Jump to content
Left leaderboard

Recommended Posts

Silly question probably, but what order do Eqs eq stuff in? Because...

I have a guitar eq pedal that i like to use to cut 400 hz and boost 1khz. I also have a zoom b3n that has a bass equaliser it, which doesn't have a 400hz 'slider'. So if i was to set say 2 parametric Eqs as 'pedals' one after the other, boosting the 1khz and cutting the 400 hz, is that the same? Or is my whole signal going to  be 1khz-ed and then 400hz-ed?

I know i could just use the EQ pedal in front of the zoom, but the point of it (for me) is to only have one box to carry about, not a pedal board...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup - that should work.

Fyi - the Bass GEQ effect on the B3n has a 7 band EQ including 400Hz and 800Hz which should pretty much get you there?

If not, you can use the Para EQ to sort the 1kHz as you are proposing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it should work fine.  The additional setting with parametric EQ is the "Q", which affects how much of the frequencies either side of 400Hz are also affected.  So a high "Q" would be quite narrow, only affecting (say) 375-425Hz; whereas a low "Q" would have a broader affect on (say) 250-650Hz. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, jrixn1 said:

I think it should work fine.  The additional setting with parametric EQ is the "Q", which affects how much of the frequencies either side of 400Hz are also affected.  So a high "Q" would be quite narrow, only affecting (say) 375-425Hz; whereas a low "Q" would have a broader affect on (say) 250-650Hz. 

And just taking that one step further, be interesting to know how narrow band the "Q" is on a normal (non-para) EQ with a fixed "Q" setting? I'm guessing pretty narrow?

Edited by Al Krow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@operative451 I think you might be over thinking this xD

The signal will pass through the EQ stage instantaneously - there's probably a very small millisecond or so delay on the Zoom as the signal is processed from analogue to digital and back again, but you're not likely to ever notice that (no doubt someone will claim they can detect it but in reality they're probably deluding themselves!) but to all intents and purposes you'll play the note and hear it straight away with whatever EQ is applied. Whether the EQ is applied lows first, through the mids and then highs last, or in any other order, I don't know but with the speed it happens I honestly and I don't think it really matters!

In theory the Zoom parametric Eqs should only be working on the frequency that you have selected and leaving all the others alone so your proposal to use 2 of them together should work fine in principal. Whether it sounds exactly the same as your guitar eq pedal is another matter, it may be that either pedal is imparting something of its own that you may or may not like. Best thing to do is to try it and see. What's the worst that could happen? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Osiris said:

In theory the Zoom parametric Eqs should only be working on the frequency that you have selected and leaving all the others alone...

Apologies if I am being unnecessarily picky, but not sure that last bit is quite right given the point about "Q" that John mentioned?

Edited by Al Krow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Al Krow said:

And just taking that one step further, be interesting to know how narrow band the "Q" is on a normal (non-para) EQ with a fixed "Q" setting? I'm guessing pretty narrow?

Probably the other way around! A graphic will tend to have higher Qs, but a standard 3 band will have pretty wide ranges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

Apologies if I am being unnecessarily picky, but not sure that last bit is quite right given the point about "Q" that John mentioned?

Yes, you are unnecessarily being picky, now do [email protected]#k off, there's a good chap xD

OK, so to clarify things, yes if you take my original post absolutely literally as in it is only the user selected frequency that is affected then that is incorrect, as I'm sure we all know. At least I assumed we did! The Q is the width of the frequencies either side of the centre frequency (i.e. the one selected by the user) that are also affected. This usually looks like a bell shape when plotted on a graph, i.e. if you adjust at 400 Hz, that will be the the highest (or lowest if you're cutting) point on the graph, 380 and 420 Hz hill be slightly lower, 350 and 450 lower still, and so on. 

Many EQ systems have a fixed Q whereas parametric equalisers allow the user to vary the Q i.e. how much or how little of the surrounding frequencies are affected. So yes, it is not only the user selected frequency that is affected when a change is made to an EQ control, the surrounding frequencies will also be affected, but how wide that affect is depends on the EQ that's being used. Every EQ control, whether it's a simple bass and treble arrangement or something more sophisticated will have some sort of Q, either a fixed one or one that can be adjusted by the user. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, Jus Lukin said:

Probably the other way around! A graphic will tend to have higher Qs, but a standard 3 band will have pretty wide ranges.

Agreed for 3 band.

Just to confuse matters (sorry!) the B3n GEQ, which is the alternative being discussed for the OP, is actually a 7 band EQ

Edited by Al Krow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Osiris said:

Yes, you are unnecessarily being picky, now do [email protected]#k off, there's a good chap xD

I'll feck off, like a good chap, now then 😉

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

Agreed for 3 band.

But the B3n GEQ which is the alternative being discussed for the OP, is a 7 band EQ

I realise that, although you were non-specific enough ask about a 'normal' EQ with fixed Q, which is a pretty open question. That said, seven bands with centres between 50 and 10,000 hz aren't going to be what I'd call 'pretty narrow' in the big scheme of things. Given that there are 31 band hardware equalisers out there in regular use and very frequency specific notches possible, the bands are probably fairly medium Q. While it's more specific than the EQ on a Marshall Super Bass, something like the GEB-7, while useful, is hardly a surgical EQ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I guess the important thing with all of this discussion around Q is not to get overly concerned / bogged down (as I am rapidly in danger of doing myself - haha!).

A key point is that a "surgical Q" in the context of bass tone doesn't necessarily imply a better tone. In fact a broader and smoother Q could well be the better sounding option. 

It brings to mind the (somewhat out of fashion these days) smiley EQs we used to see across the ubiquitous TE amps in all rehearsal rooms 'back in the day', which clearly had a smoothing intent to the overall mid scooping of the bass EQ. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heehee! Oops! Its amazing what triggers of an argument.. . :D

I suppose i'm thinking of it as a software thing, where instructions run in the order you put them - you're right, i shall twiddle knobs and see what comes out the other end... ;D

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, operative451 said:

Heehee! Oops! It's amazing what triggers off an argument.. . :D

One question

4 basschatters

10 different answers

none of them correct 😂

But it stops us going out and mugging old ladies, so it serves an important social function.

...I did promise the great god (actually more short scale lover these days ) Osiris that I would be a good chap and feck off, so I'd best go do that now! 😂

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Close the door on your way out 😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, operative451 said:

 i shall twiddle knobs and see what comes out the other end... ;D

I wholeheartedly approve of this approach....in almost any situation.

Edited by ahpook
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Al Krow said:

And I guess the important thing with all of this discussion around Q is not to get overly concerned / bogged down (as I am rapidly in danger of doing myself - haha!).

A key point is that a "surgical Q" in the context of bass tone doesn't necessarily imply a better tone. In fact a broader and smoother Q could well be the better sounding option. 

Yep. And boosting and cutting often benefit from different bandwidths. Then there's the factor of how many bands we are using, because interactivity comes into play. I've measured and/or designed and built quite a few bass preamps, and to me this yet another "just depends" kind of a thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Al Krow said:

A key point is that a "surgical Q" in the context of bass tone doesn't necessarily imply a better tone. In fact a broader and smoother Q could well be the better sounding option.  

A surgical Q as you call it is usually a very high Q (i.e. a very narrow band of frequencies are being adjusted) and as the name implies is used to control unwanted frequencies, for example on a booming stage you can cut the offending frequency that's causing the boom without having to cut the other bass frequencies and end up sounding thin. You're simple removing the problem frequency. 

Generally speaking most of us want a broader (lower Q) set of frequencies to be controlled by our EQ systems. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ofc none of this matters if you aren't using gold-plated iridium jacks and rhodium-plated cables that are always wound anti-clockwise.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, operative451 said:

I don't think my Hi-Q is high enough.. :D

You and me both. Guess that's why the Low-Q is so popular. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When asked about Hi Q

The collected basschat minds

Began to unravel

 

There - a Haiku about Hi Q.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/05/2019 at 13:57, Jus Lukin said:

Probably the other way around! A graphic will tend to have higher Qs, but a standard 3 band will have pretty wide ranges.

It all depends on the circuit, a 3 band EQ, is most likely to be of a Baxandall type where the only "band" to have a Q is the mid. Bass and treble are shelving filters rather than the band pass filter of the mid.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any wider than that and they call it a volume control! 😄

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...