• 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.

MXR M82 Envelope Filter vs. EHX Microsynth

B

bake124

Sep 28, 2013
4
0
#1
Hello, all.

I've been back and forth between purchasing one of these two pedals but I can't pull the trigger. Please help me talk it out.

I currently run:
Ernie Ball MusicMan Sterling (neck - single/bridge - humbucker) > Boss TU-2 > MXR Auto Q > Bass Crybaby Wah > EHX Bass Big Muff Pi > Boss Super Chorus CH-1 > Boss Digital Delay DD-7 > Ampeg BA115

I need to replace the Auto Q because it's borrowed. I love the classic filter tones of the MXR M82 Envelope Filter but I also really dig the versatility of the Microsynth. I don't even mind spending the extra money on the Microsynth. My main concern is that the filter effects on the Microsynth won't be as "true" as the Envelope Filter. I'd hate to drop the extra cash for the Microsynth, only to have to go out later and buy the M82 anyway.

Do any of you have any input that may help?

Thanks much!
 
#4
bake124 said:
Essentially, that is what I'm asking. Could flatten out the sliders on the Voice Mix side of the Microsynth and use the Filter Sweep sliders to give me an Envelope Filter type sound?
Click to expand...
It's not as satisfying as a multieffects pedal IMO. It's great for what it is (one of my favorite pedals on my board for many years now), but it's not a great dedicated filter, dedicated fuzz, or dedicated octaver. It's greater than the sum of its parts, though.
 
#5
Just because the MS has a slider that says "filter" doesn't mean that the pedal is a filter.

EDIT: Lemme elaborate further:
I'm having the same sort of issue because I just sold a dedicated filter (too big, it was) and I have a multi-effects unit that has many filters in it. Even THAT doesn't replace a dedicated filter because it's a small part of a greater whole and isn't very versatile. So I'm shopping for another filter. I also like synth stuff, but won't be looking to get a MS in order to have a filter.
 
#6
Unrepresented said:
It's not as satisfying as a multieffects pedal IMO. It's great for what it is (one of my favorite pedals on my board for many years now), but it's not a great dedicated filter, dedicated fuzz, or dedicated octaver. It's greater than the sum of its parts, though.
Click to expand...

+1 definitely fun to set it for long sweeps or short quacks etc. But wouldn't use it as an octave ef or fuzz. Purely dedicated synth
 
#7
Thanks for the input, guys.

I'm now thinking that I might go with the M82, but also pick up the MXR M288 octave pedal that I can pair with it. I'd like to have the option to dial up some synth sounds, but I don't think I will use it enough to spend big dollars on a quality stand-alone synth pedal.

Any thoughts on that combo? I've tried to run the Big Muff and the Auto Q together, but it sounds like s#!t no matter how much I tweak it.
 
#8
At 6:58 endorser ed friedlander hooks that combo up:

Invalid Link Removed

That MXR octave has me questioning my OC-2, but it's still an analog pedal so I'll probably stay put. I agree with you that I don't use enough synth to justify a stand-alone pedal like the MS (which isn't all that micro, btw) but filter, dirt and octave are crucial. I'd guess that your problem withe the Big Muff and Auto Q combo isn't the Muff but the Q. The muff with an octaver in front of it could, and should, be awesome.
 
#10
bake124 said:
Thanks for the input, guys.

I'm now thinking that I might go with the M82, but also pick up the MXR M288 octave pedal that I can pair with it. I'd like to have the option to dial up some synth sounds, but I don't think I will use it enough to spend big dollars on a quality stand-alone synth pedal.

Any thoughts on that combo? I've tried to run the Big Muff and the Auto Q together, but it sounds like s#!t no matter how much I tweak it.
Click to expand...

I think this is probably a good way to go for what it seems like you want to do. You can also throw a fuzz in and get even synthier. Your not going to get long synth sweeps doing this which can definitely turn heads. But spending that kind of money for that may not be worth it for you.

Also remember, if you find something you just want to try used for a good price, chances are of you want to try it a lot of pretty people do to and you will be able to sell or here easily with little to no loss. I'm currently in a trying out kick right now and it works out well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rick_Bass
#13
Nobody's spelt it out yet, but the difference is that the BMS filter is not affected by your volume of your bass's signal, other than triggering the filter sweep when the volume goes above the trigger level. That means the sweep will always be the same speed and frequency range, whether you play loud or quiet.

An envelope filter changes the filter frequency depending on the volume of your bass's signal, making it more dynamic and responsive.

Of course, for synthy sounds, you might want a fixed filter response - kinda like an old monosynth with a non-velocity sensitive keyboard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: blakelock
#14
Funkinthetrunk said:
I like pretty better.
Click to expand...

Hah.

Like this pretty mofo?

bootsy_collins89054893.jpg
 
#16
One big distinction I want to make the OP in case it's not clearn. The EHX is not actually an envelope filter. The filter section of the BMS is a triggered filter. In an envelope filter, the cutoff of the filter follows the volume envelope of the bass signal (that is, as the bass signal comes in, the filter rises and falls with the curve of the volume of the signal.

The EHX works differently. It has a trigger slider that sets the volume at which the filter sweep triggers. However, once it's triggered, it doesn't follow your volume envelope. It follows a fixed sweep determined by the start, stop and rate sliders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: blakelock

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back