1. Register NOW and become part of this fantastic knowledge base forum! This message will go away once you have registered.

waves eq vs. hardware channel strips

Discussion in 'Pro Audio Equipment' started by igloo, Jul 12, 2004.

  1. igloo

    igloo Guest

    What do you guys think about waves renaissance eq instead of hardware eq. while tracking?

    There are great units out there like the Vintech or Chandler types that are pre-amp and eq section, but are significantly more expensive than their pre-amp only versions.

    How would you feel about using just a high quality hardware pre-amp such as Chandler TG-2 and mixing in the box with Reinassance eq and compression?

    Charles Dye mixes his records with Waves plug-ins, no hardware processing and still achieves a nice pro sound.

    What do you think??
  2. AudioGaff

    AudioGaff Distinguished Member

    Feb 23, 2001
    Silicon Valley
    Depends on which outboard units you are referring to as if they are betther or not. No software can not yet compete with the likes of units from Vintech, Daking, Chandler, Manley and at least a dozen more makes/models I can think of when it comes to having a great sounding, full unique tone. Mabe someday, but not today...
  3. jonyoung

    jonyoung Well-Known Member

    Dec 31, 2003
    Like all things audio, it depends on your budget! I'm tracking into a stand alone 24 track HD deck through an analog board and mixing in Sonar using the Renaissance plugs. Sonically it's much better than the rack gear I have right now, which admittedly, is not top shelf, but not bottom shelf either. My next chunk of change will be for some high end pres for tracking. I don't like to add EQ while recording for fear of phase issues while mixing.
  4. Aziel

    Aziel Guest

    try the Sony Oxford EQ...amazing...it`s just like the real thing, good by itself...IMHO...i`m not a gurĂ¹ or nothing like that :wink:
  5. tripnek

    tripnek Active Member

    Jun 9, 2003
    The EQ in my A&H console is far better than my Waves Plugs. And the A&H is far from as good as some of the rack units (GML, API, ect..) and the Neve consoles.
  6. iznogood

    iznogood Guest

    the ren eq doesn't do well compared to anything!!!

    anything analog over 500$ sounds way better..
    even a mackie 1202 mixer while less flexilble but sounds better

    but for plugs... filterbank or sony... although is doesn't come close to a good analog thingy
  7. sdevino

    sdevino Active Member

    Mar 31, 2002
    Sony Oxford or Massenberg EQ are the current plugin heavyweights. They are both as good as any clean EQ in a rack out there. If you want flavor go to the high end racks.

  8. Massive Mastering

    Massive Mastering Distinguished Member

    Jul 18, 2004
    Chicago area, IL, USA
    Home Page:
    For light corrective EQ'ing on the way in or in the DAW, there are a lot of reasonable plugins. For many critical applications, there is no substitute yet that I've heard that can compete with a nice analog EQ (YMMV).
  9. missilanious

    missilanious Guest

    "even a mackie 1202 mixer while less flexilble but sounds better''
    thoise EQ's are complete garbage, crap, noisy sound destroyers, after reading another post where you said "the 9098 eq is gritty and only sounds good for bass or destroying drums!!!" I think you work for Mackie and are doing comparisons on clock radio speakers, sorry about the harshness but you must be kiding.
  10. sonixx

    sonixx Guest

    lets see... all plugins suck... they can't compete...

    well check this out...

    (dead link removed)
  11. sheet

    sheet Well-Known Member

    May 28, 2003
    Kansas City, KS
    Home Page:
    I don't know what Waves plugs you have, or what console that you have. I have everything Waves makes under 4.5, and there is no EQ that compares to an EQ on a console in form or function. My Waves plugs will smoke any AH console I am sure, but then again we are talking about mastering applications vs. basic channel applications, and a difference in users.

    It is not the plug, but how one uses it. If you are mic'ing correctly, and you have quality instruments, performers and acoustics, EQ whouldn't come into play really.

    I don't know of too many people who track with EQ myself. Maybe there are some other here who do. But you cannot compare EQ'ing before and after the AD process anymore than you can compare compressing/limiting. It has a differenct effect. One is reversable, one is not.
  12. Massive Mastering

    Massive Mastering Distinguished Member

    Jul 18, 2004
    Chicago area, IL, USA
    Home Page:
    I almost forgot to mention The Exception... Universal Audio's Pultec EQ plugin on the UAD card has that "magic" to it that's unlike any other plug I've used.

    Just like the hardware, my favorite setting is "ON" with no adjustments. Freakin' amazing, and worth the price of the whole collection on its own.
  13. iznogood

    iznogood Guest


    you're completely entitled to your opinion..... as i am entitled to mine!

    yes i think the ren eq sounds absolutely crap.... and i should know.... i've had it for years.

    and yes i do think the 1202 vlz sounds ok for what it is!! and for lifting a bit in the high or lo end it sounds way better than the ren....

    and yes i do think the 9098 sound is gritty (i have the old one).... that's why i like it for drums... destroying is a positive thing sometimes...

    i also love the manley massive passive (we have 2) and it's gritty as hell! compared to avalon/fairman/gml and some other things

    and no... i don't work for mackie and i compare on hi-end speakers

    btw ... here's a link to the studio i work in so you can see for yourself what kind of equipment i'm used to...


    what speakers are you on??

    mine are speakers handbuilt on danish (of course) drivers... the same as krell uses in their hi-end series

    i like people with a temper.... but for the sake of allah and this post...


Share This Page