jsteiger

RGO Senior Member







Posts: 1,081

RGO Senior Member CAPI BT50 EQ Tests and Comparisons junior noah shain , and 7 more like this Quote Select Post

Select Post Deselect Post

Deselect Post Link to Post

Link to Post Back to Top Post by jsteiger on



In the rack from left to right we had:

1. Vintage 550 (earliest version of this style EQ, probably a late '60's or very early '70's unit)

2. Vintage 550A (2nd version of this EQ, probably a mid to late '70's specimen)

3. BT50 with gar1731’s and Panasonic film caps for low band

4. BT50 with gar1731’s and TDK film caps for low band

5. Reissue 550A with hand-wired switches (maybe 8-ish years old?)

6. Reissue 550A with 7 free’s per band and PC mount switches (fairly recent production)

**Disclaimer: there may be something up with the #6 module although it came from a fully functioning pro studio. Just ignore the clips thru #6. My goal was never to imitate that version anyways.**



All 550 style modules have whatever opamps in them that they came with from the factory.



John opened up a Chad Cromwell session that was tracked at Sound Emporium A. We did a rough no processing mix to mono for the first set of clips. We took this bounce track and ran it thru each EQ in the rack. We went a little on the extreme with all of the settings for the 3 comparisons. We felt that was the best way for any differences to show themselves.



Here are the settings we used for the mono full kit.





Next we did the same with snare top from the same Chad Cromwell session.



Here are the settings we used for the snare top.





And we close with a snippet of a vocal from an artist that John has worked with, Holley McCreary.



Here are the settings we used for her vocal.





Again, these are all a little extreme just to hopefully exploit any sonic differences. We did not get extremely scientific with levels but they should be pretty dang close.



The PT session zip can be downloaded here.

www.capi-gear.com/catalog/images/gallery/BT50/Proto/BT50_Tests.zip

**Disclaimer: there may be something up with the #6 module although it came from a fully functioning pro studio. Just ignore the clips thru #6. My goal was never to imitate that version anyways.**



Let me know what you think! I think I am done and ready to release these bad boys!

Cheers, Jeff Today I went over to John Kennedy’s with the proto’s of my new BT50 EQ’s. I have heard these at a few studios around town recently but wanted some clips to post. John was gracious enough to offer up his time and expertise. My goal was the sonic glory that only the original 550 has, with some added frequency points. The 550 is "special" and anyone who has ever used or owned one knows what I mean.In the rack from left to right we had:1. Vintage 550 (earliest version of this style EQ, probably a late '60's or very early '70's unit)2. Vintage 550A (2nd version of this EQ, probably a mid to late '70's specimen)3. BT50 with gar1731’s and Panasonic film caps for low band4. BT50 with gar1731’s and TDK film caps for low band5. Reissue 550A with hand-wired switches (maybe 8-ish years old?)6. Reissue 550A with 7 free’s per band and PC mount switches (fairly recent production)All 550 style modules have whatever opamps in them that they came with from the factory.John opened up a Chad Cromwell session that was tracked at Sound Emporium A. We did a rough no processing mix to mono for the first set of clips. We took this bounce track and ran it thru each EQ in the rack. We went a little on the extreme with all of the settings for the 3 comparisons. We felt that was the best way for any differences to show themselves.Here are the settings we used for the mono full kit.Next we did the same with snare top from the same Chad Cromwell session.Here are the settings we used for the snare top.And we close with a snippet of a vocal from an artist that John has worked with, Holley McCreary.Here are the settings we used for her vocal.Again, these are all a little extreme just to hopefully exploit any sonic differences. We did not get extremely scientific with levels but they should be pretty dang close.The PT session zip can be downloaded here.Let me know what you think! I think I am done and ready to release these bad boys!Cheers, Jeff

drbill

RGO Senior Member







Posts: 5,141

RGO Senior Member CAPI BT50 EQ Tests and Comparisons monkeyxx ChaseUTB andlike this Quote Select Post

Select Post Deselect Post

Deselect Post Link to Post

Link to Post Back to Top Post by drbill on OK. Listening on JBL's in the Hedback designed CRM.



First, the current reissue 550A always sounds broken to me. Or like it needs to be recapped or it had a LPF on. Weird, but consistent.



My favorite was always (I think - I didn't agonize over listening, but gave em a quick overview) the VINTAGE 550A. Maybe because that's SUCH a familiar sound to me (been using them for 20 years.....)



Both Jeff's versions - the TDK and Panasonics were fantastic though. I mean, I'm splitting the smallest of hairs here. I could use any of these aside from the current reissue. (Still think it's broken....) But on Jeff's versions I flipped back and forth between which was "best" - it depended on the source. Again, I could use either. Mic position or amount of boost / cut or level in mix would have way more of a play than the op amp version.



And also, I preferred the 550 versions over the LC's. Again, perhaps due to famiarity and a basic love for the 550A.



Great job Jeff! Looking forward to getting some.



How difficult is the build, and the ever ending question - cuanto cuesta?





JOHN - thanks for doing the PT version. Made life EASY!!! BTW, there were some files missing. Try downloading and opening with your session drive shut down. Some of the original files are missing - the vocal and snare top source files.

Johnkenn

Administrator







Come, my children...

Posts: 19,551

Administrator CAPI BT50 EQ Tests and Comparisons ChaseUTB likes this Quote Select Post

Select Post Deselect Post

Deselect Post Link to Post

Link to Post Back to Top Post by Johnkenn on drbill said:



First, the current reissue 550A always sounds broken to me. Or like it needs to be recapped or it had a LPF on. Weird, but consistent.



My favorite was always (I think - I didn't agonize over listening, but gave em a quick overview) the VINTAGE 550A. Maybe because that's SUCH a familiar sound to me (been using them for 20 years.....)



Both Jeff's versions - the TDK and Panasonics were fantastic though. I mean, I'm splitting the smallest of hairs here. I could use any of these aside from the current reissue. (Still think it's broken....) But on Jeff's versions I flipped back and forth between which was "best" - it depended on the source. Again, I could use either. Mic position or amount of boost / cut or level in mix would have way more of a play than the op amp version.



And also, I preferred the 550 versions over the LC's. Again, perhaps due to famiarity and a basic love for the 550A.



Great job Jeff! Looking forward to getting some.



How difficult is the build, and the ever ending question - cuanto cuesta?





JOHN - thanks for doing the PT version. Made life EASY!!! BTW, there were some files missing. Try downloading and opening with your session drive shut down. Some of the original files are missing - the vocal and snare top source files. OK. Listening on JBL's in the Hedback designed CRM.First, the current reissue 550A always sounds broken to me. Or like it needs to be recapped or it had a LPF on. Weird, but consistent.My favorite was always (I think - I didn't agonize over listening, but gave em a quick overview) the VINTAGE 550. Maybe because that's SUCH a familiar sound to me (been using them for 20 years.....)Both Jeff's versions - the TDK and Panasonics were fantastic though. I mean, I'm splitting the smallest of hairs here. I could use any of these aside from the current reissue. (Still think it's broken....) But on Jeff's versions I flipped back and forth between which was "best" - it depended on the source. Again, I could use either. Mic position or amount of boost / cut or level in mix would have way more of a play than the op amp version.And also, I preferred the 550 versions over the LC's. Again, perhaps due to famiarity and a basic love for the 550A.Great job Jeff! Looking forward to getting some.How difficult is the build, and the ever ending question - cuanto cuesta?JOHN - thanks for doing the PT version. Made life EASY!!! BTW, there were some files missing. Try downloading and opening with your session drive shut down. Some of the original files are missing - the vocal and snare top source files.



OK - weird...will do.



I thought the BT50 was right in the middle of the vintage 550 and 550A. The 550 is awesome. The vintage 550A could get a little aggressive on top IMHO. But again - splitting hairs here - they were both awesome. I thought the BT50 had a presence that the 550 didn't have, but didn't get as bright as the 550A. I thought the PAN might have had a little more meat in the 200Hz area...but man, I don't know...very, very similar. To me, the Handwired Reissue 550A sounded ok, but not as good as the other 4. Then you're right - we wondered the same thing - if the current 550A model was broken or something, because it sounded cloudy as hell. The LC comparison probably wasn't fair because of the 6.4 to 7kHz differences...but I'm using those now and they are sick too. I'll probably end up with those because they fit my needs a little better. OK - weird...will do.I thought the BT50 was right in the middle of the vintage 550 and 550A. The 550 is awesome. The vintage 550A could get a little aggressive on top IMHO. But again - splitting hairs here - they were both awesome. I thought the BT50 had a presence that the 550 didn't have, but didn't get as bright as the 550A. I thought the PANhave had a little more meat in the 200Hz area...but man, I don't know...very, very similar. To me, the Handwired Reissue 550A sounded ok, but not as good as the other 4. Then you're right - we wondered the same thing - if the current 550A model was broken or something, because it sounded cloudy as hell. The LC comparison probably wasn't fair because of the 6.4 to 7kHz differences...but I'm using those now and they are sick too. I'll probably end up with those because they fit my needs a little better.