Para EQ Pedals for Hard Rock/Metal: Any Experiences?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Junk Yard Dog
  • Start date Start date
J

Junk Yard Dog

Well-known member
I've been interested in a pedal form para EQ lately and some clips I've heard of it doing clean to somewhat dirty are making me think it could be better than a straight EQ pedal for tone shaping.

The Empress para EQ has my interests. Unfortunately, I can't find many clips of people using para EQ's on modern amps. I know most amps don't need them, but it could open up even more possibilities.

Anyone have any experiences with one, the Empress or others?

Also, do you put them out front or in the loop and why?

Cheers!
 
Ibanez 9 series from way back when...the blue one. I have one and I love it.
 
A parametric EQ doesn´t really do anything a well-chosen graphic can´t do, it still comes down to the same factors of Q, frequency and gain. They don´t inherently sound any different, but they are a lot more flexible.

Having it before the preamp makes any EQ act more in the vein of using a different set of pickups (you´ll overdrive certain frequencies more), and using it post-preamp is a lot more powerful for shaping the overall sound, like a second set of tone controls in a typical amp. See how a Boogie Mark works for comparison, one set of rotary controls before the preamp to shape the feel and saturation and one set of graphic sliders to really control the sound.

I have that same Ibanez, by the way, it´s called the PQ9. It´s only semi-parametric, though, since it has a a fixed Q. Adjustable frequency and gain, though!
 
Gary Holt uses a presonus EQ3b up front to tweak the mids in Exodus. Great cutting live tone.

When I did the huge rack thing in the 90s I had a rocktron pro-q that had a parametric in it. I dug it bigtime back then. Now a graphic in the loop is all the extra tone shaping i ever add to any head,if needed.
 
I have the Empress Para Eq in the front of a Mesa Mark IVa. The shaping abilities with this are more precise over a graphic Eq. The Empress got me the Stryper tone I was after. It works well with the Mark IV's graphic sliders. Really tightens up the low end too. A small bump on the Mark's 750 slider from completely scooped and I get a Metallica tone that crushes in conjunction with the Para Eq.
 
Dave L":bumdevem said:
A parametric EQ doesn´t really do anything a well-chosen graphic can´t do, it still comes down to the same factors of Q, frequency and gain. They don´t inherently sound any different, but they are a lot more flexible...
Click to expand...
Concur.

I find the MXR 108S (new silver one with VERY bright blue LEDs) to be tits for the price.
I've got a couple now, in the loop of whatever amp I'm using.
Got the Perfect10 Whirlwind too, for twice the price I can't say it's any better.
But ya, in the loop, they've now become critical additions to my modest pedal arsenal.
 
OK, great feedback, gents: thank you. I'm still a bit torn between an a Para EQ. I've had the old school 10-band MXR before, so I know what that does, and it was awesome.

I'm leaning toward ParaEQ, though, because I know Demartini used one and I LOVE the early Ratt tones using one, and I've never used one. If I don't like it, I can always return it.

So I'm still curious why some do the loop and some do the front? Does it really make a difference or is the effect the same. I don't use distortion pedals; I use amp gain plus an OD on occasion.

Cheers!
 
It makes a lot or difference using it before or after distortion, to the point where it basically does two different things. For the 80s rock thing it´s in front acting more as a boost than an EQ, overdriving those mids to the max for juicy saturation, and post-distortion in the loop it is a lot more powerful in shaping the overall sound.
 
I may not be much help but what I can say about the Paraeq is that it is a very powerful tool. I have tried a few different graphic EQ's but this was the only parametric I have tried. It was really awesome and very powerful to shape your tone but I felt that I did not really need it and that it was overkill.

Maybe great for some and in the studio I bet it is ridiculous but the entire reason I got it was to cut one certain "fizzy" frequency out of the equation. After having I believed that this frequency was just part of the amp character or distortion and there was no getting rid of it. I already liked my tone so that was not an issue and the "fizz" is very subtle anyway.

I would say definitely try one just to experience it, can always resell if needed. I only took a very minor loss as these things are not hard to sell.

Edit: It did nothing for me out front, maybe user error but it seemed very weak in comparison to putting it in the loop.
 
maddnotez":237qrmca said:
I may not be much help but what I can say about the Paraeq is that it is a very powerful tool. I have tried a few different graphic EQ's but this was the only parametric I have tried. It was really awesome and very powerful to shape your tone but I felt that I did not really need it and that it was overkill.

Maybe great for some and in the studio I bet it is ridiculous but the entire reason I got it was to cut one certain "fizzy" frequency out of the equation. After having I believed that this frequency was just part of the amp character or distortion and there was no getting rid of it. I already liked my tone so that was not an issue and the "fizz" is very subtle anyway.

I would say definitely try one just to experience it, can always resell if needed. I only took a very minor loss as these things are not hard to sell.

Edit: It did nothing for me out front, maybe user error but it seemed very weak in comparison to putting it in the loop.
Click to expand...

OK, that's good info. I may try a graphic EQ, though i really don't need either, it might be fun just to see how much more tonal variety I can get out of my BE50.
 
Junk Yard Dog":33r13k69 said:
maddnotez":33r13k69 said:
I may not be much help but what I can say about the Paraeq is that it is a very powerful tool. I have tried a few different graphic EQ's but this was the only parametric I have tried. It was really awesome and very powerful to shape your tone but I felt that I did not really need it and that it was overkill.

Maybe great for some and in the studio I bet it is ridiculous but the entire reason I got it was to cut one certain "fizzy" frequency out of the equation. After having I believed that this frequency was just part of the amp character or distortion and there was no getting rid of it. I already liked my tone so that was not an issue and the "fizz" is very subtle anyway.

I would say definitely try one just to experience it, can always resell if needed. I only took a very minor loss as these things are not hard to sell.

Edit: It did nothing for me out front, maybe user error but it seemed very weak in comparison to putting it in the loop.
Click to expand...

OK, that's good info. I may try a graphic EQ, though i really don't need either, it might be fun just to see how much more tonal variety I can get out of my BE50.
Click to expand...

Either of these (graphic or para) will give you variety. Para is just way more in depth/specific imo and the graphic will give you more of a broad range.

If you have never tried either I would definitely get a graphic EQ. It is fun for sure and even if you don't need it can be a lead boost or something. Even the cheap Fish and Chips EQ is a noticeable difference. Some say adding an EQ in the loop is like taking a blanket off your amp and I absolutely agree (amp dependent)
 
maddnotez":48v2ayka said:
Junk Yard Dog":48v2ayka said:
maddnotez":48v2ayka said:
I may not be much help but what I can say about the Paraeq is that it is a very powerful tool. I have tried a few different graphic EQ's but this was the only parametric I have tried. It was really awesome and very powerful to shape your tone but I felt that I did not really need it and that it was overkill.

Maybe great for some and in the studio I bet it is ridiculous but the entire reason I got it was to cut one certain "fizzy" frequency out of the equation. After having I believed that this frequency was just part of the amp character or distortion and there was no getting rid of it. I already liked my tone so that was not an issue and the "fizz" is very subtle anyway.

I would say definitely try one just to experience it, can always resell if needed. I only took a very minor loss as these things are not hard to sell.

Edit: It did nothing for me out front, maybe user error but it seemed very weak in comparison to putting it in the loop.
Click to expand...

OK, that's good info. I may try a graphic EQ, though i really don't need either, it might be fun just to see how much more tonal variety I can get out of my BE50.
Click to expand...

Either of these (graphic or para) will give you variety. Para is just way more in depth/specific imo and the graphic will give you more of a broad range.

If you have never tried either I would definitely get a graphic EQ. It is fun for sure and even if you don't need it can be a lead boost or something. Even the cheap Fish and Chips EQ is a noticeable difference. Some say adding an EQ in the loop is like taking a blanket off your amp and I absolutely agree (amp dependent)
Click to expand...

Well, crap. The new MXR 10-band needs 18v and my Friedman Power Grid ony does 9V.
 
Truetone V189 18-volt to 9-volt Converter.

problem solved!
 
I have a BYOC Parametric EQ I built. It works very good, and is fairly cheap compared to the rest..... assuming you can build the kit yourself.
 
The parametric does things a graphic CANT do, because the bandwidth isn’t fixed on a typical rack mount parametric, this give a much sharper spike to those frequencies than a graphic could ever give... and THAT is the key to almost any 80s LA metal sound. Ratt, Dokken, Stryper, ICON, Night Ranger, Doug Aldrich, and many more.
 
I have one of the newer silver MXR 10 band eq's with the BRIGHT Blue lights and picked up a cheap pedal sized Artec parametric eq, and for me it just kind of fills in the little gaps between the 10 bands range,really fills out the sound throughout the range,but when doing adjustments a little goes a long way,so have to just barely bump it up and its definitely noticeable.I have only tried it in the effects loop so might be cool to see what happens through the front end of my EVH head. I started with the cheap Artec just as an experiment,and I would imagine the Empress would be so much better with way more adjustability.I figured some time I would find a used Empress and go ahead and get it and see what happens,but as Ventura has said in earlier comments here the newer MXR's eq's work outstanding,for now my favorite pedal except for my new tuner.
 
I just got a Boss GE7 eq pedal that I run up front as a slight boost and I like it a lot better than a tubescreamer. I run the Kerry King frown shape but only cutting the lows and highs rather than boosting any frequency over 0. Only a slight bump on the gain switch to hit the preamp harder.
I never got along with Eq pdeals in the loop, only like it in front.
 
Empress ParaEQ is a powerfull tool you can do a lot to any amp both in front or in the loop of an already amazing amp like a BE-100.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top