Kev

Me too, I figured out that I preferred playing 5 frets down than using the G string about 8 years ago now, gave up 5 strings for good and switched to BEAD/Drop B, haven't looked back.

Having spent a week with this, the retriggering with hammer-ons in certain settings is just about the only negative I have. It sounds brilliant, and now I'm learning how it wants to be played, it's tracking very, very well. Having everything adjustable by twisting knobs is just wonderful, can't be a coincidence that the only two synth pedals I've ever got on with have not involved PCs or apps. Fat fingers will struggle a tad though, i can see some finding it hard to adjust knobs without knocking others, which would be especially frustrating when adjusting saved presets. Did I read somewhere that there is a way of setting the pedal to work as a filter without any of the synth voices in the mix IE a filter affecting Dry signal only? It's not something I've spent long looking for but it isn't immediately obvious to me how.

I didn't know about the daisy chain trick either, swear when I used to run daisy chains I still had issues with ACA pedals, perhaps not though as we're going back some years!

I had a MIJ OC-2 and an OC-5 at the same time, and recently sold an Octaver. None left now though, the Quad Cortex model is perfectly good enough for me

Never seen the bottom packaging before. Used these strings a lot before switching to NYXLs, was always the top packaging but perfectly possible they've changed, could even be why they selling them cheap.

I think one of the main reasons I enjoyed this pedal so much was for the fuzz and filter circuit, which no digital synth I have tried can touch. Removing tracking and the VCO from the equation entirely, you can get some marvelous sounds. I preferred to use an external octaver with it, but with the onboard waveforms like any synth it can track pretty well once you get used to how it wants you to play. But do pursue the building blocks etc on CGraham, it can fast track you to figuring the signal chain and understanding how everything interacts.

I am intrigued also, but not cross-country level of intrigued It's just this does make me wonder as its not really a subjective thing. Latency is latency, and I think I remember reading a very geeky post on TB or perhaps on reddit about someone actually measured what it was at a specific fret on a specific string from the waveform and it came out at something silly like 2ms, which of course isn't perceptible! I think my Shure wireless is double that, and again that's just not something you're ever going to notice. Given that it is digital though, I feel like it must vary somewhat depending on the input signal, as opposed to the analog OC-2 type circuits that just flip whatever comes in back at you . So its an interesting one, though perhaps one for the Dull Mens Club on Facebook 😅

I guess I can only conclude it's more sensitive to bass/signal chain/playing etc in that case. Odd but interesting.

It does though, which is why I'm confused about how yours is behaving in your setup? I've owned a lot of OC-2 and OC-2 types (including the 3leaf clone), and although it was a few years ago now, the OC-5 didn't fall short at all for me. Sure, it wasn't QUITE as rubbery in tone as the OC-2 when directly compared solo'd, but it was extremely close and I'd never tell them apart blind, and there was no latency. Didn't like the other mode at all, but vintage was spot on.

In vintage mode, the OC-5 responded almost identically to the OC-2. If you're actively noticing a difference in latency, that's very odd. The other mode is an entirely different matter, but on the one I had, the vintage mode did not suffer any latency.

Cool, I only ask as I know there's subtle differences between a big box regular muff and the nano. Id be interested in trying one, as it does seem to have a different vibe.

Is there a circuit/sound difference between the Nano and the LTD?