Orban/dbx 242 Parametric EQ??
Jordan Slator
"Having met Bob Orban years ago, I felt comfortable contacting him, so I
shot him out an email asking which of his equalizers he thought I should
track down and purchase. I was a little surprised when his answer
came. He told me that his "final analog parametric eq" was the DBX
Project 1 Model 242, and that was what he recommended that I purchase.
He said he was sure that I'd be happy with it."
Is this true? Mr. O? Has anybody tried this unit? Are they good for
anything?
- J. Slator
Harvey Gerst
Jordan,
It's very true. I just picked up a second 242 and I love it. It's somewhat
different than the Speck ASC, but for the money, it's an amazing parametric.
Very musical, very quiet, very surgical, very easy to use.
Harvey Gerst
Indian Trail Recording Studio
http://www.ITRstudio.com/
Trevor de Clercq
"professional" version of the 242, kind of like how a 160A compares to a
266XL? From their web site, it also seems like they no longer make the 242
now. It's shame they only seem to offer graphic EQ's (besides that 900
module).
Cheers,
Trevor de Clercq
Harvey Gerst
but I think I recall reading that he was pretty proud of this unit
>Trevor de Clercq <tdec...@fcstrategy.com> wrote:
>Yeah, I see that you won one on Jan. 10 on eBay....Did dbx ever make a more
>"professional" version of the 242, kind of like how a 160A compares to a
>266XL? From their web site, it also seems like they no longer make the 242
>now. It's shame they only seem to offer graphic EQ's (besides that 900
>module).
David Morgan (MAMS)
"Harvey Gerst" <har...@ITRstudio.com> wrote in message ...
> >Is this true? Mr. O? Has anybody tried this unit? Are they good for
> >anything?
>
> Jordan,
>
> It's very true. I just picked up a second 242 and I love it. It's somewhat
> different than the Speck ASC, but for the money, it's an amazing parametric.
> Very musical, very quiet, very surgical, very easy to use.
>
> Harvey Gerst
Interesting piece of information.....
I've spent a lot of time 'slamming' the entire DBX 2xx 'Project' series models,
always making an exception of the parametric. I suppose now I understand
why I felt it actually served it's purpose quietly and well. I sure hope Mr. Orban
didn't have much to do with the rest of the Project 1 series. :-\
--
David Morgan (MAMS)
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (972) 622-1972
________________________________________
Main Street Studio, Garland, TX (972) 487-4045
V455
I had a dbx 266 compressor that was offered at the same time the 242
parametric eq was, same product level, and this 266 compressor was
horrible.. I think I gave it away. It was built as cheap as could be, and
sounded very cloudy and stuffy... the farthest thing from clear or
transparent. Ironically, at the time, I bought a 166A as an upgrade to the
266.... and then I later realized that the 166A sounded terrible also, at
least compared to a 160X. The 160X is cool, and makes all those other
"newer" low-end dbx compressors sound pretty poor, in my opinion anyway. I
guess that this doesn't really have any bearing on the 242 eq, but... well,
one thing that isn't so wonderful about the 242 per my knowledge is that it
only has unbalanced i/o... or am I wrong? It's interesting that a unit from
that low-grade "200" series production line is actually good. I guess it
goes to show that you have good and bad on every level, and gear can only
really be judged piece by piece. -dm
Albert
Albert
> one thing that isn't so wonderful about the 242 per my knowledge is that
> it
> only has unbalanced i/o... or am I wrong?
Robert Orban
says...
Yep.
The design started out as the successor to the Orban 642. The improvement
was a complex crosscoupled feedback arrangement that allowed reciprocal
curves to +/-16dB EQ, yet still allowed an infinite notch. The whole
thing required a MAJOR optimization to solve all of the relevant
equations, because, unlike most EQ designs, the properties are not
guaranteed by the topology but rather by correct selection of (if I
recall correctly) six different resistors.
(We have since received a patent on the topology, and, for the
brave-hearted, the optimization procedure and the equations are to be
found there.)
About that time, AKG decided to drop the Orban studio line and just
concentrate on broadcast because they had just purchased the remains of
the dbx Pro operation, and dbx was to become the new "pro" line.
The EQ design was pretty cool, but the powers that be at AKG decided that
we would sell a lot more of them if they were aimed towards the project
studio market. This required a few compromises, like a wallwart power
supply. But the main signal path is 5532s in low-gain inverting mode, and
it's actually pretty clean.
There _is_ an entirely gratuitious electrolytic coupling capacitor at the
input, which I would advise bypassing. At this point, you will have an
admirably clean signal path.
The parametric filters are made with TL074s, and these could certainly
stand an upgrade.
Bob Orban
Robert Orban
says...
>
>
>Yeah, I see that you won one on Jan. 10 on eBay....Did dbx ever make a more
>"professional" version of the 242, kind of like how a 160A compares to a
>266XL? From their web site, it also seems like they no longer make the 242
>now. It's shame they only seem to offer graphic EQ's (besides that 900
>module).
No. I imagine that the 242 could be modified to "professional" standards,
however. I discussed some of that in another post.
The main limitation is that it would continue to require an external power
supply.
Robert Orban
<C7E89E4D53A95490.9D042BDE...@lp.airnews.net>,
ma...@airmail.net says...
>
>
>
>"Harvey Gerst" <har...@ITRstudio.com> wrote in message ...
>
>> >Is this true? Mr. O? Has anybody tried this unit? Are they good for
>> >anything?
>>
>> Jordan,
>>
>> It's very true. I just picked up a second 242 and I love it. It's
somewhat
>> different than the Speck ASC, but for the money, it's an amazing
parametric.
>> Very musical, very quiet, very surgical, very easy to use.
>>
>> Harvey Gerst
>
>Interesting piece of information.....
>I've spent a lot of time 'slamming' the entire DBX 2xx 'Project' series
models,
>always making an exception of the parametric. I suppose now I understand
>why I felt it actually served it's purpose quietly and well. I sure hope Mr.
Orban
>didn't have much to do with the rest of the Project 1 series. :-\
Well, there was this product manager...<g>
Actually, the other piece that I like is the 286 mic processor. It was, once
again, built to a price, but the compressor topology was _entirely_ different
than the compressors in the rest of the Project 1 series, and it was capable
of sounding very clean, dynamically, even with fast release times that would
ordinarily cause a compressor to chew up individual bass waveforms.
Some folks didn't like it because it resisted pumping and didn't have much
"character," even when it was working very hard indeed. But that's what makes
horse races, after all...
Bob Orban
Harvey Gerst
>jsl...@powersurfr.com says...
How cool. Thanks for the tips. As I pointed out, I really liked the 242 - now
I know why.