Experimental Fully Modular Bass Rig.

[Flux Jetson]

Welcome to Page 12

Things started getting a little foggy there for a while. I was getting pretty discouraged with all of this, as it started to become obvious that I was getting lost in a sea of over-information. I started losing focus and direction, the compass didn't seem to be working and I felt like I was just poking a stick into the dark seeing what would come from it ...

Page 11 was like a flush. It helped me weed out some of the midrange voicing devices and get some of the potential candidates removed from the auditions. Those auditions also helped me realize what type of routing setups work best, and work the least best.

Parallel processing is .. without any doubt .. the way to go. Now keep in mind that my main central goal here is to create a usable "bass amp" with a solid central framework and a flexible tonal structure. So there's kinda two things happening here:

1.) Design the basic superstructure. Something that everything else will attach to. Something that is flexible enough to allow a total rearrangement of the basic block diagram and flow chart. Something that will allow and encourage placing the little building blocks in any of the most usable arrangements.

2.) Select the actual components that are inserted and attached to that framework ... with the tonal goal (for now) being aimed at producing that 1970s Rock Bass sound and it's variants. But total and complete tonal changes had to be possible (which refers us back to #1 above).

That said, I feel that by now I can honestly say that a combination of series and parallel processing is the key. If we look at a buck-standard bass amp (pick one, any one) we would see that there are some elements aligned in series, and other elements aligned in parallel. So if we're going to create a bass amp where each single element is replaceable (like a modular synth) then we have to have both series and parallel pathways and insert points in the basic superstructure.

The mistake most of us have made when we build up our bass rigs is that we place these stompboxes and rack things all in series. We end up with these long strings of series processors all set up in a line. So the sound comes out of our basses, and is subjected to this long string of FX and processors ... the whole while the tone is getting changed and noise is being added

I mean, imagine if you were to draw a schematic diagram of your bass rig that included every single stompbox and effector in your system in the drawing. What would that look like? It would basically be block after block after block of different processors all in a row until the actual bass amp were included in the diagram, then suddenly the tone stack comes along and the signal goes into parallel pathways.

Kinda makes you go Hmmmmm....

So .... that said ... we need to think more like the bass amplifier designers. Putting things in parallel that would benefit from that the most, and putting things in series that would benefit that the most. The series part is easy, connect stompbox X outputs into stompbox Y inputs, stompbox Y outputs into stompbox N inputs .. (and so on). But parallel is more difficult to do. It requires a splitter of some sort. That splitter has to be something that has small little VERY TRANSPARENT amplifiers in each parallel pathway so as the signal is divided up into multiple paths it doesn't lose power. And it would be great if the splitter were small and easily inserted into this "bass amp" that we''ve splayed open and spread out all over the floor (or rack).

So without goin to far into territory that I've pounded to death already, let's just leave this with the statement of the superstructure framework of the bass amp had to be developed. And I was getting a bit lost between all of the details that were submersing me in a sea of data.

Until the other day .......

 

[Flux Jetson]

Before I get into the happy mistake (those things are what drive a lot of science!), I want to talk a little more about setting up this bass rig of mine .... and this word "algorithms".

In the context that applies to what I'm doing with this gear ~algorithms~ are preset arrangements of basic building blocks that the various separate pieces of kit. They are a basic description of of the layout of the individual chunks.

Below is an image of the algorithm chart found on the Yamaha DX-1 FM synth. It used these different preconstructed ~blocks~ of synthesizer circuits that they called "operators". All of the operators (six of them in this case) were identical, and if you arranged them is certain ways they could be used to create many different sounds. If you look at this chart there were 32 algortihms, each algorithm consisted of six operators. The algorithms used different combinations of operators arranged in series, parallel, and series/parallel relationships.

Well what we all do when we set up our stompboxes and processors and our bass amps is we create an algorithm of our own operators. Each operator consists of each stompbox or bass amp stage. What I've learned so far is that while there are a vast number of algorithms available in a mathematical sense, there's only about a half dozen of them that are practical in our use for creating useful bass tones.

Here's the basic algorithm I've been using for the most part so far ....

I'll be refering to this drawing from time to time from here on out. It is important to note that each one of the RED LINES is an "insert point" .. that is to say that each one of those red lines is a place where processors of any type can be placed .. or "inserted" .. into the signal chain. There may be more than one processor/FX inserted at any one given insert point, they can be placed in series with each other as well.

Also, note the flowing:

STAGE-1 (input stage) = BLUE
STAGE-2 (parallel send/return processing) = PURPLE
STAGE-3 (power amplification) = GREEN
STAGE-4 (speaker cabs) = GREY

So this is the basic algorithm I've been using. Reason? Well after a lot of trial and error this basic arrangement has proven to be the best general frame to work with.

2 Pickups - why not use dedicated signal chains and amps for each pickup? I've been asked several times why I don't run each pickup through it's own set of processors and then out to it's own dedicated amp. Actually, I can! It's a simple matter to rematrix the rig and patch it up into a totally different (here it comes) algorithm. But to be honest, that protocol has been done to death. And there's a weakness within it. It limits the rig to the use of basses that have been modified to have 2-channel operation.

With Algorithm-1 (above) I can use any "standard" sinlge output bass guitar by simply inserting it at the insert point between Stage-1 and Stage-2 (Insert point #3). Or, I may even insert a standard single output bass into either of the input preamps and just not use the pickup switching feature. And now this signle output bass can have all of the benefits of STAGE-2, 3, and 4 without a bunch of repatching. So any efforts that have been placed into getting the FX processors all dialed in will be employed with any bass that is used.

If I were to go to the trouble of setting up the rig to deal with discrete processing channels for each pickup, the use of another bass would take an entirely new set of efforts to learn and make record of a totally different processing setup.

So I figure if I use a setup such as Algorithm-1 then I've constructed a basic structure that can be applied to single channel basses, 2-channel bases, as well as guitar, and even my modular synth.

So there's the basic framework that I am using for most of these tests and experiments.

 

[mc_muench]

I have to say, I dont understand much of what you say, but this whole thing is pretty frickin cool.

 

[Flux Jetson]

I have to say, I dont understand much of what you say, but this whole thing is pretty frickin cool.

Thanks a lot! Well, hopefully it'll make sense at some point. Don't feel bad, half the time I don't understand much of what I say either

 

[Flux Jetson]

Observing a real time analyzer carefully while just as carefully listening to some favorite old rock as well as some favorite new rock, as well as taking careful notes ... (anyone remember notes??? ... y'know .. pen-paper .. that stuff??) ... producing the coveted 70's rock bass sound seems to be centered around placing varying degrees of emphasis on the octave above the fundamental. For instance, if you listen to Geddy's latest tone, if you imagine the bottom end gone, his bass's "voice" sounds a LOT like a semi-distorted guitar's voice. Which is an octave higher than the low end of the bass.

Hmmm... this seems like solid ground here, especially with what I've learned and observed lately. That notion also seems to explain a recent success as well (that "happy accident" I've yet to talk of). It also helps to explain why playing the bass using the technique of letting the pad of the finger release the string just a millisecond or so before the nail releases the string produces so much of ~that sound~ .... the pad creates the low end, the nail produces the first harmonic. They are two very obvious components of that sound ... and the use of that playing technique .. when carefully applied in measured amounts ... produces either more or less of ~that sound~ at will. The right types of electronic processing only produces a greater obvious definition of the two components.

It's like playing two instruments at once ... a bass and a guitar ... and then processing them both within the same signal. So imagine recording a bass and a guitar on the same track as they both play the same line in unison. The two are now a single waveform because they've melded together in the single recorded track (just like mixed paint .... once two colors are mixed together there is no way to separate them). But they both have an obvious existance of their own. The trick is to make them sound ~together~ while attempting to process them as if they were ~apart~ to emphasize their own characteristics while not ending up creating too much division and over-definition between them. Like mixing red and blue ... you get purple. But you want to enhance the red and enhance the blue, while keeping the purple intact.

(No ... I have not been smoking something .. um .. "earthy". I know precisely what I mean, I'm just very tired and am having difficulty verbalizing this concept).

It's all beginning to piece together a little more. Now that I have the proper tools at my disposal this seems to be getting easier. No wonder the "big shots" use multi-channel processing. Paralleling has made all the difference.

That dim bulb that floats above my head is becoming a little bit brighter. It now almost-but-not-quite rivals a 4 watt night light!

More soon ..... I've been up all night working this out, it's now after 6:30am and I need to get a little sleep!

 

[tibpson]

I have to say man, this thread is F****** AMAZING!! Not only the work you are doing but also because you are charing it with such detail.

Maybe in the end you could compile all the information and conclusions in this thread in one book, this is like a thesis.

 

[Flux Jetson]

I have to say man, this thread is F****** AMAZING!! Not only the work you are doing but also because you are charing it with such detail.

Maybe in the end you could compile all the information and conclusions in this thread in one book, this is like a thesis.

Thank you very much! It's become an obsession at this point.

I would love to summarize it all in a book. I'm not much of a writer, actually I just barely graduated from a rural high school in Arizona in 1978 (severe problems at home really distracted me from studies .. I chose escapism rather than academics, so I eek'd-by with a D+ average, and joined the military a few months after graduation). I just record my findings and blab my head off here unloading my mind to make more room in the skull for the next bunch of incoming info. I've regretted not going to college, but my grades were a prohibiting issue, and money wasn't really available either. So I've just been a blue collar hack my whole life.

Thanks for the VERY encouraging comments. I'll continue to do my best to update this photo-journal of my little project for those that find this interesting.

Now I really gotta get some sleep. Gonna have some breakfast, watch a little bit of the Roadrunner/Coyote (I am a fan of vintage cartoons as well as some of the modern anime fanstasy cartoons such as Cashern Sins) .. and burn out!

Zzzzzzz......

 

[the_hook]

It's like playing two instruments at once ... a bass and a guitar ... and then processing them both within the same signal. So imagine recording a bass and a guitar on the same track as they both play the same line in unison. The two are now a single waveform because they've melded together in the single recorded track (just like mixed paint .... once two colors are mixed together there is no way to separate them). But they both have an obvious existance of their own. The trick is to make them sound ~together~ while attempting to process them as if they were ~apart~ to emphasize their own characteristics while not ending up creating too much division and over-definition between them. Like mixing red and blue ... you get purple. But you want to enhance the red and enhance the blue, while keeping the purple intact.

This is interesting to read, because after I had my friend separate my SX Jazz PU's into stereo I was at home one night tooling around and decided to plug one cable into a guitar combo amp, the other into my bass rig.

I put reverb on the guitar amp and it sounded freakishly like a guitar and bass playing exactly the same thing, but I was playing only the bass fingerstyle.

Then later at one of my band jams I handed the bass to the guitar player and plugged one end into a Marshall guitar amp and the other into my bass rig. He cranked it and the place rattled with again, that guitar/bass unison playing. It was hilarious.

It's like looking at a dog expecting it to bark, instead it sounds like a dog and cat at the same time...

 

[Flux Jetson]

This is interesting to read, because after I had my friend separate my SX Jazz PU's into stereo I was at home one night tooling around and decided to plug one cable into a guitar combo amp, the other into my bass rig.

I put reverb on the guitar amp and it sounded freakishly like a guitar and bass playing exactly the same thing, but I was playing only the bass fingerstyle.

Then later at one of my band jams I handed the bass to the guitar player and plugged one end into a Marshall guitar amp and the other into my bass rig. He cranked it and the place rattled with again, that guitar/bass unison playing. It was hilarious.

It's like looking at a dog expecting it to bark, instead it sounds like a dog and cat at the same time...

And there lies the trick, getting the two sounds to sound like one sound. It's not impossible, in fact it's quite possible, it's done all the time. And there is more than one avenue of approach to get it done as well. I'm investigating several with this rig. Time will produce the best method for my situation. Well, time and effort!

 

[Flux Jetson]

Alrighty then ..... I'd been going on and on about this "new plan" for a few days here. This "happy accident" and such. Ok, I think I'm ready to make a call on it. I had been reluctant to post it as an entry here until I had done more than just a few hours of screwin' with it. I think I'm ready to commit to it at this point. I mean, it isn't anything like all super wonderous or never-before-seen by the likes of mankind or anything like that. It's just that I've ranted "THIS IS IT!" more than a few times so far in this thread (and then fell flat on my face after I realized it was NOT it!) that I wanted to be sure I had my shyte together this time. So let me get on with it here.

Ok ... first of all, I shytcanned the whole using a guitar amp and cab to shore up the high mids and top end thing. It works all good and such, and I may even adopt it's use at certain times. However ---- I've discovered that the 4x10 does a great job of holding that end of the equation up just fine. Being a sealed cab 4x10 it has a higher voice, or rather it is able to handle the higher stuff just fine. And being a bass cab it also helps to add to the overall low end volume as well. Rated at 800 watts at 4ohms, it's no lightweight either!

(NOTE: Always keep in mind that the MAIN GOAL here with the experimentaion is to reduce the system down to the least amount of elements .. as in GEAR .. as possible.)

So using the 4x10 with some other stuff in it's discrete channel has proven to be mondo effective! That said, so far I have settled on this basic configuration -(We'll use ALGORITHM-1 as a reference). Most of the focus right now in this particular posting is on INSERT POINT #8 in the drawing below.

Here's what happened: Quite by accident, I patched up the 8ch mixer's output into the POD Pro's input. Then out of the POD Pro's mono output into the 4x10's amp channel. This all happened right there at INSERT POINT #8. So here's how it ended up being patched ...

The drawing above pretty much says it all. This entire thing was a slip of the brain, I got the Send/Return jacks on the pathcbay that I use very confused and totally patched up something other than what I had thought I'd patched up, resulting in what you see in this drawing.

A doofington ..

.. brain fartage ..

.. disengaged skullbone ..

.. DOH! ..

.. glue headed ..

.. Duh-whut a-ziod move! ..

And it totally works great!

There's a shipload of power there. The 4x10 repsonds to this setup VERY well. And it's a good thing too, because I had been considering selling the 4x10 and replacing it with another ported 2x10 so I would ultimately have two ported 2x10s and the guitar amp/cab. While that idea has it's merits I think this setup is more versatile and doesn't end up costing me any more money.

What I'm eager to try is running my modular synth through this rig! It seems to cover all of the sonic bases the sounds I make with synths require. PuhLENTY of low end nuts, presets to change the setup to suit the synth, tons of Fx Processing power with the M13 in the mix of it all.

YEA YEA YEA .. TOYS-n-GIZMOS GALORE ... SO WHAT? ... HOW DOES IT SOUND FLUX? Right, sound, yup ... danged important stuff there, that sound stuff is. It sounds perfect. It is providing me with the basic midrange foundation I need to accomplish my goals (pursuit of The Geddy). The neatest thing is the flexibility and ease of use. When I want a LOT of rude-ass midrange, that's when the Mega-Modded-Wah comes into play used as a band-pass-filter (BPF). Inserted into one of the parallel insert points (refer to drawing above called "Algorithm-1", see insert points 4, 5, 6, or 7) the modded wah/BPF can be mixed into the sound easily. AND since it has to eventually go through this midrange system here, it can be tuned and honed and manipulated until it sounds just right.

So then... .. yea ... ok .. so now it's beginning to take shape and gel. This stuff here is what tackles the midrange voicing, as well as a lot of the FX I want to use. The Rane Parametric EQ is assigned to the 2x10 (for the most part) to carve out the low end and help shape the midrange that the 2x10 puts into the works. The Aphex is the last thing that the sounds hit 'aforn they get shipped out to the power amp channels to put the final fine-tune on things and provide two really excellent recording outputs as well that includes both amp channels (so any and all processing that is done is included in the "sends" that are sent to the recording interface).

So ... with all of that having been said, it's just about time to do some more SoundCloud demos to submit to you folks for critical review. Let you all hear what this sounds like so far.

It's just about time that I also begin to introduce my Cort A4 into this system to see how another bass is handled by this rig (so far I've ony been using the 2-channel Jazz). And as I said already, it's also time to interject the modular synth into this system, as well as my guitars too.

So there we have it ... ... a mistake that ended up being a perfectly executed "wrong turn at Albuquerque" that lead me to discovering something EXCELLENT!

I probably would have dicovered this at some point anyway .. yea .. right!

I'll just keep telling myself that! Haahaa!. But I would have gone through any number of crapcanned configurations and bad ideas along the way wasting my time as well as everyone following along with this thread. I can investigate other avenues with this setup any time, there's a ton of power in it that will need to be tested and tried, but I can play with all of that later.

So for now I've found a great foundation setup that I can use as a basis for most of what I will need to do. Big step forward towards getting it done. Once I get the basics all finished I may begin to normalize the patched connections to eliminate the need for so many patchcords.

So that's all for the moment ... Yay!!!

 

[Doner Designs]

Its fun to follow some of this as it takes shape. Can't wait to see when its "done". I suppose like some of my project basses it will only be done for a few months before the next round of mods starts to formulate in your mind.

Anyway, it will be good to read in a single post about how it all works when finished. REALLY cool stuff!

Lots of us do bass mods but not so many (if any) do as much outboard as you are.

 

[Flux Jetson]

Thanks. It will be done when it is able to become anything I need. It's getting closer to that State Variable Protocol.

But actually, it's all ramblings of a madman for the most part.

 

[Flux Jetson]

I totally spaced mentioning this unit. I've used one of these things for a very long time to produce simple parallel chains. VERY effective device, and at $80 bucks shipped, it's cost effective as well. Quiet too.

http://www.musiciansfriend.com/amplifiers-effects/boss-ls-2-line-selector-power-supply

Multi-modal, does all kinds of different routings. It can even be used as the anchor-man in a 9VDC power daisy chain.

Here's a link to the manual ....

Invalid Link Removed

(scroll down to the "LS-2" manual and download or open it. Well worth a look as this unit has a number of features and modes).

Just trying to help!

 

[Flux Jetson]

Merry Christmas Everyone!​

Flux Of Earth.

 

[Flux Jetson]

Ok .... all along I've been avoiding the temptation to process each pickup's output in a discrete manner. I mean it's been done so much over the last 40+ years that it's nearly cliche at this point. "Oh brother, here we go again ... another dood that thinks processing each pickup on it's own is something new and exciting. Yawn!". Well, "new" it isn't, but "exciting" it just may be.

If you'll recall, previously I was using a footswitchable transistor switcher that provided me with the power to switch two sets of pickup feeds by holding down a momentary footswitch. I set it up so that when I was off of the footswitch, the individual pickups feeds were sent to a mixer that allowed me to get a very fine tuned pickup mix. Step on the footswitch and hold it down and the pickups' outs were sent to two other channels of the same mixer which provides me with a totally different pickup mix setting. Since I have a lot of angst regarding how every bass I have ever played the E/A strings do not sound the same as the D/G strings, I set it up to where when the pickups were using one mix the E/A strings sounded great, then with the other mix (footswitch held down) the D/G strings sound great. With practice I have learned how to switch between those two settings pretty seamlessly mid-riff. So as I am playing I can swap between pickup mixes so that the strings sound the most balanced and good. But this setup did nothing for actually processing those pickup feeds until AFTER they were mixed together as a mono signal and sent to the next stage of the routing rig (the parallel processing stage ... Stage-2).

So I got to thinking that maybe I could set up a parallel processing rigging for the pickups themselves BEFORE they were mixed together at the tail end of Stage-1. The more I thought about this, the more it appealed to me. (I have to thank "Steve" .. aka Talk Bass member "donor designs" .. for planting the seed in my head. He asked me about doing the "amp for each pickup" thing and I rejected the notion immediately, but the idea of it all got me to thinking about refining that idea into something better. Guys like Billy Sheehan use the amp-per-pickup setup and use the "air" as their mixer. I thought that maybe the idea is ok, just needed more refining, more control over the mix of the two sounds rather than letting chance and serendipity deal with it after the two feeds are tossed out into the room and letting the environment create the actual mix.

Not only that but with the one-amp-per-pickup rig, if you use only one pickup you've lost exactly half of your amplified power. Mmmm .... nope. Not diggin that. No no ... this idea I'm adopting simply allows complex tonal processing ... y'know my whole ~parallel processing~ trip, with each pickup before they are mixed together. And not only that, I can use two separate processing methods for the two separate pickup mixes so that A/B switching between the two pickup mixes will yield the finest exploitation of the idea.

So it's like I did the whole pickup-per-amp thing, but my way. I created two of the entire setup I use .. one for each pickup ... then added a third one ... for the mix of the two pickups. So there are three total parallel send/return stages .. one for each pickup, then the ouputs of theose are mixed and run through yet one more parallel send/return stage, then out to two parallel amp channels. Hells yea!

To review, here's the original input stage (STAGE-1) algorithm that I have already been using ...

So it comes out of this stage as a mono-mix of the two pickups and is then sent to STAGE-2 (parallel processing) where the sound is subjected to some powerful processing .. perhaps too powerful ... meaning that you have to "try too hard" to get what you're looking for tone wise. Here's STAGE-2 (the listed FX are just examples, literally anything can be placed in those four parallel processing blocks) ....

And then after things are processed there in STAGE-2, it goes out to STAGE-3 where the sound is split up and sent out to the amplifier channels to ulimtately go out to the 210 low end cab and the 410 "voice" cab.

So, back to the input stage .... yea, sure, I could stick EQs or other ~stuff~ in there between the pickup switcher and the pickup mixer. But there may be a better method, one that provides a lot more processing power and more refined tonal sculpting ......

(next post ...)

 

[Flux Jetson]

..... So that's the original setup I settled on. Let's get into the new idea here.

Ok, as explained I wanted to try to do some decent processing of each pickup before they are mixed together. This allows me to really tune-up each pickup's sound, really get the strongest aspects of each pickup exploited and emphasized to get the most I can out of the bass. So here's what I conjured up as the next evolution of the input stage (STAGE-1).

When both pickups are on, I've got a lot of detailed processing power availble. I felt it necessary to be able to have both pickups play as nicely with each other as possible.

When the second pickup mix is selected ("B") there is less detailed processing power available because most likely "B" with only be the neck pickup. MAYBE a little wiff of the bridge pickup in there, but for the most part it's just the neck pickup alone with the pickup switcher is on "B". Keep in mind that we stall have all of STAGE-2 as well as the processing going on with the two amp channels in STAGE-3. So I thought that a sinlge feed for mix "B" would be more than sufficient. If not it isn't too difficult to repatch to obtain more power to process the neck pickup byitself.

Here's an example of how things might be routed when the pickup switch has both pickups on ("A") ... FOOTSWITCH NOT PRESSED - BOTH PICKUPS ON.

Keep in mind that every red line is an insert point, a place where any type of processor, stomp box, rack thingy, whatever may be insterted. so that is what the routing looks like when the footswitch is left alone. Here's how it looks when the footswitch is held down and the switcher module goes into mode "B" ... FOOTSWITCH HELD DOWN - NECK PICKUP ONLY (or maybe just a tiny bit of bridge pickup mixed with the neck pickup)

Much simpler.

I can't wait to try this setup. I personally feel it will alow me to get a better voicing out of each pickup and may get me closer to the grail ... The Geddy. The Roundabout Tone. That fat-assed 70's rock bass sound. If this works out it wil save me grom untold $$$ spent on trying pickup after pickup, and different on-bass wiring schemes et al. If this works out better than the original rigging it means I can use it to tune the tone in any manner I wish. Modern to 70's.

I'll add a summary to this in the morning. It's after 1am, with Christmas, family, all of the travelling around and such I am beat!

More later ... hope this primes your mental pump somewhat.



Hasta Lasagne!

 

[Flux Jetson]

The new algorithm for STAGE-1 is a smash hit. It allows better control over each pickup's sound BEFORE they are mixed together. It's like having better pickups, since you can tweak each pickup's sound to suit you.

So let's summarize the new setup, and diagram it out in it's complete structure. It won't hurt, I promise.

Here's STAGE1 with the newly adopted algorithm.
The only thing missing are the two mic preamps, but we know they go before everything and you can just assume they are in the signal chain on the pickup input feeds there on the far left:

Here's STAGE2. This is the parallel processing stage for the mono-mix of the pickups, if this were a conventional bass rig this would be the sortof pedalboard.

Here's STAGE3. This is where that processed mono signal is split once more into two separate amp/cab channels. The 4x10 channel has the POD Pro added to it's channel to provide the last word in voicing and sounds for the upper mids.

So there we have it. The Three Stage Structure from pickups to speaker cones. All ready to have various FX, EQs, Special FX, Filters, Everwhat loaded in to the various insert points. Consider these three stages as the basic framework that the Experimental Modular Bass Rig is built upon. Some of the insert points may or may not be used at all, but since there are patching jacks at every one of these insert points the ability to tweak and modify this rig is there and available.

This is like being able to add any type of circuitry inside each stage of a common bass amplifier. What I've done is essentially busted open a bass amp and made connection points to insert any type of stompbox anywhere I please. It's the ulitmate bass amp.

And .. even with the way I expanded STAGE1 (input stage) the whole thing STILL fits in that one 5U rack adaptor! My guess is that once I get it going a little more that it won't require much in the manner of added processors to reach my goals of 70's rock bass tones. This system has made it so easy to try any processor/FX in any given point.

Thanks for following along. Now with this mental torture behind me I will get busy with sonic testing. In other words ... time for SoundCloud tracks! Since I've FINALLY got all of this routing business out of my head, I can at last move ahead with making sounds and recording them in various ways.

Killa!

 

[Flux Jetson]

Here it is, all racked up. This is the entire thing except for the Pedal Interface, which can be mounted inside the rack.

This image totally speaks for itself, use the Algorithm images as a reference and compare them with this to get a better grasp of how it is all setup in reality as opposed to the theoretical setups that the algorithmic stage diagrams represent.

Und now ve dahnce .... shprockets ...

 

[JetBlackJazz]

This thread is definitely worth the hours of lurking.

 

[Flux Jetson]

This thread is definitely worth the hours of lurking.

Thanks. I know it has to be a bit of a chore to follow along, and I'm fairly certain I've lost a few subscribers by now, but like I keep saying this is more of a photo journal that has been very helpful for me.

If nothing else it helps me keep my head on straight. I use it like a master reference of what has worked and what hasn't, as well as keeping track of where I need to head.

Haha! Wouldn't be funny if I end up using two Boss LS-2 line switchers and nothing else? I mean ... after allllll of this yakkity yak and testing of these ~sophisticated~ synth modules and grand ideas, I end up using 2 or 3 LS-2s to get the whole job done? It's kinda feasible y'know!

Anyhow, thanks for the supportive comments! I always get a boost when someone pipes in with a bit of cheerleading.

This post concludes Page 12 of this thread. More later today as I begin with Page 13 and demo tracks of the results from the research I've done over the last few weeks.

Fluxola,