Quatschmacher

If that was indeed the case then your pedal was defective. With the clean signal off and the filter fully open, the Down knob should produce audible results very quickly when dialling it up from zero as no frequencies are being filtered out. However, if the clean is off and the filter is fully closed then you’d not hear very much when turning up the Down knob. This is because only the very lowest frequencies are being allowed through and, on the V1, these didn’t have a high enough output volume to be audible.

I feel like I’m in Groundhog Day!

If you reread you’ll see that, in part, we’re saying the same thing: … which is why you can now hear the lower frequencies when you’ve got the filter almost fully closed on the V2 (and the clean signal turned off) - because those frequencies are now physically louder on the Down signal than they were on the V1. No. As before, overall output volume is governed by both volume knobs, just that on the new version, the Down knob has more volume available. On the V1, the only way you could hear (for example) 30Hz at a high enough volume was by dialling in the clean signal. This was because 30Hz on the Down signal didn’t have the same (maximum) volume as 30Hz on the clean signal in actual dB terms. On the revised model it’s most likely the other way round now (i.e. that the output of the Down signal is higher than the clean at any given frequency). Hence now, 30Hz becomes audible at lower clock position of the Down knob. This is why you describe it as “being governed by” that knob now.

There’s an analogy in visual motion: imagine a pendulum swinging at a low frequency (say twice per second). If it’s only moving a short distance (a few millimetres) you would probably not see this easily. Moving a short distance is the equivalent of low volume (ie the amplitude of the pendulum’s swing is low). If it were moving at a frequency of twice per second but covering a distance of a metre in that time then you’d definitely be able to see that. That is analogous to higher volume as the amplitude of the pendulum’s swing is large.

If the low pass filter is fully (or almost) fully closed then you’re only letting frequencies probably around 20-40Hz through (bass A string is 55Hz). Those close to 20Hz are around the limit of human hearing so if their amplitude (volume) is low, as were ALL frequencies in Down signal of the V1, then you’ll struggle to hear them. (Volume can be also thought of as proportional to the back-and-forth distance your speaker cone moves; small back-and-forth movement equals lower volume as the air isn’t being pushed as hard. Frequency is how many of those back-and-forth motions happen per second.) Can you shoot a video clip of this happening? The volume (amplitude) of ALL frequencies in the Down signal has been boosted, hence when you roll in the filter, thus stripping out the higher frequencies, the remaining lower frequencies are at a louder and more audible level (ie have a bigger amplitude) than they were on the V1. In simple terms, the Down signal is louder/hotter. Low frequencies at the edge of human hearing are difficult to hear unless they are given a bigger amplitude.

Yup, Octabvre nails it.

For furthermore clarification, VOLUME is amplitude of the waveform, that is the height of the peaks and troughs (vertical distance). (Frequency is the number of times the waveform repeats per second, and is intimately related to the horizontal distance between two adjacent peaks.) Higher harmonics are naturally at a lower volume compared to the fundamental. So by turning down the VOLUME knob you will get to a point where some of those high frequencies become inaudible. By contrast, a low pass filter REMOVES the higher frequencies ALTOGETHER, but leaves the lower frequencies intact (their volume remains unaltered). Since extreme low frequencies are difficult to hear anyway you might PERCEIVE the applying of a low pass filter as a reduction in volume (as the higher, more audible frequencies are gradually removed) but that’s not what’s actually happening as it is not modifying the amplitude of the fundamental waveform. I can understand how you’ve conflated these two phenomena, after all, the end result is that the audible frequencies become inaudible. However, the reasons why that is so is different in both scenarios - low amplitude versus not being present due to having been filtered out altogether. I hope that makes sense.

For reference:

It’s not the filter which lacks volume, it’s the sub octave output which was of low volume. The low pass filter simply removes the high frequencies from the octave down signal, gradually removing frequencies lower and lower as you apply it. Again, this is misleading. In the original pedal, turning up the clean was simply adding some more audible frequencies in (i.e. your bass’s clean signal). In one sense, they may have been the “same” frequencies that the filter removed (numerically speaking, eg, 100Hz) but not the “same” in the sense of coming from the same source signal. The filter only removes frequencies from the octave down signal, whereas you were adding frequencies from the clean signal.

I’d like to try this new version. I loved the sound of the original but the two issues I had were the low octave down output (now fixed) and poor tracking on my bass (though Tom suggested some components could be altered if one were handy with a soldering iron).

I’ve just ordered a Squaver P1 and will report my findings.

Not the best showcase but…

On the Squaver it seems like the input LPF has been modified to auto follow the input but the silk screening doesn’t reflect this so I guess they modified the internals but still have a supply of casings to use up.

The chip used in the pitch detection is unique here so I’m keen to see if it’s an improvement on current stuff.

Indeed. Elsewhere on the site it says “tracking within a cycle or two) so that could be 24-48ms at the low end. But for standard octaver type use (playing an octave up and pitching down) it’ll probably be useable (much like my Subterranea but this Sonicsmith has more functionality with the CV ins and outs).

Have you tried an MXR BOD? That is something great which reads from pitch to create a synthesised voice and it’s tracking and latency time is just fine. So pitch could work. If these track as well as that then I’ll be perfectly happy with it. I need to try in person to form a proper opinion on them.

Monophonic is just fine for bass as far as I’m concerned.

I wonder if Sonicsmith would consider just making a product which had the pitch-to-CV convertor with the gate and pitch outputs in it.

Basically one could run the audio out and envelope out from the Convertor into a Moogerfooger lowpass filter (with an inverted envelope if so desired) and that’d be a pretty fine synth sound right there.

Did you check out their Convertor pedal? It does most of what the Squaver does but doesn’t have the extra VCF. On their Facebook page there’s a demo of them using it with a guitar to control a Moog Minitaur. They also appear to have 40% off at present so the Convertor is £225 and the Squaver is £397. Also, they’re based in Poland so no import duty! I really need to give these a go.

I’m uncovering a whole host of enticing stuff. Pedalboard-friendly audio controlled oscillator synths: https://sonicsmith.com/