It's not that the attenuation curve is shifted, it's the parallel config which makes the difference

That said, I don't rely much on Pultec emus on my mixbus or in general and I usually get similar curves with other eqs.

Also +1 to blind eqing, curve dysplays and fft analyzers tend to distract me

 

That's an happy error, like the "all buttons" on 1176

 

What exactly do you mean though? 37 Hz - everything below that gets attenuated? 37 Hz - everything above that gets louder? 37 Hz - exactly in the middle?

Is 37 Hz in <your plugin> the same as in <your other plugin>?

37 Hz in a bunch of different EQs (ReaEQ, RBJ, SVF, Melda AutoDynEQ, "won't attenuate above indicated frequency", bx Focusrite SC)

 

This is a extremely basic and typical EQ curve that cannot be achieved with Pultec (EQP-1A module) emulation. Can you believe that?

 

Last edited: Jul 18, 2023

Fair objection, but I have settled with one EQ, so 37 Hz always means the same (not to mention that 37 Hz was just an example of a typical setting I use, but not rigidly or compulsively though). I know of these differences you mention from one EQ plugin to the other, Dan Worrall often highlights these in his videos and it's obvious that for example a filter that attenuates only 6db per octave will sound less drastic than one that attenuates 12db etcetera

 

"... are great, because ..." they are fast. I mean, i turn 2 knobs and get the sound i want and use my ears to judge that. Who cares if it's attenuating 237 hz or 287? If it works, works. If you expecting accuracy and surgical cuts and boosts, better use other tools, pultecs are not for that, as you said, stock eqs can be more suitable for that than any pultec. But as long as i know when to use it, and what it will give me, i don't think twice to throw my fav one on the source material.

 

Except, they are not fast. Slick EQ is fast, because I can dial in exactly what I want, without having to factor in that the controls don't do what they claim to do. It takes few seconds. If I want to to a 3db low-shelf boost starting from 120 Hz and below, I set the dials accordingly and will get the curve I expect. Try approximating this with Pultec!

Look my previous post: very simple curve right? You cannot achieve this with an emulation of the main Pultec module. You can achieve something similar with an emulation that has the additional Mid Range module included, but you will still have to factor in the odd behaviour of the Low and High sections of the main module, especially if you attempt to use boost and attenuation at the same time!

My argument is not about 100% total accuracy between the displayed values and the EQ curve, but Pultec is not even nearly doing what the labels indicate. It's very very off!

 

I'll try to reiterate my points in a more approachable way.
0) We're talking about character EQ right now, everything I say should be read in this context.
1) Pultec-style EQ are a one-trick pony.
2) Their trick is nothing unique, because see below.
3) You don't EQ with your eyes. What EQ can do what curve is irrelevant. If you want specifically a certain curve - you're approaching EQ wrong, as it's the same as using EQ presets made by someone else who never heard a single sound you're working with.
This is why pultecs are overrated, this is also why the mirroring "pultec can't do this curve" kind of argument is meaningless.

 

Okay:

If we consider Pultec as a straightforward tool to EQ your track, it matters very much that it can't even do very basic and typical EQ curves that you would want.

This argument is not about using generic preset EQ curves (repeatedly you are misrepresenting / misinterpreting what I've said: I get the feeling you are doing this deliberately?)! This is about: is the tool capable of dialing in a basic EQ curve as the one I have posted above.

Maybe you are also on the spectrum and hence struggle to abstract from a given example? It's not about the exact example, but about the general idea behind it. In the instance of the image I posted above: a low shelf that gives you a controlled boost of the bass and sub-bass area without affecting the (lower-) mids in combination with a focussed (not too broad, not too narrow) dip in the lower mids, where muddiness tends to appear. Additionally a broad slight booast of the mids to high-mids. Pultec EQP-1A cannot handle this very simple, straightforward, very common task!

So, I will have to disagree with your wrong conclusion.

 

Last edited: Jul 18, 2023

Wait, lemme reach my $30k Pultec unit and compare it with some plugins.

 

you read all the bullcrap you posted here,not for me, change my mind about slik eq or whatever you have there with some significant audio. Can you walk the talk? fkin start your rambling threads with your fine work or go home.

 

Some time ago I compared several Pultec emus and tended to like those most which sounded most clear and transparent. Up to the point where I ask myself where the difference to a purely digital EQ would be, only to find out that the one I liked most was in fact purely digital (even if it claimed to be an analogue emu). Since then I prefer to use a combi of saturation and 'Pultec effect' with digital EQ.
Benefit on top, no boomy freqs boosted, free choice of freq and slope and the digi EQ is useful for way more.

And if someone thinks what's printed on (especially ancient) analogue hardware (and their emulations), be it EQs or compressors, has to do with reality, , that's cute.

 

No need to feel offended.

 

Last edited: Jul 18, 2023

No! It's absolutely no problem here just to talk about plugins - without any audio example. If this is not your way, that's ok too, just move along.

 

Not gonna play this game. Moving on.

...then we're about to miss its point completely. It's an experimental breakthrough tool, a mad prototype from 1953 that became a one-trick pony in later years, it's not a all-round EQ. In fact, workflow-wise, you'd be better off considering it a type of "tone-shaping box" akin to certain saturators and compressors. Because its singular use is to alter the signal's tone in a very specific way. You can't just EQ with it and the fact that you're trying to bring that across as an unpopular but true opinion would've been endearing were you to listen to other people.

Hence this is a wrong question to ask. Pultec-style is, simply put, trash if you were to use it as your main all-round EQ. It's a one-trick pony, and I think you don't realize what exactly this phrase means. It means that it's incapable of, or very bad at, doing anything other than one specific thing.

So what we should realistically be discussing is not pultec style's versatility and usability as an EQ (cause there's none and there's nothing to discuss), but rather whether or not its singular trick has any merit. Which everybody here tries to do but you.

What I'm saying is, nobody's arguing with your points, you're right. It's just that your points are irrelevant when it comes to discussing pultec-style EQ's usability, and I was under an impression that this is the discussion you wanted to have.

 

Well, since I was the one opening this thread, shouldn't I be the one best qualified to determine what this debate is about and what it isn't about?

No, my points are not irrelevant, since Pultec is used for EQ duties. Hence, it's a legitimate question to ask whether it can actually handle basic EQ duties. I wouldn't know why you are under the impression that this is irrelevant?

It might be irrelevant to you. No one forces you to participate in the discussion, if the issue is too banal to you.

Bottom line is: Pultecs are frequently used for handling broad-strokes EQ tasks, not only to do "Pultec trick". As I've highlighted, Pultec design is so rigid and idiosyncratic that it can not even handle the most basic EQing tasks. It's not a one-trick pony, it basically cannot do anything you would want a very basic EQ to do, as I've shown in the example with the image before. It's not a one-trick pony, it's nothing, it's utterly useless, it has no advantage over the most basic, most generic EQ plugin. That's the point!

 

I also think it's a one trick pony. I mean, it's famous for its trick and for the tube sat. You use just for that. Can you use a clean eq + saturation? Obv, but with a pultec emu youre gonna be faster, using a curve that worked thousand of times (and if you need you can eventually use the other bands). Do you prefer more control? Well, use another eq if you need. As always, YMMV

 

Grab a 500 series lunch box. Pop 2 cheap Lindell Pex500 modules in it and run some mixes through it. Sounds like butter !

 

Pultec mixing contest. Wait what? Who said that? This forum is haunted.

 

YEEEEEEESSSSS THE MAD MAN ACTUALLY SAID IT!! That shit has driven me crazy for so long, the ms denominator means literally nothing because compressors are, who would've guessed it, dynamic. lol