Drop1s EQ tutorial

[Omega Monkey]

Yeah that makes a lot of sense, to you. I had to look at this from the stand point that people may know virtually nothing about this, not cater the to the people who know enough to argue.

That really has no bearing on what I said. What people were asking for was any sort of brief summary of this magical amazing technique you claimed to have, so they would have some idea if it would be useful/new to them. But instead you chose to sensationalize it like it was some huge mystery and your "simple technique" would be far too complicated to explain. But I just did that. In 30 seconds. Because come to find out, all it really is is "play each note of the bass to find problem frequencies, then translate the note into a frequency using a readily available chart that there are a zillion different versions of on the internet". You would have saved yourself an awful lot of crap if you had just said that in the first place instead pretending to be Zoltar the Magnificent. it doesn't really matter if every single person understands your summary or not, the ones who don't would probably stick around to see what it was about, the ones who did would likely say "ok, I feel like I already know this, so it probably won't be helpful to me".

Way to go, @Drop1. I like yer tenacity about all this. Some people would've tucked tail, or said to hell with it, what with all ridiculous negativity being flung around. Nice post, I'm gonna try it.

There was no ridiculous negativity. If he hadn't done the whole infomercial routine and refused to divulge any detail whatsoever (and also not said silly things like "eq not tone"), nobody would have batted an eye. But he chose to present his "technique" as some amazing new breakthrough, and wouldnt even hint at what it was, despite posting again and again saying he "didnt have time" to explain it, even in summary. I mean, he must have spent over an hour posting that he didn't have time to type up an explanation of a 5 minute technique. And again, I came up with an explanation that would have satisfied most of the people in that thread in about 30 seconds, that honestly, anyone who knows what a "frequency" is should at least have had an understanding of what the technique was about, whether or not they understood how or why it worked or why it would be useful. The OP refused to give people that opportunity, and THAT is where the "ridiculous negativity" came from.

Anyway, hopefully he learned a lesson or 2 about how not to post on the internet and will do better next time. And if he had just posted this thread first instead of trying to be a carnival barker, he most likely would have received primarily thanks, additional suggestions, perhaps some minor critique, but likely very little criticism or attack of his approach.

 

[Keger Jupit]

There was no ridiculous negativity.

In your opinion...

And again, I came up with an explanation that would have satisfied most of the people in that thread in about 30 seconds, that honestly, anyone who knows what a "frequency" is should at least have had an understanding of what the technique was about, whether or not they understood how or why it worked or why it would be useful.

Must've missed it...

Anyway, hopefully he learned a lesson or 2 about how not to post on the internet and will do better next time. And if he had just posted this thread first instead of trying to be a carnival barker, he most likely would have received primarily thanks, additional suggestions, perhaps some minor critique, but likely very little criticism or attack of his approach.

In your opinion...

If he hadn't done the whole infomercial routine and refused to divulge any detail whatsoever (and also not said silly things like "eq not tone"), nobody would have batted an eye. But he chose to present his "technique" as some amazing new breakthrough, and wouldnt even hint at what it was, despite posting again and again saying he "didnt have time" to explain it, even in summary. I mean, he must have spent over an hour posting that he didn't have time to type up an explanation of a 5 minute technique.

Thanks for the edu-ma-cation on impatience. It's been enlightening...

 

[scubaduba]

Hey all—

Let's keep it civil and on topic please.

 

[WillieB]

@WillieB

Mesa WD800 has 3 sweepable mids. Empress ParaEQ or Tech21 QStrip are other options.

Thanks Wasnex!

I switched from an empress para eq to a whirlwind 10 eq.
I needed to cut all 20hz some of 40, and boost 80, & 150.
Just couldn't do that with most parametric equalizer,

Maybe using an HPF instead of a graphic eq ....... I haven't found one that I like
or will do what I want it to do.

Bill

 

[Drop1]

Thanks Wasnex!

I switched from an empress para eq to a whirlwind 10 eq.
I needed to cut all 20hz some of 40, and boost 80, & 150.
Just couldn't do that with most parametric equalizer,

Maybe using an HPF instead of a graphic eq ....... I haven't found one that I like
or will do what I want it to do.

Bill

I would love a good truly parametric 5 band eq with fully adjustable frequency and Q and shelf options.
I don't think anyone has ever made one.

 

[WillieB]

I would love a good truly parametric 5 band eq with fully adjustable frequency and Q and shelf options.
I don't think anyone has ever made one.

Agreed.

 

[Wasnex]

I would love a good truly parametric 5 band eq with fully adjustable frequency and Q and shelf options.
I don't think anyone has ever made one.

I am not aware of any pedals that meet all of these requirements. But there are racks that have more bands of parametric EQ.

 

[Wasnex]

Thanks Wasnex!

I switched from an empress para eq to a whirlwind 10 eq.
I needed to cut all 20hz some of 40, and boost 80, & 150.
Just couldn't do that with most parametric equalizer,

Maybe using an HPF instead of a graphic eq ....... I haven't found one that I like
or will do what I want it to do.

Bill

I used to use one of these (long ago).
Invalid Link Removed

The only other musician I know of who used one was Stanley Clarke, and he inspired me. The used to be common in FM radio mastering.

I also ran a Rane 31 band graphic in the Effects Loop of an SWR Redhead that used for a couple of years.

 

[Boundary Effect]

I would love a good truly parametric 5 band eq with fully adjustable frequency and Q and shelf options.
I don't think anyone has ever made one.

Not a pedal, but... [Invalid or Expired Link Removed]. Good box.

 

[countrybass]

Thanks Drop1!
I’ll try it.
So, if I understand correctly, play the E note
(12th fret on the low E string) and work my way down
half step at a time?

If I hear it, first move the amp?
As in move it how or where?
Like the other side of the stage,or more like tilting it in
another direction? ( I usually have it pointed straight ahead).

If that doesn’t work, then move myself?
Am I understanding correct?
Again should I move to another side of the stage and leave
the amp in place, or are we talking me just taking a few feet
left or right?

Then I try the eq?
I have a Thunderfunk head that has semi parametric bands
(can adjust boost or cut and frequency, but not width)

Thanks for your time and help.
Hope I don’t come off as being a smart ass,
I’m just confused.
Will this work for stringbass as well as bass guitar?

 

[Omega Monkey]

For moving, you would want to move it in relation to it's distance to the walls primarily. But I would just start out trying to be at least 5 feet or so from any wall if possible, as long as you actually have enough cab to do the job. The further from the walls, the more you'll just get the cab sound without being added to by the reflections from the walls.

For the EQ, you play each note on the bass chromatically, starting from the bottom, listening for anything that's amiss. If a particular note jumps out above the rest, you look up the frequency, and then try to cut right at that frequency until the note sits evenly with the others around it. With a parametric EQ that presumably isn't graduated (ie marked along the travel of the knob so now what frequency is being affected, sometimes you might get the top and bottom of the range, but that's usually it), you would basically just keep playing that problem note, with either a moderate boost or cut on the appropriate band, sweeping the frequency until that boost or cut is the most accentuated.

And yes, this method can be applied to any instrument, but lower pitched instruments will probably have more drastic effects from the room usually that you might want to compensate for with this.

 

[terlewine]

Thanks very much for posting this, Drop1!
Two questions I'm puzzling over:

Why is it better to think of open E as E2?

What about the same frequency E sounding very different depending on which string/fret is producing it (1st string/12th fret vs. 2nd string/7th fret vs. 3rd string/2nd fret)? This seems to be the case on every bass I've ever owned.

 

[Drop1]

Thanks very much for posting this, Drop1!
Two questions I'm puzzling over:

Why is it better to think of open E as E2?

What about the same frequency E sounding very different depending on which string/fret is producing it (1st string/12th fret vs. 2nd string/7th fret vs. 3rd string/2nd fret)? This seems to be the case on every bass I've ever owned.

Using open e as e2 works better for us. Most Eqs that we use dont have a sweepable low or bass. We start getting better control in the low mids. If you have a sweepable low knob or a good graphic eq that has control that low, feel free to utilize e1.

As to other notes sounding different it really diesnt matter. By just balancing the e string, you will automatically put balance into the lower frequencies of other strings. Our strings are not all the same size so they will always sound a bit different. As long as note to note consisticy sounds good, so should string to string balance.

 

[terlewine]

I haven’t had a chance to try this yet, but am looking forward to it. It sounds really helpful.

 

[Wasnex]

Thanks very much for posting this, Drop1!
Two questions I'm puzzling over:

Why is it better to think of open E as E2?

What about the same frequency E sounding very different depending on which string/fret is producing it (1st string/12th fret vs. 2nd string/7th fret vs. 3rd string/2nd fret)? This seems to be the case on every bass I've ever owned.

When you play the same note on different strings, the tone changes because the balance of the harmonics are not the same. This gets into the mechanics of how how strings vibrate and pickup position in relation to stopped string length. Here are a couple of relevant webpages.
Response Effects of Guitar Pickup Position and Width
Bass frequency/waterfall plots: what they mean to rigs

As far as whether you should focus on E1 or E2? You should focus on whichever has the biggest problem when you play in half steps up and down the neck of the instrument. Often if you have a resonance at one frequency, you will have a lesser resonance at the other, but this is not always the case.

As an example, when I tune a PA for feedback, I often wind up dipping octaves, fifths, and possibly thirds of the offending frequency. In other words the feedback is reinforced by the overtone series. Also it's fairly common to improve gain before feedback if you put a little dip at subharmonic frequencies, one or two octaves below the problem frequency. There are however, no hard a fast rules on this. Each room is different so you have to experiment to get the best performance.

Something to consider is electric basses typically do not produce a strong fundamental. Bass frequency/waterfall plots: what they mean to rigs So unless there is very significant problem at E1, adjusting E2 will probably make a more noticeable difference. IMHO much of the fat in the bass's tone is 60hz and higher. Keep in mind 61.7hz is B1, the first overtone of the open B string.

 

[Omega Monkey]

I wouldn't listen to him on the "open E as 82 Hz" thing. That's going to make it more confusing. Just know that any note you play is going to have overtones/harmonics/partials at every octave above that note. So if you don't have a precise way to control what's happening at 41 Hz, you might try 82 or 165, which should still help somewhat. Or you may just have to use your "bass" control (which is usually a low shelving control, which either cuts or boosts everything below a certain frequency), which would be a less surgical approach but may end up working just fine, especially in conjunction with intelligent adjustments at higher harmonics of the problem frequency (ie higher octaves, like 82, 165, etc...).