MXR Dyna Comp or EQ

Steve Dodson · Post by **Steve Dodson** » 2 Oct 2005 2:20 pm

On a small scale set-up,just guitar, 7A match box and a boss DD-3. If you where looking to add just something, to help your amp along which of the these would you add. The MXR Dyna Comp or an MXR 109 6 band EQ?

Gere Mullican · Post by **Gere Mullican** » 2 Oct 2005 3:30 pm

Steve, in my opinion (which is absolutely worthless) I was using a DD-3 and the NV112 amp with my GFI. I got an MXR Dynacomp and now use it exclusively. No longer use the DD-3 and I get the sound I like. It's kind of fat and thick and mellow to my ears. My picking ain't too good but my sound is. In case you decide to go with the Dynacomp, I have an extra one because I bought a brand new one.Send me an email and let me know. Thanks.
Gere

------------------
GFI SD10, Peavey NV 112, Hilton Pedal & Boss DD-3 & MXR Dynacomp compressor and Boss Tone

Bobby Boggs · Post by **Bobby Boggs** » 2 Oct 2005 6:46 pm

The MXR Dynacomp It's kind of fat and thick and mellow to my ears. Yep. I love the sound I got with it.Here at the house or on sessions. But it will drive you insane or you simply will not be heard on a gig...bb

James Quackenbush · Post by **James Quackenbush** » 3 Oct 2005 9:20 am

Steve,
This all depends on what amp you're playing thru....My EQ is already set up as I use a Steel King, and a Webb, so in my situation a nice compressor pedal like the Dynacomp would be my choice ...If my amp did not have a good EQ, I would probably go the EQ pedal, and get the Dynacomp later.... I would say that you would probably use a good EQ more than you would a compressor to shape your tone ...Then again, maybe not if you like the sound of a compressor in line, and already have the EQ the way you like it ........Jim[This message was edited by James Quackenbush on 03 October 2005 at 10:22 AM.]

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 5 Oct 2005 1:10 pm

Without doubt, I'd pick the 6-band EQ. Players who have never played through a good graphic EQ simply don't know what they're missing, tone wise. Amps today (yes, all of 'em) are extremely narrow in their tonal range and capabilities. Manufacturers would rather sell many amps than they would sell one or two, so they "voice" each one (that is, limit each model's tonal range...ergo, its capabilities) so it will only be good for one instrument.

"So, you play lead and steel? Then you really need two different amps."

David Mason · Post by **David Mason** » 6 Oct 2005 10:21 am

I have a rack with stereo EQ and stereo compression each doing different things as well as stompbox varieties of both, and if I had to make a choice I could get by without the compressors a lot more happily than I could get by without the EQ's. They're not really comparable; they do different things, but I would intuitively guess that if you play by yourself in the living room a compressor might be more fun initially to fatten and smooth your tone, but if you're trying to adjust your tone to fit into a specific frequency slot in a band context, trying to duplicate tones on recordings, or trying to vary your tone when recording multiple tracks, the EQ's the one to go with. You know you'll end up getting both eventually, right?

Steve Dodson · Post by **Steve Dodson** » 6 Oct 2005 1:34 pm

Thanks Guys!