Tracking weirdness involving the Freqbox and Boss buffers

[fightthepower]

Im in the process of rearranging my board, and found that placing a buffered Boss pedal in between an OC-2 or Octoplus and a Freqbox significantly improves the tracking of the Freqbox- even when there are no other pedals in the signal chain. Why might this be? Could it have something to do with impedance matching? Or maybe the buffer rolling off just enough the highs to aid in tracking?**

**In a recent thread I posted some clips and showed my findings that by placing an EQ or filter after an OC-2 will greatly improve the tracking of the Freqbox. I also just got a DOD Octoplus, and put it at the very beginning of my chain, before the OC-2 (boss buffer), and the Freqbox tracked it very well, just as well as the OC-2+EQ/filter combo.

Well, I started rearranging my board tonight, and was experimenting with the LS-2 and splitting up my octavers and the Freqbox into two chains so that I could blend different octaves and waveforms. For starters I put the OC-2 and Pollyanna in loop A, and the Octoplus and Freqbox in loop B, with the LS-2 set to A-B Mix (using its level knobs to solo either loop when not blending--

--When I did this, the Freqbox's tracking was way off-- with the Octoplus it now exhibited the same behavior it did with the OC-2. This made no sense so I tried a few things, and found that by placing any of my buffered Boss pedals in between the OC-2 or Octoplus and the Freqbox, that the tracking is spot on--- remove the Boss pedal, and it goes to crap!! When I made the above referenced clips, I was also very surprised at how well the Freqbox tracked the OC-2 solo'd all of a sudden, it wasn't perfect but wayyy better than I had remembered!! Well, I made those clips with a Boss GEB-7 in the chain, and now realize that it is why the Freqbox was miraculously tracking the OC-2 without the aid of EQ (my normal signal chain has only the OC-2's buffer, the rest in a true-bypass looper).

So to recap:
*Freqbox has trouble tracking solo'd suboctaves in the 'first' position (10-12th fret E string)
*Eq'ing out highs from suboctaver going into Freqbox significantly improves tracking (even with the true bypass BMS as an 'eq')
*Placing a bypassed Boss pedal in between an octaver and Freqbox has the same effect as Eq'ing on the Freqbox's tracking--

Is there an obvious explanation to this phenomenon?

[bongomania]

Interesting! Normally I'd say putting a buffer in line would tend to preserve more highs in the signal, rather than rolling any off. But I suppose it could be a "bad" buffer that rolls off the highs in a way that happens to be useful here? Don't know... Curious.

[fightthepower]

Originally Posted by bongomania

Interesting! Normally I'd say putting a buffer in line would tend to preserve more highs in the signal, rather than rolling any off. But I suppose it could be a "bad" buffer that rolls off the highs in a way that happens to be useful here? Don't know... Curious.

I keep a buffer at the beginning of my long chain for this reason, and have never been bothered by having a single boss buffer in my chain-- but I started thinking about the supposed 'tone sucking' Boss buffers and if they might have something to do with it (while under the assumption that 'tone suck'=loss of highs.)

I just tried a switching out a few different buffers in chain of Bass->OC-2->buffered pedal->Freqbox and found that:

Using a GFX25 (fx25b) as the buffer netted the best results-- reliable clean tracking down to "low B"; about the same results I get from Eq'ing pre-Freqbox

Boss buffers work well and get tracking down to low C, though using an actual Eq or BMS gets slightly cleaner tracking.

The DOD buffers in the old FX25's/Octoplus is such a tone sucker that it actually changes the tone coming out of the Freqbox when no other changes were made! It still improves the Freqbox's ability to track the OC-2, but only down to low D. Still an improvement from running an OC-2 straight into the Freqbox. Weird.

[RCCollins]

Originally Posted by bongomania

Interesting! Normally I'd say putting a buffer in line would tend to preserve more highs in the signal, rather than rolling any off. But I suppose it could be a "bad" buffer that rolls off the highs in a way that happens to be useful here? Don't know... Curious.

but is there really such a thing as a "bad" buffer?


and ftp, this MUST be your imagination because everybody knows true bypass is better

[fightthepower]

Do the old DOD pedals count as buffered? I'd say they're pretty bad if its the buffer sucking all that tone, though the effect itself is great! Or is it to do with mechanical switching/something different altogether?

I think Im just going to scrap my 'dual oscillator' idea (i think that's what i was trying to emulate anyway..), as it would now require a dummy buffer in the octoplus/freqbox loop... or I guess I could put the OC-2 in there as well, though it would limit me to the Pollyanna's squarewave in loop B- not a total loss but not ideal... diminishing returns if you will. Might not even be that great of an idea to start with, but at least I... figured something out, even if I don't know what it is yet.

[scotch]

Originally Posted by RCCollins

but is there really such a thing as a "bad" buffer?


and ftp, this MUST be your imagination because everybody knows true bypass is better

Bad buffers? Heck yeah! Old Musitronics buffers are horrible. Even someone with a True Bypass chip on their shoulder would notice it ! In the studio, I've also noticed some treble roll off when multiple Boss pedals are in series (and bypassed). Don't get me wrong, the modern Boss buffer is one of the better ones, but multiple buffers can get really squirrelly. Many of EH's pedals from a few years back also have notoriously bad buffers (like the original Bass Micro Synth).

[rnilson]

Originally Posted by fightthepower

I think Im just going to scrap my 'dual oscillator' idea (i think that's what i was trying to emulate anyway..), as it would now require a dummy buffer in the octoplus/freqbox loop... or I guess I could put the OC-2 in there as well, though it would limit me to the Pollyanna's squarewave in loop B- not a total loss but not ideal... diminishing returns if you will. Might not even be that great of an idea to start with, but at least I... figured something out, even if I don't know what it is yet.

No man, a dual oscillator is a great idea for the type of music you are doing. Square Wave under a Detuned Saw Wave is the "Reece Bass" sound. I wouldn't give up on it.

[Proton Lenny]

Fight The Power, I haven't seen a picture of your board in a while. All this talk about the Freqbox and such is making me want to see all that you are working with. You got any pictures for us? Or at least a list of the chain (I understand you are experimenting with it).

Proton

[fightthepower]

Originally Posted by rnilson

No man, a dual oscillator is a great idea for the type of music you are doing. Square Wave under a Detuned Saw Wave is the "Reece Bass" sound. I wouldn't give up on it.

I appreciate the encouragement

Ive reached a plateau recently (one of many), where I understand each individual effect and the basics of how they react to each other in series. Im happy with the tones I currently have, but my synthesis is still very rudimentary, and I have the tools to do a lot more than I am right now. Now that Ive figured out how to get the waveforms and make the filters/modulation move, the next logical step seems to be adding the 'second oscillator'- splitting/doubling the chain for processing the highs/lows or lows/lows with different waveforms/modulations&detuning/filter lfo subdivisions, etc... or something like that, just typing it out right now is helping me make sense of it all.

One thing that is proving difficult, is taking the information on reece bass effect chains and the like, and simplifying it into a limited (compared to softsynth) and static hardware setup. You could really get down with one of those midi switching systems.. It looks as though the 'dual oscillator' setup will inevitable require a complete redesign of my boards..... just when I thought I was done! (hell, I might as well make the pt2 a ptpro and get a second Freqbox so I don't have to quote "oscillator" hah)

Read stuff, stare at my pile of gear, scratching my head, plugging and unplugging, staring at my pile of gear, scratching my head, plug unplug test retest, damnit, cable is cutting out, staring at my pile of gear... scratching my head.. fix a george l or two, read more, scratch head.. plug unplug

Originally Posted by Proton Lenny

Fight The Power, I haven't seen a picture of your board in a while. All this talk about the Freqbox and such is making me want to see all that you are working with. You got any pictures for us? Or at least a list of the chain (I understand you are experimenting with it).

Proton

Signal chain? Heh.. good one.. Hehe.. Im trying to figure out how much signal processing to do in each of the two LS-2 loops, and how much is done after A and B are combined, so I don't really have a signal chain to speak of at the moment, but here's what it looks like right now:



Here's what I had going a few weeks ago- the brown dog recently switched boards, into the loop of the Grinder and replaced the Prometheus, otherwise the big board has been unchanged for a while.


Bass->Pt2: Pollyanna->OC-2->P&C->HOG->Geiger->Empress->BMS->GEB7->Devi Bass Fuzz->TrueBypass looper on PtPro:

board2-
Loop1-- Freqbox->Ringmod
Loop2-- Grinder with Brown Dog in its effects loop
loop3-- MF101
loop4-- BassMurf->Phaser
loop5-- Polychorus->DM-2
out to EBS Multicomp->Markbass LM2

[megadan]

That is a crazy setup! I'd love to play around with something like that someday.
Maybe it's time to start selling amps and basses and just buying pedals... I keep telling myself 'you can only play one bass at a time.'

[fightthepower]

The set up is a lot of fun, and I've changed it up a bit since last posting in this thread. Its a bit more complicated with two Freqbox's in parallel, one being fed and detuned/pitch shifted/etc by the HOG, but also more streamlined, having trimmed some of the extra filters, fuzz, etc from the setup and replaced by a CP251.

Im at a bit of a roadblock, with my USB audio interface + Ableton's MIDI timing being too rough to accomplish much of the synced MP201 LFO mod, and automation via Abletons envelopes through the MP201 I'd like to achieve in real-time, so for that and other reasons, a new interface is on my radar. Having trimmed off some of the fat, the bass rig is more efficient and much improved from the above pictures, and lots of fun to control with a MIDI keyboard through the MP201's MIDI/CV conversion.

[DonKartofflo]

Okay first I'm gonna say that I'm almost a total noob in synthesis but IMO you could just imitate a normal synth:

////////////FreqBox>>Ringmod n Stuff>>
Signal>>Split^^/////////////////////Back Together>>A/D/S/R>>Filter>>EQ>>Other>>Amp
////////////FreqBox>>Octaver for SubOctave^^



Wouldn't that be somehow a modular synth?
And please don't flame me for I don't know anything, I'm just guessing :P

I'm planning to do a similar setup:

////////////FreqBox>>Ringmod>>
Signal>>Split^^/////////////Back Together>>A/D/S/R/Comp.>>Filter>>EQ>>BMS>>Amp
/////////////Mothership>>>>>>>


Gonna take me a while to reach my goal though

[jbednarski]

Originally Posted by fightthepower

I appreciate the encouragement

Ive reached a plateau recently (one of many), where I understand each individual effect and the basics of how they react to each other in series. Im happy with the tones I currently have, but my synthesis is still very rudimentary, and I have the tools to do a lot more than I am right now. Now that Ive figured out how to get the waveforms and make the filters/modulation move, the next logical step seems to be adding the 'second oscillator'- splitting/doubling the chain for processing the highs/lows or lows/lows with different waveforms/modulations&detuning/filter lfo subdivisions, etc... or something like that, just typing it out right now is helping me make sense of it all.

One thing that is proving difficult, is taking the information on reece bass effect chains and the like, and simplifying it into a limited (compared to softsynth) and static hardware setup. You could really get down with one of those midi switching systems.. It looks as though the 'dual oscillator' setup will inevitable require a complete redesign of my boards..... just when I thought I was done! (hell, I might as well make the pt2 a ptpro and get a second Freqbox so I don't have to quote "oscillator" hah)

Read stuff, stare at my pile of gear, scratching my head, plugging and unplugging, staring at my pile of gear, scratching my head, plug unplug test retest, damnit, cable is cutting out, staring at my pile of gear... scratching my head.. fix a george l or two, read more, scratch head.. plug unplug



Signal chain? Heh.. good one.. Hehe.. Im trying to figure out how much signal processing to do in each of the two LS-2 loops, and how much is done after A and B are combined, so I don't really have a signal chain to speak of at the moment, but here's what it looks like right now:



Here's what I had going a few weeks ago- the brown dog recently switched boards, into the loop of the Grinder and replaced the Prometheus, otherwise the big board has been unchanged for a while.


Bass->Pt2: Pollyanna->OC-2->P&C->HOG->Geiger->Empress->BMS->GEB7->Devi Bass Fuzz->TrueBypass looper on PtPro:

board2-
Loop1-- Freqbox->Ringmod
Loop2-- Grinder with Brown Dog in its effects loop
loop3-- MF101
loop4-- BassMurf->Phaser
loop5-- Polychorus->DM-2
out to EBS Multicomp->Markbass LM2

Holy s***! In the last year I've owned just about all the pedals that are in your setup but never had them all running at the same time. How do you have any signal at all at the end of that chain? :/