Octaver Tracking

deekay911 · #1 06-05-2008, 02:34 PM

I see people talking about 'tracking' in relation to Octavers - how would you describe that?

nicfargo · #2 06-05-2008, 02:38 PM

It keeps up with your playing from what I can gather. If it doesn't track well, you won't hear the octaver effect on all notes you play (especially when playing really fast or already low notes). This term relates to other pedals as well. Some pedals just track very poorly and you'll get the effect intended only 90% of the time.

bongomania · #3 06-05-2008, 02:58 PM

"Tracking" has a very specific meaning. It means how well a digital effect "reads" your incoming signal and then computes the right output effect signal. If a digital processor reads too slowly (especially with bass notes, which have very long /slow wavelengths), then it has a harder time putting out the right note in response. If it reads quickly enough but doesn't have enough computation power to make the correct decision fast enough, then too it will have a hard time putting out the right effected note.

There's a lot of grey area between "digital" and "analog" actually... I'm saying "tracking" is exclusively a digital problem, but in reality there are "analog" circuits which rely on digital-like functions for tracking, which blurs the definitions.

dannybuoy · #4 06-05-2008, 03:00 PM

On most analogue octavers, the low notes will warble as it tries to duplicate an octave below. It's like it can't work out which octave range you're playing and the generated note bounces up and down between 2 octaves.

deekay911 · #5 06-05-2008, 04:00 PM

So this is partly why analog is 'better' than digital in some cases (like older design pedals?)

kevteop · #6 06-05-2008, 04:03 PM

Nah. Analogue circuits tend to have more warmth and character, whereas digital effects sound very clean and precise, but not necessarily very musical. That's why people tend to gravitate towards analogue gear.

I think in an octave pedal, most people would prefer good polyphonic digital tracking (I don't think there is an example of polyphonic analogue tracking, I don't think it's ever been attempted) but an all-analogue audio path. Sadly the only such pedal I know of is the forthcoming Chunk Systems Octavius Squeezer, which is bundled with a bunch of other effects, will cost a fortune, and nobody knows how good the tracking is yet.

bongomania · #7 06-05-2008, 04:56 PM

The MXR Pitch Transposer was polyphonic, or maybe "omniphonic" is a better word- everything at the input would be transposed, regardless of frequency content. It wasn't "tracking" anything, it simply multiplied or divided the input by whatever amount you specified. The "blue face" version was analog, the later "black face" version was digital; the blue one is coveted to this day as one of the best analog harmonizers ever, while nobody wants the black one.

As far as analog polyphonic pitch-tracking being "attempted" (in addition to the MXR), there were a number of guitar and piano pitch-tracking systems that used separate pickups per string, essentially allowing polyphony by having multiple monophonic trackers in parallel on one instrument.

JanusZarate · #8 06-05-2008, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deekay911

So this is partly why analog is 'better' than digital in some cases (like older design pedals?)

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevteop

Nah. Analogue circuits tend to have more warmth and character, whereas digital effects sound very clean and precise, but not necessarily very musical. That's why people tend to gravitate towards analogue gear.

But over the last few decades since the advent of digital effects, this has changed dramatically. It's becoming more difficult to tell them apart. While at one point, the medium was to blame, that's no longer the case. Besides, I've used some rather "dry" and "plain" analog pedals as well.

On a side note... depending on the effect and what you're aiming for, digital may be generally better or worse for that application. Example: want polyphonic tracking in a compact octave pedal? The EHX Micro POG is the best out there, and it's digital. But what if you want the glitches, the warbles, the "warmth" and dirt? Analog is still the way to go, but a pedal like the Digitech Whammy acts very much like an analog octaver would (until you start shifting with the treadle).

With delay pedals, the distinction is more blurred than ever... with more digital delay pedals than ever being able to nail (and even outdo) the sounds of their analog counterparts, it can get tricky (if not impossible) to tell which is which unless you're looking at the simpler, more straightforward delay pedals. For example, the MXR Carbon Copy is a good example of a good analog delay with perks, and the DD-6 is a good example of a digital delay with perks. But throw an EHX Stereo Memory Man with Hazarai, a digital pedal, into the mix... in a blind test, you're going to struggle knowing which is which based on sound alone unless you know a few things about what digital can do that analog can't.

But again, I'm not trying to tout the superiority of digital (because there are plenty of digital effects pedals that sound awful)... I'm simply pointing out that I'd be careful when it comes to assuming that the analog/digital stereotypes still apply in full force. They don't. And again, it all depends on what you're looking to get out of a particular effect.

Jazz Ad · #9 06-05-2008, 05:14 PM

It's not a digital thing. Analogic pedals can have tracking issues too.

bongomania · #10 06-05-2008, 05:34 PM

If and only if they use logic to determine the pitch. Logic is in that "middle ground" between digital and analog.

kevteop · #11 06-05-2008, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MysticBoo

But over the last few decades since the advent of digital effects, this has changed dramatically. It's becoming more difficult to tell them apart. While at one point, the medium was to blame, that's no longer the case. Besides, I've used some rather "dry" and "plain" analog pedals as well.

Yeah, 100% agree. We tend to cherry-pick the most successful analogue circuits, and it's easier to do that because we've got decades of experience to base our decisions on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MysticBoo

On a side note... depending on the effect and what you're aiming for, digital may be generally better or worse for that application. Example: want polyphonic tracking in a compact octave pedal? The EHX Micro POG is the best out there, and it's digital. But what if you want the glitches, the warbles, the "warmth" and dirt? Analog is still the way to go,

Again, agreed. I'd love to have both a Micro POG and an OC-2 on my board, but I don't really have room for two octavers and I love the sound my OC-2 produces so I've never bought a Micro POG. It's an impressive unit though (and I'm a sucker for EHX pedals).

Quote:

Originally Posted by MysticBoo

With delay pedals, the distinction is more blurred than ever... with more digital delay pedals than ever being able to nail (and even outdo) the sounds of their analog counterparts,

I've got a digital delay here (Line 6 Echo Park - which admittedly I have put up for sale recently but only because I need more features) and the tape and analogue modes really are excellent. I've always trashed Line 6 for their "modelling" efforts but their delays are so sodding useful and sound surprisingly good.

I think if you can only have one delay, it makes a lot of sense to go digital. Of course if you're a studio you wouldn't ever own any Line 6 gear at all, and you'd have all manner of classic examples available instead, but for a live board you'd need the flexibility you can only get from a software-based delay.