Graphic EQ pre or post FX loop?

Can anyone tell me if the Mk5's EQ section (sliders or preset knobs) comes before or after the FX loop? For instance, when using the Mk5 in a wet/dry/wet setup clearly the "Slave Out" would be affected by the onboard graphic eq, but taking the dry signal from the "FX Send" and running it to an outboard EQ before passing it on to stereo effects and power amp could make for some interesting variations, yes? Thanks in advance.

It is before the fxloop. Ive run the mark v pre into other power amps using the fxloop send and the eq always works.

Thanks Cron.

Cron said:

It is before the fxloop. Ive run the mark v pre into other power amps using the fxloop send and the eq always works.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I second that. Unlike all other Marks, the GEQ is before the FX loop in the V. Not sure why...

>Photi G< said:

Unlike all other Marks...

Click to expand...

Interesting... Maybe I should be looking at a III or IV.

NoGlassNoClass said:

>Photi G< said:

Unlike all other Marks...

Click to expand...

Interesting... Maybe I should be looking at a III or IV.

Click to expand...

I'd probably choose an amp based on it's sound and features before I concentrated on where in the chain the EQ is. With outboard processing you still have the ability to re-eq the wet channels, regardless of whether the signal has already undergone EQing previously.

screamingdaisy said:

I'd probably choose an amp based on it's sound...

Click to expand...

Absolutely, I agree. Just thinking out loud I guess... In the market for a new amp, and looking at ways to incorporate stuff I already have (2 Recto 4x12s, an EV-loaded Theile, a bunch of pedals some of which are stereo, and a 2:90) See the empty spot for a nice Mark-series combo? Nothing set in stone here, just looking at my options.

I was trying to avoid re-EQing the wet channels as IME trying to boost back freqs that have already been cut introduces a lot of noise and hiss. This may be a non-issue however, as differences in speakers/cabs, coloration from FX, microphones, and the overall mix with other instruments will give enough contrast between wet and dry guitar tones without having to use another EQ.

NoGlassNoClass said:

I was trying to avoid re-EQing the wet channels as IME trying to boost back freqs that have already been cut introduces a lot of noise and hiss. This may be a non-issue however, as differences in speakers/cabs, coloration from FX, microphones, and the overall mix with other instruments will give enough contrast between wet and dry guitar tones without having to use another EQ.

Click to expand...

I've only done wet/dry, and in my very limited experience I found the sound naturally separated itself. Of course, I was using differently voiced amps/speakers....

Dry -> Mark V -> Recto 4x12

Wet -> Mark V preamp -> Eventide Timefactor (killdry) -> Slaved into Lonstar Special's power amp and fed into the combo's single MC90 speaker.

I guess I'm not really after w/d/w in the purest sense...I dont want the 4x12s running 100% wet with delays and reverbs. Many times the stereo pair is bone-dry as well as the center. An EQ can make it sound like 2 completely different amps. Running a 10-15 ms delay (killdry and only one repeat) sounds like double-tracked guitars. Add +/- 3 cents detune can sound like two different guitars playing in unison.

Of course you can always go for the huge Gilmour-esque delays and not fall out of the mix, as the dry amp will keep your tone punchy and in-your-face.

>Photi G< said:

Cron said:

It is before the fxloop. Ive run the mark v pre into other power amps using the fxloop send and the eq always works.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I second that. Unlike all other Marks, the GEQ is before the FX loop in the V. Not sure why...

Click to expand...

iirc, it has to do with the placement of the channel masters, wattage selection, and the fx loop/output & solo controls. the mark v is the first mark with newschool fx/output controls.

phyrexia said:

...the fx loop/output & solo controls...

Click to expand...

That makes sense. With the final volume controls being part of the FX loop (and bypassable with the loop), any tone-shaping would have to come first.