If it's been forever, you've lost that "I haven't had time to save up for it" excuse. Get one. Trust me, you'll thank yourself for finally getting around to it. Once you dig into the computer interface, and realize everything it will do, you'll REALLY thank yourself (and maybe me).
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Anyone miss Graphic EQs on amps?
- Thread starter MultiScaleMale
- Start date
If it's been forever, you've lost that "I haven't had time to save up for it" excuse. Get one. Trust me, you'll thank yourself for finally getting around to it. Once you dig into the computer interface, and realize everything it will do, you'll REALLY thank yourself (and maybe me).
still using it....tho i dont fiddle with any of the knobs, my tone has been dialed in perfectly the past 38yrs...lol
I've fallen out of graphic EQs in general. If I need that kind of versatility, para/semi-para is my way, because I can tune by ear. Otherwise, I like the character and simplicity of a more traditional EQ.
I miss them. I think of each slider as its own tone control, whereas if you have a seven-band slider, you have seven tone controls.
No, my last amp with a graphic EQ was an Acoustic 370 that was sold in the early 70's. I was able to learn to operate a 3 band parametric EQ thanks to some coaching from guys like TBer Rip Van Dan from over at the old Eden forum. I'm really not much of a knob twister, especially on the gig as we have a sound company and that sort of thing tends to drive the sound techs nuts. Recording wise I go direct to the board let whoever is engineering the recording to EQ it.
I remember that used to be part of the amp hype - the more EQ options, the better.
I remember getting seduced by the graphic EQ on the Hartke, with the little LED on each slider. The look was freaking awesome, the sound... not so much IME. (Added hiss and always seemed to create more sonic problems than it solved.)
I still have an Ampeg tube preamp from that era, and the graphic EQ on that thing actually sounds pretty good to my ears.
My Glockenklang Soul has 5 knobs for EQ. That might be the threshold - any more bands than that and sliders would make more sense.
Can I survive a gig without graphic EQ? Most definitely, absolutely YES!!
It would seem that just this once the majority opinion eventually converged with mine.
I remember getting seduced by the graphic EQ on the Hartke, with the little LED on each slider. The look was freaking awesome, the sound... not so much IME. (Added hiss and always seemed to create more sonic problems than it solved.)
I still have an Ampeg tube preamp from that era, and the graphic EQ on that thing actually sounds pretty good to my ears.
My Glockenklang Soul has 5 knobs for EQ. That might be the threshold - any more bands than that and sliders would make more sense.
Can I survive a gig without graphic EQ? Most definitely, absolutely YES!!
It would seem that just this once the majority opinion eventually converged with mine.
I don't see any need to have a built in graphic EQ.
I have one on my SWR SM-500. I leave it set flat since it's primarily intended to be used as a set & forget feature to ostensibly best match your instrument to the amp rather than as an regular EQ stage. IMO it doesn't do anything a HPF will do far better. Or that a programmable EQ pedal like the Source Audio EQ or EQ2 can handle more flexibly and efficiently.
I think the old school approach of packing a ton of features into amp has been rendered pointless by all the technical advances made over the last 20 or so years in amp and cab design. Add that to the increased reliance on FOH systems and IEMs for today's music performances and the need for fancy feature-rich instrument amps becomes more and more moot with each passing year.
tl:dr - Nope. Don't miss it or see the need.
I have one on my SWR SM-500. I leave it set flat since it's primarily intended to be used as a set & forget feature to ostensibly best match your instrument to the amp rather than as an regular EQ stage. IMO it doesn't do anything a HPF will do far better. Or that a programmable EQ pedal like the Source Audio EQ or EQ2 can handle more flexibly and efficiently.
I think the old school approach of packing a ton of features into amp has been rendered pointless by all the technical advances made over the last 20 or so years in amp and cab design. Add that to the increased reliance on FOH systems and IEMs for today's music performances and the need for fancy feature-rich instrument amps becomes more and more moot with each passing year.
tl:dr - Nope. Don't miss it or see the need.
Last edited:
No, I don't miss graphic EQ on my current days. I prefer parametric EQ.
i used to own and use Hartke HA3500 between 1997 and 2013. I remember it sounded better with its graphic EQ bypassed…
i used to own and use Hartke HA3500 between 1997 and 2013. I remember it sounded better with its graphic EQ bypassed…
I don't use the EQ on this one. It seems to me a case of feature bloat, along with the lousy integrated XLR balanced line out SL Ampeg introduced with this head.
I have a graphic on a tiny (10W) Phil Jones head. I don't like it and frankly prefer the mid + mid frequency dials on my other head, but that's just me. I've heard, that current PJB heads use nearly same type of EQ, but controlled by pots.
on other hand, for me faders are arguably easier to fine control than +-18dB rotary pots, so I wouldn't mind a semi-parametric 3-4 band EQ, but controlled by faders.
on other hand, for me faders are arguably easier to fine control than +-18dB rotary pots, so I wouldn't mind a semi-parametric 3-4 band EQ, but controlled by faders.
