Re: more Mesa Boogie pedals
I like parametric equalizers for the fact that you can choose your own frequencies and bandwidth. I also happen to like my MXR 10 band. On the dunlop website it says "10 carefully chosen frequencies". If the frequencies they decided on are as myopic and arbitrary as some of you are saying, are dunlop guilty of false advertising?
The MXR 10-band frequencies are ISO...now I can't remember what that means exactly, but I do know that it is a standard that was set up back in prehistoric times so that an engineer could walk into any studio, adjust the EQ and know EXACTLY the frequencies he's adjusting--same as in his own studio. The 10-band adjusts octaves; same goes for 15-band (2/3 octave) and 31-band (1/3 octave EQs). So, no false advertising.
I have a couple of the old blue MXR 10-bands, as well as a new MXR footswitchable 10-band and they are indeed very handy tools. I also have an old Ibanez Parametric EQ pedal which has saved my ass countless times. The typical parametric EQ in pedal form has only a single band. Studio paras usually have four or more, and allow you to set the frequency, boost/cut, and the Q, or the bandwidth of the frequency. So in most cases, the graphic EQ is used to set the broad frequency response, while problem areas like narrow band feedback, are often best addressed by a para EQ.
The old MXR 10-band was not just for guitar; it could be used for guitars, keys, bass--I've even patched mine into a PA system once or twice, and they marketed a stereo tabletop version with phono jacks for home hi-fi use. But, the 10-band has a lot of bands that don't effect the guitar's range and not enough of the ones that do. MXR came up with the little 6-band EQ, and those bands were not ISO centers, but designed to work more in the range of the guitar. Boss came up with their footswitchable 7-band version, and a few other companies have offered similar pedals over the years.
Mesa's 5-band EQ really is a great addition to their amps. I have Mark IIIs, a IV and now a V, and the sliders make a big difference in tone with very little movement. I understand that some folks prefer the Mark II-C+ without the EQ; that the sans-EQ version is really the one with the Holy Grail tone. That may be, but I will probably never get a chance to own one, so I can't say for sure. Personally, I would never buy a Mark III without the EQ; in that amp it makes the LEAD CHANNEL really sweet.
Bill