Manley Labs Stereo Equalizer STEREO EQ User Manual

OWNER'S MANUAL

LANGEVIN

MINI MASSIVE

STEREO EQ

MANLEY

LABORATORIES, INC.

MANLEY LABORATORIES, INC.

13880 MAGNOLIA AVE.

CHINO, CA. 91710

TEL: (909) 627-4256

FAX: (909) 628-2482

http://www.manleylabs.com

email: emanley @ manleylabs.com

email: service @ manleylabs.com

Rev. MSMPXxxxx

INTRODUCTION

THANK YOU!...

for choosing the Langevin MINI MASSIVE STEREO EQUALIZER. This Equalizer is based on the

Manley Massive Passive Stereo Tube EQ and might be described as an evolution and an alternative to the

original.TheMassivePassiveandtheMiniMassiveshareanumberofqualities.Botharebasedonpassive

circuits comprised of resistors, capacitors and inductors to sculpt tone, in fact for the most part, the exact

same circuits. These EQ circuits substantially attenuate the signal, and gain is needed to restore signal

levels to nominal unity gain when ‘flat’ and provide the apparent EQ boosts. The Massive Passive uses

mostly tubes to provide the gain and the Mini Massive uses solid-state gain blocks. The Massive uses

tubes and transformers simply because it was designed for a certain amount of color and character. The

Mini Massive was designed to be clean and pristine and be an alternative for people wanting the magic

of the its big brother, but who generally prefer EQs that have less intrinsic color.

The Massive Passive was intended to be a brute-force EQ in the same vein as classic vintage units,

most useful on close-miked instruments needing some drastic treatment. Like many things, the users

found many applications that the designer had not expected, such as stereo buss, mastering and subtle

vocal treatments. The Mini Massive should be even better suited for these tasks for some people,

because of its basic cleanliness and more minimalist design. Of course, the best choice is at least one

of each, plus a good analog parametric, a familiar vintage EQ, plus a few good digital EQs, including

a linear phase type.

Some sections of this manual have been directly 'borrowed' from the Massive Passive manual and some

parts are fresh and only pertain to the Mini Massive. As usual, the manual is mostly just train-of-thought,

random ramblings from one engineer to another and can be read with a grain of salt or a smile.

GENERAL NOTES

LOCATION & VENTILATION

The Langevin MINI MASSIVE must be installed in a stable location with ample ventilation. It is

recommended, if this unit is rack mounted, that you allow enough clearance on the top of the unit such

that a constant flow of air can move through the ventilation holes. Airflow is primarily through the top.

You should also not mount the MINI MASSIVE where there is likely to be strong magnetic fields such

as directly over or under power amplifiers or large power consuming devices. The other gear's fuse values

tendtogiveahintofwhetheritdrawsmajorpowerandislikelytocreateabiggermagneticfield. Magnetic

fields might cause a hum in the EQ and occasionally you may need to experiment with placement in the

rack to eliminate the hum. In most situations it should be quiet and trouble free.

WATER & MOISTURE

As with any electrical equipment, this equipment should not be used near water or moisture.

SERVICING

The user should not attempt to service this unit beyond that described in the owner's manual.

Refer all servicing to your dealer or Manley Laboratories. The factory technicians are available for

questions by phone (909) 627-4256 or by email at <[email protected]>. Fill in your warranty

card! Check the manual - Your question is probably anticipated and answered within these pages......

THE BACK PANEL

OUTPUT

INPUT

IF IN DOUBT USE +4 BALANCED

“IRON” IF OPTION IS INSTALLED

OUTPUT

INPUT

CHANNEL 1

MANLEY LABS

13880 MAGNOLIA AVE., CHINO, CA 91710

PHONE (909) 627-4256 fax (909)

CHANNEL 2

MINI MASSIVE

SERIAL NUMBER

HOT

LOW

www.manleylabs.c⁶²o^8-2m⁴⁸²

GROUND

INPUT OUTPUT

LEVELS

TRANSFORMER

OPTION

VINTAGE

+4 UNBALANCED

BY MANLEY LABS

FUSE 1A @ 117V

FUSE .5A @ 220V

MINI-MASSIVE

IRON

BAL

CAUTION

RISK OF ELECTRIC SHOCK

TWO CHANNEL EQUALIZER

VOLTAGE

DO NOT OPEN. REFER SERVICING TO

QUALIFIED PERSONNEL ONLY

N9512423

-10 UNBALANCED

BYPASS

3 1

First connect all the cables, then turn on the power, wait 30 seconds, then have fun, as if we had to tell you....

1) POWER CONNECTOR. First verify the POWER SWITCH on the front panel is off (down). Use the power cable supplied with your

Massive Passive. One end goes here and the other end goes to the wall outlet. You know all this.

2) VOLTAGE LABEL (ON SERIAL STICKER). Just check that it indicates the same voltage as is normal in your country. It should

be. If it says 120V and your country is 220V, then call your dealer up. If it says 120V and you expect 110 it should work fine.

3) FUSE. The fuse holder on this unit is part of the IEC power connector and can be accessed by flipping the small rectangular panel. Before

attempting this be sure the power cable is removed to ensure there is no possibilty of getting shocked As to be expected, the big hint that

the fuse is blown is that there seems to be no power, no LEDs lit no matter where the switches are set, in other words the same smptoms

as the power cable not being plugged into the wall or the Mini Massive (which should be the first thing to check). Fuses are meant to "blow"

when an electrical problem occurs and are essentially safety devices to prevent fires, shocks and big repair bills. Only replace it if it has

"blown" and only with the same value and type (2A slow-blow for 120V, 1A slow-blow for 220V). A blown fuse either looks blackened

internally or the little wire inside looks broken. Because the Mini Massive automatically goes into "hard-wire bypass" when power is

removed audio will pass through the unit even when there is a blown fuse.

4) Fuse Value. Just in case you don't read manuals (including this one obviously) we remind you of the right value of fuse to use on the

back panel. In fact, there are a few other bits of technically marginally useful info on the back panel that you may refer to occasionally.

5) Input / Output Level Switch. This 3 position toggle is important to set properly. It allows you to properly interface the Mini Massive

with your studio. For most situation the default setting will be the center position "+4 Balanced" that should work with most pro gear. The

other settings are "+4 Unbalanced" and "-10 Unbalanced". In most situations, especially with typical balanced audio gear, when this switch

is improperly set, the symptoms are subtle, with only a loss of headroom being the significant factor. If in doubt, set this switch to the middle

position and read the section on page 25 for a more complete explanation.

6) COMBO JACK INPUTS. Accepts balanced or unbalanced and XLR or 1/4 inch Tip-Sleeve or Tip-Ring-Sleeve plug sources. These

are just the Input jacks and will easily interface with most gear.

7) XLR JACK OUTPUTS. These are the basic output jacks and should easily interface with virtually any audio equipment whether

balanced or unbalanced when the appropriate setting is chosen at the Input / Output Level Switch. Pin 1 is Ground, Pin 2 is hot or + and

Pin 3 is low or -. These outputs are not the typical pseudo-balanced or cross-coupled type which automatically compensate for unbalanced

inputs but are often unstable and may significantly reduce hum rejection. These outputs maintain a constant and very balanced output

impedance regardless of loading conditions.

8) Transformer Option Switch. Mini Massives may have the "Transformer Option" installed and part of the option includes the fitting

of this switch. If the switch is not here then the "Transformer Option" is not installed. With the switch in the lower position, the transformer

is bypassed and the output is direct coupled from the line drivers. The advantage is a wider frequency response, extending from 1 Hz to

100 kHz, and slighly lower distortion or less color. With the switch in the center position the output goes through the transformer. The

advantages include "Floating" outputs which are very forgiving when it comes to interfacing and the slightly warmer and smoother color

caused by the transformer. The transformer sound in this case is deliberately exagerated a little just because we all expect a bit of tonal

change,and in truth when this transformer is used raw the difference sonically may be too subtle to justify its inclusion, so the circuit pushes

it for extra color . The upper position of the switch further exagerates the transformer by biasing a separate winding with enough DC current

to increase the even order distortions and is intented to begin to simulate some Class A discrete British console circuits from the mid 70's.

This position may seem to increase the apparent lows especially as the user increases the low boosts on the front panel. It may be too much

for some purposes and may be most appropriate where a little less fidelity may be desired - rock guitars for example.

Maybe it might be worth pointing out to those with less time behind the soldering irons and oscilloscopes, that modern transformers tend

to be a lot more transparent than marketing suits may want you to believe (remember when "tubes make it warm" was the hype). We pointed

out that it was more like the old transformers that gave that vintage warmth and now this is the new hype. Basically, some old (and new)

transformers used cheap steel (low permeability) laminations and this caused some low freq distortions. Of course, any distortion can be

said to both be useful on some things but a disaster on other sounds. Its not platinum record magic, its just familiar distortions. OK?

THE FRONT PANEL

3 2

BOOST

OUT

BOOST

EQ IN

BOOST

OUT

BOOST

OUT

LOW FREQUENCY EQ

BANDWIDTH

HI FREQUENCY EQ

LOW FREQUENCY EQ

HI FREQUENCY EQ

BANDWIDTH

FREQUENCY

150

LEVEL

FREQUENCY

3K9

BANDWIDTH

LEVEL

FREQUENCY

150

BANDWIDTH

LEVEL

FREQUENCY

3K9

LEVEL

OUT

100

220

2K7

5K6

100

220

2K7

5K6

CUT

330

470

1K8

1K2

8K2

12K

16K

330

470

680

1K8

1K2

8K2

12K

16K

mini

BY MANLEY LABS

massive

SHELF

BELL

SHELF

POWER

SHELF

BELL

SHELF

680

820

BELL

560

27K

560

27K

BELL

5 4

5 4 1

5 4 7

5 4

1) The Power Switch: First things first, flip the toggle up to turn on the Mini Massive. There is no "power on LED", instead

the "Bypass" LED indicator is lit red for a few seconds as the unit warms up and stabilizes. If the "EQ IN" switch is also up,

then a few seconds later the LED changes from red to green. The Mini Massive has a "hard-wire bypass" so even when power

is off it will pass audio untouched. In fact, because this EQ is quite transparent when set flat, one of our tests is cycling power

on and off while listening for any audible change - it should be as transparent through the unit as when hardwire bypassed.

2) EQ IN toggle: This activates both sides of the EQ and is intended as a convenience feature. Of course, it is pretty easy to

bypass the two individual sections per side using the "OUT" setting (Switch#3) so one can easily use the unit as two mono

EQs. This master EQ IN switch makes auditioning and comparing the effect of the total stereo EQ extremely easy.

3) BOOST / OUT / CUT, TOGGLE. Each band has individual toggles to select whether that band will boost or cut or be

bypassed. "OUT" is a hardwire bypass for that band. Unlike most EQs, you must select boost or cut for each band. There are

several good reasons for this arrangement. First, because the boost part of the circuit is in a different place than the cut part

because it is passive, this allows us to use the same components in both sections but doing essentially opposite functions. The

conventional arrangement of a boost/zero/cut pot (baxandall) circuit was avoided to really make it passive. This switch also

allowstwicetheresolutionofthe"GAIN"potandamuchmoreaccurate"zero". ThecenterdetentofconventionalEQsisrarely

the "electrical" center of the pot so what you expect is zero is often a little EQed. This toggle allows some of us, who use dip

EQ to reduce offending frequencies to verify those frequencies in "Boost" and then switch to "Cut". Finally, it allows us to

bypass each band individually, without losing our "GAIN" pot setting rather than resetting a band to zero or bypassing the

entire EQ.

4) SHELF & BELL toggle. The two lowest (leftmost) bands can each be a special Low Shelf or conventional Bell shape. The

two highest (rightmost) bands can each be a special High Shelf or conventional Bell shape. Shelf & Bell describe the EQ's

shape. We included some diagrams to help visualize these curves. Bell curves focus their boost and cut at given frequency and

the further away we get from that frequency, the less boost or cut. The bell curves on the Mini Massive are moderately wide

and the "Bandwidth Control" does not have a lot of range and it also affects the maximum boost and cut (like a Pultec). Shelf

slopes generally boost (or cut) towards the highs or lows (thus high shelves and low shelves). These are not to be confused

with "high or low filters" which purely cut above or below a given frequency. Shelves also have gain or dB controls which

allow you to just boost or cut a little bit if desired - filters never have these controls.

The High band also has a special setting labelled BELL 2 that only operates on the 4 highest frequencies. It simply narrows

the Q for those 4 highest frequencies. This can be useful for controlling the apparent air or sweetness of the extreme highs.

One may notice the ovals marked around the 4 highest freqs and a corresponding oval around the Bell 2 setting.

It is a bit of an refinement from the Massive Passive which doesn't offer that feature and which followed a more general

philosophy of maintaining very similar curve shapes across the spectrum. While the SHELF curves on both the Massive

Passive and Mini Massive are capable of good control of 'air', it seems many users missed that idea because they generally

favor bell curves and in the case of the Massive Passive the bell Q is probably too wide for great 'air' control. The Mini Massive

includes 3 features that vastly improve 'air' control. The first is this narrower Q in Bell 2, the second is reshaped curves for

the 4 highest shelf frequencies, and the third is the incredible clarity offered by the Rapture amps along with transformerless

outputs, which extents the frequency and phase response. These features were considered important for a basic 2 band stereo

EQ more aimed at mastering than the Massive Passive was, where ironically it has seen a lot of use.

Similarly, wereshapedthe4lowestshelfcurvesformorefatness, depthandpunchcomparedtotheMassivo. Thesenewcurves

might be considered more Pultec-like but are not in the strictest sense. They just offer a similar usefulness and essentially

increase the range that the bandwidth control can be effectively used for those lowest freqs. It also breaks away from the

philosophyontheMassivoofmaintainingsimilarcurveshapingacrossthespectrum. TheMinishiftsthedipaspectoftheshelf

curves more towards the low mids and mids for those lowest 4 frequencies.

It may also be worth pointing out that the shelf curves that were introduced by the Massive Passive were quite unique at that

time and while there have been imitations since, these shelves are still unique, unusual and certainly unconventional compared

to most EQs and are worth exploring and learning. Let us just say that the biggest fans of the Massive are the engineers who

quickly learned the strange shelf 'features' and those who approached it as a whole new tool, and not just a standard EQ.

5) GAIN. This sets the boost and/or cut depth or amount and works with the BOOST, OUT, CUT, TOGGLE. FLAT is fully

counter-clockwise not straight up "12:00" like most EQs. It is more like a Pultec in this regard. Maximum boost or cut is fully

clockwise and can be up to 20 dB - but not necessarily. There is a fair amount of interaction with the BANDWIDTH control.

The maximum of 20 dB is available in Shelf modes when the Bandwidth is CCW and is about 12 dB when the Bandwidth is CW.

The maximum of 20 dB is available in Bell modes when the Bandwidth is CW and is about 6 dB when the Bandwidth is CCW.

Atstraightup"12:00"inBellmode"narrow"expectabout8dBofboostorcut. Inotherwords, youshouldn'texpectthemarkings

around the knob to indicate a particular number of dBs. Many Eqs are this way. On the other hand, this interaction is the result

of natural interactions between components and tends to "feel" and sound natural as opposed to contrived.

The 2 bands will have some interaction and interdependence especially when both are set towards mid frequencies. It is a parallel

EQ rather than the far more common series connected style. If you set up all 2 bands to around 1kHz and boosed each 20 dB,

the total boost will be 20 dB rather than 40dB (20+ db of boost and 20 dB into clipping). This also implies, that if you first boost

one band, that the next will not seem to do much if it is at similar frequencies and bandwidths. Virtually all other parametrics

are both series connected and designed for minimal interaction, which seems to be quite appealing if you wear a white lab coat

with pocket protectors ;.) Actually, there are valid arguements for those goals and there are definately some applications that

require them. However, there is also a valid point for an EQ that is substantially different from the "norm", and for audio toys

that have artistic merit and purpose and not just scientific interest or gimmickry. We tried to balance artistic, technological and

practicalconsiderationsinboththeMassivePassiveandMiniMassive,andofferbothsomenewandoldapproachesthatappealed

to the ears of recording engineers (and our own ears).

6) BANDWIDTH. Similar to the "Q" control found in many EQs. A more accurate term here would be "Damping" or

"Resonance" but we used "Bandwidth" to stay with Pultec terminology and because it is a "constant bandwidth" (*) design rather

than "constant Q" and because of the way it uniquely works in both Bell and Shelf modes. In Bell modes, you will find it similar

to most Q controls with a wider shape fully CCW and narrower fully CW. The widest Q (at maximum boost) is about 1 for the

and the narrowest Q is about 2.5 to 3 for most of the frequencies. On paper, the bell widths appear to have less effect than is

apparent on listening and the sound is probably more due to "damping" or "ringing" and the way it interacts with the gain. Also

some people associate a wide bell on conventional EQs with more energy boost or cut, and at first impression the Massivo seems

to work backward compared with that and narrow bandwidths give more drastic results. On the Massive Passive a narrow

bandwidth bells will allow up to the full 20 dB of boost (or cut) and wide bandwidths significantly less at about 6 dB maximum.

In Shelf Modes the Bandwidth has a special function. When this knob is fully CCW, the shelf curves are very similar to almost

all other EQs. As you increase the Bandwidth control, you begin to introduce a bell curve in the opposite direction. So if you

have a shelf boost, you gradually add a bell dip which modifies the overall shelf shape. At straight up, it stays flatter towards the

mid range, and begins to boost further from the mids with a steeper slope but the final maximum part of the boost curve stays

relatively untouched. With the Bandwidth control fully CW, that bell dip becomes obvious and is typically 6dB down at the

frequency indicated. The boost slope is steeper and the maximum boost may be about 12 dB. These curves were modelled from

PultecEQP1-Asandlargelyresponsiblefortheoutrageous"phatness"theyareknownfor.AsyouturntheBandwidthknob(CW),

it seems as if the shelf curve is moving further towards the extreme frequencies, but mostly of this is just the beginning part of

the slope changing and not the peak. This also implies, that you may find yourself using frequencies closer to the mids than you

might be used to. These shelf curves have never been available for an analog high shelf before and provide some fresh options.

7) FREQUENCY. Each band provides a wide range of overlapping and interleaving frequency choices. Each switch position

isselectingadifferentcapacitorandinductor.Infact,inSHELFmodetheEQcouldbedeemedthirdordersections,whichimplies

3 frequency dependent components are in play, 2 capacitors and an inductor or two inductors and a capacitor. Normal shelf EQs

are first order with only one capacitor creating the EQ shape, and this shape is less steep and controllable by the user.

Atextremehighandlowfrequencies(including10Kand12K), youmightgetsomeunexpectedresultsbecauseoftheBandwidth/

Shelf function. For example, you can set up 20 dB of boost at 12K and it can sound like you just lost highs instead of boosting.

This happens when the Bandwidth control is more CW only and not when it is CCW. Why? You are creating a dip at 12K and

the shelf is only beginning at the fringes of audibility but the dip is where most of us can easily percieve. It takes a little getting

used too the way the controls interact. The reverse is also true, where you set up a shelf cut and you get a boost because of the

Bandwidth control being far CW. In some ways this simulates the shape of a resonant synthesizer filter or VCF except it doesn't

move. These wierd highs are useful for raunchy guitars and are designed to work well with the Filters. There are a lot of creative

uses for these bizarre settings including messing up the minds of back-seat engineers.

NOTES

1) Do not assume the knob settings "mean" what you expect they should mean. Part of this is due to the interaction of the controls. Part

is due to the new shelf slopes and part due to a lack of standards regarding shelf specification.

2)Youmayfindyourselfleaningtowardsshelffrequenciesclosertothemidsthanyouareusedtoandthe"action"seemsclosertotheedges

of the spectrum than your other EQs. Same reasons as above.

3) You may also find yourself getting away with what seems like massive amounts of boost. Where the knobs end up, may seem scarey

particularly for mastering. Keep in mind that, even at maximum boost, a wide bell might only max out at 6 dB of boost (less for the lowest

band) and only reaches 20 dB at the narrowest bandwidth. On the other hand, because of how transparent this EQ is, you might actually

be EQing more than you could with a different unit. Taste rules, test benches don't make hit records, believe your ears.

4)Sometimestheshelfswillsoundprettywierd,especially(only)atthenarrowbandwidthsettings.Theymightseemtobehavingacomplex

effect and not only at the "dialed in" frequency. This is certainly possible. Try wider bandwidths at first.

5)AreasonablestartingpointfortheBandwidthforshelvesisstraightuporbetween11:00and1:00. Itwasdesignedthiswayandisroughly

where the maximum flatness around the "knee" is, combined with a well defined steep slope.

6) The back panel I/O level switch is important to set properly in order to maximise headroom and ensure that there is not an unwanted

6 dB level loss. However, there may be situations where a deliberate goal might be to make the Mini Massive clip early. For example, one

could use the "+4 UNBALANCED" setting (assuming it is patched into balanced gear) and get 6 dB less headroom or use the "-10

UNBALANCED" setting which will clip the input 12 dB early.

7) And speaking of clipping, there are no "Clip LEDs" mostly because like the Massive Passive, the headroom is generally outrageous. For

example the balanced output clips at +30 dBm which is about 6 dB more than most gear and 8-10 dB more than most A to D converters.

That said, one still needs to always be listening and should be aware that clipping may be possible with extreme settings.

8) The Mini Massive may sound remarkably different from other high end EQs and completely different from the console EQs. Yes, this

is quite deliberate. Hopefully it sounds better, sweeter, more musical and it complements your console EQs. We saw little need for yet

another variation of the standard parametric with only subtle sonic differences. We suggest using the Mini Massive before tape, for the

bulk of the EQ tasks and then using the console EQs for some fine tweaking and where narrow Q touch-ups like notches are needed. The

Mini Massive is equally at home doing big, powerful EQ tasks such as is sometimes required for tracking drums, bass and guitars, or for

doing those demanding jobs where subtlety is required like vocals and mastering.

9) Of course the Mini will get compared to the Massive Passive which gets compared to vintage Pultecs and to Manley's Enhanced Pultec

EQs so maybe a few words from the designer are appropriate. First things first - The vintage Pultec EQ section was designed by Western

Electric and decades later Eugene Shenk added his gain stage and formed a company called Pulse Technologies to manufacture these EQs.

Shenk's design used 4 triodes (2 tubes) in a balanced topology and 3 transformers, and we might point to the interstage transformer and

less than optimal drive circuitry for its vintage Pultec crunch . This made it a favorite for kick and sometimes bass guitar during the 70's

and 80's but may have been too low fidelity to be used on much else. Of course, most Pultecs by that time had drifted to the point where

if one had 10, one was lucky if two sounded similar enough for stereo. The Manley Pultecs were designed initially for mastering and a

cleaner gain stage was used and transformers were chosen that were flatter and cleaner and more consistant. Of course, the exact values

of the original EQ components were used, but the quality of capacitors, resistors and pots had improved and were used. So the original EQ

shapes are intact along with several new frequencies added. Pultecs have been a studio and broadcast standard since the 60's and that most

engineers used both the boost and cut knobs at the same time - so it may be a bit funny that what we call "the Pultec Curve" wasn't described

until the late 90's and wasn't resurrected earlier.

The Massive Passive was designed as a tracking EQ and as an alternative or addition to the usual tools like console EQs and plugs.

A) There were hundreds of op-amp based parametric EQs and a growing number of software based simulations of that idea. Even a Manley

variation on that idea wouldn't have been so different and we didn't want to use op-amps (but ended up using one in the end)

B) Nobody had really addressed the issue that most engineers favorite EQs were Neves, APIs and Pultecs and nobody had really done an

new inductor based EQ design in decades.

C) There was more of a percieved need for a new tracking EQ than a 'mastering EQ'. Besides back then there were a lot fewer people calling

themselves mastering engineers. The idea of strapping an EQ across the mix at that time was pretty unusual and almost unheard of.

D) So we set out to design an EQ that would be good for guitars, bass, keys and drums, and of course it ended up being used for almost

everything else (like vocals) and started a fashion of EQing the stereo buss (for better or worse).

TheMiniMassivecameaboutduetothedesignerfinallyfindingasolidstategainstagehelikedalot(itwasdevelopedforanA/Dconverter)

and because he appreciated how the Massive came to be used and how that style of EQ might be improved for some users. Of course, some

usetheMassiveforitscolorandtherewasnoneedtorepeatthat(ifthatiswhatyouneedwestillbuildtheMassive).TheMiniwasenvisioned

as a buss EQ so and was optimised for that (it is clean), so, of course, we expect it will get used for everything else.

More Thoughts from the Designer

Clean versus colored - Active versus Passive - Tape versus Digital - well it all gets a bit tiresome.

Here is the real deal: they are all a bit colored and for the most part remarkably clean. So if anything

we are basing our preferences on which flavor of subtle color we either happen to like, or believe we

need (based on something we read somewhere) which may be just a slightly familiar sound rather

than some magnificient life changing event. No magic, just good tools. The music is the magic.

Does Digital require some analog warmth, some color to make a great recording? Not necessarily.

For example some recordings call for "as clean as possible" and even some instruments within an

otherwise grungy mix may sound best or provide a wonderful contrast when made as clean as

possible. And while this designer doesn't claim that today's hi end digital is absolutely clean and

transparerent or clinical and sterile, adding more and more stages of processing whether analog or

digital will mostly tend to make it less transparent, less true to the source. Choose wisely.

Will some analog processor fix digital's flaws? This designer hears digital's flaws as a subtle form of

time smear. Much analog on the other hand can be characterized as having various forms of

harmonic and intermodulation distortion, plus often some time smear caused by phase shifts which

are practically inevitable given the normal frequency responses of audio gear. One form of distortion

doesn't cancel out the other and adding more time smear should make things worse. However, there

are some families of distortion that may be euphonic and either add to the effect of 3D depth, some

distortions give an effect of fatness or warmth (transformers), and some distortions that seem to

evoke vintage tone like a familiar smell. So 'as clean as possible' is appropriate for some situations

and somewhat controlled dirt is appropriate for others. Beware of getting the mind-set that either

goal is appropriate for every sound and every situation. Like every house should be the same color.

There are many situations where one might want a processor (or preamplifier) that doesn't leave its

thumbprint on the sound. Typically mastering is one place for a transparent EQ, especially when the

mix is already pretty damn fine. Other situations, of course include, most classical and live ensemble

or choir recordings, a lot of acoustic recordings, folk, country, jazz, choir, classical, etc. While the

MiniMassive does have very transparent gain stages, and the EQ sections are passive so they have

less artifacts at low to modereate settings than most op-amp based EQs, it should be pointed out that

significant drastic settings with any EQ (or compressor) regardless of how clean it started, will

probably leave a thumbprint. Sometimes 'natural' is very good goal, and it can be the most familiar.

The place to start is player, instrument, room then mic choice & position, preamp & converter. EQ?

With the MiniMassive, expect a generally clean and natural sound with conservative to moderate

settings. However, it will gradually introduce a signature color at more drastic settings. With the

transformer option, one can introduce some vintage color and subtle warmth. The downside with

iron, and there is always a downside, is some subtle time smear that might be noticed with sounds

that have lots of energy (and tightness) at the edges of the spectrum. Worth a check on big solid

mixes or kick drum tracks or high hat tracks. Drastic EQ settings (from any EQ) can 'time-smear'

too. EQ changes generally introduce phase shift so listen for time smear with spectrum changes.

And for those who have need for more color and more of that elusive vintage vibe, we designed

another EQ to do that function. It is called the Massive Passive, and it is a vacuum tube based unit

originally designed to be an alternative to the typical mostly boring EQs available then. Ya know?

Just a few notes for plug-in users.

One question that gets asked a lot is “Why no ‘Link’ switch “or “Why not a stereo EQ with one set

of controls?” The most accurate answer is “you guys are spoiled, ha ha”. To do it in digital is almost

a no-brainer and is just a matter of passing a few numbers to the other sides parameter registers. To

do it on an analog compressor is a bit more involved but still pretty easy and not pricey. But to do it

on an analog EQ, requires big expensive multi-deck switches, pots, and practically all audio

switching be done with relays or FETs. Now given that the rotary switches and all the pots are

already custom and difficult to source, getting ones that are twice as deep, 4 times rarer, and would

only be used occasionally, would add a lot of cost to the unit. Besides that, considering that the Mini

is really stuffed with parts, just routing printed circuit board traces, would be difficult and involve

compromises to the integrity. Which brings up the final point, crosstalk would probably bite one’s

butt for even trying. Basically, a stereo link or single set of knobs is way more difficult to do in

analog, and extremely easy in digital and that is the difference.

Next question…”Why no Manley EQ plug-in?” Maybe we are a bit too picky, but we haven’t heard

a plug in that really approximates the subtleties of an inductor based EQ or even a transformer.

Maybe some day, we’ll combine our knowledge with some DSP wizard’s knowledge and do

something cool, and cheap (which is really what you are asking for, right?). We might also say, that

we would prefer to do something new and different than try to clone our existing stuff. If and when

Manley does a plug-in it should be at least as radical and special as the hardware. In other words,

take advantage of digital technology and do what it can do best, rather than the questionable effort of

trying to recreate (again) analog processes especially if this is where digital technology is at its

weakest or most immature for now. However, like yourselves, we do use plug-ins, music programs,

etc, and evaluate too many to name, and we are keeping our ears and eyes open. Of course, some of

you know that the we have contributed to some non-Manley plug-ins that are highly regarded.

Meanwhile progress continues and we are continuing to listen, and maybe some day we'll hook up

with some adventurous DSP hot shots with more on their minds than "clone market $".

Or this question…” Have you guys thought about digital controlled analog so that maybe we can

control the EQ like a plug-in and automate or even recall settings?” Gee, we would love to but…..

we, as an industry, just don’t have the technology yet that would enable that without compromising

the signal integrity (and do it at a reasonable cost). For us, that has to be a prime consideration, and

it is really why most of our customers come to Manley. We’ve been approached by a few companies

asking to put our front panels on a computer screen for recalls, but none have suggested any reason

why that would be better or more accurate or cheaper than a pencil and paper, especially when we

supply a paper template in the back of the manual. So, our decisions are based on why people buy

our stuff, which is usually the quality and sound rather than feature set and buzz words.

Or the big question…”Why do analog EQs sound better or at least different than my 50 plug-ins?”

Maybe DSP guys trying to model analog, have zero experience with analog. Maybe young guys who

haven’t yet developed their ears are developing audio software. Maybe FIR filters used everywhere

in digital audio might be a little more audible than people presume. Maybe human hearing and both

analog and digital processing are deeper topics than most people believe and all of us are still

learning. The good news is that the difference is narrowing every year and maybe some day the

choice will be mostly whether this signal path is analog or digital or the order that you prefer to

process or whether you prefer LCD screens or physical knobs and switches.

This section is borrowed from the Massive Passive Manual

Beginnings

"The Super-Pultec"

The very earliest equalizers were very simple and primitive by

Manley Labs has been building a few versions of the Pultec-style

EQs for many years as well as an updated version of the EQ-500

(another vintage EQ). These are classic passive EQs combined with

Manley's own gain make-up amplifiers. Engineers loved them but

we often heard requests for a Manley Parametric EQ with all the

modern features but done with tubes. Another request we had was

fora"Super-Pultec". Webrieflyconsideredcombiningthe"bestof"

Pultecs into a new product but the idea of some bands only boosting

and some only cutting could only be justified in an authentic vintage

re-creation and not a new EQ.

todays standards. Yes, simpler than the hi-fi "bass" and "treble"

controls we grew up with. The first tone controls were like the tone

controls on an electric guitar. They used only capacitors and

potentiometers and were extremely simple. Passive simply means

no "active" (powered) parts and active parts include transistors,

FETs, tubes and ICs where gain is implied. "Passive" also implies

no boost is possible - only cut. The most recent "purely passive EQ"

we know of was the EQ-500 designed by Art Davis and built by a

numberofcompaniesincludingUnitedRecordingandAltecLansing.

It had a 10 dB insertion loss. No tubes. It had boost and cut positions

but boost just meant less loss. Manley Labs re-created this vintage

piece and added a tube gain make-up amp for that 10 dB or make-

up gain to restore unity levels. It has a certain sweetness too.

ThenextchallengewastomakeanEQthatsoundedasgoodorbetter

than a Pultec. With all the hundreds of EQs designed since the

Pultec, none really beat them for sheer fatness. We knew why. Two

reasons. EQP1-A's have separate knobs for boost and cut. People

tend to use both at the same time. You might think that this would

just cancel out - wrong.... You get what is known as the "Pultec

Curve" . The deep lows are boosted, the slope towards "flat"

becomes steeper, and a few dB of dip occurs in the low mids. The

second reason for the fatness and warmth was the use of inductors

and transformers that saturate nicely combined with vacuum tubes

for preserving the headroom and signal integrity.

Youhaveprobablyheardofpassivecrossoversandactivecrossovers

in respect to speakers or speaker systems. Each has advantages.

Almost all hi-fi speakers use a passive crossover mounted in the

speaker cabinet. Only one amp is required per speaker. Again,

passive refers to the crossover using only capacitors, inductors and

resistors. Active here refers to multiple power amplifiers.

One of the main design goals of the Massive Passive was to use only

capacitors, inductors and resistors to change the tone. Pultecs do it

this way too and many of our favorite vintage EQs also relied on

inductors and caps. In fact, since op-amps became less expensive

than inductors, virtually every EQ that came out since the mid '70's

substituted ICs for inductors. One is a coil of copper wire around a

magnetic core and the other is probably 20 or more transistors. Does

the phrase "throwing out the baby with the bath water" ring a bell?

Couldweusea"bandwidthcontrol"tosimulatethe"PultecCurve(s)?

The Pultec curve is officially a shelf and shelf EQs don't have a

"bandwidthorQknob"-onlythebellcurves.So,ifwebuiltapassive

parametric where each band could switch to shelf or bell and used

that"bandwidth"knobintheshelfmodeswecouldnotonlysimulate

the Pultecs but add another parameter to the "Parametric EQ" We

found that we could apply the "Pultec Curve" to the highs with

equally impressive results. This is very new.

Another design goal was to avoid having the EQ in a negative

feedback loop. Baxandall invented the common circuit that did this.

It simplified potentiometer requirements, minimised the number of

parts and was essentially convenient. Any EQ where "flat" is in the

middle of the pot's range and turning the pot one way boosts and the

other way cuts is a variation of the old Baxandall EQ. Pultecs are not

this way. Flat is fully counter-clockwise. For the Massive Passive,

Baxandall was not an option. The classical definition of "passive"

has little to do with "feedback circuits" and we are stretching the

definition a bit here, however, it certainly is more passive this way.

TheMassivePassivediffersfromPultecsinseveralimportantareas.

Rather than copy any particular part of a Pultec, we designed the

"Massivo" from the ground up. As mentioned, each band being able

to boost or cut and switch from shelf to bell is quite different from

Pultecs. This required a different topology than Pultecs which like

most EQs utilize a "series" connection from band to band. The

Massive Passive uses a "parallel" connection scheme.

Aseriesconnectionwouldimplythatforeachband's20dBofboost,

there is actually 20 dB (more in reality) of loss in the flat settings.

Yeah, that adds up to over 80 dB, right there, and then there is

significantlossesinvolvedifoneintendstousethesamecomponents

tocutandtoboost.Andmorelossesinthefilterand"gaintrim".That

much loss would mean, that much gain, and to avoid noise there

would need to be gain stages between each band and if done with

tubes would end up being truly massive, hot and power hungry.

We only use amplification to boost the signal. Flat Gain ! What goes

iniswhatcomesout. Ifwedidn'tuseanyamplifiers, youwouldneed

to return the signal to a mic pre because the EQ circuit eats about 50

dB of gain. Luckily, you don't have to think about this.

We visited a few top studios and asked "what do you want from a

new EQ ?" They unanamously asked for "click switch frequencies",

"character" rather than "clinical" and not another boring, modern

sterile EQ. They had conventional EQs all over the console and

wanted something different. They had a few choice gutsy EQs with

"click frequencies" that were also inductor/capacitor based (which

is why the frequencies were on a rotary switch). Requests like

"powerful", "flexible", "unusual" and "dramatic" kept coming up.

Instead, we used a parallel topology. Not only are the losses much

more reasonable (50 dB total!) but we believe it sounds more

"natural"and"musical". InmanywaystheMassivePassiveisavery

unusual EQ, from how it is built, to how it is to operate and most

importantly how it sounds.

We designed these circuits using precise digital EQ simulations,

SPICE3 for electronic simulations, and beta tested prototypes in

major studios and mastering rooms for opinions from some of the

best "ears" in the business.

We started with these goals: modern parametric-like operation,

passive tone techniques through-out, and features different from

anything currently available and it had to sound spectacular.

"The Passive Parametric"

Another important concept. When you use the shelf curves the

frequencies on the panel may or may nor correspond to other EQ's

frequencymarkings. Itseemsthereareacceptedstandardsforfilters

and bell curves for specifying frequency, but not shelves. We use a

common form of spec where the "freq" corresponds to the half-way

dB point. So, if you have a shelf boost of 20 db set at 100 Hz, then

at 100, it is boosting 10 dB. The full 20 dB of boost is happening

until below 30 Hz. Not only that, like every other shelf EQ there will

be a few dB of boost as high as 500 Hz or 1K. This is all normal,

except.........

For years, we had been getting requests for a Manley parametric

equalizer, but it looked daunting because every parametric we knew

of used many op-amps and a "conventional parametric" would be

very impractical to do with tubes. Not impossible, but it might take

upwards of a dozen tubes per channel. A hybrid design using chips

for cheapness and tubes for THD was almost opposite of how

Manley Labs approaches professional audio gear and tube designs.

Could we combine the best aspects of Pultecs, old console EQs and

high end dedicated parametric EQs?

Except we now have a working "bandwidth control" in shelf mode.

With the bandwidth set fully counter-clockwise, these shelves

approximate virtually ever other EQ's shelf (given that some use a

different freq spec). As you turn the bandwidth control clockwise,

everythingchangesanditbreaksalltherules(andsoundsawesome).

Lets use an example. If graphs are more your style, refer to these as

well. Supposeweuse4.7Konthethirdbandbyswitchingto"boost"

and "shelf" and turning the "bandwidth control" fully counter-

clockwise. Careful with levels from here on out. Just for fun, select

4.7kHz and turn the "dB" control to the max - fully clockwise. This

should be like most other shelf EQs, except with better fidelity, (if

you can set them to around 5 kHz!) . Now, slowly turn the

"bandwidth" clockwise. Near 12:00 it should be getting "special". It

also sounds higher (in freq). Keep turning. At fully clockwise it

seems to have gotten a little higher and some of the sibilance is

actually less than in "bypass". It sort of sounds as if the bandwidth

is acting like a variable frequency control but better. More air - less

harshness.

What is the definition of a "Parametric Equalizer"? We asked the

man who invented the first Parametric Equalizer and coined the

term. He shrugged his shoulders and indicated there really is no

definition and it has become just a common description for all sorts

of EQs. He presented a paper to the AES in 1971 when he was 19.

His name is George Massenburg and still manufactures some of the

best parametric EQs (GML) and still uses them daily for all of his

major recordings. Maybe he originally meant "an EQ where one

couldadjustthelevel,frequencyandQindependently".Heprobably

also meant continuously variable controls (as was the fashion) but

this was the first aspect to be "modified" when mastering engineers

neededreset-abilityandrotaryswitches. Thenextdevelopmentwas

the variation of "Constant Bandwidth" as opposed to "Constant Q"

in the original circuits. "Constant Q" implies the Q or bell shape

staysthesameateverysettingofboostandcut."ConstantBandwidth"

implies the Q gets wider near flat and narrower as you boost or cut

more. Pultecs and passive EQs were of the constant bandwidth type

and most console EQs and digital EQs today are the constant

bandwidthtypebecausemostofusprefer"musical"over"surgical".

Lately we have seen the word "parametric" used for EQs without

even a Q control.

Compared to "conventional parametrics" in all their variations, the

Massive Passive has just "upped the ante" by adding a few useful

new parameters. The first is the use of the "bandwidth" in shelf

modes.Secondistheabilitytoswitcheachandeverybandintoshelf.

The original parametrics were only "bell". We have seen some EQs

that allow the lowest and highest bands to switch to shelf. Now you

can use two HF shelfs to fine tune in new ways without chaining

several boxes together. Lastly, each band can be bypassed or

switchedfromboosttocutwithoutlosingaknobsetting.Thisallows

twice the resolution from the "dB" pots and allows one to exagerate

an offending note in order to nail the frequency easier, then simply

switchto"cut". Youcanalwayscheck, withoutlosingthedBsetting

by switching back to "boost" for a minute. You can also have

absolute confidence that the "zero" position on the dB pot is "flat"

which is not the case with center detented pots. Mechanical center

and electrical center are rarely the same.

We can call the Massive Passive a "passive parametric" but .... it

differs from George's concepts in a significant way. And this is

important to understand, to best use the Massive Passive. The dB

andbandwidthknobsarenotindependent.Wealreadynotedthatthe

QofthebellcurvewidenswhenthedBcontrolisclosertoflat. More

significantly, the boost or cut depth varies with the bandwidth

control. At the narrowest bandwidths (clockwise) you can dial in 20

dB of boost or cut. At the widest bandwidths you can only boost or

cut6dB(andonly2dBinthetwo22-1Kbands). Somehow, thisstill

sounds musical and natural. The reason seems to be, simply using

basic parts in a natural way without forcing them to behave in some

idealized conceptual framework.

"SPICE" printout

"Normal Shelf" Wide Bandwidth

"Special Shelf" Medium Bandwidth

"Pultec Shelf" Narrow Bandwidth

Bell Cut Narrow Bandwidth

Why Passive?

And Why Parallel?

If you hate tech talk, just skip this section - it has to do with

electronic parts and circuits and design philosophy.

The Massive Passive is a "parallel design" as opposed to the

far more common "series design". A few pages back, we

mentioned the main reason for going with a parallel design

wastoavoidextremesignalloss,whichwouldrequireextreme

gains and present the problem of noise or extreme cost. The

parallel approach not only avoided this but has a number of

advantages as well.

AllEQsusecapacitors.Theyareveryeasytouse,predictible,

cheap and simple. Some sound slightly better than others.

Inductors do almost the mirror function of capacitors.

Unfortunately, they can be difficult to use (they can pick up

hum),theycanbedifficulttopredict(theessentialinductance

value usually depends on the power going through them

which varies with audio), they are expensive and generally

have to be custom made for EQs. These are qualities that lab-

coat engineers tend to scowl at. Some effort was aimed at

replacing the poor inductors and more effort made to bad-

mouth them and justify these new circuits. The main reason

was cost. All of the "classic" Eqs used real inductors and that

has become the dividing line "sought after vintage" and just

old.

WiththeseriesEQdesign,ifyouset3bandstoboostthesame

frequency 15 dB each, the total boost will be band one plus

two plus three - or 45 dB - but then it would probably be

distortinginaratheruglyway.WiththeMassivePassive,you

can dial in 4 bands to boost 20 db near 1K and it still will only

boost 20 dB total. If you tend to boost 4 bands at widely

separated frequencies (like what happens on two day mixes

withsneakyproducers),ittendssoundalmostflat,butlouder.

Other EQs seem to sound worse and worse as you boost more

andmore. Forsomepeopleitwillactasa"safetyfeature"and

prevent them from goofy EQ. Occasionally, you may be

surprised with what looks like radical settings and how close

toflatitsounds.Asideeffectisthatifyouarealreadyboosting

a lot of highs in one band, if you attempt to use another band

to tweak it, the second band will seem rather ineffective. You

may have to back off on that first band to get the desired tone.

You actually have to work at making the Massive Passive

soundlikeheavy-handedEQbyusingabalancedcombination

of boosts and cuts. In a sense it pushes you towards how the

killer engineers always suggest to use EQs (ie gentle, not

much, more cut than boost). This is good.

What the lab-coats didn't consider was that inductors may

have had real but subtle advantages. Is it only obvious to

"purists" that a coil of copper wire may sound better than 2 or

3op-amps,eachwithovertwentytransistors,hundredsofdBs

of negative feedback along with "hiss", cross-over distortion

and hard harsh clipping?

We mentioned the inductance value can change with applied

power. This also turns out to be a surprising advantage. For

example, in the low shelf, with heavy boosts and loud low

frequency signals, at some point, the inductor begins to

saturate and loses inductance. Sort of a cross between an EQ

and a low freq limiter. The trick is to design the inductor to

saturate at the right point and in the right way.

While there may be interesting arguments against any

interactionbetweenEQbands,thereasonstendtobemorefor

purely technical biases than based on listening. In nature and

acoustics and instrument design, very little of the factors that

affect tone are isolated from each other. Consider how a

guitar's string vibrates the bridge which vibrates the sound

board, resonates in the body, and in turn vibrates the bridge

and returns to the string. What is isolated? The fact that the

bandsareNOTisolatedfromeachotherintheMassivoisone

of the reasons it does tend to sound more natural and less

electronic. We noticed this effect in a few passive graphic

EQs, notably the "560" and a cut-only 1/3 octave EQ.

In the mid-bands and bell curves a somewhat different effect

happens. The center-frequency shifts slightly depending on

both the waveform and signal envelope. This "sound" is the

easily recognizeable signature of vintage EQs. It is not a type

of harmonic distortion (though it can be mistaken for this on

a test-bench) but more of a slight modulation effect.

Inductors in the form of transformers are also a large part of

whyvintagegearisoftendescribedas"warm"whetheritwas

built with tubes or transistors. In fact, the quality of the

transformer has always been directly related to whether a

pieceofaudiogearhasbecomesoughtafter.Saturationinthis

case involves adding odd harmonics to very low frequencies

which either tends to make lows audible in small speakers or

makesthebasssoundlouderandricher(whilestillmeasuring

"flat"). The key is how much. A little seems to be sometimes

desireable (not always) and a little more is beginning to be

muddy and a little more can best be described as "blat". The

numberofaudiotransformerexpertshasfallentoamerehand

full and some of them are getting very old.

There is a type of interaction we did avoid. That is inductor to

inductor coupling. It is caused by the magnetic field created

by one inductor to be picked up by another. It can cause the

inductors to become an unexpected value, or if it is band to

band, can cause effects that can best be described as goofy. In

the Filter Section we utilized close inductor spacing to get

some hum-bucking action but avoid magnetic coupling with

careful positioning. Some kinds of interaction suck and some

are beneficial.

Phase Shift?

Mini Massive and Massive Passive - Similarities & Differences

Deadlytopic.Thisisprobablythemostmisunderstoodtermfloating The Mini Massive is obviously based on the lowest and highest

aboutinthemixingcommunity.Lotsofpeopleblameornamephase bandsfromtheMassivePassive. Infact, theyshareabout95%ofthe

shift for just about any audio problem that doesn't sound like typical same components and about 85% of the same circuit board layout.

distortion. We ask that you try to approach this subject with an open Most settings using those two bands can be easily transferred from

mind and forget what you may have heard about phase for now.This one to the other.

is not to be confused with "time alignment" as used in speakers, or

the "phase" buttons on the console and multi-mic problems.

One intention of the Mini Massive is to be a good answer for those

who took issue with one or another factor of the Massive Passive

First-allanalogEQshavephaseshiftandthattheamountisdirectly even though the number of those who had any issue were few and

related to the "shape" of the EQ curve. Most digital EQs too. In fact, most likely the noisiest of these individuals will still find some

one could have 3 analog EQs, 3 digital EQs, and an "acoustic rationalizations in their attempts to be internet-orious. But they did

equivilant", and a passive EQ, each with the same EQ shape, and raise some valid points and inspired an alternative version.

ALL will have the same phase shift characteristics. This is a law, a

fact and not really a problem. The two exceptions are: digital EQs Number 1) The Massivo is too colored for mastering. Maybe for

with additional algorithms designed to "restore" the phase, and a some, but many of the top mastering engineers do use it 5 days a

rarefamilyofdigitalEQscalledFIRfiltersbasedonFFTtechniques. week and it happens to be one of the most likely pieces of gear to be

seen in professional mastering rooms. That said, the Mini Massive

Second-OpinionsaboundthatanEQ'sphaseshiftshouldfallwithin is designed to be one of the cleanest and most transparent equalizers

certain simple parameters particularly by engineers who have ever offered and which is easily verified by you hitting the hardwire

designed unpopular EQs. The Massive Passive has more phase shift bypass switch reasonably frequently.

than most in the filters and shelfs and leans towards less in the bells.

Does this correspond to an inferior EQ? Judge for yourself.

Ontheotherhand, theMassivePassivewasdesignedwithtubesand

transformers for deliberate color and for those situations where

Third - Many people use the word "phase shift" to describe a nasty some departure from digital sterility is desired it is a better choice

quality that some old EQs have and also blame inductors for this. Its overtheMiniMassive. Thesedaysyoumighthaveavarietyofways

not phase shift. Some inductor based EQs use inductors that are too to generate "warmth" so the choice of EQ is more open. In other

small, tend to saturate way too easily, and create an unpleasant words the Massivo was designed more with vintage console and

distortion.TheMassivo(ofcourse)usesmassiveinductors(compared Pultec EQs in mind and created for similar applications. The Mini

tothetypicaltype)whichwerechosenthroughlisteningtests.Infact MassivewasdesignedmoreforbussEQandmasteringaswellasfor

we use several different sizes in different parts of the circuit based surround and maybe tighter budgets, which brings us to.....

on experiments as to which size combined the right electrical

characteristics and "sounded best". The other very audible quality Number 2) The price... Not much we could do about the cost of the

people confuse with phase shift is "ringing". Ringing is just a few Massive Passive because it does require a lot of parts and many of

steps under oscillating and is mostly related to narrow Qs. It is more them are custom and most are premium quality. By halving the

accurately described as a time based problem than phase shift and number of bands, making the chassis smaller and simpler, going

is far easier to hear than phase shift. For our purposes, in this circuit, with solid state, and making the output transformers optional, we

these inductors have no more phase shift or ringing than a capacitor. were able to offer a slimmed down version with a slimmed down

price tag.

Fourth - A given EQ "shape" should have a given phase shift, group

delay and impulse response. There also exist easy circuits that SomemightalsoseetheMiniMassiveasasinglechannel4bandEQ

produce phase shift without a significant change in frequency and set up their cabling or patch bay with that in mind. This gives

response. These are generally called "all-pass networks" and are them the versatility of a 4 band EQ or a stereo 2 band in a 1 rack unit

usually difficult to hear by themselves. You may have experienced package at a competitive price, but with that well known Massive

a worse case scenario if you have ever listened to a "phase-shifter" sound. Great for tracking, great for overdubs, great for mixing.

with the "blend" set to 100% (so that none of the source was mixed

in) and the modulation to zero. Sounded un-effected, didn't it, and Number 3) Sculpting in the extreme lows and highs. The Mini

that may have been over 1000 degrees of phase shift. Group delay Massive is an evolution of the basic Massive Passive concept and is

andimpulseresponsedescribethesignalintimeratherthanfrequency designed to really provide some interesting abilities to create huge

and are just different ways of describing phase shift. Some research bottomthatremainstight(transformerless)plusamazinglysweetair

shows these effects are audible and some not. The Massive Passive for brilliance or sparkle tweaking. In fact, a warning to not over-do

tends to show that group delay in the mids is more audible than those kinds of boosts needs to be mentioned. Just because you can

towards the edges of the spectrum and there may be interesting now doesn't mean that you always should. And if you lose fidelity

exceptions to generalities and conventional wisdoms. The audible in other parts of the chain, boosting here might exagerate problems.

differencesbetweenEQsseemstohavemoretodowithQ,distortions,

headroom and topology than with phase shift.

Number 4) Portability and reliability. Reliability has never been

much of an issue with the Massive Passive nor are tubes in reality

Fifth - Phase Shift is not as important as functionality. For example, a fragile technology - quite the opposite, though eventually they

we chose very steep slopes for some of the filters because we should be replaced. However the myth remains, and for live and

strongly believe the "job" of a filter is to remove garbage while broadcastapplicationsmanyprefersolidstate. Thesesituationsalso

minimally affecting the desired signal. A gentler slope would have tend to prefer the smaller size, less heat, the simplicity and lighter

brought less phase shift but would not have removed as much crap. weight. This is for them.

LOW SHELF CURVES

Just like most EQs, a 100Hz low shelf

doesn't reach "max" until about 10 Hz.

Normal Shelf Wide Bandwidth

(slope =about 4 to 5 dB/oct)

Special Shelf Medium Bandwidth

(slope = about 8 to 10 dB/oct)

"Pultec Shelf" Narrow Bandwidth

Bell Cut Narrow Bandwidth

(just for reference)

(

)

MORE 100Hz SHELVES SHOWING

BOOST AND CUT WITH VARIOUS BANDWIDTHS

THIS IS ABOUT +1.5 DB

AT 300 Hz AND NEGLIGIBLE

LOW SHELF +20 WIDE BW

LOW SHELF +20 MED BW

LOW SHELF -20 MED BW

LOW SHELF -20 WIDE BW

SPICE SIMULATION CURVES

THESE CURVES SHOW ONE OF THE IDEOSYNCRACIES

AND IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A LF BOOST TO SOUND AS IF IT HAS LESS LOWS

DEPENDING ON THE FREQUENCY AND INSTRUMENT.

SIMILAR CURVES APPLY TO THE HIGH SHELVES AND

PARTICULARLY 10K AND 12K CAN BE STRANGE WHEN THE BW IS NARROW

100

NOTICE THIS 8 dB BOOST AT 100 Hz

WHILE SHELF CUTTING 100 Hz

LOW SHELF +20 WIDE BW

LOW SHELF +20 NARROW BW

LOW SHELF -20 NARROW BW

LOW SHELF -20 WIDE BW

AND NOTICE THIS 8 dB DIP

WHILE SHELF BOOSTING

THE HALF WAY (10 dB) POINT

HAS SHIFTED TO 50 Hz

TYPICAL BELL CURVES

"dB" set at max (20 dB) and changing the Bandwidth

Narrow Bandwidth

Bandwidth at 12:00

Wide Bandwidth

Bandwidth at 12:00

Narrow Bandwidth

Changing "dB" and Changing Bandwidth

Max Boost Narrow Bandwidth

12:00 Boost Narrow Bandwidth

Max Boost Wide Bandwidth

12:00 Boost Wide Bandwidth

THE GUTS

1) To Open:There should be little or no reason to open the Mini Massive - No user servicable parts, no tubes to change and

about the only reason to take the top off is unity gain adjustments. One can access the fuse on the back panel power connector

withoutremovingthetop. AfewPhillipsheadscrewsholdtheperforatedtopinplaceandwhentheseareremovedthetopshould

easily slide back. Other than mains voltage at the power switch and towards the right side of the mains transfomer box, there

are no high voltages or currents but mains voltages can be dangerous so caution cannot be over-emphasized. A trained service

technician is generally the best choice for any service or adjustments. The active gain blocks, the Rapture amps, are potted in

epoxy after critical part numbers are scraped off, but a trained service technician can easily replace a module if needed. They

are definately not interchangable with other epoxied gain blocks.

2) Replacing a fuse. The fuse is located in the IEC power connector on the back panel. Disconnect the power cable first to

prevent any chance of getting a shock. A little rectangular plastic panel needs to be gently pryed open and the fuse becomes

exposed.Thisisaxyzminituresizefuseandis2amp for100and117voltACcountriesand1ampfor220and240voltcountries.

3) ChangingACMAINSVOLTAGE: Thisoperationreallydoesrequireatechnician. For117voltACpowertherearecircuit

board traces that pre-select the proper transformer taps. For 100 volt / 200 / 220 and 240 volt AC power these traces need to

becutandjumperssolderedinatappropriatepadlocations. ManleydoesthisforeachdestinationthataMiniMassiveisshipped

to and most international Manley / Langevin dealers are capable of making the change if needed. Part of the reason we did this

is to discourage some grey market sales. However the following page does show this section of the board in detail and what

traces need to be well cut and where jumpers need to be soldered for various AC line voltages.

4) Adjusting unity gain. There are only two trim pots in the Mini Massive and they are located towards the back of the unit.

The left one is for the left side or channel 1, and the right one adjusts the right side. Be sure that each band is in bypass on the

boost/out/cut toggles and the master bypass is not in bypass (green LED). Also be sure that the back panel toggle that sets

interface or I/O level is properly set. Feed the Mini Massive with 1 kHz at an appropriate level (typically +4 dBu or dBm) and

adjust the trim pots for the same level coming out the Mini Massive. Check using the master bypass switch and there should

be less than .1 dB level change, and if the is .01 dB change stop adjusting already. There may be .1 dB level change just due

to the varieties of loading and source impedances in normal studio situations anyways, and that is better than normal. The trim

pots only have a few dB of range and are only meant for unity gain adjustment with the Mini set flat.

5) Adding the transformer option. Again this should be done by a trained tech or the dealer because it requires soldering in

two Manley transformers, adding a switch and a jumper wire. It also requires testing and probably re-tweaking unity gains.

ManleywillsupplyakitwiththeneededpartsanddetailedinstructionsforthosewhodecidetoretrofitanexistingMiniMassive

with this option. Best to order it initially with or without it though. The switch does allow transformer bypass.

AC MAINS VOLTAGE SELECTION

This may involve soldering jumpers and cutting of printed circuit board traces.

Danger : There is a possibility of electric shock if power is connected and danger of

damage to the Mini Massive if the procedure is done wrong. This should only be done by a

trained technician and ONLY ever be done with the power cable removed.

0#" *5-0%23

ꢀ

ꢁ

ꢂ

ꢃ

ꢂ ꢁ

ꢃ

ꢅ

ꢇ

ꢄ

ꢅ

ꢇ

ꢄ

ꢆ

&/2 ꢀꢀꢆ 6!# ꢉ 02).4%$ #)2#5)4 "/!2$ 42!#%3 3(/5,$ %8)34 /. 4(% "/44/- /& 4(% #)2#5)4 "/!2$

"%47%%.ꢌꢀ ꢊ ꢁꢋ"%47%%. ꢄ ꢊ ꢆꢋ!.$ "%47%%. ꢆ ꢊ ꢇ /.,9

)& ./4 2%-/6% !.9 /4(%2 *5-0%23 !.$ 3/,$%2 4(%3% ).ꢍ

&/2 ꢀꢈꢈ 6!# ꢉ #54 4(% 42!#%3 "%47%%. ꢄ ꢊ ꢆꢋ!.$ ꢆ ꢊ ꢇ

! 0#" 42!#% 3(/5,$ %8)34 &2/- ꢀ ꢊ ꢁ

3/,$%2 *5-0%23 &2/- 0!$3 ꢃ ꢊ ꢅ !.$ ꢅ ꢊ ꢇ

&/2 ꢁꢁꢈ ꢎ ꢁꢃꢈ 6!# ꢉ

02).4%$ #)2#5)4 "/!2$ 42!#%3 3(/5,$ %8)34 /. 4(% "/44/- /& 4(% #)2#5)4 "/!2$

"%47%%.ꢌ ꢄ ꢊ ꢆꢋ!.$ "%47%%. ꢆ ꢊ ꢇ /.,9

#54 4(% 0#" *5-0%2 "%47%%. ꢀ ꢊ ꢁ

3/,$%2 *5-0%23 "%47%%. 0!$3 ꢁ ꢊ ꢂ

!$$

42!#%3 #54 /. "/44/- /& 02).4%$ #)2#5)4 "/!2$

Equalizers

The only significant digital variation on the parametric concept, has

been the linear phase equalizers. These are the first EQs ever

EQs range from simple bass and treble controls on a hifi system to (including nature) that can change the spectral shape and not change

pretty tricky parametric EQs and 1/3 octave graphic EQs. As an the phase response in turn. Sometimes this can be appropriate or

audiofreak,youhaveprobablytriedquiteafewEQsandhavegotten sound better this time on this sound - and sometimes not.

both great results and sometimes less than great and you probably

have a favorite EQ. Now that you probably have a digital system, Passive EQs have come out over the 60 (150) odd years for a variety

you may have questions about these digital EQs and the differences ofdifferentpurposes.Ifweincludeallinductor/capacitorbasedEQs

between any analog and digital techniques. Let us begin at the the list includes API 560's, most of Rupert's designs up to the 80's,

beginning, andthengetintosomerealtechniques. Whoinventedthe allthePultecsandPultecclonesandanumberofhighend1/3octave

first electronic tone control? Who knows? The first hints of “flat” graphics. Essentially the list includes most of the desirable vintage

electronics came decades later. Simple bell and shelf EQs seem to EQs that comprise many engineer's all-time favorites. The Massive

have been born in the 1930's for telephone company use. The Pultec Passive is one of the only non-clone tube passive EQs and the only

passive circuits came from that era at Western Electric. "Graphic one we know of that is 4 band quasi-parametric with boost and cut

EQs" seem to have been invented in the mid 60's and were common on each band.

by the early 70's. A 19 year old prodigy, George Massenburg first

described, in a 1971 AES paper, the “Parametric Equalizer”.

Now there are a large number of enhancers, exciters, extenders and

multi-band compressors, that usually use combination of EQ,

All EQs do one thing — they can make some bands or areas of distortion, dynamic effects and deliberate phase shift to create

frequencieslouderorquieterthanothers,manipulatingthefrequency effects that are related to EQ. They all seem to come with a warning

response. SpeakersandmicsdothattobutwenormallythinkofEQs "not to overuse". The more "secretive" it is the more we should hold

assomethingthatallowustoalterthefrequencyresponse,deliberately, it suspect. Some of these are boxes are useful and often a reasonable

with some knobs and buttons - including the GUI ones. Some alternative to conventional EQs. Sometimes, we think "if my EQs

equalizers have no controls, they are part of a circuit and generally and Limiters did what I wanted, then I sure wouldn't use this". We

are almost “invisible” to the user. A good example of this is the EQ hope that the Mini Massive helps towards this quest for "Air" and

circuits used as “pre-emphasis” and “de-emphasis” used for analog "Punch". Maybe you just needed a better EQ rather than a phase

tape machines and radio broadcasting. The idea of these is to boost shifted, dynamically challenged distortion box.

the high frequencies before it hits the tape (or air), then reduce the

highsonplayback(orreception).Thisreducesthehissandnoiseand What most EQ's have in common is in the shapes of the shelves.

usually allows a hotter signal which also improves the noise Almost all shelves can be designated as "first order" which means

performance. These EQs usually have trimmers available but we that a single capacitor (or inductor) is used to shape the frequency

would rarely consider using them for adjusting the tone. Instead, the response. Second order implies two components, etc. A first order

object is to get a ruler-flat response at this part of the signal chain. filter is generally 6 dB/oct, second order should be 12 dB/oct, third

It is still called an equalizer. In fact the original definition of order 18, etc. Shelf EQs never quite get to 6 dB/oct and at the

“equalizer” was a device to restore all the frequencies to be equal steepest point seem to be 4.5 dB/oct which is pretty gentle and why

again, in other words, force the frequency response to be as flat as a 10K boost seems to affect mids. Bell curves are normally second

possible.

order but arranged to create a damped resonance. On a first order

shelf,thecapacitormaybesurroundedbyanynumberofcomponents

Other common EQs that you are probably familiar with include the to create gain or to simulate an inductor or for other purposes. These

common 1/3 octave graphic EQs with about 30 or 60 cheap sliders other components are a large reason why different EQs sound

across the front panel. These are usually a good tool for tuning a different, but that single capacitor sets up a frequency response

room, but they may be a difficult thing to use for individual sounds. curvethatisverysimilarforalmostallEQs. TheshelvesontheMini

Most1/3octEQsexcelwhenanumberoflittletweaksspacedacross Massive combine a first order shelf with a variable depth second

the spectrum are needed but not great for wide tonal changes. Too order bell. At wide bandwidths it acts first order and at narrow

many resonances. Some room tune experts are now relying on bandwidths approaches third order. We have played with true

parametricswithcontinuouslyvariablefrequencyknobsapparently second and third order shelves with real 12 and 18 dB/oct slopes and

to "nail" the peaks. One reason 1/3 octave EQs have a bad name are they sound pretty damn good. When you boost or cut a band of

the"realtimeanalyzers"thatdisplayasingleaspectofthefrequency frequencies,withasteeperslope,youaffect thefrequenciesthatyou

response but without any time information, real or otherwise. are aiming for, with much less action on other frequencies that you

People often get much better results with warble tones, or tuning didn’t intend to touch. Of course, to build an EQ like this with

rooms by ear with music. 1/3 octave EQs are appropriate for some frequency selection (even more need) the component cost and

masteringtasksbutareprobablylessusedbecausetheytendtoscare complexity rises fast.

clients. The Mini Massive was not intended for room tuning.

The future of EQs may bring us bells where each side (high & low)

Parametric EQs come in lots of flavours, 3, 4 or 5 bands, most with plus the top "flatness" can be adjusted separately. We are beginning

3 knobs per band and lots of variations. The earliest ones offered to see variations of shelves in plug-ins but so far it is just Tom

only bell shapes, no shelves, no filters. Today's most common copying Dick who mimmicked an analog circuit by Harry. Perhaps

variation has 2 mid bells with Q, a high shelf, low shelf and filters. another parameter would be nice like, a sepately adjustable phase

We see these in many consoles and in outboard EQs at a wide range shift or distortion. And if we could bend the rules of nature and have

of prices. Almost all have limitations either in boost/cut range, Q a non-resonant bell with zero ringing, we might have something

range, frequency range or overlap and audio performance. Every trulynewtohear.Itwouldbeverytransparentbutprobablyquiteun-

month we see a new / same-old parametric plug in digital EQ, with natural sounding. There is validy to "physical modelling" even in

the same 3 predictable knobs per band as the analog EQs.

analog EQ circuits. "Natural" is kinda nice and very easy to listen to.

EQ TECHNIQUE

If mic choice is a mystery, you might want to research some Steve

Albini or George Massenburg interviews. Rather than guess wrong,

some engineers compare 3 or 4 probable choices. Some choose the

mic that minimizes EQing later, some hear the mic’s transient or

dynamiccharacterandanticipatewhatsomeEQshouldaddinanice

way. Some guys have been there, done that, and know exactly what

they like and don’t, (but always seem to be ready to learn more) and

bring in their own mics to get thier trademark sound.

One of the best things about almost all EQs is that you don’t really

need an instruction manual. You plug it in, turn a few knows and

when nothing happens you take it out of “bypass” and the rest is

easy.Youjustkeeptwiddlinguntilitsoundslikeyouwantitto.Most

digital devices like synthesizers and reverbs tend to get a lot of use

from the included presets. Most guys just don’t want to get into that

kind of “programming”. EQs are the opposite where most guys will

ignore the presets and start from scratch or flat. This section may be

most helpful for the musician non-engineers, and may be applicable

to EQs in and music engineering in general. There are no real rules

here, just hints, suggestions and bits of other peoples wisdom.

Thecloseryouhavethemictosomeinstruments,themorelikelyEQ

will be needed and less likely you will get both some great leakage

and some not-so-good leakage. Close miking is better when you

intend to sculpt the sound. Distant miking is better for documenting

(recording) the music. On vocals and room mics, many use big

diaphragm condenser tube mics where you want smoothness and

richness. Some tube mics may add a bit of “attitude” and

aggressiveness and some are very “real” sounding. The biggest

differences in this family of mics is the two lowest and highest

octaves and what the back of the mic sounds like. Small diaphragm

condensers can be fast, bright, clear but sometimes brittle, hard or

thin. Some are quite good for acoustic instruments, cymbals and hi-

hats.Watchout,thereisawidevariationinmaximumSPLandnoise

with these. Of course most engineers favor large diaphragm

condensers and typically use FET types on drums and guitars. The

pattern choice is an important tool. Remember that the proximity

effect(lowboosting)isbiggestin“figure8”, moderatein“cardioid”

and non-existent in “omni”. It is worth listening to both the “room

tone” and instrument in the 3 main patterns - it's often surprising.

The low roll-off (HP) should be used where ultra-lows are not

needed or wanted and the filter kills some of the room noise and air

conditioning rumble. Dynamic mics are more commonly used close

for guitar amps, drums and sometimes horns. Ribbon mics have

theirresonanceinthedeeplowsandtypicallyhaveasoftishtopend.

They seem to have a more “ear-like” dynamic range. This makes

them a superb choice for raunchy guitar amps, horns and anything

thatmaybetooedgy.Somearecardioidandsomefigure8.Tryusing

2 figure 8's as a stereo pair (rotated 90 degrees ala Blumlein).

Officially, miking technique is not EQing but it does some of the

same things and does it in the beginning. This makes EQing easier

and elegant.

Not so long ago, in order to get your chance at the console, you had

to follow the path from cleaning toilets, to making coffee, to

assisting, to engineering to producing. It cost years of micro-

paychecks and humble pie. Not so anymore. If you want your turn

attheconsole,youbuyaconsoleorbethemainemployeeataprivate

studio. There were some benefits ofwatching the old pro’smake the

gear sound great and being able to ask how and why. What we hope

to do here is be a small substitute for those who didn’t get that

opportunity. Specific settings for EQs are different for different

situations. SomeoftheseexamplesdriftabitfromjustEQingbutwe

include them for reference and to make EQing less of a fixer.

LiveSound:Inthisauthor’sexperience,livesoundusuallyrequired

the most drastic and heavy handed EQ. Every factor contributes to

this: Not the greatest mics, lots of leakage, feedback, strange

soundingstagesandrooms,questionablehousespeakers.Noluxuries

like mic positioning, just a quick sound-check (sometimes) and the

doors open. Tapes from live shows are almost as tough. If you are

accustomed to studio recording and clean tracks, you may need to

adjustyourtechniquesinahurry.Sometimes,yougetthesewonderful

clean tapes with a lot of energy. These tapes should be easy. Other

tapes can be pretty messy. Some of your usual studio tricks are not

working this time. With these tapes, you just might try taking the

“house mixer” approach. Pull down the effects, there’s too much

leakage, and dig in with those EQs. It might help to start out with a

good “fader only” mix and avoid using those “solo” buttons until

yougettheEQroughedout. Gatesmayhelp, butmaybeaudibleand

disconcerting if the leakage is gruesome. You might have to write

mutesearlyandavoidtoomuchcompression.EQingthevocalsmay

causealotofleakageproblemsifyouboostlowsorhighssignificantly.

IfyougetarawtapewithvirtuallynoEQorcompressionwhenitwas

recorded you may need to use "unusual" and more EQ on many of

the tracks. Usually, the best approach is to try to smooth it out but

not kick it into submission, but remember, this is raw and may need

more help than studio tracks.

When you do have to EQ, the band tracking session is the time to be

careful and conservative. Most experienced pro engineers don’t

wing it here. Safe, fast, ready, recorded. It may not sound as

“slamming” as it could be, but wait, it still gets overdubs and a real

mix. Engineers who don’t play it safe at the right time tend to find

other occupations like accounting. You can fix the EQ and

Compression later particularly if you are working digital. You may

want to save those initial more-or-less flat tracks though, for a few

days or weeks, just in case.

Tracking the band: (in the studio) A bunch of musicians, a bunch

of mics, and typically not a bunch of budget. Well, at least you have

some good mics. By far, the best way to EQ at this stage is to use

those good mics to your advantage. With the right mic and the right

position,verylittleconsoleEQisneeded.Usetheroomsappropriate

to the instrument and use separation to control unwanted spillage,

get the instruments physically sounding awesome (we wish), then

usethemicstocreateanaturalpicturewithrealroomambiance. The

betterthemictechnique,thelessEQthatwillbeneeded.Infact,with

less fix-it EQ, the easier it will be to finesse your available EQ . Hit

"Record", finesse it in the mix. More important to get the vibe, than

to burn out the band doing sound checks and tweaks.

Another little detour. There always seems to be some fascination

withre-capturingsomeofthat60’sandevenearly70’ssound.These

were the days of 4 track and 8 track analog machines and no time-

code or sync systems. They didn’t have a lot of gear, so it was

important to have the good stuff. Much of it was vacuum tube or

passive. Overdubs were a luxury but they could mix those 4 or 8

tracks to mono or stereo and bounce them over to another machine.

It was analog tape so you couldn’t do it more than a few times. So,

what are the priorities when you record that way?

1) The song and the vocals was what producers wanted and perhaps

that hasn’t changed much. Bands were recorded with live vocals

back then. Even overdubs were a band thing. Much of the signature

of both the British or American sound were the vocal harmonies.

Same today.

The last problem was that they only had a few weeks to shout at each

other. Avoidthattechnique. Yougottabecreative, playitbyear, use

your own variation if it works out that way this time. Only the final

result counts. There are many ways to get a killer sound and too

damnfewthatworkeverytime. Youmayknowmostofthisalready.

2) It was only practical to record as a band, as a group. They rarely

used a click, except for TV & film scores. The “groove”, as today,

was important, but it was a little less rigid. It sometimes meant

MANY band takes with different tempos and stylings.

General Suggestions: If you are recording acoustic instruments,

the most important first step is going out to the studio and listening,

evaluating and memorizing. Next step, if there is a way you can fix

a sound physically, like changing a drum skin, or tuning a tom, this

is the time and place. If you can, you should attempt to improve the

mic choice and positioning. There’s always room for improvement,

but most often the obstacle is “available time”. EQing is usually

faster than experimenting with mics unless the producer wants

“perfection”. EQ is maybe more dangerous though and a poor

substitute for great mic technique.

3) Arrangements were often written in stone. It was cool to walk in

with a working rehearsed arrangement. Sometimes professional

arrangers were hired. The fewer the instruments, the easier it is to

make each one sound great. They ‘featured’ instruments by writing

musical rests for the other parts rather than moving a fader. Big and

powerful dynamics could mean more players, more chairs.

4) The mixes were critical because the word re-mix wasn’t created

yet. Remember, each “bounce” had to be a real mix and these

submixes were the basis of the final mix. This is where they EQed

most. PartoftheBritishsoundwasdippingabitbetween200Hzand

1K on some instruments . It was the “proper” way to clear space for

each instrument. Bass was hinted as the secret of rock and roll. Part

of the American sound was both the bored union engineers and the

young rookies. There wasn’t much gear so they stretched it and

pushed it hard. Simple shelf EQs and filters were the norm and “bell

curves” were rare until the mid 70’s. However, they sometimes had

5 to 7 band graphic EQs. They could and did cut tape so they mixed

in sections and spliced - no automation.

5)Notmucheffectsindemdays;tapeslap, livechamberreverband/

or EMT plates. Some were OK and some were plain bad. They did

focus more on creating an acoustic space with the mics. It wasn’t

until 16 track that it became fashionable to focus on separation and

dead rooms. Then we heard a lot of overdubs and double tracking

and we got the 70’s sound.

6) DI boxes and synths were very rare, percussion was normal,

“unusual” instruments were cool. Song “structure” often leaned

towardafewstandardpatterns(ABABCAB).Itwasamoreinnocent

era but more likely to be censored. On the other hand, the phrase

“politicallycorrect”wouldhavebeenviewedasajoke,anoxymoron.

Vocals: There is something that makes EQing vocals very difficult.

Human beings have evolved hearing fine tuned to other human’s

voices. Not many people know precisely what a drum sounds like

butalmosteverybodycanrecognizewhenthevocalsoundsweirdor

natural. Another common factor is the goal of making a mediocre

vocal sound awesome through the miracle of electronics. The

toughest one is when the singer deeply desires to sound like their

idol and thinks that the only difference is the gear and settings. With

luck, youmayworkwithagreatsingeranddiscoveryouneednoEQ

and it sounds incredible. Same is true with spoken words. Some of

the best paid guys are those professional voices that do narration,

voice-oversandcharactervoices.Theydon’tdoitwithEQ,it'sinthe

voice. If the singer is having headphone adjustment problems, try

flippingthephaseofthemicandaskingthesingerwhichtheyprefer.

Some mics are out of phase with some people’s bone conduction or

the headphones are 180 degrees out, but there seems to be 50-50

oddsthatflippingthephasewillsoundbettertothemandabout99%

likelyitwillsoundthesametoyou(untilyouputontheirphonestalk

into the mic and check it out).

We commonly chop off the lows while recording voice to kill room

rumbleand“pops”.SomeuseaHPswitchonsomemics,someangle

the mic so its not directly facing the mouth, some use the mic pre

filters and some use their console EQ. The Massive Passive HP

filters are as good or better than anything you have been using for

filters. The other most common technique is boosting highs. Part of

this is because somebody used a dull mic because it was advertised

as “warm”. The other reason to boost is a bright, airy voice may be

needed with massively over-dubbed, over-synthed mixes just to get

above the track. Watch out for boosting too much esses as you try

to get it bright. Conventional high shelves (even if set for 16K) will

boost the esses and possibly the mids. The Massive Passive was

designed to not have that very common problem and allow some

unusually gorgeous highs. Some engineers, avoid EQing to tape

while recording, but use it in the monitor or mix channels as needed.

This way, they still get a good working mix and may hear if

headphone leakage will end up being a problem. On the other hand,

as the tracks add up, some engineers find it more practical to EQ

tracks while recording, so that speedy fader mixes are simple for the

monthsofoverdubs.Inthemix,ifyoufindyourselfwantingtoboost

alotofhighs, trydippingthemidsandboostingthehighsless. Ifyou

still need a de-esser use it as the last processor in the vocal chain in

the mix. Wanna know one of the least expensive and best de-essers?

“A bit of chewing gum or wax filling the gap in the singer’s front

teeth.”

Some of these techniques may be useful to you whether you are

attempting to resurrect the 60s or the get the cool grunge of the 90’s.

Some tricks like the editing of mix sections can be transposed to

workstations with all the advantages of both. It sure can be a better

alternative to an long automated homogenized mix. Limiting

overdubs may inspire getting that perfect band groove and may spur

creativity.Limitingyourselftoshelvesandfiltersoroldgearmaybe

a silly way to get the 60s sound. When you want to lean on shelves,

the Mini Massive EQ shelves are about as good as it gets. In other

words, an old analog engineer will feel right at home - well “hear”

right at home”. Now if you could just remove that computer

screen.......

Individual Sounds: There just isn’t a general EQ that works on all

snaredrums,orkicksorvocals.Toomuchdependsontheplayer,the

instrument, the room, the mic, and a hundred other variables. We

heardofoneproducerthatinsistedoncloningaguitarsoundheonce

gotbyinsistingonusingthiselaboratechainthathehaddocumented

of amps, mics, several vintage compressors and several old EQs.

There were 3 problems. This producer insisted that only the exact

settingshehadsocarefullynotedwereused. Itwasadifferentstudio

with different individual units, like mics, like rooms, consoles,

engineers.

Percussion: There are two big tricks. The first is don’t trust VU

meters-usepeakmetersanddon’tgettooclosetofullscale.Thekey

word is percussion and the peaks or transients are very short and

impressively hot. When in doubt, turn it down. Actually when in

doubt, listen to a short bit recorded, then turn it down if it was

crunchy. The second trick is to EQ these tracks in the mix, not

soloed. We tend to make things bigger by themselves, but the

function of percussion is to fit in the track and work with the other

instruments. They don’t have to be loud to work. Be aware that

boosting mids or highs will make peaks easier to clip too.

Rather than try to do all your compression while recording vocals,

save some for the mix. This takes a little pressure off of finding the

“ultimate”compressorwithperfectsettingsandyouhavetheoption

of compressing the vocals as a group.

RealDrums:Typicallyneedlots‘o’EQbecausewetypicallyclose-

mike individual drums. Big shelf boosts on the Massive Passive are

particularly good. When EQing watch out for leakage so have the

drummerplaythewholekitalternatingwithadrumyouareworking

on-keepthoseotherfadersup.Sometimes,boostingtoomuchhighs

on a snare or toms may boost the hi-hat and cymbals out of control.

Gates may be needed in profusion when the close-mic style and

drastic modificationisdesired. Anotherconsideration isEQ ringing

and time smear. Drums particularly are good at showing off bad EQ

settings. The transients "trigger" ringing, so big narrow bell boosts

becomeobviousEQ.Usuallythisistobeavoided.Steepfiltersbring

group delay which smears the time clues and transient accuracy,

especially when the filters are nearer the mid band. Watch out for

this. Occasionallythese"effects"canbeusefulespeciallyifusedfor

their effect-value such as transforming a click into a drum.

Bass:Goodspotforareminder. Thebassandkickareusuallymeant

to work together musically yet remain separate and distinct. The

usual idea is if you have a deep bottom kick then the bass guitar

doesn’t cover that space. Put it in the low mid part of the spectrum.

Or you can make the bass guitar extra-deep and the bass drum in a

higher part in the spectrum. You also want to watch where you place

the kick’s attack and the harmonics of the bass. If you use a mic on

the amp plus a DI, expect that when you mix them, they very often

sound half out-of-phase. You can use a delay to try to compensate

the DI or just use the Massive Passive filters to get the DI lows (filter

from the mids up) and mix in the mic/amp highs (filter or shelf cut

the lows). What is easier, simpler and can be best is, using only the

amp with a damn good selected mic and using the Mini Massive low

shelf to nail the bottom.

Spend a little less time working on individual drum sounds and get

the mix up sooner and get the groove going earlier, then go back to

adjust EQ as needed. Keep in mind that the hi-hat and snare work

together, whichshouldfitwiththebassdrumandbass, andthatmost

people hear the drums as one instrument and mostly engineers hear

them as several individual sounds or tracks. The blend and groove

are most important, the image or room sound is what sets the “tone”.

The EQ and processing may be used to ensure the best overall

groove and image rather than make each drum “perfect”.

Guitar: My favorite difficult instrument to EQ. So many different

guitarsoundsandsolittletime. Filteringthehighfreqsonloudamps

can make them more amp-like, natural and kills that “studio” buzzy

distortion. Check out what filtering highs does with any low pass

filters you have. The low-pass filter is one of the main functions of

speaker simulators. Feel free to play with the simulator’s controls

along with your LP filters. The mids are especially critical and

might take some drastic EQ. This is where you get “singing” lead

solos or biting ones or more unusual sounds and its how you can

separateafewpartsfromeachother. Togetthatbigbottomyouhear

in the studio but not in the control room, means that you should have

used a ribbon mic and/or miked the cabinet back too. You may still

need to EQ but be sure you have some solid lows to work with. The

secret to acoustic guitar is no EQ. Getting the sound with instrument

choice and with careful miking is how the professionals do it. Again

you can dip mids or shelf boost the highs. Sometimes a notch and/

or HP filter is absolutely needed.

Yes, it is legal to EQ and Limit overhead and room mics. EQ both

sides of a stereo pair identically and “link” limiters. If you are lucky

you can almost get most of the drum sound from the overheads or

room mics, with some bass drum and maybe snare snuck in. You

should also consider suggesting to the drummer to bring lighter,

brighter, smallercymbalsinthanwhatheorsheuseslive. Eitheryou

know why we say this or you will find out.

Some engineers use a combination of a filter (set between 25 an 50

Hz) and a shelf boost (between 100 and 200Hz, roughly). It almost

approximates a standard bell boost, but sounds drier and tighter and

stillhuge.Theshelftendstoringlessordecayfasterthanbells,while

the filter keeps it clean and under control.

Leslies: This reminds us of a trick question. When you have a

rotating baffle for the lows and a rotating horn for the highs, what is

the most critical thing to EQ. Answer - the mids. If you somehow

lose the mids, it will sound weak. You can make it bark or bite or

soften it into a smooth pad, but the attitude should fit the song, not

some memory of some legendary B3 unless it was playing a similar

part in a similar texture.

Sampled Drums: Probably pretty good right out of the box. Try

using a strange sample and using EQ, compression and clipping to

turnitintosomethingtotallydifferent.Youcanturnaclicktrackinto

a bogus kick drum. It is fun and you might never run out of sounds

this way.

Some of the genesis of the rap kick and “808” rediscovery was some

NYengineerswhowoulduseadrummachinepart, totriggeranoise

gate on the studio’s oscillator set at 40 or 60 Hz. Others found it

easier to get similar results with an extinct vintage 808 drum

machine sound sampled and EQed. Many went all the way back to

using purely the 808s and these little drum machines became sought

after, which then sparked an industry of 808 clones and sample

disks. These things seem to start off cool and clever and became a

bit mindless and overused, then sneered at for a few years, then

makes the cycle again. Fashion... At least we don’t have Rodeo

Drive and Milan suggesting we replace all our gear every season

Piano: Different engineers have different ideas on how a piano

should sound and how to mic and process it. So much depends on

the piano, the player and musical style. Rockers generally want it

hard and brite, jazz guys like it warm and classical guys expect

distanceandperspective.Wemightsuggeststartingoffwithagentle

dip in the 200 Hz to 500 Hz area. The piano may benefit with a shelf

boost in the upper mids and highs, but be gentle in the recording

stage.Rememberitisapercussioninstrumentandaboostmaymake

it harder to record without clipping. Being such a full range &

dynamic instrument, leave yourself options for the mix.

Loops: The trick? Make the bad stuff sound good and the good stuff

soundbad. Putitalltogetherandgonutswiththemuteswitches. For

that ol’ telephone filter, first try the two mid bands with deep shelf

cuts. You might expect to just use the filters but these ones probably

neither go high enough nor low enough for this purpose so use them

in combination with those deep shelves.

3)Therestofthegearinmajormasteringhousesisalsosoimportant

that “cost is no object”. The engineers regularly “shoot-out” new

gearandwillalwaysbuyifitISbetter.Inapromasteringhousethere

are no weak links in the chain and no semi-pro gear.

4) There isn’t a single processing unit that is the key but more

like a combination of several that are mostly slightly utilized. A

common scenario is a combination of esoteric analog parametric

EQs and compressors along with the digital EQs and dynamics

processors, all used together and each for a few dB of its

strongest features. Manley Labs is one of the very few names

commonly seen in most major mastering facilities.

Synths: There is a lot of room to EQ on analog synths and often less

with samplers. Watch out for sub-harmonics and ultra-deep lows

that the small monitors don’t reproduce. What you hear in the studio

and what “they” hear with a subwoofer can be different, and that is

often an understatement. Some car systems are a good place to

evaluate the very deep subwoofer zone.

The newest and least common piece of gear in project level

mastering is “DSP Multi-band Compressors”. Multi-band

compressors have been used to maximize the loudness of radio

and network broadcasts for about 20 years. Do you really like the

radio squash? Contrary to the ads, a single piece of gear does not

make anybody into a mastering engineer. This also does not

mean these devices are bad, only that they can be somewhat

dangerous, or powerful and sometimes amazing when used

properly and carefully. Rather than think of them as multi-band

compressors, you will find that they act like multi-compressed

EQs. These compressors are changing the EQ all the time so it is

important to understand the specifics of the controls and what

each does to the sound. Just because it is multi-band doesn’t

excuse a poorly set-up compressor, in fact, it makes it worse

because EQ changes are easier to notice than “flat” gain changes.

The most exercised button should be the bypass switch. The

mastering engineer may not be able to fix up a tape butchered by

these toys. It is becoming a common story, where the mastering

engineer sends the client back to re-mix because of an abused

multi-band toy.

More often than not, try to leave space for the rest of the tracks by

dipping a bell curve strategically. It works better than boosting bells

(into resonance) on the remaining tracks. If the arrangement is

dense, avoid making every sound as big as a house. The secret to

amazing sounding individual tracks are sparse sections where these

soundsarefeatured.Thearrangementalsohelpscreatecontrastsand

sets up the thicker sections to be huge. LP Filters can be very

interesting on synths because a LP filter sound is a functional part

of analog synth hardware (or software). Try making up a synth-like

resonant filter with one of the high shelves deeply cut and the

Bandwidth turned way up. Too bad you can’t sweep it.

Mixes: There are two ways to process a mix. The first is to set up the

2 mix EQ and compression early in the rough mix stage, then mix

into the processor. The second and more common way is to get a

finished mix then EQ and compress. The first way forces you to mix

differently and can produce results that can be powerful, but it can

also be dangerous in less than experienced hands. More and more

guys are EQing their final mixes. Sort-of pre-mastering or skipping

the mastering process altogether. Should you?

One can prepare for mastering, fairly simply. Mix to a well

maintained 1/2" tape or to a 20 or 24 bit digital format. Many

guys mix to DAT only, but mastering engineers will almost

always suggest analog. Best format - mix to all three and let the

mastering engineer choose. The best prep for the mastering

engineer is a well balanced mix. It's fine to compress and EQ the

mix, but absolutely don’t overdo it. Be careful, you can mess up

months of work if you get carried away. The time to de-ess is

during mix as the final step in the vocal chain. De-essing a mix in

mastering can be 10 times harder. You have probably heard that

one of the reasons we master, is to get hotter levels. True, but

keep in mind that anybody can compress 20 dB, squash and clip

and get super-loud but that mastering engineers do not do that.

The way they compress and limit typically gets about 6 dB into

the red on a VU meter and rarely sounds compressed or

crunched. It is not only about getting louder, but “optimally

loud” and not at all messed up in the process.

Let us describe some of the main ideas in mastering from the

mastering engineer’s “order of importance” and you can decide.

1) The most important thing in mastering chain is the mastering

engineer.ThesepeopleEQandcompress,editandcheckeveryone’s

“final” mixes, a CDortwoa day, 5daysa week, andyearinandyear

out. They specialize in the most subtle paths to the polished product.

They are expected to bring the clients tapes to be “ready for prime-

time” quality and be sure that a problem free master is absolutely

ready for any pressing plant. Of course, you are going to have to pay

for this “expert” service.

2) The most important piece of gear for mastering is the tweaked-up

speaker systems. The best mastering engineers typically spend a

great deal of money, time and effort to be sure that their room is true

and accurate (to them) and that every last bit of performance is

squeezed out of the entire system and that it is that way every day.

Afterall, thebigreasonweneedtogothroughthemasteringprocess

is that most of us mix on cheap, small speakers, self-powered or not.

The kinds of speakers most of us use for mixing are about 2%-25%

of the reference quality most mastering engineers use every day. If

youdescribeyourmonitorsas“Iguessthespeakersaregoodenough

to master on” then they’re not and if you say “ I KNOW these

particular monitors in this room are good for mastering” then they

probably are. These may well be the same speakers too. Do you

understand the difference? (its not just attitude)

The best way to prepare for mastering is to do the best mix you

can. Don't go nuts on trying to pre-master, by over-compressing

and EQing and especially "multi-band limiting". The idea is to let

the mastering engineer do their job and not try to do it for them.

Leave them enough room to work and get optimal compression.

The other thing to remember is to know the speakers you are

mixing on. An 8 inch woofer should not sound like an 18 incher.

The second most common problem is from engineers who have

cranked up their sub woofers and end up with a mix with no

bottom. Play other peoples great mixes on your speakers fairly

frequently. It helps maintain your reference.

The Circuit

If you are attempting to master the project or “pre-master” (this

year’shot,newaudiobuzzword)yourself,herearesomesuggestions.

Take a week off after mixing, then listen to the mixes on as many

different systems as you can, friend’s homes, cars, boom boxes,

headphones, etc. andmakenotes. Withaneyeonthosenotes, adjust.

Now check it out on some of those systems again, before you send

it out. 80% of mastering is ensuring quality and confidence through

expertise,20%isknobturningandthenitis“whichknobs,howlittle

(as opposed to much) and when”. On the other hand, it is only two

tracks and probably you only intend to do a minor touch-up and you

are sure it will help. It may not be as good as it gets but it is a valid

improvement and you are not doing anything radical or stupid,

so..........go for it!

The Mini Massive is a not a particularly complicated circuit. The

audio comes in, is converted from balanced to unbalanced and DC

servo'd and given enough power (a few watts) to drive the EQ. This

stage uses one half of a potted module called a "Rapture Amp". It

was developed in an exercise in R&D to find the most transparent

and inaudible gain stage for a digital converter.It has enough drive

and power to feed the first part of the passive EQ circuits.

How did that name happen? Listening to the circuit with some of

our all time favorite recordings, we were simply enraptured. It was

almost like hearing the recordings right for the first time. What can

I say, we laughed, we cried, and we couldn’t peel ourselves away

from the listening position except to change disks. We were in

slack-jawed rapture listening. Miriam Webster’s Unabridged

Dictionary suggests a few definitions: 1 a : a state or experience of

being carried away by overwhelming emotion b : a mystical

experience in which the spirit is exalted to a knowledge of divine

things, 2 : an expression or manifestation of ecstasy or passion. We

are aware that some of you may have some other definition, but our

use of the word is based on definition #1.

Miscellaneous Techniques:

Rather than stress out trying to make one EQ solve every problem,

try a combination of two different EQs or one for recording and a

different one in mixing that track. It's like an old engineer’s trick.

Rather than look suspect with an EQ boosted 12 dB, he would use

three different EQs, each with 4 dB. It looked way better, very “pro”

and seriously into gear. Ever have producer looking over your

shoulder, checking out your "curves"?.... Nuff said.

The passive EQ introduces significant signal losses and requires

make-up gain. While one might expect a single gain stage would be

ideal, in practice best performance is achieved by spreading the

amplification over a few stages. In the Mini Massive, all the

amplification and line drive is handled by extremely clean Rapture

Amps. The first recieves balanced inputs and acts as a small power

amp to drive the lowish impedance EQ section. The secondstage (in

the same block) provides imtermediate gain and keeps the signal

level up thus reducing noise. The last two stages provide a little

make-up gain but primarily work in counter-phase and are used for

the robust line drivers.

Alsoitisworthexperimentingwiththeorderofprocessorsespecially

when compression, limiting and clipping is involved. We get asked

whether it is best to EQ then compress or the other way around.

People do it both ways and each has advantages depending on the

situation. If you compress first, then you should be able to boost EQ

more without clipping. If you compress after EQ, then you smooth

the track based on the new tone, which may be more leveled or

“even” sounding . De-essing, if needed, is best and easiest as a final

or next to final stage. Limiting should be the last step and should be

done gently (a few dB) because more rarely sounds better.

EQing a sub-group saves using a lot of EQ on individual tracks and

tends to blend and mesh the tracks into a cohesive group and usually

makes it easier to mix them. Lots of us group, EQ and compress the

drums or backing vocals. You should start off with the group EQ,

then the individual channel EQs should fall into place easier. Of

course, your console needs to be capable of this.

Most of the parts in the Mini Massive are capacitors and inductors

used for frequency shaping but with all the choices of frequencies,

boostorcut,andbellorshelfthesheernumberofpassivecomponents

is significant. The 11 position two deck Greyhill switches just select

the combinations of C's & L's. Closest to the front is shelf selection.

The only slightly complex part is the around the toggle switches. In

"bell mode" they have to switch each EQ section from the boost

circuit into the cut circuit. In "shelf mode" the components for shelf

get switched and the bell components get switched into the opposite

section.Eachbandneedsarelayboardwith4DPDTrelaystohandle

the complex switching. "Bandwidth" control is just variable series

resistance, just like a Pultec.

And for the opposite approach....Some guys “split” a track (or

“mult”itorcopyit)andEQonechannellightlyandoneheavily,then

mix them. The advantage is that you can easily change the tone by

changing the mix in automation. It also gives twice as many options

for adding reverbs and delays now that there are two channels but

expect the fader moves to affect the effect sends and balances.

The power supply also accounts for an appreciable number of

components. A doubly shielded custom toroid transformer feeds

snubbedandfilteredbridgerectifiers.Thedirectcurrentisseparated

into left and right channels then regulated with conventional 3

terminaldevices, thenfurtherfilteredandshuntregulatedtoprovide

very quiet and stable supply rails (including quiet grounds). The

goalswerereductionofACpowerlinenoiseand RFandlowZnoise

of regulators from corrupting grounds and power rails.

Youprobablythoughtofthisone-ChainingonechanneloftheMini

Massive into the next one so that you have a 4 band EQ. Here is the

cool trick - put a distortion device or heavy compressor in that chain

between the EQs. This way you have incredible control of the

distortion character or dynamic depth. For example, you can boost

highs before the distortion, which tends to reduce out the tendency

to mostly distort the low mids, then remove some highs after the

distortion which removes some of the buzzy edge. This is leaning

towards simulating analog tape and guitar amps.....

Unlike many products, almost the entire internal area of the Mini

Massiveisstuffedwithrespectablyexpensiveandphysicallychunky

components. However, part of the secret of the sound, is that the

signal is only flowing through a few transparent gain stages and a

few premium passive parts that are practically in parallel and share

the load

The first, last and only real rule about EQ is “if it sounds good, do

it”. Feel free to experiment. Enjoy and please let us know what

adventures you are having with the Mini Massive.

Line Drivers and Interfacing

And then there is the transformer output option, which remains the

most forgiving and automatic method to interface given that the

ouput is floating and either leg can be grounded without a loss of

headroom and with less groundloop difficulties. Technicalities

aside, the transformer also provides a bit of fashionable transformer

warmth and richness or fatness. The switch associated with the

transformer option, then allows transformerless direct outputs, the

transformer, or a slightly exagerated transformer color labelled

vintagebecauseitbiasesthetransformersimilarlytovintageBritish

console circuits. 3 sounds, your choice.

Most balanced line drivers are one of a few variations of cross-

coupledmixedfeedbackcircuits.Youknow,theoneswhereyoucan

plug in balanced, or unbalanced pin 2 or pin 3 grounded gear and are

supposed to allow fool-proof transformer-like interfacing. Two