be5c035d957c@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> I've heard these units and they sound great. But would a Klark Teknik
> DN 360 be appropriate for mastering? Are they clean enough?
>
> If not, what EQ would be a better choice in an analog mastering
> chain.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>

On Jun 15, 12:49 am, "Federico" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Why would you need a graphic EQ for mastering?
> F.

?? ....... To change the tone of the sound.

Usually a parametric EQ would be much much better....
F.



"J_West" <[email protected]> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:60caa334-8a06-4f6c-bc83-6eaa6133b0c3@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 15, 12:49 am, "Federico" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Why would you need a graphic EQ for mastering?
> F.

?? ....... To change the tone of the sound.

On Jun 15, 10:04 am, "Federico" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Usually a parametric EQ would be much much better....
> F.
>

True. But these are very, very nice EQs.

Sorry,
I just think that graphic EQs are not versatile enough for mastering.
KT may be a nice sounding EQ but it's not the kind of EQ I would choose for
the job.
F.



"J_West" <[email protected]> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:ab9e06f5-8b7a-44c3-868a-63ece281e680@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 15, 10:04 am, "Federico" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Usually a parametric EQ would be much much better....
> F.
>

True. But these are very, very nice EQs.

J_West wrote:

> On Jun 15, 12:49 am, "Federico" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Why would you need a graphic EQ for mastering?
> > F.
>
> ?? ....... To change the tone of the sound.

So what would you use for a compressor ?

Graham

In article <[email protected]>,
J_West <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Jun 15, 12:49=A0am, "Federico" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Why would you need a graphic EQ for mastering?
>
>?? ....... To change the tone of the sound.

Using a graphic EQ for mastering would be like repairing a watch with a
sledgehammer. You can change the tone of the sound all right... that
is the problem with it.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On Jun 15, 4:12 pm, [email protected] (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
>
> J_West  <[email protected]> wrote:
> >On Jun 15, 12:49=A0am, "Federico" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Why would you need a graphic EQ for mastering?
>
> >?? ....... To change the tone of the sound.
>
> Using a graphic EQ for mastering would be like repairing a watch with a
> sledgehammer.  You can change the tone of the sound all right... that
> is the problem with it.
> --scott
> --
> "C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."


Thanks for the response Scott. Always helpful. What parametics EQs are
your favorites for Mastering?

As for the Klark Teknik DN360 , I recently bought a very nice one for
300 bucks and was considering doing some Mastering with it. But your
reasoning for not to, makes sense.

Would you recommend the KT for general studio use? I know it's a live
PA favorite.

On 2008-06-15 [email protected] said:
>Thanks for the response Scott. Always helpful. What parametics EQs
>are your favorites for Mastering?
>As for the Klark Teknik DN360 , I recently bought a very nice one
>for 300 bucks and was considering doing some Mastering with it. But
>your reasoning for not to, makes sense.
>Would you recommend the KT for general studio use? I know it's a
>live PA favorite.
IF I needed an eq and didn't have another parametric for the
channel or channels in question. hOwever, for most studio
apps I prefer a parametric for the reasons scott cites.

NOw to ring out a system quickly I"ll take a graphic.
THough even here many prefer a parametric I find that for
overall tweaking ofstage monitors or tuning a system with a
room a decent graphic can get me there quickly.

I wouldn't turn it down if there was one put in my remote
truck, but for my money I"d just as soon buy more channels
of good parametric for the racks. A graphic is sort of like
doing surgery with a machette imho.



Richard webb,
replace anything before at with elspider

<[email protected]> wrote in message
p%i5k.6005$AJ6.5675@bignews8.bellsouth.net
> On 2008-06-15 [email protected] said:
>> Thanks for the response Scott. Always helpful. What parametics EQs
>> are your favorites for Mastering?
>> As for the Klark Teknik DN360 , I recently bought a very nice one
>> for 300 bucks and was considering doing some Mastering with it. But
>> your reasoning for not to, makes sense.
>> Would you recommend the KT for general studio use? I know it's a
>> live PA favorite.
> IF I needed an eq and didn't have another parametric for the
> channel or channels in question. hOwever, for most studio
> apps I prefer a parametric for the reasons scott cites.

I too have found graphic EQ's to be wrong for mastering my projects.

I find that tone controls are enough. A little bass or treble boost is just
the ticket for a good "commercial" sound.

"I don't really have a replacement career, it's a very gnawing thing."

Robert Morein
Dresher, PA
(310) 237-6511
(215) 646-4894

Fuckwit

> I too have found graphic EQ's to be wrong for mastering my
projects.
>
> I find that tone controls are enough. >
'
There's no real difference between shelving tone controls and Graphic
EQs. Just a different way of 'viewing what you're doing'.

J_West <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Thanks for the response Scott. Always helpful. What parametics EQs are
>your favorites for Mastering?

I personally use the Millennia NSEQ-2. The Q goes nice and high, although
the Q control is kind of touchy. It doesn't have a lot of filters, and
I think the "twin topology" thing is more of a gimmick than anything else,
but it sounds good.

The Sontec units are not bad... I have worked on a lot of them, though, and
they are rather weird designs, and the support from the manufacturer has been
spotty at times (although seems to be improving... he showed up at the last
AES show in NYC and we were all surprised he was even still alive). But they
sound good when they work, although they don't do super-narrow filters.

For years I worked in a place with an Orban 622M, which was swanky and new
at the time but which today can be found at closeout prices. It could sound
a little grainy if you pushed it too hard with too tight a Q, but it was not
bad at all. It was a standard 622B, but with very different controls; the
gain controls had all been replaced with stepped attenuators.

I have briefly used the GML, never used the Prism at all. I have used the
non-mastering version of the Speck and I would not hesitate to recommend
it (although the filters won't get super-narrow), but I have never used the
version with the stepped controls.

>As for the Klark Teknik DN360 , I recently bought a very nice one for
>300 bucks and was considering doing some Mastering with it. But your
>reasoning for not to, makes sense.
>
>Would you recommend the KT for general studio use? I know it's a live
>PA favorite.

I'm not sure why anyone would really want a graphic EQ in the studio. The
reason the PA guys like graphic EQs is that they can immediately pull down
one band when they hear ringing in that band... it's very rapid to operate.
For anything else, they really aren't very useful, because in the real world
most of the problems you deal with aren't on third-octave centers.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."