• 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.

The Sushi Box FX Secret Society

#12,601
Sushi Box FX said:
So whatever I end up putting in it's going to be passive. An active EQ is typically a filter put into the feedback loop of an op-amp stage, and common-cathode tube stages don't have feedback loops. So basically you use the tube stages for gain and general frequency response control to push the EQ the way you want it. I'm still leaning towards the Baxandall, I'm undecided on the mids control. I gave it some more thought today, but Señora Sushi and I continue to be busy so no solid decision has been made.

View attachment 4727299
Click to expand...
I did that on my wedding day (before the ceremony, while the ladies got their hair did). I was fine in the air, but I'm not so good on boats and the wind sprayed my innards all over the captain.

Me (heaving): "Sorry about that, man!"

Capt. (grinning): "Happens all the time!"
 
  • Like
Reactions: S-Bigbottom, lomo and BentonvilleBass
#12,602
JackFawkes said:
Correct.
Space Heater + D.I. = Finally
Space Heater + Fender tone stack = Underground Accelerator
I'm not a circuit expert, but that would be ridiculously difficult. For one thing, even the potentiometer values are different in a TMB (Fender) tone stack vs a Baxandall tone stack.
If you'd like to learn more about how both of these control sets are wired/designed, check out Rob Robinette's page on TMB Tone Stacks (which goes into Baxandall at the bottom).

Jack
Click to expand...

I think the idea was to have two channels like a Smoke Signal with the Fender and Baxandall channels instead of clean and OD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rwkeating and macmanlou
#12,604
I just tried my HWUA, everything set flat and it sounds huge. It sounds even better through an amp than listening in headphones, but even through headphones its great. I'm going to play around with the UA in front and behind my Markbass Compressore to see where I like it best. I'll post a picture of my pedal board once I figure out where I want it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: S-Bigbottom, MTN.bass72, BentonvilleBass and 3 others
#12,605
Also, with the discussion of the lack of ability of the Fender tone stack to boost mids, I have one bass, the 1967 Epiphone Rivoli in my profile picture, that needs quite a bit of lows and low mids cut and high mids boosted to get rid of the mud from the neck position Mudbucker. If I am plugged into my GK 400RB IV, its EQ easily does it. Obviously the controls on a UA wont do that, and it was never intended to, which is why I use this $30 Amazon EX EQ7 pedal for when I am not going through my amp. Put one of these cheap EQ pedals like the EX EQ7 or the Stax Bass EQ or any one of the many cheap EQ pedals in front of a UA and you have all the tone shaping control you need and you still get the toobz flavor from the UA.

61nOVBDtnQL._AC_SL1000_.jpg
71vPbqh-6WL._AC_SL1500_.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kubicki Fan and lomo
#12,607
Derek Williams said:
Dr Wattson arrived, another great sounding pedal. I'm going to have to do a 3 way comparison between the Slampegg, UA, and Dr Wattson to determine what I like about each one, but for now I'm giving the Dr Wattson a run at being my main. And I've got an almost complete rainbow of rainbow's end pedals now!
Click to expand...

I would be very interested in your opinion of those three pedals back to back. I was torn between those three, especially between the Dr Wattson and the UA. I went with the UA and I might sell it and get one of the updated Smoke Signals, but I am sure I would have been happy with the DW also.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BentonvilleBass and Derek Williams
#12,608
Derek Williams said:
Dr Wattson arrived, another great sounding pedal. I'm going to have to do a 3 way comparison between the Slampegg, UA, and Dr Wattson to determine what I like about each one, but for now I'm giving the Dr Wattson a run at being my main. And I've got an almost complete rainbow of rainbow's end pedals now!

View attachment 4729876
View attachment 4729880
Click to expand...

Nice collection! Rainbow's End is a fantastic looking finish. I really hate that it will no longer be offered, I wanted to eventually get something in that finish :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: mmbass21 and Derek Williams
#12,609
CochinoBass said:
Also, with the discussion of the lack of ability of the Fender tone stack to boost mids...
Click to expand...

True you cannot boost the mids but you can increase the apparent level, which amounts to the same thing essentially by cutting bass and treble. In the case of the Epi, maybe not the treble so much...

Have you tried starting with the Mids all the way up, set the treble where you have mids plus bite and then start adding bass ?

The Fender /RcA stack isn't for eveyone for certain but, there are mids in there if you work at it. Enough to overcome a mudbucker ? Maybe, maybe not...

IME adding lower end pedals in the chain is a way to lose some of the sheen. If I were looking for a pedal to get more mids out I'd look for a good 1 band parametric or maybe a Nathan East...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JackFawkes
#12,610
I don't have any problem with the Fender tone stack, but a few pages back there was a discussion about the lack of ability to boost mids. I have always been able to get a tone I like easily from a Fender tone stack. I have never had a problem getting a good tone from a Baxandall either.

I have not tried the Rivoli yet with the UA, it really has no sheen to lose. LOL. It's the only bass I use the cheap EQ with and it makes it a usable bass, which it is not without the EQ.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JackFawkes
#12,612
4Mal said:
True you cannot boost the mids but you can increase the apparent level, which amounts to the same thing essentially by cutting bass and treble. In the case of the Epi, maybe not the treble so much...

Have you tried starting with the Mids all the way up, set the treble where you have mids plus bite and then start adding bass ?

The Fender /RcA stack isn't for eveyone for certain but, there are mids in there if you work at it. Enough to overcome a mudbucker ? Maybe, maybe not...
Click to expand...

This link is a useful tone stack simulator.......

TSC in the web

I really don't see (or hear) how mids can even be "relatively emphasized" with a simple Fender tone stack. The best I can do is bump everything below 100Hz with the Fender controls and subtract the lowest borborygmus with a HPF. With mids at 10 and bass/treble a 0, the Fender tone stack is pretty much as flat as Kansas (or Saskatchewan) ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kubicki Fan and Derek Williams
#12,613
JackFawkes said:
It's kinda pricy, but I've been really impressed by DEADfx's 532 EQ.
It includes adjustable HPF and LPF, Blend, and it's own FX Loop.

ComradeEQ1.jpg
Click to expand...

That looks like an exceptionally well-conceived box........a little wider than a Broughton HPF/LPF/mid thingy with more features (and actually current availability).......but ........I need another pedal like an Inuit needs ice cubes.......
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kubicki Fan
#12,614
lomo said:
This link is a useful tone stack simulator.......

TSC in the web

I really don't see (or hear) how mids can even be "relatively emphasized" with a simple Fender tone stack. The best I can do is bump everything below 100Hz with the Fender controls and subtract the lowest borborygmus with a HPF. With mids at 10 and bass/treble a 0, the Fender tone stack is pretty much as flat as Kansas (or Saskatchewan) ;)
Click to expand...

With the Fender / RCA stack, yep... if you don't have enough mids at flat, you have the wrong tone stack... I think a really good, single band parametric would be the thing but adding a pedal to solve the lack of mids in a tone stack is less preferrable to using a preamp with a tone stack that doesn't need the help...
 
  • Like
Reactions: rwkeating, lomo and macmanlou
#12,615
JackFawkes said:
It's kinda pricy, but I've been really impressed by DEADfx's 532 EQ.
It includes adjustable HPF and LPF, Blend, and it's own FX Loop.

ComradeEQ1.jpg
Click to expand...
The price seems totally reasonable to me, especially considering the balanced connections and internal 15V rails from a standard 9V power supply. If I were in the market for an EQ, that would be top of the list.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kubicki Fan, 4Mal and lomo
#12,618
lomo said:
This link is a useful tone stack simulator.......

TSC in the web

I really don't see (or hear) how mids can even be "relatively emphasized" with a simple Fender tone stack. The best I can do is bump everything below 100Hz with the Fender controls and subtract the lowest borborygmus with a HPF. With mids at 10 and bass/treble a 0, the Fender tone stack is pretty much as flat as Kansas (or Saskatchewan) ;)
Click to expand...

If you leave bass at zero, dime the mids and add treble quite a bit, there is a theoretical possibility to have a high mid bump by reducing the excess treble content with the instrument’s tone pot.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Kubicki Fan, FronTowardEnemy and lomo
#12,619
Heikki L. said:
If you leave bass at zero, dime the mids and add treble quite a bit, there is a theoretical possibilty to have a high mid bump by reducing the excess treble content with the instrument’s tone pot.
Click to expand...

That's a cool workaround I hadn't thought of, although I'm not sure how satisfying it will sound, since the mids I typically like to emphasize are in the 150-300 Hz range......I will definitely try it though!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heikki L.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back