-
Currently Being ModeratedRe: Pod HD High Gain Tone Guide
glad you have found it helpful! i am 100% with you on the 2+ band parametric EQ. I would really like to know what the max requirements are for the unit per effect. Obviously a 2 band parametric EQ shouldn't use more DSP than the smart harmony or pitch glide or spring reverbs... So I can only wonder if there's a limit to the number of tweakable parameters. I can swear some effects have 6 parameters though, which is all you'd need for the 2 band parametric EQ - just drop the "highs" and "lows" parameters and add another set of freq, Q, and gain.
- Report Abuse
-
Like (0)
-
Currently Being ModeratedRe: Pod HD High Gain Tone Guide
meambobbo,
Great guide - lets hope the next HD update gives us a decent eq.
Just thought I should mention something that I looked into a year or more ago which you might want to mention in the guide and perhaps try yourself - I did. You wrote:
"Also, many amps, particularly 1x12’s, are really bright directly in front the amp. You could try to use something like a beam blocker to even out the sound, or just stand slightly off center."
The latter solution if of course fine for you as the guitarist, but is not so good for the audience who are getting "beamed" by the ice-pick highs that you don't hear as you are off-axis. This problem is why many bands especially those that only use backline often sound rubbish to the audience - the audience gets a completely different sound to the musicians.
An alternative option is the "Mitchell Doughnut" which is a thin flat doughnut shaped disk of acoustic foam placed in front of the speaker. In the most simplistic terms the hole in the middle acts a bit like a smaller speaker for the frequencies that are blocked by the foam - this means that high frequencies get a higher dispersion pattern resulting in much more even sound everywhere.
Jay Mitchell really knows what he is talking about here; the fix is very cheap, reversable and most importantly it does work. Jay wouldn't like my quick description as it is technically incorrect, but his version takes a lot more words; he also proves that beak blockers don't work in the way that you might expect...
He wrote an article about it here: http://www.tgpwebzine.com/?page_id=424 and there are a lot of forum threads that also go into it in a lot of detail if you search for "Mitchell Doughnut".
Matt
- Report Abuse
-
Like (0)
-
Currently Being ModeratedRe: Pod HD High Gain Tone Guide
I'm unfamiliar with this whole Line6 community/corporate interaction thing -- how do we make a formal request for a 2+ band eq?
Eq's are likely near the lowest cost in terms of DSP, and I see no reason why we can't have a multiband EQ in a single slot.
- Report Abuse
-
Like (0)
-
Currently Being ModeratedRe: Pod HD High Gain Tone Guide
Kurisu2 wrote:
I'm unfamiliar with this whole Line6 community/corporate interaction thing -- how do we make a formal request for a 2+ band eq?
Eq's are likely near the lowest cost in terms of DSP, and I see no reason why we can't have a multiband EQ in a single slot.
click the contact us link at the bottom of the page, select product feedback, and in that feedback form, use the dropdown menu to select new feature, and ask for what you want.
- Report Abuse
-
Like (0)
-
Currently Being ModeratedRe: Pod HD High Gain Tone Guide
Rowbi wrote:
click the contact us link at the bottom of the page, select product feedback, and in that feedback form, use the dropdown menu to select new feature, and ask for what you want.
Great, thanks! I sent off a request just now. Perhaps others can too and we'll get some critical mass?
- Report Abuse
-
Like (0)
-
Currently Being ModeratedRe: Pod HD High Gain Tone Guide
Matt, thank you very much for the link and info. I spent a bit of today reading about the two approaches, and I have to say the "Mitchell donut" sounds like a much better approach.
For those of you unfamiliar with each approach, the Weber Beam Blocker or a homemade "beam blocker" is a round piece of paper or plastic that gets placed in front of the center of the speaker. Whether it is flat or curved makes no real difference. It will reflect much of the sound back into the speaker, which relfects it back outwards, and so on and so forth until it eventually finds its way out to where you can hear it. The higher frequencies often end up radiating outwards at a wider angle than the typical "beam", so you get the brightness of the speaker tone at a wider angle. Additionally, the "beam" effect is diminished, in comparison to wider angle listening. So you get slightly less highs on axis but more highs off axis.
The "problem" with this approach is that by reflecting the sound back into the speaker, you are combining refections of prior sound with the direct sound from the speaker, resulting in various interference patters. Certain frequencies may sound out of phase whereas others sound even louder. And certain frequencies may be being "beamed" outwards directionally, albeit not necessarily directly in front the speaker on axis. Essentially you are turning the area inside your speaker cone into an acoustics mosh pit. And while the on axis beam effect for all high frequencies may be diminished, you get various beams at different angles for smaller frequency spectrums.
The "Mitchell Donut" on the other hand, uses a piece of 3/4" or 1/2" absorbant foam placed directly in front of, but not touching the speaker, with a 3" hole cut into it directly in front of the speaker's center. The foam will absorb but not (significantly) reflect all frequencies above 1 kHZ. Given that most of the high frequency response is not actually coming from the speaker's center but various parts of the cone all the way to the edges, much of those high frequencies are being absorbed rather than beamed directly outwards. The 3" hole allows these high frequencies to pass through. Because it is in the center, while most of the high frequencies are created off-center, they can only emanate through the hole in an off-axis direction. Thus, it essentially eliminates the on axis beam effect while having little effect on the rest of the tone, other than a slight darkening and decrease in volume.
Most people tend to say the "beam blocker" technique results in making the off-axis tone sound brighter, while diminishing the brightness of the on-axis beam, but it comes at the price of comb filtering and other acoustic interference. The "Mitchell Donut" technique results in a less bright tone across the board; however, it mainly soaks up highs inside the on-axis beam, resulting in a more consistent tone at all angles.
I believe that you'd want to dial in brighter tones with the "Mitchell Donut" to get the sound you want; however, you won't get a beam, plus you won't have to deal with any unwanted phasing/filtering effects.
Another thing to consider is close mic'ing - both techniques would change how you would close mic a speaker. I would recommend you take off not only the beam blocker or Mitchell donut to do so, but the speaker grill itself. If you have to use your cab as a reference but also need to mic it for the PA, i'd recommend leaving the beam blocker or donut on all but one speaker, and try to point the mic'ed speaker so that the beam is inaudible to both yourself and the audience.
- Report Abuse
-
Like (0)
-
Currently Being ModeratedRe: Pod HD High Gain Tone Guide
Rewolf, thanks for the tip on Jay Mitchell...
- Report Abuse
-
Like (0)
-
Currently Being ModeratedRe: Pod HD High Gain Tone Guide
No problems.
I tried it on my rig which is currently HD500 into a Marshall 8008 into a pair of 1912 (1 x12") cabs and it makes a lot of difference - the beaming effect is substantially reduced and the sound is a lot more consistent.
Some of the forum discussions do go into the practicalities of miking up a doughnut equiped cab, but I haven't played anywhere big enough to require miking of the backline.
That said I am currently, and not as patentiently as a I might be, waiting for delivery of a pair of FBT MaxX2a that I hope will replace the Marshall stuff. I just feel that I can't get the right sound for an open back Fender amp simulation or for an acoustic from the closed back Marshall cabs - so I am going FRFR and as long as it works properly I won't have this problem any more. It will also allow me to mix in a bit of keyboards into a single monitoring solution.
The delivery is scheduled for today, but the tracking says that although collected on time 2 days ago they are still at the wrong end of the country.... come on.... come on....

- Report Abuse
-
Like (0)
-
Currently Being ModeratedRe: Pod HD High Gain Tone Guide
If I decide to try it out I'll have to search for some of those discussions since we do mike our gear at most shows. Fortunately my cabs aren't too directional, not like the Twin I used to own...
I'm wondering why wouldn't you just mike it in the center, maybe w/ the mike off-axis? Is it too bright or something right there at the opening?
- Report Abuse
-
Like (0)
-
Currently Being ModeratedRe: Pod HD High Gain Tone Guide
it really shouldn't sound any different micing it if you are stick the mic INSIDE the donut hole. Remember, all parts of the cone are generating sound. If the line of sight from any part of the cone to the mic is blocked by the foam, those high frequencies are going to be absorbed. With the mic inside the donut hole, all parts of the cone have a direct line of sight to the mic and no sound is being absorbed.
So the difference is going to be if you are micing it further back (even 2 inches off your grill) or pointing it towards the foam. Then it's going to sound darker than usual. Of course, with the donut, you might be dialing in tones a little brighter than before, so it might all even out.
With close micing, the brightness you get when putting the mic dead center is that all parts of the cone's high frequencies are hitting the mic at the same time. When you move slightly off-axis, because the high frequencies wavelengths are so small in size, they hit the mic at different time points, causing destructive interference, resulting in less brightness. The lower frequencies are larger and thus require larger distances to get destructive interference.
I would start by placing the mic inside or as close to inside the donut as possible. If the tone is too bright, try moving it to the side a bit or angling it. If it's still too bright, try backing it outside the donut and repeating, each time moving further and further away until you get the right amount of brightness..
- Report Abuse
-
Like (0)
-
Currently Being ModeratedRe: Pod HD High Gain Tone Guide
If only our soundman had any interest in this much detail... ;-(
Since the grill will still be on the cab, the best I can get would be right up against the grill. I guess I'd try maybe right about the edge of the donut hole...
Thanks for the ideas!
- Report Abuse
-
Like (0)
-
Currently Being ModeratedRe: Pod HD High Gain Tone Guide
Love this thread! Any new tones/updates?
- Report Abuse
-
Like (0)
-
Currently Being ModeratedRe: Pod HD High Gain Tone Guide
I hope to have a revision and tone dump next month. I got really set back because the guitar with all the low tunings I used I just found out the signal is really bad (either a bad pickup or bad wiring/tone-pot), so the patches are all set up for a guitar that has a completely unnatural sound (they sound good ONLY for that guitar). So I have to fix that before I can dial in my good Periphery, Meshuggah, and Scar Symmetry tones. I have 2 incredible Petrucci tones. And I'm close to getting Metallica Justice and Black album tones.
As a couple quick updates...
I've given up using the XXL cab altogether. I EQ the hell out of it to get a tone that I ultimately still don't like. So F it.
I've given up trying to use the Uber in amp any sort of metal fashion. The only place I use it now is for my Vai patch. It does Legacy-type breakup. It's not djenty at all but with a overdrive pedal it isn't really muddy either.
I've been using the Line 6 Elektrik a lot more - basically everywhere that I formerly used the Uber, except the Vai patch.
I've found that v1.4 seems to feature more power amp distortion (or maybe I'm going crazy), especially on the Line 6 Elektrik. I've turned down the Master Volume parameter on most of my patches. L6 Elek is at like 10-25%. Mesa Recto I keep around 20-40%. ENGL Fireball I keep around 50% or higher. This amp gets more of a mids-boost/compression type thing rather than that "dink dink" splatty type distortion in the upper-mids/presence spectrum. Marshall J800 depends on target tone. Lower values can sound too much like a cheap stomp box distortion, but too high and it gets real dirty. Sometimes you want a smoother distortion, but other times you want the dirt.
For most of my really heavy rhythm tones I use a dual amp setup - 2 amps with the exact same gain and EQ settings and the Recto (Treadplate) V30 4x12. I use the SM57 mic on one of them, and the 4038 Ribbon on the other. Then I put the SM57 amp volume at about 50% and the 4038 at 35-50%, depending on how bright vs. midsy I want the tone. Try it - it sounds amazing. The downside is that you will hit DSP limits if you want much else in it. So I mainly use it for rhythm tones, but you can get a very basic lead sound out of it if you're willing to sacrifice. Using this approach, I find I don't have to use as many EQ effects to get the tone I want - I can generally use the amp's EQ controls, as well as varying the amp volume levels.
For most of my leads, I've switched to the 87 Condensor, which I think might have the cleanest mid-range response. You have to boost the highs to get it to sound like a complete guitar sound, but I find this sounds better than boosting the mids with the SM57 on axis. Also, mids are generally more important that highs for a good lead tone.
Also, I have given up using the Screamer entirely. If you use it on a completely clean signal, even with drive at 0%, it still causes the tone to break up a little. I don't want that - I want it to mainly EQ the tone, and maybe compress it a little - no breakup. So I've been using the Classic Distortion instead. It stays clean and gets me the tones I want.
If I can get the pre-distortion tone I want with EQ's, I'll use that instead of the Classic Distortion. The Distortion effect seems to suck some of the tone out the signal. I get a richer tone using EQ. I generally set pre-distortion EQ by putting a parametric EQ in front the amp and setting the Q to like 75% and the gain to like 80%. Then I'll record a bunch of muted power chords, unmuted power chords, and single notes in the looper. I let that play back as I sweep frequency between 35 - 70%. There should be one spot that really brings out the djent around 50-55%. 35% is generally used for reference - it makes the tone more "honky" and like a dog choking on something. I am failing to describe it well. At 70% or higher, you really don't hear much effect on your tone - it might smooth out the distortion more, but you don't get that insane djent sound. I am for right above the spot where you get the choking dog sound. Then I'll widen the Q and start playing with the gain.
Sometimes you have to go the other way and suck out some of the "dog choking" lower mids to get the tone to get that crispy dirty sound. So I do the same thing but put start with gain at like 20% and frequency between 15 and 40%. Usually it's around 30%.
Finally, if the bass is a little flubby or muddy, suck out some bass with the "lows" parameter. Suck out JUST enough to dial out the flub. You might think the tone is thin afterwards. If so, add some bass in after your distortion, with the amp's controls or with another EQ effect.
I set the new variable Z parameter to auto, which usually means it's 1M, as I hit an EQ or amp first.
The new hard gate is incredible. Wikipedia "noise gate" if you don't understand what the new controls mean.
As a final piece of advice, you can really get a good metal tone by setting up your patch for the neck pickup. It's not the one you'll be using for your tight metal rhythms, but if you can get it to sound good, your bridge pickup will sound incredible. Usually the neck pickup has a bunch of bass/mids but not enough presence to dial in that sweet but dirty sound.
- Report Abuse
-
Like (0)
-
Currently Being ModeratedRe: Pod HD High Gain Tone Guide
+1
Ya I have found sometimes that what sounds good to me on the neck pickup for a lead tone sounds incredible for rythyym when the verb and delay are adjusted or removed.
BTW I loved your take on Rhoads using the JCM800 .. I did a few eq adjustments and added some sag and it was perfect to my ears. Sounds even bettter after update for some reason.
- Report Abuse
-
Like (0)
-
Currently Being ModeratedRe: Pod HD High Gain Tone Guide
Absolutely brilliant work. Just shared the thread with the TGP community. Hope you don't mind.
Edited...@ meambobbo. I can't access the audio on your website usin Forefox, I just get a rectagular grey shape covering the play section.
I can manage a work around usin IE.I get the message: Your browser does not support the audio element, but I do get the option to divert to source, which takes me to Quicktime player. Just thought I'd let you know, as others may have the same problem
- Report Abuse
-
Like (0)
Actions
More Like This
- Retrieving data ...
Incoming Links
-
About
-
Follow
Stay in the mix and in the know.
Subscribe
Latest offers, special deals and insider updates.