curious about this eq

seannash · 10-11-2010 1:53am #1

Purely for my own curiosity id like to hear if anyone has used the Clariphonic Ultimate Mix Bus eq.

As most of ye know im fairly clueless when it comes to this sort of stuff but whilst browsing i came across there videos and ill admit i was kinda impressed(i know i shouldnt be impressed from the sound of a web video but still)

http://vimeo.com/15118568

Theres no way i can afford it but it seems like a one stop solution to my dull mix problem.
So anyone used them?

madtheory · 10-11-2010 10:10am

seannash wrote: »

Theres no way i can afford it but it seems like a one stop solution to my dull mix problem.

What speakers are you using, are they correctly positioned, what room treatment have you done?

seannash · 10-11-2010 12:39pm

madtheory wrote: »

What speakers are you using, are they correctly positioned, what room treatment have you done?

Well to be honest i dont have anything setup at the moment.I just do most of the work in earphones then when i have all my elements I set up my monitors wherever i can(sittingroom,bedroom etc) so that i can finish it.

Definetly not helping things i agree and I know thats aot to do with my problem.Like I said there no way i can afford it but curiosity got the better of me

Oh genelec 8030's and guess there positioned properly but hard to tell as there never permanantly setup

DamagedTrax · 10-11-2010 2:48pm

heard this in person a while back. stunning eq!

madtheory · 10-11-2010 2:51pm

Good thing it's too expensive. There's no box that will fix your problem. You could make 6 to 8 bass traps, simple panels of RW3 in a frame made of 2x4 and covered with dust sheets. Very simple. Store them away when not in use. Take a look at the realtraps website for some straightforward tips on speaker positioning. The Genelec manual should definitely be referred to also! To get the right settings for the tilt switches on the back.

When you said "earphones" did you mean "headphones"? If you're really using earphones, stop! The problem is caused by proximity effect- the buds are too far from your ear hole. They'll produce less bass so you mix bass heavy to compensate. You can hear the effect by pushing them gently in and out of your ears, doesn't take much to completely change the bottom end.
Couple of good articles in Sound On Sound about mixing with headphones. I'm a big cans fan.

madtheory · 10-11-2010 2:57pm

DamagedTrax wrote: »

heard this in person a while back. stunning eq!

Very good marketing job with that video. Seems to make stuff a tad louder when dialed in. That's sneaky. Louder always sounds better! Would like to hear how it fares in a blind AB test, level matched.

No schematics on the website. I'm guessing they're using second order passive filters, and maybe a transformer or two, gives that "smooth" effect by adding some nice 2nd harmonic. Good idea. Hate the marketing though.

DamagedTrax · 10-11-2010 4:23pm

madtheory wrote: »

Very good marketing job with that video. Seems to make stuff a tad louder when dialed in. That's sneaky. Louder always sounds better! Would like to hear how it fares in a blind AB test, level matched.

No schematics on the website. I'm guessing they're using second order passive filters, and maybe a transformer or two, gives that "smooth" effect by adding some nice 2nd harmonic. Good idea. Hate the marketing though.

well its pretty impossible not to boost volume when you're boosting volume :pac:

but what i liked about it was that you can max the dials and really lift the high without any harshness.

madtheory · 10-11-2010 4:30pm

DamagedTrax wrote: »

well its pretty impossible not to boost volume when you're boosting volume :pac:

Well it's a fact, psychoacoustically louder is always perceived as better. So it's a tricky one! For a fair test there has to be level matching.

seannash · 10-11-2010 4:50pm

madtheory wrote: »

Good thing it's too expensive. There's no box that will fix your problem. You could make 6 to 8 bass traps, simple panels of RW3 in a frame made of 2x4 and covered with dust sheets. Very simple. Store them away when not in use. Take a look at the realtraps website for some straightforward tips on speaker positioning. The Genelec manual should definitely be referred to also! To get the right settings for the tilt switches on the back.

When you said "earphones" did you mean "headphones"? If you're really using earphones, stop! The problem is caused by proximity effect- the buds are too far from your ear hole. They'll produce less bass so you mix bass heavy to compensate. You can hear the effect by pushing them gently in and out of your ears, doesn't take much to completely change the bottom end.
Couple of good articles in Sound On Sound about mixing with headphones. I'm a big cans fan.

yep i meant earphones,as in ipod earphones:eek:

I know its definitely useless but i made a promise that ill only buy gear thatll be useful to me when i do have a permanant space to set it all up.

Im just plugging away for now(somewhat happily as it happens) with the earphones.dont really wanna get something to fix my situation that i may not need when i have a space(If that makes sense)

A i said I was just curious about this eq and wondered was me being suitably impressed justified.
Damaged is it just a quick alternative to eq'ing?
Im sure you could get similar results with proper eq'ing
I saw on gearslutz that someone got similar results using a digi III.

I just like the simplicity of it and the fact that it came across so well even on the video(to me anyway)

madtheory · 10-11-2010 5:21pm

seannash wrote: »

dont really wanna get something to fix my situation that i may not need when i have a space(If that makes sense)

All I'm saying is you'll always have a use for broadband absorbers, and a decent pair of headphones e.g. Sennheiser HD-25II.

seannash wrote: »

I just like the simplicity of it and the fact that it came across so well even on the video(to me anyway)

It would take only slightly longer in mastering the achieve the same thing with a standard eq.

seannash · 10-11-2010 5:39pm

madtheory wrote: »

All I'm saying is you'll always have a use for broadband absorbers, and a decent pair of headphones e.g. Sennheiser HD-25II.

It would take only slightly longer in mastering the achieve the same thing with a standard eq.

Okay cool,I just thought that it was an impressive process especially seeing as how its so simple to use.

was looking to see if people had used it

DamagedTrax · 10-11-2010 6:04pm

the thing is as we all know, an eq is just an eq and you can do virtually the same thing with most of them but its the way its implemented and the harware inside that makes this one shine. i'd love to hear the results with the digi eq. while i can imagine it boosting a similiar freq range if set-up with the same bands, its never gonna add the clarity and detail and general lushness that the clariphonic adds... if i had the cash right now i'd grab one for my 2 buss.

plus greg ubk is a bit of a genius really, anything he touches is very high quality. ive never used the ubk fatso but i've heard what it does on mixes and its a step above the original fatso, which itself is some piece of hardware...

seannash · 10-11-2010 6:41pm

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-shoot-outs-sound-file-comparisons-audio-tests/538126-ubk-clariphonic-vs-digi-eqiii.html

Thats the comparison with the digi III.

DamagedTrax · 10-11-2010 7:10pm

cheers, just read thru it. seems everyone prefers the ubk.

i had a listen and the differances are really obvious. worlds apart. if you listen to the air in the ubk its smooth and has space. the digi just sounds like your typical harsh high boost IMO, while it does boost the highs it doesnt really open the sound up at all. its almost as if the boost is applied over the music while the ubk seems to pull the music up with it, bringing detail with it and seperating if you know what i mean. it adds height to the track.

seannash · 10-11-2010 7:31pm

DamagedTrax wrote: »

cheers, just read thru it. seems everyone prefers the ubk.

i had a listen and the differances are really obvious. worlds apart. if you listen to the air in the ubk its smooth and has space. the digi just sounds like your typical harsh high boost IMO, while it does boost the highs it doesnt really open the sound up at all. its almost as if the boost is applied over the music while the ubk seems to pull the music up with it, bringing detail with it and seperating if you know what i mean. it adds height to the track.

Cheers
I was bit sceptical of the favouritism towards the ubk as ths test spilled over from another thread where the other fella basically called the clariphonic "just an eq"
People were really jumping to greg ubk's defence so i felt like they maybe were showing favouritism to him.

Great to get an impartial version of it as i cant hear ****(thanks earphones

)

Still cant afford it though:)

DamagedTrax · 10-11-2010 7:36pm

seannash wrote: »

Cheers
I was bit sceptical of the favouritism towards the ubk as ths test spilled over from another thread where the other fella basically called the clariphonic "just an eq"
People were really jumping to greg ubk's defence so i felt like they maybe were showing favouritism to him.

Great to get an impartial version of it as i cant hear ****(thanks earphones )

Still cant afford it though:)

to be honest, any favouritism towards greg's stuff is deserved

seannash · 10-11-2010 7:39pm

DamagedTrax wrote: »

to be honest, any favouritism towards greg's stuff is deserved

Is his stuff quite popular.I cant find many reviews of this eq or the fatso compressor

DamagedTrax · 10-11-2010 7:49pm

seannash wrote: »

Is his stuff quite popular.I cant find many reviews of this eq or the fatso compressor

till recently it was quite niche and boutique. mostly modded versions of some existing hardware. he seems to have stopped modding now but only offers the 2 products for sale.

good article down bottom of page on modding the EL fatso to turn it into a ubk fatso.

http://www.kushaudio.com/kush/

seannash · 10-11-2010 8:16pm

DamagedTrax wrote: »

till recently it was quite niche and boutique. mostly modded versions of some existing hardware. he seems to have stopped modding now but only offers the 2 products for sale.

good article down bottom of page on modding the EL fatso to turn it into a ubk fatso.

http://www.kushaudio.com/kush/

Hmm doesnt give an article unfortunately

DamagedTrax · 10-11-2010 8:26pm

you're right, the article is gone. was there a few weeks back!

madtheory · 10-11-2010 9:28pm

I don't think many people would use the EQIII for this kind of work... the Focusrite Red would be a fairer comparison.

seannash · 10-11-2010 9:32pm

madtheory wrote: »

I don't think many people would use the EQIII for this kind of work... the Focusrite Red would be a fairer comparison.

It was just the eq that the guy was using.

He wanted to show how the clariphonic eq was just an eq and that with any decent eq you could achieve the same results

jtsuited · 13-11-2010 11:04am

DamagedTrax wrote: »

the thing is as we all know, an eq is just an eq and you can do virtually the same thing with most of them but its the way its implemented and the harware inside that makes this one shine. i'd love to hear the results with the digi eq. while i can imagine it boosting a similiar freq range if set-up with the same bands, its never gonna add the clarity and detail and general lushness that the clariphonic adds... if i had the cash right now i'd grab one for my 2 buss.

Yeah I think that's the vital point about stuff like the Clariphonic (and perhaps great hardware in general). It's not about WHAT it can do, it's about HOW easily it can do it.

In theory, you can get any sound you ever want with things like csound, etc. using fast fourier transforms and all that other shtuff. But it's just a question of time and perhaps processing power.

6 months of trying to do all that, or just buy a box with two knobs, that only go up....

I haven't been very tempted by a lot of hardware (bar the massive passive), but this little gizmo has me drooling after listening to the a/b comparisons.

seannash · 13-11-2010 11:12am

jtsuited wrote: »

Yeah I think that's the vital point about stuff like the Clariphonic (and perhaps great hardware in general). It's not about WHAT it can do, it's about HOW easily it can do it.

In theory, you can get any sound you ever want with things like csound, etc. using fast fourier transforms and all that other shtuff. But it's just a question of time and perhaps processing power.

6 months of trying to do all that, or just buy a box with two knobs, that only go up....

I haven't been very tempted by a lot of hardware (bar the massive passive), but this little gizmo has me drooling after listening to the a/b comparisons.

Wanna go halfsies:)

jtsuited · 13-11-2010 11:16am

think it'd more have to be 1/64ths...

...

on higher purchase!

seannash · 13-11-2010 11:19am

jtsuited wrote: »

think it'd more have to be 1/64ths...

...

on higher purchase!

Jesus all my years of living illegally have made me forget about higher purchase.

Its gonna be a great christmas after all kids

jtsuited · 13-11-2010 11:24am

seannash wrote: »

Jesus all my years of living illegally have made me forget about higher purchase.

Its gonna be a great christmas after all kids

higher purchase and state cheese....every cloud etc.

seannash · 13-11-2010 11:25am

jtsuited wrote: »

higher purchase and state cheese....every cloud etc.

ha ha ha

curious about this eq

Comments