• The Gear Page Apparel & Merch Shop is Open!

    Based on member demand, The Gear Page is pleased to announce that our Apparel Merch Shop is now open. The shop’s link is in the blue Navigation bar (on the right side), “Shop,” with t-shirts, hats, neck buffs, and stickers to start. Here’s the direct link: www.thegearpageshop.com

    You’ll find exclusive high-quality apparel and merchandise; all items are ethical, sustainably produced, and we will be continuously sourcing and adding new choices. 

    We can ship internationally. All shipping is at cost.


The Mid Focus EQ is a HPF (HD500)

Aaron Mayo

Member
Messages
2,180
This stuff was contained in another thread, bit was OT, so I made a new one.

A lot of folks have not been happy with the boomy low end on the POD HDs. The mid focus eq is a bandpass filter and can be used to trim the fat from boomy amp/cab models. Place it immediately following the amp block. Here's how I set it up:

set the gain at 10-ish (the is roughly unity)
both Q's, I believe, are set at 50 by default. Leave them alone.
LP freq goes to 100, so it's "out of the circuit."
HP freq is adjusted by ear (depends on room, guitar, amp, cab, etc). Roll it around till the bottom is tight enough for you. I usually end up at 30.

I'd love to know the cutoff freq (not the %), but it's no big deal since you should use you ear anyway. It's not global, but it works for me. Hope that helps.
 

fr8_trane

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
7,025
The problem with the midfocus is 2 fold.

One the slope of the filter seems to be very gradual and there is no control over it.

two you have no idea what frequecies are being affected

In my experience using the mid focus you end up with either too much low end removed or not enough. Its like using a brick to pound in a nail. it sort of works but its definitely not the best tool for the job.

As many of us have noted there needs to be a dedicated, well thought out global EQ (in HZ!) to deal with the excess bass in the HD.

Hell a simple well executed variable HPF with a steep slope would work wonders. I tried all of the EQ's in the HD and nothing sounded as good as the simple 100hz filter built into the EV powered monitor I was using at the time
 

Aaron Mayo

Member
Messages
2,180
The problem with the midfocus is 2 fold.

One the slope of the filter seems to be very gradual and there is no control over it.

two you have no idea what frequecies are being affected

In my experience using the mid focus you end up with either too much low end removed or not enough. Its like using a brick to pound in a nail. it sort of works but its definitely not the best tool for the job.

As many of us have noted there needs to be a dedicated, well thought out global EQ (in HZ!) to deal with the excess bass in the HD.

Hell a simple well executed variable HPF with a steep slope would work wonders. I tried all of the EQ's in the HD and nothing sounded as good as the simple 100hz filter built into the EV powered monitor I was using at the time
The default Q works for me. Q affects slope, I believe, but I don't touch it cause it works where it is. I'd like to know the hz that corresponds to my setting, but I'm using my ears, so no big deal. Global eq would be nice, I agree, but I don't use a ton of patches live anyway and haven't run out of DSP, so setting it up per patch works. I disagree w/ the "brick" analogy, but to each his own, no biggie! FWIW, I think Shure makes an in-line HPF on a barrel connector you could put between the POD and everything else.
 

pluck

Member
Messages
21
I'd like to know the hz that corresponds to my setting
You may know this already, but you could easily do this in any DAW using a frequency analyzer like Voxengo's Span(free btw). Google up a white noise audio file to route through your HD and put the analyzer plugin on the track receiving the signal. Pan the send and receive tracks hard left and right to prevent a feedback loop. Now you can adjust the EQ parameters on the HD and observe their effect on frequency, Q, etc.
 

fr8_trane

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
7,025
You may know this already, but you could easily do this in any DAW using a frequency analyzer like Voxengo's Span(free btw). Google up a white noise audio file to route through your HD and put the analyzer plugin on the track receiving the signal. Pan the send and receive tracks hard left and right to prevent a feedback loop. Now you can adjust the EQ parameters on the HD and observe their effect on frequency, Q, etc.
Sure you could do that... or L6 could change a couple lines of code and display the frequencies properly.
 

Will Chen

Platinum Supporting Member
Messages
6,707
The Mid Focus EQ does the job for me. Its kinda an odd name for what it does, though I guess there's not much else they could call it as its not really a band-pass. My main issue with it is the lack of proper labeling. I'd really like to be able to see the frequency and eve a graphical representation of the filter. I know these things should always be tuned by ear, but it would just make things easier for me.

The channel strip coming in the next update contains both HP and LP functionality. How tweakable it will be is yet to be determined...
 

Aaron Mayo

Member
Messages
2,180
You may know this already, but you could easily do this in any DAW using a frequency analyzer like Voxengo's Span(free btw). Google up a white noise audio file to route through your HD and put the analyzer plugin on the track receiving the signal. Pan the send and receive tracks hard left and right to prevent a feedback loop. Now you can adjust the EQ parameters on the HD and observe their effect on frequency, Q, etc.
Thanks, that's a great idea.
 

Rena Rune

Senior Member
Messages
3,218
the problem is the boominess isn't necessarily going to be a nice slope upwards into the low end in of itself. A lot of the time the "Mud" comes from the higher part of the bass or even the lower mids at times. The mid-focus EQ helps, but it's not quite what you need.
 

Jim Soloway

Member
Messages
14,439
I tried this out this morning and I found the results to be both way too dramatic and unpleasantly boxy. I much prefer using the studio EQ. The results are much more subtle.
 

Pietro

2-Voice Guitar Junkie and All-Around Awesome Guy
Messages
16,442
Keep in mind, those of you who want an all new EQ, that the HD series uses M-series effects, JUST like in the M-series. They did not feel, it seems, they had to create anything new in that regard, to add to their all-new amp modeling.

Were they right? Sales numbers may say yes, it seems, as they seem to have driven some other guys from the market entirely!

I think we need to start thinking about telling Line6 what we want in the eventual "POD HD 1000" or whatever it will be called.

That said, the global EQ is apparently on their list of things to do soon, so... maybe...
 

scottro123

Member
Messages
193
I did not stumble across this trick until several months after owning the HD. Thanks for posting, it should help others. This is a definite must in dialing in the Marshall models.

It sounds like the 2.0 update may have a more elegant solution to this issue in the mic pre feature:
“Vintage” HD Mic Preamp Model. A vintage-voiced tube mic preamp based on* the Requisite® Y7. Place this model at any point in the signal chain to give incredible warmth to vocal sounds and guitar and bass tones. Its controls include:
Gain
HPF (High Pass Filter)
LPF (Low Pass Filter)
Phase
Output



I'm hoping this provides some of the 'Magic Fairy Dust' that helps the models sound a bit more like what my ears hear from the modeled cabs instead of what the mic hears if you know what I mean.
 

meambobbo

Member
Messages
493
The only EQ's I've gotten good results from are the Studio and Parametric. I just use a bunch of them - as many as needed to dial in the tone in combination with the amp EQ controls.

I used to put a graphic Eq in front my amp to completely change the way the crap stock pickups in my Ibanez RGA8 sounded, but I've repalced those pickups, so I no longer use the graphic EQ at all.

Also, I like to use dual cabinets - mixing the Treadplate and XXL together - this produces a nice full range sound. I tend to use the SM57 on axis, but sometimes I use the 409 and 421 dyn mics.

I don't understand all the clamoring for a global EQ. They should just add a bunch more EQ effects. The Pod XT/X3 EQ, a Mesa Mark 5 band graphic EQ, a 10 band graphic EQ (possibly spread over two effects), a Parametric EQ without the "lows" and "highs" parameters to save DSP, a dual Parametric EQ (again no lows or highs), a HPF/LPF, a 2 band notch EQ, and a 3 band notch EQ.

Since DSP is such an issue, Line 6 should try to only include features that someone would want, or make variations where some are stripped down to core functionality. For instance, I'll often use 3-4 Parametric EQ's on a patch, but I'll only use lows or highs on maybe 1 or 2 of them. That's enough wasted DSP for at least another effect.

I have also said that Line 6 should simply re-EQ the cab/mic models. The difference between the Treadplate and XXL is simply ridiculous. They're both closed back cabinets loaded with 4 vintage 30's. There's no way their frequency response is so colossally different. I'm not saying they should all be EQ'ed to have an unrealistic flat response, but they should be a lot more neutral than they are.
 




Trending Topics

Top