Is there really a difference in graphic eqs?

[Resonant Serpent]

I've been looking at getting a graphic eq, but I've noticed that the prices vary a lot between the Klark Teknik and the Art graphic eqs. Is there really a difference between them? What about the Alesis MEQ-230?

Does it all come down to build quality, or are there fundamental differences in the way they work or in the sound of the unit?

TIA

[rwc]

they all sound different.

get a used pultec.

They'll all do -6 at 200 hz and +3 at 5K, but they all sound different.

[Jim Williams]

Proportional Q graphic EQ's are great for getting sounds, they extrapolate the lines between bands to create a smooth EQ curve. Constant Q graphics all have ripple at the EQ points. A broad smile curve will show bumps at each band center, whether in boost or cut. It looks like a picket fence on an analyzer. Those are designed for room tuning, to rid of nodes. The older proportional Q designs don't do a good job at that but excel at creating smooth complex EQ curves.

[joel hamilton]

You could apply this line of reasoning to ANY piece of gear that is used for recording (or otherwise, I guess)...

Of course there is a difference, whether you care or not is up to you.
Anything in the chain, no matter how tangential (like a clock source) , will make a difference. whether it is subjectively "better" or "worse" is up to you.

Using a piece of gear for its inherent qualities transcends price tag. Learn the strengths and weaknesses of each piece of gear and you will have more fun in the studio.

[jetboatguy]

Their can be massive differences from one EQ design to another...

Each time you boost or cut frequencies with an EQ... it fucks around with the phase relationship pre and post of the center frequency chosen... the key to a good sounding musical EQ is whether the it can boost or cut frequencies with minimal artifacts of drastic phase shifts ,cancellation, distortion and noise.

[Resonant Serpent]

Thanks for the responses everyone. That is exactly the kind of information I was looking for. While I assumed some of it, I couldn't back up my assumptions with any resource on the internet.

I'm always dealing with the 'diminishing returns' aspect of gear. My Agile les paul copy cost half of what my cousins Gibson les paul cost, but we both agreed that the Agile was the better piece of gear. Besides info on fuction, that's what I was trying to do here.

I have a friend who has a few graphic eqs, and I'm going to give them all a spin to see what I like.

[Resonant Serpent]

You could apply this line of reasoning to ANY piece of gear that is used for recording (or otherwise, I guess)...

Of course there is a difference, whether you care or not is up to you.
Anything in the chain, no matter how tangential (like a clock source) , will make a difference. whether it is subjectively "better" or "worse" is up to you.

Using a piece of gear for its inherent qualities transcends price tag. Learn the strengths and weaknesses of each piece of gear and you will have more fun in the studio.

I totally agree, and this seems to be the TapeOp ethos that I love so much. I'll admit that I was totally caught up in the GAS craze back in the 90's, and it's one of the reasons I quit music. I felt I couldn't compete with the gear other people had, so why bother. About five years ago I began just doing it for fun, and discovered the magazine, and found that there were plenty of people making great music on low budgets.

"Using a piece of gear for its inherent qualities trancends price tag."

I've found this to be completely true. I paid 50.00 for my Joe Meek VC3v2, and it's the best piece of gear I've bought so far, to me, because I love the way it sounds, and its versatility. I'm currently using the effects loop in it to hook into my modular for some really cool and brutal sounds that remind me of the early BBC Radiophonic Workshop sounds.

It's a great time to be a musician.

[Professor]

Nope, all the EQs are the same, it's just that some manufacturers are trying to screw you out of more money than others.
It's the same as those damn acoustic guitar - why would anyone pay thousands for Taylor or Breedlove when Esteban sells his for $199 with all those DVDs.
Or cars - damn Porsche selling a new Carrera GT3 for over $100k when a Scion is under 20k and you get more surface area for cool paint jobs.




Sorry, I couldn't help myself and had to toss out a little Sunday morning sarcasm.
But as said above, of course there's a difference, but different and better aren't necessarily the same, especially when you consider what use you will have vs. someone else shopping for graphic EQs. Most graphics are aimed at the live sound market and not at the studio market to begin with, but beyond that there is always a price/performance balance that has to consider the rest of your system. If you're building a high-end PA at a 2500-seat venue, using Meyer cabinets and a top-end Midas console, then you're probably going to go for those Klark-Teknik EQs. If it's a bar system for 50 people, you have Behringer cabinets and a Phonic board, then you will probably aim for a lower price point.

And I have to agree with Joel there. It should obvious that there is a difference, but do you care and will it matter to how you plan to use the gear?

-Jeremy

[syrupcore]

Will some one explain to me what is happening in an EQ circuit that causes the phase shift?

[jetboatguy]

Their can be massive differences from one EQ design to another...

Each time you boost or cut frequencies with an EQ... it fucks around with the phase relationship pre and post of the center frequency chosen... the key to a good sounding musical EQ is whether the EQ can boost or cut frequencies with minimal artifacts of drastic phase shifts ,cancellation, distortion and noise.

when you accentuate or cut a certain frequency... the frequency response changes due to the relationship of phase... shifting or forcing the positives cycles per second into the negatives swings of a givin' frequency will cause some phase cancellation...etc

[The Real MC]

Will some one explain to me what is happening in an EQ circuit that causes the phase shift?

Basically the EQ is built around the product of resistance/capacitance, resistance/inductance, or resistance/capacitance/inductance. The non-resistive components introduce a dynamic impedance that varies with frequency - the "center frequency" is the point where the boost/cut is most prevalent. They also have associated phase shift that varies with frequency, a necessary evil of EQ circuits. While the fundamental of your signal is of interest to the EQ's center frequency, it also imparts a phase shift on your harmonics approach. The nature of the phase shift response over frequency varies all over the map depending on the circuit design. The result can be musical, it can be surgical, it can be sterile, or it can be disastrous.

The variety of EQ circuits is mind-boggling. There are so many variations in the equation that impact the sound of an EQ. Many designers have spent eons finding the "ideal combination" of the right topology, the right dielectric insulator for the capacitors, the right element for resistors, and don't get me started on the "black magic" of inductors.

These things have a bigger impact on sound than most people are willing to admit...

We haven't even talked about active gain components yet. Want an EQ that can boost? You need an opamp or transistor circuit. If you thought the passive components were overwhelming, active components are even worse. Replacing a 4558 opamp with an LF353 can make a world of difference. Bipolar transistors sound radically different from FETs, and the pros/cons of each would fill a textbook. Or two.

Most audio products are an exercise in compromise. Designers would love to use boutique opamps and capacitors that make their EQs sound stellar but then the purchasing agents bring them back to reality when they wouldn't blink about replacing a 5532 with a 1458 because of better quantity pricing (hey it's just an opamp!). After all, the marketing department is the final authority - sad to say.

[Andy Peters]

What about the Alesis MEQ-230?

I'm surprised that nobody's said this yet, but the MEQ-230 is quite possibly the worst piece of "audio" "gear" you can imagine.

In most cases, you're better off with no EQ than with the MEQ-230.

On the live side of things, we tend to like the dbx 1231 as a decent moderate-cost graphic EQ.

-a