HPF vs Parametric EQ for controlling rumble w/Streamliner and Thunderchild?

[babebambi]

OK, found a new and unexpected way to control the low end and overall balance of the Thunderchild/Streamliner combo last night, with no HPF or EQ involved:

I just flopped the cab over on its side and tilted it back a little, using a spare DI box. I don't know what that does to floor coupling, but I got a tight, articulate tone with minimal EQ. I kept the ParaEq on for a very slight bass rolloff and a tiny bit of push at 600 and 2.5K, but it actually sounded fine with the pedal bypassed.

I think that part of the improvement might have been due to orienting the horn sideways, since that makes it a 90 by 60 horn, instead of 60 by 90. But I don't think that would fully explain what happened in the bass and low mids...

I think it's just frequency masking, you are hearing a lot more mid.
What you did should not affect boundary effect at the low end
Have you try bringing the cab all the way up to head level, in its normal orientation?

Back when you say you are clipping the para EQ with high gain
Have you try turning the volume down, then up the master at the end of the chain?

 

[steve_rolfeca]

What didn't the 9.2 do for ya? Mine is coming in soon & I've had the 12.0 & liked it...especially with warmer cabs.
I love the tube & FET channel so the diversity is there.. but what tone couldn't you get? The Streamliner cushy upper mids?

Interesting way to describe it, but yeah, that was one aspect- that Streamliner "heft" that rounds out the top two strings, and seems to be a combination of dynamic feel and EQ. I could make the Streamliner sound somewhat "Max-ish", but I couldn't get the SMax to do a convincing Streamliner imitation.

The treble balance was another aspect. Compared to the Streamliner, the SMax sounded like it had a bit of a blanket on the top end until I boosted the treble, and then it quickly got edgy sounding. I like the way the SL900 can carry a lot of treble information yet still sound so smooth, kind of like a good tube mic preamp.

Ease of use was also an issue with the SMax. It reminded me of getting lost in menu hell with my POD XT Live. With the extra EQ, adjustable contour presets, FET and tube channel mixing, etc, it always felt like my target tone was just around the corner, but I never actually got there.

The fixed-Q, active tone controls only added to my frustration. To my ear, the semi-parametric bands on the SMax still suffer from the same "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" effect as the Streamliner, where I find myself wishing I could carve out a narrower notch or boost a broader range. Plus, there's the sound of the tone controls themselves. The SMax reminds me of an older Mackie mixer, with tons of cut and boost, but a narrow Q that gets a bit odd-sounding at extreme settings. Meanwhile, the broad-bandwidth passive bass and treble controls on the Streamliner sound more like the "British EQ" upgrades that are showing up on recent consoles.

For me, the combination of the Streamliner's easy-to-use, broadband tone controls and the adjustable-Q parametric filtering on my Empress pedal, feels much more intuitive than the SMax, and provides more control than either amp.

Make no mistake, these are subtle and extremely subjective issues. I still think the Shuttle Max is an amazing amp. The power stage in the 12.0 is particularly interesting, since it can effortlessly drive a pair of 4 ohm cabs. However, I don't need the outrageous flexibility of the SMax, and in the end, I felt like the SMax was a 7 out of 10, while the Streamliner alone was an 8 or 9. The Streamliner/Empress combo was a 10 out of 10, maybe even an 11.

The final deal-killer for me, was the form factor. Since I would end up wanting the ParaEQ with either amp, why not go for the more compact Streamliner/Empress combo, which fits so nicely into a couple of my existing gig bags?

 

[steve_rolfeca]

I think it's just frequency masking, you are hearing a lot more mid.

Could be. But I didn't hear the same change in the low end when I tried simply squatting down to tweeter level, with the cab upright.

Have you try bringing the cab all the way up to head level, in its normal orientation?

Nope. I have a stand, which angles the cab back about 10 degrees, and raises it a couple of feet. Unfortunately I'm over 6' tall, so that's still not enough to unmask the horn when I stand too close to the cab. I would feel a little itchy about having my amp and cab on a narrow stand that reached all the way to my head height, and the placement of the crossover board makes it impossible to put a flush-mount pole socket on the bottom of the Thunderchild.

I have tried the sideways orientation of the cab with the TC on my little stand, but I didn't give it a really comprehensive tryout. First impressions were that it did give some improvement in midrange and treble clarity, but I don't remember noticing any impact on the low end.

Back when you say you are clipping the para EQ with high gain
Have you try turning the volume down, then up the master at the end of the chain?

Yep.

I only ran into problems when I was experimenting with overdrive. At least with my basses, I can get a certain amount of overdrive from the Gain knob alone, but if I really want to get into fuzz territory, I need to punch the gain button, and crank the Volume as well. At that point, the signal level is REALLY big, and I end up having to use the master as an attenuator. So much for keeping my levels low going into the effects loop...

It's not a problem for me personally, because within the range of volumes that I normally use, I don't get clipping. But I don't like overdriven bass sounds, and don't even use the gain button.

Of course, for anyone who is into overdrive, there's always the option of putting the ParaEq in front of the amp, instead of in the gain loop. That's where I've been using it lately.

 

[sunbeast]

The Channel volume control is pre-FX loop though isn't it? So if you are boosting with the Gain control you can just bring it right back down with the Volume control, and then use the Master as a Master. This worked fine for me when experimenting with the fDeck HPF in the FX loop of the Streamliner...

 

[agedhorse]

The Channel volume control is pre-FX loop though isn't it? So if you are boosting with the Gain control you can just bring it right back down with the Volume control, and then use the Master as a Master. This worked fine for me when experimenting with the fDeck HPF in the FX loop of the Streamliner...

This is correct, and why the channel volume control is included on all of our amps. It allows for better gain stage control and signal levels in the effects loop under high gain conditions. It's possible to get up to +18dBu (IIRC) at the effects loop under some high gain high volume control conditions. No problem for a rack mount pro piece like a DBX-160, but not going to work well with a pedal unless the channel volume is decreased and the master increased to compensate.

 

[steve_rolfeca]

The Channel volume control is pre-FX loop though isn't it? So if you are boosting with the Gain control you can just bring it right back down with the Volume control, and then use the Master as a Master. This worked fine for me when experimenting with the fDeck HPF in the FX loop of the Streamliner...

As agedhorse confirmed, you can attenuate the level going out to the loop with the Volume control.

But there's more distortion hiding behind the Volume control. At least with my basses, if I want all the fuzz that the Streamliner is capable of, I have to crank the Volume as well as the Gain. As agedhorse also condirmed, that's the situation where you get really big levels, and as I found out for myself, you start clipping tnon-rack gear (like the ParaEQ, or fDeck's HPF, for that matter).

 

[agedhorse]

As agedhorse confirmed, you can attenuate the level going out to the loop with the Volume control.

But there's more distortion hiding behind the Volume control. At least with my basses, if I want all the fuzz that the Streamliner is capable of, I have to crank the Volume as well as the Gain. As agedhorse also condirmed, that's the situation where you get really big levels, and as I found out for myself, you start clipping tnon-rack gear (like the ParaEQ, or fDeck's HPF, for that matter).

This is also true, the distortion mechanisms are quite complex and happen throughout the amp.

With a pro line level device in the effects loop, the leves get preserved and it won't alter the distortion characteristics (other than the processing itself) but if you have to attenuate a lower signal level product, there will be a difference in distortion charactersitics. It may be desireable, maybe not but there is a difference.

 

[sunbeast]

I personally wasn't all that fond of the balls-to-the-wall overdrive that even just cranking the Gain control could give me, so for my purposes I was able to get plenty of drive for my uses and control it well enough using the first Volume control, which did not audibly clip the fDeck HPF. I never really considered overdriving the later gain stages in that amp, but I certainly did seem to notice a difference in tonal characteristics depending on how hot the pre signal was vs the Master (independent of overdrive), so that does make sense.

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

Just received an Empress ParaEQ. I'm using it "in line" and it does, indeed, help "lighten" the heaviness of the Streamliner in a good, musical way.

How do you use the ParaEQ with the Streamliner effects loop? Cable the ParaEQ "out" to the SL effects receive, and the SL send to the ParaEQ "in" jack? Will standard mixer patch cables work? Kinda new at this.....

 

[steve_rolfeca]

Just received an Empress ParaEQ. I'm using it "in line" and it does, indeed, help "lighten" the heaviness of the Streamliner in a good, musical way.

How do you use the ParaEQ with the Streamliner effects loop? Cable the ParaEQ "out" to the SL effects receive, and the SL send to the ParaEQ "in" jack? Will standard mixer patch cables work? Kinda new at this.....

Exactly. Regular guitar cables are fine- short ones if you want it to sit on top of your amp, or longer ones if you want it foot-switchable, on the floor.

I'm actually using mine in front of the amp for gigs without PA support, because it saves a cable and seems to work equally well.

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

I'm really digging the ParaEQ. Here's a dumb question: if I set the LF knob to about 40 hz and cut that signal, is the result a pseudo high-pass filter? I realize it wouldn't cut all the lows below that point unless I twisted the gain knob all the way to the left. But even with a mild cut to 11:00, the tonal difference through my 12/6 is remarkable.

 

[steve_rolfeca]

I'm really digging the ParaEQ. Here's a dumb question: if I set the LF knob to about 40 hz and cut that signal, is the result a pseudo high-pass filter?

Yes....

...and no.

An HPF would be a shelving filter with a steep slope. The filters in the Empress are all bandpass, and the slopes are pretty mild in comparison to a real HPF, even on the narrowest setting.

Still, it's serving a similar function in this situation. Try cranking the frequency control all the way down, and then play with the width switch, to see what effects you can come up with.

Remember that with the width switch on the medium setting, a 6dB cut at 40Hz will have a smaller, but noticeable effect all the way up to around 100Hz, and down to well below 20Hz.

I realize it wouldn't cut all the lows below that point unless I twisted the gain knob all the way to the left. But even with a mild cut to 11:00, the tonal difference through my 12/6 is remarkable.

The Empress is pretty sensitive. Small cuts and boosts can be surprisingly effective.

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

Thanks. Oops, I meant to say "high pass filter." But you knew what I meant.

 

[steve_rolfeca]

I was feeling so generous, I even continued your error! Just edited my response, so anyone reading the thread will know what we were talking about.

 

[eeyorebass]

Thumpinator's slope is too shallow for serious bass boosting. Probably good for the casual 4-string user. Not my first choice for 5-stringers.

rpsands, I may be misunderstanding you. How is the slope on the micro-thump too shallow for bass boosting? Isn't it supposed to cut bass? And, since it starts rolling off at 30hz, how is it not suited for 5 strings? (low B being about 32hz if I remember correctly).

For an in-line thing I suggest looking at a pedal format HPF. Putnam can do a nice one to your specs (35hz 24db/octave butterworth!)

Also, who is Putnam? I've been looking at the Micro-Thump as an HPF/Buffer for my pedal board, so I'd be very interested to know about other makers/options.

Thanks. I find these sorts of discussions fascinating as well as useful.

 

[rpsands]

The thumpinator's slope is too shallow to allow you to crank up the bass knob and still be safe. It looks around 12db/octave.

Mike Putnam - P u t n a m G u i t a r s - Custom guitars mods amps pedals effects speakers

 

[KJung]

Can't figure out why you would need a high pass filter on a Genz head. Beautiful high passing built in. The most controlled low end of any amps I've owned.

Big low end, no subharmonics or excessive cone movement

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

Can't figure out why you would need a high pass filter on a Genz head. Beautiful high passing built in. The most controlled low end of any amps I've owned.

Big low end, no subharmonics or excessive cone movement

Depends on the room. In my small studio, for instance, the ParaEQ allows me to clarify the tone by slightly removing the "heaviness" though my 12/6. It's subtle but pleasing to me. That amp & cab can be overbearing. It's especially true with my 15/6. I wasn't sure before trying the ParaEQ, but am a believer now that I've experimented with settings. Also, tightening up the tone can give the Streamliner a slightly more modern tube feel, which can be good depending on tonal goals.

 

[KJung]

Depends on the room. In my small studio, for instance, the ParaEQ allows me to clarify the tone by slightly removing the "heaviness" though my 12/6. It's subtle but pleasing to me. That amp & cab can be overbearing. It's especially true with my 15/6. I wasn't sure before trying the ParaEQ, but am a believer now that I've experimented with settings. Also, tightening up the tone can give the Streamliner a slightly more modern tube feel, which can be good depending on tonal goals.

My guess those issues are well above the frequencies impacted by a high pass filter. I typically deal with those issues by just dialing back the bass a smidge, and altering right hand technique a bit.

I do agree that if you want the Streamliner to kind of 'not sound like a Streamliner', an external EQ can be helpful.

 

[steve_rolfeca]

Can't figure out why you would need a high pass filter on a Genz head. Beautiful high passing built in. The most controlled low end of any amps I've owned.

Big low end, no subharmonics or excessive cone movement

Totally agree.

During my early attempts at trying to get a better low B, I had a rack setup that measured flat down to around 10Hz, and a huge cab/processor combo that was flat down to about 32Hz, at least on paper.

At low volume levels, the open B felt and sounded pretty awe-inspiring, but it was fart city the moment I tried to keep up with a drummer. In comparison to that, I can't get over the SL900's ability to lay down such a big, plush-feeling low end without excessive cone movement.

I think that Ukiah Bass's issue (and mine), is further up into the bass and low mids, and it's related to the interaction of room acoustics, cab behavior and the Streamliner's midbass hump. EDIT: Having recently tried a 15/6/1 at the Toronto GTG, I can see why he'd want to trim the bass back a bit in some situations...

On a scope, you can see the Streamliner's steep HPF sloping away rapidly below about 39Hz. But just above that, there's a broad midbass hump, peaking at about 200Hz. Because the tone controls are so interactive, it's hard to tame the midbass without neutering the low end.

That's where an external EQ comes in handy.