Currently Being ModeratedJan 15, 2011 3:28 PM (in response to arcticman)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
Seriously... can anyone help me understand how to utilize the frequency and Q parameters expressed as %?
Here's an example:
(copied from the Advanced manual)
This EQ features a Low shelf, High shelf and one parametric band, with a 12dB Gain boost/cut control for each.
Adjusts the low frequencies (a high pass filter).
Adjusts the high frequencies (a low pass filter).
Freq, Q and Gain: These 3 parameters make offer a single parametric "band" EQ filter. Set the frequency to center the band and use the Gain to boost or cut this frequency. The Q
is used to widen or narrow the adjacent frequencies.
How do I know what frequency I'm selecting when adjusting the "frequency knob"... what is 50% frequency?
Currently Being ModeratedJan 16, 2011 12:01 AM (in response to Lution777)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
There's several threads about this but no good answer. I tried to do a frequency analysis with a plugin to figure it out, but those sliders jump all over the place and I couldn't get a good reading. Sorry. Line 6 should realize that % is not an acceptable unit of measure for many things - you don't have the delay time in %, but miliseconds. hopefully they remedy this in an update.
Currently Being ModeratedJan 16, 2011 5:05 AM (in response to arcticman)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
Agreed - percent is not acceptable in this context. The only workaround is to edit using the HD's physical interface, as I believe that all of the EQ effects work in hz there. Or at least some of them, right?
Currently Being ModeratedJan 16, 2011 10:36 AM (in response to chimp_spanner)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
I think they're the same in edit as they are on the unit. i almost always edit on the unit itself.
the graphic eq you have to turn your head sideways to "see" the EQ curve like a graphic eq is designed to do, but it at least tells you the frequencies (they're fixed though). of course I feel it should be at least a 5 band.
the parametric is complete guesswork at this point. all line 6 has to do is put out a spec sheet on this effect. of course, it'd be better if you could actually adjust in HZ/KHZ
Currently Being ModeratedJan 21, 2011 8:38 AM (in response to arcticman)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
articman, you were a little late on that last post, eh? maybe you're in a different time zone - i'll allow it!
I have some updates. Nothing firm but it seems ~15% is the boomy section of the EQ, I'm guessing around 120-240 HZ. This is a good place to cut on the Recto. Also, ~85% is pure djent. I dial this up on my Recto patches. I'm guessing it's around 2.4 - 2.8 KHZ.
Currently Being ModeratedJan 21, 2011 9:49 AM (in response to arcticman)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
Currently Being ModeratedJan 21, 2011 10:02 AM (in response to tubealot)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
thanks tubealot, i'll try those out. the two i've tried out so far weren't helpful at all. I set the Q quite high and slowly panned through all the frequencies, while the looper played back some ringing chords, and I definitely didn't see a corresponding moving spike in the analyzer - it seems to more or less always show the same frequency curve - it only got louder as I went through the midrange frequencies. The effect on the sound, however, was quite blatant. Maybe I'm not using these correctly?
as of now my plan is to run an X3 in the FX loop and get the EQ's on both units to produce the same sound, then record the frequency from the X3. I want to create a mapping for every 5%'s on the HD.
Currently Being ModeratedJan 21, 2011 10:52 AM (in response to meambobbo)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
meambobbo, not saying these are the best tools for the job, the internet is full of free alternatives. My idea was whacking some white noise through the POD while riding the EQ faders, this should clearly reveal the frequencies on the analyzer.
I cannot try myself because I am waiting for my third POD, hoping for an unborked unit slipping through L6's QA (Quality Avoidance dept.?) in my direction. Trying hard to believe this is just a Murphy'esque fluke.
Currently Being ModeratedJan 21, 2011 6:05 PM (in response to Lution777)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
Let me rephrase: I cannot try to make a diagram of frequency as a function of displayed percent by using this proven method without the actual POD at hand.
I chose to pitch the mentioned software because it offers the trivial stuff needed for the task, comes from reputable sources, and is free of bloat and spam.
Feel free to ridicule my english, but know you are walking on thin ice when challenging the electronics degree I made back when you were probably not even planned.
I think I had too much coffee today.
Currently Being ModeratedJan 21, 2011 6:28 PM (in response to tubealot)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
if that's directed at me, i definitely wasn't trying to be a jerk - i completely understand what you are saying and I'm sorry to hear of your bad units. i definitely appreciate your suggestions and will get around to mapping the frequencies.
Currently Being ModeratedJan 21, 2011 8:03 PM (in response to meambobbo)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
Here are the preliminary results of my test for the parametric eq - things might be one off, but it seems to make sense:
05: 60 HZ
10: 90 HZ
15: 120 HZ
25: 200 HZ
30: 260 HZ
35: 330 HZ
40: 400 HZ
45: 600 HZ
50: 750 HZ
55: 900 HZ
60: 1.2 KHZ
65: 1.5 KHZ
70: 1.8 KHZ
75: 2.2 KHZ
80: 2.6 KHZ
85: 3.0 KHZ
95: 4.0 KHZ
100: 5.0 KHZ
Currently Being ModeratedJan 22, 2011 9:17 AM (in response to meambobbo)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
Sorry for the misunderstanding meambobbo, I was referring to lution whose pointless lolling caught me on the wrong foot.
Congrats to your unveiling of the sacred secret frequencies!
Currently Being ModeratedJan 22, 2011 10:48 AM (in response to tubealot)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
Hey Tubealot. Sorry bout that, didn't mean to offend you. Not sure why you would end up as upset as you are, but everyone has their personal sensitivity thresholds. I must have gone past yours with my "lol". It just sort of struck me funny that you presented, in your initial posting, nothing but some links to some software that you later admitted you haven't even used. I was sort of poking fun at that. You clearly were not amused.
But, it turns out that you actually know a lot about sound. Presenting that fact along with your links in your initial post would have been more valuable to the discussion, established your expertise in the subject, and prevented my electronic bellylaugh from offending you. But thank you for the links and sharing your knowledge. Sorry I hurt your feelings.
Currently Being ModeratedJan 21, 2011 11:38 AM (in response to tubealot)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
yeah, i think what was throwing me off was that I wasn't using noise - i was using clean guitar - the attack was definitely hurting my ability to get a good reading.
and 3rd time is the charm, right?
Currently Being ModeratedJan 21, 2011 1:26 PM (in response to meambobbo)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
Thanks for investigating the freq parameters... I appreciate all your efforts.
I believe my question is legitimate and deserves a reply/explanation from Line 6. It shouldn’t be necessary for PODHD owners to use a spectrum analyzer to effectively use the tools within the PODHD modeler.
I’m hopeful Line 6 will reply soon.
Currently Being ModeratedMay 3, 2011 2:54 PM (in response to arcticman)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
Hey guys here are my test results for "parametric eq frequency values"
i've sent pink noise to pod hd and noted the changes on a spectrum analyzer
i also checked the 'lows' and 'highs' knobs
'lows' cuts/boosts all frequencies below 200 hz
'highs' cuts/boosts above 1500hz
and both works like a shelf eq
Currently Being ModeratedMay 3, 2011 6:12 PM (in response to alpernar)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
nice research - i trust your analysis over my own.
it's complete garbage the thing maxes out at 4.5 khz. the uber amp seems to have a fizzy spot above 8 khz, but it sounds crappy to use the studio eq and cut all the 8 khz + freqs.
Currently Being ModeratedMay 3, 2011 10:43 PM (in response to meambobbo)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
Good work by everyone who has contributed... much appreciated.
It's a shame Line 6 has yet to address this issue in this or the several other threads requesting information regarding the use of % as a unit of measure for frequency.
ps I never marked this question as "answered".
Currently Being ModeratedMay 4, 2011 9:24 AM (in response to arcticman)RE: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
Unfortunately we do not have any further documentation on the specifications of the EQ parameters on the POD HD500.
I have made a request to our development team to include this information in further releases.
In the mean time, we appreciate all the great effort put fourth by the members of the community to put some numbers to the percentages.
Keep in mind, especially with guitar, it is best to use your ears when to make the decision of what sounds best. Possibly the percentages were implemented to focus your attention at getting a good sound, instead of dialing in frequencies. Please keep in mind that not all users are that experienced to understand EQ frequencies.
I hope this helps, and we will leave this thread open for further contributions from the community.
Currently Being ModeratedMay 4, 2011 9:58 AM (in response to Line6Don)Re: RE: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
I have to agree with people who are requesting frquencies here. Beginner users theoretically may not understand, but they should also start to think this way as it is the way it is normally done. Experienced users simply can't use the tool because they know what they're trying to do and the tool makes it difficult. Percent is a relative, not absolute measure. 50% of what? It is confusing at best, unusable at worst. Even beginner users understand higher frequencies and lower frequencies so I must confess, I don't understand how % could have ever been considered for these parameters. Hopefully this will be addressed in an update.
Currently Being ModeratedMay 4, 2011 10:31 AM (in response to Line6Don)Re: RE: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
"Keep in mind, especially with guitar, it is best to use your ears when to make the decision of what sounds best. Possibly the percentages were implemented to focus your attention at getting a good sound, instead of dialing in frequencies."
LOL. Too bad 99% of manufacturers don't know this and include the actual frequency. It's so hard to dial in good tones! </sarcasm>
Let's be real - there was no intention to use an arbitrary unit. It came to be from developer LAZINESS or RUSHING A PRODUCT TO MARKET. There's no excuse for this. It certainly was not purposefully designed to improve user experience.
Currently Being ModeratedMay 4, 2011 4:03 PM (in response to Line6Don)Re: RE: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
Hi Don... thanks for replying.
Much of what has been discussed in the POD HD forums is how "realistic" the modeling of the amps and FX are as compared to the actual gear.
Wouldn't it make sense to program the modeled FX using the same unit of measure the actual gear displays? How difficult could it be to update the software to display Hz? As other forum members have already pointed out… using percent as the UOM is useless.
As far as documentation on the specs of the EQ parameters as related to the % value displayed… that information must exist or how else could the developers program the EQs? Actually I'm not concerned about Line 6 providing EQ documentation… I don't want to have to refer to a chart to tweak my patches.
Hopefully Line 6 will address these shortcomings of the POD HD in future upgrades and consider updating all the FX to portray the parameter values used in the actual gear.
Currently Being ModeratedMay 4, 2011 11:48 AM (in response to arcticman)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
The percentages are of "Linesixons", a much more accurate measurement unit than Hertz and such. In fact all the modeled EQs were originally designed with Linesixons in mind so the HD500 has the best EQs available through current technology.
Currently Being ModeratedMay 4, 2011 3:21 PM (in response to arcticman)Re: HD500 Frequency % and Q %
I can't say I have had much of an issue with this, but I do think it is rather backwards to set something up so people who "don't know how" to use/read a real EQ can use it easier...shouldn't those people learn how an EQ works so maybe they don't have to go to a manufacturer help forum everytime they need to know what is what?