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.
HPF vs Parametric EQ for controlling rumble w/Streamliner and Thunderchild?
- Thread starter steve_rolfeca
- Start date
I think I might be in the same boat- before getting my Streamliner I had been (and still am) playing a Mesa Walkabout for a couple years happily. I've been using the semi-paraEQ on that to cut at around 30-40hz for most of that time, and it was trying to use the Streamliner without that option that really showed me how important it was for my sound! I have since tried dialing out that cut on my Walkabout just to compare the amps and it sounds boomy as well. Now if only Mesa would just make a 900 watt Walkabout all this experimentation would be unnecessary...
- Apr 3, 2003
- 35,515
- 19,944
- Disclosures
- Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
I've been beating them up about this for some time now, but I do think that it's on their radar (just not a top priority at the moment - they have two new tube heads to get out, first). In the meantime, the Titan V-12 is probably the closest thing I have heard to a more powerful WalkAbout.
FYI, the bass control on the Streamliner is probably the best in the business. Amazing mix of perfect hi passing (no cone overextension...ever) and a big round tone with massive headroom that is never boomy (unless you have a boomy cab). And, the Q of that control (or the shelving design... not quite sure of the exact design of that control... unique in the industry to my ear) results in a very powerful control to roll off some of the bottom without ever sounding thin. Pretty amazing.
The low end of the Mesa heads is much less controlled, and for me, alway took a lot of knob turning to make it optimally punchy and deep at the same time. I attribute this to poor (or no) hi passing, resulting in a lot of mushy, deep low end bleeding into your tone (which you can control a bit with your technique of dialing out the lowest freq's on the low mid semi parametric). You definitely can get there, but it takes a bit more work IMO and IME. And, of course, the Walkabout will start to compress down there when pushed.
However, there is no way to dial in the brightness in the upper mids with the Streamliner that you hear in the Walkabout (even with the semi-parametric midrange of the Streamliner, which has a very wide Q). So, if you like that high ratio of upper mids to bass, the Walkabout (and even more extremely, the Carbine) will make you quite a bit more happy than the fat, smooth Streamliner.
The EQ on the Streamliner is highly interactive (even more than the Mesa tone circuit), and it is amazing how just a slight cut of the bass control, and a more significant boost of the midrange control can work together to get you to a very controlled, big, fat, but still articulate tone with most cabs. However, you won't ever get the bright grind of some other heads with the Streamliner... that isn't its thing.
One the 'more powerful Walkabout', according to Mesa's website, they believe they have done that with the MPulse600. They have not, and my understanding is there is no plan to replace the MPulse600 with a head that sounds more like the Walkabout. Interestingly (having owned the Walkabout and the MPulse600, and now the Streamliner), the Streamliner is a bit like a louder and 'better behaved down low' MPulse600.
I always listed the Walkabout and the MPulse600 as the two best options of those who want as close to an 'all tube tone' as they can get with a lightweight amp... with the Walkabout being very harmonically rich in the mids, and quite bright and grindy if you want it to be, and the MPulse600 being much fatter, cleaner, smoother, wider, and 'big' sounding. I still feel the same way about the Walkabout, the Streamliner eats the MPulse600 for lunch, and will give you a 'similar but better' (IMO) big, wide, fat, all tube tone in that 'clean, smooth and wide' tone universe. Of course, the Orange micro also also a player in a different way.
As I have mentioned many times, in my experience with the Streamliner I was not able to tighten the bass enough for my taste using just the controls on the amp. This is the same reason I got rid of my M6 (though an M9 may be in my future). With both of these amps I was playing almost entirely through my NV610, which in my experience has a nicely rolled off low end that makes it extremely punchy with almost any amp (including the M6, Walkabout, and all of my past all tube amps)- I found the voicing of the Streamliner to actually seem to fight this naturally punchy tendency of the NV610 IME. I could "punch it back up" with fairly extreme EQ, but was just never wowed at higher volumes because of that softness in the lows. Like I said- I could dial in a similar softness with my Walkabout, but couldn't seem to dial it out with the Streamliner enough to really fall in love with it. For what it's worth, I would not call the Walkabout tone "mushy" by any means- it's all punch with my cab until you hit the end of its headroom!
It really could just be a matter of being a strongly voiced amp voiced for something other than what I was looking for, and I really liked my time with the Streamliner, its just not for me!
It really could just be a matter of being a strongly voiced amp voiced for something other than what I was looking for, and I really liked my time with the Streamliner, its just not for me!
+1 on the M6 being IMO quite problematic with many cabs down low. And +1 that the Streamliner with a sealed 610 cab would give you a wider, smoother tone than many who choose a cab like that would want... as you say, it 'is what it is'.
If you dig that '610 punchy grind with signficant low end roll-off', both the Walkabout or the BB750 would be pretty first rate for that sort of deal!
- Apr 3, 2003
- 35,515
- 19,944
- Disclosures
- Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
Actually, they have been considering this. I have discussed this topic with Randy, Dough, and Dan on several occassions, and Dan commented on it in my interview back in issue #5.
Talked to a couple of dealers recently and from what I undestand now there is nothing in the works. Who knows though. For me, if they would just put speakons on that thing, and a simple switch for pre EQ DI option, they would be good for another 5 years on the market!
- Apr 3, 2003
- 35,515
- 19,944
- Disclosures
- Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
I am not surprised that the dealers would not know this.
Well, if anyone would know, I think that it would be Randall and Dan!
Fixed!
That would work!To be fair to Mesa, my guess is that the MPulse600 was an attempt to make a higher powered Walkabout (as described by them on their website). My guess is, it would be pretty difficult to keep the same tonality of the Walkabout while greatly changing the power section. All this stuff works together.
To be fair to Mesa, my guess is that the MPulse600 was an attempt to make a higher powered Walkabout (as described by them on their website). My guess is, it would be pretty difficult to keep the same tonality of the Walkabout while greatly changing the power section. All this stuff works together.
It is possible- certainly the headroom will increase the low end delivery abilities significantly. However, several TB'ers have said that they can more or less get the Walkabout baseline tone from both the BB750 and Titan V12. It seems for some reason when they did make a larger head with the Walkabout "mojo", they also decided to twist around the whole preamp section into a new beast (ie- removing the semi-para eq and adding the active mid control)- what I want though is the same useability of the WA and MP600 (simple basic EQ section + 3-4 semi-parametrics) along with the driver tube magic of the Walkabout!
Anyway- I hate to make this another "Walkabout with more power" thread so I'm done with my WA ramblings!
I owned the BB750 for a very short time when I owned my Walkabout. I hear VERY little similarity between those two. I do understand that the Titon was a bit closer to the Walkabout than the MPulse600, but that is no longer on the market from what I understand, and of course, was huge.
My Empress ParaEQ arrived while I was at a gig yesterday afternoon. Fired it up last night, and was pretty pleased. Solidly made, logical control layout, very quiet, good control of overall gain via the boost control and 3-position pad switch.
Having switches for filter bandwidth instead of rotary controls sacrifices some flexibility, but makes setup very quick and easy. Set it to narrow bandwidth, find your frequency, then a couple more clicks and a few tweaks of the gain knob to see which bandwidth gives the best result.
The low band worked fine for controlling the port resonance (or whatever it is) that has been bugging me down around 50-60Hz, leaving two spare bands for finding new tones.
In the end, I got the best tones with the pedal in the effects loop, rather than out front. That may have simply been the way I was using it, though- there's a lot of flexibility with this setup. I also found that it worked best when used in combination with plugging or unplugging one port on the Thunderchild. Playing with various cuts and boosts in combination with the Streamliner's onboard EQ, I was able to dial up an impressive range of sounds, from a tight, burpy bridge p'up funk tone to a pretty good imitation of a Markbass LMII with the VPF engaged. It easily drove the Streamliner to full power when I used it as a preamp, bypassing the front end of the amp and giving me another flavour altogether.
One oddity: with the amp racked up fairly high, sitting the ParaEQ on top of the Streamliner induced a mild hum. This was surprising, as I've sat a couple of different mixers on top of the amp for my in-ear setup, without any noise issues at all.
Summary: the overall sound quality and noise levels were very impressive for a pedal. I would still have preferred the extra flexibility of a good rack EQ w/separate HPF and LPF sections and rotary Q controls, but for a quick grab-and-go tone shaper, the ParaEQ looks like it will work out just great.
I'll post another update after my acoustic set this afternoon.
Having switches for filter bandwidth instead of rotary controls sacrifices some flexibility, but makes setup very quick and easy. Set it to narrow bandwidth, find your frequency, then a couple more clicks and a few tweaks of the gain knob to see which bandwidth gives the best result.
The low band worked fine for controlling the port resonance (or whatever it is) that has been bugging me down around 50-60Hz, leaving two spare bands for finding new tones.
In the end, I got the best tones with the pedal in the effects loop, rather than out front. That may have simply been the way I was using it, though- there's a lot of flexibility with this setup. I also found that it worked best when used in combination with plugging or unplugging one port on the Thunderchild. Playing with various cuts and boosts in combination with the Streamliner's onboard EQ, I was able to dial up an impressive range of sounds, from a tight, burpy bridge p'up funk tone to a pretty good imitation of a Markbass LMII with the VPF engaged. It easily drove the Streamliner to full power when I used it as a preamp, bypassing the front end of the amp and giving me another flavour altogether.
One oddity: with the amp racked up fairly high, sitting the ParaEQ on top of the Streamliner induced a mild hum. This was surprising, as I've sat a couple of different mixers on top of the amp for my in-ear setup, without any noise issues at all.
Summary: the overall sound quality and noise levels were very impressive for a pedal. I would still have preferred the extra flexibility of a good rack EQ w/separate HPF and LPF sections and rotary Q controls, but for a quick grab-and-go tone shaper, the ParaEQ looks like it will work out just great.
I'll post another update after my acoustic set this afternoon.
Looking forward to hearing more. I like the idea of a couple of bands of Parametric EQ to use with my passive basses and the SM900. My Fishman Platinum Pro unit can do most of this work, but I am curious about having a tight control available to punch up the low mids or cut the string gank from my Jazz.
Yeah, baby...
At my acoustic set this afternoon, I wanted a little more 600hz. This would normally be a problem, as I use the Streamliner's bass AND mid controls (@220Hz) on this gig, to cut the bottom end for a light, woody tone.
With the ParaEQ, no problem. For the guitar & bass tunes, I used a small cut at around 60Hz on band one, a medium-Q boost at 600Hz on band two, and left the upper mids and treble alone.
When Marcel switched to piano, I reached back and added a wide-band boost centred at about 3K, for a little extra zing. Once again, this would have been impossible without external EQ, because the SL900's mid control was still in use, and set to 10 o'clock @220Hz.
These cuts and boosts were pretty subtle, so we're not talking about earth-changing differences. I was still getting a warm, rounded tone that to my ears, that was identifiably "Streamliner".
...Except that I got an interesting compliment from Marcel: he said that I was more supportive than in our previous gigs together. When I quizzed him about it, he said that I was more forward in the mix without being unpleasantly loud, and it gave him a stronger foundation to work off.
This is the kind of compliment that means something to me, as Marcel isn't gear conscious, and didn't know about the Empress.
At my acoustic set this afternoon, I wanted a little more 600hz. This would normally be a problem, as I use the Streamliner's bass AND mid controls (@220Hz) on this gig, to cut the bottom end for a light, woody tone.
With the ParaEQ, no problem. For the guitar & bass tunes, I used a small cut at around 60Hz on band one, a medium-Q boost at 600Hz on band two, and left the upper mids and treble alone.
When Marcel switched to piano, I reached back and added a wide-band boost centred at about 3K, for a little extra zing. Once again, this would have been impossible without external EQ, because the SL900's mid control was still in use, and set to 10 o'clock @220Hz.
These cuts and boosts were pretty subtle, so we're not talking about earth-changing differences. I was still getting a warm, rounded tone that to my ears, that was identifiably "Streamliner".
...Except that I got an interesting compliment from Marcel: he said that I was more supportive than in our previous gigs together. When I quizzed him about it, he said that I was more forward in the mix without being unpleasantly loud, and it gave him a stronger foundation to work off.
This is the kind of compliment that means something to me, as Marcel isn't gear conscious, and didn't know about the Empress.
Steve, thank you very much for sharing your experience with Empress EQ and Streamliner!
If you don't mind, I would like to ask you, do you power it with 9V or do you supply higher voltage? What about pedal headroom when used in STL FX loop (cca +4dBu full). It is necessary to apply its input pad? I'm asking, because I have experience, that only few instrument EQ pedals handle these levels without internal clipping during boosts.
Thank you
Michal
If you don't mind, I would like to ask you, do you power it with 9V or do you supply higher voltage? What about pedal headroom when used in STL FX loop (cca +4dBu full). It is necessary to apply its input pad? I'm asking, because I have experience, that only few instrument EQ pedals handle these levels without internal clipping during boosts.
Thank you
Michal
I can't speak for Steve's experience, but one cool part of the Streamliner (and other Genz amps) is that they have that extra Preamp Volume control before the FX loop. This means that no matter how high you set the Input Gain on the amp you can balance it out by lowering the secondary volume. You could feed the Para EQ a fairly low power signal and use the boost on the pedal to bring back the level if you wanted (not sure which gain stage would be inherently noisier- boosting with the amp's preamp or the pedal...).
Thank you Sunbeast,
i think it will work as you described (If it will be necessary). I don't have experience with Empress' EQ and forgot, that it have separate switch for boost. Without that if you bypass the EQ, volume level will be significantly dropped.
Cool.
EDIT.. Sorry i've read manual, and it seems, that bypass switch bybasses both boost and EQ. So it will work but with volume drop.. I hope, that it won't be necessary.
Michal
