New passive graphic EQ is the $hit

I can tell you this: I cut the extreme highs and lows first, before I do anything else (with excellent results). Many times nothing else is necessary.

Having the mids higher than the lows and highs is good for me too.

You can get the mids higher by lowering the "sides" or boosting the "middle".

Because of the design of some analog EQ's and some digital EQ's, cutting can introduce fewer artifacts and result in a more natural tone than a boost.

So cutting the lows and highs is a more natural sounding mid "hump" than a mid boost (depending on the eq of course).

The artifacts of boosting can be desired though. Some EQ's get knarly in a good way with boosts and can really make a part pop in a mix.
 
Anyone know if the 5 band passive has the same frequency centers as the Mark (80 240 750 2200 6600)? Can't find that anywhere in the Wiki or manual. Thanks!
 
Yes, it appears to be the same centers. That was my earlier confusion and I'm still not sure I'm doing this right, but early experiments sound good. Tomorrow night I get to try it live, and I'll play with it some more today. Right now the 80 and 6600 are cut about 2 dB; the others are boosted by about the same amount. Running post-cab.

But if someone can set me straight - what's the difference between the "passive" 5-band and the Mesa?
 
With this eq, is there a difference between-to use Wildwind's numbers-cutting highs and lows by 2dB and boosting the 3 mids by 2dB and just cutting the highs and lows by 4 dB, other than overall volume (which could just be adjusted with the patch level)?
 
With this eq, is there a difference between-to use Wildwind's numbers-cutting highs and lows by 2dB and boosting the 3 mids by 2dB and just cutting the highs and lows by 4 dB, other than overall volume (which could just be adjusted with the patch level)?
Yes, an enormous difference. First, any adjustments made with the EQ adds its own character to the tone. Secondly, the bands overlap, so by boosting the two outer mids you're making up for some of the attenuation on the part of the outer bands that overlap; plus whatever boost you add to the middle band. Make sense? I'd cut first, and see how it sounds before making any other changes. Remember, by cutting those frequencies you are in effect boosting others.
 
Yes, an enormous difference. First, any adjustments made with the EQ adds its own character to the tone. Secondly, the bands overlap, so by boosting the two outer mids you're making up for some of the attenuation on the part of the outer bands that overlap; plus whatever boost you add to the middle band. Make sense? I'd cut first, and see how it sounds before making any other changes. Remember, by cutting those frequencies you are in effect boosting others.

"Remember, by cutting those frequencies you are in effect boosting others." This is exactly what I was asking, and it doesn't really jive with the rest of your post. So, this is why I'm confused.

-2 +2 +2 +2 -2
creates the same eq curve as

-4 0 0 0 -4

So, does this eq actually color the tone more as things are boosted?
 
"Remember, by cutting those frequencies you are in effect boosting others." This is exactly what I was asking, and it doesn't really jive with the rest of your post. So, this is why I'm confused.

-2 +2 +2 +2 -2
creates the same eq curve as

-4 0 0 0 -4

So, does this eq actually color the tone more as things are boosted?

Even though the "difference" between the bands appears the same, those two different settings you mention will likely produce different results.

I'm not sure of the algorithm details but boosts in analog eq's can result in artifacts (as can cuts sometimes too).

Good artifacts in some eq's like the API stuff.

I find passive eq's more forgiving in general. You can hit them hard and it still holds up and sounds musical. That is part of the "magic" of passive eq. Large boosts and cuts sound great.
 
"Remember, by cutting those frequencies you are in effect boosting others." This is exactly what I was asking, and it doesn't really jive with the rest of your post. So, this is why I'm confused.

-2 +2 +2 +2 -2
creates the same eq curve as

-4 0 0 0 -4

Don't think so. Cutting only the outer bands 4db as per your example without doing anything else creates a perceived (that's what "in effect" means) boost in some of the mids that should be noticeable simply because there are less highs and lows. You are not actually boosting the mids. Additionally, because the bands overlap, you'd also be attenuating the portion of the adjacent mid bands that overlap both outer bands. As far as I know, this type of EQ will add its own character regardless of whether you boost or cut.
 
"this type of EQ will add its own character regardless of whether you boost or cut."

But that character is dependent upon there being a cut or boost?

Because this isn't the way that most modern eqs work, so I'm trying to wrap my head around exactly what's going on here and why.

For example, a modern, in the box eq would sound exactly the same with either of those curves that I posted except for a difference in overall volume (which could be compensated for with makeup gain). So, basically the whole "cut don't boost" thing is actually kind of not true with most modern eqs as long as you're correctly using your makeup gain.

What I'm hearing here is that the passive eq specifically doesn't work this way. That it adds its own special sauce ONLY when there's a boost or cut. Correct? And, if so, does the special sauce actually increase as the boost/cut is made bigger, in addition to the actual eq effect?
 
As I understand it, the middle three are "peaking" type, meaning the center frequency gets boosted (in our example above) the most, while the frequencies on either side "fall away" in some type of curve, and in fact, as was pointed out, can be effected by adjacent sliders in the non-modern type (I think "modern" here means constant Q). So, if you boosted all three center sliders you would have three humps, which is totally different than cutting the outer bands only (producing kind of a flat-topped frown).
 
Been playing around with this for about a week now and fine tuning the EQs(I'm using multiple EQs in multiple stages) and I've now got a tone that I'm really satisfied with, been really fun jamming with and decided to see how it sits in a mix, so I recorded this little piece if anyone's interested in hearing it:
https://soundcloud.com/scottckr/friedman-hbe-tone

No post-processing done on rhythm guitars and only a phaser and delay on the lead guitars.
Recorded using my LTD AW-7 with BKP Juggernauts, Friedman HBE with OwnHammer Diezel IRs.
Excuse my sloppy playing.

What I really like about this tone is the "crispyness" which is all thanks to the passive EQs, this tone was sounding really dull before I applied a GEQ after the cab block.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom