Quote:
Originally Posted by bongomania Plus you have to distinguish between a buffer in the bypass mechanism versus a buffer in the effect signal path. Those two get conflated way too often.
(...) |
Excellent point. I agree.
The first should be called something like "bypass with electronic switching" or “active bypass switching”.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bongomania --What kinds of effect circuits can be made that include no buffer whatsoever? |
In theory any effect that has high input impedance and low out impedance doesn't need any buffering.
In practice not many circuits allow that. When the last stage is an op-amp, a buffer is not always needed but high impedance inputs are less common.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bongomania --Which pedals on the market happen to be very effective buffers when engaged? |
For obvious reasons, I can’t comment on this but designing a good buffer (i.e. low noise, high headroom, good in/out impedance...) is not that difficult. The point is, as always, not
what but
how and
why.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bongomania --Which pedals happen to be very effective buffers when bypassed? |
This is a tricky one.
The best buffer in the world will, inevitably, add something to the signal. If it is well designed and implemented it is likely that what it adds is below what we can hear.
However, if every pedal adds something as we use 10 pedals the cumulative effect of all the buffers in the chain can be audible. This is why true-bypass has its merits.
IMO, in an ideal world, a pedal board with more than 3-4 pedals should have an input buffer (the micro-thumpinator springs to mind), an output buffer and the pedals working in true-bypass.
The buffer should also have an electrostatic protection to discharge any charge that may be present on the musician side. This protects the pedals on the pedalboard.