I may be in the minority on this, but I much prefer to get it "right" out of the synth. It's like post-processing in photography. Get your exposure and white-balance correct on exposure and you're going to have the optimum dynamic-range and best-case colorimetry. For the small amount of quality gained in shooting RAW, it's often simply not worth the time, storage, and data-management in practical use. (An exception for cine applications, however, where custom-LUTs are built-in by the DIT for the DP, and making color decisions post-exposure are beneficial due to the high-level workflow employed in movie-making).
Sure, if you're shooting a double-truck ad for Revlon, shoot RAW. If shooting news, entertainment, or personal work, the built-in JPG profiles are usually more than adequate, and viewers (even expert ones) would have a hard time telling the difference.
That said, I may use some graphic-EQ in Logic to pump-up or shave-off a bass-frequency. Parametrics also definitely have their place, but I consider these more mastering- rather than production-tools.
That said, I think the WMD mixer is the best bang-for-the-buck in mixers. Though the initial investment may seem steep, it's still cheaper than buying two four-channel mixers with similar capabilities (because, you know, four-channels just ain't going to be enough). With its ample feature-set and number of channels, the WMD's cost-per-feature bests all of its competitors. It's one the first investments I made in modular since having a bunch of voices with nowhere to control them (or even simply to just monitor them) made creating sounds without such a tool an extremely limiting way to work.