Username: Password:

Author Topic: Parametric or Graphic Eq?  (Read 19056 times)

witeter

  • Lightweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 569
    • Flailhead
Re: Parametric or Graphic Eq?
« Reply #15 on: June 26, 2012, 05:58:48 PM »
Thanks man will look into that also :-)

richard

  • Lightweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 821
Re: Parametric or Graphic Eq?
« Reply #16 on: June 26, 2012, 06:38:50 PM »
I have a Boss GE7 and it is one pedal I'll always hang on to because it comes in very useful sometimes. Most recently I was using it in the loop for a solo boost when there was another guitarist in the band. Since we sacked the other guitar player (idiot junkie) I don't need it. I find the Boss to be very quiet although others have reported noise issues with them. In fact I bought it to replace an Ibanez graphic which was very noisy. Very cheap and, if noise is an issue, there are mods available for not much cash - Monte Allums springs to mind.
PRS Bernie Marsden Abraxas set
PRS S2 Singlecut RY's
JV Strat  IT Bridge
Gibson SG JB bridge
Fender Mex Tele Thinline TV Jones Classics
Fender Bassbreaker 15
Yamaha THR 100 Dual
Quilter Aviator Cub

witeter

  • Lightweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 569
    • Flailhead
Re: Parametric or Graphic Eq?
« Reply #17 on: June 26, 2012, 07:33:34 PM »
Cheers Richard- good to hear that the BOSS works great for you - i would be considering it more seriously if it wasnt for the fact some reviews say its 'noisy'  - then again, thats very subjective. Glad the 'idiot junkie' 2nd guitarist saga was cleared up though!

Slartibartfarst42

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 2125
  • Random Solution
Re: Parametric or Graphic Eq?
« Reply #18 on: June 27, 2012, 12:56:52 PM »
I wonder if I could slightly hijack this thread a little as I have a related question on EQ's. I'll start another thread if you prefer.

I've never used an EQ before and I know nothing about the engineering of sound so you can take it as read that my knowledge is non-existent, however, when I bought my Digitech RP1000 I noticed it had a parametric EQ  but I'm finding it a bit confusing. I understand that I can boost the highs, mids and lows but I'm also able to specify a particular frequency for each of these and that's where I'm lost. For a 24 fret guitar with a trem that plays both rhythm and lead, what should I set the frequencies to for bass, mid and high? I'm thinking that I'll start by adjust the EQ on the amp so the EQ on the RP1000 can be used to fine tune the tone and provide a boost in some songs. I realise I can change the frequencies on this system for every song we do but frankly, I don't want it that complicated. I just want to set the frequencies so they're the same on every patch and then just change the amount of boost on each one to suit. So, can anyone tell me what frequencies to use for bass, mid and high?
BKP owned:

Bridge - Emerald; Cold Sweat; Crawler; A-Bomb; Holydiver; Miracle Man; Sinner; Trilogy Suite

Neck - Emerald; Cold Sweat; Crawler; Holydiver; Sinner; Trilogy Suite

froglord

  • Featherweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 325
Re: Parametric or Graphic Eq?
« Reply #19 on: June 27, 2012, 02:22:35 PM »
Anyone used the Source Audio Programmable EQ?

http://www.sourceaudio.net/products/utility_pedals/programmable_eq.php

Looks pretty funky.
Mules (Eggle Berlin), Piledriver/Yardbird (CV Tele Thinline)
Egnater Tweaker 15

witeter

  • Lightweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 569
    • Flailhead
Re: Parametric or Graphic Eq?
« Reply #20 on: June 27, 2012, 06:44:26 PM »
No worries man-hijack away :-) id also be interested in the answers to your questions btw

Froglord-that looks very impressive! will research further-cheers!

MDV

  • Middleweight
  • *****
  • Posts: 6945
  • If it sounds good it IS good
Re: Parametric or Graphic Eq?
« Reply #21 on: June 27, 2012, 07:07:22 PM »
In general for guitar effects graphic is the way to go. Parametrics are hands down better, but you cant get really good quality and control/flexibility out of conventional 'guitar effects' budgets. To put this in perspective, the reference standard parametric, designed by the guy that invented parametrics, is the GML8200, which is just 5 bands stereo, and costs about £4,500.

When using graphics just remember that the bands almost always overlap, use it for refinement of a sound that is as close as you can get it on the settings on the amp (i.e. less is more) and you should be fine.

I wonder if I could slightly hijack this thread a little as I have a related question on EQ's. I'll start another thread if you prefer.

I've never used an EQ before and I know nothing about the engineering of sound so you can take it as read that my knowledge is non-existent, however, when I bought my Digitech RP1000 I noticed it had a parametric EQ  but I'm finding it a bit confusing. I understand that I can boost the highs, mids and lows but I'm also able to specify a particular frequency for each of these and that's where I'm lost. For a 24 fret guitar with a trem that plays both rhythm and lead, what should I set the frequencies to for bass, mid and high? I'm thinking that I'll start by adjust the EQ on the amp so the EQ on the RP1000 can be used to fine tune the tone and provide a boost in some songs. I realise I can change the frequencies on this system for every song we do but frankly, I don't want it that complicated. I just want to set the frequencies so they're the same on every patch and then just change the amount of boost on each one to suit. So, can anyone tell me what frequencies to use for bass, mid and high?

Guitar sound consists largely of overtones. The fundamental of the lowest note on a guitar depending on tuning will be between about 55 and 82hz, and is likely to be eliminated altogether to let the bass handle that. A common first thing to do is to cut out everything below 100Hz. Above that, you need to keep some low mids and mids for the fundamentals of higher notes, but by and large youre dealing with broadband sound from overtones that can be shaped to your taste without much musical impact. There is sometimes a need to EQ differently for different tunings, but thats generally in a recording and mixing setting, and would be overkill for live or playing for your own amusement.

Very, very, VERY roughly (and more than a little debatably) speaking, its something like this:
<100hz. Kill. Probably. Up to you, but its generally quite wise.
100-150: 'bass' (which is really the first overtones of the lowest notes)
150-400: meat and chunk, and quite a lot of note fundamentals.
400-1k: kinda honky, forward, cardboardy mids. Lots of this drives your sound forward but robs it of depth and thickness. Careful, still qutie a lot of note fundamentals in here.
1k-2k very forward, punchy, inyourface mids. Can also detract from apparent thickness and depth if overly present.
2k-4k: Main range for pick attack and definition. Very loud to the human hear. Many ultrascooped sounds have everything but this and 100-200hz or so ripped out of them.
4k-6k: bit and fizz.
6k+ here be dragons. 'Air' and some more fizz. Questionable how much of it is really there. Many people just rip it out completely, some dial more in for a more open sound. May invite more fizz due to overlapping with fizz range in the EQs band Qs (Q means width, basically, which is fixed for graphics and variable for parametrics). If in doubt just leave it alone.

witeter

  • Lightweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 569
    • Flailhead
Re: Parametric or Graphic Eq?
« Reply #22 on: June 27, 2012, 07:18:33 PM »
Cheers man thats very informative, so for example- Marshall amps which have an emphasis on upper mids, does this mean that comes from the 2-4k range?

Slartibartfarst42

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 2125
  • Random Solution
Re: Parametric or Graphic Eq?
« Reply #23 on: June 27, 2012, 07:31:54 PM »
'Very, very, VERY roughly' is fine by me  and a hell of a lot better than I'd manage on my own  :D

At the moment the EQ is set to this:

Low = 100Hz so I'm guessing I can raise this up a bit; possibly to somewhere in the 125Hz - 250Hz area depending on taste.

Mids = 1.5kHz so it sounds like I might want to raise this one up too. At the moment I have the mids boosted a lot to cut through the mix but based on your description it sounds like I might want to back this off a bit.

Highs = 5kHz so on this one it sounds like I might want to reduce the frequency a bit to make sure there's no fizz.

The RP1000 also offers three types of band width from wide to narrow so I've got mine in the middle as it seemed the best thing to do if I didn't understand it!!! If that's wrong, please let me know.

Many thanks for your post MDV, it's VERY helpful.
BKP owned:

Bridge - Emerald; Cold Sweat; Crawler; A-Bomb; Holydiver; Miracle Man; Sinner; Trilogy Suite

Neck - Emerald; Cold Sweat; Crawler; Holydiver; Sinner; Trilogy Suite

AndyR

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 4715
  • Where's all the top end gone?
    • My Offerings
Re: Parametric or Graphic Eq?
« Reply #24 on: June 27, 2012, 07:57:14 PM »
^ This MDV man knows his stuff :D

And reading it, it turns out I seem to know some of it too! (It pretty much tallies with a crib sheet I use when mixing - but that deals with all instruments, and I'm looking/listening to sounds already recorded, not shaping a signal going into the front or the middle of an instrument - the amp).

The biggie that needs highlighting in MDV's post is nearer the start. If you're new-ish to this stuff, you go straight to the list of magic numbers at the end and start cutting and boosting like a bar-steward (thats what I did with my crib sheet :lol:).

The magic numbers are what you need, but you must keep this in mind ALL the time:

"When using graphics just remember that the bands almost always overlap, use it for refinement of a sound that is as close as you can get it on the settings on the amp (i.e. less is more) and you should be fine."

The underlined stuff applies to a parametric as well.

Slarti, the way I learned what differing bandwidths did was this - set everything flat (no cut or boost) then set the one you want to fiddle with to cut the maximum it can. Then set the band width as narrow as possible. Then play something and sweep the frequency slowly up and down to hear what the effect is. Then pick a frequency and vary the bandwidth to see what that does. Then try it with boosting. Just use this exercise to train your ears to see what effect it all has.

When you get a feel for it, you'll know where and how wide you want it.

You also have to learn how much – which I guess is behind the bit of MDV's I quoted.

On mixing, some folks have a beginners rule "DON'T CUT OR BOOST ANYTHING BY MORE THAN 3DB – after a few mixes you can get more adventurous" – I followed this rigorously for a while, and it really does help.

When I you start you think "I'll have some more low mids" or what ever. You put them in and you can't hear them, so you put in a bit more for luck – that way leads to "naff" pretty quick. Oh, finally, if you have a bypass switch, when you think you're set, press the bypass switch. You'll be surprised at how often the original sounds better :lol:. Don't give up, set it all back to zero and try again!
Play or Download AndyR Music at http://www.alonetone.com/andyr

MDV

  • Middleweight
  • *****
  • Posts: 6945
  • If it sounds good it IS good
Re: Parametric or Graphic Eq?
« Reply #25 on: June 27, 2012, 10:49:51 PM »
Quite so, Andy, quite so.

Over-EQing, especially with narrow bands (as per many graphics), can just make things sound outright weird. And you can lead yourself up the garden path very easily if you dont stop and wash your ears out (silence or references). 3 bands on an amp is all very nice and well, but 10 bands of +/-15db or the infinite flexibility of a parametric...well, with great power comes....:lol:

Listen, experiment, listen more, experiment more, and keep listening. Its not something theres a silver bullet for (if only), its something that comes with experience. And listening.

witeter

  • Lightweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 569
    • Flailhead
Re: Parametric or Graphic Eq?
« Reply #26 on: June 28, 2012, 05:27:50 PM »
Great info MDV thanks for the extra advice and explanations.
I dont know if im alone in saying this - but is this the best forum on the net? i think so!

HTH AMPS

  • Middleweight
  • *****
  • Posts: 5649
    • HTH AMPS
Re: Parametric or Graphic Eq?
« Reply #27 on: July 02, 2012, 08:27:06 PM »
Anyone used the Source Audio Programmable EQ?

http://www.sourceaudio.net/products/utility_pedals/programmable_eq.php

Looks pretty funky.

I've been spying one of those for a while - its in the works to buy one. 

TheyCallMeVolume

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 1602
Re: Parametric or Graphic Eq?
« Reply #28 on: July 05, 2012, 05:25:32 PM »
I use the Empress ParaEQ live on my full rig and it's fantastic.  It does take some getting your head around though.  I have it always on with my preferred settings.

At rehearsals on my mini-board I have a modded Boss graphic - simple, cheap and easier to fiddle with on the fly.

I don' t think you'll go wrong with the MXR 10-band.

How is the Empress? I've been looking into one for a while, the 2 button one with the boost.

add4

  • Flyweight
  • *
  • Posts: 56
Re: Parametric or Graphic Eq?
« Reply #29 on: August 12, 2012, 09:45:24 AM »
i have the old version of the empress para eq and i think its great
the para eq really lets you emphasize the frequencies you like. i wouldn't use a graphical anymore now. or for really basic tone shaping things.

Current: Emerald (n), The boss (b)
Had: Manhattan (n)
Wish list: VHII (n), Blackguard 50 (n)