New: Zoom B3n Multi-Effects

[bfields]

Dumb question: is there any reason not to just buy the guitar versions of these pedals instead? What do you miss out on?

(I'm pretty insensitive to tone myself, once the level and EQ is good enough to fit in with the other instruments--I doubt I could distinguish between amp sims, for example. I've ended up using my B3 mainly as a convenient all-in-one tuner/USB interface/DI. (With the DI function made a bit less convenient by the the hot output, as others have noted--so I also carry like this little attenuator, but then it isn't quite as all-in-one.).)

 

[John Swartz]

The B3 manual says that its XLR is a "balanced" output, and it does give some impedance and HOT/COLD/Ground specs. So, to the extent that it CAN be used as a DI feed to the PA system, it can function as a DI box...sorta. However, you are right in that if you use the settings necessary for the B3 to drive a power amp input and passive speaker, the output will be very, very hot if also sent to the PA system via XLR, as mentioned. Although a lot of modern consoles have input padding to accommodate a hot signal, I have also been told that it is still far too hot of a signal. In that context, it's not acting like a traditional direct box, which provides a reasonable MIC level for interfacing with a mixing console.

Yup, my experience as well. It's workable, but it is not a "true" D.I., for those that care about that.

Lately, I've been powering my passive full range stage cabinets with a GK head, so I've been using the 1/4" out of the B3, and the XLR output of the GK head (set PRE - preamp) to feed the PA system. For me, this whole argument is mostly a moot point. The only times I find the XLR output handy is when I'm interfacing with a power amp that only has XLR input, and I need to feed it a hot signal. Most everything else has a 1/4" input or combo XLR & 1/4".

I'm starting to do something similar. I was using my B3 as a preamp (as originally suggested to me by @jimfist), but was also carrying around a Peavey Maxbass pre-amp in my rack box containing my poweramp (mostly as a backup, or for gigs where I didn't want to take my B3, or if I was letting someone else play through my rig - easier to let them go into a pre-amp than the Zoom if they don't know how to adjust it) and finally thought, "Why the hell don't I start running the Zoom into the preamp first? The things just sitting there in the rack..." The Maxbass has both tube and solid-state channels so I can use the solid-state channel clean with the Zoom for most stuff, but then switch over to the tube channel for some dirt (rather than using the Zoom's distortions).

Also, I had some issues with the B3 XLR output being dodgey sometimes when using various mic cables. It didn't seem to always seat very well, and could be intermittent at times. I also HATE the PRE/POST processing rear button switch associated with the XLR! I always seemed to hit it in transport. I'd send the XLR to the PA thinking they were getting my processed sound, and since I was using the 1/4" output from the B3 I couldn't really tell until I was engaging a very radical effect and could sense it didn't sound right out front. ***!!

Now solved using the XLR out on my pre-amp (or your GK) instead...

Guess I'm helping make the case for not needing that XLR out on the Zoom...

John

 

[jimfist]

Dumb question: is there any reason not to just buy the guitar versions of these pedals instead? What do you miss out on?

(I'm pretty insensitive to tone myself, once the level and EQ is good enough to fit in with the other instruments--I doubt I could distinguish between amp sims, for example. I've ended up using my B3 mainly as a convenient all-in-one tuner/USB interface/DI. (With the DI function made a bit less convenient by the the hot output, as others have noted--so I also carry like this little attenuator, but then it isn't quite as all-in-one.).)

Funny, I carry an in line XLR attenuator for the same exact reason.

I've been using the G5n for bass since it was introduced March 2016, so it certainly can be used for bass as-is. I don't use it on its own for all of the shows I do, but I've done plenty of gigs using just the G5n and have been pretty happy with the results. The G5n gives you USB audio I/O, up to 9 effects slots to fill, more pedal switches, dedicated tuner switch, expression pedal, etc. As for sounds, the primary difference is just the amps. The B3n will have bona fide bass amps/cabs modeled. With the G5n you have to make it work with amps/cabs that are generally used for guitar sounds, although I was able to easily make things work for bass with the Bassman and HiWatt amps.

 

[HelpImaRock]

Funny, I carry an in line XLR attenuator for the same exact reason.

I've been using the G5n for bass since it was introduced March 2016, so it certainly can be used for bass as-is. I don't use it on its own for all of the shows I do, but I've done plenty of gigs using just the G5n and have been pretty happy with the results. The G5n gives you USB audio I/O, up to 9 effects slots to fill, more pedal switches, dedicated tuner switch, expression pedal, etc. As for sounds, the primary difference is just the amps. The B3n will have bona fide bass amps/cabs modeled. With the G5n you have to make it work with amps/cabs that are generally used for guitar sounds, although I was able to easily make things work for bass with the Bassman and HiWatt amps.

My hesitation here, as stated earlier, is that I like a clean blend on my dirty sounds. Having looked through the dirt and amp effects on the G5n, I don't see blend as an adjustable parameter. And that's what keeps me from buying one. Otherwise, you're right, might as well go with it.

 

[jimfist]

My hesitation here, as stated earlier, is that I like a clean blend on my dirty sounds. Having looked through the dirt and amp effects on the G5n, I don't see blend as an adjustable parameter. And that's what keeps me from buying one. Otherwise, you're right, might as well go with it.

Yup. Clean blending isn't nearly as popular for guitarists, no doubt. I added the Divaricator. There are always other fx loop pedals that allow you to do wet/dry blending, but then we're talking about adding another pedal, which is less desirable if you're looking for all-in-one and minimal floor space. Again, as of yet, there's not really a great all-in-one multi-fx modeler solution in the low budget end of the market. Otherwise, it's splurge for a Helix or AX8 at 4x the cost. This makes adding an fx loop pedal for wet/dry a lot more appealing. No consolation, though.

When I get around to purchasing the B3n, it will be used for back end amp modeling and cab sim, and perhaps some post-compression/EQ. The total cost of the G5n (front end fx), Divaricator (hi pass to the G5n fx) and B3n will be on the order of $700, plus or minus. Even at that price point, there's not really much available for a comprehensive all-in-one. No manufacturer seems to even want to go there.

 

[HelpImaRock]

Yup. Clean blending isn't nearly as popular for guitarists, no doubt. I added the Divaricator. There are always other fx loop pedals that allow you to do wet/dry blending, but then we're talking about adding another pedal, which is less desirable if you're looking for all-in-one and minimal floor space. Again, as of yet, there's not really a great all-in-one multi-fx modeler solution in the low budget end of the market. Otherwise, it's splurge for a Helix or AX8 at 4x the cost. This makes adding an fx loop pedal for wet/dry a lot more appealing. No consolation, though.

When I get around to purchasing the B3n, it will be used for back end amp modeling and cab sim, and perhaps some post-compression/EQ. The total cost of the G5n (front end fx), Divaricator (hi pass to the G5n fx) and B3n will be on the order of $700, plus or minus. Even at that price point, there's not really much available for a comprehensive all-in-one. No manufacturer seems to even want to go there.

I'm not saying I'm not going to buy a B3n, but if Line6 ever announces a smaller Helix, I'm all over it. It'd still be $1000, but it would be that all-in-one solution.

 

[arthur38]

Availability March 2017.... arghhhh... february ll become the longuest month!

 

[BrentSimons]

Yup. Clean blending isn't nearly as popular for guitarists, no doubt. I added the Divaricator. There are always other fx loop pedals that allow you to do wet/dry blending, but then we're talking about adding another pedal, which is less desirable if you're looking for all-in-one and minimal floor space. Again, as of yet, there's not really a great all-in-one multi-fx modeler solution in the low budget end of the market. Otherwise, it's splurge for a Helix or AX8 at 4x the cost. This makes adding an fx loop pedal for wet/dry a lot more appealing. No consolation, though.

When I get around to purchasing the B3n, it will be used for back end amp modeling and cab sim, and perhaps some post-compression/EQ. The total cost of the G5n (front end fx), Divaricator (hi pass to the G5n fx) and B3n will be on the order of $700, plus or minus. Even at that price point, there's not really much available for a comprehensive all-in-one. No manufacturer seems to even want to go there.

Invalid Link Removed ?
Brent

 

[ChubbyJerk]

I'm not saying I'm not going to buy a B3n, but if Line6 ever announces a smaller Helix, I'm all over it. It'd still be $1000, but it would be that all-in-one solution.

I would be fairly surprised if they did not release a Helix Mini at some point. It's a standard move. (Although you could argue it usually goes the other way around...smaller product first, then a bigger version ("XL" or "Plus" or what-have-you) later.) We've got a good example here - Zoom's various form factors all based on the same basic software. B3 B1xon G3 G3x G5n B3n etc...whatever they're all called. (I know some share firmware and others don't, not sure off the top of my which are which, but you get the point.) Fractal has done it. Line 6 has even done it (or similar) with their M9 / M5 / Mwhatevers (I think).

If they didn't build the Helix firmware from the ground up with this thought in mind, they screwed up big time. Take of the expression pedal, halve the number of inputs and outputs, use 1 sharc instead of 2...and you can release the same type of killer thing at a price point that's much easier for people to buy in at.

 

[jimfist]

I'm not saying I'm not going to buy a B3n, but if Line6 ever announces a smaller Helix, I'm all over it. It'd still be $1000, but it would be that all-in-one solution.

I would be fairly surprised if they did not release a Helix Mini at some point. It's a standard move. (Although you could argue it usually goes the other way around...smaller product first, then a bigger version ("XL" or "Plus" or what-have-you) later.) We've got a good example here - Zoom's various form factors all based on the same basic software. B3 B1xon G3 G3x G5n B3n etc...whatever they're all called. (I know some share firmware and others don't, not sure off the top of my which are which, but you get the point.) Fractal has done it. Line 6 has even done it (or similar) with their M9 / M5 / Mwhatevers (I think).

If they didn't build the Helix firmware from the ground up with this thought in mind, they screwed up big time. Take of the expression pedal, halve the number of inputs and outputs, use 1 sharc instead of 2...and you can release the same type of killer thing at a price point that's much easier for people to buy in at.

Based on what I've read from the Line 6 mouthpieces re: a mini-Helix, it ain't gonna happen any time soon, primarily due to the nature of the cost of the processors necessary to run these detailed algorithms. Line 6 DID build the Helix from the ground up, and came up with....the HELIX. It's simply near impossible to make money scaling this technology down when you must start with such limited commodity powerful digital processors that do real time processing.

Fractal scaled down from their expensive $2000+ modeler (AxeFXII) to a $1200 floor pedal version (AX8), and it's still out of reach for the vast majority of guitarists, let alone bassists. You'd probably get some interesting responses at the Fractal forum if you requested a scaled down version of the AX8 for $800.

Zoom can be flexible because they are dealing with a much lower cost for their processors, and they aren't nearly as powerful as the ones in the Helix or AX8. Plus, the target market isn't expecting the highest levels of quality and features that you'd expect a high end unit to have (even though a lot of people still DO!).

JMHO

 

[jimfist]

Invalid Link Removed ?
Brent

Headrush does look interesting, but they sort of need to step up their game a little bit in terms of the demos they're putting out (not very good at the moment) I'm keeping my eye out, though. Much like the Helix, it appears to be a pretty large footprint, which is one of my top three concerns (smaller = better). They've got a long way to go from what I have heard, before the Helix or AX8 are in any jeopardy of losing a portion of the market to the Headrush. Cool touch screen interface, though.

 

[CharlieC]

Have faith in Zoom's new DSP, I think we bassists finally have hit jackpot!

 

[ChubbyJerk]

Based on what I've read from the Line 6 mouthpieces re: a mini-Helix, it ain't gonna happen any time soon, primarily due to the nature of the cost of the processors necessary to run these detailed algorithms. Line 6 DID build the Helix from the ground up, and came up with....the HELIX. It's simply near impossible to make money scaling this technology down when you must start with such limited commodity powerful digital processors that do real time processing.

Fractal scaled down from their expensive $2000+ modeler (AxeFXII) to a $1200 floor pedal version (AX8), and it's still out of reach for the vast majority of guitarists, let alone bassists. You'd probably get some interesting responses at the Fractal forum if you requested a scaled down version of the AX8 for $800.

Zoom can be flexible because they are dealing with a much lower cost for their processors, and they aren't nearly as powerful as the ones in the Helix or AX8. Plus, the target market isn't expecting the highest levels of quality and features that you'd expect a high end unit to have (even though a lot of people still DO!).

JMHO

Yeah, you take a lot of my main points and draw the exact opposite conclusion. I know Line 6 did build the Helix from the ground up...I said that, and it's 100% my point. The question was if they built it from the ground up with reuse in mind. Software R&D is very expensive. One of the best ways to mitigate that cost is to reuse the software. A lot of the decisions that make that possible (or at least cost-effective) happy early in the process.

 

[Crystalman85]

At least for its first year of release, Zoom will supply the B3n with one new amp model per month as stated at NAMM 2017.

I believe all the classic and must-have amps not supplied on board with initial purchase will appear. They need to space them out as to highlight the benefits of the download portal.

Yeah true, but still it would be nice to include a gk amp model on it. other than that, I am intrigue by the fact it has darkglass models on it.

 

[HelpImaRock]

Based on what I've read from the Line 6 mouthpieces re: a mini-Helix, it ain't gonna happen any time soon, primarily due to the nature of the cost of the processors necessary to run these detailed algorithms. Line 6 DID build the Helix from the ground up, and came up with....the HELIX. It's simply near impossible to make money scaling this technology down when you must start with such limited commodity powerful digital processors that do real time processing.

Fractal scaled down from their expensive $2000+ modeler (AxeFXII) to a $1200 floor pedal version (AX8), and it's still out of reach for the vast majority of guitarists, let alone bassists. You'd probably get some interesting responses at the Fractal forum if you requested a scaled down version of the AX8 for $800.

Zoom can be flexible because they are dealing with a much lower cost for their processors, and they aren't nearly as powerful as the ones in the Helix or AX8. Plus, the target market isn't expecting the highest levels of quality and features that you'd expect a high end unit to have (even though a lot of people still DO!).

JMHO

Yeah, I don't expect another offering from Line6 for quite a while.

 

[jimfist]

Yeah, you take a lot of my main points and draw the exact opposite conclusion. I know Line 6 did build the Helix from the ground up...I said that, and it's 100% my point. The question was if they built it from the ground up with reuse in mind. Software R&D is very expensive. One of the best ways to mitigate that cost is to reuse the software. A lot of the decisions that make that possible (or at least cost-effective) happy early in the process.

Well, I did allow for the possibility that they'd eventually come out with a stripped down Helix, just that it wouldn't be "any time soon", so we'll see.

In the immediate, they've decided to take the Helix the "pay for" software plug-in route (debut just recently at Winter NAMM), which not many people saw coming.

Hey, I'm all for Line 6 regurgitating the current modeling algorithms in a smaller format pedal with a solid set of features for +/-$800, and I'd probably be first in line to try to get one if it does ever happen.

 

[ChubbyJerk]

Well, I did allow for the possibility that they'd eventually come out with a stripped down Helix, just that it wouldn't be "any time soon", so we'll see.

In the immediate, they've decided to take the Helix the "pay for" software plug-in route (debut just recently at Winter NAMM), which not many people saw coming.

Hey, I'm all for Line 6 regurgitating the current modeling algorithms in a smaller format pedal with a solid set of features for +/-$800, and I'd probably be first in line to try to get one if it does ever happen.

Whoah, I hadn't seen that. It's not at all the route I expected. It does, however, perfectly illustrate what I was talking about. They encapsulated the algorithms so that they could make more money off the same software R&D. I was sure they'd reuse it, I was just completely wrong about how. (For now, at least.)

 

[arthur38]

One question which haunt my night. I'm guitarist first and newer bassist. I've owned a G3n which is great for me.
So: better to wait the B3n for an all in one, or a ZOOM MS 100BT for bass amp or special bass effect et G3N for the rest (dist, mod,...) and its aux in input. MS 100 is less expensive, have the amp and effect I need, but is the sound quality of the amp will be better on B3n???

 

[CharlieC]

One question which haunt my night. I'm guitarist first and newer bassist. I've owned a G3n which is great for me.
So: better to wait the B3n for an all in one, or a ZOOM MS 100BT for bass amp or special bass effect et G3N for the rest (dist, mod,...) and its aux in input. MS 100 is less expensive, have the amp and effect I need, but is the sound quality of the amp will be better on B3n???

When I first purchased my B3 in 2012, for the next two years, many of us waited for a firmware update that never did arrive. After that we waited another few years, up to this very day, for the arrival of a bass product successor.

My recommendation for you would be to wait out these final 6-weeks for the new product built on new DSP.

Cheers!

 

[ga_edwards]

In the immediate, they've decided to take the Helix the "pay for" software plug-in route (debut just recently at Winter NAMM), which not many people saw coming.

Waits for helix ipad version....