Opinions about needing an EQ in the loop

  • Thread starter Thread starter MadAsAHatter
  • Start date Start date
So many amps and preamps have built in EQs separate from the TMB tonestack. Why does it matter if you add your own externally? As long as it gets you the inspiring sound you’re looking for why does it matter?

I don’t run EQs in the loop but that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t be against it. My only requirement is that the noise floor not be ruined by one.
 
glpg80 said:
So many amps and preamps have built in EQs separate from the TMB tonestack. Why does it matter if you add your own externally? As long as it gets you the inspiring sound you’re looking for why does it matter?

I don’t run EQs in the loop but that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t be against it. My only requirement is that the noise floor not be ruined by one.
Click to expand...
Well mainly that. Most EQs add too much noise for my taste. Once you have an amp loud enough to be heard over a drummer that becomes an issue. Plus, simplicity. One more thing that you need to set up, run cables to and hope doesn’t flake out on you. Also why I rarely if ever use fx loops in general.
 
Devin said:
If I can't make an amp sound good without adding any extra toys I'd sell it immediately, personally
Click to expand...
Yes for me, except in the case of a front end boost. I pretty much have to boost everything nowadays using a baritone.
 
Racerxrated said:
Number 1 with a bullet. Long ago, I read how running one in the loop was the way to go....tried it, and while yes you can really sculp the tone which is cool, using the loop in any fashion became an obvious tone sucker. That's what loops do, so I try to avoid using them.
The only amp that sounded better with an eq in the loop was a Randall Diavlo 100. Sold it pretty fast.

I've found that an eq in front can sculp the tone just as good.
Click to expand...
An EQ up front is sometimes the best boost as well! The GE-7 works great as a boost.
 
boltzthrower said:
I tune down to G#. 99.9% of amps were not designed for that so EQ in the loop is absolutely necessary or it’s butt mud city.

I’m a rack guy. I’m very sensitive to tone suck and with a good analog EQ between the pre & power amp I don’t hear any signal degradation which leads me to believe that those mentioning tone suck have a shitty equalizer or their head has a shitty loop.

To those saying if they need an EQ then the amp is not for them, sure, you’re a steak and potatoes guy, you do you, but if you also try different pickups/speakers/strings/tubes/boost but draw the line on EQ, that makes no sense to me.
Click to expand...
This is a great but overlooked point. Downtuning changes almost everything about the equation.
 
acceptance said:
About what frequencies are you adjusting?
Click to expand...
On just about any amp I have the treble cranked all the way and it’s often still not enough. But the Q is typically too wide, or centered on an unideal frequency so It’s adding unwanted harshness. And I want a bit of a boost around 100hz but the Q on the bass knob is too wide as well. With an EQ in the loop I can get that 100hz boost and cut low mids to compensate, And I’m typically boosting high mids & the right highs.
 
Here is the basic settings for EQ in the loop that works with pretty much all amps and cabs...

1. Slight bump at 2K. Helps with cut.
2. Slight dip at 4K. Balance the push from 8K.
3. Slight bump at 8K. A bit more than 2K. Adds air.
4. Cut 250 to get rid of the mud.

Leave everything else flat.

This will make a vintage sound more modern. It's basically a simulation of post production.
 
stephen sawall said:
Here is the basic settings for EQ in the loop that works with pretty much all amps and cabs...

1. Slight bump at 2K. Helps with cut.
2. Slight dip at 4K. Balance the push from 8K.
3. Slight bump at 8K. A bit more than 2K. Adds air.
4. Cut 250 to get rid of the mud.

Leave everything else flat.

This will make a vintage sound more modern. It's basically a simulation of post production.
Click to expand...


this is why i tell guys get a parametric, once you start understanding which frequencies do what and how they interact the slightest bump in a couple spots can really make a night and day difference. most all the graphics on the market have the same shitty frequencies that to me arent really the best for guitar, xacttone though has a modded one with much more guitar friendly frequencies.

ge-7.jpg
 
RaceU4her said:
this is why i tell guys get a parametric, once you start understanding which frequencies do what and how they interact the slightest bump in a couple spots can really make a night and day difference. most all the graphics on the market have the same shitty frequencies that to me arent really the best for guitar, xacttone though has a modded one with much more guitar friendly frequencies.

ge-7.jpg
Click to expand...
I agree. I want the new Ibanez PTEQ. It will probably end up in the loop of the Fryette Power Station PS-100. Looks like the centers are similar to the Mesa GEQ. One review reported low noise.

https://www.ibanez.com/eu/products/detail/pteq.html

1716733982711.jpg

1716734651992.jpg

1716734624943.jpg
 
Last edited:
I like how they used GEQ and Parametric in one pedal. I have not seen a review of it being used in the loop or with a high gain amp yet.
Hope the thing really has low noise.
 
To me an EQ in the loop rarely works. It always sounds 'off' or 'unnatural' for lack of a better word. The GEQ in a Mesa Mk series amp always worked and sounded like it was part of the amp though.

I even have a TC 1140 Parametric in my rack and it's almost always off. Its difficult to dial in a sound that I think sounds better without it. I can make it sound a tiny, tiny bit better after tweeking the fuck out of it.
 
stephen sawall said:
Here is the basic settings for EQ in the loop that works with pretty much all amps and cabs...

1. Slight bump at 2K. Helps with cut.
2. Slight dip at 4K. Balance the push from 8K.
3. Slight bump at 8K. A bit more than 2K. Adds air.
4. Cut 250 to get rid of the mud.

Leave everything else flat.

This will make a vintage sound more modern. It's basically a simulation of post production.
Click to expand...
About what bandwidth around each target frequency?
 
Last edited:
stephen sawall said:
I agree. I want the new Ibanez PTEQ. It will probably end up in the loop of the Fryette Power Station PS-100. Looks like the centers are similar to the Mesa GEQ. One review reported low noise.

https://www.ibanez.com/eu/products/detail/pteq.html

View attachment 313701
View attachment 313734
View attachment 313737
Click to expand...
I will probably buy one of these eventually. They look like a great option in this space. Most pedal parametrics are only 3 bands, so this is one of the only options I can think of that is fully analog.

I have a 5-Band rack parametric EQ I use with my tube stuff, but this is smaller, and simpler.
 
SpiderWars said:
To me an EQ in the loop rarely works. It always sounds 'off' or 'unnatural' for lack of a better word. The GEQ in a Mesa Mk series amp always worked and sounded like it was part of the amp though.

I even have a TC 1140 Parametric in my rack and it's almost always off. Its difficult to dial in a sound that I think sounds better without it. I can make it sound a tiny, tiny bit better after tweeking the fuck out of it.
Click to expand...


have you tried the mesa frequencies with the 1140?? i have the mesa 5 band and use it with everything and its great, but i can do pretty much the same thing with my parametric
 
i’ve tried the Mesa frequencies on a Soldano Hot Rod 50 by running the send of the HR50 into the return of my 2c+. Absolute rig of doom, shat on evening else I had around at the time, MZero, 6505, 5153 for that type of modern big metal tone that I don’t use, but it was an experience.
I’ve also tried the Mesa EQ values in post when mixing other amps. Didn’t work.
Eg I find i need to be very careful around 200Hz with a Bogner. boost and the sound is fucked, cut too much and it’s like it’s not a Bogner. so i do an very small cut around 200hz and manage all frequencies around that to clean up the sludge.

An EQ in the loop is useful for tuning a rig to the room, rental cab etc or manage some frequencies a bit more surgically if the stack has a wide Q. can help or hurt depending the context.
it can only get you so far before running into trouble eg you may wanna boost 2K but notch 2.5K at the same time; such moves are not untypical in mixing but too surgical live so imho it’s best to use the loop EQ sparingly and only where needed and hope that the sound guy will do the more surgical moves and catch resonances etc.
 
Catthan said:
i know.. but it can happen
Click to expand...

it can, we actually had some pretty good ones at the bigger clubs around here, a lot of national acts would have been better off using the house guys than their own. my thing was always let them do their thing, other bandmates ive had not so much lol
 
RaceU4her said:
have you tried the mesa frequencies with the 1140?? i have the mesa 5 band and use it with everything and its great, but i can do pretty much the same thing with my parametric
Click to expand...
Yes I actually did do that and it just sounds unnatural for lack of a better word. The punchy low end you get from a cranked Marshall...I've never really been able to get that reamping no matter how much EQ-ing I do. It's never there, never the same or even close but I'm used to it. I know volume has a lot to do with it but I think it could/should be closer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top