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.
Boss GT 1000Core
- Thread starter Krisfield
- Start date
So happy with the core in my setup, just need to start getting a bank per song now so I can use it to its fullest
Yes, exactly. Core definitely offers more options. I read a lot about all the SY series pedals before deciding on the SY-200. Very easy to use, with patch memories, external footswitch control and midi options. Add external effects as needed.
Now, if only Boss added some SY functionality to Core in a future update. Just dreaming.
Here is a bit of little know info on the SY-1000.
There are four amp blocks, so you can use all 4 at the same time, four cabinet blocks, four separate EQ's one each output,
each INST block has an Amp and an EQ.
The Main and SUB outputs can be split into individual moveable outputs anywhere in the signal chain.
So you have a total of 9 EQ blocks, and with the four tone sources (3 x inst blocks each can be synth, or guitar models, or bass models), and one ormal guitar pickup input,
this lets you run a quadraphonic setup (if you wanted to).
The GT-1000 has two amp blocks, the SY-1000 has four, even though the SY-1000 only has one divider/combiner, the 3 inst tone sources also have 3 combiners (1 each)
The SY-300 and SY-1000 both has three synth generators/tone sources, where the SY-1 ad SY-200 only has a single tone generator.
There are four amp blocks, so you can use all 4 at the same time, four cabinet blocks, four separate EQ's one each output,
each INST block has an Amp and an EQ.
The Main and SUB outputs can be split into individual moveable outputs anywhere in the signal chain.
So you have a total of 9 EQ blocks, and with the four tone sources (3 x inst blocks each can be synth, or guitar models, or bass models), and one ormal guitar pickup input,
this lets you run a quadraphonic setup (if you wanted to).
The GT-1000 has two amp blocks, the SY-1000 has four, even though the SY-1000 only has one divider/combiner, the 3 inst tone sources also have 3 combiners (1 each)
The SY-300 and SY-1000 both has three synth generators/tone sources, where the SY-1 ad SY-200 only has a single tone generator.
Great information, thanks! You explanation helps clarify why going with SY-200 with Core is the better option than SY-1000 - for me!Here is a bit of little know info on the SY-1000.
There are four amp blocks, so you can use all 4 at the same time, four cabinet blocks, four separate EQ's one each output,
each INST block has an Amp and an EQ.
The Main and SUB outputs can be split into individual moveable outputs anywhere in the signal chain.
So you have a total of 9 EQ blocks, and with the four tone sources (3 x inst blocks each can be synth, or guitar models, or bass models), and one ormal guitar pickup input,
this lets you run a quadraphonic setup (if you wanted to).
The GT-1000 has two amp blocks, the SY-1000 has four, even though the SY-1000 only has one divider/combiner, the 3 inst tone sources also have 3 combiners (1 each)
The SY-300 and SY-1000 both has three synth generators/tone sources, where the SY-1 ad SY-200 only has a single tone generator.
I play and love old analogue monosynths. The playing experience, the immediacy, simplicity, physical presence and unpredictability can not be simulated by software or menu-driven hardware synths. Even the sound is not the main issue any more, as modern synths can and do sound amazing, but the playability. Trust me, I’ve tried, but always return to my antique analogues: Yamaha CS-15, Korg MS-20, Moog Rogue and so on. They have limitations. I love them. For example, my Yamaha CS-5 (small analogue mono synth of late 70’s) has two oscillator waveforms, a filter, one LFO, one ADSR and not much more. Limited, but lovely!
So, it surprised me how close to the old analog feel I was able to get with the SY-200. Some of its sounds are nice, most are just ok. But it is very immediate: select preset, play a bit, adjust the three parameters. Like the result? Good. Don’t like it? Try the next one. I spent three days playing and tweaking, selecting and editing presets for 20-ish songs, and had great fun!
If I’d had a SY-1000 instead, I would still be crafting complex patches, month and a half later. Too many options can lead me to a programming bubble, in a completely different mindset. I’d be playing less, having less fun. I’m a bass player first, so I need a bass, an amp and some effects. The SY-200 is a nice to have toy to bring some extra colour to live playing.
So, SY-200 with GT-1000Core seems to be the best option for me. But we’ll see, in a week or so!
I absolutely will!Do NOT start experimenting with the dividers and mixers in the Core.
Something that I think is worth documenting. I have very hot pickups (Dimarzio Model P) on my main P Bass. I haven’t been happy with my clean tones. So now I cut the Input Gain all the way to -20db, and then makeup that gain with the Hard Limiter after the Speaker Sim block. I can now get super crispy clean tones.
In your video you mention using your drives with a loop blender. Could you explain a bit about that? How do you process the sound that you blend to the drives? Mainly I am interested in your HM-2 sound, I have an on/off my board relationship with mine for 5 years now haha!
Or maybe you could direct me to one of your videos where you explain more? There's a bit too many too check them all
.
In your video you mention using your drives with a loop blender. Could you explain a bit about that? How do you process the sound that you blend to the drives? Mainly I am interested in your HM-2 sound, I have an on/off my board relationship with mine for 5 years now haha!
Or maybe you could direct me to one of your videos where you explain more? There's a bit too many too check them all
of course man, i don’t use a loop blender on all my drives, I use a damnation audio loop blender, well I actually use 2! 1 for my fuzzrocious Bongripper and the other for my coloursound
my Hm2w (I have the waza version not the og) is just straight up in line and I love it, I’m actually recording a video on it tomorrow would you believe it! I’ve just found a sound that I really like that works for my setup
video going live on my channel friday morning, but dm me any questions or comment on the video as i guess its not really a gt1000 Q.
Another question for y'all....
I'd like to set up two mono outputs, the idea being that one goes to an amp, the other to a DI. The output to the amp should not include any amp sims or cab sims, and the DI should have options for amp/cab sims.
I'm thinking I could use a divider near the end of the signal chain, set in Dual mode. Channel 1 goes to the DI, so it can use an amp sim, and output via the R/Mono jack (thus it uses the cab sims). Channel 2 goes to the physical amp, so it can use Send 2 in "Branch" mode, skipping the amp sim.
However, by default this will mix the Ch1 and Ch2 signals, thus reducing the effect of the amp sim by 50%.
So, what's the most effective way to handle this without halving or doubling the signal output? It seems like the options are:
• Put a copy of the same amp sim from Ch1 into Ch2, after the Send2
• Set the mixer to Pan L/R, and set the A:B balance to 100:0
• Scrap all this, put a single amp sim earlier in the signal chain, set the divider into Dual mode and just use outputs A for amp, B for DI, which frees up Send 2 for an effect, not care that the amp will get some of the amp and cab sims
Any reason to do one over the other?
I'd like to set up two mono outputs, the idea being that one goes to an amp, the other to a DI. The output to the amp should not include any amp sims or cab sims, and the DI should have options for amp/cab sims.
I'm thinking I could use a divider near the end of the signal chain, set in Dual mode. Channel 1 goes to the DI, so it can use an amp sim, and output via the R/Mono jack (thus it uses the cab sims). Channel 2 goes to the physical amp, so it can use Send 2 in "Branch" mode, skipping the amp sim.
However, by default this will mix the Ch1 and Ch2 signals, thus reducing the effect of the amp sim by 50%.
So, what's the most effective way to handle this without halving or doubling the signal output? It seems like the options are:
• Put a copy of the same amp sim from Ch1 into Ch2, after the Send2
• Set the mixer to Pan L/R, and set the A:B balance to 100:0
• Scrap all this, put a single amp sim earlier in the signal chain, set the divider into Dual mode and just use outputs A for amp, B for DI, which frees up Send 2 for an effect, not care that the amp will get some of the amp and cab sims
Any reason to do one over the other?
I think the best way would be to set up dual channels with Ch A, Main Out to Amp, and Ch B Sub Out to DI. Ch A you can turn off the amp and speaker sim, Ch B can have what ever you want.
H'm
Forgive my ignorance, but what does "Sub Out" mean in the Boss/GT world?
Also, in case I wasn't clear, I have the Core, so "DI out" is going to a 1/4" jack. From there it has to go to a separate DI box.
Was there not a trick to use a disengaged mono effect to sum stereo signals to mono? That way you could just use outputR and outputL as the 2 mono outputs not needing to sacrifice a Send/Sub as an outlet. Maybe I remember this incorrectly! Please correct me if I am wrong!
About the Sub Out, look at hardware settings/other:
Amp Control; Exp Hold; Ground Lift; Other - Boss GT-1000CORE Parameter Manual [Page 54]
Using the send this way you get a dedicated output EQ for free!
About the Sub Out, look at hardware settings/other:
Amp Control; Exp Hold; Ground Lift; Other - Boss GT-1000CORE Parameter Manual [Page 54]
Using the send this way you get a dedicated output EQ for free!
Sub out basically let’s you use the send of one of the effects loops as an output you can place anywhere
Sub Out is a term for was is basically another, but independent, Main Out pair.
The stereo pairing can also be "un-linked" into separate mono units.
The stereo pairing can also be "un-linked" into separate mono units.
I remember someone saying they were using the Core for Ric-O-Sound with their Rickenbacker. I have tried to get this to work but I just can't figure it out.
I can easily get both pickups into the core separately. I can also get output from both left and right core outputs.
The problem is there seems to be no way to keep the signals separate as they pass through the core.
Anyone who knows how to do this please help.
I can easily get both pickups into the core separately. I can also get output from both left and right core outputs.
The problem is there seems to be no way to keep the signals separate as they pass through the core.
Anyone who knows how to do this please help.
