Turn PEQ on/off with Global Cab (old: PEQ in Cab block)

[Sunburst71]

I'd like to suggest adding a PEQ to the Cab block. The PEQ will be used for tone shaping when using FRFR, and will be turned on and off globally together with the Cab blocks on all presets. The idea is that when using the Axe with a guitar cab, this FRFR-specific PEQ will be turned off together with the Cab block.
This will afford greater flexibility than having a Global PEQ since each patch could be adjusted differently.

I just ran into this issue when trying to adjust my non-FRFR patches to work with FRFR while my SLA-1 is being serviced...

 

[rsf1977]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

I think what also might solve the issue is having any block assignable t a global bypass switch. So anything in any patch can all be bypassed with one control. It's an idea anyway.

 

[Smilzo]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

... having any block assignable t a global bypass switch.

Like amp & cab?
I like it very much.

 

[rsf1977]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

exactly, instead of them being in all separate controls just have them all assigned to one master bypass. So in the lets say Reverb block of a preset there will be a toggle to attach it to the Master bypass. What's cool about that is you assign specific blocks not all the reverb blocks all the time. It would be helpful when lets say you are designing a preset and use a PEQ to tweak a cab blocks tone and then have another PEQ doing general cutting before the amp block. You don't want that PEQ for the cab IR to be used when you use it with a real 4x12 so you assign it to the master bypass. Flip 1 switch and everything you don't need is bypassed. Sounds like a handy tool, but probably more complicated to code then it may sound.

 

[javajunkie]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

I think what also might solve the issue is having any block assignable t a global bypass switch. So anything in any patch can all be bypassed with one control. It's an idea anyway.

you can already do that.
that is what the [] under bypass is for

 

[rsf1977]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

I think what also might solve the issue is having any block assignable t a global bypass switch. So anything in any patch can all be bypassed with one control. It's an idea anyway.

you can already do that.
that is what the [] under bypass is for

I didn't know that lol. I just love looking foolish on this board it's becoming a trend haha. how does that work exactly Java?

 

[javajunkie]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

I think what also might solve the issue is having any block assignable t a global bypass switch. So anything in any patch can all be bypassed with one control. It's an idea anyway.

you can already do that.
that is what the [] under bypass is for

I didn't know that lol. I just love looking foolish on this board it's becoming a trend haha. how does that work exactly Java?

Just like you would assign a modifier to the volume to control volume or freq to control the sweep of a wah. Just go to the bypass parameter, hit enter, assign the modifier source to an external controller. Assign the external controller to an IA switch. Now the on/off of the effect will be controllers by that IA switch.

 

[rsf1977]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

is there a way to flip that on and off in te axefx without using an external midi source?

 

[AlbertA]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

is there a way to flip that on and off in te axefx without using an external midi source?

It's a modifier, so you can attach it to whatever you want.

 

[Bakerman]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

If you aren't using all 8 externals I think you could assign an unused one to bypass the EQ then toggle using its init. value in the I/O menu. Leave PC RST off.

 

[Sunburst71]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

Wouldn't you have to toggle the assigned IA on every patch, though? At least that's how it would work on my MIDIMate.
I was thinking about a global on/off, piggybacking on the Cab on/off, that would let the user set the status, well, globally...

Apologies if I'm missing something here

 

[Bakerman]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

Wouldn't you have to toggle the assigned IA on every patch, though?

I meant if you aren't already using all 8 externals you could choose one that's unused, leave it set to "none" and assign it to EQ bypass in each preset. Its init. value in the I/O menu will determine whether the EQs are bypassed or not.

 

[Sunburst71]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

Wouldn't you have to toggle the assigned IA on every patch, though?

I meant if you aren't already using all 8 externals you could choose one that's unused, leave it set to "none" and assign it to EQ bypass in each preset. Its init. value in the I/O menu will determine whether the EQs are bypassed or not.

So do you mean that in order to globally change the value, I'd go into the I/O menu and change the initial value of the external? Thanks

 

[Bakerman]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

Right

 

[joegold]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

OK. I should probably keep my mouth shut, because some of what I'm about to say will probably generate some sort of flame fest here but...

It seems to me that this whole notion, that appears to be becoming the accepted wisdom here, that we need to use a PEQ after the Cab Block with blocking of the extreme upper frequencies and the extreme lower frequencies is really just an indication that the Cab Block itself requires some sort of further development.

A good IR is supposed to take care of those frequencies that you all are using the PEQ to compensate for.
Those frequencies would not be present in the mic'd signal of a real guitar speaker. Why are they present in the signal produced by the Cab Block?

It might just be that the stock IRs need to be upgraded.
But it seems to me that folks still experience the same types of problems with the Red Wirez IRs.

It might be that Cliff should add some parameters to the Cab Block that are in some ways the opposite of the new Air parameters, in that the Air parameters allow us to feed some of those extreme high uncompensated frequencies back into the signal coming out of the Cab Block.

This is essentially what the OP of this thread is asking for. But I don't think it needs to be a full-blown PEQ.
All we'd need is a hi-freq roll-off with adjustable centre freq and adjustable Gain as well as the same for the extreme low freqs. Essentially just 2 blocking filters at the extreme ends of the frequency spectrum.
Anybody who needs more EQ than that can use a post-Cab Block EQ Block.

I think that even with the most ideal cab IR monitored through the most transparent system that these new parameters to the Cab block would probably be pretty useful.
So I'm going to vote, yes, in this poll.

 

[Ingo]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

A good IR is supposed to take care of those frequencies that you all are using the PEQ to compensate for.
Those frequencies would not be present in the mic'd signal of a real guitar speaker. Why are they present in the signal produced by the Cab Block?

I don't think that's the point. PEQ is used to make the guitar fit better into the mix. The frequencies eliminated *are* present in mic'd cab signals very typically. Therefore, post-EQ is a given in nearly any recording situation, AFAIK.

A properly acquired IR *is* the sound of a properly mic'd speaker cabinet, whatever that may be. This is scientific fact, and it does not contradict my personal experience that I do *not* like the sound of most IRs I have come across.

My understanding only here, etc...

 

[joegold]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

PEQ is used to make the guitar fit better into the mix. The frequencies eliminated *are* present in mic'd cab signals very typically.

People here are using the PEQ after the Cab Block to get rid of the unnatural sounding "fizzy" frequencies they hear in the tone when they are playing through FRFR monitors and/or in the studio.

They may also be using them as part of the mixing process in the same way they'd use an EQ when mixing a mic'd cabinet.

But that's not what all these PEQ-after-the-Cab-Block threads have been about. They've been about making the Cab Block itself sound more like a real guitar cab when going FRFR.

 

[dk_ace]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

PEQ is used to make the guitar fit better into the mix. The frequencies eliminated *are* present in mic'd cab signals very typically.

People here are using the PEQ after the Cab Block to get rid of the unnatural sounding "fizzy" frequencies they hear in the tone when they are playing through FRFR monitors and/or in the studio.

They may also be using them as part of the mixing process in the same way they'd use an EQ when mixing a mic'd cabinet.

But that's not what all these PEQ-after-the-Cab-Block threads have been about. They've been about making the Cab Block itself sound more like a real guitar cab when going FRFR.

Then you've misunderstood an awful lot of the PEQ after cab threads. The Axe-FX IRs, save a few of the additions acquired by Jay, are close-miced. Close-miced cabs sound quite different from the typical listening position that most guitar players are used to. The Axe-FX cabs sound like real cabs close miced, which is what they are.

When you close mic a cab, you often need to further EQ it. The Axe-FX is no different.

The other thing about the PEQ after the cab is that it is also especially helpful for making the guitar find it's appropriate place in the mix by getting rid of certain frequencies.

If you go back to the mega thread by Radley on the PEQ, which is what really got the discussion going on this topic, you'll see these two themes repeated.

The bottom line is that the Axe-FX IRs sound like close miced cabinets, which is what they are.

FWIW, I voted no on this poll because I don't want the cab block taking up extra resources. I can always add a PEQ block when I want one.

D

 

[Jay Mitchell]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

It seems to me that this whole notion, that appears to be becoming the accepted wisdom here, that we need to use a PEQ after the Cab Block with blocking of the extreme upper frequencies and the extreme lower frequencies is really just an indication that the Cab Block itself requires some sort of further development.

No. In the first place, it is not universally (or even widely) agreed that "we need to use a PEQ after the Cab Block." I for one have no need of one in the vast majority of my presets. Secondly, it is a near-universal practice to make heavy use of EQ on the signal from a close-mic'ed physical cab, both for recording and reinforcement. Why would you consider the use of the identical practice inside the Axe-Fx undesirable?

A good IR is supposed to take care of those frequencies that you all are using the PEQ to compensate for.

Depends on how the IR was taken and how you want to use it.

Those frequencies would not be present in the mic'd signal of a real guitar speaker.

Wrong. "Those frequencies" are definitely present in the "mic'd signal of a real guitar speaker" when the mic is placed directly in front of the speaker. One of the reasons for all the experimentation with choice and placement of mics for close-mic'ed recording and reinforcement is because the sound the mic picks up at a few inches from the speaker is profoundly different than the sound the player hears several feet from the speaker, and it varies wildly with very small changes in mic position.

Why are they present in the signal produced by the Cab Block?

Because the speaker produced those frequencies at the mic location that was used to acquire the IR.

It might just be that the stock IRs need to be upgraded.

In Your Opinion. One man's "upgraded" is another man's "ruined," and we've seen that phenomenon countless times. You yourself have complained that the amp block changes in 9.03 - which are overwhelmingly preferred by users who have stated a preference - have made the amps sound "worse."

But it seems to me that folks still experience the same types of problems with the Red Wirez IRs.

If, by "folks," you mean some users, then you can make the same statement about any aspect of the Axe-Fx or any physical amp. In short, different people like different things. FWIW, most of the Redwirez IRs are close-mic'ed as well, so the same "problem frequencies" can be expected to exist in many of them as well.

 

[Scott Peterson]

Re: Parametric EQ in Cab block

As one of the most outspoken "PEQ after the cab" FRFR based guys on the Net, I am not using them at this point at all.

It comes down to tools in the toolbox. You don't need, IMHO, a parametric in the cab block. You can currently drop one before and/or after if you so desire. Another in the actual block gives you no new tools to work with should you deem them necessary.

I won't enter into the pissing contest of 'cab block does/does not need improvement'; suffice to say that if you think you want something different from the cab block, the tools are out there. Custom IR's are flat out one of the most powerful tools you can use.

You just add the tools and utilize them as needed. If they are not needed, they simply don't get used.