Zoom b3n vs ms60b comparison?

[Elfrasho]

alrighty folks

 

I own the b3n at the moment, and i did own the ms60b previously. I was happy with the ms60b at the time, and im happy with the b3n at the moment. However, I simply don't use the functionality of the b3n at all. ie  I literally use it for amp/cab sim, comp, octaver and tuner. And for that set up, I only need one foot switch as everything's always on except the octaver which is switchable - the ms60b is perfect for that. I also like the idea of going back to a single boss size pedal as that basically means i can fit everything in my gig bag. Thats a big benefit to me.

 

So with that in mind, has anyone got both pedals which they've done a direct A/B comparison on audio quality specifically on the effects listed? From memory, Im sure they use even the same names for some of the amp sims so it would be good to know if the b3n edges it on sound quality. 

 

Cheers

[Al Krow]

In theory the B3N should edge it on sound quality as it has the newer Zoom chip set and it does have greater processing power which allows additional effects in a patch as compared to the MS-60B.

If you want the best of both worlds including:

• the much easier programming interface and patch scrolling, together with headphone amp capability and latest chip set of the B3N;
• plus easy to access drum machine and looper and global volume and EQ controls

for a price that's comparable or less than the MS-60B, I'd recommend considering getting the B1-4 instead. I've got the sibling B1X-4 - it's a bit larger than the B1-4 due to the wah pedal and a little more expensive (but not by much).

I've previously had both the MS-60B and B3N but have happily settled on the B1X-4 as my budget multifx. Hope that helps.

Edited April 18, 2020 by Al Krow

[linear]

Doesn't the B3n use impulse responses for the cab sims, and the MS60 does not?  I have the B3, which I think uses the same engine as the MS60, and the amp and cab sims leave a lot to be desired, in my opinion.

[Elfrasho]

1 hour ago, Al Krow said:

In theory the B3N should edge it on sound quality as it has the newer Zoom chip set and it does have greater processing power which allows additional effects in a patch as compared to the MS-60B.

If you want the best of both worlds including:

• the much easier programming interface and patch scrolling, together with headphone amp capability and latest chip set of the B3N;
• plus easy to access drum machine and looper and global volume and EQ controls

for a price that's comparable or less than the MS-60B, I'd recommend considering getting the B1-4 instead. I've got the sibling B1X-4 - it's a bit larger than the B1-4 due to the wah pedal and a little more expensive (but not by much).

I've previously had both the MS-60B and B3N but have happily settled on the B1X-4 as my budget multifx. Hope that helps.

Interesting! I've never seen the b1-4... is this more in line with the b3n chip set then, do you know?

 

1 hour ago, linear said:

Doesn't the B3n use impulse responses for the cab sims, and the MS60 does not?  I have the B3, which I think uses the same engine as the MS60, and the amp and cab sims leave a lot to be desired, in my opinion.

I wasn't aware of that. Id love to hear a direct comparison to really hear the difference. I may need to just buy one (or the b1-4) to test it myself!

[Al Krow]

1 hour ago, linear said:

Doesn't the B3n use impulse responses for the cab sims...

I think it's being a little bit "generous" on Zoom's part to be asserting that. The B3N / B1-4 do not, themselves, have IR capability.

Zoom have used IR from amps and cabs to provide them with the basis in designing their cab sims. In other words they are saying they think they're pretty close to the real thing.

[linear]

45 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

I think it's being a little bit "generous" on Zoom's part to be asserting that. The B3N / B1-4 do not, themselves, have IR capability.

Zoom have used IR from amps and cabs to provide them with the basis in designing their cab sims. In other words they are saying they think they're pretty close to the real thing.

Ah, thanks.  I did wonder, as the manual does mention IR, but is a bit oblique about it.