Zoom B3 / B1on Question

[stewblack]

Calling @Al Krow and other Zoom aficionados. Intrigued by all this HPF talk on the other thread, I'm interested to know if I can achieve it on my older Zoom pedals.

If so how? I'm just beginning to get a feel for these pedals, at long last, being a simple soul I struggle when presented with too many options. But I'm simplifying how I use them and getting good results. 

Some effects produce worryingly powerful bottom end moments. If I try taming them with the bass eq within said effect I thin the whole sound. Hence my interest in the HPF. 

Thoughts? 

[stewblack]

By the by I found this rather excellent visual (and audio) demo of a HPF in action but the video itself is entirely free of information about how it was achieved. 

 

[dannybuoy]

I believe people were using the AcBsPre model in the older units (including the B3 and B1on) that didn't come with a dedicated HPF.

[stewblack]

8 minutes ago, dannybuoy said:

I believe people were using the AcBsPre model in the older units (including the B3 and B1on) that didn't come with a dedicated HPF.

OK, I'll have to dig around and look at that. At the end of the chain presumably? 

[Al Krow]

25 minutes ago, stewblack said:

OK, I'll have to dig around and look at that. At the end of the chain presumably? 

I use my HPF at the start of the chain to remove low end 'crud' (rather than at the end of the chain) which means that none of the later pedals on my board, or later effect sims on a Zoom patch, need themselves to be dealing with unnecessary low end stuff.

There was a comprehensive HPF thread a year or so back and the AcBsPre effect sim was discussed in some detail. Here's a few comments from our more expert BC'ers from that thread relating to the AcBsPre:

Jus Lukin: ...the AcBsPre, which is based on the Fishman Platinum Pro EQ. The 'depth' control [being an HPF] is for the filter, 10 being minimum cut. Depending how accurate the copy of the filter it is, it should be introducing a cut at 10hz even at 10. At 9 it is cutting from about 40hz, so is the most akin to a Thumpinator. 

I find that with the AcBsPre, all EQ halfway with Gain at 50 and Level at 100 gives me a 'bypassed' sound which I can use as just a low pass filter. The depth control is the HPF, and I find that with everything at zero, gain at 50 and level at 100, it is essentially at unity. Except the depth, which is at its minimum at 10!

Jrixn1: The Depth rolls off the lows :
- at 10 -> no roll off (full bass)
- at 0 -> like an HPF fixed at 200Hz
and in between :
- at 5 : 100Hz
- at 6 : 80Hz
- at 7 : 70Hz
- at 8 : 60Hz
- at 9 : 40Hz
(I made very quick measurements, so it's "almost" these frequencies).

Opticaleye:  I'm sure it's been mentioned here before but just a reminder how Fishman recommend  setting up the Platinum Pro Eq depth control. This of course applies to the AcBsPre sim on the MS-60B and the B3.

 Depth

Tighten up your sound, or dial out deep-bass feedback with the Depth control. The Depth control works hand in hand with the Bass control to bring out tight and articulate lows:

1. Start with the Depth turned up full (5:00) with the EQ set flat on your bass amp and/or PA.

2. Set the Bass control to full boost.

3. Play the bass and back off the Depth (counter-clockwise) until you hear the sound tighten up, usually between 9:00 and 12:00.

4. Re-set the Bass slider to taste.

I've always found this method to be really effective.

Edited June 2, 2019 by Al Krow

[stewblack]

That's super thanks Al 

[PaulWarning]

bit more info here

 

https://www.talkbass.com/threads/zoom-ms60-b3-para-eq-help.999053/page-2#post-15143265

After that the frequencies are set that way on this preamp :
- Bass : 40Hz
- Low-Mid : 800Hz (Low mids ???)
- Hi-Mids : 4kHZ
- Treble : 7kHz
and you can select the frequencie you want as Mids (real low mids for example  ).

Another information : the 3 mids parameters have a smaller Q than the mids of the Amp Sims (so acts on a larger band).

just been paying around with this on my B1on and in fact the frequency selection control affects the Lo Mids not the Mids as seems to be indicated

Edited June 2, 2019 by PaulWarning

[stewblack]

Marvelous. Don't have any more time to play, first meet with new band lunchtime, but thus evening I shall be delving. 

Thanks again. 

[stewblack]

Finally got round to following the above suggestions at Friday's gig. 

It's a real game changer. Used a humble B1on as an ersatz Thumpinator, a compressor and a smidge of distortion too. 

Utterly transformed where the bass sat it the mix. I was never loud, no trouser flapping bottom but I heard every note clearly. 

Lost a bit too much dynamic control which suggested to me that I was a little heavy handed with the compression, but the band sounded better, and I was heard. Result. The sound itself was quite pleasing, the distortion gave it a bit of character without sounding like rock or metal (not what I was after in this particular band) and it was nicely tight and controlled. 

Count me in the HPF/Comp Club. 

[stewblack]

Hey guys, gals, experts, and fellow confused travellers. 

What if any are the benefits of the Thumpinator over this Zoom hack ? 

[bartelby]

On 02/06/2019 at 08:58, stewblack said:

By the by I found this rather excellent visual (and audio) demo of a HPF in action but the video itself is entirely free of information about how it was achieved. 

 

I've only just seen this thread. That's my video. I made it for the HPF thread on here. I think all the info, along with frequency curves, was in the post I made.
It was definitely using a Zoom B3 and was probably comparing single and stacked multiple AcBsPre patches.

EDIT:so I've found the post:

"With one AC BS Pre on the B3. The synth is running a sine wave 2 octaves below, so it's a bit extreme (near the end of the clip I turn the depth knob up and down to see the difference):"

With a following post saying:

"I've also just had a look at what multiple instances of the AC BS Pre might do. The frequency plot it unchanged having 1, 2 or 3 instances running."

Here's the plot from earlier in the same thread: 

Top line is off, then Depth 10 - 0 (gain 50, bass toTreble  0) . Looks like once you get down to 15Hz and lower the white noise is a little less stable. 

Edited November 3, 2019 by bartelby

[jrixn1]

6 hours ago, stewblack said:

What if any are the benefits of the Thumpinator over this Zoom hack ? 

I wouldn't call the Zoom a hack; it's a valid solution.

The Zoom has adjustable frequency, and a gentler slope (12 db/octave?).  I usually have my Zoom set up with three HPF presets - 60Hz, 80Hz, and 120Hz.

The Thumpinator is fixed at 30Hz (I think?) and with a steeper slope (24 db/octave?).

I have both, although I only got the Thumpinator recently - in fact only done one gig with it so far.  The room was awful and I was stuck in a stone-walled corner and my double bass was rumbling a lot.  I think in this case the Zoom would have been better as I could have increased the cut-off frequency.  Unfortunately, I only had the Thumpinator with me; I'd left the Zoom at home.

 

[stewblack]

1 hour ago, jrixn1 said:

I wouldn't call the Zoom a hack; it's a valid solution.

The Zoom has adjustable frequency, and a gentler slope (12 db/octave?).  I usually have my Zoom set up with three HPF presets - 60Hz, 80Hz, and 120Hz.

The Thumpinator is fixed at 30Hz (I think?) and with a steeper slope (24 db/octave?).

I have both, although I only got the Thumpinator recently - in fact only done one gig with it so far.  The room was awful and I was stuck in a stone-walled corner and my double bass was rumbling a lot.  I think in this case the Zoom would have been better as I could have increased the cut-off frequency.  Unfortunately, I only had the Thumpinator with me; I'd left the Zoom at home.

 

Excuse my poor choice of words. I suppose what I was driving at was as I have the Zoom and I'm happy with it, is there any compelling reason to spend big on the Thumpinator.

[jrixn1]

3 hours ago, stewblack said:

I have the Zoom and I'm happy with it, is there any compelling reason to spend big on the Thumpinator.

I'm not sure there is.  I have a Zoom which I am happy with, which is only used for HPF duties.  The Thumpinator is simpler in that there are no buttons.  With the Zoom I have to press the buttons to make sure its on the correct preset - but as in my previous reply above, it's probably an advantage to me that I can switch between frequencies.

I thought I'd be able to hide the Thumpinator under my board, for neatness - but there isn't enough room under a Pedaltrain Nano as I have a power supply down under there too.  (The Thumpinator itself fits - but I can't get the jacks and power leads attached.)  Having said that, I saw on the sfx website there is now a Micro Thumpinator v2, which is smaller than the original v1 I have. 

Edited November 3, 2019 by jrixn1

[PaulWarning]

On 03/11/2019 at 10:51, bartelby said:

I've only just seen this thread. That's my video. I made it for the HPF thread on here. I think all the info, along with frequency curves, was in the post I made.
It was definitely using a Zoom B3 and was probably comparing single and stacked multiple AcBsPre patches.

EDIT:so I've found the post:

"With one AC BS Pre on the B3. The synth is running a sine wave 2 octaves below, so it's a bit extreme (near the end of the clip I turn the depth knob up and down to see the difference):"

With a following post saying:

"I've also just had a look at what multiple instances of the AC BS Pre might do. The frequency plot it unchanged having 1, 2 or 3 instances running."

Here's the plot from earlier in the same thread: 

Top line is off, then Depth 10 - 0 (gain 50, bass toTreble  0) . Looks like once you get down to 15Hz and lower the white noise is a little less stable. 

be interesting to see a graph with the depth at 0 but the bass turned up, should result in the big cut at 30Hz and below but less at 50ish and above, in other words a steeper drop off at the really low frequencies, if I'm understanding the graph right

[Chienmortbb]

I am not sure what thread I got the original image from but here is a plot of what the Thumpinator does. It does seem to infer that the cut-off frequency is at or just below 30Hz. As the plot was unclear I have added an hatched triangle showing the effect of the Thumpinator.

 

Edited November 18, 2019 by Chienmortbb
Edited for clarity.

[stewblack]

I don't fully understand the whole Thumpinator /HPF thing. 

I get what it does and broadly understand why it is desirable. 

However your most recent post @Chienmortbbhas me questioning whether I actually have grasped it.

I've spent my many long years as a bassist focused firmly on the jumping up and down pulling faces at the audience side of things, technical discussions always left me cold. 

Now I have an interest in learning anything and everything but I fear my brain is so much less malleable than it once was. 

I had formed the impression that the point was to save the speaker from wasted effort handling unwanted and unheard ultra low frequencies and in so doing enable one's amplifier to operate more effectively at lower volumes thanks to the cabs increased efficiency. This would save the amp and speaker from hard work and perhaps enable us to play at gig levels without shaking people's insides quite so much. 

If all this is vaguely correct then it wouldn't matter what room we were in as the Thumpinator /HPF is all about what happens in the amp and the cab. The vagaries of the room would be a job for the eq. 

At least that's what I thought. Now I just don't know. 

[Chienmortbb]

12 minutes ago, stewblack said:

I don't fully understand the whole Thumpinator /HPF thing. 

I get what it does and broadly understand why it is desirable. 

However your most recent post @Chienmortbbhas me questioning whether I actually have grasped it.

I've spent my many long years as a bassist focused firmly on the jumping up and down pulling faces at the audience side of things, technical discussions always left me cold. 

Now I have an interest in learning anything and everything but I fear my brain is so much less malleable than it once was. 

I had formed the impression that the point was to save the speaker from wasted effort handling unwanted and unheard ultra low frequencies and in so doing enable one's amplifier to operate more effectively at lower volumes thanks to the cabs increased efficiency. This would save the amp and speaker from hard work and perhaps enable us to play at gig levels without shaking people's insides quite so much. 

If all this is vaguely correct then it wouldn't matter what room we were in as the Thumpinator /HPF is all about what happens in the amp and the cab. The vagaries of the room would be a job for the eq. 

At least that's what I thought. Now I just don't know. 

Don't panic, you have grasped it perfectly. The primary purpose of an HPF is to stop erroneous  low frequencies from reaching the amp and especially the speaker. This is exactly what Thumpinator was designed for and it helps clean up your sound and increases the real life headroom of both amp and speaker.

However in the event that you have an unruly room (not talking about the punters now) you can use a variable HPF* to help tame the room resonance. One of my old practice haunts had a horrible resonance at 44Hz. Yes I could use the bass control but the slope of a bass control is usually much less severe than that of an HPF**. So I could take out some of the 44Hz (low E) but not alter my sound too much.

 

*Thumpinator is a fixed frequency HPF

** in technical terms most bass controls will have a slope of 6-12dB per octave whereas a good HPF should have 24dB per octave.

[stewblack]

Got it!

[pete.young]

3 hours ago, Chienmortbb said:

** in technical terms most bass controls will have a slope of 6-12dB per octave whereas a good HPF should have 24dB per octave.

I seem to recall 27Hz from somewhere for the Microthumpinator , but can't remember the source.

The one in the Zoom is 12dB/octave so it is more akin to a bass control than a genuine HPF.

[Chienmortbb]

27Hz is probably correct. In my opinion that is too low and 30-35Hz is better for bass. 

[Bigwan]

Can you stack 2 of the AC pre blocks to get 24dB/octave?

[bartelby]

11 minutes ago, Bigwan said:

Can you stack 2 of the AC pre blocks to get 24dB/octave?

No. 

from my post in the HPF thread...

On 03/11/2019 at 10:51, bartelby said:

With a following post saying:

"I've also just had a look at what multiple instances of the AC BS Pre might do. The frequency plot it unchanged having 1, 2 or 3 instances running."

 

[Bigwan]

Just now, bartelby said:

No. 

from my post in the HPF thread...

 

Interesting... I wonder what would happen if you tried stacking 2 iterations of the pre with different curves/cutoff frequencies? I'll have to try that...

[Al Krow]

One point to be aware of is the limited amount of blocks and DSPs you have available with the Zoom pedals. I've been using an HPF, comp and noise gate as a standard clean patch and then adding whichever effects on top on my B1X-4, which has a more modern chip and therefore likely greater DSP than the older chip on the B3, B1on and MS 60B models. But still not much space / processing power spare even with the newer B1X / B3N chipset.

Re. the Thumpinator I'm pretty sure Max confirmed to me it was set at 28 Hz initial cut off, which is very much in line with the 27 Hz that folk were mentioning above. Not sure 28 Hz is too low, though, particularly if it has closer to a 24/dB cut, obviously depending on what you want to use it for. If the aim is purely to eliminate the sub sonic crud but leave your bass frequencies intact, starting with the 31 Hz B fundamental, then Max has designed it very well. 

Edited November 19, 2019 by Al Krow