After a good night's sleep, all becomes clear: put a digital delay in the second loop of an LS-1 (or a Divaricator), and then you can dial up a small delay to match the latency of the Zoom.
Problem solved!
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.
New: Zoom B3n Multi-Effects
- Thread starter CharlieC
- Start date
-
- Tags
- b3n multi-effects zoom
Problem solved!
Do any of you folks who are using FRFR set ups have any words of wisdom,/secret tips they would like to share? Just got my Yamaha DSR 112, and I will be setting up patches over the next few days. I'm running Pandora through it as we speak, to break it in a bit.
Don't want to sound discouraging, but just plug in and play!
I overslept this morning, and ended up having to plug straight into the house DI. Zoom was sitting off in a corner, unused.
The Dingwall (passive) sounded great in my IEM's, and no-one noticed the difference.
Really wonder why I obsess about this stuff sometimes...,
I overslept this morning, and ended up having to plug straight into the house DI. Zoom was sitting off in a corner, unused.
The Dingwall (passive) sounded great in my IEM's, and no-one noticed the difference.
Really wonder why I obsess about this stuff sometimes...,
+1. I wonder if I just left this thing at home and plugged straight in, who other than I would notice.
My tonic for that is to try to innovate and develop more interesting tones that push my role beyond what's normal for bass. That worked well in my original funk-fusion-acid jazz group. Right now I play in a wedding and drunk-girls-in-bars band; the bass role kind of is what it is.
You can only push the envelope so far on "867-5309 Jenny." This is also why my 6-string hasn't left the house in 5 years...
Yup. I've had some impromptu situations arise where all I could do was pull a DI feed off my bass and then be at the mercy of of the house systems for my sound. It does work, and sometimes it can work quite well, especially if the music doesn't lean on the bass to provide highly stylized or effected bass tones. Still, I think I'm doing just fine carrying only one pedal for all my gigs.
So
Sorry for the late reply, I use an MS60B, as my always on ZNR/compressor/amp sim/HPF. FLIP TOP is my go to for amp sim. I'll post settings when I dial it in with my new Yamaha DSR 112.
My early home recordings, before I knew anything about tone, involved a cheap active bass plugged directly into a cheap usb interface into a crappy pc with usb version 1, and the SOUND (not the playing, just the sound!
) is good! I mean, it’s not amazing, but it’s listenable as a bass track. The guitars, which were recorded through a pedal with a “direct out” jack, sounded crap because I dimed the gain and cut all the mids, but the bass sounded like bass (ie the bass I hear on recorded tracks by bands I like), and sounded nice.
Last edited:
To my ears I really like the bassamp models. But I don't like the speaker simulation models. It seems like there's some dynamics reduction and some extra latency inserted when adding a speaker model, apart from the obvious highs rolloff. I've a FRFR setup (EV ZLX15 speaker) but I use the B3N mostly as a sophisticated DI.
Typical patch for me is:
[Compresssor (as effect, not always on)] > [modulation FX on/off] > [SVT or SWR amp model] > [GEQ].
The grafic EQ gives me enough possibilities not to drive the other bandmembers nuts with too much mid- and highrange (little skooping of 300-500zh territory, little top end roll off). The sound is more directly communicating with my playing than using the speaker sim. With speaker sim it's more dull and 'slow'.
Does anyone actually have good results using the speaker sims? To me they seem to mess too much with the dynamics and latency.
Typical patch for me is:
[Compresssor (as effect, not always on)] > [modulation FX on/off] > [SVT or SWR amp model] > [GEQ].
The grafic EQ gives me enough possibilities not to drive the other bandmembers nuts with too much mid- and highrange (little skooping of 300-500zh territory, little top end roll off). The sound is more directly communicating with my playing than using the speaker sim. With speaker sim it's more dull and 'slow'.
Does anyone actually have good results using the speaker sims? To me they seem to mess too much with the dynamics and latency.
i am used fretless simulator
not bad very smooth
not bad very smooth
I use the cab sims when I want a smooth, processed, sound in some situations. Especially with the Dingwall, which has more bite.
When I'm playing more sensitively, or need more bark for uptempo stuff, they are off. Especially with the P-Bass, which is already darker.
Yes. Of course, preference and taste in tone is subjective. I tend to work with the BALance and Bottom parameters. I find that when using overdrive/distortion, a complimentary cabinet sim is a great way to tame those sounds at the extremes of the bass guitar audio spectrum, which is exactly what speaker cabinets do naturally. This is particularly apparent when pairing the SVT amp and cab models, and the Acoustic amp and cab models, since those amp models can be set to overdrive/distort the tone.
I've never felt that the dynamics have been significantly reduced, nor that there was any real, discernible latency added.
I just finished my first bass performance on stage using the Zoom B3n into Sans Amp as the DI. I had a problem or two with the song but the tone I was able to get from the B3n was killer!
I can’t say enough at how pleased I am with the B3n...I can’t wait to see what other goodies Zoom has in store for us.
I can’t say enough at how pleased I am with the B3n...I can’t wait to see what other goodies Zoom has in store for us.
Question for all you zoom users. Looking to get a few bass synth tones and a pitch shifter in a multi efx box. Looking at the effects list the zoom has it. I am not looking to recreate anything in particular just get a decent synth tone to cover some current pop music. Will the zoom do this and sound good, or am I better off looking elsewhere? I have everything I need in my board for dirt, compression, en filters etc. just need synth, pitch shifting and maybe some delay and reverb.
I'd say the synth and pitch are perfectly serviceable considering it's a $199 multi-fx. You may need to fuss a little bit in order to get them to behave the way you want. Adding a compressor will help track sustained notes, and for pitch shifting across wide intervals (5ths, octaves) some post filtering of the top end using EQ or even a drive can help make the tone sound a little more natural.
Lots of factors to consider, though (bass instrument, technique, etc.) so YMMV. IMO, bass synth and pitch shifting are two of the toughest nuts to crack, and a lot of bassists have gone to great length and expense to chase this stuff down. You may be happy with the B3n, but don't be surprised if synth and pitch shift aren't up to snuff vs. dedicated pedals that do nothing else, and can cost a bit of $$$.
Sub-octaves seem to work better.
For some reason, pitch accuracy is a bit dicey on the octave up effects.
For some reason, pitch accuracy is a bit dicey on the octave up effects.
To my opinion the pitch shifters and bass synth effect is not the department where the ZOOM's strength is. The ZOOM is very capable with the more 'standard' FX like Chorus, Flanger, EQ, Amp sims. But the pitch shifters and the Synth bass sound a bit thin and 'digital' to me. Try before you buy is a cliché but definitely necessary if you have a particular sound in mind.
Thanks. I think what I am looking for probably is going to cost more than the zoom and do less, but I’ll get that pop synth sound. Thanks for all the input all.
Exactly! And that's the point. These two dedicated pedals will, we presume, do an excellent job at pitch shifting and synth sounds. The price for both is going to be +/-$300US, and neither pedal is programmable. So that's the trade-off, and why it is worth spending a little bit of time seeing if you can get acceptably good results with a programmable multi-fx (like the $199 B3n) for occasional use of synth and pitch shifting effects. I wouldn't say this if synth/pitch shifting were a primary concern and the cornerstone of someone's effected sounds. If that's the case, then you have to open up your wallet and spend the required time to see what works best, and even then, if you require programmability/presets, you might be looking at some pretty pricey stuff.
