On the computer speaker yes, it offered something that translated well on this support, even if I was under the impression all the time, that the cosmetic change that occured was minimal. On the PMC and PSI, he sounded inferior.
The thing is a Pultec style EQ is incredibly easy to build. The only thing you need is an inductor and a capacitor per setting... The EQ itself drops between 16 and 20dB in gain so you need to amp the signal to compensate. Basically the EQ is making everything more silent and the boost brings it up to where it was originally. The material for a proper built is basically what the Klark costs ready to go. I think i spent like 800 for my dual Pultec kit from PCBGrinder ... and people trying to build with NOS parts and fancy enclosures will easily spend the same or more on a single unit. Fact is, the amp tube and the balancing input and output transformers are what shapes the sound. And here the Midas ones are the cheapest one can find and believe me, with a set of proper Lundahls the Klark would not lose so much mid range as it does here. The reason it sounds "better" is that the low and high end boost are more intense and the overall compensation is stronger....so less signal left in the mids..so more level lost, so more noise when bringing it back up. Try the Tegeler , both the Creme and the EQP for a proper affordable , dual mono solution.
For how I use it I actually find that mid range drop off very useful. Thanks for the explanation I’m interested in replacing these tubes and seeing if there’s any noticeable difference for my small setup
I have the Crème by Tegeler, it's a good alternative but i found it a bit limited sonically, (the 10khz to 24khz is pretty cool tho) i coupled it with an IGS "pult-EQ", which is basically the Rubberband without the power supply, pluggin it in lowers the signal down to 30db and i have to use a dual preamp to bring the volume back, i use all of that with an SPL vitalizer, as part of my mastering chain, and it sounds amazing !
Actually preferred the Igs for its heft and dark tone which some consider to be mud! It sounds like it would work great on breaks and the stuff I'm into! Wouldn't mind a pair of klarks though either. Good work Redstone!
It's quite amazing how all three clones have their own strengths on drums, bass, guitar and the entire mix. All three could be used in all situations, however the IGS sounded like it was compressing the sound on drums and bass but was good on guitars and the mix. The Klark was particularily good on drums and bass. The Summit was good on all. Klark costs 200 EUR, has a nice sound and is an allrounder, for me the winner.
I agree with the comments, I liked the KT's the most of all, maybe it's because they're affordable I want to like them!! But the IGS sounded really dull and the Summit is nice but it's top end is a little bit bright for my taste, almost too much. Thanks so much for posting this!
I think with a higher quality 12ax7 in the Klark, you could get rid of that slightly over saturated sub low and open up the hi a little. But they all sound great. I noticed the summit is much more clearer in the hi mids, the other two seem to be a bit more muddy. Can’t believe how good the Klark sound though
IGS is really smooth with a certain lack of top end. Summit has this natural little kick in the lo-mid band and the klark teknik is thinner but with the EQ curve we expect from the settings. EQP-KT is incredible for the price! Nice review and introduction thx.
Dynamic Rockers you heard the EXACT SAME THING my ears heard. The IGS was smooth and I liked it on guitar but it lacked brilliance. The Summit sounded like the klark to me but with a little more clarity and presence. However for 280$ that I paid from Sweetwater not bad at all. One thing I learned is if one piece of gear is warmer just boost the low end on your klark to try and get the same warmness to the best extent. You can use the same settings on all three but they aren’t built the same. Its all on the engineer to tweak the knobs and get the best sound out of the unit. I feel better about not spending almost 4k on the more expensive units but I wish I could play with them in my studio room so I can really hear
Klark on the mix bus is defenitely too harsh on the high ends, stuff that the igs keeps in check, and struggles to control the low ends + i can hear some phase issues coming from the 2 units.
It would be interesting to compare the IGS rubber bands in 500 series against the rack unit and maybe the Lindell 500 series pulteq :) Interesting video, thanks for the comparison! :)
Holymoly! The Klarks are absolutly fantastic! They killed the IGS right away... The Summit Audio sound the best, but the Klark is really a Bang for the Buck
i had to wiggle my ear. im i hearing right? the Klarks sound fantastic . the IGS units sound to wooly and muddy, the summits do sound the best. but klarks for the price
Great video. Pleasantly surprised by the Klarks. Would have been useful to add a Warm Audio EQP-WA to the mix as it sits in the sort of mid-price range.
Good video, I’m looking into some hardware units and this style of EQ is on my list to eventually add. Interesting that I thought the Klark sounded the best on the full mix but depends on what someone’s going for. Also tough to compare directly between hardware units since there variability in components and pots but this showed that they all seem very usable. Thanks for the video.
Klark Teknik: I'm surprised again, as this not the 1st comparison I watch about it, and it's holding so well so far. And if you fancy it, change the tubes and transformers to something bring a unique color that set nicely to your taste and it's still gonna be way cheaper even than the Warm Audio clone. IGS: to my taste too muddy, doesn't bring the bass in a nice way. BTH I'm disappointed because it's not cheap at all. Summit Audio: Best in bringing live and depth into the music, doesn't have the fattest super-low-end but the low-mid is so nice on it that's why I felt it's bringing live and depth.
I'm listening on my Adam Audio mons and TBH the KT sounded the best on the mix.I been thinking about betting a pair of these and every video with the Klarks reassure my wanting to grab a pair!
Although all three units obviously produce very different tone curves using the same settings, for sheer value for money the KT's are quite remarkable. However, I can not deny the transparency and "openness" of the Summit. It has more 3D information in the stereo mode, especially when listening for the reverb and instrument separation as the band was playing. The KT, by comparison, although having a pretty nice eq, seemed dimensionally more flat in stereo. To my ear, the Summit and IGS also have a slightly tighter bass response. So, if money was no object, I'd pick the Summit, followed by IGS. But, that is not to say that the KT is bad, quite the opposite, especially given the "bang-for-buck" factor. p.s. What about the Warm Audio EQP-WA?
Thanks for the comparison. The Summit seems to have missing low end. Are the tubes needing service? To me it sounded the lest attractive, except for the guitars. KTs seem to have a very good price-performance-ratio.
Dear Murat, thanks a lot for your comment! The tubes in the Summit are in good state and we honestly prefer the Summit Audio over the other 2 options in the video every day of the week. KT on the other hand at 1/10 of the price come in as a viable alternative when extra pultec style Eq's are needed. The IGS one is great because it is a stereo unit and no L-R matching is needed: also this one seems to have lots of Low End compared to the others. Stay tuned for more!
I was realy impressed by the Klar Technics of that Test. For the Price it does realy a good Job. Not for Mastering but it works out pretty well. The thing is - how close is a Waves Puigtech EQ to that Hardware.. i do love this Plugin. Spent just 30€ and it makes almost everything sound more alive. I did have watched some videos about KT vs Waves and the Plugin was just sound better than the KT. So i dont feel the need to buy such expensive gear anymore. Same was by the SSL Bus Compressor. Useing the NI Solid Bus Comp as Klone was such a mindblowing experience that i give up the need for Hardware. Yes perhaps i could go 5% Better with Hardware but are those little differences worth put 2000-10000€ into a Hardware chain? I dont think so. But there are Tools i would love to get - like SSL Fusion.. but to be true, i dont realy need it. It would make everything just more Kompex to my workflow and thats a huge stepp Backward.
Marc thanks for watching our content and your comment. We believe that plugins are getting everyday closer to the analogue outboard counterpart in terms of sound and lots of engineers and producers are embracing them while others continue to work in a hybrid fashion (like ourselves) depending on the project we are workign on. Keep in mind the importance of ADC and DAC when working with analogue outboard as well.
Definitely going to buy the Klark Teknik next week. It sounds fantastic and for that price, its a no brainer for me. I cant afford any other ones anyway. Lol
I own a pair of the Klarks and very impressed with them for the price..I like that summit also.. on that song mix I liked the klark it has more of a silky sound to my ears didnt care for the igs could have been the settings just sounded muddy to me..great video
The summit sounded the most open the igs had this darker smooth vibe with less highs then the other two units and the Klark had a good all around sound maybe less low end then the summit and the igs but it definitely sounded good I’m wowed by it especially for the money 🔥
KT worked great. in other videos i heard that they tend to make mid frequencies weak but still....great job. I think the IGS sounds less focused. Liked the Summit.
All 3 EQs have their own personal signature. If I could be so lucky I'd get all 3. Hahaha... All of them are OK and all of those 3 bad boys can make a difference. Now, having owning KT's EQP, and from this video too, IGS is more muddier and Summit is more boxy. But it's just me and I am on my work using cheap PC headset. Like a closed headset for Skyping and such... But the differences are there!
The summit sounds best to me, but this listening experience made me feel comfortable in our studio's choice to get the KlarkTechnic for a mastering EQ until a Massive Passive MST makes sense financially. Thanks for the quality content
Could just be the settings but I thought both Rubber Band and the Summit were terrible on the 2 bus. The Klark seemed to add some glue without wrecking things too much. The RB sounded like a box and Summit warped the stereo image right? On the other sources summit seemed best. but i don't think anything got nailed. Probably you could find settings that nail stuff for you with each unit since they are all probably pretty good.
i'll probably pick up a summit audio first, then a couple kKs later and modify them...or maybe the other way around. I'm surprised how muddy the igs sounded. thanks for the video!
Those number do not refer to dB: the Boost control has slightly higher gain than the Attenuation has cut, and the frequencies they affect are slightly different creating a nicely shaped curve.
Because we do not have those warm audio pultec style available at the studio. We only review what we have and we do not have everything... far from there actually
To my ears, you could possibly tweak any of them sound close enough to pass a TH-cam comparison. KTs hold their own and for the money, for a project studio, can't be beaten for the price.
Felt like the KT was good but lacked character in the low and mids. The IGS highlighted the low but lacked the mid and high clarity. The Summit was all around solid. Summit is the best but it’s hard to go wrong with the KT’s price. And knowing that the low and mids need more attention, I’d just EQ with that in mind 🤷🏻♂️
I quite liked all of them, all usable. The IGS imparted less of a pultec sound but a smoky, darker analog thickness - I liked it though. The summit pushed the midrange a bit much - very forward snare. I’ll be picking up a pair of klarks and put a better set of tubes in there as of next week. I have to for that price!
Honestly, i didn't like the IGS at all. Only on the guitar I felt it was doing something acceptable. For the rest I totally prefered the Summit, with the Klark as a close second. Quite a surprise for me. Thanks for the video!
I'm kinda embarrassed to admit it, but I liked the KT the most too. Interestingly, I thought it was the middle priced one, so there was no bias when listening for the first time. Either I have bad taste, or in this context, the KT sounded better than the others.
Changing the Tubes and the Transformers for something higher in terms of fidelity will definitely improve the performances of these units! Lots of infos on this online!!
Its hard no to be biased by price. But the klark tekniks just kicked but. The igs seemed to make everything muddier. The summits good but very very close to the klarks. So I think my future bears 2 klarks :). Great review. Would have like a bit more back and forth between each sound/unit.
Thanks for your comment and your suggestion! Next time we will provide some back and forth comparison between the units and HQ audio files for download.
@Bristolpa what mullard tubes did you use and are they hard to change out? I have a pair of Klarks coming Thursday and I've never changed or even bought tubes. But I have a few units that I think I should probably do this to.
The Klark destroys the stereo image and washes out everything on its way , IGS has a very nice solid bottom and nice mids my personal preference goes to the Summit Audio.
I listened through nearfields in a treated space ... The KT really doesn’t sound like any real Pultec I ever worked with over the years (I never owned one, but I did work at studios that had them). Pultec is known for much smoother mids, more defined lows, and a “sheen”’on the top end that was hard to mimic using a console’s EQ, or other OB EQ’s. I’m not saying the KT sounds “bad”; I don’t think it does, and for the inexpensive price, you could do a lot worse... but it doesn’t sound like an actual Pultec. Not even close. 😉 The Summit is MUCH closer to the “character” of a Pultec EQP, and, while $3k sounds expensive, keep in mind that you’re getting 2 for that price, making it great for strapping across a stereo buss. I thought the Rubber Band sounded a little better than the KT, but I don’t think it sounded “twice the price better”... and it also fell quite a bit short of the real thing. I’m sure both could be very useful for both track EQ and Bus EQ, - and perhaps either could be modded by using different XFO’s and Tubes, and maybe doing that could get closer - but if you want the response, resonant curves and sound of a Pultec, then the Summit is going to be your closest emulation. Or... lol... you could save up your money, bet the farm, sell a lung and a kidney, and buy the real thing; I’ve seen them in the past few years, STARTING at around $5k. 😉
Auditory memory is incredibly unreliable. If you had them in front of you and made the same observations on the same material I'd trust your real -time experience. This isn't personal it is the reality of auditory perception. You can't make a reliable assessment made hours ago let alone months or years ago especially on different material .
The Klark Teknik sounds surprisingly good tho. Don't like the low end of the IGS one. Sounds too muddy to me. But the winner is the Summit Audio i think. Sounds so good.
Thanks for your comment Ronny! They all serve their purpose beautifully I think. I must say that the IGS with the settings matched with the others sounds like it's pushing more Low Ends, so backing off the Boost on the Low band would make it less Bass heavy for sure.
Wow, I am in the minority with my opinion of the KT.....I thought they sounded pretty lousy in comparison to the Summit and I OWN a pair of the KT. (IGS didn't do much for me). Really liked the midrange of the Summit compared to the midrange in the KT. KT sounded a bit plastic to my ears. I'm weird tho....I usually pick opposite of everyone for all of these tests
No, you're not weird. The Klark is a cheap piece of junk that gets hyped up for no reason. I love affordable gear that's good, and I try to scout for it as much as possible, but the Klark isn't it. Not because it doesn't sound like a Pultec, but because it's poorly made, full stop. And the reasons you listed are completely true, because making tube gear that sounds good requires money and expensive components. The other two units sound considerably better.
IGS did not sound to great. On the full mix the Klark perceived good cause the highs are more prominent almost like digital plugin Eq's but needs more bass and fullness in the lower range to balance the overall sound out. The Klark's could be a good exciter tool.
Those KTs sound really bad man. You can already hear that it's losing fidelity in the highs, as they start to get distorted. If he had ran a hotter signal through, they would not have held up. That's exactly what you don't want in analog gear. The IGS is kinda lackluster as well. I was about to buy an RB 500, but now I'm kind of second guessing my choice. It does round the low end off really nicely, but it doesn't carry itself as well as I thought it would. Definitely nowhere near as nice as a pultec. The summit was really nice. In my opinion, what you get out of that unit is exactly what a good tube EQ should provide. It maintained it's fidelity, and added that nice analog polish that you would expect from a pultec style EQ. But it's not really my flavor either. Great video!!! Keep'em coming!!!!!
I know you guys are doing hardware reviews, but it would be super interesting if you could run the same tracks through this new Pultec Plugin from Rule Tec: th-cam.com/video/CBvct25rpHA/w-d-xo.html This plugin seems to be be way better than anything else out there right now (even the ones from UAD) and the price (100$) is super low as well. If you don't want to make a video out of it I would really appreciate it, if you could post some links to audio snippets from the unprocessed recordings you used for this video, than I will go and check it out for myself. Thanks a lot for the great review!
The Klark was pretty bad (it slurs the low end completely and sounds very tinny; as is to be expected from cheap tube gear with cheap transformers), and the IGS and Summit Audio sounded similarly good (low end was much more focused, and they had nice high-freq sheen). Thanks for making this comparison!
Drums:
8:50 - dry
9:01 - Klark
9:12 - IGS
9:23 - Summit
Bass:
9:34 - dry
9:45 - Klark
9:55 - IGS
10:05 - Summit
Guitars:
10:15 - dry
10:25 - Klark
10:35 - IGS
10:45 - Summit
Mix:
10:55 - dry
11:12 - Klark
11:30 - IGS
11:46 - Summit
Thank U Wilson!
MVP
Klark on the mix sound like a record The others Were a lot Darker
I purchased the Summit Audio thanks to this video!
Glad I could help!
So did i 😊
How do you like it?
wow. the KT held its own and on the full mix was the best to my ears
I totally agree.. It sounded like it came to forward clearly
On the computer speaker yes, it offered something that translated well on this support, even if I was under the impression all the time, that the cosmetic change that occured was minimal. On the PMC and PSI, he sounded inferior.
I agree! It was the best on the mix! This just saved me a lot of money😂😂😂
@@boboutelama5748 sounds good on these $2k focals for the full mix . for the money anyway
The thing is a Pultec style EQ is incredibly easy to build.
The only thing you need is an inductor and a capacitor per setting...
The EQ itself drops between 16 and 20dB in gain so you need to amp the signal to compensate.
Basically the EQ is making everything more silent and the boost brings it up to where it was originally.
The material for a proper built is basically what the Klark costs ready to go.
I think i spent like 800 for my dual Pultec kit from PCBGrinder ... and people trying to build with NOS parts and fancy enclosures will easily spend the same or more on a single unit.
Fact is, the amp tube and the balancing input and output transformers are what shapes the sound.
And here the Midas ones are the cheapest one can find and believe me, with a set of proper Lundahls the Klark would not lose so much mid range as it does here.
The reason it sounds "better" is that the low and high end boost are more intense and the overall compensation is stronger....so less signal left in the mids..so more level lost, so more noise when bringing it back up.
Try the Tegeler , both the Creme and the EQP for a proper affordable , dual mono solution.
Are you building them?
For how I use it I actually find that mid range drop off very useful. Thanks for the explanation I’m interested in replacing these tubes and seeing if there’s any noticeable difference for my small setup
I have the Crème by Tegeler, it's a good alternative but i found it a bit limited sonically, (the 10khz to 24khz is pretty cool tho) i coupled it with an IGS "pult-EQ", which is basically the Rubberband without the power supply, pluggin it in lowers the signal down to 30db and i have to use a dual preamp to bring the volume back, i use all of that with an SPL vitalizer, as part of my mastering chain, and it sounds amazing !
The Klark sounds best too me it really sounds clean.amazing you can get a stereo pair for $400
Thanks guys. Well done, lovely unbiased presentation.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Actually preferred the Igs for its heft and dark tone which some consider to be mud! It sounds like it would work great on breaks and the stuff I'm into!
Wouldn't mind a pair of klarks though either.
Good work Redstone!
Yeah my thought exactly. I heard what everyone else heard but to me it sounded good lol
Great video, love the history and basic technical breakdown and then your demonstration is superb.
Glad you enjoyed it!
It's quite amazing how all three clones have their own strengths on drums, bass, guitar and the entire mix. All three could be used in all situations, however the IGS sounded like it was compressing the sound on drums and bass but was good on guitars and the mix. The Klark was particularily good on drums and bass. The Summit was good on all. Klark costs 200 EUR, has a nice sound and is an allrounder, for me the winner.
I agree with the comments, I liked the KT's the most of all, maybe it's because they're affordable I want to like them!! But the IGS sounded really dull and the Summit is nice but it's top end is a little bit bright for my taste, almost too much. Thanks so much for posting this!
Excactly how I felt aswell!
I think with a higher quality 12ax7 in the Klark, you could get rid of that slightly over saturated sub low and open up the hi a little. But they all sound great. I noticed the summit is much more clearer in the hi mids, the other two seem to be a bit more muddy. Can’t believe how good the Klark sound though
Ohh the summit was very colorful loved it!
IGS is really smooth with a certain lack of top end. Summit has this natural little kick in the lo-mid band and the klark teknik is thinner but with the EQ curve we expect from the settings. EQP-KT is incredible for the price! Nice review and introduction thx.
Dynamic Rockers you heard the EXACT SAME THING my ears heard. The IGS was smooth and I liked it on guitar but it lacked brilliance. The Summit sounded like the klark to me but with a little more clarity and presence. However for 280$ that I paid from Sweetwater not bad at all. One thing I learned is if one piece of gear is warmer just boost the low end on your klark to try and get the same warmness to the best extent. You can use the same settings on all three but they aren’t built the same. Its all on the engineer to tweak the knobs and get the best sound out of the unit. I feel better about not spending almost 4k on the more expensive units but I wish I could play with them in my studio room so I can really hear
Klark on the mix bus is defenitely too harsh on the high ends, stuff that the igs keeps in check, and struggles to control the low ends + i can hear some phase issues coming from the 2 units.
It would be interesting to compare the IGS rubber bands in 500 series against the rack unit and maybe the Lindell 500 series pulteq :)
Interesting video, thanks for the comparison! :)
Holymoly! The Klarks are absolutly fantastic! They killed the IGS right away... The Summit Audio sound the best, but the Klark is really a Bang for the Buck
i had to wiggle my ear. im i hearing right? the Klarks sound fantastic . the IGS units sound to wooly and muddy, the summits do sound the best. but klarks for the price
Thats how i heard it too. The IGS was really dark in comparison. The Summit was really clean and well rounded, but that Klark was really close.
on the drum buss the high end just vanished with the igs
Great video. Pleasantly surprised by the Klarks. Would have been useful to add a Warm Audio EQP-WA to the mix as it sits in the sort of mid-price range.
I ended up getting a pair of Klarks...May even buy another pair
Good video, I’m looking into some hardware units and this style of EQ is on my list to eventually add. Interesting that I thought the Klark sounded the best on the full mix but depends on what someone’s going for. Also tough to compare directly between hardware units since there variability in components and pots but this showed that they all seem very usable. Thanks for the video.
Excellent presentation and the Klark more than measures up.
Klark Teknik: I'm surprised again, as this not the 1st comparison I watch about it, and it's holding so well so far. And if you fancy it, change the tubes and transformers to something bring a unique color that set nicely to your taste and it's still gonna be way cheaper even than the Warm Audio clone.
IGS: to my taste too muddy, doesn't bring the bass in a nice way. BTH I'm disappointed because it's not cheap at all.
Summit Audio: Best in bringing live and depth into the music, doesn't have the fattest super-low-end but the low-mid is so nice on it that's why I felt it's bringing live and depth.
I'm listening on my Adam Audio mons and TBH the KT sounded the best on the mix.I been thinking about betting a pair of these and every video with the Klarks reassure my wanting to grab a pair!
Summit sounded the best on everything, followed by the Klark and then the IGS, apart from the final mix which the Klark sounded the best to my ears.
Great content as always. keep it up!
Although all three units obviously produce very different tone curves using the same settings, for sheer value for money the KT's are quite remarkable. However, I can not deny the transparency and "openness" of the Summit. It has more 3D information in the stereo mode, especially when listening for the reverb and instrument separation as the band was playing. The KT, by comparison, although having a pretty nice eq, seemed dimensionally more flat in stereo. To my ear, the Summit and IGS also have a slightly tighter bass response. So, if money was no object, I'd pick the Summit, followed by IGS. But, that is not to say that the KT is bad, quite the opposite, especially given the "bang-for-buck" factor. p.s. What about the Warm Audio EQP-WA?
Thanks for the comparison. The Summit seems to have missing low end. Are the tubes needing service? To me it sounded the lest attractive, except for the guitars. KTs seem to have a very good price-performance-ratio.
Dear Murat, thanks a lot for your comment! The tubes in the Summit are in good state and we honestly prefer the Summit Audio over the other 2 options in the video every day of the week. KT on the other hand at 1/10 of the price come in as a viable alternative when extra pultec style Eq's are needed. The IGS one is great because it is a stereo unit and no L-R matching is needed: also this one seems to have lots of Low End compared to the others. Stay tuned for more!
I was realy impressed by the Klar Technics of that Test. For the Price it does realy a good Job. Not for Mastering but it works out pretty well. The thing is - how close is a Waves Puigtech EQ to that Hardware.. i do love this Plugin. Spent just 30€ and it makes almost everything sound more alive. I did have watched some videos about KT vs Waves and the Plugin was just sound better than the KT. So i dont feel the need to buy such expensive gear anymore. Same was by the SSL Bus Compressor. Useing the NI Solid Bus Comp as Klone was such a mindblowing experience that i give up the need for Hardware. Yes perhaps i could go 5% Better with Hardware but are those little differences worth put 2000-10000€ into a Hardware chain? I dont think so. But there are Tools i would love to get - like SSL Fusion.. but to be true, i dont realy need it. It would make everything just more Kompex to my workflow and thats a huge stepp Backward.
Marc thanks for watching our content and your comment. We believe that plugins are getting everyday closer to the analogue outboard counterpart in terms of sound and lots of engineers and producers are embracing them while others continue to work in a hybrid fashion (like ourselves) depending on the project we are workign on. Keep in mind the importance of ADC and DAC when working with analogue outboard as well.
Awesome video I’m buying klarks
Summit had unusually boosted mids. I like Klarks the most. Time to empty my Paypal :)
Definitely going to buy the Klark Teknik next week. It sounds fantastic and for that price, its a no brainer for me. I cant afford any other ones anyway. Lol
Hope you enjoy it!
Outstanding video, thanks.
Glad you enjoyed it! Please don't forget to subscribe if you want to help us produce more videos.
IMO KlarkTeknik best sound.
I own a pair of the Klarks and very impressed with them for the price..I like that summit also.. on that song mix I liked the klark it has more of a silky sound to my ears didnt care for the igs could have been the settings just sounded muddy to me..great video
The summit sounded the most open the igs had this darker smooth vibe with less highs then the other two units and the Klark had a good all around sound maybe less low end then the summit and the igs but it definitely sounded good I’m wowed by it especially for the money 🔥
KT worked great. in other videos i heard that they tend to make mid frequencies weak but still....great job. I think the IGS sounds less focused. Liked the Summit.
All 3 EQs have their own personal signature. If I could be so lucky I'd get all 3. Hahaha... All of them are OK and all of those 3 bad boys can make a difference. Now, having owning KT's EQP, and from this video too, IGS is more muddier and Summit is more boxy. But it's just me and I am on my work using cheap PC headset. Like a closed headset for Skyping and such... But the differences are there!
The summit sounds best to me, but this listening experience made me feel comfortable in our studio's choice to get the KlarkTechnic for a mastering EQ until a Massive Passive MST makes sense financially. Thanks for the quality content
Could just be the settings but I thought both Rubber Band and the Summit were terrible on the 2 bus. The Klark seemed to add some glue without wrecking things too much. The RB sounded like a box and Summit warped the stereo image right? On the other sources summit seemed best. but i don't think anything got nailed. Probably you could find settings that nail stuff for you with each unit since they are all probably pretty good.
I like your taste. Same Goals :)
I thought the summit unit did the best work in the stems but in the whole mix the klark won for me😊😊😊
Can I use Klark with balanced cables 1 to 2 TRS ? I see there's just one channel for each. Thank you!
@@AuroraPostLab you got to buy two bro
i'll probably pick up a summit audio first, then a couple kKs later and modify them...or maybe the other way around. I'm surprised how muddy the igs sounded. thanks for the video!
Have you guys tested the WES Audio units?
Not yet, I’ll give it a try as I’m hearing good things about it.
Sorry if you've covered this or if it's obvious...the Boost +4, Cut -2 etc. Do those numbers refer to decibels? Boosting 4dB and cutting 2dB?
Those number do not refer to dB: the Boost control has slightly higher gain than the Attenuation has cut, and the frequencies they affect are slightly different creating a nicely shaped curve.
thanks for the great video.
Man the IGS is deep and dark. The Klark really is a win at that price
Summit gives also depht and great color...
Why didn't you use the warm audio replica
Because we do not have those warm audio pultec style available at the studio. We only review what we have and we do not have everything... far from there actually
Really nice review!
To my ears, you could possibly tweak any of them sound close enough to pass a TH-cam comparison. KTs hold their own and for the money, for a project studio, can't be beaten for the price.
Felt like the KT was good but lacked character in the low and mids. The IGS highlighted the low but lacked the mid and high clarity. The Summit was all around solid. Summit is the best but it’s hard to go wrong with the KT’s price. And knowing that the low and mids need more attention, I’d just EQ with that in mind 🤷🏻♂️
Igs sound great
I quite liked all of them, all usable. The IGS imparted less of a pultec sound but a smoky, darker analog thickness - I liked it though. The summit pushed the midrange a bit much - very forward snare. I’ll be picking up a pair of klarks and put a better set of tubes in there as of next week. I have to for that price!
I'm thinking about getting the klark teknik
Kt is amazing, I own it and the kt 2a.... amazing
I've heard the Warm Audio version is very close to the original at about the $800 range.
Not close lol.
IGS clear winner. The KT worth buying imho
Thanks a lot for your comment. Stay tuned for more!
I like IGS...sounded fuller to me not muddier but that is my opinion...cheers
Johnny Vegas sounds best on the guitar to me but not best on the others.
Great video
0:03 Sweet
Honestly, i didn't like the IGS at all. Only on the guitar I felt it was doing something acceptable. For the rest I totally prefered the Summit, with the Klark as a close second. Quite a surprise for me. Thanks for the video!
Fair enough! Glad you liked our content, please subscribe to the channel, it is important for us.
the kt balanced the mix esp on cans, not too bass heavy
De klarks did the job. Same settings doesnt really make a fair comparison tho. Matching sound would be better. Still good review.
Summit wins in all ways, just its color
Two years after - i think IGs sounds the best on the mix
My ears say, Igs= Darker and EQP-KT thinner and Summit is well balanced.
You have a fine set of ears my friend! Please consider subscribing to our channel.
I'm kinda embarrassed to admit it, but I liked the KT the most too. Interestingly, I thought it was the middle priced one, so there was no bias when listening for the first time. Either I have bad taste, or in this context, the KT sounded better than the others.
Thanks for your comment. If you liked the video please subscribe to our channel, it would mean a lot to us.
You mod those KT's, I heard just changing the tubes gets better results
Changing the Tubes and the Transformers for something higher in terms of fidelity will definitely improve the performances of these units! Lots of infos on this online!!
Its hard no to be biased by price. But the klark tekniks just kicked but. The igs seemed to make everything muddier. The summits good but very very close to the klarks. So I think my future bears 2 klarks :).
Great review. Would have like a bit more back and forth between each sound/unit.
Thanks for your comment and your suggestion! Next time we will provide some back and forth comparison between the units and HQ audio files for download.
@Bristolpa what mullard tubes did you use and are they hard to change out? I have a pair of Klarks coming Thursday and I've never changed or even bought tubes. But I have a few units that I think I should probably do this to.
@@benbreas9958 1 year later, how do you feel about the KTs?
Any modded klarks for review?
house machine I hear the mods make them even better. Look into Revive. The mod the Klark.
I've had terrible experiences with Revive in the past and would recommend saving your money and getting a higher end unit instead.
The Klark destroys the stereo image and washes out everything on its way
, IGS has a very nice solid bottom and nice mids my personal preference goes to the Summit Audio.
wow. welp, time to buy some Klarks
I listened through nearfields in a treated space ...
The KT really doesn’t sound like any real Pultec I ever worked with over the years (I never owned one, but I did work at studios that had them). Pultec is known for much smoother mids, more defined lows, and a “sheen”’on the top end that was hard to mimic using a console’s EQ, or other OB EQ’s.
I’m not saying the KT sounds “bad”; I don’t think it does, and for the inexpensive price, you could do a lot worse... but it doesn’t sound like an actual Pultec. Not even close. 😉
The Summit is MUCH closer to the “character” of a Pultec EQP, and, while $3k sounds expensive, keep in mind that you’re getting 2 for that price, making it great for strapping across a stereo buss.
I thought the Rubber Band sounded a little better than the KT, but I don’t think it sounded “twice the price better”... and it also fell quite a bit short of the real thing.
I’m sure both could be very useful for both track EQ and Bus EQ, - and perhaps either could be modded by using different XFO’s and Tubes, and maybe doing that could get closer - but if you want the response, resonant curves and sound of a Pultec, then the Summit is going to be your closest emulation.
Or... lol... you could save up your money, bet the farm, sell a lung and a kidney, and buy the real thing; I’ve seen them in the past few years, STARTING at around $5k.
😉
Auditory memory is incredibly unreliable. If you had them in front of you and made the same observations on the same material I'd trust your real -time experience. This isn't personal it is the reality of auditory perception. You can't make a reliable assessment made hours ago let alone months or years ago especially on different material .
I think you'd be crazy to not snag those KT's.
Dont understand how this being done with out the warm audio
Thanks for your comment. We do not have the warm audio pultecs, that’s why they are not featured.
The Klark Teknik sounds surprisingly good tho. Don't like the low end of the IGS one. Sounds too muddy to me. But the winner is the Summit Audio i think. Sounds so good.
Thanks for your comment Ronny! They all serve their purpose beautifully I think. I must say that the IGS with the settings matched with the others sounds like it's pushing more Low Ends, so backing off the Boost on the Low band would make it less Bass heavy for sure.
Surprisingly KT was the best. I'm usually sceptical off KT. Much prefer Audioscape. IGS sounded muffled. Summit too mid-rangey.
Wow, I am in the minority with my opinion of the KT.....I thought they sounded pretty lousy in comparison to the Summit and I OWN a pair of the KT. (IGS didn't do much for me).
Really liked the midrange of the Summit compared to the midrange in the KT. KT sounded a bit plastic to my ears.
I'm weird tho....I usually pick opposite of everyone for all of these tests
These people are crazy. Summit is in a different world than the others and igs still better than KT just need to boost less low cut more.
No, you're not weird. The Klark is a cheap piece of junk that gets hyped up for no reason. I love affordable gear that's good, and I try to scout for it as much as possible, but the Klark isn't it. Not because it doesn't sound like a Pultec, but because it's poorly made, full stop. And the reasons you listed are completely true, because making tube gear that sounds good requires money and expensive components. The other two units sound considerably better.
IGS did not sound to great. On the full mix the Klark perceived good cause the highs are more prominent almost like digital plugin Eq's but needs more bass and fullness in the lower range to balance the overall sound out. The Klark's could be a good exciter tool.
Those KTs sound really bad man. You can already hear that it's losing fidelity in the highs, as they start to get distorted. If he had ran a hotter signal through, they would not have held up. That's exactly what you don't want in analog gear.
The IGS is kinda lackluster as well. I was about to buy an RB 500, but now I'm kind of second guessing my choice. It does round the low end off really nicely, but it doesn't carry itself as well as I thought it would. Definitely nowhere near as nice as a pultec.
The summit was really nice. In my opinion, what you get out of that unit is exactly what a good tube EQ should provide. It maintained it's fidelity, and added that nice analog polish that you would expect from a pultec style EQ. But it's not really my flavor either.
Great video!!! Keep'em coming!!!!!
I had the chance to test the KT last week and can't confirm your impression at all.
Igs but then again I am biased 🙃
I know you guys are doing hardware reviews, but it would be super interesting if you could run the same tracks through this new Pultec Plugin from Rule Tec: th-cam.com/video/CBvct25rpHA/w-d-xo.html This plugin seems to be be way better than anything else out there right now (even the ones from UAD) and the price (100$) is super low as well. If you don't want to make a video out of it I would really appreciate it, if you could post some links to audio snippets from the unprocessed recordings you used for this video, than I will go and check it out for myself. Thanks a lot for the great review!
Check out the *free* RareSE by Analog Obsession. Best Pultec emulation I have tried incl. UAD's efforts.
The Klark was pretty bad (it slurs the low end completely and sounds very tinny; as is to be expected from cheap tube gear with cheap transformers), and the IGS and Summit Audio sounded similarly good (low end was much more focused, and they had nice high-freq sheen). Thanks for making this comparison!
they all sound different fr
Too me the Klarks sounded best and way better than the mid priced eq which sounded dull and boxy
What about the Summit Audio??
Thats a joke.....KT.?
Definitely the IGS or the summit ......not impressed with the KT’s
Thanks a lot for your comment. Stay tuned for more!