Raise frequency limit on the Parametric EQ's "Low Freq" band

[HonestOpinion]

As those of you who use it already know the Parametric EQ on the Helix has three frequency ranges (High, Mid, Low) and a high and low pass filter. I find that when I use the Parametric EQ I may need all three of the "range" cuts but have a problem in that the frequency on the "Low" range is limited on its highest setting to 500Hz. I often require a third cut but can't use the 'Low Freq' range because it does not extend high enough into the frequency range where I need it (above 500Hz). At this point I have already used my 'High Freq' & 'Mid Freq' ranges and still require a third cut. I think it would be better to allow the 'Low Freq' parameter to go much higher, potentially all the way to 20khz but a limitation of 5khz would probably be sufficient.

 

By removing the 500Hz limitation on the 'Low Freq' parameter you would have the flexibility to set all three ranges on the parametric wherever you wanted. For example, you could set up a cut at 2.2khz, at 4.4khz, and at 5khz with your Low Cut filter set at 100Hz and your High Cut at 10khz. This follows on the discussion of cutting fizz or just making general EQ adjustments.

 

I understand that Line6 tried to split the three ranges into areas that "make sense" for low, mid, and high and that wider ranges make more granular, smaller setting changes more challenging but I would prefer the flexibility to set my cuts where they are most needed. Many parametric EQs on DAWs and digital PAs provide more flexibility either by providing more ranges(e.g. Low, Low Mid, Mid, High Mid, High) or controls that allow you to cut anywhere in the full frequency range from 20Hz-20khz or at least in a wider range than the Helix's 'Low Freq' parameter currently allows. The low cut you may want to make (excluding what you do with the low pass filter) may be above 500Hz and that is the current limitation on the parametric's "Low Freq" parameter. Wondering if anyone else is running into this?

[DunedinDragon]

I can't say I've ever run into that kind of limit.  I do use the parametric EQ on occasion but it's typically just a minor tweak to surgically address some irritating isolated frequency.  But then I'm not very prone to doing a lot of EQ.  I try to manage the tone as best I can using the amp's EQ and then the cab/IR and mic positions.  Beyond that it's just very minor EQ tweaks if at all.

[zooey]

Can't say as I have, but just add in another parametric block, they're not that CPU intensive.

[HonestOpinion]

Can't say as I have, but just add in another parametric block, they're not that CPU intensive.

That's exactly what I thought until I went to add a second EQ block on one of my presets yesterday and it was grayed out because my DSP was maxed. Granted not every preset is going to be like that but for my "general purpose" multi-channel presets I do tend to have several amp blocks and effects in the signal path which often put me close to or at the DSP limit. I also may have the max eight blocks already on the signal path. It just seems that it would be a good feature to allow more flexibility in the range on the parametric EQ as can be found on some other parametrics, including the one for instance on Line6's M20d mixer.

 

Maybe I am in the minority in how I would like to use the parametric but I have really been attacking fizz in my presets lately and I am finding three distinct bands above 500hz that I would like to cut in addition to my low and high cuts on either end of the range. The limitation for the "Low Freq" parameter forces the addition of a second Parametric EQ block if I want to do that. A second block also seems like a less elegant or efficient solution to me than removing a somewhat arbitrary limitation on the "Low Freq" parameter. However, if I am one of few users who have encountered this I can understand where it might seem like a really trivial or outlandish request. Not going to be selling my Helix over this. ;)

 

I suppose I could use the Global EQ as my second parametric but I try to reserve that if I need to adjust the overall sound to the room rather then running it all the time. The Global EQ would also apply the same cut to every preset and I am trying to customize each one slightly.  I am also reminded of how helpful it would be if the Parametric EQ showed the EQ curve graphically the way the Global EQ already does. After all, the Global EQ is just a parametric that gets applied globally. The 'per preset' Parametric EQ could show the frequency curve just like the Global EQ as the capability is already built in to the Helix.

[HonestOpinion]

I can't say I've ever run into that kind of limit.  I do use the parametric EQ on occasion but it's typically just a minor tweak to surgically address some irritating isolated frequency.  But then I'm not very prone to doing a lot of EQ.  I try to manage the tone as best I can using the amp's EQ and then the cab/IR and mic positions.  Beyond that it's just very minor EQ tweaks if at all.

 

Thanks for replying, interesting to see how others are using the parametric. My requirement may be relatively rare. In an effort to really nail down where the fizz is located on some of my presets I have found three distinct areas, varying a bit from preset to preset, all of them above 500hz in addition to the cuts I make on the extreme high and low end with my high/low cut filters. Like you I try to do minimal EQ'ing and start by finding amps and cabs and especially mic models that work with as little EQ as possible. I have found that for some combinations though comprehensive use of the parametric really helps in dialing out any harshness (subjective to me) while leaving me with a full sound without having to lop off the high end. It is more time consuming and involved alternative than just using the high and low cuts but makes for subtler more transparent cuts and it would be easier without the 500hz limitation on the PEQ's "Low Freq" parameter.

[ric1966]

HO, when you run two PEQs are you using both paths in your signal chain? Each one has its own DSP.

[Lelik]

I almost use the PEQ effect always on my patches, and mostly before the amp to shape the pickup sound.

I agree with the original poster: I'd prefer to have no band limit on all the frequency ranges, and I suppose that would not be a problem of DSP or logic to make that change for Line6.

In case you post this request in the Line6 ideascale forum, I will vote it!

[HonestOpinion]

HO, when you run two PEQs are you using both paths in your signal chain? Each one has its own DSP.

 

Yes I am. I often use a Super Serial (x2) setup so all available paths and potentially all available DSP are being exploited . My first thought was to use a second Parametric but depending on how the signal path  is set up, it can be difficult finding the right position to jam two extra PEQ blocks and in some presets I just don't have the spare DSP. Just looking to simplify wherever possible, a more flexible PEQ would be better than having to use two IMHO.

[HonestOpinion]

I almost use the PEQ effect always on my patches, and mostly before the amp to shape the pickup sound.

I agree with the original poster: I'd prefer to have no band limit on all the frequency ranges, and I suppose that would not be a problem of DSP or logic to make that change for Line6.

In case you post this request in the Line6 ideascale forum, I will vote it!

 

I think I will put an Idea up although it may receive relatively few votes, at least for now. I think this is an issue that may percolate for a while though and come up again later due to the fact that others may find that there are three areas on many presets above 500hz that when cut surgically really help to deliver a warmer tone without chopping off desirable frequencies in the mid and high-mid frequency ranges. A single PEQ that can accommodate all three cuts as you commented would seem to be a relatively simple modification to the code for Line6 although maybe they would need some logic to resolve what happens if a user overlaps two frequency range cuts. That logic is already on the Helix however as the "Mid Freq" and "High Freq" ranges already overlap with each other. The "Mid Freq" range overlaps with both the "High Freq" and the "Low Freq" parameters and actually extends all the way down to 125Hz. Again, it just seems that the 500Hz limitation on the "Low Freq" range is somewhat arbitrary and presents a problem for my intended usage for the PEQ.

[zooey]

Bigger question I think is the resolution of the frequency control. If it had a finite number of steps, they'd be much further apart if the range was way wider, unless they added a new Range parameter. There's also the related question of backwards compatibility.

 

All that goes away if controls can have arbitrarily wide ranges, but resolution could still be an issue in the UI

[HonestOpinion]

Bigger question I think is the resolution of the frequency control. If it had a finite number of steps, they'd be much further apart if the range was way wider, unless they added a new Range parameter. There's also the related question of backwards compatibility.

 

All that goes away if controls can have arbitrarily wide ranges, but resolution could still be an issue in the UI

 

Yup, agreed, all those issues would have to be accounted for. Increased resolution in the low range might have been Line6's rationale for limiting the low range but there are alternate methods for getting higher resolution or more "steps" than severely limiting the range. Parameter controls can take larger steps when spun more rapidly and smaller ones when turned more slowly (a fairly common knob implementation on lots of equipment). This change seems like it is the realm of the easily attainable. Should be a lower bar though than, for example, polyphonic effects.  ;)

 

I think backwards compatibility would be an easy issue to address. As long as the PEQ retains the user's setting from prior presets, offering a wider range on the "Low Freq" parameter should not impact them provided that, as you mention, the resolution is such that their old settings still exist in the new wider available frequency range.