|
Post by ab101 on May 25, 2021 0:15:04 GMT -6
Nice demo video:
The Audioscape is only $1099 a channel. That is less than my Pultec little 500 series 500x - which I like but is on the clean - non-mojo - side. And then I am reading this from the audioscape website: Not only does the EQP-A include a full complement of NOS tubes - utilizing the oft excluded NOS 6x4 Rectifier Tube; an important aspect of the originals sound, custom-wound inductor, and high-end custom iron that matches the specifications and performance of the originals - including the critical interstage transformer omitted from most "clones" despite its crucial contributions both to performance and faithfully recreating the originals box tone - but, by necessity, we've actually “corrected” the circuit to more accurately reflect the behavior and sound of the vintage units, after finding the original schematic(s) contained errors that drastically affected performance at certain filter settings.
And then it has all this which is not in my Pultec 500 series 500x units: 12AX7 12AU7 6X4 (RECTIFIER) Exclusive, Custom-Wound Input Transformer (exacting replica of the original) Exclusive, Custom-Wound Interstage Transformer (exacting replica of the original) Carnhill Output Transformer (an exceptional recreation of the obscenely RARE, virtually unobtainable original Peerless Iron)
Am I reading three tubes and three transformers per channel? And somehow a plugin or 500 series unit without all this, is going to sound like this? I am real skeptical about that.
I don't like that it takes three spaces. But these audioscape people seem to be more insistent on the sound and performance than the space issue.
And then there is the great demo and I have to believe at $1099 they would take a unit right back if someone was unhappy. I just do not get why this is even a question unless someone can afford the tube pultecs for about $8000+? I am impressed and looking for space options.
|
|
|
Post by nomatic on May 25, 2021 6:09:09 GMT -6
I use the Rultec all the time in mixing but my Audioscape kills in tracking and no plug can touch it yet....
|
|
|
Post by robschnapf on May 25, 2021 6:15:21 GMT -6
The Plug ins are like really nice pictures of Hawaii The hardware is like going to Hawaii amd taking the pictures
|
|
|
Post by Chad on May 25, 2021 7:36:02 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by plinker on May 25, 2021 7:53:22 GMT -6
It's one of the reasons I've been eying the Tegeler EQP1A for a while. Dual mono EQP1A in a 2U space. Plus instant recall! Guts...
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on May 25, 2021 9:04:44 GMT -6
Nice demo video: The Audioscape is only $1099 a channel. That is less than my Pultec little 500 series 500x - which I like but is on the clean - non-mojo - side. And then I am reading this from the audioscape website: Not only does the EQP-A include a full complement of NOS tubes - utilizing the oft excluded NOS 6x4 Rectifier Tube; an important aspect of the originals sound, custom-wound inductor, and high-end custom iron that matches the specifications and performance of the originals - including the critical interstage transformer omitted from most "clones" despite its crucial contributions both to performance and faithfully recreating the originals box tone - but, by necessity, we've actually “corrected” the circuit to more accurately reflect the behavior and sound of the vintage units, after finding the original schematic(s) contained errors that drastically affected performance at certain filter settings. And then it has all this which is not in my Pultec 500 series 500x units: 12AX7 12AU7 6X4 (RECTIFIER) Exclusive, Custom-Wound Input Transformer (exacting replica of the original) Exclusive, Custom-Wound Interstage Transformer (exacting replica of the original) Carnhill Output Transformer (an exceptional recreation of the obscenely RARE, virtually unobtainable original Peerless Iron)Am I reading three tubes and three transformers per channel? And somehow a plugin or 500 series unit without all this, is going to sound like this? I am real skeptical about that. I don't like that it takes three spaces. But these audioscape people seem to be more insistent on the sound and performance than the space issue. And then there is the great demo and I have to believe at $1099 they would take a unit right back if someone was unhappy. I just do not get why this is even a question unless someone can afford the tube pultecs for about $8000+? I am impressed and looking for space options. The space is not needed. Pultecs are simple circuits with modern PCB layouts which audioscape does as you can see below. It's a huge case carrying almost nothing. You could easily fit a stereo unit in the same 3u case it comes in. It wouldn't even be hard. I love hardware to death. More than plugins in general. But as a hardware owner and aquire..er..space is always a premium that you have to consider. 6u for a stereo pair is insanely excessive by today's standards given the simplicity of the circuit. And I'm a big fan of audioscape. I own a 76a and vcomp. Would own a pair of these and the 2a probably but they take up way too much space. The D3a is perfectly executed on this. They took a classic 2u stereo package and made it 1u with some extras. It's a shame they didn't do that with something like the this eq. Yeah exactly. Lot of empty space... Edit: this is the tegler ha my bad. But still shows the simple circuit although uses SMD components vs through hole.
|
|
|
Post by ab101 on May 25, 2021 9:26:16 GMT -6
Hi Blackdawg. My sentiments are with your thinking. I originally agreed with you that the space is not needed. Audioscape claims it is and I honestly have forgotten their reasons. Obviously, all the components can be crammed in together in a way to use less spaces, but will that be a sustainable product? Maybe they will write here and explain. It is in their interest to have less spaces, and I believe we are dealing with honest people. I would love it if they had a stereo unit that knocked off a couple of spaces. So, I would like audioscape to address their reasoning again. (It maybe in another thread here too.) So, bottom line, I put the space as a downside in my mind. But if it sounds like the pultecs, that also take up the same amount of spaces, for about $8000, instead of about $2000, then I think it is worth finding space.
|
|
|
Post by robschnapf on May 25, 2021 11:36:53 GMT -6
Man I don’t get the space thing being a big issue. I mean yeah it’s a pain but I much prefer the sound then the space. I have a gates SA39 and a RCA 86A that’s two channels of limiting in 13 spaces.!! Add the coil rack on top of that. Just Kills rack real estate but the return is huge.
|
|
|
Post by thecolourfulway on May 25, 2021 12:03:01 GMT -6
Love my pair of eqps, sooo very glad they are 3U, they look proper! Well ok the blue is a little funny, but...
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on May 25, 2021 21:26:05 GMT -6
Hi Blackdawg. My sentiments are with your thinking. I originally agreed with you that the space is not needed. Audioscape claims it is and I honestly have forgotten their reasons. Obviously, all the components can be crammed in together in a way to use less spaces, but will that be a sustainable product? Maybe they will write here and explain. It is in their interest to have less spaces, and I believe we are dealing with honest people. I would love it if they had a stereo unit that knocked off a couple of spaces. So, I would like audioscape to address their reasoning again. (It maybe in another thread here too.) So, bottom line, I put the space as a downside in my mind. But if it sounds like the pultecs, that also take up the same amount of spaces, for about $8000, instead of about $2000, then I think it is worth finding space. The only reason I can think of maybe is heat. But even then..meh. There are lots of tube units in smaller 2u chassis. And it's a moot point. I doubt they will change anything. But Im sure Chris could talk about it audioscape If they did a stereo unit even in 3u I'd be down in a heart beat. Man I don’t get the space thing being a big issue. I mean yeah it’s a pain but I much prefer the sound then the space. I have a gates SA39 and a RCA 86A that’s two channels of limiting in 13 spaces.!! Add the coil rack on top of that. Just Kills rack real estate but the return is huge. Well idk. I have a lot of gear and space is limited. Its gotta be good to stay and im sorry but 6u is a lot. Thats 2 11 space 500 racks. Or I could fit 6 channels of compression or any number of things. I have NO doubt these EQs are stellar. I'm sure i'd adore them. I just can't give up the space at least not right now. I'm sure there are lots of others out here that are similar.
|
|
|
Post by miadaudio on May 26, 2021 1:09:05 GMT -6
From a manufacturing point of view, there are a few good reasons to go bigger
|
|
|
Post by robschnapf on May 26, 2021 2:14:44 GMT -6
[/quote]Well idk. I have a lot of gear and space is limited. Its gotta be good to stay and im sorry but 6u is a lot. Thats 2 11 space 500 racks. Or I could fit 6 channels of compression or any number of things.
I have NO doubt these EQs are stellar. I'm sure i'd adore them. I just can't give up the space at least not right now. I'm sure there are lots of others out here that are similar. [/quote]
Space is limited for me as well. The point is this, the pultecs, SA39 and 86A are worth the space as there is nothing in a 500 rack that replaces what they do. They are tools that are used everyday. It's a nice problem to have....
|
|
|
Post by Quint on May 26, 2021 7:09:05 GMT -6
I'd be way more interested if a pair didn't take up 6 freaking u of space. Should be 2u. Yeah, I just can't devote 3u to one channel of eq and, really, it would be 6u for 2 channels, since I would want a pair. If they could get it down to 2u, I could handle that. I'd replace my pair of KT Pultecs in a heartbeat. But 3u, just takes up too much space for me. I'm basically nearly out of rack space and simply don't have room to put a 5th rack in. Also, even if I had the room, I've gotten to the point where I've kind of self imposed a limit of four 16u racks. I've got 24 in/24 out snakes going to each rack. If I can't do what I need to do with that, a 5th rack isn't going to help. That Tegeler looks really interesting. Hmmm...
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on May 26, 2021 11:08:51 GMT -6
That Tegeler looks really interesting. Hmmm... Yeah, I would love to hear them next to the Audio Scape or an original for reference.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Dec 13, 2021 6:17:21 GMT -6
I'd be way more interested if a pair didn't take up 6 freaking u of space. Should be 2u. That's called Retro 2A3 VERY recommended! I am having this same debate with myself and keep leaning toward the 2A3. Although, I could buy a sidecar to match my Dangerfox desk and (2) Audio Scape EQP1s and I would still spend less money. Seriously though, these and their Opto should be 2U each, not 3.
|
|
|
Post by tasteliketape on Dec 13, 2021 8:01:56 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Dec 13, 2021 11:45:53 GMT -6
that looks very sweet. Look forward to hearing more about it. 6RU vs. 2RU is a no brainer. I've had the talk with Charlie, and I understand WHY they did the 3RU, but it's just too much in a modern studio that's limited size wise IMO. If you can get 2 channels of EQ in a 2RU package with the maid's, and the Avalon 2055's - why not? And both those are stellar EQ's.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Dec 13, 2021 12:15:23 GMT -6
Going to have to track down some of the youtube reviews. That looks really nice. The price point is right there too.
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Dec 13, 2021 12:25:44 GMT -6
Sounds solid to me:
Plus I love its all on switches. Recall would be fast and easy.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Dec 13, 2021 12:34:49 GMT -6
Watching this one. This is a nice unit.
|
|
|
Post by tasteliketape on Dec 13, 2021 12:55:38 GMT -6
I don’t need it , but what the hell I just bought the wife a new house ! My turn lol
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Dec 13, 2021 13:05:52 GMT -6
Yeah I like it a lot. Seems to do the Pultec thing well. Switches. Added Mid band. Looks very versatile.
|
|
|
Post by ab101 on Dec 13, 2021 14:56:54 GMT -6
If audioscape could make a two channel, two rack space option, that would be very nice. By the way, I recently received the Iron Age V2 and my recent experience with it is that it does more for the kick and snare in a way that I like better than the Empress demo above (could be the way it was demoed). I like a tight punchy kick, not a round kick. As to snare, I like it to have body. The V2 with different settings for the kick using one channel, and snare using the other, does kick and snare superbly!
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Dec 13, 2021 15:03:07 GMT -6
If audioscape could make a two channel, two rack space option, that would be very nice. By the way, I recently received the Iron Age V2 and my recent experience with it is that it does more for the kick and snare in a way that I like better than the Empress demo above (could be the way it was demoed). I like a tight punchy kick, not a round kick. As to snare, I like it to have body. The V2 with different settings for the kick using one channel, and snare using the other, does kick and snare superbly! The V2 has proportion Q as well and is in general tighter Q by a lot compared to a Pultec which is VERY broad filters. The "Shift" switch on the Empress is just tightening Q by the sounds of it. Which is why we have different EQs I like the LC CAPI EQs on snare too.
|
|
|
Post by ab101 on Dec 13, 2021 16:37:02 GMT -6
I love the CAPI Lc25s. I just did not like the Empress that much on the drum part of the demo compared to other eqs. (And it could just be the demo. Maybe the Empress would be great on snare, vocals, strings, etc.) Yes, there are different eqs, and some are not good at all, and some just have their special applications, and I suppose some are just great for everything but I am not sure I have found that one yet.
|
|