GEQ position is not ideal

[trickytrevParticipant]

Can anyone tell me why the GEQ’s are positioned where they are? Or why we can’t pick a matrix before processing of the MainLR for example?
1. If a matrix needs a different GEQ to the Main LR (maybe the opposite GEQ settings because it could be in a different room), then what is the approach you would take?
2. Likewise for a recording pre-fade MainLR from a matrix… the MainLR GEQ is getting into the recording.
3. Take a signal path from a channel to a group to MainLR to a Matrix… I have 3 GEQ’s in series…
4. In general, we should be able to select where we want a matrix “picked” from in the chain (or can we somehow?).

It would be nice if the GEQ’s were really on the outputs, but they are not.
Am I going about this wrong? Any tips?

Cheers,
Trev

[TobiParticipant]

Maybe just leave the MainLR-GEQ “blank” and only use Matrix GEQ?

1. Problem solved
2. Recording from MainLR will not be affected by GEQ
3. Also don’t use GEQ on Groups?
4. Don’t know… I have not seen such a feature even in high price desks.

Best Regards,
Tobias

[trickytrevParticipant]

Hi Tobias,
1. Yep, that’s my approach too (don’t use the GEQ if possible).

2. This is NOT true (or tell me how you mean exactly?), and not according to the Technical Datasheet or my tests. If I look at USB meters (MainLR) and send a signal into a channel and GEQ the MainLR with fader flip (bring all faders down) – I lose the MainLR in the meters. https://www.allen-heath.com/media/SQ-5-Technical-Datasheet_G.pdf

–> But if I want to use a GEQ on the MainLR (for the FOH PA), then USB recording the MainLR is affected by the MainLR fader and all the other EQ/comp. And this gets passed onto a matrix as well. Is there a workaround? I’d like a new firware to pick the signal for a matrix BEFORE all the EQ…(sounds simple, right?)

3. I don’t usually use GEQ on groups, but I was just highlighting how everything “could” be summed (and unintentionally delayed by the GEQ filters) unintentionally.

4. I don’t think it’s a feature request – just a question of why it’s like this if the idea is to replace a rack of GEQs for every FOH/Aux/matrix amp channels. The desk is routed totally different to the analog days.

Cheers,
Trev

[TobiParticipant]

Mmh… 2. I meant, if you don’t use MainLR-GEQ, then you are clear with your recording. I did not mean, that they are not in the signal path.

3. There is no delay… all is compensated internally. The Input-Output Latency on SQ is fixed, does not matter how many GEQ you are using.

BTW I am using the Matrixes for GEQing my stuff and keep MainLR clear. Also I normally record Multitrack, so also no problem coming up.

Best Regards,
Tobias

[trickytrevParticipant]

No worries, Tobias.

For 3: a PEQ or GEQ (no matter what the implementation – digital or analog) will always have a small delay – different for each of the 31 bands – (and mostly inaudible in our applications). It’s different to latency of the whole chain, and is not related to a “delay” block either…it’s just plain filter theory. I’m not so worried about this part, but the routing just chews up matrixes and unusable processing blocks for no reason, that I could otherwise use in some applications.

@ A&H: can we consider such a signal path routing option? Why use up a matrix for this? On a Yamaha, I can just use CASCADE 2TRK instead of STEREO and it solves my problem 🙂

on an SQ5: If you keep your MainLR on 0dB, no GEQ, no other EQ or comp, then you have no problem – of course.

Cheers,
Trev

[maw92Participant]

That’s why you‘re not tuning your PA with Main LR processing. That’s what Matrices are for.
Every processing on Main LR is just for mixing purposes, at least I handle it that way (just like you would process your master in a DAW).

Then I use matrices for tuning and time aligning PA, Subs and fills.

[Author]

Posts