Square State Solid State EQ Model One B
- metanoiastudios
- buyin' gear
- Posts: 593
- Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 4:38 am
- Location: Goshen, IN
- Contact:
Square State Solid State EQ Model One B
Hey guys,
I am interested in seeing what you think about this upcoming EQ:
http://www.zenproaudio.com/squarestatesolidstateeq.aspx
I don't have a dedicated unit, and would like to get one for making some corrective decisions while tracking. Any thoughts on this unit, or a similar unit you would recommend? would a dedicated hardware EQ provide better results when compared to a software plugin?
Thank you
I am interested in seeing what you think about this upcoming EQ:
http://www.zenproaudio.com/squarestatesolidstateeq.aspx
I don't have a dedicated unit, and would like to get one for making some corrective decisions while tracking. Any thoughts on this unit, or a similar unit you would recommend? would a dedicated hardware EQ provide better results when compared to a software plugin?
Thank you
http://www.paulojuarez.com
*Will trade design work for gear!*
*Will trade design work for gear!*
-
- tinnitus
- Posts: 1135
- Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 8:19 am
- Location: beautiful Carlsbad, CA
- Contact:
Swinging input designed inductor based EQ's were very popular in the 1970's .
I don't personally like them, I hear the inductors ringing and that bothers me now.
I much prefer a simulated inductor design using quality opamps, r's and c's.
I have rebuilt some of those early designs. The ones with torridal inductors seem to be best of those. With super low noise, low offset, low THD opamps like the ADA4898-1, all coupling caps are removed and they are super quiet and very low THD, until you tweak a EQ knob, then the THD goes up. You can really hear those inductors with those opamps.
Sweeping the frequency response on the Audio Precision also shows the non-linear nature of LC EQ's, one will see each band with a different slope and peak.
I don't personally like them, I hear the inductors ringing and that bothers me now.
I much prefer a simulated inductor design using quality opamps, r's and c's.
I have rebuilt some of those early designs. The ones with torridal inductors seem to be best of those. With super low noise, low offset, low THD opamps like the ADA4898-1, all coupling caps are removed and they are super quiet and very low THD, until you tweak a EQ knob, then the THD goes up. You can really hear those inductors with those opamps.
Sweeping the frequency response on the Audio Precision also shows the non-linear nature of LC EQ's, one will see each band with a different slope and peak.
Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades
Audio Upgrades
-
- moves faders with mind
- Posts: 2745
- Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 11:26 pm
- Location: Denver, CO
- Contact:
Y'r all talkin' 'bout my baby.
I'm 50% partner in Square State Solid State...so take everything I say with a large grain of salt. Joel test drove one of my prototypes a couple years back, and had good things to say...but I'll let him speak for himself.
Hardware vs. plugins? They each have their strengths. This EQ won't get saved with your session file...it also won't make you wince when you boost 17K. As Jim mentioned, the concept of this design is 30+ years old...but still working strong. And they should still be working in another 30 years. Running today's software in even 3 years can be a concern.
I built this EQ because I couldn't find anything else that
A> did what I wanted sonically, and
B> I could easily afford
I wanted an EQ that gave me better control over the low end, so I could get a thunderous bass guitar and a slamming kick drum to coexist. The fixed shelf on my console wouldn't do it...but the model 1B can, by offering a variety of frequencies on the low end, in both shelving and bell responses. Extend that same sort of control and character to the mids and highs, and it turns out you've got a very useful EQ.
To address Jim's point: I worked very hard to keep the character of the EQ the same from band to band and frequency to frequency - the slopes and peaks don't get too screwy (they're inductors - of course they're going to be a little screwy! Ringing and THD are the name of the game!).[/i]
I'm 50% partner in Square State Solid State...so take everything I say with a large grain of salt. Joel test drove one of my prototypes a couple years back, and had good things to say...but I'll let him speak for himself.
Hardware vs. plugins? They each have their strengths. This EQ won't get saved with your session file...it also won't make you wince when you boost 17K. As Jim mentioned, the concept of this design is 30+ years old...but still working strong. And they should still be working in another 30 years. Running today's software in even 3 years can be a concern.
I built this EQ because I couldn't find anything else that
A> did what I wanted sonically, and
B> I could easily afford
I wanted an EQ that gave me better control over the low end, so I could get a thunderous bass guitar and a slamming kick drum to coexist. The fixed shelf on my console wouldn't do it...but the model 1B can, by offering a variety of frequencies on the low end, in both shelving and bell responses. Extend that same sort of control and character to the mids and highs, and it turns out you've got a very useful EQ.
To address Jim's point: I worked very hard to keep the character of the EQ the same from band to band and frequency to frequency - the slopes and peaks don't get too screwy (they're inductors - of course they're going to be a little screwy! Ringing and THD are the name of the game!).[/i]
- Dakota
- re-cappin' neve
- Posts: 740
- Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 10:14 am
- Location: West of Boston
- Contact:
I'm very interested in hearing this EQ. I like inductors a lot *for* their characteristic behavior, and can't at present afford pultecs or pultec clones.
A switching high pass at 20, 40, 80, 200, 400 at the front of this would really seal the deal if you ever get into a rev2. A stepped low pass too.
The Scum: congrats! A major accomplishment launching indie hardware.
A switching high pass at 20, 40, 80, 200, 400 at the front of this would really seal the deal if you ever get into a rev2. A stepped low pass too.
The Scum: congrats! A major accomplishment launching indie hardware.
- Warhead
- audio school graduate
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 4:51 pm
- Location: Columbia, SC
- Contact:
Indie it is!
There are a dozen bypass vs EQ clips in mp3 and 44.1/24 on my site page.
Kick
Snare
OH
Toms (rack and floor)
Bass
Male Voc
Female Voc
Ac Gtr
Cello
Stereo Mix Buss
Some of them you can line up in your DAW and play around with together. Many of them I pushed pretty hard, too.
If anybody wants to email me clips to EQ at certain settings, I am glad to do it also if you can be patient.
I find the Model One B to be a great combination of clean and detailed sound and character that sounds very familiar and has an enhancing effect.
It's actually shipping now also, not upcoming.
War
There are a dozen bypass vs EQ clips in mp3 and 44.1/24 on my site page.
Kick
Snare
OH
Toms (rack and floor)
Bass
Male Voc
Female Voc
Ac Gtr
Cello
Stereo Mix Buss
Some of them you can line up in your DAW and play around with together. Many of them I pushed pretty hard, too.
If anybody wants to email me clips to EQ at certain settings, I am glad to do it also if you can be patient.
I find the Model One B to be a great combination of clean and detailed sound and character that sounds very familiar and has an enhancing effect.
It's actually shipping now also, not upcoming.
War
- ott0bot
- dead but not forgotten
- Posts: 2023
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:54 pm
- Location: Downtown Phoenix
How closely are the units matched?
I was looking for a stereo eq to pass drum busses and mixes through, but a pair of these looks fairly promising. Plus I'd surely use them for mono sources as well. I can hardly find anything in this price range that would be an improvent over my DAW or my racked PM1000 channel strips.
I'm going to check out the samples when I get home for sure.
I was looking for a stereo eq to pass drum busses and mixes through, but a pair of these looks fairly promising. Plus I'd surely use them for mono sources as well. I can hardly find anything in this price range that would be an improvent over my DAW or my racked PM1000 channel strips.
I'm going to check out the samples when I get home for sure.
-
- moves faders with mind
- Posts: 2745
- Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 11:26 pm
- Location: Denver, CO
- Contact:
I've been doing FFT sweeps as part of the testing on every unit. The HF and LF sections are very closely matched. The MF has a little bit of variance, due to accumulated component tolerances, but I'm not sure how critical it is. I've scheduled some time at my partner's studio today to go give two units that measure differently a listen, and I'll report back. Watch this space.How closely are the units matched?
If there's an audible difference, we'll figure out how to make matched pairs available.
Also, when you ask for "stereo EQ," are you looking for one box with two independent channels, or are you looking for a device with one set of controls that tweaks both channels together?
It sounds like I've got an industrial espionage problem...have you been peeking at my workbench?A switching high pass at 20, 40, 80, 200, 400 at the front of this would really seal the deal if you ever get into a rev2. A stepped low pass too.
I've got a prototype HP/LP filter together, but nowhere near complete...I was hoping for swept rather than stepped, and as a separate unit from the EQ, possibly 2 channels in a 1/2 rack.
Please consider giving the model one b a try - I know what you're looking for by asking that. I found that the bell curves gave me the results that I look for in coupling an HP filter with a low shelf EQ...boost without bloat.
- Warhead
- audio school graduate
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 4:51 pm
- Location: Columbia, SC
- Contact:
The Scum wrote:Yup, that was the first thing I noticed when EQ'ing a kick drum: you can bring a great boost with the bell (at say 50hZ) without a bunch of sub bass junk coming up. I made a note about that in my "mini review" on the site page too as I found it a cool characteristic. It certainly does not "need" additional filtering in my experience, this thing dials in quick and easy and sounds heavenly.I found that the bell curves gave me the results that I look for in coupling an HP filter with a low shelf EQ...boost without bloat.
My biased opinion of course.
War
-
- moves faders with mind
- Posts: 2745
- Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 11:26 pm
- Location: Denver, CO
- Contact:
As promised, regarding matching:
The production units are pretty closely matched to each other. Differences should be inaudible. If you're really concerned, get units from within the same production run (at the moment, there's only been one run, SN's 1 through 25).
We also had a prototype available, and compared it. It's seen some bench abuse, so it's not to the same spec as the production units. Again, very similar, though on some program material (pink noise), a couple of the midrange band frequencies were a tiny bit different (off by maybe a quarter step?)...but not so much that I'd hesitate to use it in a stereo pair.
For grins, we compared frequency matching on a few channels of the studio's Trident 65...and they're less well matched. The low-mid band, at the lowest frequency, boosted all the way, let us hear the center frequency. They varied by as much as a major third. Probably lower component tolerances from 25 years ago.
The production units are pretty closely matched to each other. Differences should be inaudible. If you're really concerned, get units from within the same production run (at the moment, there's only been one run, SN's 1 through 25).
We also had a prototype available, and compared it. It's seen some bench abuse, so it's not to the same spec as the production units. Again, very similar, though on some program material (pink noise), a couple of the midrange band frequencies were a tiny bit different (off by maybe a quarter step?)...but not so much that I'd hesitate to use it in a stereo pair.
For grins, we compared frequency matching on a few channels of the studio's Trident 65...and they're less well matched. The low-mid band, at the lowest frequency, boosted all the way, let us hear the center frequency. They varied by as much as a major third. Probably lower component tolerances from 25 years ago.
-
- steve albini likes it
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2003 9:40 pm
- Location: Evergreen, Colorado
- Contact:
Just thought I'd chime in because I am excited about this EQ and for Byron's company. Full disclosure, I am a friend of Byron's, have played in a band with him (in the past), and own the Model 1 EQ before he partnered with Joe and formed SSSS. I PAID for my Model 1 EQs too...
If the Model 1B is anything like the Model 1, and I've been assured it is, then these EQs rock. Now, I can only comment on the Model 1 which was the predecessor to the 1B, but we LOVE Model 1. It gets used very often on vocals, kick, and bass. The high end does not get harsh at all. There is a very musical quality to the EQ overall and it's easy to overdue it so be careful
When we have the funds I will be buying two of the Model 1B EQs because two of the Model 1s just isn't enough
Congrats Byron and Joe (and War too!) and good work! I love seeing people succeed.
If the Model 1B is anything like the Model 1, and I've been assured it is, then these EQs rock. Now, I can only comment on the Model 1 which was the predecessor to the 1B, but we LOVE Model 1. It gets used very often on vocals, kick, and bass. The high end does not get harsh at all. There is a very musical quality to the EQ overall and it's easy to overdue it so be careful
When we have the funds I will be buying two of the Model 1B EQs because two of the Model 1s just isn't enough
Congrats Byron and Joe (and War too!) and good work! I love seeing people succeed.
- Dakota
- re-cappin' neve
- Posts: 740
- Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 10:14 am
- Location: West of Boston
- Contact:
Ha, workbench, that's great! Yes, we're talking about the same goal, boost options in the low end without bloat. That's reassuring that your bells are designed with that in mind. I was just thinking that an additional simple passive hi-pass stage would free up the low bells and shelfs to not also be skirting around keeping the sub lows clean. But that's just me being fussy, thinking about an ideal multi-EQ tool in one box.The Scum wrote:It sounds like I've got an industrial espionage problem...have you been peeking at my workbench?Dakota wrote:A switching high pass at 20, 40, 80, 200, 400 at the front of this would really seal the deal if you ever get into a rev2. A stepped low pass too.
I've got a prototype HP/LP filter together, but nowhere near complete...I was hoping for swept rather than stepped, and as a separate unit from the EQ, possibly 2 channels in a 1/2 rack.
Please consider giving the model one b a try - I know what you're looking for by asking that. I found that the bell curves gave me the results that I look for in coupling an HP filter with a low shelf EQ...boost without bloat.
One thing I do among many is indie mastering, and I don't like having to use a plugin to do DC cut and un-needed sub low cut if there is hardware on hand to do so. And I like to clean up the low end right as I track and also as printing fx/comp/eq/tape treatments, less to worry about later.
Re: stepped. A sweep hipass (and low pass too) would be ideal, actually. I was just thinking about the theme of traditional old school inductor/capacitor ways of doing this, figuring the stepped way would be less expensive to put into a unit. Correct me if I'm wrong, my grasp of electronics is reasonably solid for some studio maintenance and mods, but I'm far from being a designer. I could definitely live with stepped for hipass if it were significantly less added cost to a box. And had good choice of points.
That's awesome news you are working on a 2 channel 1/2 rack HP/LP. That would be very cool, and very useful. Would this have "slope" control, like some crossovers have? That would also be really useful. If so, would the slope be up to 24db/oct, or 18 or 12?
-
- takin' a dinner break
- Posts: 170
- Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 6:23 pm
- Location: portland
- Contact:
+1!drumsound wrote:Please do this!!!!The Scum wrote:
I've got a prototype HP/LP filter together, but nowhere near complete...I was hoping for swept rather than stepped, and as a separate unit from the EQ, possibly 2 channels in a 1/2 rack.
And did you say something about making it for the 500 series? No? ok, I thought maybe you did.
P.S. This looks like a really cool EQ!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 55 guests