As a potential purchaser of a Fantom G, i cant seem to see if the audio tracks have any eq on them.

I recentley ditched my Roland MV8000 (which has eq on the 8 audio tracks) and Motif ES keyboard keeping a Fantom X6 (i prefer the sequencer) and buying a Motif es rack. I thought I was doubling up with the MV but was disapointed to find no eq on the audio tracks of the X.

I am now seeing if the G can replace everything, but eq on the audio tracks would be a must, I would have thought. Can anyone advise?

Ok a bit tricky but possible without using any mfx .
YOu just need to record the audio then play it not in the audio track section but create a patch from samples and select the track you recorded as the sample ,you can then use the pfx with eq on it.

tranztek: You simply can't have EQ in each audio track in the means of realtime EQ, just like in a DAW or a dedicated hardware recorder. The only way to apply different EQ in every track is to record the audio with the EQ, using one of the two MFX processors during recording.

I have never found it necessary to use EQ or to have EQ on every track.
You just need some forward thinking before recording.

I run my G8 through an external analog EQ and tube compressor before resampling it onto a HD recorder. To me this is the fastest and best sounding option.

I'll agree with Quinnx on this one. I find most of the Fantom-G's sounds very full and convincing right out of the box. After all, you can edit a sound in patch level with a filter or something like that. Separate EQ on each track is NOT what Fantom-G is lacking in the sequencer area. What would be great is automation in audio tracks. and I mean REAL automation, not workarounds. ;-)

A good sound indeed doesn't need an EQ, at least there is no need "fix" it using an EQ. Pretty much all sounds on the G sound well-balanced as they are.

There are two cases when I generally need an EQ during making music:
- To remove excessive bass from bass and kick drums, rarely on some synth or pad sounds. This can be usually done in the patch itself (using one of it's filter) or using the PFX (many algorithms have a built-in two-band EQ).
- On mastering stage, but I do this on my Mac.

I can see that an EQ may be useful when playing back audio tracks in the mix with internal parts, and here there is a workaround of using a sample as a patch.

IMHO an EQ for each sound or track is very easy and usefull. Often a sound is okay but in the mix or as a layer it could use EQ.

yah, i wish each part came with its own dedicated 3 band parametric EQ...FULLY sweepable... and a final mastering EQ with another 3 band parametric EQ fully sweepable. that would be great. :p

Exactly, a 3 band parametric EQ per track is great, even when using excellent sounds.

EQ is all well and good and I agree on the necessity in a mix, but at some point wouldn't you rather get out of the box? I notice enough talk like this should have this and that and that and that that I have to make note.

It's a great opportunity for added flavor, innit?

Maybe I have some skewed perception about workstations being the end all.

dbijoux- i already am using external gear. i dont use the workstation as a workstation. i just use it as a sound engine and controller.

it's the same with cars. i dont use my 2 seater to carry kids or go to the supermarket. :D i have another grocery getter car that does that.

Exactly! It was either kenchan or innit, but yeah I was referring to your EQ and compressor.

I don't think anyone would find it so appealing to think Fantom G is for Grocery getter.

Well, EQ or not I finally took the plunge into G land and bought a fantom G6!

Congratulations mate!