Earthquaker Devices Blumes

[Frank_Raider]

I was wondering the same. Having the Cusack, seems to me -by YT demos, so...- the Blumes has more gain on tap and more overall highs and lows, and I think I like the no clipping option better than the shottky one in the Cusack, though the Screamer Bass is still one of my favorite TS variants for bass.

 

[Maxi Funkl]

so far mode 2, but i think that like mode 1 just as much.

How does it compare to the Zoar? Consider they are close in price.

 

[Derek Williams]

Here, and i think it's a GREAT sounding overdrive:

View attachment 5314790

Worth getting vs Halcyon Green? Hard to turn this one down at this price.

 

[johnk_10]

Worth getting vs Halcyon Green? Hard to turn this one down at this price.

i have a halcyon green and like it a lot but surprisingly think i may prefer the blumes. i'll have to test them side by side to see though.

 

[triviani]

Got one. After a few minutes playing I've decided that I hate it, so it's back to the box and already listed for sale.

The gain is totally different from the original Plumes, and this one has too much gain on tap. Also, I have no idea why EQD uses such taper for volume, it's too loud. Nobody is going to crank that volume knob, specially with bass amps. In the middle mode the volume goes from 0 to too loud in just a slight touch.

And these are not that cheap over here. Last EQD I buy brand new.

 

[johnk_10]

the volume control is my only complaint with it. if it's not an audio taper, it should be. or possibly a different value.

 

[johnk_10]

i just replaced the volume pot which was a B100k (linear taper), with an A250K (audio taper) and it has a much better range of sweep. i probably could have gone with an A500K or even an A1M, but i'm happy with the A250K.

 

[Melvin7822]

That’s insane. What conceivable reason could they have for using a linear taper on the volume pot?

 

[johnk_10]

That’s insane. What conceivable reason could they have for using a linear taper on the volume pot?

i have no idea, but the A250K does work a lot better.

 

[AnotherOneBitesTheBass]

Got one. After a few minutes playing I've decided that I hate it, so it's back to the box and already listed for sale.

The gain is totally different from the original Plumes, and this one has too much gain on tap. Also, I have no idea why EQD uses such taper for volume, it's too loud. Nobody is going to crank that volume knob, specially with bass amps. In the middle mode the volume goes from 0 to too loud in just a slight touch.

And these are not that cheap over here. Last EQD I buy brand new.

I couldn't agree more with this.
I just got mine and spent about an hour with it. Although I must say that you get saturations in the three modes that are total winners, the level control is totally unusable in mode 2, coincidentally the mode that I liked the most. While it is true that mode 3 has significantly less volume than the others, the volume has no use beyond nine o'clock, unless you want to blast the front end of a tube amplifier, something much more common on guitar than with bass guitar. @triviani couldn't have better described the behavior of the level for modes 1 and 2.
For my part, it will be returned while waiting for Earthquaker to solve this issue with an V2 (or V1.1) of this pedal that I got with the hope that it would cover the low end loss often reported with the Plumes (which I have not tried personally) or the Walrus 385+ whose saturation is also a winner for me, but which I have returned given its loss of bass (IME) and price tag compared to the Plumes/Blumes.
A total shame because the low end retention and saturation palette are stellar with the Blumes.

 

[johnk_10]

hmmm. i think that the walrus 385MKII (or MKI) doesn't lack low end at all. I've owned both versions and kept the MKII.

 

[AnotherOneBitesTheBass]

Not in my experience, at least with my rig/signal chain and compared to other overdrive pedals that I have.

 

[kazuhank]

Interesting experiences with the volume pot issues some had. My first Blumes arrived the same day as a rehearsal, so I swung by home to grab mine on the way and did not have time to fiddle with it much. That said, I was able to get a usable volume in mode two immediately without noticing the taper. Obviously, YMMV, but it became an instant favorite for me (and I go through way too many drives). I played almost the entire rehearsal with mode two engaged and am very happy with this pedal. IME it fixed the things I didn't like in the Plumes and made it an instant add to my main board.

 

[IronLung1986]

Got one. After a few minutes playing I've decided that I hate it, so it's back to the box and already listed for sale.

The gain is totally different from the original Plumes, and this one has too much gain on tap. Also, I have no idea why EQD uses such taper for volume, it's too loud. Nobody is going to crank that volume knob, specially with bass amps. In the middle mode the volume goes from 0 to too loud in just a slight touch.

And these are not that cheap over here. Last EQD I buy brand new.

I get the impression that not much thought or consideration went into making this a pedal for actual bass players. Jamie was asked on a live stream why it has no clean blend and he said he hadn't thought of it. Really? The one thing that differentiates a bass pedal 95% of the time and you didn't think of it when designing your bass pedal? I understand that there's more low end in the sound, but a clean blend is used by bass players for more than simply having enough low end in the sound. It adds sturdiness and makes the pedal's sound more consistent with the sound when the pedal is off, so you can turn it off and on without it feeling like a major shift is happening.

The modes have little relevance to bass players, as does the crazy amount of volume. We don't "pummel our amps into sweet saturation" or whatever. They're the exact same modes from the guitar version. Just seems kinda thoughtless. The doubled gain was also an odd choice. If anything we'd be looking for less gain than the original Plumes. I feel the Blumes could have been just mode 2 from the Plumes with whatever mod they did to increase the low end, plus a clean blend. Maybe the switch could be 3 different crossover settings at set frequencies or something. In that same live stream Jamie played the Plumes and the Blumes back to back and the Plumes actually sounded better except for the low end cut. The basic tone of it was better.

All in all, I have to say it seems like a pedal designed by guitar players with a rather flippant disregard for the needs of bass players.

 

[kazuhank]

The one thing that differentiates a bass pedal 95% of the time and you didn't think of it when designing your bass pedal?

I watched the stream as well but am a bass player that falls into the "no thank you" camp on most clean blends. The Damnation Audio blends are the only ones that I have found that feel musical to my ears. Most of the other clean blends I have tried end up feeling like parallel signals to my ears. They are certainly popular for most bassists, but I'm not the only bass player I know that prefers no blend, or a well designed blend with an LPF.

The doubled gain was also an odd choice.

I have tried a bunch of guitar designed dirt circuits that are hardly noticeable in my bass rig. Reading the romance copy on release, I had the same thought that doubled gain didn't make sense, but when actually playing the pedal, I was able to get the right amount of dirt without it getting too dirty. To me, the dirt levels in all three settings felt right on my passive basses and in my rig.

When I watched the stream I was happy to hear that they are planning on more bass specific pedals and that they are not looking to just offer bass versions of their existing pedals.

 

[Lammchop93]

I get the impression that not much thought or consideration went into making this a pedal for actual bass players. Jamie was asked on a live stream why it has no clean blend and he said he hadn't thought of it. Really? The one thing that differentiates a bass pedal 95% of the time and you didn't think of it when designing your bass pedal? I understand that there's more low end in the sound, but a clean blend is used by bass players for more than simply having enough low end in the sound. It adds sturdiness and makes the pedal's sound more consistent with the sound when the pedal is off, so you can turn it off and on without it feeling like a major shift is happening.

The modes have little relevance to bass players, as does the crazy amount of volume. We don't "pummel our amps into sweet saturation" or whatever. They're the exact same modes from the guitar version. Just seems kinda thoughtless. The doubled gain was also an odd choice. If anything we'd be looking for less gain than the original Plumes. I feel the Blumes could have been just mode 2 from the Plumes with whatever mod they did to increase the low end, plus a clean blend. Maybe the switch could be 3 different crossover settings at set frequencies or something. In that same live stream Jamie played the Plumes and the Blumes back to back and the Plumes actually sounded better except for the low end cut. The basic tone of it was better.

All in all, I have to say it seems like a pedal designed by guitar players with a rather flippant disregard for the needs of bass players.

I understand where you are coming from, but personally I avoid pedals with a clean blend. I’ve never found one that I liked. They are common on bass pedals, but I think they don’t sound good for the sound I look for. This is a huge perk for me on the blumes

 

[bassness]

I don't understand the obsession with clean blends. I can't stand them as I don't want to hear a dry thud under a dirty tone. It sounds anemic. Dirt pedals made for bass usually have plenty of low end and do not have a need for a blend. I prefer to drive the entire frequency range, not just a portion.

I still use a Rat that I bought back in 1991. Yes, it does thin the signal out but I run a Q/Strip after it to fatten it back up and it sounds huge and as deep as I want it.

 

[IronLung1986]

I watched the stream as well but am a bass player that falls into the "no thank you" camp on most clean blends. The Damnation Audio blends are the only ones that I have found that feel musical to my ears. Most of the other clean blends I have tried end up feeling like parallel signals to my ears. They are certainly popular for most bassists, but I'm not the only bass player I know that prefers no blend, or a well designed blend with an LPF.


I have tried a bunch of guitar designed dirt circuits that are hardly noticeable in my bass rig. Reading the romance copy on release, I had the same thought that doubled gain didn't make sense, but when actually playing the pedal, I was able to get the right amount of dirt without it getting too dirty. To me, the dirt levels in all three settings felt right on my passive basses and in my rig.

When I watched the stream I was happy to hear that they are planning on more bass specific pedals and that they are not looking to just offer bass versions of their existing pedals.

I don't understand the obsession with clean blends. I can't stand them as I don't want to hear a dry thud under a dirty tone. It sounds anemic. Dirt pedals made for bass usually have plenty of low end and do not have a need for a blend. I prefer to drive the entire frequency range, not just a portion.

I still use a Rat that I bought back in 1991. Yes, it does thin the signal out but I run a Q/Strip after it to fatten it back up and it sounds huge and as deep as I want it.

I understand where you are coming from, but personally I avoid pedals with a clean blend. I’ve never found one that I liked. They are common on bass pedals, but I think they don’t sound good for the sound I look for. This is a huge perk for me on the blumes

Well, clean blends work. If you dial in too much clean then yea they sound lame. But if you're sneaky about it they can improve the sound. And anyway, my point was not to profess undying love of clean blends. It was more to say that they're the norm, and that not even thinking of it, along with some of the other design choices, shows a lack of consideration that we bass players frankly no longer have to settle for.

 

[kazuhank]

There are a ton of bass specific dirt pedals that deliberately omit clean blends. I also mentioned that there are some blends (like ones with LPFs) that work well.

To say that not including a clean blend shows a lack of consideration is missing the point that EQD made a bass pedal. That’s more than some pedal makers their size are doing.

I am stoked that Jaime and EQD are even making bass specific effects in the first place. my personal preference is like Jaime’s in that if I could design a bass TS9 I would want it to sound rad on bass on its own and not need a clean blend. We think alike and that’s cool for me, but not for you.

It’s okay to like different things. There are frankly too many options out there these days, so it’s cool that some of us dig this pedal and some not.

I guess I see it like a guitar builder that never made basses finally offers a bass model and then we bass players complain because it’s not a 5-string, or doesn’t have active electronics. Both those options are favored by some and panned by others, but it doesn’t negate that said builder is now offering a bass model.

 

[MtManiac]

I don't understand the obsession with clean blends. I can't stand them as I don't want to hear a dry thud under a dirty tone. It sounds anemic. Dirt pedals made for bass usually have plenty of low end and do not have a need for a blend. I prefer to drive the entire frequency range, not just a portion.

I still use a Rat that I bought back in 1991. Yes, it does thin the signal out but I run a Q/Strip after it to fatten it back up and it sounds huge and as deep as I want it.

I agree with your take on clean blends.

Off topic, but can you or someone else explain to me what a Q Strip does or is? My journey through dirt is pretty nascent, and I’m getting frustrated with being able to hear my dirt in my IEMs but not in FOH. Sometimes in FOH I just hear the fizz and no low end. Sometimes it’s all low end and no fizz.