New EQ effect POD HD

[scias23]

I know that the EQ effects included in the POD can do its job well as long as the user knows the equivalent of the percentages. It's just pain in the a88 for me to lose three effect blocks just to EQ my patches (two parametric eq, one mid focus eq to roll of the low and high end).

 

Now, can L6 make a new EQ model based on the Global EQ that they will be implementing? I've read here that it is impossible to make the percent into dB and Hz so just make the values in percentage. It wouldn't take much of the DSP I guess.

 

EDIT: once the new firmware is out, I won't be using the Global EQ as a tone shaping tool for my patches as I EQ them differently. I'll be using it to adjust my output per venue.

 

Global EQ should remain global.

Add new EQ effect that has HPF, LPF, and 3 adjustable band with Q fully adjustable also.

[talwilkins]

That would be nice!

Post that idea at ideascale and promote to vote fore it here!

[innovine]

"it is impossible to make the percent into dB and Hz"

 

This is just a load of bull from line6. You can create a lookup table... 5% = 100Hz.. 10% = 500hz   20%=1kHz. You could figure this out with white noise and an analyser (I think even meambobo did something like this already?)  Who cares if it's slightly off, it'd be a lot better than mystery numbers. Line6 are flat out lazy here, and we should NOT accept this level of incompetence.

[talwilkins]

I beleive Line6 stated that it isn't as easy as many seem to think, not impossible.

Sure, in the edit software it shouldn't be very difficult but in the firmware it's probably a different story.

I guess Line6 wants to do it right or not at all, right being in the firmware.

[scias23]

"it is impossible to make the percent into dB and Hz"

 

This is just a load of bull from line6. You can create a lookup table... 5% = 100Hz.. 10% = 500hz   20%=1kHz. You could figure this out with white noise and an analyser (I think even meambobo did something like this already?)  Who cares if it's slightly off, it'd be a lot better than mystery numbers. Line6 are flat out lazy here, and we should NOT accept this level of incompetence.

 

 

I beleive Line6 stated that it isn't as easy as many seem to think, not impossible.

Sure, in the edit software it shouldn't be very difficult but in the firmware it's probably a different story.

I guess Line6 wants to do it right or not at all, right being in the firmware.

 

I am a software developer by profession. Those kind of mess up really happen unfortunately. Maybe the Hz and dB issue is so tightly coupled in the firmware that it would be impractical and costly to rewrite a whole chunk of the code base just to make the percent to appropriate units.. especially if they are already developing the codebase of the successor of the POD HD. (which is I think very likely)

 

But let's not worry. As DI have stated in a post I read here somewhere, future L6 products will show dB and Hz.

[scias23]

Global EQ should remain global.

Add new EQ effect that has HPF, LPF, and 3 adjustable band with Q fully adjustable also.

 

Or maybe give us also the option to apply the Global EQ per preset, and add a new EQ effect. Win win for the different use cases of people here.

[jandrio]

...I won't be using the Global EQ as a tone shaping tool for my patches as I EQ them differently. I'll be using it to adjust my output per venue....

 

this is EXACTLY the correct way 2 use global eq!

[duncann]

Or maybe give us also the option to apply the Global EQ per preset, and add a new EQ effect. Win win for the different use cases of people here.

 

Here's an ideascale link to vote on that does one-half of what you said:

 

http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Global-EQ-Linked-to-Preset-Global-Inputs-Setting/688240-23508?submitted=1

[duncann]

this is EXACTLY the correct way 2 use global eq!

 

Why does the global eq only have to be used for room correction? Why can't it be used for a final tone shaping tool? Or are these two things the same?

[jandrio]

http://line6.com/support/topic/8225-dilemma-pod-hd-on-pa-lottery/?do=findComment&comment=56988

 

http://line6.com/support/topic/8225-dilemma-pod-hd-on-pa-lottery/?do=findComment&comment=56994

....the pa MUST be equalized according 2 the venue sound "signature".
if this is not done, overall sound is crap.
u can check that by feeding the pa with a simple mp3 track. if it sounds good, then ur pod will also sound good.
usually if this is the case and ur patches r well designed, u shld ask the sound guy 2 have both ur 2 channels flat.

.... with bad master eq in a bad sounding venue with glass windows 'n other sound reflecting areas it really doesn't matter whether u play direct or with a tube amp; ur sound will b nasty...

 

Why does the global eq only have to be used for room correction? Why can't it be used for a final tone shaping tool? Or are these two things the same?

 

what do u mean by the term "final tone shaping"?

global by default means that it will apply on ALL PATCHES.

i suppose this IS THE DEFINITION OF  "final tone shaping", isn't it?

 

[innovine]

I am a software developer by profession. Those kind of mess up really happen unfortunately. Maybe the Hz and dB issue is so tightly coupled in the firmware that it would be impractical and costly to rewrite a whole chunk of the code base just to make the percent to appropriate units.. especially if they are already developing the codebase of the successor of the POD HD. (which is I think very likely)

 

But let's not worry. As DI have stated in a post I read here somewhere, future L6 products will show dB and Hz.

 

 

I am also a software developer. Creating a lookup table in the UI is a perfectly reasonable solution to something like this. You don't rewrite a whole chunk of the code base, you just calculate or empirically measure 64 or 128 points and make a lookup table. Takes less than 1k of memory, and no cpu use. "rewrite a whole chunk of the code base". Tell me, are you a consultant who gets paid by the hour?

[duncann]

Yes. But since the coding likely already exists for making it apply to all patches or per patch because of the inputs setup setting, why not have that option as well? The global EQ is still always there, but you can have different global EQ settings per patch. It would be like having an extra FX block at the end of the chain that's unmovable. Plus it seems that not every patch would do well with the same global EQ settings even if the room is the same. And I remember DI saying they optimized the code which results in a few percent more DSP.

 

I can imagine guitarists at a gig screwing around with the global eq for room compensation for one patch, and then moving to a different patch and wishing they could have different settings from the previous patch without losing the settings for the first patch.

 

Already, even before the new firmware is released, I've seen a few people wanting the global EQ as a movable effect block or having it apply per patch. I guess I can count myself as one of those people.

[scias23]

I am also a software developer. Creating a lookup table in the UI is a perfectly reasonable solution to something like this. You don't rewrite a whole chunk of the code base, you just calculate or empirically measure 64 or 128 points and make a lookup table. Takes less than 1k of memory, and no cpu use. "rewrite a whole chunk of the code base". Tell me, are you a consultant who gets paid by the hour?

Just making assumptions here. We both don't know their source code. We also don't know why they won't make a lookup for the db and hz equivalent. I come in peace.

 

Anyways, for me, it is enough that we know now the equivalent of those percentages. Thanks to the hard work of the forum people here.

[pianoguyy]

EDIT: once the new firmware is out, I won't be using the Global EQ as a tone shaping tool for my patches as I EQ them differently. I'll be using it to adjust my output per venue.

 

Global EQ should remain global.

 

 

BINGO 

 

Although, I am going to take it one step further by saying: 

I don't think I am going to download the update for awhile. I don't need a global eq for room correction. I plug straight into the PA. That is the sound man's job to make it sound pretty in a room. 

 

 

 

Or maybe give us also the option to apply the Global EQ per preset, and add a new EQ effect. Win win for the different use cases of people here.

 

Then its not really global, now is it? 

 

 

 

 

 

Why does the global eq only have to be used for room correction? Why can't it be used for a final tone shaping tool? Or are these two things the same?

 

They are kind of the same thing. 

You are designing your patches partly based on the environment you are in when you are designing them. When you change environments, your sound changes. The perfectly designed patch sounds like garbage. So, one could say that the final tone shaping tool IS room correction. 

 

 

 

 

 

The global EQ is still always there, but you can have different global EQ settings per patch. 

 

There are already numerous eq's that you can use in each patch. 

A global eq is not based per patch. It is global. It affects ALL patches. It even engaged when using a "blank patch". 

IT IS GLOBAL 

[duncann]

There are already numerous eq's that you can use in each patch. 

A global eq is not based per patch. It is global. It affects ALL patches. It even engaged when using a "blank patch". 

IT IS GLOBAL 

 

It's easy to say to use the already existing EQs in a patch. But in practice, it may not be so easy for several reasons. No more FX blocks left, and even if there are, there may not be enough dsp. None of the existing EQs has the functionality of the new global EQ, so it could take multiple EQs and FX blocks and even more dsp. If you find a way to use one or more of the existing EQs in your patch, it might require a complete redesign of the patch. I for one do not find the current EQs very easy to work with.

 

If the new EQ could be assigned globally or on a per patch basis (and only at the very end of the chain), perhaps Global would be a bad choice of words, since a lot of people seem to have hangups about word choice, you could call it something more appropriate. It would really only be global in the sense that it's always there no matter what, like you say, even when using a blank patch.

 

Maybe refer to it as simply the EQ Block, much like the amp is call the AMP Block, or the mixer can be called the MIXER Block.

 

Then you could say the EQ Block can be assigned globally or by preset.

 

I don't understand the people here arguing against more functionality for the new EQ. It's kind of baffling.

[pianoguyy]

Fixing what some people think is wrong with the current eq options is one thing. Not enough DSP or blocks is a separate issue all together. 

This is a separate eq. A global eq, that is to be used for "room correction". It is not meant to be part of patch design. 

 

 

 

You are correct though. 

Calling it the eq block would make sense if it was available per patch. And there is already an eq block. But the new one is not per patch, its global.... 

Much how the Master Volume is global. Regardless of how you have your volume/mixer set within a patch, the master volume (could also be called, global volume) controls the overall volume of the unit. 

The global eq (master tone controls) are the overall tonality. 

[meambobbo]

I didnt make the images, but they clearly show what to expect.

 

Http://foobazaar.com/podhd/toneGuide/EQ

 

Yeah i think the whole db/eq/% debacle is likely more a problem of getting locked into a bad design vs. L6 laziness. Aggravating yes, but forum anger isnt going to help you. The more you use the EQs, the easier it is to figure out how to dial them in and even what freq they correspond to.

[clay-man]

I know that the EQ effects included in the POD can do its job well as long as the user knows the equivalent of the percentages. It's just pain in the a88 for me to lose three effect blocks just to EQ my patches (two parametric eq, one mid focus eq to roll of the low and high end).

 

Now, can L6 make a new EQ model based on the Global EQ that they will be implementing? I've read here that it is impossible to make the percent into dB and Hz so just make the values in percentage. It wouldn't take much of the DSP I guess.

 

EDIT: once the new firmware is out, I won't be using the Global EQ as a tone shaping tool for my patches as I EQ them differently. I'll be using it to adjust my output per venue.

 

Global EQ should remain global.

Add new EQ effect that has HPF, LPF, and 3 adjustable band with Q fully adjustable also.

 

 

There's no way it's not impossible to change it to Hertz and DB. That has to be an excuse.

[meambobbo]

I will say I was very disappointed that L6 never provided an official translation table or even verified one of several that the community made

[bjnette]

Well it aint no Kemper rig, but I am grateful Line 6 is still supporting us, after all we are potential Variaxe (note correct spelling) customers.

 

Duncann, I totally get how great your idea would be, especially for midi bank control recording.

 

But the EQ will be easier to tweak on board with the 4 display knobs being utilized, 

 

Tweak the EQ between rhythm and lead patches instead of running into an EQ in your seqencer which I rarely  do incidentally; preferring to nail the tone in the HD500 and why your idea would be great to me.

 

Sometimes it is good to manually change a setting rather then set and forget as itt tunes your ears and your ears are more in tune for good tonal separation in the mix. 

[duncann]

Well it aint no Kemper rig, but I am grateful Line 6 is still supporting us, after all we are potential Variaxe (note correct spelling) customers.

 

Duncann, I totally get how great your idea would be, especially for midi bank control recording.

 

But the EQ will be easier to tweak on board with the 4 display knobs being utilized, 

 

Tweak the EQ between rhythm and lead patches instead of running into an EQ in your seqencer which I rarely  do incidentally; preferring to nail the tone in the HD500 and why your idea would be great to me.

 

Sometimes it is good to manually change a setting rather then set and forget as itt tunes your ears and your ears are more in tune for good tonal separation in the mix. 

 

I'm like you that way. Nailing the tone in the pod and no processing necessary in the daw. Something to said for minimalism.

 

I didn't even think about the benefits of it while recording, mostly because I never change presets or banks from the daw, or very rarely. Another plus I guess.