Using EQ pedals in effects loop on Venue or PZ Pre?

[arashaw]

Originally Posted by BoB/335

Maybe I am misunderstanding. I have a ZED 12FX and there are times when I have certain acoustics plugged in that I can't get enough signal even with the gain all the way up. I believe the 10FX has special configuration with pres designed specifically for acoustics.
If the pres on a board are the same (basically) as an acoustic preamp than why do I sometimes need an additional preamp for some acoustics?

So Bob/335 is saying plugging directly into a mixer is not the same. He needs an external pre for the proper amount of gain. Minus all the "feature set" stuff described, is a mixer channel the same/better than an external pre? Again, the only reason I'm bringing it up is a couple folks said they didn't need an external pre to get the same sound.

[lschwart]

Originally Posted by arashaw

So Bob/335 is saying plugging directly into a mixer is not the same. He needs an external pre for the proper amount of gain. Minus all the "feature set" stuff described, is a mixer channel the same/better than an external pre? Again, the only reason I'm bringing it up is a couple folks said they didn't need an external pre to get the same sound.

Not all mixers are the same. However, assuming that they are of similar quality, there is not likely to be any audible difference between a preamp in a mixer channel and one in an external preamp. A preamp is a preamp. But there are a lot of other variables than can affect sound and that can determine what's best to do with a given pickup or mixer or preamp in a given context. In other words, what you need depends on, well, what you need, given the particular pieces of equipment you have or want to use.

Louis

[Aaron Smith]

I agree with everything Louis has said, by the way.

[el_kabong]

Originally Posted by lschwart

There are three different issues at play here. One is impedance; the other is the strength or level of the signal.; the third is balancing.

The two high-z (or high impedance) inputs on the 10FX (these are unbalanced, 1/4" inputs) are designed to properly match the impedance of most passive pickup signals, allowing you to plug these signals in directly. Because these are unbalanced, however, that works as long as you're not too far away from the board (unbalanced lines will degrade the signal noticably after about 12 feet or so). Whether or not there's enough gain at these inputs for a given pickup signal is another matter. There's enough for one of my passive pickups, for example, but not quite enough for my other one. You can boost the gain on these inputs with a little switch, but when I do that the weaker pickup distorts the input (this function is mostly there for recording electric guitar where certain kinds of distortion might be desireable). It's a stuck between situation. The other works just fine without the boost. But I'm not always close enough to the board to make that work--and on a busy stage there are lots of sources of noise--so I prefer not to use these inputs at all and go through a DI box into the XLR inputs (all of them are the same on the 10FX) with my stronger pickup and through a preamp/DI with my weaker one. I can plug my active pickup guitar into any of the 1/4" inputs--it's impedance isn't so high--but again, I prefer to go through either a DI or my preamp DI (with the variable gain on that unit turned to it's low setting) and into one of the XLR inputs.

One big advantage to doing it this way is that when I move around on stage, the worst that can happen is I'll drag my preamp/DI unit a few inches with me if I go past the slack on my line. If that happened with me plugged directly into my mixer, the whole thing would topple off it's stand. Again, as I said in my long-winded earlier post, it's all about context.

Louis

Yes, good answers Louis.

Oh...my "sound guru" told me about another old trick for difficult situations with low output sources where he'll run an insert from one channel into another channel....which can, of course, add additional noise with some preamps, but is a way to add another gain stage where needed. I'll have to try it out.

[Aaron Smith]

Originally Posted by lschwart

Not all mixers are the same. However, assuming that they are of similar quality, there is not likely to be any audible difference between a preamp in a mixer channel and one in an external preamp. A preamp is a preamp. But there are a lot of other variables than can affect sound and that can determine what's best to do with a given pickup or mixer or preamp in a given context. In other words, what you need depends on, well, what you need, given the particular pieces of equipment you have or want to use.

Louis

Louis is correct regarding pre-amps. Conversely, I've found that the EQ on different mixers and acoustic pre-amps can sound dramatically different. And the more of the EQ that you need to use, the more you're going to notice the changes.

For my needs, acoustic pickups usually require significant EQ. For comparison, when I EQ a vocal mic I almost never add or cut more than 3dB of a given frequency. Sometimes when I'm using my K&K or Baggs Lyric, I will want to add or cut up to 12dB. That is a HUGE difference that will really bring out the strengths and weaknesses in your EQ section.

[BoB/335]

Originally Posted by lschwart

There are three different issues at play here. One is impedance; the other is the strength or level of the signal; the third is balancing.

The two high-z (or high impedance) inputs on the 10FX (these are unbalanced, 1/4" inputs) are designed to properly match the impedance of most passive pickup signals, allowing you to plug these signals in directly. Because these are unbalanced, however, that works as long as you're not too far away from the board (unbalanced lines will degrade the signal noticably after about 12 feet or so). Whether or not there's enough gain at these inputs for a given pickup signal is another matter. There's enough for one of my passive pickups, for example, but not quite enough for my other one. You can boost the gain on these inputs with a little switch, but when I do that the weaker pickup distorts the input (this function is mostly there for recording electric guitar where certain kinds of distortion might be desireable). It's a stuck between situation. The other works just fine without the boost. But I'm not always close enough to the board to make that work--and on a busy stage there are lots of sources of noise--so I prefer not to use these inputs at all and go through a DI box into the XLR inputs (all of them are the same on the 10FX) with my stronger pickup and through a preamp/DI with my weaker one. I can plug my active pickup guitar into any of the 1/4" inputs--it's impedance isn't so high--but again, I prefer to go through either a DI or my preamp DI (with the variable gain on that unit turned to it's low setting) and into one of the XLR inputs.

One big advantage to doing it this way is that when I move around on stage, the worst that can happen is I'll drag my preamp/DI unit a few inches with me if I go past the slack on my line. If that happened with me plugged directly into my mixer, the whole thing would topple off it's stand. Again, as I said in my long-winded earlier post, it's all about context.

Louis

Thanks for that explanation. I think I understand it. I'm considering going with a K&K and internal mic setup and using a dual source blender. It seems it would be best to go XLR out of the pre-amp/DI to the board for the best signal and outcome but I can't figure out how I can get a Looper pedal and Harmonizer into the chain.

[Aaron Smith]

Originally Posted by BoB/335

Thanks for that explanation. I think I understand it. I'm considering going with a K&K and internal mic setup and using a dual source blender. It seems it would be best to go XLR out of the pre-amp/DI to the board for the best signal and outcome but I can't figure out how I can get a Looper pedal and Harmonizer into the chain.

If your cable run to the board is less than 30 feet or so, use 1/4" unbalanced all the way and don't worry about it. Otherwise, sounds like a good strategy.

[el_kabong]

Originally Posted by BoB/335

Thanks for that explanation. I think I understand it. I'm considering going with a K&K and internal mic setup and using a dual source blender. It seems it would be best to go XLR out of the pre-amp/DI to the board for the best signal and outcome but I can't figure out how I can get a Looper pedal and Harmonizer into the chain.

Bob: I've run various effects, including a looper, through the aux send/return routing for my mixer. Alternatively, as noted above, you can use an insert (if you have that option) and even run the feed back into a separate channel. It does take some planning and, of course, most mixers are versatile enough that there's more than one way to skin the cat. It's helped me to draw out the routing options.

Oh, also, I would agree with Aaron's earlier comment about the importance and variable quality of the EQ. Parametric adjustment, even if limited to the mids, is pretty useful.

[BoB/335]

Kinda hijacked this thread. Sorry!

Thanks for the advice guys. Never thought about using aux sends and returns. I've never done that. Sounds like I might even be able to send the 2 guitar channels (mic and pickup) to the same send/return in order to get the full signal going to the looper without using a blender/DI. Hmm. I'll have to look through the instructions for my board.

The Zed has sweepable mids and was heavily suggested to me back when to get a board with sweepable mids. (Still trying to understand that) Or would something like the Venue or PZ Pre still help with this? (Actually I know that neither of these units are for 2 sources but I was trying to bring the original topic back into the discussion)

[el_kabong]

Bob:

Well, I too strayed off the OP's topic, but did consider it closely related insofar as one of the weaknesses cited by many reviews of the PZ-Pre is the inability to individually EQ each channel. I figured that was one of the factors that may have prompted the OP's question.

Anyway, the DTAR Solstice is one often recommended alternative that allows independent EQ, but doesn't have parametric mids. The Baggs Venue may have superior 5-band parametric EQ but is, of course, limited to a single channel.

And, if having more detailed EQ control is the only concern, then all of them have an effects loop which would allow an additional outboard EQ pedal. Of those three, the PZ and the Venue also have notch filters, which might be considered by some as a useful additional EQ option.

My ("closely related") thought was that a good mixer like the ZED10FX offers independent parametric EQ (albeit not a 10-band) for each of 4 mic-input channels, and lacks only the notch filter option...which, of course, can also be added outboard. It also offers a heck of a lot of additional capacity and flexibility in signal routing, monitoring, etc.

[ukejon]

A preamp is a preamp.

It would be nice to hear from additional sound/recording experts on this matter. I was under the assumption that all preamps are not alike and that the technical quality of the internal gizmos--semiconductors, capacitors, and the like--have much to do with the quality of the sound. Isn't this why some companies, for example Apogee, are known for the sonic purity and clean gain of the their proprietary preamps? And then there is the quality and flexibility of the EQ, as already mentioned in this thread. Lots to consider.

[arashaw]

Originally Posted by el_kabong

Bob:

Well, I too strayed off the OP's topic, but did consider it closely related insofar as one of the weaknesses cited by many reviews of the PZ-Pre is the inability to individually EQ each channel. I figured that was one of the factors that may have prompted the OP's question.

Anyway, the DTAR Solstice is one often recommended alternative that allows independent EQ, but doesn't have parametric mids. The Baggs Venue may have superior 5-band parametric EQ but is, of course, limited to a single channel.

And, if having more detailed EQ control is the only concern, then all of them have an effects loop which would allow an additional outboard EQ pedal. Of those three, the PZ and the Venue also have notch filters, which might be considered by some as a useful additional EQ option.

My ("closely related") thought was that a good mixer like the ZED10FX offers independent parametric EQ (albeit not a 10-band) for each of 4 mic-input channels, and lacks only the notch filter option...which, of course, can also be added outboard. It also offers a heck of a lot of additional capacity and flexibility in signal routing, monitoring, etc.

Didn't stray too far off topic. My OP was asking about using additional eq on a pre like a Radial or Baggs. The "vibe' here seems to be that the eq does more for pickup than the pre does, but you might as well use the mixer's pre with eq instead of an outboard pre, because pres are all the same and you'd have less in the signal chain.

[lschwart]

Originally Posted by ukejon

It would be nice to hear from additional sound/recording experts on this matter. I was under the assumption that all preamps are not alike and that the technical quality of the internal gizmos--semiconductors, capacitors, and the like--have much to do with the quality of the sound. Isn't this why some companies, for example Apogee, are known for the sonic purity and clean gain of the their proprietary preamps? And then there is the quality and flexibility of the EQ, as already mentioned in this thread. Lots to consider.

I'm no expert myself, just someone who has talked with some experts and thought a lot about what they've said to me in relation to my own growing experience using a certain basic level of "pro-sumer" equipment.

This thread over at Harmony Central was one of the things that helped to sort out what it was I'd be hearing--and not hearing--in using my equpment (many of the participants in this discussion are experienced design engineers--some of them actually designed some of the equipment many of us use. Many are also sound-reinforcement providers at various levels of experience and professional prestige):

http://www.harmonycentral.com/t5/Liv...highlight/true

The take-away from this and other similar conversations is pretty simple. Marketing hype is deceptive and useless when it's abstracted from real-life contexts. What modest differences there are in the sound of particular pieces of equipment also need to be evaluated in context. To just take one big example, what might matter in a recording context is not likey to matter nearly as much, if at all, in a live context--and more--or less--in some live contexts than in others. Those differences are also clearly the product of a large number of factors and variables, and the circuitry of a preamp is only one of these--and perhaps one of the least important, beyond a certain very basic level of quaility.

The key is to try and avoid magical thinking about preamps and to try and get hold of the best tool for a given job, keeping in mind what's really most likely to matter for that particular job. To just take an obvious example: the quality of a preamp circuit and the way it works within the overall design of a larger unit (a DI/preamp box, a combo amp, a mixing board, a rack-mounted preamp unit, etc.) is going to matter more for a fingerstyle soloist in a recording studio than for a live acoustic rhythm player in a classic rock band playing a local bar. In both cases, however, there's no doubt that the pickup, the mic-placement, the speakers, the room's acoustics, even the right-hand technique of the player, etc., are all going to matter much, much more than that preamp circuitry or even the whole unit it's a part of (again assuming it's reasonably well-designed and built and not malfunctioning). Even within that unit there are more consequential things at work.

That's at least how it seems to me.

Louis

[el_kabong]

Originally Posted by arashaw

Didn't stray too far off topic. My OP was asking about using additional eq on a pre like a Radial or Baggs. The "vibe' here seems to be that the eq does more for pickup than the pre does, but you might as well use the mixer's pre with eq instead of an outboard pre, because pres are all the same and you'd have less in the signal chain.

Hey Aaron: I don't think I'd be very far off the mark to say that all mics and/or pickups benefit from a good quality preamp (even those that are internal to a stand-alone amp, btw). Naturally, some are better than others and some will "color" your sound more than others.

My sense is that many of the preferences cited here (including my own) will tend to reflect a fairly limited range of experimentation with various instruments, pickups, amps, or PA systems. A number of members (Doug Young, notably, among others) have a much wider range of experience and, accordingly their preferences are worth noting.

For acoustic amplification, clarity or detail and fairly neutral frequency responses are often cited as the ideals. Still, I suspect that many preferences - for mics, pickups, amps, speakers, etc., inherently reflect some manner of tonal coloration (added warmth for instance) that the user happens to find pleasing in their particular application. That's just the nature of the beast. Sometimes, it's the "uncolored" sound folks are trying to avoid.

So, the preamp is just one part of the signal chain, which starts with your instrument and your pickup or mic. The need for EQ will, of course, be strongly influenced by those sources, other effects in the chain, and your desired tone. EQ can, and is, provide ways to tailor those influences, both early or later in the chain.

When you're blending multiple sources, the EQ options will almost certainly become more critical, as you might reasonably want to enhance the best parts - and reduce the worst parts - from each source. So, as important as EQ might be in general, it becomes more critical with multiple sources/channels. Your notion of having more detailed control (like a 10 band, for instance) might be useful in your particular setup and, as noted before, can be added to almost any pre-amp or mixer that you might use. And, again, they can be added early in the chain, as an effect loop, or with the blended signal.

I'm not sure that I've found the best solution for myself yet, but I'm working on it and have been experimenting with a number of approaches. Being on a somewhat limited budget, it's just going to take time and creativity. As I noted, I'm currently using a small mixer as opposed to a dedicated pre-amp, since I believe it affords me greater flexibility in testing these various options.

Good luck.

[Aaron Smith]

I think for studio work, the pre's themselves have differing sonic qualities that can be discerned. For live performance work, there are a million other variables that make the actual difference in sound between different pre's negligible.

Note that I didn't say "no difference at all". With no EQ, I can definitely hear a difference when I plug a guitar pickup (say a Baggs Lyric) into my Mackie board, my A&H board, or a dedicated acoustic guitar pre. It's just that the difference is small compared to other factors (like EQ).