Every time I see the picture my eyes see "Mr. Octabvre"
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
3Leaf Audio Club - Episode 2
- Thread starter fivestringgecko
- Start date
Is the Overload just a rebranded Tim switch or is it something else?
It also seems the Tone knob has a wider range to it, dubbier CCW, synthier CW
It also seems the Tone knob has a wider range to it, dubbier CCW, synthier CW
I read this differently (possibly). The tone knob function sounds like it will be different to what it's been over the entire history of the pedal dating back to mkI. It's always been OC-2 on the left, Octave Divider on the right. Now it's a different description which doesn't quite match what it used to be, although it may be the same concept. The Octave Divider side has always had some significant grit and harmonic saturation to it, which has maybe been offloaded to the overload switch, which might effectively take two available sounds and turn them into four (clean OC-2, saturated OC-2, clean Divider, saturated Divider). We won't know for certain until they're out in the wild. I'm still not a fan of the smaller form factor with two footswitches relative to my large shoe size, so I'll be sticking with my old school white and red large box mkI for the time being, but I do hope these sound great and sell well.
Seems like a different function entirely based on the description.
Interesting - in that case it certainly seems like it’s more of an MK4 in a MK3 case.
Iterative naming is such a tricky thing. All I know is this: Put this in a larger case with the footswitches more spread out and it's an instant buy-and-try for me
I could be wrong, but it sounded to me like he was just describing the tone knob without outright saying "OC-2" or "Octave Divider". It sounded to me like, if anything, maybe the (formerly) "Tim" switch had changed it's function a little bit.
Marketing do be marketing sometimes.
Marketing do be marketing sometimes.
Agreed on all points. It could definitely be different ways of marketing OC-2 versus Divider.
You're in luck! He already has: the Octabvre MKI and Octabvre MKII. No need for a new enclosure design.
Hmm, I don't see it this way at all. I view the smaller knob for the suboctave volume as a functional choice: that's not a setting one tweaks as often, and the smaller knob means it won't get bumped by accident.
This is the key question.
I also "read this differently (possibly)." To me, the language of the email suggests that the function of the tone knob is the same (varying tone), but how it produces tonal difference and what tones it produces are different. But that feels like a big enough change to justify MK4 so maybe it really is just a different description for the same concept (plus a wider range)
And then there's the idea of a "separation control" (which I address more fully in my response to the two comments below) which further supports the interpretation that the tone knob has changed.Whatever it is, it's goofy we're all this confused. Customers should know the details of what they are buying. I hope he clarifies how this circuit is different from the MKIII.
Intriguing theory. Why do you think Spencer is hesitant to use that language? That's how he's described the Octabvre in the past.
- For example, the manual for my Octabvre MKII says: "The sound quality of the octave down signal. Fully counter-clockwise is a functional equivalent of the classic OC-2 circuit. As the tone knob is turned up, the sound becomes fuzzier and starts to take up more of the frequency spectrum."
- And the manual for my Octabvre MKIII says: "TONE blends between two separate sub octave tone circuits. With TONE all the way counter clockwise and TIM on, the sound is identical to the OC-2. Everyone loves that sound. But you should experiment with the TONE and TIM controls."
That goes without saying lol. After all, we are talking about 3 Leaf Audio 
@Iommian posited that production of a larger format Octabvre may be impeded by a need to design a new enclosure. My point is that ~1590BB-sized Octabvres already exist, not that they are cheap or in stock.
@Iommian posited that production of a larger format Octabvre may be impeded by a need to design a new enclosure. My point is that ~1590BB-sized Octabvres already exist, not that they are cheap or in stock.
I have the old school mini as well and think it sounds great too. The variation in the tone knob and the adjustability to get the volume just right really sets it apart from other OC-2 variants. The only thing that bugs me is the always present Tim mode. It's like too much Timmy. At lower settings with the octave blended back it's not too bad but if I blend in more of the octave, the PA subs are getting crushed. I mean I like it, the soundman.....not so much. I've received a few "looks" when using this on gigs.I'm perfectly happy with my old school mini; had the latest iteration and even Tim Lefebvre himself said it doesn't sound as good. I appreciate Spencer trying new things, but for me if it ain't broke
I'm currently running an old mkI Octabvre (big white and red box). It received the Tim-tuning mod that predates the inclusion of the Tim switch. I think it works exceedingly well for blended sounds in the 50% or less range. For me I'm almost always going for a Sledgehammer type of sound (OC-2 side of the tone knob, 50/50 blend), but I do have a few spots where I need the sub solo function. In those instances I do find the Tim-tuning to be a bit much. Fortunately my Source Audio EQ2 can easily high pass for that situation. My dream version of this pedal would be one where Tim-tuning was engaged while the main pedal footswitch was turned on, and then Tim-tuning would be disabled when the sub solo footswitch was engaged. For my purposes that would be the best of both worlds.
When I read the description of the tone knob, I thought it described the existing function of the tone knob pretty well. The OC-2 is a rich subby thing and the Octave Divider has some grit/girth... BUT sound AND language are subjective so your ears, or your interpretation of the text may vary.
What sounds better: "I copied these 2 circuits and you can pan between them" or "I've created a circuit that has this effect"?
Thanks!Info is posted on the previous page:
It's the internet, EVERYTHING is controversial
He hasn't been putting the manuals on his site for a bit, here's one of the previous version's manual (seems like he tweaks the wording for each release, nothing major)
