The problem with Sugar Britches is that it's been out-of-stock for some time...
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.
Cross-Over (Crossover or Splitter) pedals
- Thread starter BurningSkies
- Start date
The problem with Sugar Britches is that it's been out-of-stock for some time...
Have you had a chance to try to use the merge button on the JDI to mix the two (crossed-over) signals? Did it work well?
I sent an email query to Radial about it just this morning...
So what do you think about the Singlecross?
Have you experienced the second issue pointed out in post No. 127 in this thread? (i.e., the lack volume controls/lower gain) Thank you.
!There seem to be internal switches to select between affected highs or lows (current version only does high), and also to turn it into a standard full range blender pedal.
Not sure why there are two sets of switches for that crossover / blend thing, but we will see !
There seem to be internal switches to select between affected highs or lows (current version only does high), and also to turn it into a standard full range blender pedal.
Not sure why there are two sets of switches for that crossover / blend thing, but we will see !
Good news indeed!
i love the Singlecross, use it all the time on my Bass VI board. It's near the start of my signal chain then I have two parallel paths which each have an amp/cab sim and then I use a JHS Summing Amp to blend the signals together with the amp sims (Tech 21 VT Bass and Leeds) volume knobs controlling the output volume and blend ratio of the two paths.
I have just installed Sugar Britches on my pedalboard. I am looking forward to next gig!
I'm investigating a crossover-type setup, but with an added wrinkle: I want it to be compatible with dual-output basses, such as a Rickenbacker 4003's Ric-O-Sound output. I've looked at crossover circuits from Musikding such as the Pro-Cessor, in which the crossover is basically LPF and HPF running in parallel; both fed by a single input as supplied, but which shouldn't be too hard to separate. I could use normalled jacks, so that plugging in a single jack feeds both circuits.
(The Pro-Cessor circuit uses 24dB/Oct filters, which might be too steep for a "simple" application such as the bass, and the crossover frequency is fixed, so it's not quite right for my application.)
I know the Line 6 Helix Stomp can do that, and I could get one of those for an easier life, I suppose!
(The Pro-Cessor circuit uses 24dB/Oct filters, which might be too steep for a "simple" application such as the bass, and the crossover frequency is fixed, so it's not quite right for my application.)
I know the Line 6 Helix Stomp can do that, and I could get one of those for an easier life, I suppose!
Digital is a very good option, I don't have a dual output bass but I use a Quad Cortex and I split my signal right after the tuner: one split is my mono pedals, the other is clean (with an optional OC-5). Then on the QC I can apply any HPF/LPF (with adjustable slopes) I want to the signals to combine them.
If you want to stay analog, the Morningstar ML10X would be fun. Dual inputs, then get separate Broughton HPF and LPF pedals, and then you have loops for 8 more pedals. You can have different presets combining pedals in all kinds of different ways.
Can you explain what you are trying to do? Cut all the highs from the neck pickup and all the lows from the bridge pickup?
The Omnilooper (which is an awesome kit which may unfortunately no longer be available) uses split FX Loop paths for the HPF and LPF signals and has the option of pre-loop or post-loop for each filter, so if you selected "post-loop" you could plug each output into the FX return of its respective loop and get them mixed into one output. You could even send one of the bass outputs into main input and the other into one of the FX Return jacks and get a 3rd non-filtered FX loop for the pickup you plugged into the Input: OMNILOOPER – Schalltechnik_04
I'm not trying to anything drastically different to what's already been discussed in this thread, except for the dual input idea, which isn't supported by any of the options mentioned. Nearly all of them are no longer available anyway, including the OmniLooper you mentioned. I think low dB/octave filters in the crossover are important because I don't want to cut all the highs or lows, which was my point. Other posters have said similar things too.
Another possibility is the DSM & Humboldt Simplifier Bass Station, which has crossover-like features, by first splitting a single signal in to two: a main channel with EQ and gain stage, and a parallel channel with a LPF and phase control. Both have FX loops, and so it would support dual pickups if I use the parallel return for the low (neck) pickup (after something like a compressor). Then it has a blend control if you want a single output. There's a block diagram in the manual on their website.
@bnt I apologize if this seems like an ignorant/basic question, but why do you need some sort of crossover device for the stereo Ricky output? I frequently use a 4003, and have played a number of gigs using the dual pickup sound. In theory, if you aren't looking for hard crossovers, could you not just EQ the two amps differently to push and shelve the frequencies you had in mind? That's what I did; the neck pickup in particular has a lot of tonal information in the higher register I didn't want to lose, so made sure that amp signal still retained some mids and highs both on stage and in FOH.
Unless the plan is to do the stereo Ricky out with only one amp? It's doable, but doesn't seem like an ideal way to maximize the stereo output options you have at hand.
Unless the plan is to do the stereo Ricky out with only one amp? It's doable, but doesn't seem like an ideal way to maximize the stereo output options you have at hand.
In a sense you already have mild LPF/HPF with a Rick because you can use the vintage tone cap to remove bass from the treble pickup and the neck pickup tone control to remove treble from the neck pickup and these two signal paths remain independent unless you blend them back passively later (at which point the two pickups and controls will load each-other down just as in a mono bass). Doing all this outside the bass with active filters or EQ seems far more tweakable and useful on paper but also comes with lots of other potential strange interactions as always happens when blending independently manipulated signals of the same sound source.
What you are trying to do is pretty distinct from a crossover because you are utilizing two existing distinct/ independent signals for the highs and lows, while a crossover is creating two distinct pathways from one signal. One of the reasons a crossover can be problematic with say 24db/octave filters is that those filters drastically shift phase (and not in a 90 degree fashion) around their cutoff point so they can create weird dips and peaks around the crossover point when mixing the signals back together. Using two separate signals as from a Rick would mean the frequency-based phase relationships of the two signals are already going to be different (each picking up harmonics at different parts of the string/waveform) so phase interactions when mixing the two filtered signals back together will be even harder to predict (and again, not fixable with only a full-frequency 90 degree phase shift). Using EQ also creates frequency-dependent phase-shifts in most cases, so the same potential issues when recombining signals.
Of course all of these phase relationships could sound good (they are part of the signature sound of blending pickups after all), but best IMO to have as many tools available as possible to try to hone them in (like adjustable filters on each channel for one, so you can create or eliminate audible crossover between the two sides as needed).
Enjoy the journey!
I don't have it anymore, but it sounds like you want something like a custom pedal I had, albeit with two inputs instead of one.
I don't think there's anything like it currently available but maybe it gives inspiration for a custom order from a builder other than Broughton.
Systems like the OmniLooper, or the Simplifier I mentioned above, don't call themselves crossovers as such: they split a signal in two and can EQ them separately. But if I look at circuit diagrams of crossover circuits, that is basically what they do: split a signal in two and EQ the two halves separately. I want to do that with a standard bass - conventional crossover - and I also want the option of doing that with a split output bass: instead of splitting one signal, feed in two signals at that point, before the HPF and LPF as if they were two halves of one signal.
Of course you can do that without something like the Simplifier, just use two separate signal chains, with EQ, even two amps like e.g. Chris Squire did. I've already done it digitally by feeding both signals in to Apple MainStage, and the results can sound huge. So I know it works, but I'm thinking about ease of use in a live situation, and consistency of tone, when swapping between mono and "stereo" basses through a pedalboard. That's what I was trying to get at above: I'm in no doubt that it can be done, since I've done it already, just not through a pedalboard.
Of course you can do that without something like the Simplifier, just use two separate signal chains, with EQ, even two amps like e.g. Chris Squire did. I've already done it digitally by feeding both signals in to Apple MainStage, and the results can sound huge. So I know it works, but I'm thinking about ease of use in a live situation, and consistency of tone, when swapping between mono and "stereo" basses through a pedalboard. That's what I was trying to get at above: I'm in no doubt that it can be done, since I've done it already, just not through a pedalboard.
I thought I replied to this before, but yeah essentially a typical hardware crossover is doing exactly the same as the Omnilooper except only allowing a single frequency point for the filters to do their thing (of course a passive crossover like used in a speaker is a different thing). Something like the Omnilooper allows you to create (or eliminate) a degree of overlap between the two signals as needed which in my experience can help with weird artifacts between the two signals (as I was trying to point out earlier, there is always some overlap at the cutoff of a crossover dependent on the type of filters used that can cause weird phase inconsistencies). I dig that extra flexibility that having individual filter controls for each signal allows. I also have an old Peavey rackmount crossover with 4 different frequency regions and it allows for some cool experimentation but ultimately isn't that useful for me for making a single cohesive signal like the Omnilooper (of course the Peavey was designed for use with multi-driver/amplifier speaker systems and not for effects blending!)
Hope the Broughton works out for you!
What did you mean by that?
I mean: did you speak about that prototype or about the previous version (which is currently "out of stock")?
THX
