EHX MicroSynth VS MicroPOG for Octaving?

smo · #1 10-07-2009, 12:02 AM

Hi all,

I currently have a MicroPOG - and can't help but like the clips/vids I've seen of the MicroSynth.

For Octaver type sounds (think MicroPOG)
Can the MicroSynth do what the POG does, as far as tracking?
Especially with chords?
Does it sound the same as the MicroPOG when just using the octave part of the pedal?

I'm really thinking of trading the MicroPOG for a Microsynth...... but I don't want to end up with an inferior octaver sound.

And to those of you who have one - where do you put it in your signal chain?

Thanks again guys and gals!
smo

fightthepower · #2 10-07-2009, 12:09 AM

The Microsynth is analog, and therefor is monophonic and can not handle chords at all when using the suboctave, but it has a fatter suboctave than the digital micropog. The Micropog tracks better than the microsynth or any other analog octaver (except for the bit of latency that all the xOG's have).. and at least as good as every other octaver out there, if not better tracking wise, but the microsynth tracks well for an analog octaver-- just no chords (on any analog octaver).

JimmyM · #3 10-07-2009, 01:07 AM

Micro Pog's tracking is why I still keep it. Gets a little twangy but it tracks like nothing else.

fightthepower · #4 10-07-2009, 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smo

I'm really thinking of trading the MicroPOG for a Microsynth...... but I don't want to end up with an inferior octaver sound.

And to those of you who have one - where do you put it in your signal chain?

Thanks again guys and gals!
smo

The Microsynth is great.. but its octaver wasn't its strong suit in my opinion. Im not a huge fan of the digital octaves, though I do use my HOG's suboctave when playing in the first positition because the tracking is a breeze and that fact that its not so fat keeps it from getting muddy as easily as an analog octave. Another thing to note is that the XO Microsynth does not have the most headroom, and many people (myself included) find issue with clipping on low notes on the B or E string especially. I always had this problem on the open E through F with my big box BMS as well, though my pbass overpowers many pedals.

I didn't use the BMS's octaves or dirt at all, so I kept it after my octavers and dirt and just used it for its filter (modulation went after it).

What are your octave uses? Where on the neck to you use them the most, do you mix your clean signal generally or solo the octave, etc? I think I preferred the sound of the BMS's octave, but depending on your uses it may or may not be the better octaver for the job.

smo · #5 10-07-2009, 07:29 AM

Ta for the info guys

Tracking is why I like the MicroPOG too.

I guess I'm more of a up-the-neck octave user.
Mainly use it (octave up) to thicken up those lead guitar sections here or there.
Don't use an ocatver that often to be honest, as I prefer to play chords/octaves the old fashioned way if my technique allows me.

What attacts me to the BMS is the filter/swell function. It looks like a great toy to have.

I guess what I'm trying to do is kill two birds with one stone.
I am trying to keep my pedalboard as small as I can.

So with the BMS - does the octave up still work just fine when you go waaaaaayyy down the low B on a 5 banger?

Smurf-o-Deth · #6 10-07-2009, 08:17 AM

The octave up on the BMS is nothing like the POG octave up--analogue octave up is distortion-based, and does not come through well on bass until about mid-neck. The octave up on the BMS is more for presence than anything. If you want a distinct octave up in all positions, you are stuck with digital.

3toes · #7 10-07-2009, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimmyM

Micro Pog's tracking is why I still keep it. Gets a little twangy but it tracks like nothing else.

Big ol +1 there.

It's not the most "organic" or warm sounding octaver out there... but I have 100% confidence in it being able to keep up with any note I play and however many notes I play.

4StringsEnough · #8 10-07-2009, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smo

Tracking is why I like the MicroPOG....What attacts me to the BMS is the filter/swell function.

It sounds like you need the POG2. It has all the octave abilities (and more) of the Micro Pog and also has a swell function.

Basstovsky · #9 10-07-2009, 02:26 PM

The BMS is a beautiful sounding pedal, but it has its limitations in being analog. I find it tracks very well for being monophonic, but of course the sub octave doesnt work on anything lower than the 5th fret on the E string (or open A string). It doesnt do chords but it keeps up well. The octave up was a little dissappointing for me, since I wanted to try and simulate an 8-string, but its great for synth/fuzz tones, as Smurf-o-Deth said its mostly a distortion simulated sound.

The BMS is amazing for organic synth and crazy fuzz/distortion sounds, and you can get a TON of different effects between the voice (octaves/dry) and filter sections, but when it comes to octaves nothing does it like the POG/MicroPOG.

I plan on getting a MicroPOG to complement my BMS, but neither could replace the other.

It is highly recommended the BMS goes as close to the start of your effects chain as possible for best results with the filter section, it might not react properly to the signal if it is already effected, but its always fun to experiment. Personally my BMS is first in my chain.

Swift713 · #10 10-07-2009, 02:58 PM

I tried the BMS, it didn't seem to get along with my bass's output and the octaves and swell were really unreliable. I got a micro pog and I'm happy with that but I don't solo either octave. The Enigma might get you a filter section similar to the BMS?

bassbmx · #11 10-07-2009, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swift713

I tried the BMS, it didn't seem to get along with my bass's output and the octaves and swell were really unreliable. I got a micro pog and I'm happy with that but I don't solo either octave. The Enigma might get you a filter section similar to the BMS?

I'm still playing around with my BMS and really like it when it decides to work. I'm finding it's quite picky as to what you feed into it. I really like the sound when it works well but I'm thinking the Enigma might be a good way to go.

Could possibly replace the Q-tron+ and BMS...

Anyone modded Enigma for expression control over the stop frequency?

bigchiefbc · #12 10-08-2009, 05:05 AM

Did any of you guys complaining about the BMS accepting your hot input actually use the input gain adjustment? I found that made a world of difference.

bassbmx · #13 10-08-2009, 05:18 AM

I'm running passive basses into mine but I'll have a play around with the trim pot and see if I can improve on the tracking/triggering.

coreyfyfe · #14 10-08-2009, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smo

What attacts me to the BMS is the filter/swell function. It looks like a great toy to have.

I guess what I'm trying to do is kill two birds with one stone.
I am trying to keep my pedalboard as small as I can.

So with the BMS - does the octave up still work just fine when you go waaaaaayyy down the low B on a 5 banger?

When I had a micropog and a BMS I used the pog for octave, BMS for the filter. Not that it needs repeating as it's been said by everyone else in this thread, but the analog octaves do not track as well as the digital octave, especially at lower frequencies. I had an xo BMS and had trouble below Ab. Above that, it was fine, but it didn't like low notes, and I doubt it would handle a low B at all. Stick with the pog.

I have a HOG now for all my octaves, run some dirt for when I want to cover up the digitalness, and I use a separate filter. The BMS and POG really complement each other, but neither will replace the other IMO.

smo · #15 10-08-2009, 11:27 PM

Cool.

Thanks for all the input here guys! I really appreciate it.