The time for playing around with putting various little electronic toys into neat little rows is done for now. It's now time to put that set of efforts into use. So I hope to be posting demo tracks and discussing what has been recorded and presented.
Ok, so doing tracking today. I plan on covering some of the results of the routing setup that I've settled on here, as well as tracking a few things using the Boss LS-2 as a routing unit. 99.9% (that is - one out of a thousand) people that would do this will not have a 2-channel bass with indivual outputs. Which pretty much makes all of STAGE-1 something that is of little use to them.
STAGE-1, for the most part, is a mixing station for the 2 pickup signal chains that I'm attempting to exploit. Always ... always ... keep in mind that this is a research rig. To determine how much (or how little) of this ~stuffs~ is actually needed to create the spread of bass sounds that I wish to create. "What if it turns out that the 2-channel pickup setup doesn't offer enough returns to justify it?" Simple, it will be discarded. I literally have about $40 tied up in it. The extra jack, and one ART Mic Preamp. Everything else I use for that setup is stuff that I can use with my modular synth for doing ~synth stuff~.
So if it turns out in the end that all I need to create this "Uber Preamp" is a couple/few rack items, a couple of Boss LS-2 line switchers, and a soup of a few stompboxes of my own choice .... then so be it.
The Mackie power amp, the Carvin cabs, the Rane parametric EQ, the Aphex 204 -- those are things that will remain useful no matter the outcome of these experiments. The bulk of what I'm doing here is RESEARCH. Research is far more important than development. Development doesn't ~create~ anything new. It simply develops what has been researched.
So if it ends up that I built two thousand ways to NOT build a light bulb, and one way TO build a light bulb, then it all paid off.
In the end ... you gotta try. You have to set those goals waaaaay out in front of you. In fact, you kinda have to think whatever it is you're shooting for isn't even possible. Because that's the only way to make new things possible.
Thanks for hanging in there with me people .... onward!
Ok, I'm off to the studio to begin with that. It's 6:15am, I have a few hours of setup and tracking to do. I'll be back after a while with some SoudCloud links.
So you"re basically making your own Multi-FX, right?
This got me to thinking. In my band I have about 3 or 4 basic sounds that I'm trying to achieve:
1. A straight up grindy metal sound that rips heads off with mainly a 70/30 bridge/neck mix.
2. A subdued ballad sound that just kind of blends in with a 40/60 bridge/neck mix.
3. A dub-reggae sound with a 10/90 br/neck mix.
4. A rock sound that's not too in your face but just keeps a good solid foundation.
It seems to me like the thing to do would be to have the separate pickup outs into ???
I don't know what I'm trying to say/ask. I guess all I'm saying is I'm having this same issue of not being able to turn the blend knob on my bass fast enough mid-song and I'm trying to wrap my head around how I'm going to fix that issue.
Awesome thread, sometime after I get an electrical engineering degree maybe I'll figure out what's going on...
__________________ The biggest chance you can take is not to take a chance
Schecter #237
This is all totally cool but I have a dumb question.
In the panel photo in another post it looks like 2/3 of the gear is devoted to Stage 1. But in the functional diagram of this post it looks (to stupid me) like all Stage 1 does is blend the two pickups into a single signal which feeds to stage two where the real action happens.
How does Stage 1 differ from an onboard blend knob? I see the nuance but am asking in an extreme way to illustrate how stupified I am.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flux Jetson
The new algorithm for STAGE-1 is a smash hit. It allows better control over each pickup's sound BEFORE they are mixed together. It's like having better pickups, since you can tweak each pickup's sound to suit you.
So let's summarize the new setup, and diagram it out in it's complete structure. It won't hurt, I promise.
Here's STAGE1 with the newly adopted algorithm.
The only thing missing are the two mic preamps, but we know they go before everything and you can just assume they are in the signal chain on the pickup input feeds there on the far left:
Here's STAGE2. This is the parallel processing stage for the mono-mix of the pickups, if this were a conventional bass rig this would be the sortof pedalboard.
Here's STAGE3. This is where that processed mono signal is split once more into two separate amp/cab channels. The 4x10 channel has the POD Pro added to it's channel to provide the last word in voicing and sounds for the upper mids.
So there we have it. The Three Stage Structure from pickups to speaker cones. All ready to have various FX, EQs, Special FX, Filters, Everwhat loaded in to the various insert points. Consider these three stages as the basic framework that the Experimental Modular Bass Rig is built upon. Some of the insert points may or may not be used at all, but since there are patching jacks at every one of these insert points the ability to tweak and modify this rig is there and available.
This is like being able to add any type of circuitry inside each stage of a common bass amplifier. What I've done is essentially busted open a bass amp and made connection points to insert any type of stompbox anywhere I please. It's the ulitmate bass amp.
And .. even with the way I expanded STAGE1 (input stage) the whole thing STILL fits in that one 5U rack adaptor! My guess is that once I get it going a little more that it won't require much in the manner of added processors to reach my goals of 70's rock bass tones. This system has made it so easy to try any processor/FX in any given point.
Thanks for following along. Now with this mental torture behind me I will get busy with sonic testing. In other words ... time for SoundCloud tracks! Since I've FINALLY got all of this routing business out of my head, I can at last move ahead with making sounds and recording them in various ways.
I think I know the answer, but does your setup allow for keeping multi-output-jack bass signals separate all the way to the speaker while still making full use of all your stages, bells and whistles?
Since you are running two power channels to two sets of cabs it seems like there could be some benefit to keeping the chain separate all the way from string to cab with no mixing.
I think I know the answer, but does your setup allow for keeping multi-output-jack bass signals separate all the way to the speaker while still making full use of all your stages, bells and whistles?
Since you are running two power channels to two sets of cabs it seems like there could be some benefit to keeping the chain separate all the way from string to cab with no mixing.
Well it's like I said back on page 12 (I think) .. the separate processing for each pickup all the way out to the speaker cones has already been done to death, since 1970 or before. I don't necessarily feel that's the most optimal way to best exploit the 2-channel bass guitar. Not only that, but if you use only one pickup in that type of setup you've lost 50% of your amplification (if you use only the neck pickup then the entire bridge pickup amp channel is silent, killing off a full HALF of your amplified sound). So instead of going with that tired old way of using the 2-channel bass guitar, what I did was extend Stage-1's capabilities to include per-pickup processing, then blending them down to a mono signal after each pickup has been processed. Stage-2 can then be used to add even more parallel processing (if needed) which is then also mixed down to a mono signal. Then Stage-3 splits that parallel-processed mono signal into the two separate amp feeds, with their own ability to be processed separately if desired.
So Stage-1 not only offers pickup blending, but before they are blended each pickup can be processed by itself. Stage -2 offers parallel processing for the blended pickups (if desired). And Stage-3 offers separate processing for each amp feed (if desired).
So it comes in as 2 signals mixed down to 1 ---- then opens up to 4 signal then mixed back down to 1 ---- then opens back up to 2 where it's sent to two amps/cabs.
I feel that this routing algorithm creates the ability to produce richer tones than the "one pickup per amp" designs, and it also doesn't chop off half of your volume if you should only use one pickup (like the typical "2-channel bass/one amp-n-cab per pickup" setup would). The way I'm doing it has the potential to sound more homogenized, more like "one sound" rather than two sounds coming out of separate amps. Also keep in mind that serial FX setups can also be done ANYWHERE in the signal arrangment. You can place any type of FX/distortion/compressor/whatever on any of the horizontal lines in that diagram. The ability to run several things in parallel simply multiplies your conceivable processing power by .. um ... (lemme see ... carry the two .. ) ... uh ... well .... by a LOT! And the best single thing about paralleling is that you can totally .. TOTALLY .. retain all of your low end. Totally! No matter what type of FX you use, in no matter what position in that entire set of chains.
If a person wants, a straight shot from the bass's output can be run right out to the amps without touching the signal with any of these parallel processing chains, y'know, like regular people with regular undamaged brains do.
A single ouput bass (like normal sane people play) simply inserts in right between Stage-1 and Stage-2, effectively bypassing all of Stage-1 completely. OR .... the "sane bass" can also be input right at Stage-3's insert point, bypassing all of Stage-1 and Stage-2. You can even bypass the amp splitter at the beginning of Stage-3 and plug in right at the direct amp channel input for either amp channel if desired.
Since there are gazoodles of insert points, you can plug in at literally any point in the hairball.
I think most people jump directly to what seems like the obvious way to exploit the two channel bass. There is this temptation to send each pickup out to it's own amp for some reason. I honestly feel like that is not the best way to utilize the two channel bass though. I feel it creates a better, more "melded" sound when each channel is processed with whatever FX make each one sound their best, then mix them together, and then put separate FX on each amp channel to make them sound their best.
I feel that you have far more control over the sound of each pickup that way. Running each pickup out to separate amps, you're relying on using the ROOM as your mixer. So each person in the audience will hear a totally different pickup mix. Doing it the way I have it set up, I have full control over the final mix of the pickups, I'm not hoping the room will give me what I want in all positions of the room. Mixing the pickups after processing them separately gives me total control over the overall sound.
Doing it that way essentially lets you produce your own pickups. What I mean is that since you are processing each pickup discretely, you can tweak and twank each of the pickups to sound many many different ways. It's totally like having tweakable pickups in your bass. Every time you goof with the FX on each pickup, it is almost like changing pickups to a new set or them. You have the ability to apply gain structure changes, compression level changes, and tonal changes to each pickup by simply messing with the FX that each pickup is run through. You can completely change the way the bass responds to your touch and technique by changing the gain structure and dynamics of each pickup. I am a firm believer in using gain structure to alter touch response.
THEN - after goofing with the actual sound and response of each pickup .. you even have complete control over the blend! And then after mixing them, you can even apply further processing to that blended pickup sound (Stage-2). And then after that, you have a fully biamped amplification system (Stage-3). And each of the two amp channels can even be tweaked to produce their best sound and their best mix.
It's the ulitmate in control over your sound. And this routing stuff is just the beginning. You have total freedom of your choices over which FX are placed within those routings. And freedom to CHANGE what FX are in those routings at any time as the years go by.
Fully ..... Modular ..... Bass .... Rig.
If I do this thing right, I'll never have to buy another bass amp again. Just make little changes to this thing to satisfy my whims and changes of taste.
A note on the audio tracks. I have a few done already, but it seems that SoundCloud wants money from me to post any more tracks. I mistakenly thought that I could add tracks to existing "sets" ... it seems that isn't the case. And with the "free" account one is limited to only THREE sets (which I have already hit). So since I can't create any more sets (without paying for a upgrade), and I can't add more tracks to existing sets .... I'm kinda stuck until I pays-up withs the mo' munnies. Bastids!
So yer gonna hafta wait until we can pay SoundCloud more cash to upgrade my account so I can post more tracks. A few days perhaps.
Ok .. I have figured out how to post more tracks to existing sets in SoundCloud. It just took me awhile! Doh!
So this is Pickup Switcher 1. This track demonstrates how the pickup mix footswitcher works. It is a basic tone patch using "the X-Rig". I did the best I could at tagging the track where I stepped on the pickup mix switching footswitch. This is my Squier VMJ 2-channel bass with the original strings that came on it when I bought it back in August of 2012.
Here is Pickup Switcher Track 2. Same deal. Again, this track and the one above are just to demonstrate how the pickup switching rig works. Nothing really spectacular tone-wise (although it really doesn't sound too bad considering the age and the hours on the strings).
Tuning is C# - F# - B - E. Stock "Squier" strings - 105 to 45 (whatever in the heck they are, I have zip-clue about what strings are on these Squiers when you buy one).
As with Pickup Switcher Track 1 I tried to tag the places where I made changes with the momentary footswitch. Now know that anytime you hear the lowest two strings that will ALWAYS be both pickups on, it's only when I'm playing the D/G strings (aka "treble strings") that the neck pickup was on, and only when I tagged it as "neck only". I didn't tag every single switch, some of them are pretty obvious so I left them untagged.
(Thanks for the comment Grampa! You had already posted that before I even got done messing with the track while I was still in SoundCloud! Haahaa!).
So there's those two. Of course ... more coming in a couple of days. The next tracks will demonstrate different uses of all of these routings with various EQs and FX.
I'll post a flowchart diagram of the setup used for these tracks shortly.
So you"re basically making your own Multi-FX, right?
This got me to thinking. In my band I have about 3 or 4 basic sounds that I'm trying to achieve:
1. A straight up grindy metal sound that rips heads off with mainly a 70/30 bridge/neck mix.
2. A subdued ballad sound that just kind of blends in with a 40/60 bridge/neck mix.
3. A dub-reggae sound with a 10/90 br/neck mix.
4. A rock sound that's not too in your face but just keeps a good solid foundation.
It seems to me like the thing to do would be to have the separate pickup outs into ???
I don't know what I'm trying to say/ask. I guess all I'm saying is I'm having this same issue of not being able to turn the blend knob on my bass fast enough mid-song and I'm trying to wrap my head around how I'm going to fix that issue.
Awesome thread, sometime after I get an electrical engineering degree maybe I'll figure out what's going on...
Haha ... Thanks for the compliments. You don't need a degree in EE ... I mean, myself, I just barely graduated from a rural high school in friggin southwestern Arizona of all places with a D+ grade avg. So if I can figger this stuff out, surely anyone else can!
Just try to imagine each of the "blocks" as separate stomp boxes. And the routings are like the patchcords that connect them. So with some of the more complex routing algorithms I've diagramed, just imagine connecting a bunch of stompboxes together and lay them all out on the floor arranged just like the boxes are in my diagrams.
Now, on to your pickup mixing setup .... it can be done! The neat thing about the way I'm doing it (with the synth modules) is that there is a module that does that type of A/B switching available to me which has greatly simplified things for me. And it allows me to use a momentary footswitch (opposed to a "latching" type footswitch, just like what most stompboxes use). The momentary allows me to just hold the footswitch down to make the swap, and let it up when I need to go back to the "default" pickup setting.
If I had to use "latching" footswitches, then I'd have to step on it twice to make it all work ... once to switch to an alternative pickup mix, and once to take me back to the default mix. Not to convenient! The momentary is FAST and SILENT. So fast, that I can actually switch from one mix to another so quickly and quietly that it can be used while I'm mid-riff! And that aspect makes the footswitchable pickup mix switcher SUPER useful, especially for dealing with that annoying tonal issue between the big strings and the small ones.
As for as me making my own "multi-FX" ..... hmmm .... well, not really. I'm making my own "bass-amp". I'm selecting what will serve as the bass knob, the midrange knob, the treble knob, as well as many other functions. All of these things are totally my own choices. I can use whatever I want as the "bass knob" in my bass amp here. Same thing with the mids, treble, output volume, input volume, and more. I'm literally constructing an entire bass amp out of separate FX and separate EQs and filters and compressors. So it's not really what you might call "multi-FX", but I suppose I will be using various FX in the setup so I guess it kinda IS making multi-FX. And kinda not.
Just keep hanging in there, these ideas I post will come to you ... the light will come on and it will look like a nuclear bomb going off above your head. Atomic Understanding!
Just to let anyone following this know. I had been waiting on an incoming order of a bunch of parts that have to do with my job to come in. Well guess what landed today.
So I have a LOT of work ahead of me .. bill-payin' work .. so things might begin moving a little slowly here in this thread for a few weeks. I have ben able to put time into this while I was waiting on part to come in for the thing I do for a living. Since they arrived today I need to get busy, so things here in the forum will slow down somewhat when it concerns my participation.
Just wanted to get that said. I'll still try to add more tracks here, I have a LOT of things I wish to record, and if I keep them short I still have plenty of room left in my SoundCloud account (as well as some bandwidth that has been offered to me by a generous soul that frequents my efforts here in Talk Bass).
- I was going to add two more synth module distributors to the X-Rig, but I may go with two of these instead. I already have one that I've had for years, and it works excellently.
- For the person that wishes to get into this whole parallel processing trip without buying a bunch of gear and going through the whole shipload of hassle to get it assembled, go with one or two of these.
- New they are about $80 bucks (yup, eighty lousy bucks) - SHIPPED!
- Used on Fleabay they are around $50 bucks ... Fiddy Bux!!! Half a hunsky!
- They also have a "power output" jack so you can use it as a power distributor by using a power cable daisey chain (Boss PCS20A .. about $17 shipped).
- With it, any fuzz is now viable, any distortion is now useable. Run a Tech-21 Boost Fuzz (the one for guitars) into a Cry Baby wah on ch-A, then your clean tone on ch-B. Mix the two to suit your needs. Done! Super Rawk Bass all up in yo Sooper Rawk Fass!
- Mondo versatile. You don't ever have to worry about whether the new Bad-Ol-Fuzz by Excellento Pedals has enough low end response.
- This gadget lets YOU control how much of everything does ~what~ to your sound. You can put a number of dirt-pedals in one channel and turn them on or off as needed because it will work with any of them.
- It has has one of the finest buffered bypass circuits out there, which is perfect for use at the front of a long chain of "true bypass" stuff to prevent the dreaded "True Bypass Chain Capacitance Tone Suckage". It has a 1meg/ohm input impedance, just like all of the very best/most expensive bass amps do. So your passive J-bass/P-bass just loves loves loves it as the first gadget in the line.
(A note on True Bypass: True Bypass is one of the most over-hyped aspects of FX pedals to come down the hill in many a year. It is good to convert older pedals that have really REALLY crappy buffered bypass circuits, or pedals with really poor input impedance levels. But when you go stacking up a chain of True Bypassed pedals, and you bypass them all, your tone will really suffer from capacitance tone suckage. So having a buffered bypass module/pedal at the front end of your signal chain really REALLY helps out your tone, especially if you have a passive bass like a P or a J or any other passive basses. Read up on this topic, Bing-it ... I'm not much of a Google fan btw .. they are totally sold out. So Bing the "true bypass" issue ... LEARN PEOPLES ..... LEARN!)
- If you plug no other FX into it, you can even use it as TWO BOOSTS. Just set the channel volumes to whatever boost levels you require and then set the mode switch to whichever switching mode for the footswitch works out best for you ... rawk!. Each channel volume offers 20db of boost. So you can have unity (bypass), and two separate levels of super clean boost .. without buying anything but that one pedal!
I'm actually using TWO of them with my 2-channel modded J-bass now. One for each pickup!
So check out that video (link posted above). It may just open the doors for you to go through to introduce you to parallel processing. Many many informed bass players use this type of processing. Why?
Fantastic review. I love this pedal. I've owned two of them in the past, and I always end up selling them when they no longer become "usable" on my board...and then regret it. hahaha, its such a swiss army knife pedal! Everytime I buy a new one I say to myself "I'm going to hold on to this no matter what."
You can find it for about $40-50 new. Great piece of gear I plan to add to my setup!
Yea, those are pretty neat. But they don't put anything over the Boss LS-2 or my rig. Were talking Apples and Oranges here .. totally. See, that ART is PASSIVE .... it won't add any volume to anything that is needing it. Which can translate into limits on how well you can actually mix things in a useful manner, and can also translate into a lot of added noise if you have to use something else to raise the overall output levels due to that "one thing" in your setup that has lower volume levels. You can't raise it because the splitter/mixer is passive, so that means you must lower everything else to it's level to get stuff to mix right and sound right. Consequently you must raise the volume of the entire mix with some other gadget -- which ends up rasing the entire noise floor.
The ART also has a pretty low input impedance, (25k to 100k depending on how you have the knobs set) so if you have a passive bass it's going to load the heck out of your pickups unless you use a buffer or preamp in front of it. The ART is no different than using two of the Rolls passive mixer/splitters.
The ART also only has four controls, I didn't read the manual so I don't know if those knobs control the input of the mixer channels, or the output of the splitter channels, or ??? So I don't know what those four knobs are actually controlling. My synth modules have controls for the output of each splitter channel, and controls for the input of each mixer channel (so a knob for each "send" and a knob for each "return" - total of eight knobs in a four channel setup) The Boss controls how loud each channel is just before they are mixed together and sent out through the output jack.
The Boss LS-2 is an ACTIVE splitter, with 20db of gain per channel (ART and the Rolls both have zero db of gain per channel, they're both passive, which means they cannot raise the volume of anything that is plugged into them to any higher than it is as it comes in). The Boss has a 1meg/ohm input impedance vs the ART's 100k (at best!) input impedance (the Boss has one million ohms of input impedance vs the ART's one thousand ohms .. the higher that number is, the better your bass sounds, by a lot!). So the Boss is a totally different thing than the ART or the Rolls. And my setup is rack mounted which suits my setup far better than a desktop type splitter, I can actually fully normalize those synth modules so that no patchcords are needed.
And the ART (and the Rolls as well for that matter) aren't built anywhere NEAR as well as the Boss LS-2, and they're not even on the same planet with the synth modules when it comes to construction and design. The synth modules use "through-hole pcb construction" which is 100% repairable by nearly anyone. Both the ART and the Rolls use "surface mount-pcbs" which are 100% NON-repairable as well as pcb-mounted jacks (notice that there are no nuts on the jacks? All that holds them into the box are the actual solder joints where the jacks are soldered to the pc board - that can be troublesome and create reliability issues. That exact thing has caused problems in the past for many companies, so much so that they end up discontinuing the particular device altogether. Ask "Damage Control" and "Aphex" and even "Line6" about that very issue!). And as I've already pointed out both the Rolls and ART are also passive which means you'll have to manage the input level knobs so that they are all MAXED OUT when used for multiple inputs, otherwise the input impedance will be so low that the tone will be muddy as hell.
Don't get me wrong, the ART and the Rolls units will work, and they are highly cost effective, but they aren't in the same league and the Boss LS-2 and not even anywhere near the modular synth distributor/mixer setup. Don't forget that I went with modular synth modules because I already had some of them to begin with for use with my modular synthesizer.
So don't worry, you didn't "one up" me -- not at all. I'm not slammin' on you here, just illustrating the differences -- I'm using this as a teaching moment.
The ART falls in the exact same category of useage as the Rolls splitter/mixers do. Passive mixers that can also be used as splitters due to their passive designs.
If you don't think that you actually have a need for four-parallel channels, spend that $50 bucks on a used Boss LS-2. But if you think you will need the four sends and four returns, the ART is a fine choice for the money. I use ART mic preamps on both my pickups (so I use two ART preamps). I find them to work just great! ART makes good stuff, no doubt. So does Rolls. I have a Rolls crossover network.
Pics of the synth module construction details are in this very thread, check around the first 5 pages. A review of the Rolls mixer/splitter is also in this thread. Pics of the Rolls Tiny Crossover that I use are also in this thread (page 12?). My comments about the ART mic preamps are scattered throughout this thread as well. And every single SoundCloud track that has been posted in this thread that I've recorded was done with the two ART mic preamps as input stages for my pickups. And those ART preamps have THREE YEAR WARRANTIES!!! (not including the 12AX7 tubes inside them).
The ART splitter you've presented should probably work out fine for you, I'm sure you'll put it to great use. But realize that stuff like that costs $45 for a reason. My synth modules are roughly $85 each, but still require a way to mount them, and a power supply. The Boss is $80 new, and requires a 9v battery or a wall wart.
Fantastic review. I love this pedal. I've owned two of them in the past, and I always end up selling them when they no longer become "usable" on my board...and then regret it. hahaha, its such a swiss army knife pedal! Everytime I buy a new one I say to myself "I'm going to hold on to this no matter what."
No doubt, totally great tool that any bass player (or kybd player or guitar player!) should have as one of their basic pieces of kit. I used one as a dual-channel OD with my guitar rig for a long time. Didn't use anything plugged into it at all, just used the 20db built-in amplifiers as boost pedals thatI could A/B between. That worked GREAT for a long time. Now I'm going to use one with my X-Rig ... it's ultimate position is undetermined just yet.
Yup .. great device! And easy on the wallet too. And it's so tough you could use it in a bar fight and it would do you well, and then still work great on your pedalboard after it was used to defend you life with! Haahaa!
Another limit of the ART seems to be that you can only use each channel as a mixer OR a splitter. This is from the website .....
"Plugging into a mix input channel removes it from the splitter bus, and plugging into a splitter output channel removes it from the mix bus"
(end quote)
So if I am reading that properly, (let's say) if you use Channel 1 as a split channel to send a signal to a distortion box, you cannot use Channel 1 as the return channel, you have to plug the return signal coming from the distortion box into another channel to mix it into the chain. And when you do that, that channel you used to bring the distortion unit back (the "return" signal) cannot be used for splitting. This boils down to meaning that the ART is essentially a 2-channel spit/mix. Each of the four channels it has can be used as a split-send ... OR ... a mix-return .. but not both (even though each channel has two jacks, one for sends, the other for returns).
Hmmmm.....
So it seems as though it has some limits that may or may not be a problem, depending on your expectations. The Boss is starting to look like a much better deal.
Well I see what you're saying with the limitations of the ART, but I took those into account. All I need is 2 channels, I don't need any boost, and I prefer the passive setup. I have enough clean volume from my TC Electronic to compensate, as I can play in my church's cavernous sanctuary at gain-5, master-3. Thanks for showing your opinion and concern though.
You do show confidence, though, that the LS2 is a better piece of gear for the money. Convince me it's better, I'd like you to.
