Does anyone here use LP-64 as go to eq?

He must have a powerful computer because he seriously placed it on every track. I occasionally use LP-64 on master or Bus.

dubdisciple
He must have a powerful computer because he seriously placed it on every track. I occasionally use LP-64 on master or Bus.

Even with a super computer its an unnecessary thing to do. The only reason to use an LP EQ is that there is a noticeable problem using a normal EQ. 
 
But what I find interesting is Beepter's remark about the Pultec EQ NF. I picked it up too for the sale price. One has to ask oneself why are such Eqs useful?  If the LP is so darn important then one would avoid a Pultec type it seems to me.   

The LP to me is for Mastering. I use the LP 64 Multiband on my master and have been getting excellent results. But as a rule I don't , and never have used a lot of EQ in general. 
I'm of the school that I record things the way I want them to sound. I have already applied any EQ  on the way in via my mixer. And even there it's pretty minor tweaks. The right instruments and the right mikes etc. 
With midi I won't use a sound I don't find just right so no EQ there either. 
I guess over time this is a natural process that I don't have to think about anymore. It's rare that I'll have a track that I have to EQ with a plug in now we have Pro Channel. 

johnnyV
The LP to me is for Mastering. I use the LP 64 Multiband on my master and have been getting excellent results. But as a rule I don't , and never have used a lot of EQ in general. 
I'm of the school that I record things the way I want them to sound. I have already applied any EQ  on the way in via my mixer. And even there it's pretty minor tweaks. The right instruments and the right mikes etc. 
With midi I won't use a sound I don't find just right so no EQ there either. 
I guess over time this is a natural process that I don't have to think about anymore. It's rare that I'll have a track that I have to EQ with a plug in now we have Pro Channel. 

I have to second that notion.  I believe that mastering and mixing begins at the start of the recording chain, so that when one gets to the end of the chain, less work is needed.

Ok, so I'm not missing out on some secret knowledge lol. 

dubdisciple
Ok, so I'm not missing out on some secret knowledge lol. 

If there was secret knowledge about it, do you think we'd be so foolish as to mention it in a public forum? If you haven't discovered the anti-gravity button in the interface, I'm not going to be the one to show you where it is. 

Well this is where this forum shines. The cream of the crop members are here posting much the same thing. What else can anyone ask for? Maybe the location for the secrete button for activating anti gravity is the only thing left to figure out. 

jb101
To the O.P. - No, I haven't used the LP-64 much for a while.  The Quad Curve is my main EQ.
 
It (LP-64) can work well for me when all else has failed, but I use it as a last resort now, and only when mastering..  This is what it was designed for. I think.  I remember using it on a vocal when it first came out, whilst tracking, and loved the results, but couldn't understand why my DAW slowed to a halt..  This is when I first learnt about latency..
 
The Blue Tubes Pultec EQ (PEQ2B) is nice on tracks (bass drums, snare, bass guitar etc), but the PULSE-TEC EQ plug-in is great as a mastering plug in.  The inclusion of the Pultec Mid-Range Equalizer MEQ-5 (with the Pultec EQP-1A) "takes it to another level" for me.
 
I also picked this up on sale recently for £6 (instead of $129) or so, and was blown away.  Even the presets sound great.
 
So - to the O.P. - I still use the LP64 EQ and Multiband Compressor, but only when mastering, and not as often as I used to..
 
 

I just picked up the pultec EQ's on sale too.  i have a few vocal projects I have been wanting to try those on.

The LP-64 has been my go to eq on the master bus since X1. It's there to add that "ever so slight" nudge to those frequencies that the song is asking to be brought out or pushed back. As someone else here has said, it's quite transparent but has quite a hit on the CPU; much too CPU intensive to put on every channel on my computer, it would grind to a halt very quickly if I used it on more than just the one channel.
Just lately though, I have been using the Pro Channel EQ on my master bus as it's so easy to use, it's just there, and it doesn't seem to mess with the sound too much if you don't over tweak it.

Yes I mix as I go along and use the Lp 64 at the end of the process if I have to tweak I delete it then make adjustments then use it again. Seems to work but its good to use to learn how to mix and master your own pieces.
 
http://youtu.be/gc6WX4otj8g

Ah yes... the LP-64 used to cause a lot of crackling, dropouts, etc for me when I first installed X1 and was still using my old interface. It was annoying to use while mixing because the crackles or the fact everything would go silent while adjusting things during playback made it hard to really hear what it was doing. In X3 with the Scarlett (and increased buffers if need be) it can be used without all those distractions. Still not as useful to me for general mixing stuff. It's too much work to get the desired results for individual tracks.
 
Definitely good for overall cleanup on a master or a stubborn stem bus but on every track? Nah... hell nah.

jb101

dubdisciple

I just picked up the pultec EQ's on sale too.  i have a few vocal projects I have been wanting to try those on.

I would be interested to hear your views on it, when you have a chance.
 
I have often used Pultec style EQs on drums and bass, but the added Pultec Mid-Range Equalizer MEQ-5 adds so much more.
 
I was surprised at how good it can be on a final mix. I had just finished a practice track for some students when I bought it, and so tried it on the master bus and was blown away by what an improvement it could make.  Just adding one of the pre-sets sounded great..

I have been playing with it most of the day and I am very impressed. The first thing i did was follow a bit of advice from a forum member (may have been Jeff Evans) to run some noise or tones and start turning knobs to get an idea of what it's doing.  This gave me a much better perspective.  I then ran some solo vocal tracks through using presets and noticed a pleasant difference immediately.   I also  discovered that you can totally hose up a mix if anything goes into it too hot. Not very forgiving on that sort of thing at all, so  I would recommend being extra vigilent about gain staging (I think my next purchase is going to be a quality VU meter).
 
Next thing I tried was putting some drum sounds through it , both solo hits and on drum bus.  Again, very nice warmth but very easy to breach that fine line between pleasant warmth and muddiness.  Overall thumbs up, but when i did and A/B using the Vintage EQ from IK, i preferred the IK one for bottom end and the NF for top end.
 
Going to play with it on master bus later, but this is definitely a keeper. FYI, I tested this on EDM track, r & b vocals and rap vocals from one of my students.

gswitz
You shouldn't have to buy VU meters. If you want EBU loudness measurement, I don't know how to do that with standard stuff inside Sonar, but sonar meters should be able to be set up to work like VU meters, I believe.
 
In track view > Options > Meters > Select Peak and RMS. This should give you average levels like a VU Meter while still enabling you to monitor peaks.

Thanks.  I find myself struggling with meters at times.    I will try your suggestion