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.
Peavey MiniMega 1000
- Thread starter Stev187
- Start date
I don't see how you could. Geqs are much more finite in their control. They just aren't the flavor if the month atm
A studio engineer taught me the magic of Paras and its been an obsession ever since.
The whole idea of: "things have to get worse to get better."
Finding the most annoying points and precisely cutting them was so very Zen to me.
Maybe the wine is talking....
The whole idea of: "things have to get worse to get better."
Finding the most annoying points and precisely cutting them was so very Zen to me.
Maybe the wine is talking....
I don't see how that can be true. Graphics allow you to control only one of the three parameters completely, namely gain. You have only partial control over another parameter, frequency. And you have no control over 'q' factor. In a fully parametric system you have complete control over all three. The MiniMega has two semi-parametric eq bands IIRC. So you don't get to set the 'q'.
Funny, though I find parametric to be the more elegant weapon...
I'm a structural engineer, so the more "graphic" something can be, the better. I don't visualize EQ curves very well at this point in my life, so its super easy to have it literally laid out in front of me via graphic EQ. I start flat, play a little, cut/boost one EQ point at a time to figure out which ones I like/dislike, and I'm done. I can see how parametric would be super useful for a person like myself, but it would need two features in order for me to utilize it.
1. It would need a EQ curve visually showing me where the center frequency, gain, and width are.
2. I would need more than one point to work with.
Those two features may be tough to accomplish, but for a person like myself, its the only way parametric would have a hope of triumphing over the more basic graphic EQ setup.
I was cooking with it and things got out of hand.Did your wife drink all your beer or something?
Not going to lie.... there are nights I hover over pans while I deglaze them.
Exactly that.....except built into the amplifier....
I know......
But I've never seen that built in to a head that utilizes parametric. Is one supposed to just visualize that graph by themselves while turning knobs?
No, one is supposed to audibly detect changes via the Magic of hearing.
I get it. I really do, but having a graphic representation helps me understand (better) how to make the necessary changes and quantify what I'm hearing. Its just a preference and a limitation of my own brain.
No worries amigo, whatever it takes to get you to hear what makes you happy.
Passinwind
I know nothing.
- Dec 3, 2003
- 23,066
- 45,998
- Disclosures
- Designer/Toaster Tech @ Passinwind Electronics
Since you're an engineer, you might want to read some of Rane's notes on how different actual GEQ response curves can be from unit to unit at any given slider settings. Here's one in the series:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
That doesn't even broach the many possible interactivities with "regular" tone controls in the head and/or bass. But as always, the bottom line is using whatever tools work for you, and hopefully make you smile.
I haven't seen that, actually. Thanks for postingHave you seen this guy yet?
I may not like geqs but that's a sexy looking amp .
Any idea what the sound would compare to? I'm trying for a sound that's similar to my HA3500. Someone mentioned in this or another thread that the Carvin heads are kinda Hartke-ish. I definitely know that I prefer my HA3500 over my SVT-3 Pro.
