Pulsar 8200, The paragon of EQs reinvented

No Avenger · May 4, 2023

Trurl said: ↑

Sone day I want to do a blind listening test. We'll take a piece of audio, do an identical boost/ cut at three bands at a q setting they can all match and we'll see who can identify which eq is which.
Click to expand...

Well, I made two double blind tests. One with Kirchhoff, one with Equilibrium (thanks again to @Stevie Dude for the 8k2 hint). In both cases Pulsar lost.

Additionally, you can't just use the same settings. This won't work at all (Q and gain for bells, Q, gain and freq for shelves and overall output, which is raised by Pulsar ).

madbuzzin · May 4, 2023

sherpa said: ↑

Competition is already quite stiff with AlexB and Acustica creating killer Nebula versions. I have tried a real 8200 and compared it against the AlexB one and they're not quite the same. The hardware was much smoother sounding and more full, but it was definitely a close one. Let's see how this one compares.
Click to expand...

thats because its acustica lol

Peek · May 17, 2023

mk_96 said: ↑

I haven't matched them or anything, but these are my impressions based on just putting them on tracks and doing stuff:
-I felt the AMEK didn't quite do what i wanted in the lows all the way to the high mids, like sometimes the boosts/cuts feel too notiorious, sometimes not enough, sometimes nowhere near where i want them, and the Q is also a bit hard to really tell what it's doing. The 8200 does a way better job at that, you can feel what you're doing.
-The high mids and highs feel smoother in the 8200. Stuff like ride bells and other clicky things in the AMEK seem to stand out more (again, i didn't match them, just tried to "simulate" everyday use with each one), feels more detailed than the 8200 but at times harsh.
-The 8200 wins in the lows, even with the TMT thing on digital in the AMEK, the lows feel a lot tighter in the 8200, and somehow harder to loose in the mix when doing other stuff.

Overall, i'd say the AMEK feels more loose, scooped and clicky (i know, weird, but it's just a general feeling) while the 8200 feels tighter, smoother, and easier to use. And in case you were wondering, i was using the AMEK with TMT in D mode and both channels in 01, A mode felt a bit messy.

Interesting, considering that the AMEK200 is not exactly ment to emulate the GML8200.
Click to expand...

I would only use the Amek 200 in the mix on single instruments. On the buses, MixBus or MasterBus I would rather use the Amek 250, which in my opinion is the one to compare with the 8200, even though it is not an 8200 emu.

Last edited: May 17, 2023

Similar Threads - Pulsar 8200 paragon	Forum	Date
Pulsar Audio Smasher [FREE for Limited Time]	Software News	Today at 7:46 PM
Pulsar Vocal Studio vs Neural DSP Mantra - thoughts?	Software Reviews and Tutorials	Jan 22, 2026
No Audio on Pulsar Audio Plugins by GUISEPPE	Software	Nov 3, 2025
Pulsar Modular timebomb (Mac)	Software	Oct 15, 2025
Is running Creamware Pulsar w/o hardware possible?	Software	Mar 11, 2025

Pulsar 8200, The paragon of EQs reinvented

No Avenger Audiosexual

madbuzzin Platinum Record

Peek Ultrasonic

PROFESSIONAL AUDIO LOVERS

Pulsar 8200, The paragon of EQs reinvented

No Avenger Audiosexual

madbuzzin Platinum Record

Peek Ultrasonic

Useful Searches