|
|
Post by George Lewis on Jun 10, 2015 8:33:02 GMT
Hi All, The first batch of H&C Echo Units is well and truly gone .. the 2nd batch on the way and the wider guitar community still to be informed. So, for us Shad's specialists it's time for suggestions for the next piece of magic in the Hall-Collins Signature series ! EricMAMS seems to me to have a wonderful idea for a very useful EQ pedal. It should have a "direct" setting for those of us who have long since given up the idea of lugging guitar amps around, and just want to plug straight into the nearest PA ! Hi Mike Here's my 2 cents. I’m not into exactly replicating the sound of all Shads tracks – and maybe not even nailing “that sound” 100%, as heard on the records. I have a soft spot for some of the 60-62 Shads concert recordings (simple and lousy as they are), and that is the sound and character I like and is after mainly. Also my gigging days are over, but I have the luxury of being able to play “live” in my studio at realistic sound levels – and I mostly use my AC30/EF86/blues. As for recording I find myself too lazy these days – but keep planning to do at least a bit more, mañana….! I have found that to get the sound I want the EQing I need are: - a low freq roll off, - a high end roll off - plus a 2 band parametric (boost only/fixed bandwidth), working on a selected range of freqs. For the LF roll off, I used to have a Cutting Edge type of filter (switchable 3 or 4 poles), and just the AC30 Cut control for the high end. For a while I tried a 10 band graphics, but after some considerations and experiments (incl.sound knowledge and valuable experience kindly shared by resident shads track replication expert PhilC (thanks Phil), I went on to built a custom EQ box. After some testing and mods the result seems to fill my needs (for the time being, I probably have to add). The circuit has a sweepable lo-cut filter with switchable slope, and a fixed slope hi-cut filter. In addition the 2 individual parametric boost features mentioned. The lo-cut gives me the full control over the low end tightness, as required for different tunes as I hear it, all in a single dial. The hi-cut filter (working in conjunction with the AC30 cut control), gives very precise control of the brightness - to warm up the higher notes etc – also from one knob. Finally 2 sweepable mid boosts options can add fullness and bite to differing degrees and to selectable frequencies in 2 ranges. To be honest I mostly tend to have everything in my favorite position – but when/if needed (and not too lazy) I can make quick adjustments very easily. Oh - and FYI I have the custom EQ between echo and amp. The concept is obviously not that different from the 10 band EQ setup – but has some advantages for my use and to my ears. Erik A low/hi cut pedal with 3 parametric filters would be very interesting .. especially if it had "Abbey Road Secrets" in the title ! Comments and further ideas ?? Regards George |
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Hall on Jun 10, 2015 9:34:34 GMT
Hi George,
I should probably try one of the Joyo AC Tone pedals as they are so cheap, before wondering whether it would be worth taking the idea any further.
Did you really mean you would like 3 parametric filters or 2 like Erik mentioned?
Regards,
Charlie
|
|
|
|
Post by George Lewis on Jun 10, 2015 9:54:37 GMT
Hi Charlie,
Joyo ?? Don't tell me it's already been done !
Para bands ... definitely 3 .. and some Anorak Shads folks would need at least 15 bands !!
cheers
George
|
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Hall on Jun 10, 2015 10:18:51 GMT
Hi George,
The Joyo pedal is apparently a half decent emulation of an AC30. I have no idea how that translates to the kind of tones we are talking about though!
Don't get me wrong, I like parametric EQs, but I have found that most people don't really understand how they work. Those people just wouldn't ever see the benefits of even a potentially good sounding unit.
One problem is coming up with a design that would work for everyone and the use to which they might put such a unit eg. for direct recording or to use with an existing guitar amp.
When I used the little Vox AC1 to record Happy Birthday, I found that the sound was far more lively (room acoustics) than recording direct, even though the volume level I was playing at was ridiculously quiet! It made me think that having an amp and a mic for recording was a far better method.
Regards,
Charlie
|
|
|
|
Post by Jono on Jun 10, 2015 11:09:37 GMT
Just a thought or 2 off the top of my head, I have found that to get the best out of my guitars I have to 'tune' the parametric EQ into whichever guitar I am using, which points to the problem of a set 'EQ' box, it would react differently to which guitar is plugged in & varying sounds would result.
Secondly we all know that this is a fantastic box of tricks (HCSE) & I feel that a set EQ-ing would be restrictive on the players simply because we do not know at this time exactly what dizzying heights the unit is capable of.
Regards
John
|
|
|
|
Post by rogerbayliss on Jun 10, 2015 17:09:52 GMT
I have a Carl Martin pedal that does high and low roll offs and use a Para Eq with that for this type of EQing. It is different to the EQ in a Graphic EQ pedal. I think EQ is a big part of the sound after the right guitar and amp and settings and correct playing style.
I wish a company would do a pedal which featured 3 band parametric and high cut low cut filtering say with switchable slopes for roll off.
|
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Hall on Jun 10, 2015 17:56:18 GMT
Let's forget about parametric EQs just for the moment.
I assume 6dB per octave would be sufficient for the high cut filter and to just have that sweepable for frequency.
What would you want for the low cut filter, 6dB per octave and 12dB per octave?
Or would two separately tuneable 6dB per octave filters be more useful? I'm thinking it could, not to mention easier to design and build.
Regards,
Charlie
|
|
|
|
Post by rogerbayliss on Jun 10, 2015 18:03:10 GMT
I think 12 dB and 24 dB roll offs would be better Charlie so they come a bit closer to studio style slopes ?.
A sweep for the frequency would be right too. Have a look at the specs for a Carl Martin Contour and Boost pedal which I have and it works well. It has a gain pot, freq selector and a center cross over frequency off 440hz I think. The gain is essential when cutting frequencies to make up for the losses and volume.
I also have the Empress Para EQ which is a great parmametric eq pedal. I will get some links for you and post below for thoughts and ideas
|
|
|
|
Post by rogerbayliss on Jun 10, 2015 18:08:24 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Hall on Jun 10, 2015 19:17:43 GMT
Hi Roger,
24dB per octave is a very extreme roll off curve, are you sure? Those sort of curves are more for getting rid of unwanted noise like turntable rumble etc. without removing too much of the required sound.
I've looked at the specs of the two devices you have. I agree a gain control to compensate for EQ settings is required.
Regards,
Charlie
|
|
|
|
Post by erikMAMS on Jun 10, 2015 20:20:30 GMT
I'm sure 12dB/oct will do. 24dB/oct is for problem solving IMO, and that steep a slope doesn't sound very musical for tone shaping - at least that's how I hear it. As a matter of fact some of the details mentioned fits my thinking and (prelim) design   Erik |
|
|
|
Post by rogerbayliss on Jun 10, 2015 20:41:38 GMT
Not too sure Charlie as no expert but I can say the Carl Martin does a great job so whatever that is using ? I think maybe 12dB rather than 6dB. I gather the low pass stages can be ganged so a 6dB filter would need up to 4 gangs for 24dB.
I think I would be guided by some studio gear values that have proven to be classics in their time as an idea. I think a good 12 dB might be needed IMHO. Listening to Brian Ray playing the old Beatles tunes on his demo video shows the sound change clearly towards Abbey Rd style EQ so the Carl Martin pedal has something like the right specs for it. The spec sheet does not indicate the roll off though sadly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Hall on Jun 10, 2015 21:19:58 GMT
Hi Roger,
Studios may have all kind of gadgets but you wouldn't use them all in practice. Ganging or a series chain of filters is a way of getting an ultimate steep roll off but the curve is very sloppy, this is how it worked with the Cutting Edge. More precise filters allow a much flatter response to the filter frequency and then the roll off slope is much tighter, but 24dB filters are complicated and I think unnecessary, as Erik also explains. I think 6dB (easy to design and build so not expensive) and 12dB filters would be good enough. The thing is, you want one 6dB filter to emulate the roll off found in the early Vox amps and then maybe a switchable 6dB/12dB filter in addition.
Regards,
Charlie
|
|
|
|
Post by rogerbayliss on Jun 10, 2015 21:32:21 GMT
Yes I am persuaded by your thoughts Charlie and think 12 dB is sufficient. You of course will be the designer and will decide what is practicable and cost effective. I think the frequenciy should be sweepable as well as boosting output. The Carl Martin is a good template for this idea. Then we have to consider adding in the parametric bands to complete the idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Hall on Jun 10, 2015 22:07:22 GMT
Hi Roger,
I might want to take a look at your Carl Martin pedal at some later time if you are agreeable to the idea. I don't mean I want to open it up, just to listen to it and maybe take some audio measurements to get a better idea of what it does.
As for parametric filters, I already did some design work on them a while back so that shouldn't be too difficult for me, although they are quite complicated.
I noticed the pedal is mains powered. I would prefer an external power supply like with the Hall & Collins Signature Echo as that eliminates a few potential problems.
Regards,
Charlie
|
|
|
|
Post by George Lewis on Jun 10, 2015 23:18:17 GMT
Hi Charlie, I would think for a pedal, roll off of 6dB would be sufficient, though perhaps switchable for -12 dB. With additional 3 parametric bands with adjustable Q it would be quite versatile .. even for tracking down and reducing acoustic feedback issues. Being able to store and recall user customisable presets would be very nifty as the parametric bands would be more precise tonewise. An additional balanced DI type output would also make it more versatile. Here is an interesting little programmable EQ (7+1 bands) pedal. The physical design seems a good example. Small, battery or external power, 4 programmable presets and reasonably priced. presets selectable by midi might also be of interest to some. www.sourceaudio.net/products/toolblox/programmable_eq.phpRegards George |
|
|
|
Post by scanners on Jun 11, 2015 0:16:54 GMT
I was was wondering if your are planning to expand sales of the Hall & Collins to more than just enthusiasts like us? As far as suggestions, maybe a couple of tremolo and the double track would be nice. yeah I like the idea of an eq pedal, not sure if you are interested in building amps again Charlie?
Matthew
|
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Hall on Jun 11, 2015 10:18:28 GMT
Hi George,
I think programmable EQ would be beyond anything I could achieve. I could see what John thinks as he is the programmer! The pedal you have linked to is a graphic EQ so it is feasible to program the slider settings. Programming parametric EQ pot settings could be too difficult.
Hi Matthew,
There are no plans to expand the capabilities of the Hall & Collins Signature Echo to include effects other than echo/delays.
I lost interest in building amps a long time ago, although I did build one as a favour for a friend, and I used that amp on Sunday to demo the Hall & Collins Signature Echo.
Regards,
Charlie
|
|
|
|
Post by erikMAMS on Jun 11, 2015 11:01:50 GMT
As far as I can see there’s already all sorts of boxes available – from sophisticated studio style types with lots of tweakable parameters, to simpler stomp box types – to take care of every EQ/processing task you can think of. What I think would be interesting (and have some appeal) is a dedicate “vintage instro guitar EQ”, designed and customized to go between the echo and a suitable amp for live use, and with a few (as possible) carefully selected features make it possible for shadows-music-guitarist to get closer to the guitar sound they are after - ie probably the original recordings for most (the box might also be useable/useful in recording situations, but with every DAW we already have all the post processing tools we need). What technology is used doesn’t matter IMO (doesn’t need have anything to do with Abbey Road gear or other hype'ish stuff), and progamable or not - as long as it does the job AND is simple to use. My own first take on this (for personal use) is my VEQ – with lo/hi cut and two parametrics. I see most are considering 3 parametric bands, I don’t know what that is based on - and 3 might be needed – but if 2 can do it it’s preferable for simplicity IMO. A matter of choosing the right ranges I think – and above a certain point the/any added improvement in sound by more bands might be less/minimal in live situations - and really not justify the extra complexity in adjustments. Less knob tweaking is better IMO. What I have done so far is compare a number of recordings (mic’ed AC30/EF86) with the sound set as best as possible from the amp, and compare which post processing EQ was needed to get the recorded sound closer to the target – all this for a number of tunes. My own recordings are not that many (or sophisticated) – but PhilC has replicated numerous tracks and kindly went through the post processing EQ details in some his tracks. Turned out there was some similarities between our details, and even some EQing common denominators across the tracks. Obviously it’s limited material to go by and not high tech science, but it’s a start at least – and on that I have set the ranges of the two parametrics filters in the VEQ – with fixed Q, and boost option only. There are plenty of proven LP/HP/parametric filter designs. For the lo/hi cut I use Salen Keys filters with switchable slope 6/12dB roll off for the lo cut, and only 6dB with tweaked damping for the hi-cut (sounded the best to my ears). For the midd bands I chose State Variable Filters (which are true parametrics with all parameters adjustable), for simplicity Q is preset though. As Charlie said, parametrics filters are relatively complicated circuits, but with simpler alternatives you’ll loose one or more parameters. Below is a pic of my first proto/test build, incl. a peak under the hood. Mind you, this is all DIY tinkering and a test build only – with reuse parts/box etc. As you can see even with my intention to keep things as simple and user friendly as possible, the number of control gets plenty easily. Erik   |
|
|
|
Post by rogerbayliss on Jun 11, 2015 16:44:40 GMT
As far as I can see there’s already all sorts of boxes available – from sophisticated studio style types with lots of tweakable parameters, to simpler stomp box types – to take care of every EQ/processing task you can think of. What I think would be interesting (and have some appeal) is a dedicate “vintage instro guitar EQ”, designed and customized to go between the echo and a suitable amp for live use, and with a few (as possible) carefully selected features make it possible for shadows-music-guitarist to get closer to the guitar sound they are after - ie probably the original recordings for most (the box might also be useable/useful in recording situations, but with every DAW we already have all the post processing tools we need). What technology is used doesn’t matter IMO (doesn’t need have anything to do with Abbey Road gear or other hype'ish stuff), and progamable or not - as long as it does the job AND is simple to use. My own first take on this (for personal use) is my VEQ – with lo/hi cut and two parametrics. I see most are considering 3 parametric bands, I don’t know what that is based on - and 3 might be needed – but if 2 can do it it’s preferable for simplicity IMO. A matter of choosing the right ranges I think – and above a certain point the/any added improvement in sound by more bands might be less/minimal in live situations - and really not justify the extra complexity in adjustments. Less knob tweaking is better IMO. What I have done so far is compare a number of recordings (mic’ed AC30/EF86) with the sound set as best as possible from the amp, and compare which post processing EQ was needed to get the recorded sound closer to the target – all this for a number of tunes. My own recordings are not that many (or sophisticated) – but PhilC has replicated numerous tracks and kindly went through the post processing EQ details in some his tracks. Turned out there was some similarities between our details, and even some EQing common denominators across the tracks. Obviously it’s limited material to go by and not high tech science, but it’s a start at least – and on that I have set the ranges of the two parametrics filters in the VEQ – with fixed Q, and boost option only. There are plenty of proven LP/HP/parametric filter designs. For the lo/hi cut I use Salen Keys filters with switchable slope 6/12dB roll off for the lo cut, and only 6dB with tweaked damping for the hi-cut (sounded the best to my ears). For the midd bands I chose State Variable Filters (which are true parametrics with all parameters adjustable), for simplicity Q is preset though. As Charlie said, parametrics filters are relatively complicated circuits, but with simpler alternatives you’ll loose one or more parameters. Below is a pic of my first proto/test build, incl. a peak under the hood. Mind you, this is all DIY tinkering and a test build only – with reuse parts/box etc. As you can see even with my intention to keep things as simple and user friendly as possible, the number of control gets plenty easily. Erik This basically what we are looking for Erik. I am sure Charlie would find your findings helpful in any design he finally goes for. Yes 2 parametric fi;lters would do but probably 3 would be a little more versatile. |
|
|
|
Post by rogerbayliss on Jun 11, 2015 16:46:51 GMT
Hi Roger, I might want to take a look at your Carl Martin pedal at some later time if you are agreeable to the idea. I don't mean I want to open it up, just to listen to it and maybe take some audio measurements to get a better idea of what it does. As for parametric filters, I already did some design work on them a while back so that shouldn't be too difficult for me, although they are quite complicated. I noticed the pedal is mains powered. I would prefer an external power supply like with the Hall & Collins Signature Echo as that eliminates a few potential problems. Regards, Charlie Certainly willing to assist Charlie. Did you check out the UTube videos on the Carl Martin webpage for sounds achievable and have a listen. Yes it has a 3 pin 240v plug attached. Dunno what is better that or a wall wart ! LOL |
|
|
|
Post by rogerbayliss on Jun 11, 2015 17:01:54 GMT
Whilst this sort of pedal would prove to be a great tone setter for Shads I would envisage a lot of guitarists would want a pedal like this for tone shaping. Heavy metalists are an example of guitariss who often seek to shape their sound. So this pedal could prove to be a big seller !
|
|
|
|
Post by George Lewis on Jun 11, 2015 22:23:38 GMT
Hi Charlie, As Roger says this type of pedal should appeal to other genre guitarists and including bass, rhythm, acoustic, perhaps even keyboard players, so it should be versatile without being over complicated. Whilst fiddling with knobs and writing settings down is OK at home, for anyone wanting significantly different tones for live performance, programmable presets are pretty essential. I have no idea how parametric settings are set ... but are there solid state micro stepped resistor arrays that can be programmed, or could a slider type pot be used ? Maybe there are even complete little frequency filters ?? Perhaps time to ask John if he's interested to investigate another challenge !  Regards George |
|
|
|
Post by rogerbayliss on Jun 12, 2015 10:45:51 GMT
The problem is that most tunes have a different or slightly different EQ setting done in the studio, so I find a generic setting is best for live playing. Same with echos, find 2 or 3 that cover most things for live work. However if you want to record or play with the sound at home to get nearer then twiddle away as they say.
Charlie says presets might be tricky but will speak to JC about feasibility.
A variable Q factor would be another consideration as fixed Q limits possibilities I find. The Empress Para EQ has 3 switchable Q settings which work OK but sweepable is better if it is do-able.
I understand the British EQ uses a wide Q setting as noted by some manufacturers in there gear.
|
|
|
|
Post by philc on Jun 12, 2015 11:05:55 GMT
Roger,
I have four types of Parametric eq's on my D8b, the two "British" has low-band/high-pass filter, two mid-parametric bands, and a high-band/low-pass filter; British H/P EQ with low-band/high pass filter and three upper parametric bands.
For this type of pedal, variable Q and sweepable frequencies whether preset or not is very important.
Phil
|
|
|
|
Post by Cruachan on Jun 12, 2015 12:45:40 GMT
Hi, What an interesting thread! However, what is perhaps being overlooked, when all the 'old hands' get together, is that there is much industry jargon used in their discussions that flies over the heads of those, like me, who are still at the initial stages of dipping their toes tentatively in these fascinating, albeit mysterious waters. So....here is a link to another brief informative article explaining stuff like Equalization Filters and 'Q' (Quality Factor) en.wikiaudio.org/Equalization_filterMike  |
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Hall on Jun 14, 2015 17:54:40 GMT
I have noted what has been said and will put it to one side for the moment while I investigate pentode valve characteristics. From what I have read so far they contain more third harmonic than triode valves. If I get somewhere with this it would make sense to incorporate it into the finished item so users would have the EF86 type sound if they wanted it.
Regards,
Charlie
|
|
|
|
Post by Ed Cornish on Jun 14, 2015 19:18:54 GMT
Hi all,
You must excuse me for being only halfway down page 1 when it comes to all this stuff. May I go back to the mention of the Joyo AC Tone pedal that Charlie mentioned. Is this a stand alone pedal, or could you use this in conjunction with an effects pedal like a Zoom G2. And if you could, where in the chain would you put it? I am talking about both live playing and recording here.
Thanks
Ed
|
|
|
|
Post by garystrat on Jun 14, 2015 22:06:50 GMT
The Joyo AC Tone pedal is a copy the Tech 21 Sans Amp "Liverpool", both are a pedal for getting VOX amp emulations. There is no cut control, EQ is based on High, Mid and Bass settings, there is also tone shaping and drive. Both are also analogue as opposed to digital emulations, I have the Tech 21 "Liverpool" and although I have tried several of the new generation plug-in amp emulators on the computer, I still keep coming back to the physical pedal! tech21nyc.com/products/sansamp/characterseries.htmlIn the case of the Tech 21 "Liverpool" it can be used as a stand alone pre-amp, but is a lot more expensive than the Joyo (not sure if this can be used as a pre-amp) at around £160.00. Whilst it may not seem totally intuitive, based on Tech 21's recommendation my chain is guitar, Liverpool, MXR 10 M108 10 Band EQ, echo, Apogee Duet interface to computer. Hope this helps Gary |
|
|
|
Post by demowest on Jun 16, 2015 8:15:33 GMT
Hi all,
I'm not quite sure whether this is the right thread to post this to. If not, please move it to the appropriate area.
IMHO it would be excellent if there was an option to adjust the speed of the (emulated) tape as it was on some of the old echo machines. It would make the Hall & Collins Signature Echo unit even more versatile.
Best regards,
Joachim
|
|
Hi Mike 
