The layout of the hardware is different to the software. Unbelievable as this controller was made for this eq.
Wow. And I was seriously considering getting one!
I use Cubase EQ, as well as others. But I guess the problem is that we expect EQ’s and Compressors to do something else they are supposed to do. Cubase EQ does what it is supposed to do. The basic compressor also does what it is supposed to do: it compress the signal. But we (still) has our ears used to what we heard back in vinyl age, when EQ’s did something else than eqing, and compressor did something else than just compress. That is why we got back to our “vintage style” plug ins. From my POV is like using my old trusty Alesis 3630. It is not great, it is noisy, but it compress very well and does my ears return to those old days sound I miss.
I guess Steinberg took a pragmatic approach to the basic plug ins: they seems to be designed in order to do the basics, well enough. If you want that “something else” you just get the plug-in that does that.
You put an LA2A as an EQ. Though I do agree that it shapes the tone of a track by imparting a certain tone to it, you could pretty much say the same about any other character compressor. That still doesn’t make it an EQ though.
By the way, I see you have the 1073 EQ. Is this the new one or the legacy one? If the new, how do you like it? I have a $50 coupon that I could use, especially now with the current sale (I guess I lied about not wanting another EQ, lol. Then again, I did say I only use FabFilter and UAD EQ’s 
).
Most of the time I use AlexB’s ‘Mammoth’ (Manly Massive Passive) Nebula library for low and high shelves and Cambridge or DDMF Pro10 for steep high pass.
I do use Cubase channel EQ low cut a fair bit also, as well as notching bass and some other channels to make space for the kick, although side chaining rules here!
UAD Pultec is fantastic on the kick, boosting and cutting at 60Hz and 3 or 4kHz.
So, yes, I use Cubase EQs quite a bit and I find them very handy and resource friendly.
They are good enough for my purposes and I use them as necessary on voice tracks.
Regards 
I have to admit that I’ve not used them too much in recent years as I use Waves or the EQs in Komplete 9U
However, when I first started with Cubase after moving over from Cool Edit Pro I always used them to roll off the unwanted bass on all tracks…I feel that I’ll probably go back to doing that again with the mix console in 8.0 for speed/ease…and to keep the insert slots free.
For mixing, I mostly use the PSP Audioware EQ’s.
I sometimes use the HP and LP of Cubase, but often I find myself even replacing those when more EQ is necessary.
Your are quite right - of course the LA2A is a compressor - what was I thinking?
My 1073 is the legacy version. I was not so keen on the new version.I don’t think it is as good as the SonEQ from Sonimus. Which by the way is considerably cheaper. Try and pick up a Maag EQ4. The air thing that happens with the upper frequencies is quite magical at times. I have to say with computers getting more powerful by the month I am beginning to resent the premium you have to pay for UAD stuff. Plus the worry about the hardware being superceded.
Thanks for the advise! I’ll give the Maag EQ4 a try.
I agree with you regarding UAD. Yes, the plugins are expensive, which is why I always wait until there’s a sale going on. But, even with computers getting more powerful, the native plugins that do sound good are huge CPU hogs. This is where the UAD, and similar platforms, shines as it frees your system resources for other processing. I’m able to compose, mix and master all in the same project. I wouldn’t be able to do that with all 100% native plugins of UAD quality. It’s like everything, there’s always a compromise.
Actually the Maag (native version which is what I have. I got it for $99 in last years Christmas sale), the SonEQ, the Solid EQ and the ProQ2 are fairly light on the processor. In fact some of the more recent UAD emulations are CPU hogs themselves and I find that I can only run a few on my Solo and Duo cards. I mean how many Manleys can you run? Yes! I know I should have got a Quad or an Octo, but hey, they are very expensive.
A UAD Solo or Duo card is not gonna give you much processing, that’s for sure. The way I got into UAD was through the deals they usually have around this time of the year, where you buy a hardware unit and get a card for free. At the time, I got their 4-710d mic pre (free shipping, no tax and 15% discount), which came with a free Quad card mail-in rebate. Later I sold the mic pre (and even made some money off of it) and used that money to buy the Octo card during another sale (same deal as with the preamp) where they gave me close to $2,000 worth of free plugins. You just have to wait for them deals
Perhaps not so easy in the UK. Prices tend to be a bit higher.
However, it is a thought.
I use the stock EQ’s for the simple tasks or rush jobs.
I use UAD and Waves when I have audio objectives. Most importantly I have learned these EQ’s and over years feel comfortable knowing how they will react. For myself LEARNING the EQ’s takes years and I don’t have time to change to the “better” one that comes out each year. Knowing your tools and being able to select the right EQ for your particular audio objective is much more important than having too many EQ’s, or spending time doing shoot-outs, or buying the newest bestest most amazing on the planet.
Someday, Steinberg…or someone else will release a DAW where there is tight integration between DAW and EQ developer. This means I will open the Cubase mix console and instead of getting Cubase EQ’s I get UAD or Waves EQ’s of my choosing built in to the IMPROVED Cubase GUI. 
Then I could open a Waves SSL console or API console. How cool would that be?
It would take a lot of partnership with the major 3rd parties, but feel it would attract professionals who wish to custom build their DAW. As it stands now with C8 there are still GUI problems with their own mix console, so this is probably fantasy.
Something like the Glue Compressor and Live 9?
I use the Cubase EQs for just about everything, but poke around alot with other EQs (or Plugins in general just to keep my ears open) and when I find something that fits I use it. Very pragmatic. I won’t go out of my way to recreate something weird I found in some EQ with Cubase EQs for no particular reason. If it sounds the way I intend or if I’m taken by surprise by something particular that just works in the mix, why not use it? Or if I start from the other end: just shaving off some bass in a guitar to keep the thunder out of the mix isn’t worth searching for the perfect EQ for.
For basic “tool work” I use the Cubase EQ all the time. When I want to give something a little extra character, I’ll usually reach for my Waves SSL G-Channel.
My two cents…
Going back to SX3 / C5, I found the Cubase EQs to be quite ‘brittle’ sounding. Adding top end resulted in a scratchy feel (as opposed to say, the jaw-droppingly amazing high end you can add with the UAD Pultec).
What really, really changed my mind however, was opening a project file from a top-level trance producer. He had made the entire project using stock vst fx (I’m guessing to ensure it would open on any system), and had extensively used the Cubase EQ throughout. The project sounded AMAZING. If someone had played me the render and said that it was done only using Cubase EQs I would have thought them to be talking codswallop.
So from C6 I started using StudioEQ more and more. I do use some 3rd party EQs as it doesn’t have linear phase mode, plus sometimes you want to add character as well as EQ.
From Cubase 7 the studio EQ and the channel EQ use the same algorithms, or was it Cubase 6.5 ?
I like all included plugins, clean and efficient. I don’t like plugins trying to mimic outboard it sounds fake. So cubase EQ perfect for daily mixing duties, if i want more mojo i grab outboard anyway