DIYRE EQP5 Passive Equalizer Kit - 500 series SS Pultec

I did, IMO the DOA and transformer impart a minimal coloration to the sound. It's set up in a way that it's still using the IC's in some way. What it does add is punch and a smoother sound. Just running IC though it sort of reminded me of using like Fab ProQ with a pultec style curve. Just really really transparent, but you don't get that punch. When you engage the "vintage section" it is similar but gives more reaction to your input and really makes the eq more "there" I guess is a way to put it. 

I was going to rig a switch up to take them in and out of the discrete section, but I really just wasn't digging the sound of the IC only section. I run a buss somewhat similar I believe to you, I have VP28's that are running pretty hard and on the edge, I know it's not the SB, but same idea. For me there wasn't any kind of additional color, just more punch and smoothness. The VP28's, when you are hitting them hard and running them on the edge you lose a little of the lowend and also the top gets tamed, which is what I want, but having these after to give back a punchier lowend and a silkier topend is really perfect. Really impressive EQ's here. 

I don't know if that's the answer you were looking for, but I hope that helps. 

Jerome - thanks that helps! <thumbsup> Yes our setups are run in a similar fashion it sounds like - although with different pieces. Obviously. My vp28's put out a little pinch up around 3k or so, but that's their sound - at least the vintage (early) ones I have with standard transformers and GAR's.. I'd use these most likely on individual sources. I think my 2Bus is covered. At least it is 90% of the time. I appreciate your taking the time to answer.

BTW, how are Jeff's 2503's wired in?? - wire color wise - for those of us who are thinking about Jeff's Litz transformers. Thanks for that. It's the missing puzzle piece. BTW, I'm also interested in your thoughts on the LTL opamps.

The pads on the PCB's for the EQ's are already setup to take the 2503. So, if you go with the 2503L you use the color matching chart Jeff has on his site and solder respectively. 

Also, the Litz version of the 2503 is my favorite, but, I also have the early version's of the VP28's, the black board versions and I have standard 2503's on them as well. What I got from Jeff was the difference was somewhat minimal, but there was a difference in how they effect the lowend saturation, at least that's what I remember, as always I could be wrong, he'd know best. The 2503L's sound terrific though in the EQP5. I've heard plenty of non tube pultecs and these are scary similar, and for $250 and some change? No brainer. 

 Cool.  That sounds like a fun project!  They are in the mail, so you should have them later this week.

Brad

Guitar is your friend using them on the 2 bus or where ?

He's just started using them on this and that, just built them.  I guess that's probably where a lot of people are since these just came out.

Seems to me like this fill the void of something like the Eisen LilPeqr or whatever that thing was called a few years ago.

Looks a lot like a pultec without the mid band to me.  Hmmm.

So, I just read that Joel from Rascal Audio had a hand in designing these. Interesting.

This is the comparison between the SL1731 and BradM Rogue 5 

www.dropbox.com/sh/u1xehaa3uti2hmu/AAALjjvmTmqxfIj8QvBmBErla?dl=0

Jerome

Ya prefer the rogue here too, would like to here the blue as well, like on acoustic guitar.

Just as a note, I put the scope on these to find out how the IC's are acting when the DOA circuit is engaged. What I believe is that IC1 is being used to unbalance the input, IC2 is your makeup gain.

What I've done is put an OPA1642 in that spot and I've left BradM 's Rogue 5 in there. I just feel that for these EQ's that opamp compliments the circuit the best. I'd highly advise swapping out the IC1 for a newer generation opamp like the OPA16XX series, it makes a massive difference. 

Hopefully this helps anyone decided how to customize their EQ's, for me, on the mix buss this was the best configuration I have come to. I do plan on trying out the OPA1602's and OPA1612's as well, and of course I will update and give my opinions there as well. 

As a side note, this circuit can do some really amazing stuff just running on the IC circuit. If you do decide to only go IC, again and I can't say this enough, put some newer generation opamps in there, it's the biggest difference maker thus far. The DOA section does really give you a nice punch and silkier top, but the IC circuit is plenty good enough to get started with. And don't forget, get jsteiger 's 2503L's!!!! They sound incredible in this EQ. 

-Jerome

Thanks Brad, 

I'd gotten an email from Peterson on that already, but like I'd said when I scoped it out I quickly learned that IC1 is used as a receiver to unbalance. I had originally thought that for some reason IC2 was still in the circuit, but that they may had been using it as a buffer by dropping it's gain into the DOA section, but, that's not the case. IC2 is completely decoupled from the circuit when the jumper is placed into FE mode. 

Still though, by IC1 using an opamp to unbalance the signal, it's pretty important to put something in there that is more modern and better IMO. I've ordered some OPA1642's, 1612's and 1602's to see which I like the best. Those are my favorite IC opamps so far. I did order some SOIC to PDIP PCB's to make things tidy instead of using an IC socket, just not very reliable, but can work in a pinch. 

Jerome

I haven't actually, and that's really only because I currently just own a pair of them. I've considered doing some more, but I'm really leaning toward trying to experiment with the Colour Palette/modules for busses and individual tracks. I still think there is a massive void in taking that product to another level and I'm doing some talking with designers to come up with ideas to take the Colour idea to another level. 

But, back to the EQ. 99.9% of what I mix is cut here in Nashville, very rarely do I get sessions from anywhere else. The guys here almost use a preset in how the track every instrument or vocal. There is a sound that everyone is aiming to get when they're cutting and it's great because it's so pure that extremely little corrective EQ is needed. The great thing about these EQ's is that the top-end is very sweet, you can add it for days and it just keeps enhancing and helping rather than correcting. 

What I love about them is the punch in the low-end. The Kush EQ had a way of using the low cut and low boost to create something similar, but these do it in a much simpler and musical way. I like them set to pretty broad, and also a good way for helping them to maximize your punch is to HPF ITB before you hit them, then you can make it instrument/vocal specific and the filters do the most work for you. 

For me to trust them on my mix buss is something I wasn't really expecting.... But, somehow, they've created an EQ that is super simple in design and have chosen not to put a ton of extra components in the signal path, and that really is what makes these EQ's stay pure in tone. 

Just as an example of how I would use these for lets say female vox. I would roll off up to around 150hz before I hit the eq, then I would use the eq to add weight, punch and sheen. Then I'd knock the hell out of it with a comp/limiter and call it a day. That's as simple as you can get and it's going to stay pure. 

Long answer, but I answer questions when someone ask's. 

Jerome