Parametric EQ

  • Thread starter Thread starter stephen sawall
  • Start date Start date
I have the Empress….doesnt sound that great honestly. Has incredible reviews. Maybe mine isn’t working right. Just a bit harsh.
I didn't like the Empress. It imparted a synthetic/processed thing on my tone. MUCH prefer the MXR 10 band. For parametric, I do like the TC 1140 I have, very natural sounding.
 
All of these EQ's have a inherent sound that colors the sound.

This coloring is why I like or dislike certain pedals.
This is spot on.

This is why I love the vintage boss GE-10 and MXR 10 band. They color the sound slightly…but it is super pleasant and pleasing.

The Master effects PMEQ colors the sound as well, but the coloration is right and not generic or clinical.

This is why I never fully embraced the whole “true-bypass” thing. I want the coloration of specific pedals… ala MXR.
 
Last edited:
Of all the products out there in a pedal form I think the Master Effects models probably would give you what you are looking for and they don't cost any more than an actual vintage Furman PQ3.

I had an Empress ParaEQ and I thought it was pretty good but I then found an actual Furman PQ3 and it delivered a little bit better for what I was wanting. If I wanted another Parametric I would definitely try out the Master Effects EQ from Hell or the Pro model.
 
Interesting how the Ibanez PTEQ Penatone 5-band Parametric EQ Pedal has the 5 band GEQ. If you look at the center frequency of each of the 5 it is close to the Mesa 5 band GEQ. I know the Mesa centers are actually a bit off from the numbers.
If it can get similar to the sound of a Mesa 5 band GEQ and allow you to fine tune from there ....
Looks like it is still a few months till available.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rsm
As much as I love Parametric EQ pedals for the flexibility and ability to fine tune things, it's so easy to get lost in the weeds with them. I tend to stay away from EQs in the loop in a lot of situations because I find I don't typically need them for most of my amps, but when I do have an amp I can't get just right, throwing an EQ in the loop is usually my first thought at an easy fix that turns into an hour of me tweaking parameters just to end up making the amp sound worse than it did before :ROFLMAO:

That said, with time and patience, and if you can get it done before the ear fatigue sets in, you really can get what you want out of them in most cases.
I did a video showcasing the Master Effects EQ4H and PMEQ, and even though under the mic the adjustments didn't sound quite as good as they did in the room, I found it made me really enjoy an amp that I struggled with on it's own.
 
As much as I love Parametric EQ pedals for the flexibility and ability to fine tune things, it's so easy to get lost in the weeds with them. I tend to stay away from EQs in the loop in a lot of situations because I find I don't typically need them for most of my amps, but when I do have an amp I can't get just right, throwing an EQ in the loop is usually my first thought at an easy fix that turns into an hour of me tweaking parameters just to end up making the amp sound worse than it did before :ROFLMAO:

That said, with time and patience, and if you can get it done before the ear fatigue sets in, you really can get what you want out of them in most cases.
I did a video showcasing the Master Effects EQ4H and PMEQ, and even though under the mic the adjustments didn't sound quite as good as they did in the room, I found it made me really enjoy an amp that I struggled with on it's own.

That thumbnail = automatic approval!
 
Last edited:
Glen is like the Frank Burns or Doctor Smith of YouTube.
 
Almost a year later the Ibanez PTEQ came in yesterday.
So I sent a few hours with the PTEQ in the effects loop of my Fryette Sig X and Les Paul with Seymour Duncan Distortion and 59 with split coil.
So far really liking it. Not a lot of noise with high gain. Controls have plenty of room around them to easy control. This combination of GEQ with the potentiometers to control the frequency and Q seems a very natural experience. Set flat it does take away from some of the organic of the sound. But less than a lot of other EQ I have used. It's actually fairly neutral. Seems really well voiced for guitar.

Definitely need to try it in front of the amp. More time with it before I make any real conclusions.

Anyone else using the PTEQ ??
 
Last edited:
Almost a year later the Ibanez PTEQ came in yesterday.
So I sent a few hours with the PTEQ in the effects loop of my Fryette Sig X and Les Paul with Seymour Duncan Distortion and 59 with split coil.
So far really liking it. Not a lot of noise with high gain. Controls have plenty of room around them to easy control. This combination of GEQ with the potentiometers to control the frequency and Q seems a very natural experience. Set flat it does take away from some of the organic of the sound. But less than a lot of other EQ I have used. It's actually fairly neutral. Seems really well voiced for guitar.

Definitely need to try it in front of the amp. More time with it before I make any real conclusions.

Anyone else using the PTEQ ??

I got mine a few months ago; only use it in front of the amps; not always on, I use it for a different sound / lead. The only drawback is the range of the level (+/- 6 dB) vs my Source Audio EQ2 (+/- 18 dB)...it still works great, but doesn't push the front end enough when I want to.
 
I got mine a few months ago; only use it in front of the amps; not always on, I use it for a different sound / lead. The only drawback is the range of the level (+/- 6 dB) vs my Source Audio EQ2 (+/- 18 dB)...it still works great, but doesn't push the front end enough when I want to.
Each slider is +/- 10 dB. The level knob is 6 dB of boost. I tend to fine tune so the range works well for me.
I have not tried it in front of the amp yet. But don't usually boost that much dB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rsm
Each slider is +/- 10 dB. The level knob is 6 dB of boost. I tend to fine tune so the range works well for me.
I have not tried it in front of the amp yet. But don't usually boost that much dB.
the level seems limited compared to other EQ; +/- 10 dB would be more to my liking. I use the EQ level instead of a drive pedal to push the input signal into the amp.
 
I have the Empress….doesnt sound that great honestly. Has incredible reviews. Maybe mine isn’t working right. Just a bit harsh.
I don't think your wrong as I have tried version 1 and 2 and I could never bond with them as they are somewhat processed and clinical sounding too my ears no matter how I used them in the loop or out front. I had high hopes myself but sold both rather quickly.
 
Almost a year later the Ibanez PTEQ came in yesterday.
So I sent a few hours with the PTEQ in the effects loop of my Fryette Sig X and Les Paul with Seymour Duncan Distortion and 59 with split coil.
So far really liking it. Not a lot of noise with high gain. Controls have plenty of room around them to easy control. This combination of GEQ with the potentiometers to control the frequency and Q seems a very natural experience. Set flat it does take away from some of the organic of the sound. But less than a lot of other EQ I have used. It's actually fairly neutral. Seems really well voiced for guitar.

Definitely need to try it in front of the amp. More time with it before I make any real conclusions.

Anyone else using the PTEQ ??
I thought mine worked well at the beginning of my chain, but I also already have a compressor with 3-band EQ that works well there for input shaping. As a boost, the MXR 10-band worked better because it had more volume. That said, the PTEQ absolutely crushed the 10-band in the loop or after distortion. It's way more natural. Mine is just always on and it makes everything sound better and clearer.
 
Some guys I’m guessing just don’t hear that super clinical/cold sound it has or don’t mind it maybe? It can do a lot of different sounds and approximations of other boosts minus that ugly quality it has, so I can understand some of the appeal. Functionally it’s great, but tonally not so much
I used mine in a much different way. First of all, i used it on a solid state amp. The amp had a pretty bad tone to begin with. I used a graphic in the loop, but the empress parametric i used first after my buffer.

It essentially was shaping my raw guitar singal before my boost. So i turned the gain all the way up on it and went through the q to find the most noise...a very flutie high pitched noise, then i turned the gain all the way down to cut that frequency.

When the guitar signal went into the boost it would not boost that signal, so i could click it off and you would hear a ton of noise. I would click it on, and clarity.

There wass nothing clinical added as i was just subtracting. It was very useful.
 
I have the Empress….doesnt sound that great honestly. Has incredible reviews. Maybe mine isn’t working right. Just a bit harsh.
I kind of thought the same thing. In my opinion it would have been an amazing tool for Studio use but for playing at home or even gigging to me it was just unnecessary and a little over the top
 
Still using a MXR 10 band 108S EQ through all my Mesa & Marshall FX loops. I know the frequencies well enough to drop down and adjust quickly on the fly.

In tandem with boosting the front ( SD-1 ), there's nothing else that is as satisfying as this recipe.

I've been through so many and always come back to this tried and true duo.
 
EQ2 is amazing
2 discrete paths so you can put one in front and one in the loop if you want
noise gate
midi

The para option is crucial for me- I'll give y'all my secret numbers for eq in my loop:

Hi pass anywhere around 100 (80-120)
aggressive boost 160 with a moderately hi q (Ride the Lightning bass boost)
boost 400 for singing Santana
cut 400 for Diezel type crunch chugs

OR cut 500 for normal graphic eq mid cut chugs
OR cut 750 for Mesa Mark style crunch chugs

All of these mid cuts ^ should include boosting the mids on the amp higher than usual

there are some hi mids and hi eq cut boost tricks too but the above is my starting point. You can't get that on a graphic

All that being said, I wonder if a more analog para would yield improved tone? The EQ2 sounds great but I'm open to other paraEQ ideas
 
  • Like
Reactions: rsm
Back
Top