A small issue but if i bump some sliders on my graphic in the middle of a song i can set them back pretty easily. Bumping a center freq knob with a lot of boost or cut however, is a bit more disastrous and harder to set back. But maybe thats just because I'm more familiar with a graphic.
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.
Graphic or Parametric eq?
- Thread starter zultimatez
- Start date
[QUOTE="Q";9392068]A small issue but if i bump some sliders on my graphic in the middle of a song i can set them back pretty easily. Bumping a center freq knob with a lot of boost or cut however, is a bit more disastrous and harder to set back. But maybe thats just because I'm more familiar with a graphic.[/QUOTE]
Once you remember where you want them, it's no big deal (after all, you have to remember which graphic bands were adjusted and how far). The main thing is being able to get rid of that one note that just overwhelms the room and screws the mix, and a fully parametric band is the only way to do that without wrecking your tone.
Once you remember where you want them, it's no big deal (after all, you have to remember which graphic bands were adjusted and how far). The main thing is being able to get rid of that one note that just overwhelms the room and screws the mix, and a fully parametric band is the only way to do that without wrecking your tone.
[QUOTE="Q";9392068]A small issue but if i bump some sliders on my graphic in the middle of a song i can set them back pretty easily. Bumping a center freq knob with a lot of boost or cut however, is a bit more disastrous and harder to set back. But maybe thats just because I'm more familiar with a graphic.[/QUOTE]
if you can turn knobs just by bumping them, you're bumping pretty hard, and you've got that EQ sitting someplace it shouldn't be!
also, with a name like "Q" how can you not prefer parametrics?
if you can turn knobs just by bumping them, you're bumping pretty hard, and you've got that EQ sitting someplace it shouldn't be!
also, with a name like "Q" how can you not prefer parametrics?
if you can turn knobs just by bumping them, you're bumping pretty hard, and you've got that EQ sitting someplace it shouldn't be!
also, with a name like "Q" how can you not prefer parametrics?
I prefer my amp to not need another EQ box to sound good. I hate adding things to my rig if I don't have to.
As for knobs, you don't need to bump a notch filter very far to screw things up. My point is, theyre touchier and some pots can be pretty loose.
And I actually do prefer parametrics in theory. But the list of not ridiculously priced amps with more than one band of FULL parametric EQ is fairly short methinks. I would need at least three bands to consider giving up on a graphic.
For what its worth I just got myself a Presonus EQ3B and all I can say is "wow"! For the price it is well worth it. It's probably not marketed as a bass eq for live performances, but if it sounds good why not? Well I'm so impressed with it that its out with the graphic EQ and in with the EQ3B.
[QUOTE="Q";9393818]I prefer my amp to not need another EQ box to sound good. I hate adding things to my rig if I don't have to.
As for knobs, you don't need to bump a notch filter very far to screw things up. My point is, theyre touchier and some pots can be pretty loose.
And I actually do prefer parametrics in theory. But the list of not ridiculously priced amps with more than one band of FULL parametric EQ is fairly short methinks. I would need at least three bands to consider giving up on a graphic.[/QUOTE]
+1 My goal is to always buy an amp that sounds good to me out of the box. Then I can use the EQ for what it IMO is meant for... to slightly tweak the inherent tone of the amp to remain relatively constant in a variety of rooms. I do find more advanced EQ useful for dealing with cabs voiced in a way that I don't like... but I tend to not buy those
For 90% of my gigs, I run my Markbass heads totally , completely neutral (which for these particular heads also translates to relatively flat in an absolute sense, as shown by quite a few 'on the scope' tests that have been posted). For the 10% of gigs that are either in very dry, small rooms or very large boomy rooms, a slight engagement of the contour filter (which widens the low end and top end and softens the mids) for the former situation, and a slight cut to the nicely voiced shelving bass control for the latter situation works perfect.
IMO, if someone is needing multiple bands of parametric EQ or huge graphics to 'get their tone', then they have purchased the wrong gear (which happens). Of course, with DB feedback and wolftones, things can get a little more complicated, and at least one notch EQ band, or a full parametric EQ band that can be set to notch is very useful.
As for knobs, you don't need to bump a notch filter very far to screw things up. My point is, theyre touchier and some pots can be pretty loose.
And I actually do prefer parametrics in theory. But the list of not ridiculously priced amps with more than one band of FULL parametric EQ is fairly short methinks. I would need at least three bands to consider giving up on a graphic.[/QUOTE]
+1 My goal is to always buy an amp that sounds good to me out of the box. Then I can use the EQ for what it IMO is meant for... to slightly tweak the inherent tone of the amp to remain relatively constant in a variety of rooms. I do find more advanced EQ useful for dealing with cabs voiced in a way that I don't like... but I tend to not buy those
For 90% of my gigs, I run my Markbass heads totally , completely neutral (which for these particular heads also translates to relatively flat in an absolute sense, as shown by quite a few 'on the scope' tests that have been posted). For the 10% of gigs that are either in very dry, small rooms or very large boomy rooms, a slight engagement of the contour filter (which widens the low end and top end and softens the mids) for the former situation, and a slight cut to the nicely voiced shelving bass control for the latter situation works perfect.
IMO, if someone is needing multiple bands of parametric EQ or huge graphics to 'get their tone', then they have purchased the wrong gear (which happens). Of course, with DB feedback and wolftones, things can get a little more complicated, and at least one notch EQ band, or a full parametric EQ band that can be set to notch is very useful.
+1 My goal is to always buy an amp that sounds good to me out of the box. Then I can use the EQ for what it IMO is meant for... to slightly tweak the inherent tone of the amp to remain relatively constant in a variety of rooms. I do find more advanced EQ useful for dealing with cabs voiced in a way that I don't like... but I tend to not buy those
For 90% of my gigs, I run my Markbass heads totally , completely neutral (which for these particular heads also translates to relatively flat in an absolute sense, as shown by quite a few 'on the scope' tests that have been posted). For the 10% of gigs that are either in very dry, small rooms or very large boomy rooms, a slight engagement of the contour filter (which widens the low end and top end and softens the mids) for the former situation, and a slight cut to the nicely voiced shelving bass control for the latter situation works perfect.
IMO, if someone is needing multiple bands of parametric EQ or huge graphics to 'get their tone', then they have purchased the wrong gear (which happens). Of course, with DB feedback and wolftones, things can get a little more complicated, and at least one notch EQ band, or a full parametric EQ band that can be set to notch is very useful.
I thought he said he had graphic EQ. Doesn't seem like the two of you agree on having an amp that sounds like you want out of the box. He talked about parametric with big boosts or cuts, you'd have to be doing similar big adjustments with graphic.
You and I take a similar approach to rigs... if it really needs tweaks to sound great... pass. For me that goes for amps, cabs and basses.
I thought he said he had graphic EQ. Doesn't seem like the two of you agree on having an amp that sounds like you want out of the box. He talked about parametric with big boosts or cuts, you'd have to be doing similar big adjustments with graphic.
You and I take a similar approach to rigs... if it really needs tweaks to sound great... pass. For me that goes for amps, cabs and basses.
Ah, misread the post a bit I guess.
Cool... I thought I had a reasonably good feel based on reading you here all these years.
I do think my amp should sound good out of the box that is, with whatever EQ it comes with. My issue was I don't want to have to add extra boxes to it and not: "Amps should always sound good with no EQ.<_<
[QUOTE="Q";9393818]I prefer my amp to not need another EQ box to sound good. I hate adding things to my rig if I don't have to.
And I actually do prefer parametrics in theory. But the list of not ridiculously priced amps with more than one band of FULL parametric EQ is fairly short methinks. I would need at least three bands to consider giving up on a graphic.[/QUOTE]
+1, and +1.
i didn't think we were talking about built-in EQ on bass amps here, but yeah, a head with a real parametric (at least two or three fully tweakable bands) is gonna be pricey. for that money, i'll just get something that sounds good without needing all that foolishness.
[QUOTE="Q";9393818]As for knobs, you don't need to bump a notch filter very far to screw things up. My point is, theyre touchier and some pots can be pretty loose.[/QUOTE]
i'm gonna quibble; a slider is way easier to bump out of place than a rotary pot. (but hey, people who keep stumbling into their amps shouldn't have all these controls up there anyway! i had a bass-playing friend who always said that when fisher-price or tonka made a bass amp, he'd buy it)
And I actually do prefer parametrics in theory. But the list of not ridiculously priced amps with more than one band of FULL parametric EQ is fairly short methinks. I would need at least three bands to consider giving up on a graphic.[/QUOTE]
+1, and +1.
i didn't think we were talking about built-in EQ on bass amps here, but yeah, a head with a real parametric (at least two or three fully tweakable bands) is gonna be pricey. for that money, i'll just get something that sounds good without needing all that foolishness.
[QUOTE="Q";9393818]As for knobs, you don't need to bump a notch filter very far to screw things up. My point is, theyre touchier and some pots can be pretty loose.[/QUOTE]
i'm gonna quibble; a slider is way easier to bump out of place than a rotary pot. (but hey, people who keep stumbling into their amps shouldn't have all these controls up there anyway! i had a bass-playing friend who always said that when fisher-price or tonka made a bass amp, he'd buy it
)
All 3 of my rackmount pre's have one para EQ band...okay, the Demeter has two...which is more than adequate for my needs. My Rane PE-15 is collecting dust at the moment. I normally embrace the "cut only" philosophy but not always. Case in point: my Yamaha PB-1's bass shelving (not sure of the freq.) can get a bit boomy / muddy and difficult to dial-out via the para EQ. Instead, I attenuate the bass by 2 db or so (doesn't take much) then dial in a 1-2 db boost @ 100 hz and adjust the bandwidth to taste. Really improves the low / low mid response.
Riis
Riis
For a number of years I ran a Furman PQ-3 as my preamp, straight to power amp. I still use that for a practice amp.
Parametric rules, much easier and faster to zero in on the problem, more flexibility. To my ear, they sound better than graphics. Graphics are usually "almost" at the right freq, "almost" the right bandwidth. Maybe they have phase issues, or the # of components required forces them to use cheaper components, but I've always found that graphics sound great... until you put them side by side with a good parametric.
Randy
Parametric rules, much easier and faster to zero in on the problem, more flexibility. To my ear, they sound better than graphics. Graphics are usually "almost" at the right freq, "almost" the right bandwidth. Maybe they have phase issues, or the # of components required forces them to use cheaper components, but I've always found that graphics sound great... until you put them side by side with a good parametric.
Randy
