multi effects plus analog

[PatheinRaindropMoe]

haha, i was about to ask whether musical instruments produce nice ideal smooth curves waveform

heh, if you wanna play with all those waveform in a musical instrument format, look over to synth. Those gadgets are full of waveforms, oscillator and tons of things to play with.

Check out youtube for analog synth, moog, matrixsynth etc

 

[kym]

oh thanks whitestrat for those valuable inputs.

btw i m not comparing the tones coming from a digital pedal or analog pedal. rather i m comparing the waveform between the two. u will realise that i never ever mentioned tone, but waveform. haha.

to be honest, i can hardly tell how an analog effect will differ in tone from a digital effect. darn it, i find my echopark sounds like my dm3. wth!

i think some pple find digital effects not as good as the good old analog ones is because they have only tried digital effects where the "bit" and "fidelity", that u were toking about, are not very good, thus unable to reproduce a good simulated sound. assuming we can get a very good one, that will be kickass.

now, that brings me to another question, which r the worthy digital effects that can kick the ass out of analog pedals?

 

[PatheinRaindropMoe]

imho, the issue here is not about which analog can kick digital ass or vice versa. Its more to about which one suit what the person wanna outta the sound for their music, a context to fit in that sound.

If the person using, has no idea of what he/she prefers in term of sound, features etc, be it analog or digital or some nasa technology, it prolly also wont be of any help

For digital thingy, look over to vst plug in. Those are the stuff to play with, tweaking via laptop, audio interface with guitar. Digital pedal to play with, for geetars, are pretty limited, it wont take long to realise that there is no much new things to play with(in pedal format), only improved and extra features that we can play with, among the familiar sound.

And if die die wanna compare digital that we think can kick analog ass, then its time list down a series of conditions, factors which will make the comparison more focus. Cost, features, personal preferences in effect etc

if we just list down a few names for digital pedals that kick analog pedals ass, without context, conditions and preference, it will be a flawed and unbalanced view, which might not be logical in general term.

imho

 

[Arsony]

Yes, BUT don't misread this as a "digital effects sound crap" because these days, bit processing has such high resolution that the ear CANNOT tell the difference. If you take a digital effect (say BOSS MT-2) and marry it with the right EQ settings and amp, you'd never know it's digital....

My point exactly. Though of course, I'm not in the tech line to be able to explain it the way you did which I must say is nothing less than CLASS, brudder!

And yes... they still play BananaDrama....bwahahaha!

Arsony

 

[kym]

so patheinraindropmoe, following wht u said, if i normally play in a live band setting, no recording, no mixer nothing, then what kinda effect to employ?

if u say there is not many worthy compact digital pedal, then r u suggesting to go for pure analog pedals?

 

[Whitestrat]

now, that brings me to another question, which r the worthy digital effects that can kick the ass out of analog pedals?

BOSS MT-2...:twisted::twisted::twisted:

 

[Whitestrat]

imho, the issue here is not about which analog can kick digital ass or vice versa. Its more to about which one suit what the person wanna outta the sound for their music, a context to fit in that sound.

Correct. That's why I mentioned that it doesn't matter whether digital or analog, as long as you get the sound you want. I was just trying to make it clear to those who think that analog is the sex and far superior to digital that it's not necessarily the case.:mrgreen:

 

[PatheinRaindropMoe]

heh, iam afraid i cant tell you what to use, coz i have no idea of what you will be playing.

If music is an action of expression from the one creating it, then the only person who can express it, got to be the one who defines it, imho

If really wanna talk about a live setting, imho, balancing the volume and focusing on the interaction between band members be more practical and useful then to go for what effect to use etc. Its more to thinking of the music and overall then to focus on being a guitarist and playing guitar only

Bout the worthiness of digital stuff, i wasnt looking at it from a worthy or no worthy point of view thou. Personally, iam not really into how good a pedal sounds like(thru a geetar), compare to analog thingy, i am more interested in how weird or manipulative a piece of equipment can be, when put in the big picture of making the music i wanna do. Digital thingy in pedal format, will always be in a pedal format, it cant be as manipulative compared to tweaking a software effect etc.

As for pedals format, among the pedals which i have gotten over the years, its a combination of analog and digital stuff and most of the stuff which i have been actively using nowadays are mainly digital pedals, from delays to any form of modulations. If i want to, i can have a full analog board from gain to all sort of modulations, but its really not worth the time and be so anal, i rather concentrate on what i need and want then to use everything thats supposingly to be pure and goot, acoording to forums hear says..

imho

 

[PatheinRaindropMoe]

Correct. That's why I mentioned that it doesn't matter whether digital or analog, as long as you get the sound you want. I was just trying to make it clear to those who think that analog is the sex and far superior to digital that it's not necessarily the case.:mrgreen:

haha, exactly, bro brosss, we is on same wave length! Irks me to hell when seeing people talking about analog rulz and still within the realm of distortion, overdrive etc without evening knowing or having to try out most of whats out there, outside of distortion, overdrive and distortion and still overdrive

 

[kym]

thanks to both pros for ur invaluable input. i have not seen another thread that is so detailed in the discussion of comparing analog and digital effects. i must be real lucky to stumble upon this thread.

 

[PatheinRaindropMoe]

heh, theres nothing pro bout what i said, really. Its more to views and thoughts i had over the years playing effect instead of just playing guitar. Some of it are prolly wrong and not much of real technical help, other than doing wrong things to fit in something that work for me, but might not be for others...

 

[Whitestrat]

haha, exactly, bro brosss, we is on same wave length! Irks me to hell when seeing people talking about analog rulz and still within the realm of distortion, overdrive etc without evening knowing or having to try out most of whats out there, outside of distortion, overdrive and distortion and still overdrive

Digital distortion not good? I SWEAR by my MT-2 man!!!!!:twisted: (erm... that's digital right? sure sounds like it...:mrgreen

Anyways, if that doesn't cut it, my PODXTLive kills too!

 

[Whitestrat]

thanks to both pros for ur invaluable input.

We're not pros... we're just dudes who have spent too much time and money in trying to find our tone that we just picked up some things along the way...:mrgreen:

I'm still learning myself... EVERYDAY...:mrgreen:

 

[THOA]

That's why I mentioned that it doesn't matter whether digital or analog, as long as you get the sound you want.

+1

So I guess noone is gonna hurt me if I say I prefer solid states to tubes? :X

 

[Whitestrat]

+1

So I guess noone is gonna hurt me if I say I prefer solid states to tubes? :X

Of course not man... Solid states give me some of my favourite sounds... I just wish I could have bought that Yamaha DG60 amp last time... Haiz...

 

[kym]

ss amps doesnt mean digital what, no? ss amps still analog unless it is a modeller like the line 6 spider, no?

 

[PatheinRaindropMoe]

heh, that logical as well.

 

[arctopus]

Take this for example. This track was recorded by me thru a PODXTLive and a USB connection straight to a PC. It was recorded in WAV, and then compressed further into MP3. Does this sound digital to you? Is it a bad recording? Are the EFX too digital or crap? You decide.

it sounds modelled to me,pretty artificial. theres no "air" to it at all,extremely sterile. not to say its a bad tone or bad recording, but definately "digital" (modelled)

Yes, BUT don't misread this as a "digital effects sound crap" because these days, bit processing has such high resolution that the ear CANNOT tell the difference. If you take a digital effect (say BOSS MT-2) and marry it with the right EQ settings and amp, you'd never know it's digital.

people can tell the difference,quite easily in fact. alot of digital aliasing noise in the high end sometimes..people like analogue simply because its a flawed medium in terms of hi-freq response..you lose top end and thus it sounds "warmer". i thought the MT-2 wasn't digital, in that it isn't using any chips/dsp? you can get good tones out of a MT2 true, but thats going into the right amp, bringing it into the analog medium.. speakers and air moving,not 1's and 0's

the rest of your post is slightly flawed/subjective..

yes CDs are digital,and theres definatley alot of "digital" processing going on nowadays, but you're discounting the fact than the john mayer record you're talking about was probably mixed and recorded with heaps of analog outboard equipment, regardless of the digital final product. i'm also willing to bet that some overdubs were probably done in the studio, its extremely common in live albums and has been going on for YEARS.

i think you're bringing in the wrong concepts for the genre most of the people on this forum dwell in with the whole "reproduction/fidelity" thing. thats a rather purist approach associated with audiophiles/classical listeners where the aim of the recording is to faithfully reproduce the performance..but even this is slowly dying out nowadays.

rock/metal/indie/whatever mixes generally aim to be "larger than life"..faithful reproduction means nothing. the drums should be HUGE..panning of instruments exaggerated..guitars massive etc etc. its all an illusion created in the studio. show me a drumkit in real life that sounds like something on a modern rock record and i'll buy it straight away.

if someone realeased a live non-classical album that captures exactly what the audience heard in the venue i wouldn't buy it, it'll be called a bootleg. however much the sound at a concert blows you away, i reckon a properly mixed version of it will sound better in your listening environment (taking physical factors out of the equation,the thump of the bass/kick in your chest,the adrenaline blah blah because im sure you're not listening to music at home with a full NEXO array and massive sub bins) than a "faithful" reproduction of the concert.

An experienced ear can tell if the recording was done with the full band playing "live" together in the studio, or done track by track.

true, but this is more an issue of the musicians playing and reacting together (music) rather than the SOUND of the recording...a digitally recorded live record is still a live record.

i seem to have forgotten the point of this post, or topic for that matter.

oh yes, if one's asking whether putting an anlalog pedal through a multiefx might make it sound digital, my answer is subjectively yes. but thats not to say its a bad tone

currently amp modelling may sound good and definately is getting better by the day with convolution impulses and what not..but yes one can definately still tell the difference between that and a real amp with its volume dimed..they havent quite got that "air moving" thing down yet.

lastly, gene simmons IMO is a complete fuckwit whos more a businessman than a musician, and his quote completely sums that up. when was the last time you heard a good word about his tone or bass playing, as opposed to "that wog from kiss with the long tongue and spandex"?

 

[Whitestrat]

it sounds modelled to me,pretty artificial. theres no "air" to it at all,extremely sterile. not to say its a bad tone or bad recording, but definately "digital" (modelled)

Hmm... Interesting... How about this then?

SoundClick artist: Demioblue - page with MP3 music downloads

rock/metal/indie/whatever mixes generally aim to be "larger than life"..faithful reproduction means nothing. the drums should be HUGE..panning of instruments exaggerated..guitars massive etc etc. its all an illusion created in the studio.

Good points... Something I neglected to think about...

lastly, gene simmons IMO is a complete fuckwit whos more a businessman than a musician, and his quote completely sums that up. when was the last time you heard a good word about his tone or bass playing, as opposed to "that wog from kiss with the long tongue and spandex"?

That's not the point. I do agree that if too much knowledge affects your enjoyment of music, then you do know too much. I'm in the luxury watch business. I used to love watches. But ever since I joined the industry, it's sort of killed my passion in watches somewhat...:???:

And last I knew, Gene Simmons with that infamously long tongue has achieved much more in his career in music than I could ever dream of. That I think, warrants some respect... He never claimed about being a serious musician and a proficient bassist. He's an entertainer, and that's what he's good at.

 

[arctopus]

the backing tracks a little loud and distracting so its hard to tell, cant really crank it up now. the delay on the lead tone strikes me as "digital" though..its very pristine. i'd say modeller again. nice composition by the way..

i hear you on too much knowledge killing passion..and yes gene simmons has achieved more than any of us as an entertainer and savvy businessman,but im not much for him as a musician