My Dirt Bender - Another Jounal

[sunbeast]

As much as it sucks, playing advocate for the devil here,
but I want to make the following points regarding your statement:

In a studio environment, I would hope and expect that the 1176 they have in their rack sounds much better than the 1176 I have in my $400 digital board.
BUT! It most likely will also sound better than the Cali76 I have on my analog board.

In a studio environment, it's okay to tinker around with a ton of gear until the tone is just right.
In a live environment, at least for amateur musicians that do not travel with their own FOH and sound techs but will have to make do with what and who they find at the venue, it's about what works - with compromises.
We usually don't take pedals we judge too fickle, even if they are great when set just right.
A live setup has to have a certain resilience and robustness when all you get is a five minute sound check.
And that's where convenience clandestinely sneaks a foot into the door.

This is really the point where everyone has to watch out and be on their toes.
From "I'll make this small compromise because while I loose a little potential in sound, I gain a huge leap in convenience"
it's just a small step further and you're looking at a Kemper.

I think we agree for the most part.

The original big-box Cali76 pedals were never authentic recreations of a rackmount 1176 (just liberal “inspired by” designs), and the compact versions are even farther from the inspiration (that doesn’t make one or the other “better”- that’s totally subjective of course!). The differences between a rackmount 1176 and a Cali76 Compact Bass would probably be pretty easy to hear to most anyone. I’d wager (a little!) that the UA 1176 computer plugin is probably closer to an actual 1176 than the Cali76 Compact Bass is to most people’s ears for what that’s worth so not sure that particular point fits.

But yeah I agree that in this day and age (lots fewer venues without sufficient house PA rig to carry the bass, and usually coinciding demand that stage sound is decreased vs the glory days) and with our aging/aching bodies/minds (I tend to assume most of us in this thread are not in our teens/20s anymore) the convenience of a digital multi-effect is very enticing. I own and use two FWIW (HX Stomp and H90), though at this point have very rarely used them to model things like amps, cabs, comps, or drive pedals (not really the H90’s thing anyway of course!) as I quite like my hybrid bass amp as is and don’t require a huge mass of drive pedals to supplement the multiFX (honestly I don’t actually use either of my multis for any of my main bass gigs as they are just overkill for my simple needs that just fill a cut-in-half Pedaltrain Jr). For me the little hybrid bass combo has been my biggest sacrifice for convenience, as I’d love to still be blasting a full-tube rig. The shift in the types of venues that still exist where I live and the culture of declining stage volumes definitely helped solidify that choice though, as I was being asked more regularly to drop my stage volume low enough that I could barely get a 125 watt tube amp cooking like I wanted it and as was mentioned expecting to get that amp sound I loved through the PA anyway was a whole different can of worms. I do miss the days of unpermitted venues with basic vocal-dedicated house PAs quite a bit, for many reasons! I also enjoy working with good trained pro soundmen who make a nice house PA work well for a band with low stage volume (fortunately the decrease in local venues means there are a lot of good ones looking for gigs!), then there are those shows in between those two extremes that sometimes make me want to pull my hair out.

 

[el murdoque]

Is that a @disssa pedal?
Wow.

Yes, it is.

 

[el murdoque]

I think we agree for the most part.

The original big-box Cali76 pedals were never authentic recreations of a rackmount 1176 (just liberal “inspired by” designs), and the compact versions are even farther from the inspiration (that doesn’t make one or the other “better”- that’s totally subjective of course!). The differences between a rackmount 1176 and a Cali76 Compact Bass would probably be pretty easy to hear to most anyone. I’d wager (a little!) that the UA 1176 computer plugin is probably closer to an actual 1176 than the Cali76 Compact Bass is to most people’s ears for what that’s worth so not sure that particular point fits.

I was not claiming that the Cali76 is a faithful recreation of the 1176 - I was merely trying to make the point that a good pedal compressor often sounds better than the comp in a digital multi, and pictures of people's boards where a Cali sits next to the HX Stomp are a dozen a dime here on TB - which is my point. Cali76 > the comps in a $500 digital multi.
That an OG 1176 will sound better than a Cali should be self evident, but these are unwieldy beasts that are not really seen in live rigs, so instead of bringing a 19" rack with a $3000 vintage comp, people already went down the convenience route and bought a pedal. Replace Cali76 with Empress, Keeley, Effectrode LA-1A, Doc Lloyd DLA-2A .... whatever crowds the pedalboards of the snobs.

But yeah I agree that in this day and age (lots fewer venues without sufficient house PA rig to carry the bass, and usually coinciding demand that stage sound is decreased vs the glory days) and with our aging/aching bodies/minds (I tend to assume most of us in this thread are not in our teens/20s anymore) the convenience of a digital multi-effect is very enticing. I own and use two FWIW (HX Stomp and H90), though at this point have very rarely used them to model things like amps, cabs, comps, or drive pedals (not really the H90’s thing anyway of course!) as I quite like my hybrid bass amp as is and don’t require a huge mass of drive pedals to supplement the multiFX (honestly I don’t actually use either of my multis for any of my main bass gigs as they are just overkill for my simple needs that just fill a cut-in-half Pedaltrain Jr). For me the little hybrid bass combo has been my biggest sacrifice for convenience, as I’d love to still be blasting a full-tube rig. The shift in the types of venues that still exist where I live and the culture of declining stage volumes definitely helped solidify that choice though, as I was being asked more regularly to drop my stage volume low enough that I could barely get a 125 watt tube amp cooking like I wanted it and as was mentioned expecting to get that amp sound I loved through the PA anyway was a whole different can of worms. I do miss the days of unpermitted venues with basic vocal-dedicated house PAs quite a bit, for many reasons! I also enjoy working with good trained pro soundmen who make a nice house PA work well for a band with low stage volume (fortunately the decrease in local venues means there are a lot of good ones looking for gigs!), then there are those shows in between those two extremes that sometimes make me want to pull my hair out.

Watts are dirt cheap these days and speakers can do bass, yes. Those places that had a terrible setup that could barely carry the vocals usually have upgraded to something that can do heavy lifting, and more often than not, these venues want you to keep it down, especially on bass, not to interfere with FOH. That is the main reason I migrated my sound and toneshaping from the amp to the pedalboard, with the goal in mind to provide a DI signal that will work right out of the box, once you set the gain. An amp is, for me, mostly a means of self monitoring - in those projects I play in where we don't use IEM - but it's not an integral part of my sound any more.

Most of my playing is live oriented, so the thought that always rides the back of my mind is "How will this translate to a live environment".
And since I play in amateur bands and live in a rural area, the second thought is "Can a mediocre FOH tech handle that without problem?".

 

[Deleted member 409773]

It's quite strange to see people discussing which compressor is better or which effect is better (which is very subjective, especially when it comes to musical tastes).

It's clearly a matter of preference. And I agree, Cali76 is not a 1176 copy, but just something that is inspired by that classic compressor, but without that extremely aggressive attack, meaning it is made to be much more useful with bass guitar, it has more headroom (it doesn't saturate so quickly at high Ratio), it has SC HPF, Dry, functions that the 1176 compressor doesn't have.

I saw that the Echo Fix EF-P5 has both SC HPF and Blend, as well as transformers and all-in mode (the British Mode) like the 1176, but that compressor is also inspired by the original, because you can set a much slower Attack, and you have more functions that are not found on the original 1176. Does this make it a better compressor than the original or the Cali76? No, I don't think so. Because I bet everyone sounds different and this is where our preferences come into play.

For example, many say that the Empress MKII Bass Compressor is better than the Cali76 v2. Better at what? Do you have more options, does it sound better, and in what context does it sound better? I can say that as far as I'm concerned, for me Cali76 v2 is better, and I say this based on the recordings, based on how my bass sound in the mix. Look, with Empress I have an audible drop in volume when I go from slap to finger playing, which with Cali76 (with the same settings: Ratio 4:1, Slow Attack and Fast Release) doesn't happen, it's much more consistent, plus I have more character in the sound, meaning the bass cuts better in the mix, and that's audible. It's no use having the Empress compressor with more functions (or the Echo Fix EF-P5, which I haven't tested), if in my case, that is, in terms of my sound preferences, it's not as consistent when I switch from one playing style to another (from slap to finger playing), and it doesn't have that sound character that I like (that growl, which is perfectly subjective).

Cali76 v2 vs. Empress MKII Bass (both with Origin Bassrig SV):


Cali76 v2/Bassrig SV vs. Empress MKII Bass/SansAmp BDDI v2:


Cali76 v2 with Darkglass Microtubes X Ultra in band mix:

 

[Ritter667]

I forget if I mentioned this back when you had a Metal Zone on trial...

I know I mentioned the combination with the Joyo Orange Juice for a really grinding black metal -esque tone, but did I also mention that mixing the Metal Zone in parallel with a Turbo RAT at about equal measures, ideally then mixing both with a bit of parallel clean signal, wields a monstrous ballsy and heavy high gain distortion tone, that though at the same time is very well defined and articulate.

That's what I personally use for my high gain distortion tone at the moment.

 

[el murdoque]

It's quite strange to see people discussing which compressor is better or which effect is better (which is very subjective, especially when it comes to musical tastes).

It's clearly a matter of preference. And I agree, Cali76 is not a 1176 copy, but just something that is inspired by that classic compressor, but without that extremely aggressive attack, meaning it is made to be much more useful with bass guitar, it has more headroom (it doesn't saturate so quickly at high Ratio), it has SC HPF, Dry, functions that the 1176 compressor doesn't have.

I saw that the Echo Fix EF-P5 has both SC HPF and Blend, as well as transformers and all-in mode (the British Mode) like the 1176, but that compressor is also inspired by the original, because you can set a much slower Attack, and you have more functions that are not found on the original 1176. Does this make it a better compressor than the original or the Cali76? No, I don't think so. Because I bet everyone sounds different and this is where our preferences come into play.

For example, many say that the Empress MKII Bass Compressor is better than the Cali76 v2. Better at what? Do you have more options, does it sound better, and in what context does it sound better? I can say that as far as I'm concerned, for me Cali76 v2 is better, and I say this based on the recordings, based on how my bass sound in the mix. Look, with Empress I have an audible drop in volume when I go from slap to finger playing, which with Cali76 (with the same settings: Ratio 4:1, Slow Attack and Fast Release) doesn't happen, it's much more consistent, plus I have more character in the sound, meaning the bass cuts better in the mix, and that's audible. It's no use having the Empress compressor with more functions (or the Echo Fix EF-P5, which I haven't tested), if in my case, that is, in terms of my sound preferences, it's not as consistent when I switch from one playing style to another (from slap to finger playing), and it doesn't have that sound character that I like (that growl, which is perfectly subjective).

Cali76 v2 vs. Empress MKII Bass (both with Origin Bassrig SV):


Cali76 v2/Bassrig SV vs. Empress MKII Bass/SansAmp BDDI v2:


Cali76 v2 with Darkglass Microtubes X Ultra in band mix:

I'd argue that the Cali and the Empress are equals when it comes to the quality of effect you're getting.
The Cali is made a little bit better, while the Empress has much better metering - the Cali has caught up with that on the v2 version, but still, the empress is better in that regard.
In my case, I bought the Empress twice, because I wanted to like it, but I did not. I tried a ton of comps, and no slouches there. Keeley Bassist, Empress, Cali, MXR M87, Effectrode LA-1A, Doc Lloyd DLA-2A, Lehle RMI dual band comp ... just to name a few off the top of my head.
The Cali did two things for me. First, it sounded right. But much more important, It felt perfect. There was a connection, one that felt as if I am playing with the compressor instead of just sending a signal into it, letting it do its thing.

 

[gillento]

I'd argue that the Cali and the Empress are equals when it comes to the quality of effect you're getting.
The Cali is made a little bit better, while the Empress has much better metering - the Cali has caught up with that on the v2 version, but still, the empress is better in that regard.
In my case, I bought the Empress twice, because I wanted to like it, but I did not. I tried a ton of comps, and no slouches there. Keeley Bassist, Empress, Cali, MXR M87, Effectrode LA-1A, Doc Lloyd DLA-2A, Lehle RMI dual band comp ... just to name a few off the top of my head.
The Cali did two things for me. First, it sounded right. But much more important, It felt perfect. There was a connection, one that felt as if I am playing with the compressor instead of just sending a signal into it, letting it do its thing.

I had the Maxon Cp9Pro+, Demeter Compulator, EBS MultiComp, Lehle/RMI Dual, Cali 76 V1 and V2. The Cali76 V1 does exactly what you are describing, FOR ME!

 

[sunbeast]

It's quite strange to see people discussing which compressor is better or which effect is better (which is very subjective, especially when it comes to musical tastes).

It's clearly a matter of preference. And I agree, Cali76 is not a 1176 copy, but just something that is inspired by that classic compressor, but without that extremely aggressive attack, meaning it is made to be much more useful with bass guitar, it has more headroom (it doesn't saturate so quickly at high Ratio), it has SC HPF, Dry, functions that the 1176 compressor doesn't have.

I saw that the Echo Fix EF-P5 has both SC HPF and Blend, as well as transformers and all-in mode (the British Mode) like the 1176, but that compressor is also inspired by the original, because you can set a much slower Attack, and you have more functions that are not found on the original 1176. Does this make it a better compressor than the original or the Cali76? No, I don't think so. Because I bet everyone sounds different and this is where our preferences come into play.

For example, many say that the Empress MKII Bass Compressor is better than the Cali76 v2. Better at what? Do you have more options, does it sound better, and in what context does it sound better? I can say that as far as I'm concerned, for me Cali76 v2 is better, and I say this based on the recordings, based on how my bass sound in the mix. Look, with Empress I have an audible drop in volume when I go from slap to finger playing, which with Cali76 (with the same settings: Ratio 4:1, Slow Attack and Fast Release) doesn't happen, it's much more consistent, plus I have more character in the sound, meaning the bass cuts better in the mix, and that's audible. It's no use having the Empress compressor with more functions (or the Echo Fix EF-P5, which I haven't tested), if in my case, that is, in terms of my sound preferences, it's not as consistent when I switch from one playing style to another (from slap to finger playing), and it doesn't have that sound character that I like (that growl, which is perfectly subjective).

Cali76 v2 vs. Empress MKII Bass (both with Origin Bassrig SV):


Cali76 v2/Bassrig SV vs. Empress MKII Bass/SansAmp BDDI v2:


Cali76 v2 with Darkglass Microtubes X Ultra in band mix:

I think you missed the context of the discussion as well as my take. Nowhere did I say one or the other was objectively better in regards to anything for one, and the context was in regards to the accuracy of digital modeling of analog gear. My take is that digital modeling is still nowhere near as close to nailing the complexities of analog gear as ad-copy and paid YouTube reviews want you to think, but that it also doesn’t really matter because the real reason people are moving to this gear is for the sake of convenience and practicality and not because it totally nails the sound of the gear it models- in fact I don’t even think that’s a quality judgement because preference is still subjective (plenty of people are getting tones they actually enjoy more from digital gear than from their older expensive and cumbersome analog gear).

 

[Deleted member 409773]

I think you missed the context of the discussion as well as my take. Nowhere did I say one or the other was objectively better in regards to anything for one, and the context was in regards to the accuracy of digital modeling of analog gear. My take is that digital modeling is still nowhere near as close to nailing the complexities of analog gear as ad-copy and paid YouTube reviews want you to think, but that it also doesn’t really matter because the real reason people are moving to this gear is for the sake of convenience and practicality and not because it totally nails the sound of the gear it models- in fact I don’t even think that’s a quality judgement because preference is still subjective (plenty of people are getting tones they actually enjoy more from digital gear than from their older expensive and cumbersome analog gear).

And I agree with you.

 

[el murdoque]

Having played thrice in short succession, first with a real pedalboard, then with the Headrush and then again with the other pedalboard, I realized something:
I'm coming back to the tool analogy.
Both my pedalboards are tool boxes, filled with very fine single use tools.
When I know exactly what I have to expect - the set list, the other musicians, the sound varieties that are needed in that ensemble - I can fashion my tone with all the components I want and/or need.

There is a massive satisfaction in playing a pedalboard that was tailored to fit the job perfectly.

I did entertain the thought of how it would be, should I bring the Headrush to one of my bands to play, and I quickly realized that this meant I would not bring the tailored pedalboard and even the massive difference in size and weight would not be worth sacrificing those tones.

I don't know how many of you had the chance of comparing the Noble with the HX Stomp's "Regal".
The Regal does what the Noble does in terms of EQ, and it works very well. Add it to your digital rig within the Stomp and your sound receives moar toan.
Compare it to the real thing and it's not even close. It's like using a capable bluetooth speaker, something like the Bose Soundlink Mini, and then switching up to a pair of Neumann KH120's with the 810 sub. Enough ranting.

A dedicated pedalboard that does those sounds you need, and does them extremely well is the best thing.

A jam session board is something else entirely, though. At least in my book. When I'm there, I do pose as a kind of wildcard - whenever someone picks up the guitar and starts performing, I'll join in (unless they play Wonderwall), which means everything can happen.

 

[el murdoque]

....and back to the dreaded digital world. But don't worry. You'll like this, analog pedal nerds.

Possibility one to get dirt out of the Headrush: Just add a bass dirt pedal into your signal chain.
You get to choose from the following:

Grinder Bass OD: This one is, in what it does, somewhat of a mix of the Tube Screamer and the Klon. When you turn it up, the upper mids are emphasized and get really biting - so it sounds like the low end drops out.

Slab o' Meat: This one is, on the website, described as a punishing bass distortion. I clicked it into the signal chain, I twiddled the knobs and I have to agree. I feel severely punished. I would have assumed that a punishing bass distortion is meant to punish the other players in the mix, not the bassist - maybe the Headrush people did not understand the memo right.

....I forgot the name, but it's a copy of the Darkglass B7K Ultra V2. Great. They managed to capture what I complained about when I tested the B3K and the Vintage. They sound flat and lifeless, and the Headrush clone can do that no problem. You get a little more out of the EQ because it's parametric, so you can tone down those biting treble notes and bring in some 1k sharpness, but that makes the whole thing so flat it virtually sounds two dimensional.

Then, when you spent half an afternoon downloading software and creating accounts, so you get access to the Revalver suite with the cloud full of pedal clones, you realize one thing very quickly: People often do not name the pedal they clone, but rather give you a hint.
There is a Deluxe Bass Big ****. There are pedals with intentional typos, or other means of telling you what it is without using the original name.
What does that mean? Well, it means you cannot use the search function. You will have to scroll. The filters don't help much, because you can set them to only show pedal clones, but then you can only narrow it down by music genre. So you will scroll a bottomless list, looking at all the names until you find something that might be interesting. But here's the catch: When you clone a pedal using the Revalver software, you get a clone of the pedal in those particular settings. You can't turn the knobs of the pedal - there's just a generic three band EQ there. So it's hit and miss. It works as long as the person who made the clone has chosen the exact settings you want. Maybe you have more luck than me, but after trying about a dozen pedals, I completely gave up.

So, we're slowly homing in. In my humble opinion, your best bet for overdrive is to overdrive the amp.
There are two '69 SVT models in there. One only has a master volume, but the other has gain and master.
Find your clean settings, save the preset, then raise the gain to taste and lower the master, save this as another preset and you can use a foot switch to toggle.
There's also a B15, which has a warm and gentle drive sound, if the SVT style grind is too much.
In therory there's also a Fender Bassman, but I did not enjoy that and there's even a Trace Elliot Elf - for whatever reason.

As another option, you can get creative and use a clean blend. Just split the signal path, and either leave one side empty to get a dry/wet mix, or slap some compression and filtering on there to just produce low end. In the other path, you can now slap any guitar pedal you desire and it'll get you the dirt and you don't need to worry about the low cut.

Of all these options, distorting amps is the only thing that works for me.
The rest lacks feeling, and it is as bad as one would assume.
Interestingly, I can live with the comps on offer, the EQs and filters work fine, I have a lot of fun with the Wah and generally like to play with that thing. Except for dirt. Forget it for that.

 

[sloppy_phil]

....and back to the dreaded digital world. But don't worry. You'll like this, analog pedal nerds.

Possibility one to get dirt out of the Headrush: Just add a bass dirt pedal into your signal chain.
You get to choose from the following:

Grinder Bass OD: This one is, in what it does, somewhat of a mix of the Tube Screamer and the Klon. When you turn it up, the upper mids are emphasized and get really biting - so it sounds like the low end drops out.

Slab o' Meat: This one is, on the website, described as a punishing bass distortion. I clicked it into the signal chain, I twiddled the knobs and I have to agree. I feel severely punished. I would have assumed that a punishing bass distortion is meant to punish the other players in the mix, not the bassist - maybe the Headrush people did not understand the memo right.

....I forgot the name, but it's a copy of the Darkglass B7K Ultra V2. Great. They managed to capture what I complained about when I tested the B3K and the Vintage. They sound flat and lifeless, and the Headrush clone can do that no problem. You get a little more out of the EQ because it's parametric, so you can tone down those biting treble notes and bring in some 1k sharpness, but that makes the whole thing so flat it virtually sounds two dimensional.

Then, when you spent half an afternoon downloading software and creating accounts, so you get access to the Revalver suite with the cloud full of pedal clones, you realize one thing very quickly: People often do not name the pedal they clone, but rather give you a hint.
There is a Deluxe Bass Big ****. There are pedals with intentional typos, or other means of telling you what it is without using the original name.
What does that mean? Well, it means you cannot use the search function. You will have to scroll. The filters don't help much, because you can set them to only show pedal clones, but then you can only narrow it down by music genre. So you will scroll a bottomless list, looking at all the names until you find something that might be interesting. But here's the catch: When you clone a pedal using the Revalver software, you get a clone of the pedal in those particular settings. You can't turn the knobs of the pedal - there's just a generic three band EQ there. So it's hit and miss. It works as long as the person who made the clone has chosen the exact settings you want. Maybe you have more luck than me, but after trying about a dozen pedals, I completely gave up.

So, we're slowly homing in. In my humble opinion, your best bet for overdrive is to overdrive the amp.
There are two '69 SVT models in there. One only has a master volume, but the other has gain and master.
Find your clean settings, save the preset, then raise the gain to taste and lower the master, save this as another preset and you can use a foot switch to toggle.
There's also a B15, which has a warm and gentle drive sound, if the SVT style grind is too much.
In therory there's also a Fender Bassman, but I did not enjoy that and there's even a Trace Elliot Elf - for whatever reason.

As another option, you can get creative and use a clean blend. Just split the signal path, and either leave one side empty to get a dry/wet mix, or slap some compression and filtering on there to just produce low end. In the other path, you can now slap any guitar pedal you desire and it'll get you the dirt and you don't need to worry about the low cut.

Of all these options, distorting amps is the only thing that works for me.
The rest lacks feeling, and it is as bad as one would assume.
Interestingly, I can live with the comps on offer, the EQs and filters work fine, I have a lot of fun with the Wah and generally like to play with that thing. Except for dirt. Forget it for that.

This seems largely consistent with what I tend to see out in the wild, with people who use the digital/modelling stuff as the core of their sound. They have their main box (HX, QC, Headrush, whatever) and then a dedicated dirt box or two on the side. The utility effects, as well as modulation and time-based things, tend to sound good enough. But getting a good drive/gain sound is elusive in those digital realms.

Being able to parallel process wet and dry signals is quite nice, though. Does it ultimately sum back to one output, or could you in theory run a stereo output from the Headrush?

 

[el murdoque]

This seems largely consistent with what I tend to see out in the wild, with people who use the digital/modelling stuff as the core of their sound. They have their main box (HX, QC, Headrush, whatever) and then a dedicated dirt box or two on the side. The utility effects, as well as modulation and time-based things, tend to sound good enough. But getting a good drive/gain sound is elusive in those digital realms.

Yeah. I only have hands on experience with the HX and the Headrush, but on the Headrush, at least I can also live with the comp.

Being able to parallel process wet and dry signals is quite nice, though. Does it ultimately sum back to one output, or could you in theory run a stereo output from the Headrush?

both.

You can select different ways to split (starting with split signal, split in the middle, split towards the end) - and you can go stereo at any time.

 

[el murdoque]

I've finally managed to find a drive pedal that holds my curiosity:
The Browne Amplification Carbon

 

[GrowlerBox]

I've finally managed to find a drive pedal that holds my curiosity:
The Browne Amplification Carbon

Am I correct that this is Browne’s take on the Boss Blues Driver? I haven’t tried the original, but I have another pedal based on it that almost works for me (it has separate dry and wet level controls) — the long discontinued DMB Stellar Drive (4-knob version). Will be interested to hear your views.

 

[GrowlerBox]

You inspired me to dig out ye olde Stellar Drive for a quick comparison against my drive du jour, the Analog.man dual Bad Bob, mentioned a few pages back. Unfortunately for the Stellar, there is no comparison. The loss of bass can be compensated for with the clean level control, but you then get that “dual-layered” sound and feel that most blended dirt pedals produce (the Lusithand Ground & Pound being a notable exception in my opinion). I am once again impressed by the flat response curve of the Bobs, and it can produce pretty much all the distortion of the Stellar (and considerably more than I need), perhaps slightly more coarse than creamy at higher gain, but I quite enjoy that somewhat random, asymmetrical feel.

I suspect the Browne pedal will have a much better low-end; in the original Protein pedal, the “blue” (or Carbon) side is paired with a “green” (or Browne’s version of the Nobels ODB-1) side, and I imagine they’d want similar frequency responses from each side at baseline. Or I could be completely wrong …

 

[el murdoque]

You inspired me to dig out ye olde Stellar Drive for a quick comparison against my drive du jour, the Analog.man dual Bad Bob, mentioned a few pages back. Unfortunately for the Stellar, there is no comparison. The loss of bass can be compensated for with the clean level control, but you then get that “dual-layered” sound and feel that most blended dirt pedals produce (the Lusithand Ground & Pound being a notable exception in my opinion). I am once again impressed by the flat response curve of the Bobs, and it can produce pretty much all the distortion of the Stellar (and considerably more than I need), perhaps slightly more coarse than creamy at higher gain, but I quite enjoy that somewhat random, asymmetrical feel.

I suspect the Browne pedal will have a much better low-end; in the original Protein pedal, the “blue” (or Carbon) side is paired with a “green” (or Browne’s version of the Nobels ODB-1) side, and I imagine they’d want similar frequency responses from each side at baseline. Or I could be completely wrong …

All I can offer is that when someone speaks of a BB circuit in a bass context, the low cut of the original BB should be the elephant in the room.

I know @tb-player has one on his board. Maybe he'd be so kind and enlighten us in regard of the low end retention of the Browne Amplification Carbon.

 

[el murdoque]

BTW, it's been a decade or three since I bought a book for learning bass.


...but I ran across this one and bought it - it's great.
He's got some interesting bits about three finger picking and I really needed to clean up my technique in that regard, but I'm also working through the rest of the book. I like the tone, the insights and the way the practice licks are structured.
It's not a beginner's book at all. It's a book for someone who can play bass and found themselves in a metal band, quickly reaching the boundaries of what's possible with conventional methods, needing to explore a bit further.

 

[OldShark]

Dear Jounalist,
unfortunately you missed the chance to ask for the inevitable "Best book for metal" thread. Sigh.

 

[el murdoque]

I just discovered an awesome practice tool.
The Delay.
When working through Mr. Websters three finger tutorials, I learned quite a few things - first and foremost that 1-2-3-2-1-2-3-2 lends itself better to playing 4/4 beats, while playing 1-2-3-1-2-3-1-2 feels a bit odd when you'll play the one with a different finger each time, but it's ultimately more consistent and faster (at least for me, that is).
While sitting there, chugging out consistent 16th notes with my three fingers, I activated a delay, set it to a medium tempo, then played a single note, got a feel for the repeat time, then played two notes, listened, then played four and kept playing. When the playing is perfectly consistent, there is no audible delay at all as long as you stay on the same note. When you get a bit too fast or too slow, the notes sound smeared. I played for a while, then raised the tempo a bit. Then again, until I hit my limit.