Multi Effects A to Z

[Osiris]

12 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

Love to hear a clip of both from you. You're obviously getting a much better result from your MS-60B than I am from my B1-4 on pitch shift!

(Or your definition of "perfectly usable" is a different one to mine - which could be equally true and equally valid).

You've got both the newest Zoom with it's latest chip set and the HX FX. Try them side by side - with the band. Obviously you can tell them apart when it's just using them at home, but in the mix they both work well in my experience. I don't have the tech for home recording, unfortunately, but you have both models so give it a go and see what you think. 

Indeed, it was @Dood's review of the MS-60B in which he said that the pedal was worth the price alone just for the pitch shifter that was one of the reasons for me picking one up in the first place. 

[Al Krow]

17 minutes ago, Osiris said:

You've got both the newest Zoom with it's latest chip set and the HX FX. Try them side by side - with the band. Obviously you can tell them apart when it's just using them at home, but in the mix they both work well in my experience. I don't have the tech for home recording, unfortunately, but you have both models so give it a go and see what you think. 

Indeed, it was @Dood's review of the MS-60B in which he said that the pedal was worth the price alone just for the pitch shifter that was one of the reasons for me picking one up in the first place. 

You do have perfectly adequate home tech for recording same as me: the looper on your Helix. 

My main use of a pitch shift has been at home so yup I can hear the difference very clearly (and it's painful on the Zoom B1-4). Personally I don't have a big use for it in a band context: one of the big plusses of a 5 string is how easy it is to change key!

Don't get me wrong - I'm a MASSIVE fan of the B1-4: it's the best value bit of kit I've bought this year. But it has its limitations.

Edited November 16, 2020 by Al Krow

[Osiris]

But have you compared them in the mix? 

[Al Krow]

A funny question when I wouldn't ever be looking to use that particular effect in the mix? It was a home use bit of fun for me e.g. in creating a Royal Blood harmony layered sounds with the pitch shift set at +octave +5th & 4th below etc. You mentioned the chorusy result on the Zoom - that is exactly right. Then multiply that up with several layers and you have total mush on the Zoom. I wouldn't be using that ever in a band context.

Helix, however, can handle this. No chorusy effect on a single pitch shift and then combine the layers in parallel - again something you can't do on the Zoom which is series only.

It's a simple illustration of the enhanced DSP that the Helix has compared to the Zoom. Not a particularly controversial point, I wouldn't have thought?

You should have a go at using your Helix looper to record some time - no DAW required! Although tbf the loopers on both the Zoom B1-4 (I appreciate that this is not available on the MS 60B) and the Helix are very limited. (Aside: the Lekato is a great value little looper, although I've had my head turned by the latest release of the Boss RC-500, which seems a very worth successor to the RC-30 I previously had).

Edited November 16, 2020 by Al Krow

[stewblack]

59 minutes ago, Dood said:

IF anyone is interested in an overview of what various effects are and how they work, check out my monthly columns in Bass Guitar Magazine / Bass Player Magazine since January! 

An excellent recommendation. Always thorough, fair and without irritating fanfare or gimmickry. 

[Osiris]

11 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

A funny question when I wouldn't ever be looking to use that particular effect in the mix? It was a home use bit of fun for me e.g. in creating a Royal Blood harmony layered sounds with the pitch shift set at +octave +5th & 4th below etc. You mentioned the chorusy result on the Zoom - that is exactly right. Then multiply that up with several layers and you have total mush on the Zoom. I wouldn't be using that ever in a band context.

Helix, however, can handle this. No chorusy effect on a single pitch shift and then combine the layers in parallel - again something you can't do on the Zoom which is series only.

It's a simple illustration of the enhanced DSP that the Helix has compared to the Zoom. Not a particularly controversial point, I wouldn't have thought?

You should have a go at using your Helix looper to record some time - no DAW required! Although tbf the loopers on both the Zoom B1-4 (I appreciate that this is not available on the MS 60B) and the Helix are very limited. (Aside: the Lekato is a great value little looper, although I've had my head turned by the latest release of the Boss RC-500, which seems a very worth successor to the RC-30 I previously had).

@Al Krow I think we're at crossed purposes here.

I am taking about using the Zoom pitch shift in a gigging situation. Having gigged it and the Stomp pitch shifters many times each, they both work in the mix. Yes, the Zoom has a more pronounced chorus like effect, I don't disagree. But in the mix you cannot tell. 

I understand that you're coming at it from the perspective of analysing the nuances at home with nothing else going on. In which case the Helix will clearly sound more authentic.

But then again I just want some drop tuning rather than trying to sound like Royal Blood 😉

[Dood]

57 minutes ago, Osiris said:

 

Indeed, it was @Dood's review of the MS-60B in which he said that the pedal was worth the price alone just for the pitch shifter that was one of the reasons for me picking one up in the first place. 

IIRC there were two octave effects on the MS-60B, one being a bass octave and the other a pitch shifter?  Hopefully my memory isn't letting me down here, but the pitch shifter was so much better than the octave effect. Would you agree? Have I remembered correctly?

 

[krispn]

55 minutes ago, Al Krow said:creating a Royal Blood harmony layered sounds with the pitch shift set at +octave +5th & 4th below etc. You mentioned the chorusy result on the Zoom - that is exactly right. Then multiply that up with several layers and you have total mush on the Zoom. I wouldn't be using that ever in a band context.

I’d be up for trying this patch if you’re sharing it? Was messing around with some basic octave and fuzz yesterday to fill out some sections with the band and this might be a big way to do that!

[stewblack]

57 minutes ago, Dood said:

Would you agree? Have I remembered correctly?

Yes

[Osiris]

1 hour ago, Dood said:

IIRC there were two octave effects on the MS-60B, one being a bass octave and the other a pitch shifter?  Hopefully my memory isn't letting me down here, but the pitch shifter was so much better than the octave effect. Would you agree? Have I remembered correctly?

 

If I remember correctly there's a couple of different pitch shifter models as well as an Octaver on the MS-60B. One of the pitch shifters is less wobbly than the other and, as you say, tracks better and lower than the Octaver. I was initially using it to drop a tone which still has a touch of that chorus like edge, but set to the full octave below it really it's far less noticeable. As I said, you don't notice any detriment to the bass tone with the rest of the band blasting out. 

[tauzero]

I have a one octave up pitch shift on the MS-60B, but it sounds out of tune enough to set my teeth on edge on every note except E, so I don't use it much.

Harking back to the original topic, among my multieffects is the Korg AX3000B. It's a reminder of how multieffects have progressed. In common with all the multieffects of that era, it has a series of effects blocks - pre effect (compressor, wah, vibrato, chorus/flange, octave, ring mod, etc), drive/amp/cab (for some reason amps and cabs are at the front), modulation (chorus/flange again, phase, trem rotary, pitch shift, filters), delay, reverb. But you can only use one effect in each of those fixed blocks. I got the Zoom B3 to replace it as it has blocks that can each be used for anything.

I think (though I'm happy to be corrected) that there are three (or maybe four, see later) generations of multieffects - the first generation were fixed blocks, each of which could have one effect. Second generation were as above, but with amp and cab modelling introduced so they could be a single box solution running into PA or FRFR speaker. Third generation were when effects blocks could contain anything. I don't know if the introduction of routing branching into parallel paths would be a further generation.

[Baloney Balderdash]

I use my Zoom G1 Four exclusively as an always on equalizer, utikizing a patch of 5 of the 1 band fully parametric equalizer model.

I also own and use a Zoom G1Xon that I use exclusively for my reverb effects, having 4 different reverb patches set up, consisting of following : a very subtle, always on, main plate reverb :-: a more prominent plate + hall reverb :-: a thick lush plate + hall + tape delay reverb :-: and finally an extremely thick and lush reverb pad used with volume swells consisting of plate + hall + tape delay reverb 

Finally I also own a Zoom MS-70CDR multi stomp pedal, but unfortuanately it is faulty, sometimes randomly not actually adding the effects of the active patch or to random degrees sucking the tone of my signal, though other times functioning exactly as it should, both tried re-installing the firmware and re-set it to factory settings, but unfortunately not helping the issue.

I wouldn't ever use any of the Zoom digital multi effects for dirt effects or amp modeling but beside that I think they actually do a wonderful job with most of the featured modulation, delay and reverb effects.

Zoom came a long way from the absolute horrible digital multi effects they came out with in the 90's, to such a degree that I personally prefer the current and previous generation of Zoom effects to the corresponding more expensive Boss digital multi effects.

 

 

Edited November 18, 2020 by Baloney Balderdash

[Al Krow]

On 13/11/2020 at 17:36, stewblack said:

Are these definitely parallel, and do they each take up one of your 6 on/off footswitches? 

The pedal in the loop(s) can be put anywhere in your Helix signal chain, so you choose whether you have them in series or parallel and exactly where in relation to the rest.

They would use up one (or two if you are using both external loops) of your 6 on/off switches if you are going for the one fx stomp per single effects pedal mode (although tbf I've not used them set up in that mode. You would need to switch them off or on yourself unless you are going down the midi route with midi enabled pedals, but we are getting way above my pay grade at that point!), or one of the 9 blocks available on HX Effects if you are using them as part of a "patch". 

Worth adding, I'm looking to keep things uber simple and just have the Helix HX Effects as my standalone "pedal board" in the immediate future, as an alternative to my mini board, so all of the above will be for another day for me! 

Edited November 20, 2020 by Al Krow

[Al Krow]

On 16/11/2020 at 20:52, Osiris said:

If I remember correctly there's a couple of different pitch shifter models as well as an Octaver on the MS-60B. One of the pitch shifters is less wobbly than the other and, as you say, tracks better and lower than the Octaver. I was initially using it to drop a tone which still has a touch of that chorus like edge, but set to the full octave below it really it's far less noticeable. As I said, you don't notice any detriment to the bass tone with the rest of the band blasting out. 

I need to qualify my earlier comment from a while back as I think we may have been at cross purposes!

There are similarly a couple of key pitch shifter models and Octaver on the B1-4 also and I agree that one (BaMnShift) is less wobbly than the obvious one (PitchSHFT). If you're mixing with a dry signal to try to get a powerchord - it's really pretty poor; Helix does that much better as it can layer pitch shift in parallel, whereas Zoom is purely series.

However (and this is what your comment above seems to be relating to and not the powerchord stuff I was yacking on about!) in terms of purely changing key with 100% wet, whilst Helix IMO still considerably better / tighter etc., I agree that Zoom is, indeed, decently passable at dropping a tone, even in a home practice environment etc.

[andruca]

IME, only decent pitch shifter in either the MS-60B or B3 or G1Xon is the Ba Pitch model. I've tried both the regular PitchShift and the PedalPitch/BaPedalPitch but those simply track horrible or offer stupid useless modes (the pedal pitches). I don't use the single note ones, they work even worse. All this said, with the Ba Pitch I've managed to do some nice "Royal Blood on the cheap" tones basically with either 2 of my Zoom multiFXs (many tips in the video description).

 

Edited January 4, 2021 by andruca

[funkydoug]

Some Boss content...

ME50B is great for gigging. So immediate but the tech is about 15y old now so the drives are a bit basic in a studio setting. Also the Octaver is not great, digital latency too noticeable, which is a result of the hardware being limited. At a regular gig / though these are great as everything is right in front of you and remember, no one at all can hear the  difference between this and anything fancier once the band is playing. No one. (As  @stewblack quite rightly says).

Boss ME80 is even better. Drives are better but don't have a dry mix (unfortunately) and the Octaver is great. Main problem for me was the Octaver and comp (also great) are on the same pedal so you can't have both on one board / patch.

 

Brings me to GT1000 Core. I took the plunge and although I'd prefer a slightly more immediate interface (would love them to make an ME1000) it feels pretty unlimited, and sounds fantastic. Has  everything I would ever use on guitar or bass and most of the time will be a very expensive tuner!! The only frustration is that it doesn't have more knobs to twiddle for quick adjustments but for now it is the best 'one box' solution for me.

 

In terms of this being a thread that would be of use to potential buyers my main conclusion after lots (lots and lots) of over thinking this is that user interface and functionality trumps tone. That might be sacrilegious for some but honestly get something that works the way you want to work in terms of buttons, knobs, features and make it sound good. They can all sound good, what differentiates them is the way you interact with them. That's why you'll probably see my gt1000 core for sale in about 2months and I'll be looking for a something without a screen again 🤦‍♂️ 

Edited January 5, 2021 by funkydoug

[stewblack]

On 05/01/2021 at 21:03, funkydoug said:

this is that user interface and functionality trumps tone.

Absolutely right. I have pedals which _can_ sound good but take so much faff and fiddle to get right that I prefer to use something simpler. 

 

[Guest MoJo]

On 16/11/2020 at 17:36, Al Krow said:

Love to hear a clip of both from you. You're obviously getting a much better result from your MS-60B than I am from my B1-4 on pitch shift!

(Or your definition of "perfectly usable" is a different one to mine - which could be equally true and equally valid).

I can't get a good approximation of either Pino Palladino (Paul Young) or  Tony Levin (Sledgehammer) pitch shift out of my Zoom B1on

[Al Krow]

31 minutes ago, stewblack said:

Absolutely right. I have pedals which _can_ sound good but take so much faff and fiddle to get right that I prefer to use something simpler. 

+1^^  exactly this.

Nuances of tone get lost in the mix but the ball ache of complicated editing kinda sticks around!

For me that's meant being prepared to invest time with multifx's (and hopefully getting a DAW recording interface finally sorted this year) but taking a decision last year to bin PC editing elsewhere (e.g. SA & certain TC pedals, Future Impact etc.). Others have got the head space to do it all and have my respect! We all have different priorities I guess.

Edited January 8, 2021 by Al Krow

[krispn]

17 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

For me that's meant being prepared to invest time with multifx's (and hopefully getting a DAW recording interface finally sorted this year) 

Reaper is worth a look and it’s free!

[stewblack]

21 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

Others have got the head space to do it all

With me it's physical as well as mental space. I don't have room to put a pedal board on my desk and taking the pedal on and off everytime I want to tweak a setting is a pain. 

 

[andruca]

I'd like to comment (and probably polemicize -only out of frustration, sorry-) on the modules/blocks approach. I've been a Boss user (ME-8B and GT-6B -noisy!-) prior to switching permanently to Zoom around 2004 (a 708II back then, had previously owned a BFX-708). I 100% hate the "modules" approach. I like to simply chain effects. Who cares if they're MOD/SFX/REV/DLY/PRE/AMP/EQ/DYN? Don't get me wrong, Zoom switched to the "chain whatever you want in whichever order" (even several instances of the same effect) paradigm only for the recent 2 generations, but that is since 2011 (when the G3/B3 models were released).

The modules thing kills Boss for me. The "workarounds" they came up with for this (such as having duplicate FX modules, so you can use, say,  chorus and phaser at the same damm time) only make it more ridiculous to me. I'm a big fan of some features, as the parallel processing in the GT-1000, but then again, they're shootin' themselves in the foot by not allowing us to configure the "morphology" of our chain(s) however we want no matter the "module". How come I can use 5 MOD effects in a row on a 50€ B1on and not on a 600€ Boss multieffects? IDK if there's some limitation so that, say, for the hardware, a delay and a preamp are not comparable entities. Doesn't seem to be the case with Zoom, each FX is sort of a big config file for the audio engine. Some take more processing power, some less, but that's about it.

Guess I'm waiting for a future Zoom generation that allows parallel chain processing (hopefully done right: chaining whatever I want with whatever else I want, in whichever order and putting both Ys wherever I want them when going parallel).

Edited January 11, 2021 by andruca

[Al Krow]

I agree that parallel fx routing in the Zoom pedals would be a major step forward. 

I suspect it will require an upgraded chipset for them to deliver this, but I'm looking forward to it - particularly if they can provide in something as compact as a B1-4!

[andruca]

2 hours ago, Al Krow said:

I agree that parallel fx routing in the Zoom pedals would be a major step forward. 

I suspect it will require an upgraded chipset for them to deliver this, but I'm looking forward to it - particularly if they can provide in something as compact as a B1-4!

Sure, I'm counting on that for FUTURE generations, not the current one.

[stewblack]

On 11/01/2021 at 10:43, andruca said:

I 100% hate the "modules" approach.

With you all the way! Only come across this once, on a recent purchase. My first thought was... what the hell??? I can have compression or auto wah, but not both? And the compressor has to be first in the chain? And a block of reverb and a block of delays I won't need but the envelopes chorus and phasers all share a block? 

Insane.