Experimental Fully Modular Bass Rig.

[Flux Jetson]

LINK INDEX: Links to relevant information.

This link takes you to the almighty "X-Bass" project thread. This is a thread about bass modifications that are aligned with what I'm doing in this thread. This bass will be used in conjunction with this "X-Rig".
X-Bass - Experimental 3 Pickup Bass

This link takes you to page 4 of this thread, if you scroll down to POST #70 on that page you'll find the details of the modifications I did to the Squier Vintage Modified Jazz 70's Bass to set it up with 2-channel outputs.
Experimental Fully Modular Bass Rig.

This link takes you to a detailed thread about the same set of mods I did to that same bass, it just has more details than the posts I did on page 4 of this thread.
2 channel modification on a J (many pictures).

This link takes you to another project that is connected to this one, it's a midi conversion of a set of vintage Hammond bass pedals.
Cygnus midi bass pedal conversion project-1

This link takes you to a second midi bass pedal project, just like the one above but with a different set of Hammond bass pedals, that my wife will use with her 1977 Rhodes Stage 73 electric piano.
Cygnus Midi Bass Pedal Conversion Project 2 (for her).

This link takes you to my SoundCloud page where you will find recorded demos of sounds and FX-y stuff I did using this modular bass rig.
(coming soon)

Just to get this said, I'm planing on posting cross links to related projects at the top of each new page, as well as links to specific pages within this thread to help readers locate various specific topics I've covered. So the first post of each new page that I write will have links in it to help readers both new and old. Then after that index posting I'll continue on with whatever discussion was presently in progress.

Thanks!

[Flux Jetson]

Originally Posted by Doner Designs

I would vote for keeping it all together here because you will probably end up running multiple outputs from the multiple pickup bass into your multichannel rig. To me it will be all one integrated system.

Hmm ... good point. However it might not draw in new readers that may be able to offer helpful suggestions regarding various issues of the X-Bass's design and construction.

Also, this thread is in the FX forum, the X-Bass thread would be in a different forum (I haven't taken the opportunity to see which one, but I am pretty sure it wouldn't be the FX forum). That is another factor for drawing in new readers with new ideas and comments that are more bass-construction-specific.

And with cross-linking the two threads it will provide more exposure of both threads. I'll be sure to provide updates in THIS thread about what is going on in the OTHER thread. Just like I'm going to do when I get more up to speed with the midi bass pedal projects.

Cygnus midi bass pedal conversion project-1

Cygnus Midi Bass Pedal Conversion Project 2 (for her).

I think most of the subscribers here have bailed anyhow. There's a few hard-cores left but not as many as there were. At least I think so. People tend to get bored with my yakkity yak.

Hmmm .... still ping-ponging this back and forth.

Thanks for the input!

[Flux Jetson]

Red Anodized Allen Head Machine Screws for the module panels:

Got these installed, finally. They're the screws that secure the aluminum standoffs that hold the circuit boards in place on the panels. Just a cosmetic change to add some detail to the vast sea of black panels. The color works well with the red toggle switch covers, the red LEDs, and red trigger pushbuttons on some of the modules.

[amos]

Fantastic thread. A Couple questions. I completely understand what you are trying to do here. But I can't help asking if you have plan to add subharmonics or dirt to achieve some nastiness in the waveform before it hits the filter. It sort of sounds like you like to leave "synth" textures to synth oscillators, rather than use the bass guitar as a tone source. fair enough.

Are you or is anyone else aware of a pitch-to-cv module that works in the hz/v standard, preferably in eurorack format? I'm planning on starting a eurorack soon. Tip Top Audio/Pittsburgh Modular/Malekko/Wiard/Makenoise.

[Flux Jetson]

Originally Posted by amos

Fantastic thread. A Couple questions. I completely understand what you are trying to do here. But I can't help asking if you have plan to add subharmonics or dirt to achieve some nastiness in the waveform before it hits the filter. It sort of sounds like you like to leave "synth" textures to synth oscillators, rather than use the bass guitar as a tone source. fair enough.

Are you or is anyone else aware of a pitch-to-cv module that works in the hz/v standard, preferably in eurorack format? I'm planning on starting a eurorack soon. Tip Top Audio/Pittsburgh Modular/Malekko/Wiard/Makenoise.

Well, if you'll hit my SoudCloud page you'll see that I haven't used any of the VCOs as sound sources whatsoever. They are nothing but modulators or carriers for ring modulation. The bass itself is the sole sound source. In some tracks I use plenty of distortion and then filter it, or otherwise process it using various aspects of the modular synth (and other processors as well).

As for pitch-to-cv using hz to voltage ... hmm ... nope. You might try either Highly Liquid or another outfit called MidiBoutique.Com for sources of actual encoding pcbs.

Another possiblity is perhaps a few of the stompbox offerings from Electro Harmonix or even Line 6 (their M-series) for getting you the pitch to cv tracking situation dealt with first, and then something else to convert the CV to Hz tracking needs with yet some other gadget.

I'm more of a traditional synth keyboard player and not so much into the bugfart/R2D2/satelite noise type synthesis. I come from the Keith Emerson school of cool rather than the sortof Deadmou5 type form. So that may be why I'm not as attached to the type of system you are planning out.

If I might ask, what are you attemting to do?

BTW, I had a Eurorack setup for a while. I just did not like the crowded control knob situation when it was all said and done. And most of the modules are constructed using surface mount technology which make them nearly unrepairable by myself. The MU format is mainly occupied by through-hole designed pcbs that are easily modified and easily repaired if necessary. The MU (aka "dot com") format just has it's own set of appeals that I gravitate too.

[Flux Jetson]

Here's a few of the tracks that use some various distorted FX that were processed through the modular synth stuff. The first two are of the pickup switcher setup that is made up of synth modules. The others are some out-there-where-the-busses-don't-run wierdness.

http://soundcloud.com/lunardune/pickup-switcher-mp3-1

http://soundcloud.com/lunardune/pickup-switcher-mp3-2

Here's a few using this bass and my modular synth processor rig.

http://soundcloud.com/lunardune/distorted-lumbering-beast-1

http://soundcloud.com/lunardune/distorted-chasing-threshold-1

http://soundcloud.com/lunardune/bass-with-q116-ring-mod-2b

http://soundcloud.com/lunardune/bass-with-q116-ring-mod-1

There's more, I think there's a total of fifteen tracks so far.

[Flux Jetson]

Alrighty folks. I finally decided to create the thread on the creation of the bass that will ultimately integrate with this X-Rig system and be that bass that is flexible enough to exploit the potential of this "X-Rig". And the X-Rig will exploit the potential of the X-Bass. So you can see what I'm intending on doing here.

So here's the link (there's also the same link in the "index post" at the top of this page) .....

X-Bass - Experimental 3 Pickup Bass

I'll be posting relevant developments of that project in this thread as well.

[amos]

Well I had a big long reply for you, but there was a crisis of sorts this morning and I accidentally quit my browser in a fit of anxiety.

Going to try and make this one brief. I am actually more into tonal synth sounds and songwriting and performance. Eurorack is appealing to me because of its small form factor, price point, and the eurorack module companies here in the US. Pittsburgh modular for instance makes minimal-looking but great sounding stuff, with big ole classic moog-type knobs.

I really love pretty much everything about the Buchla systems, especially the fact that the few people who can afford them are more prone to using them to a musical end; Richard Lainheart (RIP) and Alessandro Cortini for instance, work strictly in the Buchla domain. The multi-timbrality and patch-memory, among other things, seem to lend the Buchla systems to more music writing and less bleep blooping, as well as less headaches for playing live!

It was the bleep-blooping that originally turned me off to modular stuff as well, until I delved a little deeper. For the last year I'd pretty much made up my mind on a semi-modular with a built in keyboard of some sort.

Lastly the dotcom stuff has that warm, vintage, vibey analog tone that we all know and love, the sound of the ladder filter for instance. this is what originally got me into analog synthesis, so perhaps a dotcom system is a better idea.

So while I would love live performance, size, and musicality to be the primary goals, I think I will have to make sacrifices somewhere, since dreaming about a Buchla is a waste of my time at this point, and probably the near-future as well.

The Oberheim SEM is probably my favorite monosynth sound. I had pretty much had my mind set on the new two-voice pro (when it starts shipping), and then I went and started looking at modular stuff like a dummy. The TVP will retail for $3500. You can buy a lot of fun modular stuff for less than that. Also, I don't have $3500

I did not know about the surface-mount vs. through-hole thing. That certainly counts for something. I would imagine that some of the discrete modules use through-hole though.

To answer your last question, what I'm thinking I want to try to do right now is sequence an analog synth and drum modules as a tool for solo composition which can later be transfered into a live band setting, with say a live drummer, at the least. I tried the computer thing, and found it to be more like work and less like music. I was thinking about something like the pittsburgh modular foundation, which is a 3u full synth voice, and then get a few extra things like a delay, and then a bunch of drum modules and a drum computer module, and a sequencer. And of course play bass w/ fx and sing, which is what I prefer to do on stage (so you guys know this isn't too wildly off-topic).

So much for my brief post. Interested in your opinion. Again, great stuff, love the demos. It also makes perfect sense to me that you don't try to replicate a synth with your bass per say, since you played analog synth before you picked up the bass. It wasn't until I started delving into synthesis, as well as analog fx boxes, that I realized the fixed harmonic overtone structure of the midrange of abass guitar will always keep it sounding like a guitar, and only a synth oscillator with ever oscillate like a synth lol! I hope this paragraph made sense. And also, lord knows guys like John Davis have gotten really goddamned good at it, so I believe it is an utterly worth endeavor, don't get me wrong.

[Flux Jetson]

Wow ... cool ... someone that hasn't been infected with Twitter-itus. The <140 character virus has not crept into your brain and shrunk it's ability to communicate or to develope larger ideas and thoughts. GOOD FOR YOU!

I'll address your post here in a bit. Thanks, lots to chew on, and relevance as well!

[Nerevar]

Have you looked into quadrophonic pickups at all? It might be an excellent way to eq each if your strings independently

[Flux Jetson]

Originally Posted by Nerevar

Have you looked into quadrophonic pickups at all? It might be an excellent way to eq each if your strings independently

I've never even heard of those, let alone checked into their use!

I'll certainly do some research on them! Thanks for the tip!

BTW, I'm going to quote this comment of yours in the "X-Bass" thread I've started. It might fire-off some discussion about them.

[Passinwind]

Originally Posted by Flux Jetson

I've never even heard of those, let alone checked into their use!

Take a look at the Roland V-Bass system for starters then. The idea has been around for decades though, see Phil Lesh ca. early 70s and, a little later, Wal basses for prior art.

[Flux Jetson]

Ok, on to your post, Amos. Thanks for taking some time to post your ideas on your own plans. So then, onward ....

Originally Posted by amos

..... I am actually more into tonal synth sounds and songwriting and performance. Eurorack is appealing to me because of its small form factor, price point, and the eurorack module companies here in the US. Pittsburgh modular for instance makes minimal-looking but great sounding stuff, with big ole classic moog-type knobs.

I hear ya mangs. I was (stress "was") interested in the Pittsburgh stuff, until I saw this video and got a perspective of how itsy-bitsy things are. Anytime an operator has to use the ~tip~ of their finger to turn a knob because the panel is so tightly engineered or packed-full of patchcords, it kinda kills it for me ....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hS2A3W-EZOY

And for $1695 for the Pittsburgh Foundation ... http://www.analoguehaven.com/pittsbu...ar/foundation/ .... I think there are perhaps better alternatives.

Take a look at the Arrick (aka "Synthesizers.Com" -- or -- even better know as just simply "Dot Com") BOX-11 based systems. The BOX11 system is $1500 ... http://www.synthesizers.com/box11.html ... and it actually has "big ole classic Moog-type knobs". You don't get any closer to the old Moog format, look, and feel than you do with Roger Arrick's modular stuff.

Here's a link to the entire "BOX11 systems" page that shows a number of possible combos, all the way up to 66 space monsters!! http://www.synthesizers.com/box11systems.html

Yes, I am highly biased on this modular synth stuff. But it isn't because I haven't researched the holy crap out of the entire pile of formats and types, that is for sure!

BOX11 system ($1500 -- fully expandable, of course - and if you flip the solid walnut endbells around it can be made to sit flat at a slight angle rather than stand up as it does in this picture, like the lower unit does in the picture just below this one) ....



BOX22 system ($2,716 -- again, fully expandable, or course. This one is my all time favorite. The perfect little 3-VCO synth. Like a "Super Minimoog") ....



And so on, all the way up to the Box66 system. And of course their are the portable systems that are built into clamshell folding boxes, and the studio systems built into mega-high quality solid walnut cases. And there's also the rack-adaptor systems, like what I'm using for my bass routing setup .....



Before I went with the metal rack adaptor rails that I use now (above) I started out using some oak trim stock that I got at Lowes for like $4.00 for 3-feet. I cut it to fit inside of a 12u rack, predrilled mounting holes in it to accept the Dot Com modules, and went from there. Very inexpensive solution to mounting the "MU" ("Moog Unit") sized synth modules.





But the Box11 system is something I favor at the moment. The basic Box11 frame lends itself to many mods, in fact I'm nearly ready to adopt one of those ino my own DIY modular rig soon. $150, and it includes all of the DC-squid, two mults and is powered by my 28space modular rig via a 5-pin/4-conductor DIN cable. Instead of buying the walnut endbells I will just DIY my own out of something like 1x4 pine, they are easy to make due to the way Roger designed the basic BOX11 frame.



Of course I'll post my progress with that addition here in this very thread soon.

Originally Posted by amos

..... I really love pretty much everything about the Buchla systems, especially the fact that the few people who can afford them are more prone to using them to a musical end; Richard Lainheart (RIP) and Alessandro Cortini for instance, work strictly in the Buchla domain. The multi-timbrality and patch-memory, among other things, seem to lend the Buchla systems to more music writing and less bleep blooping, as well as less headaches for playing live!

It was the bleep-blooping that originally turned me off to modular stuff as well, until I delved a little deeper. For the last year I'd pretty much made up my mind on a semi-modular with a built in keyboard of some sort.

Lastly the dotcom stuff has that warm, vintage, vibey analog tone that we all know and love, the sound of the ladder filter for instance. this is what originally got me into analog synthesis, so perhaps a dotcom system is a better idea.

So while I would love live performance, size, and musicality to be the primary goals, I think I will have to make sacrifices somewhere, since dreaming about a Buchla is a waste of my time at this point, and probably the near-future as well.

The Oberheim SEM is probably my favorite monosynth sound. I had pretty much had my mind set on the new two-voice pro (when it starts shipping), and then I went and started looking at modular stuff like a dummy. The TVP will retail for $3500. You can buy a lot of fun modular stuff for less than that. Also, I don't have $3500

I'm not much of an R2D2 sounds kinda person, the best example of the type of synth rock I like to (attempt!) make is the ELP song "Toccata". That pretty much sums it up. As for the Oberheim sounds, the new reissue SEM patchpanel module is a thing to behold. I totally LOVE that thing. My original plan was to use the SEM as the central core of my system, and use some Dot Com modules as modulators and expansion. As I got into the Dot Com stuff I realized that I could easily create anything the SEM does with a few Dot Com modules, so I ended up going full-on Dot Com. Zero regrets!

I will say that there is a VST out there called the OPX and OPX Pro that NAIL .. and I mean NAIL ... the sound of the Oberheim OB-X and OB-Xa ... and it's pretty inexpensive as well. Look it up, check out the numerous videos of it as well. It just KILLS the Oberheim sound as perfectly as it's gonna get. FAR and AWAY better than the Arturia SEMv ... not even on the same planet. It does Subdivisions, Countdown, Camera Eye, Tom Sawyer .. without even breaking a sweat.

Originally Posted by amos

..... I did not know about the surface-mount vs. through-hole thing. That certainly counts for something. I would imagine that some of the discrete modules use through-hole though.

Yea, surface mount totally turns me off. It makes it's way into everything. It is even now in "boutique" stomp boxes. People that don't know any different think they are buying hand wired/hand made gear when in fact it's just more robotically constructed surface-mount crap (which is totally non-repairable and non-moddable by nearly anyone that solders). I consider myself a pretty highly experienced solder jockey, and there is very little surface mount stuff I would even DARE to attempt to repair or modify.

For those that are not familiar with what "surface mount" is I'll do another post this morning regarding the differences, with pics to illustrate the point.

Originally Posted by amos

..... To answer your last question, what I'm thinking I want to try to do right now is sequence an analog synth and drum modules as a tool for solo composition which can later be transfered into a live band setting, with say a live drummer, at the least. I tried the computer thing, and found it to be more like work and less like music. I was thinking about something like the pittsburgh modular foundation, which is a 3u full synth voice, and then get a few extra things like a delay, and then a bunch of drum modules and a drum computer module, and a sequencer. And of course play bass w/ fx and sing, which is what I prefer to do on stage (so you guys know this isn't too wildly off-topic).

You are on precisely the exact same road I am on. So stick around here, you may find some things I'm doing usefull. And moving even closer towards that same end that you and I are both progressing towards, I'm also constructing a set (2-sets, actually) of Hammond bass pedals that are converted to midi and CV output to control cv/modular synth and FX, as well as control/trigger anything that is midi-fired. There are links to those projects at the very top of this page in the first post.

Originally Posted by amos

..... So much for my brief post. Interested in your opinion. Again, great stuff, love the demos. It also makes perfect sense to me that you don't try to replicate a synth with your bass per say, since you played analog synth before you picked up the bass. It wasn't until I started delving into synthesis, as well as analog fx boxes, that I realized the fixed harmonic overtone structure of the midrange of abass guitar will always keep it sounding like a guitar, and only a synth oscillator with ever oscillate like a synth lol! I hope this paragraph made sense. And also, lord knows guys like John Davis have gotten really goddamned good at it, so I believe it is an utterly worth endeavor, don't get me wrong.

Geddy Lee was an enormous inspiration for me with the way he incorporated bass guitar, analog/digital synths, bass pedals, and sample triggering all simultaneously.



My other mega-strong influence is Keith Emerson of the progressive power trio ELP (Emerson, Lake, and Palmer). In fact is was ELP that drove me to begin playing music in the first place. Keith's use of multi-instruments was highly inspirational, and I really REALLY love the way he made the Hammond into a credible rock machine. No-one else in the history of rock music ever did what Emerson did with the Hammond (or the synth for that matter). What most metal-heads are totally unaware of is that 90% of the heavy metal guitar riffs heard are nearly direct replays of the riffing and phrasing that Emerson was doing in the early 70's on his Hammond C3 (played through Leslie cabs that were powered with Hiwatt bass and guitar amp heads .. my own Leslie is powered with a Marshall Lead/Bass guitar amp that I built from a kit). When I hear most heavy metal of the 80's I hear Emerson's riffs everywhere. I think those riffs and phrasings got into many guitar players' heads sortof unconsciously.

Emerson is most definitely my "Jimi Hendrix" or my "Geddy Lee" .... he is my absolute rock hero and is the person that infuenced me the most, Geddy Lee is a very strong second place.













Anyhow, keep on truckin'. Stay tuned.

[Flux Jetson]

NOTE: I've moved this discussion from the X-Bass - Experimental 3 Pickup Bass thread to this thread so that the other thread doesn't get boinked out of "BASSES" over to the "AMPS" forum. This discussion is more appropriate for this thread. Thanks!

Originally Posted by KeithAlanK

Thanks for the info.

I "get" your signal flow and the reasons behind it, having read the other threads, and completely agree that it's a superior way to go for those inclined towards the complex.

My own immediate bi-amp future (and past) are a bit more traditional, in that I have no intent at this time to mod my basses for two or more outputs, but things change in our quest for tone.... Pretty much just lows, highs + full-range direct ASAP. (I reserve the right to add a guitar amp with all the attendant noises later. Sometimes I miss playing guitar, and my band is but a three-piece).

Just scored a Peavey MAX preamp today for $85--the same model I borrowed with great results in the studio. It's 2 channels, tube and solid state, fully footswitch selectable and combinable, with a built-in crossover and EFX loop and a good XLR out (compared to other brand's direct outputs, which often suck in my experience).
I'll be using it full-range for now, until I can get a good deal on a stereo power amp and another 410 cabinet.

One of the best parts of your system is that you mix it down for FOH. Very wise, and pretty much mandatory. It's just too far outside the experience and comfort level of most live engineers to deal with multiple bass signals effectively.
I plan to mic my cabs with large diaphragm condensers while also running the direct out, then using a mixer onstage to insert compressors and combine into a single send for FOH. Since I need the mixer to combine a SubKick with a close-mic for bass drum anyway, it's not much more trouble to get complex with my own signal.

For local club gigs, our engineer is a bassist who I've been mixing for many years so giving him 3 bass channels isn't a big deal, but we've started touring a bit and on big multi-band shows, snake and board channels are precious.

The main problem I foresee is monitoring my mix onstage without having to make my way out in front of the stacks. Perhaps a high quality powered speaker in front of me instead of a vocal wedge? I have lots of in-ear monitor stuff to play with, but would rather not.
Hopefully I won't get blank stares when asking about the subwoofer crossover point, in order to better tailor my system to the PA on any given night.


Thanks for the discussion. I'm still processing all the options you've presented me (and others) in these threads.
Hopefully someone else will help get the topic back to new ideas on the X-Bass so that project moves forward and stays in the bass section, after all this amp talk.

Keith

Thanks (editing)

[howardcano]

Originally Posted by Nerevar

Have you looked into quadrophonic pickups at all? It might be an excellent way to eq each if your strings independently

Originally Posted by Flux Jetson

I've never even heard of those, let alone checked into their use!

Originally Posted by howardcano

Judging from your relentless pursuit of "THE SOUND", I'm going to bet that you'll soon be pursuing the use of a quad pickup and individual processing of each string. That will be a good read, too! One more step toward polyphony...

I guess I should have spoken louder. Ha!

[Flux Jetson]

Originally Posted by howardcano

I guess I should have spoken louder. Ha!

I caught that post of yours, I just thought you were goofing around. I didn't know there was actually such a critter.

[howardcano]

Originally Posted by Flux Jetson

I caught that post of yours, I just thought you were goofing around. I didn't know there was actually such a critter.

That's understandable, since my humor is often low-key enough (or simply not funny enough) that it is overlooked.

You can play around with making your own quad pickup by using some unshielded, solenoid-style inductors and small magnets. Use a pair of inductors per string for humbucking action. I got 1/4" cube neodynium magnets pretty cheap off Ebay when I was experimenting with single-string humbuckers for a tapping instrument. (The one-pickup-per-string arrangement is necessary to do proper electronic muting of strings, which is a big advantage if one taps in a sloppy manner-- and that's the way I do pretty much everything.)

[garmenteros]

I congratulate you on your work. If you for some reason ever decide to make a living off of building things you no doubt can pull it off. One thing I can't get around my head is in your initial posts you mention one of your main complaints being making all the strings sound the same and part of your inspiration for making this modular setup. I have this issue with some basses (stingray 4 being the most guilty) but never thought about different EQ for specific strings.

[Passinwind]

Originally Posted by Flux Jetson

I caught that post of yours, I just thought you were goofing around. I didn't know there was actually such a critter.

Besides the pieces I mentioned upthread, the 70s Ovation Magnum is another example, although IIRC it mixed the 4 coils to one channel right at the pickup. My electric upright works like that too, with individual trimpots per string.

[Nerevar]

Originally Posted by Flux Jetson

I've never even heard of those, let alone checked into their use!

I'll certainly do some research on them! Thanks for the tip!

BTW, I'm going to quote this comment of yours in the "X-Bass" thread I've started. It might fire-off some discussion about them.

By all means! Each string has its own coil and they can all be processed individually.

http://www.ubertar.com/hexaphonic/products.html#Pickups