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
The thought of a Line 6 Helix HX in tandem with the B3n has my G.A.S. at a peak level (like +12 dBg) Running an amp/cabinet sim along with a HPF, limiter and boost in the Zoom along with the effects available in the Helix PLUS the fact that the B3n can be placed in an effects loop and moved around in the chain would make for serious firepower.
That's where I'm at right now. Because I hate the switching on the B3n, I'll probably pretty much use it as an amp/cab sim and that's it. But that's the only thing the HX is really lacking, so it works out.
I'm wondering with the price drop on the B3n if we will see a Helixish/Headrushish setup from Zoom in the near future?
Best wishes,
Brent
Best wishes,
Brent
Does anyone still prefer the older B3? I had the B3n and liked it but sold it off a while ago. Got the Zoom itch again and got a 2nd hand B3. Obviously the B3n has better dirt effects and processing power but I don't use a lot of OD/Distortion or have the need for 6 effects going at once. The DI is also a nice feature for the old B3.
I'm still satisfied with the B3n, but I still find easier to make sounds with a G5n. Now, if only my guitarist would buy an amp...
Which of the two do you favor,and why? I've been contemplating getting one or the other (can't afford both), also entertaining the ampeg scr-di. I'm aware that the B3n, and GT-1B are not DI's.
Having only used them into a clean amp I prefer the Boss, but today I bought some monitors to play through so I'll update you when I've tweaked my patches and had a play.
I know they don't have the DI XLR out but the one on the B3 was crappy anyway so you're better off going through a separate cheap behringer one really.
In terms of usability, the B3n is more intuitive set up but it's easier to get a full patch on the GT, that is to say, on every patch on the GT it's possible to have a comp/OD, modulation, eq, noise gate, amp, cab, mod 2, delay, verb, and with the FS7 you have a lot of control over the patch.
With the Zoom you can have any combination of effects (DSP permitting), but are listed to 7 slots and amps take 2 slots and cabs an extra one, and if you use a noise gate that then limits you to 3 more slots - may or may not always be enough for you.
Over all in that respect I prefer the GT but as long as I have the FS7 with it.
Thanks for the reply, and good information FuzzFacetious. Look forward to your update.
I only had time to try them with the guitar versions - lots of tweaks needed on my patches but so far through the alesis monitors I preferred the G5n to the Boss GT-1 (though not by a large distance - actually it's very hard to tell, the amps and dirt simulation is so close!), the opposite to my preference when running through a clean amp.
Hopefully tomorrow I'll try the bass versions and set my patches up accordingly, and report back.
Last edited:
USPS dropped a b3n off at my house today. I have messed with it a little bit. I will be used mostly in live situations. Here are my 1st impressions compared to my current Boss ME-50B:
1) Most of the factory patches sound bad to me. Too much volume, too over-the-top, too bright, too much ambience, too many devices inline in the patch of dubious helpfulness. I am a basic kind of guy. I'll for sure be building my own patches. The ME-50B was the same way.
2) I wish there were a master button that would bypass all patches. To remedy this, I have a patch that only has an amp sim, which will be normally turned off but is there if I want it.
3) I wish there were a quick way to mute to change basses. I guess I will be going into silent tuner mode (requiring timing lag and multiple button hits) or break out my Morley ABC pedal-- or hit the mute button on my amp.
3) The synth and octave sounds sound better on the B3n .vs. the ME-50B. They track better also.
4) I LOVE the smaller footprint. I won't miss the expression pedal, as I only used it as a volume pedal to mute everything.
5) I LOVE the display windows that display patch names and display the parameter settings of the effects. With the ME-50B, I have to remember patches by bank and pedal number. The other issue is that when going into edit mode, there is absolutely no way to figure out what the existing settings are. I have to start twiddling knobs to see what part of the knob travel would cause a change in the effect. Making an edit meant basically starting the parameter settings all over again.
6) I like that the B3n has amp and speaker sims. The ME50B has none. I don't see myself using the drum patterns much.
I think the B3n is a nice box. Also reasonably priced compared to the ME-50B, which feature-wise is beginning to show its age, sells for twice the B3n price, and requires an external pedal to change effect banks with a pedal as opposed to crouching down and hitting a tiny button.
1) Most of the factory patches sound bad to me. Too much volume, too over-the-top, too bright, too much ambience, too many devices inline in the patch of dubious helpfulness. I am a basic kind of guy. I'll for sure be building my own patches. The ME-50B was the same way.
2) I wish there were a master button that would bypass all patches. To remedy this, I have a patch that only has an amp sim, which will be normally turned off but is there if I want it.
3) I wish there were a quick way to mute to change basses. I guess I will be going into silent tuner mode (requiring timing lag and multiple button hits) or break out my Morley ABC pedal-- or hit the mute button on my amp.
3) The synth and octave sounds sound better on the B3n .vs. the ME-50B. They track better also.
4) I LOVE the smaller footprint. I won't miss the expression pedal, as I only used it as a volume pedal to mute everything.
5) I LOVE the display windows that display patch names and display the parameter settings of the effects. With the ME-50B, I have to remember patches by bank and pedal number. The other issue is that when going into edit mode, there is absolutely no way to figure out what the existing settings are. I have to start twiddling knobs to see what part of the knob travel would cause a change in the effect. Making an edit meant basically starting the parameter settings all over again.
6) I like that the B3n has amp and speaker sims. The ME50B has none. I don't see myself using the drum patterns much.
I think the B3n is a nice box. Also reasonably priced compared to the ME-50B, which feature-wise is beginning to show its age, sells for twice the B3n price, and requires an external pedal to change effect banks with a pedal as opposed to crouching down and hitting a tiny button.
You can create a completely empty patch for bypass or use the tuner in non-mute mode to achieve this.
I played the hell out of the B3n and the GT-1B this morning - Epiphone Jack Cassady - B3n or GT-1B - 2x Alesis MKIII speakers.
B3n:
I found it really hard to get my to-amp patches to sound good through speakers, first off I edited the CAB parameters as I had read that mixing the cabs almost to 0 was the best way to work them for into-amp situations, and then I worked with the amp sim and cab sim settings, dirt pedal settings etc to get them to sound as good as possible. It took a while, granted, I am mainly a guitar player who also loves bass, so I am not as good at dialing in as some of you may be, but it was annoying. Not as easy as gong into the front of the amp, for sure. The same can be said of dialing in a new patch from scratch, it was a long and arduous process. I could get nice clean patches, but then trying to add dirt wasn't fun. Maybe I'll learn something I'm doing wrong, and get better, or maybe it's just how the unit works, but it did take a long time to get good sounds. All the preset and downloaded patches that I still have on it sounded much better through the speakers than into the amp though.
GT-1B:
I changed the input setting and the patches immediately just worked through the speakers. Magic.
Patches set up similarly just sounded creamier. I was in love immediately. I didn't set up any patches from scratch yet just because it's not as easy an interface to work with and I got bored after all the tweaking I'd done on the B3n, so I just cycled patches and effects, and everything sounded nice, full, mostly usable as-is.
I definitely prefer the GT-1B.
B3n:
I found it really hard to get my to-amp patches to sound good through speakers, first off I edited the CAB parameters as I had read that mixing the cabs almost to 0 was the best way to work them for into-amp situations, and then I worked with the amp sim and cab sim settings, dirt pedal settings etc to get them to sound as good as possible. It took a while, granted, I am mainly a guitar player who also loves bass, so I am not as good at dialing in as some of you may be, but it was annoying. Not as easy as gong into the front of the amp, for sure. The same can be said of dialing in a new patch from scratch, it was a long and arduous process. I could get nice clean patches, but then trying to add dirt wasn't fun. Maybe I'll learn something I'm doing wrong, and get better, or maybe it's just how the unit works, but it did take a long time to get good sounds. All the preset and downloaded patches that I still have on it sounded much better through the speakers than into the amp though.
GT-1B:
I changed the input setting and the patches immediately just worked through the speakers. Magic.
Patches set up similarly just sounded creamier. I was in love immediately. I didn't set up any patches from scratch yet just because it's not as easy an interface to work with and I got bored after all the tweaking I'd done on the B3n, so I just cycled patches and effects, and everything sounded nice, full, mostly usable as-is.
I definitely prefer the GT-1B.
Thanks for the update FuzzFacetious with all that good information. It seems like as far as sound goes the gt-1b is superior.When it comes to setting up - not so much. Thanks, now I have something to chew on.
I think the issue with the Zooms in general is that they don't like blending gains/distortion. If an amp model has gain AND you're using gain from an OD or distortion pedal they don't interact how you'd expect. You don't hear this as much through an amp because I think the real amp and can filter out some of the harshness that this scenario creates but it's horrible through speakers. I found this to be true of the guitar version too although it will allow some interaction if the gain isn't set too high on either, but it definitely doesn't work the same as it would with an amp and pedals interacting.
The Boss pedals allow for more blending and interaction ime.
The Boss pedals allow for more blending and interaction ime.
Thanks Fuzz. That's a sound ( pun intended ) explaination of what is going on and why. Now with that in mind, I'm down to deciding between the Boss, and the Ampeg scr-di. Appreciate all of your help Fuzz.
Just putting this out there...
Zoom nails the darkglass B3K and B7K. The BOSS - I'm not sure what they modelled on the dirt side. Having said that they do make a couple pretty good drives as well.
Everyone else that has tried both - prefer the amp sims from the zoom stating they sound more organic. You should read more of this thread before discounting the zoom.
I don't find this to be the case at all. I use the B3n SVT amp model and cab sim, set with the gain of the SVT adding a small amount of grit/hair, and often couple this with a front end drive model. Certainly depending on what you're looking for, YMMV, but I find that the front end drives on the B3n are a strong point, especially compared to the B3 which gave me nothing but misery in the overdrive/distortion department.
FWIW, I'm getting pretty much exactly the results I expect to get. YMMV. I'm also able to get a pretty wide variety of tones and overdriven sounds using many different combinations of drive models in front of amp models and cab sims. And all without too much trouble, ether.
I guess we can chalk this up to a lot of things, not the least of which is that different players will be looking for different things in their gear, which may be more easily obtained favoring one piece of gear over another. No knock on anyone that doesn't prefer the B3n. Though I've never played the GT-1B, I'm pretty sure I could get some nice sounds out of it, but I'd be shocked if the tonal differences and drives would be night-and-day so much better than the B3n.
Of course, I think the B3n is more buttery, less creamy, and has those ever-elusive haunting mids that I crave.
Not sure what you mean here. Mixing the cabinet BALance parameter to 0 is essentially defeating the cab sim altogether. Could you elaborate with more detail exactly what your process is? When you're finished with a tone creation on the B3n, where do you find your cabinet sim BALance value? I find that I prefer this setting to be around 80 with dirty/grindy tones. Much lower than that and the dirt starts to sound very unnatural.
I own both the B3n and the GT-1B. I haven't put a lot of time into comparing or with the Boss unit at all. My initial impression of it wasn't that great. I sort of put it to the side as it seemed somewhat lackluster and I prefer the footswitch setup on the Zoom. So to be clear I'm not saying after extensive research or anything along those lines but the Boss hasn't grabbed me in any way and I like the B3n for the most part. YMMV. Try to get both in the same room if you can.
