ilovefuzz.com

2016 is going to be my year for really pushing my recording rack up to par. I've decided my first purchase with either be a Kush Audio Tweaker or Electra.

Ideally by the end of the year I'll be running 2 Tweakers as they are mono and an electra. I'm having a difficult time deciding which to upgrade first.

Where would you start, with a nice EQ or a nice Compressor?

The pro for the Electra EQ is that it's stereo, 1 and done for me.

Pro for the Tweaker is that although it's mono (I could totally live with only 1 for now*) I don't mind EQ'ING in the box, whereas I'm just not happy with any software based comp I've used.

Which do you think would be a better first choice?

I think there's a lot more mojo to hardware compressors than eq. Though there's certainly really great hardware EQ's, cool thing they ever really added for me was a baked in curve (which plenty of plugins emulate well) and "character", which really just means subtle distortion. Which you can get from plenty of other sources. Lots of good compressor plugins (including from Kush), but there is undeniably a lot of use for a really cool hardware "character" comp. I'd go that way, since you can use a compressor a lot of different ways. If it's more for character than "surgical", you can even just push it hard without any actual compression to impart that character to whatever tracks you want.

If it's a concern for you at all, I would hold out/save up for a stereo comp though. Depends on the usage. I don't use any hardware anymore, but when I did I had stereo units that were great for my drum buss or subtle buss compression/glue and single channel ones better suited for bass, vocals and the other mono sources. If you want that kind of super hard pushed, crazy over the top compression (even if it's for a parallel wet/dry mix) for drums, a stereo unit is just a must IMO.

It used to be you could find great deals on used stuff, because GAS extends to recording too (unfortunately, OUCH)...dunno how much is out there used now, I'm almost 10 years removed from that market now.

Corey Y wrote:I think there's a lot more mojo to hardware compressors than eq.

NSFW: show

Though there's certainly really great hardware EQ's, cool thing they ever really added for me was a baked in curve (which plenty of plugins emulate well) and "character", which really just means subtle distortion. Which you can get from plenty of other sources. Lots of good compressor plugins (including from Kush), but there is undeniably a lot of use for a really cool hardware "character" comp. I'd go that way, since you can use a compressor a lot of different ways. If it's more for character than "surgical", you can even just push it hard without any actual compression to impart that character to whatever tracks you want.

If it's a concern for you at all, I would hold out/save up for a stereo comp though. Depends on the usage. I don't use any hardware anymore, but when I did I had stereo units that were great for my drum buss or subtle buss compression/glue and single channel ones better suited for bass, vocals and the other mono sources. If you want that kind of super hard pushed, crazy over the top compression (even if it's for a parallel wet/dry mix) for drums, a stereo unit is just a must IMO.

It used to be you could find great deals on used stuff, because GAS extends to recording too (unfortunately, OUCH)...dunno how much is out there used now, I'm almost 10 years removed from that market now.

Bruh, have you seen how many Pultec EQP clones exist?
EQ was the first audio effect, born out of necessity for everything from attenuation, compensation & feedback suppression.

Check out Warm Audio. They now make 1176, EQP, La2a clone-ish boxes. 1176 can be found used for around $400, the EQ around $600, the La2a is new...but new at $800 iirc. That's 3 legendary circuits for under 2k. Granted it's only 1 channel, but that's all you need if you're working ITB. You just gotta run multiple takes.

That said, I got an 1176LN first before buying an EQ...because it was deal-of-the-decade timing. Shop around, bide time. Most people are willing to negotiate because as Corey said, GAS is brutal. Especially in the world of studio hardware.

Everything is EQ. Mic placement is EQ..

If I had to confine myself to one or the other I'd upgrade the compressor. Get one you can latch to another if stereo is a huge concern, they don't need to live inside the same box, just share sidechain information. Your ears are the boss on this one, trust them.

This thread is gold.

I would choose compressor as well, especially if you are talking "rawk" music, as opposed to folk/acoustic, orchestral, etc...As has already been mentioned, the mojo, character, presence, vibe and glue that a good compressor can bring is, for me, more valuable than the EQ upgrade. Also, pushing a good compressor hard, I find, has more of a place in music than pushing a good EQ hard. Thats not to say the EQ isn't versatile--because it is. I just tend to use EQ to sculpt things as needed whereas the compressor delivers more of the guts.

compressor I like the 7720

Warm is great. I have the WA76... makes a big difference imo. It's definitely awesome and prob the best quality for the price.

I would go with a compressor over an EQ. You can start to mold the EQ a little with mics and placement and all that stuff before you even get to mixing and even then, I've never run into a problem that I couldn't fix with the Logic (or any other stock DAW) EQ. I also have the pultec waves plugins but I don't even use them as much as I use the stock EQ.

Psyre wrote:2016 is going to be my year for really pushing my recording rack up to par. I've decided my first purchase with either be a



Pro for the Tweaker is that although it's mono (I could totally live with only 1 for now*) I don't mind EQ'ING in the box, whereas I'm just not happy with any software based comp I've used.

Which do you think would be a better first choice?

EQ is ubiquitous.

http://www.uaudio.com/store/compressors ... ction.html

stripes wrote:Warm is great. I have the WA76... makes a big difference imo. It's definitely awesome and prob the best quality for the price.

I would go with a compressor over an EQ. You can start to mold the EQ a little with mics and placement and all that stuff before you even get to mixing and even then, I've never run into a problem that I couldn't fix with the Logic (or any other stock DAW) EQ. I also have the pultec waves plugins but I don't even use them as much as I use the stock EQ.

Yeah I'm thinking OP should rly go with the WA76. The 1176 circuit is versatile enough to be your first and *only hw compressor for a while* and shine on everything from vocals to drums, guitar, bass whatever. If another route is taken, I def recommend something with an input transformer. Very easy way to *add mojo* into a signal chain, things just sound more interesting on the other side of'm.

Thanks guys, I'm definitely considering the WA76 now, as it's got a great price and I doubt will become redundant in the future.

In regards to the EQ, I'm not really looking for a graphic eq or the like, the Electra is a little more appealing as it's more of a transient shaper. I agree completely about eq being everything from the room to mic placement, but that doesn't really help me for mixing music I didn't record which I find I'm asked to do more and more lately.

Yeah there's good reason why the 1176 has been an industry staple, even standard since its introduction almost 50 years ago.
Here's some food for thought reading on the history http://www.uaudio.com/blog/analog-obses ... 76-history

WA76 is both a safe bet and a great get. You wont struggle to find use for it or locate a buyer should you want a future upgrade. I had been considering the WA76 and was ready to pull the trigger when my UA was listed by a cash-thirsty, motivated seller. The Purple audio version is also exceptional, but by no means budget priced