DOES ANYONE KNOW WHAT THIS IS???

#1 11-23-2008, 08:32 AM

I've posted the youtube link so you can hear it.

In the Rage Against the Machine song Mic Check, what effect does the bass use?

I think it's a dynamic wah, but i'm not sure. what do you think?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2flANhkdZs

PS there is only sound, no vid.

kevteop · #2 11-23-2008, 09:50 AM

Some sort of filter with distortion infront of it. Maybe a wah, maybe a filter doing a down sweep. Wah seems more likely.

vegas532 · #3 11-23-2008, 10:00 AM

105Q, at your service.

tomhanzo · #4 11-23-2008, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vegas532

105Q, at your service.

+1

perk45 · #5 11-23-2008, 11:25 AM

Do yall think he's using his double-wah or a fuzz/distortion into his wah? The wah sounds way too pronounced to me to be just a single 105Q.

RedCoatMonster · #6 11-23-2008, 12:41 PM

Excuse me if this is a dumb question, but Ive always wondered what is accomplished by using two wahs.

GingerConor · #7 11-23-2008, 12:41 PM

i now want a wah!

Unrepresented · #8 11-23-2008, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by perk45

Do yall think he's using his double-wah or a fuzz/distortion into his wah? The wah sounds way too pronounced to me to be just a single 105Q.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedCoatMonster

Excuse me if this is a dumb question, but Ive always wondered what is accomplished by using two wahs.

I thought that it had been determined that he runs his wah's in parallel and not series... meaning that the two wahs act in unison on two different channels.

Jared Lash · #9 11-23-2008, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by perk45

Do yall think he's using his double-wah or a fuzz/distortion into his wah? The wah sounds way too pronounced to me to be just a single 105Q.

Yeah, I'd be shocked if he didn't have some dirt in there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedCoatMonster

Excuse me if this is a dumb question, but Ive always wondered what is accomplished by using two wahs.

A bigger Timmy C fan can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the point for him was to have two wahs connected so that he could send the same sound through his dirty rig and his clean one.

EDIT: Apparently Unrepresented is quicker on the trigger than I am.

RedCoatMonster · #10 11-23-2008, 12:50 PM

Aaaah ok I get it.

Thanks.

Tbirdbassist · #11 11-23-2008, 03:01 PM

I really need to get the Battle of LA again, such a tight album.

Tbirdbassist · #12 11-23-2008, 04:14 PM

Also... would there be a way to get that huge a wah sound sans the dual rig set up?

If I'm thinking correctly wouldn't it involve splitting your signal into the two wahs and combing it again afterward somewhere?

Jared Lash · #13 11-23-2008, 04:19 PM

If he really is running them in parallel, then I don't think the huge wah sound has anything to do with having two wahs. What that setup allows is for the same wah sound to go into a clean setup and through one with a distortion.

You could probably get the same sound with one 105q into a distortion that's in the loop of a blender set at 50/50.

Kooldac · #14 11-23-2008, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tbirdbassist

If I'm thinking correctly wouldn't it involve splitting your signal into the two wahs and combing it again afterward somewhere?

You are correct sir!

Have fun reading - TIM COMMERFORD.

#15 01-28-2009, 03:09 PM

in the audioslave song cochise ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uhatY70Acs ) the same bass effect is used; right?

J. Crawford · #16 01-28-2009, 03:16 PM

Teamsmash, it sounds similiar but I dont think the wah is in there. Just some kind of distortion. But TimmyC is so secretive, I dont think anyone can be completely positive.

sonic assassin · #17 01-28-2009, 05:36 PM

i love the sound of 2 wahs together. ridiculous bandpassing.

Kooldac · #18 01-28-2009, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teamsmash

in the audioslave song cochise ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uhatY70Acs ) the same bass effect is used; right?

I have always thought the first few measures of the verse (or maybe post-chorus?) he used a wah, then shut it off for the rest of the verse. Research shows that he used the parallel wah technique, however knowing his ridiculousness of moding and gear choice, I am convinced for recording he changes the wahs internally. Either he installed trimpots inside or swapped caps/resistors. Besides, listen to him live - his wah sounds NOTHING like recordings.

ANYWAYS, I do think he uses a wah in Cochise. It is a lot less pronounced then, for example, Mic Check, which lends me to believe the modding theory. Either way, just look at Audioslave performing Cochise on Broudway. The wah is much more pronounced. /wall'o'text

basslyon · #19 01-28-2009, 06:52 PM

I thought the double wahs only came in for audioslave; one for each dirty channel. The clean signal has no wah on it. I maybe wrong though i thought his signal chain when in rage was.
Delay>Octave>Compressor>Spitter>
Path a: to clean amp,
Path B: Custom distortion>Wah>Hum Eliminator>Dirty Rig

Kooldac · #20 01-28-2009, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by basslyon

I thought the double wahs only came in for audioslave; one for each dirty channel. The clean signal has no wah on it. I maybe wrong though i thought his signal chain when in rage was.
Delay>Octave>Compressor>Spitter>
Path a: to clean amp,
Path B: Custom distortion>Wah>Hum Eliminator>Dirty Rig

I am not 100% on what came in for Audioslave, but I can say I am positive he has always used the parallel wah technique on two dirty channels. I always took it as he used a reversed splitter (2 in, 1 out) to recombine the parallel dirts into his dirty head. Then with Audioslave, he added a third head to run double dirty paths instead of recombining them before the head.

Edit: Yes, I realize the two charts in the link above dont ever show the 2 in/1 out splitter, but there really isn't much distinction between RATM and Audioslave.