Barefaced Machinist

[EBS_freak]

18 minutes ago, Rich said:

Absolutely. I've built two fuzz pedals this year. I never use fuzz.  But it was fun..!

This reminds me of everybody going out and exercising because the government said that they could. As far as I could see, the people partaking hadn't seen exercise in the last 25 years...

People do things just to do things I guess!

(PS I went through a phase of building pedals and never once used the ring modulator, fuzzes or anything like that that I built either)

[Beedster]

30 minutes ago, LukeFRC said:

Oh cool a thread about that new Barefaced pedal... oh look it's up to 8 pages already and I've already missed the part where everyone falls out.... 

 

We can start again Luke?

[EBS_freak]

5 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

happy band mates and audiences! 😁

But is that because they are too busy on how they sound... and as for the audience, well, all bets are off on that one. The majority of people wouldn't know/care if backing tracks were in play for starters - as long as the alcohol is flowing!

[EBS_freak]

1 minute ago, Beedster said:

We can start again Luke?

Teenage Fanclub. Now there's a blast from the past.

[Al Krow]

7 minutes ago, EBS_freak said:

But is that because they are too busy on how they sound... and as for the audience, well, all bets are off on that one. The majority of people wouldn't know/care if backing tracks were in play for starters - as long as the alcohol is flowing!

What band mates and audiences are primarily interested from us bassists is playing with groove and flair and being "in the pocket". It really is in the fingers! 

Nuances of bass tone is something of particular interest and passion for us bassplayers. Obviously "in your face" bass sounds e.g. dirt, filter, synth etc will likely get much more attention from bandmates and audiences simply cos they "register". 

Back on topic: what tracks are folk on this thread using fuzz on? 

[Cuzzie]

All the points are encapsulated - some like fully digital, some like some aspects of digital, some like analogue - to suggest any are dinosaurs/superior or the norm is folly really.

When touring happened i saw a decent chunk of bands who I know have been through normal amp to fractal/keeper/line 6 and then back to normal amps even without in ears at good stage and venue volumes with a great mix.

it can all be achieved

[Doddy]

1 hour ago, Al Krow said:

 

I think it was @EBS_freak who gave us a really good overview earlier in this thread of the direction of travel of pedal tech and it's unambiguously towards to digital and modelling. At £249, this isn't just going into bat against just about every dirt pedal out there, but also into used Helix territory which has a ton of dirt / drive / fuzz options. 

I don't think it is going up against the Helix.  There are still a lot of people who would prefer to use quality stompboxes in favour of digital effects, whether it's because they prefer the tone or they just don't want the hassle of having to use a computer to get the most out of it. In fact, I've seen and played with more than a few people who use digital gear, but will still have a standalone Tubescreamer or similar.

I'd like to hear the new Barefaced before commenting on it, but it's a crowded area with a lot of good pedals already available. Good luck to them, though.

[Woodinblack]

19 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

What band mates and audiences are primarily interested from us bassists is playing with groove and flair and being "in the pocket".

No, audiences are just wondering why the guy with the big guitar isn't doing a solo.

19 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

Back on topic: what tracks are folk on this thread using fuzz on? 

Excessive distortion on "Abba-doesn't your mother know", Brown eyed girl (in the middle), subtler distortion in a few other things.

[EBS_freak]

21 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

Back on topic: what tracks are folk on this thread using fuzz on? 

RATM. Timmy C.

[alexclaber]

I've got enough digital and computerised annoyance in my life that I don't want to introduce it to other parts of my life where I don't find it beneficial. I like digital recording because it makes massive track count and good sound quality affordable (not really bothered about all the editing potential, I'd rather just nail a good vibe as live as possible). I like streaming audio at home because its freed up a lot of space now I have small people taking over our house and it allows us to play random Disney things without buying the CDs.

I don't like anything with menus etc when I'm in my musician instrument-playing headspace - I want a knob or a switch to do what it does. I hate when things crash. I don't want to plug a USB into my amp. And I don't like the tendency of digital gear to become obsolete, or fail and be unrepairable. How many of us have analogue stompboxes that are decades old and still sound good? How many of us have older digital FX that we still use?

Yes, digital gear can be cheaper and yes it can give more options. But unless I can see a clear benefit for how I approach music then I don't want to use it. Hopefully some musicians will have a similar viewpoint and will buy our stuff - for everyone else there are lots of alternatives!

[Al Krow]

29 minutes ago, alexclaber said:

 But unless I can see a clear benefit for how I approach music... 

In answer to that question, I couldn't have put it better than what you just said:

29 minutes ago, alexclaber said:

Yes, digital gear can be cheaper and yes it can give more options. 

A decent digital multifx can replace much of an entire board. My used Helix HFX costs about 1/5 of the board it's replaced. The only thing I need to add are a couple of filter and synth pedals.

My used Barefaced BB2, however? Well that's going to take some beating!

Edited November 27, 2020 by Al Krow

[Salt on your Bass?]

@alexclaber - what are the fuzz and drive influences/ circuits on this pedal please, and are there demo's coming out soon?

 

[alexclaber]

29 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

Back on topic: what tracks are folk on this thread using fuzz on? 

Whatever I write that needs fuzz.

But if you're asking that because you're thinking this is a fuzz pedal - you can get a Jamerson Motown sound from the overdrive section, or Roger Glover with Deep Purple, or Geezer in Sabbath, or Krist in Nirvana, etc etc.

And the fuzz pedal can do all the worlds of fuzz, like the synth thing, or the Larry Graham double-tracked thing, or the Ben Folds Five thing, or Geezer again, etc etc.

There's far more dirty bass sounds on recordings that many bassists realise.

[EBS_freak]

10 hours ago, Doddy said:

I don't think it is going up against the Helix.  There are still a lot of people who would prefer to use quality stompboxes in favour of digital effects, whether it's because they prefer the tone or they just don't want the hassle of having to use a computer to get the most out of it. In fact, I've seen and played with more than a few people who use digital gear, but will still have a standalone Tubescreamer or similar.

I'd like to hear the new Barefaced before commenting on it, but it's a crowded area with a lot of good pedals already available. Good luck to them, though.

I don't think anybody said that it was realistically going up against the Helix. As you say, there is still a very buoyant market for stomp boxes (for reasons I have mentioned before) but as the price of digital continues to drop and as the tech continues to get better and better, it just won't make economic sense for manufacturers to go down the analogue route. Of course, firmware means that pedals can be continued to develop, without returning to the factory... analogue can't do that.

Embedded interfaces to edit will continue to get cheaper - I know there are manufacturers playing with interfaces being presented on phones and the like... but ultimately, pedals will be able to support their own UIs in addition to being able to be coupled to computers. You only have to look at how much you get for so little from the Helix Stomp to see that it's going to become the norm.

The tube screamer addition is an interesting one - it's one pedal that cannot be modelled entirely precisely at the moment, the Kemper won't profile it correctly either... but I don't think that's the reason why people use it. It gives instant access to a knob to quickly tweak to taste. Im sure, with market research, if the manufactures do genuinely see it as an issue, I can see instant access knobs being able to be assigned to something like the next gen Helix such that tweaks like that can be instantly available, whatever patches are in play.

Edited November 27, 2020 by EBS_freak

[Wilson_51_]

I’m looking forward to hearing some demos of this pedal. I currently have a cog Tarkin and knightfall In one pedal but only have the ability to switch between the two not have both on. 
 

The parallel idea really grabs me, and I like stacking dirt pedals. I’m watching this with interest and wondering if it might knock my Tarkin 66 off the board.

As @Salt on your Bass? asked. What are the two drives in this based on? 

[DiMarco]

It looks like an interesting pedal. Will be checking the toob for any tests/reviews in the next couple of days.

The idea of mixing od and fuzz may not be new, but adding the clean with low pass is most probably making the unit sound very proper! The combination of these aspects develops GAS tbh and I consider Alex as an honest, hard working guy.

Edited November 27, 2020 by DiMarco

[Al Krow]

1 minute ago, DiMarco said:

The idea of mixing od and fuzz may not be new, but adding the clean with low pass is most probably making the unit sound very proper! 

It's points like that have got well and truly lost in some of the earlier discussion on this thread, so thanks for bringing that back to the fore!

[barkin]

51 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

 

Back on topic: what tracks are folk on this thread using fuzz on? 

Mustang Sally & Moondance, mainly...

[MacDaddy]

53 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

 

Back on topic: what tracks are folk on this thread using fuzz on? 

for me:

intro and breakdown to '99 Red Balloons'. 

and all of 'Crawl' by Kings of Leon.

[EBS_freak]

10 minutes ago, alexclaber said:

I've got enough digital and computerised annoyance in my life that I don't want to introduce it to other parts of my life where I don't find it beneficial. I like digital recording because it makes massive track count and good sound quality affordable (not really bothered about all the editing potential, I'd rather just nail a good vibe as live as possible). I like streaming audio at home because its freed up a lot of space now I have small people taking over our house and it allows us to play random Disney things without buying the CDs.

I don't like anything with menus etc when I'm in my musician instrument-playing headspace - I want a knob or a switch to do what it does. I hate when things crash. I don't want to plug a USB into my amp. And I don't like the tendency of digital gear to become obsolete, or fail and be unrepairable. How many of us have analogue stompboxes that are decades old and still sound good? How many of us have older digital FX that we still use?

Yes, digital gear can be cheaper and yes it can give more options. But unless I can see a clear benefit for how I approach music then I don't want to use it. Hopefully some musicians will have a similar viewpoint and will buy our stuff - for everyone else there are lots of alternatives!

However, the world is going digital whether you like or not. Look at cars from the 60s and now. The modern cars have less easily serviceable parts than back then. That doesn't mean that people don't appreciate classic cars... Its just that modern cars, are now easier to use and generally less problematic. I remember as a youngster, getting into a car and there was a strong possibility that you wouldn't get to your final destination... or you would be nervously looking at the temperature gauge if you were stuck in a traffic jam.

With regard to digital pedals, I have never seen, or known a pedal crash - can anybody else comment on this being an occurrence? Maybe the more comprehensive units - but from memory, they are down to users trying beta firmware and the like - and obviously running code in beta should come with certain caveats!

Digital gear can go obsolete... but you know what, the Kemper profiler was unveiled in 2011 - that's pretty impressive that it's still competitive in the marketplace and there's still capacity for the DSP to be continued to be improved. The Kemper profiler is an amazing example of having a road map and despite the ageing technology, it's still capable to keep up - and even exceed - the offerings offered by their competitors.

In reality, choice is a beautiful thing. We have analogue. We have digital. Great. Knock yourself out. And I know that this may be crazy talk... but digital and analogue can co-exist. For now.

One last thing, there are analogue stompboxes that still sound great but have some terrible traits... like being super noisy, or suck all your tone, or don't bypass nicely. I know that some of these problems can be fixed (e.g. loopers and the like)... but the truth is, there are some pedals that have some sort of mystical quality because of who used them... but as a pedal in themselves, they do kinda suck. The Mutron comes to mind. Sounds great - but oh so noisy.

As for older digital pedals... well, there are a few notable exceptions. The Deep Impact, ME8B maybe...  

[EBS_freak]

10 minutes ago, barkin said:

Mustang Sally

I thought I would do a quick Youtube search... and you know what, I don't actually dislike... I rather hear a band do it like this than the normal drivel I hear.

[LukeFRC]

1 hour ago, alexclaber said:

I've got enough digital and computerised annoyance in my life that I don't want to introduce it to other parts of my life where I don't find it beneficial. I like digital recording because it makes massive track count and good sound quality affordable (not really bothered about all the editing potential, I'd rather just nail a good vibe as live as possible). I like streaming audio at home because its freed up a lot of space now I have small people taking over our house and it allows us to play random Disney things without buying the CDs.

I don't like anything with menus etc when I'm in my musician instrument-playing headspace - I want a knob or a switch to do what it does. I hate when things crash. I don't want to plug a USB into my amp. And I don't like the tendency of digital gear to become obsolete, or fail and be unrepairable. How many of us have analogue stompboxes that are decades old and still sound good? How many of us have older digital FX that we still use?

Yes, digital gear can be cheaper and yes it can give more options. But unless I can see a clear benefit for how I approach music then I don't want to use it. Hopefully some musicians will have a similar viewpoint and will buy our stuff - for everyone else there are lots of alternatives!

or even active basses with all the knobs and switch to a P bass with just two... it's about the interface IMO - both analogue and digital. About ten plus years ago I had a Line6 Pod thing, it got sold after the second Gig where I managed to overwrite my patch within 3 min or starting. Too fiddly and annoying. 
Fast forward to now and the HX stomp is simple enough interface that for my use it's good enough that the benefits outweigh the complexity. 

1 hour ago, alexclaber said:

Whatever I write that needs fuzz.

But if you're asking that because you're thinking this is a fuzz pedal - you can get a Jamerson Motown sound from the overdrive section, or Roger Glover with Deep Purple, or Geezer in Sabbath, or Krist in Nirvana, etc etc.

And the fuzz pedal can do all the worlds of fuzz, like the synth thing, or the Larry Graham double-tracked thing, or the Ben Folds Five thing, or Geezer again, etc etc.

There's far more dirty bass sounds on recordings that many bassists realise.

I mean this as lovely constructive feedback to your marketing copy: 
I think this is something that isn't apparent in your marketing copy. I read it as distortion and fuzz and aimed at a lot more processed sounds. I think, esp with cleaner rigs there's a massive use in a basic distortion sound. One of my fave pedals I had was a clone of the Caitlinbread SFT ... which is essentially a transistor version of a SVT circuit ... what was nice wasn't the extreme sounds but the things it could do at low settings, how it could help the bass sit in the mix nicely. 
I'ld be interested in knowing what the machinist does at that end - and then how the clean channel can help support it... If you think about the amount of players who use the sans amp to do essentially the same thing... and really that's what I use my HX stomp for... 

Edited November 27, 2020 by LukeFRC

[Cuzzie]

24 minutes ago, LukeFRC said:

or even active basses with all the knobs and switch to a P bass with just two... it's about the interface IMO - both analogue and digital. About ten plus years ago I had a Line6 Pod thing, it got sold after the second Gig where I managed to overwrite my patch within 3 min or starting. Too fiddly and annoying. 
Fast forward to now and the HX stomp is simple enough interface that for my use it's good enough that the benefits outweigh the complexity. 

I mean this as lovely constructive feedback to your marketing copy: 
I think this is something that isn't apparent in your marketing copy. I read it as distortion and fuzz and aimed at a lot more processed sounds. I think, esp with cleaner rigs there's a massive use in a basic distortion sound. One of my fave pedals I had was a clone of the Caitlinbread SFT ... which is essentially a transistor version of a SVT circuit ... what was nice wasn't the extreme sounds but the things it could do at low settings, how it could help the bass sit in the mix nicely. 
I'ld be interested in knowing what the machinist does at that end - and then how the clean channel can help support it... If you think about the amount of players who use the sans amp to do essentially the same thing... and really that's what I use my HX stomp for... 

It is amazing how some folk read things in different ways, and it’s not a diss by any stretch, but I got something more like Alex wrote on here from the online description as opposed to just being heavy distortion/fuzz

[cetera]

12 hours ago, Beedster said:

Where’s the romance

 

I think it was the bit where harsh words were offered, but really it was a cover up of your loving feelings..... you know, like teasing the girl at school you actually fancy....

 

[Billy Apple]

15 minutes ago, cetera said:

 

I think it was the bit where harsh words were offered, but really it was a cover up of your loving feelings..... you know, like teasing the girl at school you actually fancy....

 

Teasing? Farting in her face more like