|
|
Post by Cruachan on Jun 16, 2015 10:23:16 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 Hi Ed, I am experimenting with the Joyo JF-13 ACTone pedal and, I must say, it's an impressive performer. Contrary to what others may believe, I find the best position for this pedal, like the Caline CP-24 10 Band EQ, is between the Hall & Collins Signature Echo and the Amp. Charlie has stated in another thread that you would not wish to modify the guitar signal before it is processed by the Echo unit. I would imagine that this logic would apply when any other echo unit is used. charliehall.proboards.com/post/171787Regards, Mike |
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Hall on Jun 16, 2015 19:36:49 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 Joachim, We decided it was better to not have variable speed as it enabled many other features that we considered to be more important. Regards, Charlie |
|
|
|
Post by demowest on Jun 17, 2015 5:55:13 GMT
Hi Charlie,
After posting my suggestion I thought of all the variables involved in a speed controlled echo unit and I must admit you did the right thing by not implementing such a feature.
Best,
Joachim
|
|
|
|
Post by John Collins on Jun 22, 2015 23:48:05 GMT
What an interesting thread this is that I managed to miss!
From my perspective, possibilities for the future are definitely open. George's idea for analog EQ controlled by presets (ediable) seems possible. Midi was mentioned and that's something I have been working on in the background as well.
I'm up for a challenge - well after a short break, anyway!
John
|
|
|
|
Post by scanners on Jun 23, 2015 0:19:07 GMT
Hi, Regarding suggestions, I don't know if Charlie would be interested in going down this route, Digitech put out a few artist pedals a few years ago Eric Clapton, Jimi Hendrix and Brian May, they did amp and effect modeling for their most popular songs, here is my Hendrix one I have, it nails the tones www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LEA5Fe8Dm8Matthew |
|
|
|
Post by John Collins on Jun 23, 2015 7:07:58 GMT
For mine, I would be thinking of something more versatile than a single artist device. Perhaps something where you can adjust the parametrics and low and high cut filters to get the desied sound then save to a User area. The user patches then can be recalled via the front panel, or via midi program change command. Not sure if all this is possible yet.......
John
|
|
|
|
Post by philc on Jun 23, 2015 7:14:21 GMT
Hi John,
I think adjustable parameters is a necessity as all guitars and amps differ, the Hendrix pedal on the You tube link just goes to show that although the pedal has his sound, whatever the guy is plugged into doesn't.
Phil
|
|
|
|
Post by John Collins on Jun 23, 2015 9:04:18 GMT
Hi Phil,
Yes I agree - If all parameters of such a device were made adjustable (including Q) then the user would be able to set up for a particular combination of guitar and amplifier to achieve the desired sound. Then if those settings could be saved and recalled later it would be very flexible I think. You could have, for example, a patch saved for a Strat-Vox-Shadows sound, then the next patch might be Gibson-Marshall-Angus Young.!
Interesting.
John
|
|
|
|
Post by philc on Jun 23, 2015 9:10:00 GMT
Hi John, then the only problem is if the player knows how to adjust those parameters  Phil |
|
|
|
Post by John Collins on Jun 23, 2015 9:18:49 GMT
Yes, a good point Phil. Perhaps we could have a set of "ballpark" presets that the user could tweak.  John |
|
|
|
Post by philc on Jun 23, 2015 9:26:10 GMT
Sounds good.
Phil
|
|
|
|
Post by erikMAMS on Jun 23, 2015 9:49:55 GMT
Isn't there already a myriad of units available that will do every EQ and processing you can think of - programable too?
What IMO would be interesting in this forum is a dedicated EQ/process box with the target sound(s) "build in" so to speak - and just tweakable to compensate for equipments diffs or personal prefs on certain details (similar to how it is on the HCSE echo).
Would appeal to a smaller market obviously, but by widening the purpose it could easily become just another EQ.
Erik
|
|
|
|
Post by John Collins on Jun 23, 2015 14:03:20 GMT
Hi Erik,
Are those existing units that you refer Analogue?
I'm not talking about processing the signal in the digital domain (though that would be much easier to do, but rather a box, much like you describe, but with the added function of an MCU controlling the Eq parameters, enabling things such as patch storage, editing and midi control. As mentioned earlier, I haven't looked into this in great detail, but should be possible.
Regards,
John
|
|
|
|
Post by ha2he on Jun 23, 2015 14:24:17 GMT
Hi All, Not sure if this is the kind of thing you are talking about. I know it's only a seven band EQ but it looks possible to expand on something like this to end up with what would be required. Link Here.Regards, Tim. |
|
|
|
Post by John Collins on Jun 23, 2015 14:40:37 GMT
Hi Tim,
That one looks like a graphic equalizer, with fixed frequency bands,rather than the adjustable frequency parametric EQ that has been discussed by the contributors to this thread. It does seem to be digitally controlled though, which makes it a bit different from some of the other graphic EQ units like the Caline 24 which has been mentioned in recent threads.
John
|
|
|
|
Post by ha2he on Jun 23, 2015 15:29:47 GMT
Hi John, Of course it is! Looks like the teachers were right all those years ago:- Must pay more attention! Regards, Tim. |
|
|
|
Post by George Lewis on Jun 24, 2015 0:24:45 GMT
Hi Erik,
I've spent considerable time Googling programmable parametric EQ's and so far no relatively simple analogue unit such as is being suggested here.
There are a few digital units including some cheaper Behringer 24 and 40 band processors eg "Feedback Destoyers", but that is not really what we are looking for.
I would be interested if you know of anything available ?
regards
George
|
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Hall on Jun 24, 2015 0:47:34 GMT
Hi Erik,
I like the way you are thinking but I'm not sure just yet if it would be an ideal solution. When I was working on EQing tracks with Dave recently the settings I made were all over the place, however, he was using small amps like the AC4 and Mini 3. It should be possible to know better if he tries some recording with one of his AC30s when he has the time to do it.
Meanwhile, I've been quite busy learning about the EF86. There's still a way to go yet before I can put something together to emulate that kind of sound but what I'm really trying to do is to find out more about what makes them apparently sound so different. It could end up there is not as much difference as is generally thought and it could have as much or more to do with the way the EF86 channels are EQ'd with the brilliance switch on amps that have it or something similar to it.
Regards,
Charlie
|
|
|
|
Post by philc on Jun 24, 2015 7:09:46 GMT
Charlie, You have something there, I think the EF86 valves do contribute but the tone circuitry more, especially the bass cut. Here's the manual for my VoxAC30H2 showing the AC15 Channel. The extra tones added via the Brilliance switch sound totally wrong for early Shadows recordings. Phil  |
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Hall on Jun 24, 2015 7:46:06 GMT
Hi Phil,
Yes, bass cut rather than treble boost has much more to do with the early sounds. The additional treble feature mentioned might appeal to younger players and I suspect that is why the extra position was added.
Regards,
Charlie
|
|
|
|
Post by erikMAMS on Jun 24, 2015 12:36:57 GMT
John and George
OK – I probably generalized and exaggerated a bit to underline my point. Maybe a programable parametric EQ as such isn’t actually available. But wouldn’t many of the (often low priced) guitar processors have the ability to run several “effects” simultaneously – ie one graphic EQ plus one 2 or 3 band parametric etc – and save as a user patch. Digitechs. Line6 and Zooms comes to mind (starting from £25!!!) but there are possibly others. All DSP though I’d guess. On top of that there are certainly quite a number of non programable EQ/parametric pedals or boxes available.
But – an analog EQ controlled by ediable presets, and patch storage/easy call up etc sound good.
I can’t argue against that.
The main point I’m trying to make thought is that IMO too many parameters adjustable (as brought up earlier, for versatility and a wider market) isn’t necessarily for the better the way I see it. The concept for a EQ/shaper/preamp(simulating EF86 if necessary) I’m envisaging is a more dedicated and specialized unit for a certain market. Just like there’s certainly not a lack of good echo/delay units on the market, but the H&CSE fills a gap for a certain purpose and offers unique performance in that special field. Likewise I see a possible EQ/shaper/preamp box do the same – fill a gap for a certain sound/character/style rather than just be another EQ.
Whether it’s at all possible - or ideal - is another matter, but IMO it worth exploring further.
Charlie
I follow your comments about the EQ settings might be all over the place – I think that’s certainly one of the challenges, if it’s at all possible to boil it down to something manageable. For recording and replicating each and every track/sound in detail probably not – but for live playing and less than 100% accurate use I think it could turn out that a number of selectable “characters” or “moods” with selected details adjustable would go a long way.
Re EF86. Although the EF86 channel is my favorite, I’ve come to belive it’s mostly about the circuit/EQ as you mention actually more than the valve characteristics. On my AC30 (90’s RI with added EF86 channel) the TB and EF86 channels can be setup up to sound very close – in a way that most wouldn’t hear the differences (not sure I could tell myself 10 out of 10 in a blind test or when the "light are on").
Erik
|
|
|
|
Post by philc on Jun 24, 2015 13:09:29 GMT
Erik, you are correct about setting up the TB and EF86 channels to sound very similar, the big difference being the bass cut switch on the EF86 channel on my amp.
Phil
|
|
|
|
Post by John Collins on Jun 24, 2015 14:49:29 GMT
It's a really interesting thread that George has started here. A lot of valid points of view are being presented, so it is a real "think tank", I reckon.
Regards
John
|
|
|
|
Post by tonyarrowsmith on Jun 29, 2015 21:34:44 GMT
How about an EQ pedal/unit which uses the tone bands and parametric parameters that we're used in the mixing desk at Abbey Road
Tony
|
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Hall on Jun 29, 2015 22:01:04 GMT
Hi Tony,
I'll consider that, thanks.
Can someone let me know if the Abbey Road mixing desk had parametric EQ or was that done with separate EQ units?
Regards,
Charlie
|
|
|
|
Post by Cruachan on Jun 29, 2015 23:57:00 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by philc on Jun 30, 2015 6:43:55 GMT
Hi Charlie,
I've got all the AR desk info with pictures and also all outboards etc but I'm in Italy, so if your still interested when I return, I'll send it to you.
Phil
|
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Hall on Jun 30, 2015 8:34:40 GMT
Hi Mike,
Thanks. It seems the replacement desk did not have parametric EQ on each channel but did have a presence control on groups of channels.
Hi Phil,
Yes please, when you're back, I'm very interested. Enjoy your holiday!
Regards,
Charlie
|
|
|
|
Post by rogerbayliss on Jul 1, 2015 11:34:57 GMT
How about an EQ pedal/unit which uses the tone bands and parametric parameters that we're used in the mixing desk at Abbey Road Tony Great idea but I think that would be a tough one ! There were two different REDD desks used during the early period the REDD 17 and REDD 37. Both had different EQ capabilities. Additionally Abbey Road techs were known to use EQ breakout boxes for additional EQ. I also remember there was a Bass lift feature on the REDD desks as well. Then there were the tape machines and mics and mic pre etc etc. So for Charlie and John to duplicate all of this I feel would be beyond the scope of a simple EQ stomp box. However John and Charlie will of course know what is feasible. |
|
|
|
Post by John Collins on Jul 1, 2015 16:06:18 GMT
Looks like it's going to need a couple of people to carry this thing around to gigs! |
|
