If you could only choose one octave pedal

[Al Krow]

[quote name='dannybuoy' timestamp='1503250780' post='3356701']
You will be able to get many synth effects out of the Zoom, but nothing approaching the OC-2. Try and find some demos to hear the OC-2 octave soloed on bass if you're not familiar with how it sounds!
[/quote]

And am I correct from the comments on this thread that the COG T-16 is the spiritual successor to the OC-2 and improves on it?

[dannybuoy]

That's where opinion is divided. Personally I prefer the tone of the OC-2 by a wide margin, but plenty of others have replaced their OC-2's with one with no regrets.

[Johnny Wishbone]

[quote name='Al Krow' timestamp='1503252718' post='3356721']


And am I correct from the comments on this thread that the COG T-16 is the spiritual successor to the OC-2 and improves on it?
[/quote]
Others may disagree but, as a long term OC-2 user, I would say yes. It has a very similar core tone but tracks better, is louder and does away with the useless (on bass anyway) 2 octave down. On top of that, as I've said previously, the filter control sets it apart. I love my OC-2 but as soon as Tom let me try a T47 (essentially 2 T16s together - I don't even have to change settings mid-gig anymore!) I couldn't get my wallet out quick enough. For me, it takes everything that's great about the OC-2 and makes it better.

I'm also a tight b@stard, so when I pay £160-odd for a pedal you know it's something special! The OC-2 was the one pedal I own that I was convinced I'd never replace, but it's now sat in my attic gathering dust.

As always however, YMMV.

Edited August 20, 2017 by Johnny Wishbone

[Al Krow]

[quote name='Johnny Wishbone' timestamp='1503253668' post='3356731']
Others may disagree but, as a long term OC-2 user, I would say yes. It has a very similar core tone but tracks better, is louder and does away with the useless (on bass anyway) 2 octave down. On top of that, as I've said previously, the filter control sets it apart. I love my OC-2 but as soon as Tom let me try a T47 (essentially 2 T16s together - I don't even have to change settings mid-gig anymore!) I couldn't get my wallet out quick enough. For me, it takes everything that's great about the OC-2 and makes it better. I'm also a tight b@stard, so when I pay £160-odd for a pedal you know it's something special! The OC-2 was the one pedal I own that I was convinced I'd never replace, but it's now sat in my attic gathering dust. As always however, YMMV.
[/quote]

Cheers JW. I see that you are based in Tom's home town (and one also famous for its engineering)! The OC-2 is now 35 year old, albeit much loved, tech and now discontinued, which does make me a little hesitant to consider it. So it's great if there is an up to date modern successor to it. And it's always nice to find a great British product

I've just had a listen to the attached clip (via headphones). The wordy descriptions aren't always right in terms of knob positions, but otherwise actually a really useful little review [url="https://youtu.be/-0ENEfw39eI"]https://youtu.be/-0ENEfw39eI[/url]

As I mentioned above, the Zoom B3n doesn't do a bad job with wet/dry blend on tracking all the way down to a low E with little latency, so if I stopped there in terms of what I was looking for there would be little point in getting a dedicated octave pedal. However, the 100% wet sub and synth effects on the COG T16 are a step up from what I can get on the Zoom and I can see that really adding something to a live performance.

[NickA]

I've had an OC-2 for many years (now missing one knob, but otherwise as new) and always thought it a bit crap ... doesn't track low notes very well (goes all wobbly) and sounds muddy with any notes lower than an open G. Oct-2 pretty much useless unless I'm so far up the fretboard, my fingers won't fit between the frets.

I had a poke about inside it once and found that basically it's just making a square wave by dividing down a squared off version of whatever signal comes into it - so if the sound you are playing has lots of harmonics (multiple zero crossings) it may settle on one of them instead of the fundamental. There is then a bit of filtering that rounds off the square wave depending on how much high frequency stuff is in the original signal. I guess it needs to be driven by a signal that has been filtered down to the fundamental (once suggested to Trace that they put a Low Pass on the send return loop of the GP12SMX as well as the high pass - specifically for driving octave dividers - but they didn't ;-) ).

I had assumed that a modern digital thing would sound much better (guitar FX box 3 on my laptop does a better job of simply playing a lower note).

So what IS the secret with these things - how DO you track to a low F#??

[Hugsonic]

I tried a fair few and decided on the MXR. Its really easy to get a great sound and it tracks amazingly for an analog pedal. The mid boost is also a great feature for cutting through the mix. You can also get a pretty good synth sound if you dial out the direct.

[Al Krow]

[quote name='NickA' timestamp='1503257334' post='3356780']
So what IS the secret with these things - how DO you track to a low F#??
[/quote]

Modern digital pedals (e.g. TC sub'n'up) should track down to low F# [i]and indeed lower. [/i]
Consensus on analogue pedals (which seem to score better on warmth / more natural octave tone and also reduced latency) is that they can comfortably get down to a low G, but will typically struggle lower than this.

If you're asking exactly [i]how[/i] they do this rather than which pedals can do it, then that's beyond my level of expertise on the subject!

Edited August 20, 2017 by Al Krow

[dannybuoy]

My Octabvre can do a low F# no problem. It doesn't sound very good to me, as I don't find notes that low very usable, but it tracks just fine. It can handle short or pulsing notes on the low E and F, but sustained notes glitch out. Moving down to the low B string, it can even do C#/D/D# no problem.

If I pluck nearer the bridge or use a pick then tracking goes haywire, so a lot of it is down to technique too.

[dannybuoy]

http://youtu.be/MRuUY8InOGs

[Quatschmacher]

I thought the T16 sounded amazing when I had one. However, the soloed sub octave wasn't loud enough (this has now been fixed in Tom's new iteration of the pedal) and it didn't track very well for me. Caveat - I'm new to octavers and am finding that they require a better technique to avoid glitches. I found the MXR tracked much better for me and holds sustained notes on my basses better. I still preferred the T16's sound as it was way fatter.

I still want to try the Octabvres and Octamizer.

Edited August 22, 2017 by Quatschmacher

[Quatschmacher]

There are two T16s for sale here at the moment.

[HazBeen]

Must buy imho

[Al Krow]

[quote name='Quatschmacher' timestamp='1503439192' post='3358346']
There are two T16s for sale here at the moment.
[/quote]

...no longer!

[abc]

How about the Octron III ?
I too am looking for an octave and tempted by the new T 16.
Still on the fence a little as the Octron looks interesting as well, to me.
Does anyone here know , how much Cog would charge to change the design on a pedal, when one orders one?

[Dood]

[quote name='Al Krow' timestamp='1503266150' post='3356871']
Modern digital pedals (e.g. TC sub'n'up) should track down to low F# [i]and indeed lower. [/i]

Consensus on analogue pedals (which seem to score better on warmth / more natural octave tone and also reduced latency) is that they can comfortably get down to a low G, but will typically struggle lower than this.

[/quote]

I'm going to give Sub n' Up a thumbs up on both of these points. It does indeed track lower than any Octave pedal I've used whilst staying 'stable'. The Sub n' Up has different modes of operation out of the box including an Analogue emulation which is ace. Once again, where the pedal excels, like other TonePrint enabled models is getting your hands on the editor software (free). Within this pedal's parameters is the ability to adjust the EQ on each of the separate octaves (+1, -1, -2) along with the ability to even add Chorus and other cool effects. The reason I mention the EQ is that it is possible to warm up that octave tone; you'll get the best of both worlds. The Analogue sound everyone mentions [i]and [/i]the [i]ridiculously[/i] low tracking.

My own preset I've created a 1 octave down tone, but I have scooped the sub frequencies off of the -1 output. This has given me a super tracking sound but it is tight, tight, tight! So punchy rather than dub-sub (which of course it can do in spades if I want).

[Al Krow]

[quote name='dood' timestamp='1505122351' post='3369559']
I'm going to give Sub n' Up a thumbs up on both of these points. It does indeed track lower than any Octave pedal I've used whilst staying 'stable'. The Sub n' Up has different modes of operation out of the box including an Analogue emulation which is ace. Once again, where the pedal excels, like other TonePrint enabled models is getting your hands on the editor software (free). Within this pedal's parameters is the ability to adjust the EQ on each of the separate octaves (+1, -1, -2) along with the ability to even add Chorus and other cool effects. The reason I mention the EQ is that it is possible to warm up that octave tone; you'll get the best of both worlds. The Analogue sound everyone mentions [i]and [/i]the [i]ridiculously[/i] low tracking.

My own preset I've created a 1 octave down tone, but I have scooped the sub frequencies off of the -1 output. This has given me a super tracking sound but it is tight, tight, tight! So punchy rather than dub-sub (which of course it can do in spades if I want).
[/quote]

[b]TC Toneprint[/b]
That does sound like a nice best of both of worlds. However...

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]One of the other reasons besides a more natural octave tone (and reduced latency - which my old Boss PS-6 Harmonist was noticeably impacted by) for getting a dedicated analogue pedal, as opposed to using my Zoom B3n multi-fx, is that with any dedicated pedal it's pretty easy to change settings on the fly in a live situation, or even in terms of getting to grips with the tonal options in the first place.[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]The TC Toneprint stuff has always intrigued me both on the sub'n'up and the Spectracomp. But my sense is that you need to be quite adept with computer software / IT skills to get into the detail of something like the editor software on Toneprint? So if you're not a dab hand at IT is the Toneprint stuff actually really easy to use?[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]e.g. how much time did you have to spend in terms of connecting up the pedal to the computer, loading and editing the software, unplugging and re-connecting to try out on your bass and amp; keeping the sound you had just managed to achieve in your head whilst going back to the computer and reconnecting everything to make further edits to refine the sound. [Repeat] Until you have got the tone you like. [/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Now multiply that time by a factor of 2 to 4 for someone not familiar with Toneprint?[/font][/color]

[font="helvetica, arial, sans-serif"][color="#282828"]I really like the sound of what you have managed to do for your 1 octave tone down as a preset, but are you then "stuck" with that one preset and e.g. can't have another preset that sounds great as full filter synth, without changing all the software settings again? Obviously that's a non starter when rehearsing or playing live, although you could make it work for recording.[/color][/font]


[b][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]COG T16[/font][/color][/b]
I'm just getting to grips with the Gen 1.0 COG T16 which I recently bought off one of my fellow BCers. It performs pretty much in line with expectations with the posts made on this thread:
- my [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Zoom B3n, as a digital patch, tracks lower than the analogue COG T16, typically 2 to 3 semitones lower (as expected); [/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]- t[/font][/color][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]he low volume** on the 100% wet full filter / synth [/font][/color]Gen 1.0 [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]COG T16 means that you definitely need to blend in a decent of clean to get good usable full filter / synth tone ([/font][/color][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]as pointed out by a number of others on this forum). B[/font][/color][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]ut at 50% wet / dry it's a pretty good sound; [/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]- the tone and articulation on the COG is, however, definitely an improvement, over what I have so far managed to get from my multi-fx, [/font][/color][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]and this is a clear plus for the COG T16[/font][/color][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif].[/font][/color]

**the low volume full filter/synth has, I understand, been addressed on the Gen 2.0 COG T16 pedals which have very recently been released, but I note from the COG website that the T47, T65 and T70s are still using their old circuitry. Does that mean that they will continue to suffer from the low volume full filter/synth issue or was this never an issue in the first place for the higher number pedals? Given that the T47 is essentially two T16s (all just for an extra £20!) I'd assumed that COG are simply duplicating the old T16 circuitry rather than doing something different inside the T47s?

[Osiris]

[quote name='Al Krow' timestamp='1505126034' post='3369583']
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]The TC Toneprint stuff has always intrigued me both on the sub'n'up and the Spectracomp. But my sense is that you need to be quite adept with computer software / IT skills to get into the detail of something like the editor software on Toneprint? So if you're not a dab hand at IT is the Toneprint stuff actually really easy to use?[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]e.g. how much time did you have to spend in terms of connecting up the pedal to the computer, loading and editing the software, unplugging and re-connecting to try out on your bass and amp; keeping the sound you had just managed to achieve in your head whilst going back to the computer and reconnecting everything to make further edits to refine the sound. [Repeat] Until you have got the tone you like. [/font][/color]


[/quote]

You don't have to go anywhere near the Tone print editor software if you don't want to. I had a quick look when plugging my Spectracomp in and there are tons of parameters to configure and hours of fun to be had - but only as long as you know what you're doing. And I don't, so I backed out pretty quickly. But that's a limitation of me, not the software

As long as you have a smartphone you have loads of different options to try simply using the free downloadable [url="http://www.tcelectronic.com/toneprint-app/"]Tone Print app[/url]. TC add new tone prints all the time too so you can completely reconfigure the tone and sound of your pedal in just a few seconds, it's so simple. That makes each and every tone print enabled pedal incredibly versatile.

Edited September 11, 2017 by Osiris

[radiophonic]

[quote name='Al Krow' timestamp='1505126034' post='3369583']
[b]TC Toneprint[/b]
That does sound like a nice best of both of worlds. However...

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]One of the other reasons besides a more natural octave tone (and reduced latency - which my old Boss PS-6 Harmonist was noticeably impacted by) for getting a dedicated analogue pedal, as opposed to using my Zoom B3n multi-fx, is that with any dedicated pedal it's pretty easy to change settings on the fly in a live situation, or even in terms of getting to grips with the tonal options in the first place.[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]The TC Toneprint stuff has always intrigued me both on the sub'n'up and the Spectracomp. But my sense is that you need to be quite adept with computer software / IT skills to get into the detail of something like the editor software on Toneprint? So if you're not a dab hand at IT is the Toneprint stuff actually really easy to use?[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]e.g. how much time did you have to spend in terms of connecting up the pedal to the computer, loading and editing the software, unplugging and re-connecting to try out on your bass and amp; keeping the sound you had just managed to achieve in your head whilst going back to the computer and reconnecting everything to make further edits to refine the sound. [Repeat] Until you have got the tone you like. [/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Now multiply that time by a factor of 2 to 4 for someone not familiar with Toneprint?[/font][/color]

[font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif][color=#282828]I really like the sound of what you have managed to do for your 1 octave tone down as a preset, but are you then "stuck" with that one preset and e.g. can't have another preset that sounds great as full filter synth, without changing all the software settings again? Obviously that's a non starter when rehearsing or playing live, although you could make it work for recording.[/color][/font]

[/quote]

I've not used the Sub'n'Up (it's on my list though), but I use Toneprint on a Flashback extensively. It's very straightforward and requires next to zero IT knowledge. You just connect the USB cable and launch the Editor program on your computer. You do need to have some understanding of what the pedal parameters are doing, but they do name them in a way that's easy to understand and Tore stated in his intro video for the Sub that a lot of the really low level parameters are hidden. Instead you are recommended to load a template and work from that. The closest analog for a delay would be starting from a '2290 type Digital Delay' vs. starting from a 'Tape Delay'. I used the latter to make something that sounds not quite like an Echroec and it's become my standard delay. You don't need to disconnect/reconnect. Just tweak the sliders in the template, hit 'Send', try it out and repeat until it does what you want, then save it. I've criticised TC elsewhere for the lack of a portable user library and beaming of your own templates (i.e. more techy stuff), but in terms of basic functionality they really have got this right. If I had the money for an ocatver right now, Toneprint would be a major selling point.

Edit - Just saw Osiris's post. I agree wrt Multiband Compressors!

Edited September 11, 2017 by radiophonic

[dannybuoy]

Al - the low volume issue supposedly only affected the older T16 and not the rest of the range.

[Al Krow]

[quote name='Osiris' timestamp='1505127383' post='3369600']
You don't have to go anywhere near the Tone print editor software if you don't want to. I had a quick look when plugging my Spectracomp in and there are tons of parameters to configure and hours of fun to be had - but only as long as you know what you're doing. And I don't, so I backed out pretty quickly. But that's a limitation of me, not the software

As long as you have a smartphone you have loads of different options to try simply using the free downloadable [url="http://www.tcelectronic.com/toneprint-app/"]Tone Print app[/url]. TC add new tone prints all the time too so you can completely reconfigure the tone and sound of your pedal in just a few seconds, it's so simple. That makes each and every tone print enabled pedal incredibly versatile.
[/quote]

[b]TC Sub'n'Up / Toneprint[/b]
Thanks Osiris and radiophonic. Given that you are very well skilled in IT and I'm not, that's definitely answered my Q!

Downloading Toneprints - yup I can see that works for both recording and rehearsals. But we would still be limited to one toneprint per set rather than being able to modify on the fly in a live situation - bandmates and audience aren't going to put up with us getting our mobile phones out, dialing the TC website, finding the right toneprint and then downloading in the middle of a set are they (particularly when they might not even notice the difference) and definitely not mid-song! This is where having a couple of great pre-set options on something like the COG T47 can work really well, or indeed two or more options on a decent multi-fx.

Having said that a Sub n Up is going to be generally just as versatile as most other dedicated pedals in a live situation - it's just that its "killer app" of Toneprint is, for me, more of a pre-set than something that can be changed "on the fly" in a live situation.

But hey if you have an octave down that tracks [i]ridiculously[/i] low (down to an open E and [i]lower[/i]) with an authentic bass tone (via Toneprint) and the rapid tracking / low latency of an analogue pedal; add in the ability to track polyphonically and an octave up option too, then it sounds to me that the TC might just be onto a winner with their Sub'n'Up.

[b]COG T16[/b]
[quote name='dannybuoy' timestamp='1505127976' post='3369604']
Al - the low volume issue supposedly only affected the older T16 and not the rest of the range.
[/quote]

Cheers DB - yes is what I understood and would explain COG not updating their circuitry on the T47 etc. models. I'd also dropped COG a line and Tom has kindly confirmed this point i.e. [i]"the T-16 has been upgraded to the same circuitry as the rest of the octave range - only the first generation of T-16s had the lower output." [/i]

Edited September 12, 2017 by Al Krow

[Dood]

[quote name='Al Krow' timestamp='1505126034' post='3369583']
[b]TC Toneprint[/b]
That does sound like a nice best of both of worlds. However...

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]1. One of the other reasons besides a more natural octave tone (and reduced latency - which my old Boss PS-6 Harmonist was noticeably impacted by) for getting a dedicated analogue pedal, as opposed to using my Zoom B3n multi-fx, is that with any dedicated pedal it's pretty easy to change settings on the fly in a live situation, or even in terms of getting to grips with the tonal options in the first place.[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]2. The TC Toneprint stuff has always intrigued me both on the sub'n'up and the Spectracomp. But my sense is that you need to be quite adept with computer software / IT skills to get into the detail of something like the editor software on Toneprint? So if you're not a dab hand at IT is the Toneprint stuff actually really easy to use?[/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]3. e.g. how much time did you have to spend in terms of connecting up the pedal to the computer, loading and editing the software, unplugging and re-connecting to try out on your bass and amp; keeping the sound you had just managed to achieve in your head whilst going back to the computer and reconnecting everything to make further edits to refine the sound. [Repeat] Until you have got the tone you like. [/font][/color]

[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]4. Now multiply that time by a factor of 2 to 4 for someone not familiar with Toneprint?[/font][/color]

[font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif][color=#282828]I really like the sound of what you have managed to do for your 1 octave tone down as a preset, but are you then "stuck" with that one preset and e.g. can't have another preset that sounds great as full filter synth, without changing all the software settings again? Obviously that's a non starter when rehearsing or playing live, although you could make it work for recording.[/color][/font]

[/quote]

I hope you don't mind, I've numbered your points:

1. Treat Sub n' Up like a compact pedal. Once set up how you like you just sweep the controls to taste. It's just with this one you have 3 easy access pedal types, one of those being your own TonePrint. (Analogue style, Polyphonic and TonePrint).

2. Totally disagree. My daughter is 4 and can operate our smart TV and my iPad with ease. TonePrint would be no match for her lol! Of course I am making light of the subject matter, but really, it is very simple. You can't break it, and there's always the default programs to take you back to where you started. Very simple.

3. You don't need to keep disconnecting everything - changes happen instantly - so if you use the editor on a tablet, phone laptop or even desktop computer, you don't have to worry about forgetting stuff. Of course the latter device might be the most difficult if you aren't allowed to play with your bass gear at home lol. I do all of my tweaking next to my (rather cheap home made pedal board) with either my laptop or tablet. Hit save, and then when I've finished, pull the plug and the settings stay.

4. As above, leave it all plugged in and just tweak. Like you do with a new amp or bass. Turn the controls and see what happens. If it makes a good sound then it's good. Yes, it does help if you know how a compressor works in the case of the Spectacomp as it *can* be advanced if you want it too, but TonePrint I can see is designed to be simple to use and get great results. The Editor gives access to the parameters that tweaks also like.


On the subject of the Cog - I've not replied as I've not tried one, but Tom is a very talented guy and I have no reason to think that this wouldn't be anything less than a brilliant device. His workmanship is excellent. Very, very good.

Edited September 11, 2017 by dood

[Osiris]

[quote name='Al Krow' timestamp='1505128705' post='3369610']

Downloading Toneprints - yup I can see that works for both recording and rehearsals. But we would still be limited to one toneprint per set rather than being able to modify on the fly in a live situation - bandmates and audience aren't going to put up with us getting our mobile phones out, dialing the TC website, finding the right toneprint and then downloading in the middle of a set are they (particularly when they might not even notice the difference) and definitely not mid-song!

[/quote]

In that sense, it is no more limited than just about every other stomp box currently available, with a couple of exceptions

[CameronJ]

I should probably clarify my thoughts on my current collection of analogue Octave pedals. The DOD Meatbox, The COG T16, the Aguilar Octamizer and the 3Leaf Octabvre Mini. I've also started a separate thread about my recently acquired Emma Electronic Okto-Nøjs which is an octave fuzz with a soloable octave. It's quickly becoming a favourite of mine but I haven't included the write up for that in this comparison...

<disclaimer> At the moment I'm running these pedals with my active Ibanez BTB33 tuned E-C with stock Bartolini pickups and Aguilar OBP3 preamp through a Phil Jones BigHead with quality headphones ONLY. I'm working far away from home right now so I don't have my full rig at my disposal. I've set them all up at the start of my pedal chain without any compression or boost to aid them. <\disclaimer>


DOD Meatbox
I basically designed my current pedalboard layout around the idea of running my Meatbox as a parallel sub octave that I can switch in and out at will whilst layering other effects onto my parallel clean signal. This works incredibly well and nothing else does this job quite like the Meatbox. Except maybe a Mantic Density Hulk which is based on the same circuit I believe. Long story short, when it comes to chunky sub sine wave sound it can't be beaten. The wet/dry TRS output jack makes it indispensable as a switchable "thickener" on my board. Tracking here is possibly the best of the bunch but as it's a subharmonic generator rather than an octave "synth" like the others, it may not be entirely fair to compare it to the others in this department.


COG T16
The pedal that comes closest to the Meatbox in its pure sub tone is the COG T16, which is one of the big reasons I like it as much as I do. Anyone who has owned a Meatbox will know just how crazy its lows are, so you can use that as a rough ballpark comparison. The Sine-like tones at the extreme right side of the T16's filter knob arguably get deeper and cleaner in timbre than the Meatbox, but in my opinion you'd want to have a bit of sonic space in your playing context for it to really shine soloed. Running those clean subs in parallel to the rest of your signal would be lovely as a fattener but not as easy to achieve as with the Meatbox as you'd need a signal splitter before it. Dial the T16's filter back counter-clockwise and it gains some more midrange grit which takes it into more easily audible synth territory. Overall it's a very cool pedal with its own sound. One thing to note though: earlier versions of the pedal don't have tons of gain available. You'll get roughly to unity gain but not far beyond, which becomes more of an issue the further clockwise you turn the filter knob as the subbier it gets the harder it is to tell what notes you're playing! I'm told the newest version fixes this.


Aguilar Octamizer
For pure subby sine wave sounds, the Octamizer is next in line to the throne. I've said in the past that the Octamizer is the only octave pedal I'll never sell and I'll stick by that comment. The reason being it has really usable tones all the way across its filter frequency range from the subby end (anti-clockwise ) to the gritty end (clockwise) and the octave level knob allows you to get well above unity gain. If I were fighting for sonic space in a busy band context this is probably the first pedal I'd be stomping on. I've never doubted its ability to cut through a mix - Aguilar really nailed the filter knob range here. I also find the Octamizer consistently plays well with other effects, in particular filters & dirt, largely due to its great midrange punch I think. For me, the other octave pedals mentioned here are best kept soloed on my board but this is just in my opinion with my gear. Your setup may vary! Side note: Aguilar seem to have thought outside the box with this pedal as not only is there a clean level knob but also a clean TONE knob which lets you mellow out or sharpen up your clean bass sound independently of the octave and blend the two signals to taste. I've often fantasized about having 3 Octamizers - two of them with octaves soloed but filtered at opposite ends of the spectrum and the third one with octave muted and clean signal turned up for use as a clean tone knob in pedal form. One day I shall fulfil this fantasy.

The Octamizer is most likely to get a little glitchy when getting high up on my C string. Not to say it glitches easily - it really doesn't - but the others feel slightly less discriminatory at higher pitches.


3Leaf Octabvre Mini
Finally the Octabvre Mini. This is my latest octave acquisition and I like it a lot. I was after a Boss OC2 for a while but after hearing about its relatively low volume output I decided to look elsewhere. I heard the Markbass Octaver was also a decent clone but after doing some more research the Octabvre seemed more versatile and was therefore the one for me. With the tone knob all the way to the left you get Classic OC2 but with more volume available. Turn the tone knob to the right and you introduce a tone with higher harmonics and a bit more synthy grit into the mix. Hard to explain this sound but it gives me another tone to play with so I'm happy. Anyway, I tend keep the tone knob fully cranked to the OC2 end of the spectrum as that's the sound I bought it for! This is overall the least subby/deep sounding of these octave pedals. The core sound is more mid-focused but it's funky sounding and still plenty deep enough to get booties shaking.

In Summary...
All of these pedals are excellent and have something unique to offer. They all sound fantastic to my ears but sound is subjective so it really just boils down to what tones you like best. The output level of the COG T16 might have been an issue for some but now that they've fixed it on the new version of the pedal that complaint goes out of the window. Tracking is good enough between them all to make it a negligible factor in making your decision. They all track down to AT LEAST the lowest B on the E string which is plenty for 99% of musical purposes anyway. I've never really understood the obsession with wanting analogue octavers to track to a low A and below but maybe I'm missing something? When using octavers I don't play my bass as I normally would at the "low end" of the fretboard. I'm only ever utilising the area between the 5th and 15th frets roughly so the synthesised octave notes are doing the heavy lifting in the real world bass register. I never actually want my octave sound to go below the range of a standard 5 string bass (BEADG) as I find that much below that is just mush. I often have my octave sound soloed but if I do mix in my clean sound then I've got the octave at bass pitch and a natural sounding "octave up" coming direct from my bass.

It's the tracking at the high end of the fretboard which slightly differentiates these pedals for me, and even then it's splitting hairs really. Having seen demos and reviews of each of these pedals on YouTube myself, the sounds you hear online are accurate to the sound of the pedals in real life. Of course what you'll never get from a video is the sheer SPL these can produce through a rig, the technique adjustment required to cleanly play the effect or exactly how tracking will be with YOUR bass. Hotness of bass output, onboard preamp settings and string gauge will all play a role here. If at first you try one of these octavers and find the tracking isn't as good as you'd expected, don't be afraid to boost your onboard mid/bass controls slightly or give your tone knob a little turn. Try plucking a little closer to the neck to give the pedal a rounder, fuller input signal to track. Experiment before writing any of them off.


My heavily dumbed down summary of these pedals:

- If you want the most signal routing flexibility, get the DOD Meatbox. The TRS output lets you split the octave & clean signals and send them wherever you desire. Find yourself a stereo insert cable (I use an EBS one) and away you go. You only get two sounds with this thing - fat subs or fatter subs.

- If pedalboard space is a major concern, get the COG T16. It's by far the tiniest pedal of this bunch. You can literally fit it anywhere. Sounds awesome and could be seen by some as a partial alternative to the Meatbox but with much more versatility in its sound spectrum.

- If you want the most tonal flexibility, get the Aguilar Octamizer. Fully independent octave and clean circuits with a level AND a filter/tone control for each give you fine control over your sound. Can be subby or gritty and I can see it being useful in a live context across the whole range of the filter knob without too much effort mixing.

- If you're after "that OC2 sound" with a bit of extra spice on top, get the 3Leaf Octabvre Mini. The core sound is the real deal and the tone knob is a nice bonus. It's an OC2 on steroids. Check out the full sized Octabvre for a few more bells & whistles at the expense of pedalboard space. A more of a mid-focused sound with less raw bottom end compared to the others.

- If you need octave up or polyphony/chords, look elsewhere!


This personal comparison highlights to me just how useful a service like FXPedalRental could be in a market where there are so many variations of the "same" effect. I'm not affiliated with the company at all but when I do the math I realise that I've spent over £500 on these 4 pedals alone. I'm a self confessed octave junkie so I feel no burning desire to move any of them on but if I were on the quest for my one ideal octave sound, the option to trial or rent them would have saved many weeks of searching/bidding/PMing/PayPal gifting

As always, take the above with a pinch of salt. Hope it helps.

[Al Krow]

@CameronJ - excellent review! Cheers buddy and thanks for taking the time to pull that together. This is definitely now turning into the [i]definitive[/i] Octaver thread

[dannybuoy]

BTW, the Octabvre is very sensitive to what you plug into it. Plug a passive Precision straight in and you get that midrangey OC-2 sound. But certain other pedals being active before it, particularly my Blueberry, transform it and the sub bass is all of a sudden massive!