Parametric EQ tip - 'Contouring your sound'

Radley said:
I too love a great Fender clean sound, and one thing I have found helpful to re-create that elusive Fender 'glassy-ness' is to use one of the unused para bands with a rather high Q (narrow band peaking) and boost anywhere between 3.5 & 8k. In lower frequency bands this would not sound very good, but when we go beyond 3.5k, the effect is more like a controllable high frequency 'resonator', and it can add a missing HF dimension to pure clean tones.

~Rad~
Click to expand...

Let's say you boost around 8k in band 4, since we put a frequency block around 4k in band 5, won't the boost from band 4 be naturally blocked by band 5?

Also would be great to have band 1 and 5 cutoff frequencies table as reference when you want to emulate the response of all the amps in the Axe-Fx.

Good thread Radley. This and the reverb thread have been very informative. I used the PEQ before, but before the cab and without knowing anything about the blocking parameter. Works very well at the end of my chain.
 
Deltones said:
Radley said:
I too love a great Fender clean sound, and one thing I have found helpful to re-create that elusive Fender 'glassy-ness' is to use one of the unused para bands with a rather high Q (narrow band peaking) and boost anywhere between 3.5 & 8k. In lower frequency bands this would not sound very good, but when we go beyond 3.5k, the effect is more like a controllable high frequency 'resonator', and it can add a missing HF dimension to pure clean tones.

~Rad~
Click to expand...

Let's say you boost around 8k in band 4, since we put a frequency block around 4k in band 5, won't the boost from band 4 be naturally blocked by band 5?
Click to expand...
Yes, but you don't need to always set it that low. Anywhere between 4 and 12k might work depending on what you want. Me, I like it from 6k and upwards on gainier patches. Lower chops too much top off iMO. Haven't tried my cleans yet, since I like those already, but I figure I would set those higher still.
Also would be great to have band 1 and 5 cutoff frequencies table as reference when you want to emulate the response of all the amps in the Axe-Fx.
Click to expand...
They aren't really emulations... The cab sims are emulations. We are just editing them to our liking. Cutting out the stuff we don't like.
Good thread Radley. This and the reverb thread have been very informative. I used the PEQ before, but before the cab and without knowing anything about the blocking parameter. Works very well at the end of my chain.
Click to expand...
Great! I also like putting this EQ closely after the cab to give the delay and reverb room to breathe above the block. Adds a bit of air. But that might be delusional.
 
Deltones said:
Radley said:
I too love a great Fender clean sound, and one thing I have found helpful to re-create that elusive Fender 'glassy-ness' is to use one of the unused para bands with a rather high Q (narrow band peaking) and boost anywhere between 3.5 & 8k. In lower frequency bands this would not sound very good, but when we go beyond 3.5k, the effect is more like a controllable high frequency 'resonator', and it can add a missing HF dimension to pure clean tones.

~Rad~
Click to expand...

Let's say you boost around 8k in band 4, since we put a frequency block around 4k in band 5, won't the boost from band 4 be naturally blocked by band 5?

Also would be great to have band 1 and 5 cutoff frequencies table as reference when you want to emulate the response of all the amps in the Axe-Fx.

Good thread Radley. This and the reverb thread have been very informative. I used the PEQ before, but before the cab and without knowing anything about the blocking parameter. Works very well at the end of my chain.
Click to expand...
Deltones,

Believe it or not, you can block at 5k and use an extra para band to boost at 5k or higher, and it still has the desired effect - in other words, it is still changing the overall frequency contour. We must keep in mind that the blocking filter's cutoff is not a 'brick wall', but a predetermined downward slope, which means the frequencies beyond the cutoff point are 'still in play'. And if you find you can't get enough audible boost from one para band, simply go to another band and perform the same boost again! ;)

~Rad~
 
From an EQ neophyte:

The upside of this thread for me is that I've quit looking at EQ as 'compensation for something missing', but rather as an every recorded tone you've ever heard shaping tool. I fear, even with all my recent work in Logic 9 and recordings, I'll never have that 'ear' that Engineers have in tooling tone, but I can at least understand where 'the road is'.

Not having the experience here, EVERYTHING is based on what I hear immediately. I need sound clips of 'here's what it sounds like without EQ', 'here with a slight bump on 8k', etc, etc, etc.

Someday perhaps I will do that, but for now, thank you all for this very helpful thread.

Ron
 
electronpirate said:
From an EQ neophyte:

The upside of this thread for me is that I've quit looking at EQ as 'compensation for something missing'
Ron
Click to expand...
Yes - I believe that describes the old-school way of viewing EQ. The newer approach is that EQ is very important in creating a new sound, as opposed to simply tweaking a faulty one.
 
Radley said:
Believe it or not, you can block at 5k and use an extra para band to boost at 5k or higher, and it still has the desired effect - in other words, it is still changing the overall frequency contour. We must keep in mind that the blocking filter's cutoff is not a 'brick wall', but a predetermined downward slope, which means the frequencies beyond the cutoff point are 'still in play'. And if you find you can't get enough audible boost from one para band, simply go to another band and perform the same boost again! ;)

~Rad~
Click to expand...

The brickwall image is a good one. Alright, it's much clearer now. Thanks man.
 
electronpirate said:
... but I can at least understand where 'the road is'.
Click to expand...
Good picture. I feel a lot the same. Love these instructional threads. I can try and compare, train my ears and learn how a mix works. Thanks Rad and all the others for the help!
Micha
 
Dutch said:
Great! I also like putting this EQ closely after the cab to give the delay and reverb room to breathe above the block. Adds a bit of air. But that might be delusional.
Click to expand...

No difference unless delay drive is used. If not then any order of delay + reverb + EQ + cab (assuming no cab drive either) after the amp block will produce the same end result.
 
Radley - would you be willing to wiki your tips? I know Cliff trims the threads on the forums from time to time, and it would be a shame to lose such good tips!
 
strumbringer said:
Radley - would you be willing to wiki your tips? I know Cliff trims the threads on the forums from time to time, and it would be a shame to lose such good tips!
Click to expand...

Strumbringer,

I know nothing about WIKI, or how to add to it - if anyone else does, they are welcome to add any helpful posts I have made. Could someone please explain how it all works?

~Rad~
 
WIKI:

Go to the wiki and create an account.
Now for Reverb go to here and click on Edit. You can now now add your own comments.

I already added links to my How-To page in the wiki threads here on Radley's comments on reverb, PEQ and compressors. But adding the info itself to the wiki is better.
 
Bakerman said:
Dutch said:
Great! I also like putting this EQ closely after the cab to give the delay and reverb room to breathe above the block. Adds a bit of air. But that might be delusional.
Click to expand...

No difference unless delay drive is used. If not then any order of delay + reverb + EQ + cab (assuming no cab drive either) after the amp block will produce the same end result.
Click to expand...
Aaahh, Come on. Indulge an old guy his delusions.

;)
 
yek said:
WIKI:

Go to the wiki and create an account.
Now for Reverb go to here and click on Edit. You can now now add your own comments.

I already added links to my How-To page in the wiki threads here on Radley's comments on reverb, PEQ and compressors. But adding the info itself to the wiki is better.
Click to expand...
Certainly always good to add the info itself to the WIKI. Some threads on here have been known to disappear. Either by the thread turning nasty or by some hickup/cleanup of the database.
 
@ Radley .... Your blocking tip absolutely ROCKS !

On a lot of my clean presets I use a PEQ right after the cab. Set around 100 with aaround a 1 1/3 octave Q. A few moments ago I went ahead and replaced this band with band 1 set to blocking, around the same frequency, slight Q bump....and WOW...! It's doing the same effect, but even better. The notes have way more definition but without sounding thin. Absolutely fantastic trick !

It also works quite nicely right after Drive pedals with too much bass end. Very cool. Thanks a million ;) !!!
 
OK, tried this idea on a new patch. Nothing complex or heavy. Just an AC30 amp block and a 2x12 Blues cab block. Any tweaking of the Q resulted in more than occasionally hitting red lights on the output leds. I hadn't altered any ouputs except for the master on the amp block (which I put at 9). The others were as they were when you insertthem. Thoughts on what am I doing wrong.
 
TBurst Std said:
OK, tried this idea on a new patch. Nothing complex or heavy. Just an AC30 amp block and a 2x12 Blues cab block. Any tweaking of the Q resulted in more than occasionally hitting red lights on the output leds. I hadn't altered any ouputs except for the master on the amp block (which I put at 9). The others were as they were when you insertthem. Thoughts on what am I doing wrong.
Click to expand...

Putting the Master at 9 will indeed overload, unless you turn down the amp block's level.
 
TBurst Std said:
OK, tried this idea on a new patch. Nothing complex or heavy. Just an AC30 amp block and a 2x12 Blues cab block. Any tweaking of the Q resulted in more than occasionally hitting red lights on the output leds. I hadn't altered any ouputs except for the master on the amp block (which I put at 9). The others were as they were when you insert them. Thoughts on what am I doing wrong.
Click to expand...

Raising the Q on the blocking bands (especially the low end) creates a 'bump' that actually does increase the overall level - this is why we have the output level adjustment within the Para EQ.
 
I hope that this isn't too far off topic, but does anyone know of a usable
standalone spectrum analyzer program that runs under OS X SL?

It'd help me a bit to be able to visualize the results of the EQ tweaking
in addition to listening. A bit of a check & balance...

It'd be great to have something that could be focused on the band(s) being adjusted.

TIA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom