New: Zoom B3n Multi-Effects

[jimfist]

I love that Hiwatt clip!

Yeah, that was a happy accident. I know that old school bassists used those HiWatt rigs, but it surprised me easily that amp model went into overdrive, and how mid-heavy it was. It's got a nice fat grind to it. That's my go-to patch when I use the G5n on its own. The mid control on my bass cleans up a lot of the grime when I roll it back. In the end, for rock gigs, I like the SVT model in the B3 as my first choice. I've always been able to get the sound I'm after with it (as in the Soundcloud Divaricator clip). It is noticeable, though, how much the G5n amp tones seem to just breathe more, sound and feel more "open" compared to the B3 models. I'm hoping that the B3n amp/cab models offer the same refinements to the bass realm. I'm stoked to see exactly what they've got cooking for comps, drives, and other fx.

 

[4Mal]

Happy B3 user here. As long as they keep MonoSyn, DeTuner and JetFlange and the Octave effects I won't miss the XLR. Mine lives in the effects loop of a Radial Bassbone. I cable two basses and gain balance and DI from there. Simple effective rig.

 

[CharlieC]

...It is noticeable, though, how much the G5n amp tones seem to just breathe more, sound and feel more "open" compared to the B3 models. I'm hoping that the B3n amp/cab models offer the same refinements to the bass realm. I'm stoked to see exactly what they've got cooking for comps, drives, and other fx.

Agreed and finally there is grind on the amp models!

Sweetwater and MF have already stopped offering the B3 on their websites and I cannot wait for the B3n pre-order link.

 

[Musicman20]

Really not as interested in this as I thought I would be. I'll stick with the B3/G3.

 

[ga_edwards]

Assuming this operates the same as it's guitar brethren (which I know very little about, apart from a quick scan through the manual), do amps take up two effect slots - they seem to be listed as a 'large' effect that takes up two screens. If so, is the cabinet sim a third effect slot?

Also, with up to 7 effects available, do you decide which ones are hidden from view and which are switchable via stomp buttons. Or is this determined by the effect chain order?

 

[CharlieC]

Until official B3n documentation is available for download, the next best thing is to have a look at those same documents for the currently available G3n.

Invalid Link Removed

As far as hardware operation goes, I believe nothing will change.

Effects of course should hopefully become bass-centric as opposed to the G3n's list, but at least one can get a feel for models and parameters.

Cheers!

 

[CharlieC]

...If so, is the cabinet sim a third effect slot?

Yes, the cabinet sim is its own effect slot. Should one not require cab sim then that effect slot is spared for something else.

... Also, with up to 7 effects available, do you decide which ones are hidden from view and which are switchable via stomp buttons. Or is this determined by the effect chain order?

I believe one scrolls across the span of contiguous effects in the chain and by that positions the 3 effects displayed in immediate view.

 

[CharlieC]

In the nearly 5-years since the original "Zoom B3 As Preamp" thread was posted, two users in particular were highly contributive, generously sharing of their knowledge, and I hope they will continue here.

At a minimum, this post is both acknowledgement and a calling page to brothers @andreas_flf and @ticol07

Cheers!

 

[BunchyMutt]

The DSP is new and has been significantly updated in this latest generation despite the lack of details at this time.

The audio samples I have heard sound fantastic!

Where did you hear the samples?

I have absolutely no idea how DSP, sample rate, etc. work in relation to each other, but I thought DSP is the algorithm that is responsible for how an effect or model responds/feels. If that's the case I'm a little disappointed that the number of effects have gone up while keeping the sample rate the same - I hear what I think are digital artifacts more often than I wish for more effects.

 

[BunchyMutt]

Where did you hear the samples?

I have absolutely no idea how DSP, sample rate, etc. work in relation to each other, but I thought DSP is the algorithm that is responsible for how an effect or model responds/feels. If that's the case I'm a little disappointed that the number of effects have gone up while keeping the sample rate the same - I hear what I think are digital artifacts more often than I wish for more effects.

Never mind! Found the clips in the previous pages

 

[CharlieC]

Where did you hear the samples?

I have absolutely no idea how DSP, sample rate, etc. work in relation to each other, but I thought DSP is the algorithm that is responsible for how an effect or model responds/feels. If that's the case I'm a little disappointed that the number of effects have gone up while keeping the sample rate the same - I hear what I think are digital artifacts more often than I wish for more effects.

Sound samples for the G5n, G3Xn, and G3n (which use the same new Zoom processor as the B3n) can be found on YouTube.

Additionally, there are some bass samples on same hardware a page back in this thread.

 

[jimfist]

I'll reiterate that I think that the B3n/G3n physical format is less desirable than the G5n format, especially for those like me who want as many switches as possible available in a moderate-sized multi-fx pedal. The G5n format has dedicated Tuner & Tap tempo switches, exp pedal with its own switch (operates like a wah, toe down pressing action), and 4 switches at one time for engaging effects units.

My personal gig layout with the G5n takes advantage of all of the available slots for various effects that are regularly used, so the 4 top row switches and the L/R scroll switches get used a LOT. I'm regularly using pitch shift (chorus), dirt/drive pedal, envelope filter, gain boost, and occasional tremolo, in addition to my "always on" comp/amp/cab. The G5n has a max slot capacity of 9 slots total. I'd get pretty annoyed by the limitations of the B3n vs. a "B5n" as an all-in-one pedal, but that's just me.

If you have limited use of effects, don't need lots of switches, don't need an Exp pedal, then the B3n should suit many fine. It does have more/better navigation than the B3, but not worlds better. Scrolling helps. If you're looking for amp/cab simulation and not much else, then the B3n is a good choice. And if you're not so interested in amp/cab simulation, but are looking for front end effects/stomps, the B3n is a good choice. You'll probably be able to load up all 7 slots with standard FX and utilize the scroll L/R switches to get around fairly easily. This IMO is the best implementation of the B3n (front end FX).

 

[jimfist]

DSP and algorithm programming are two different animals. You can write hundreds of different algorithms to accomplish the same process, all of them executed by the same DSP. IIRC, Zoom has emphasized the algorithm programming aspect of this series of pedals, and was willing to sacrifice quantity for quality. I believe the thinking is that using improved DSP chips without addressing the algorithms themselves will not demonstrate any improvement in the sound quality worth measuring. I personally appreciate the effort ZOOM has made to step up the quality of their models, especially the amp models, cab sims, and drives. Some may not notice a significant difference. Certainly, those users will be disappointed.

 

[ga_edwards]

I believe one scrolls across the span of contiguous effects in the chain and by that positions the 3 effects displayed in immediate view.

Hmmm if this is true I may give this a miss. My dream of replacing a pedal board containing some always on and some switchable effects is seemingly not to be be found in this unit.

 

[ShadowImage]

For those interested in amp/cab modeling, in this hardware platform Zoom has separated the cabinet simulations from the amp models and extended the cab sims with dual microphones (for blending.)

In this way one could use the Mic/Cab sims as a standalone effect or with external pedals like a Darkglass B7K or VMT for example.

In my experience, after trying the amp/cab modelling in previous ZOOM models, Line 6 and various DAW VSTs I'm not convinced that amp and cab modelling is anything other than a gimmick. All it seems to be are automatic eq/comp settings which actually restrict the user under the guise of a "feature". Manufacturers just use this to tack on another feature and convince users they can get that particular $3000 Ampeg or Mesa sound through their $500 (insert random cab and amp here).
In every MF unit it seems you're better off ignoring the modelling and spending some time adjusting your own comp and EQ. I would even argue that you're worse off with modelling because it's fooling you into thinking you should have a good sound while it's actually taking away some control from your hands.

Sorry for the rant.

 

[jimfist]

In my experience, after trying the amp/cab modelling in previous ZOOM models, Line 6 and various DAW VSTs I'm not convinced that amp and cab modelling is anything other than a gimmick. All it seems to be are automatic eq/comp settings which actually restrict the user under the guise of a "feature". Manufacturers just use this to tack on another feature and convince users they can get that particular $3000 Ampeg or Mesa sound through their $500 (insert random cab and amp here).
In every MF unit it seems you're better off ignoring the modelling and spending some time adjusting your own comp and EQ. I would even argue that you're worse off with modelling because it's fooling you into thinking you should have a good sound while it's actually taking away some control from your hands.

Sorry for the rant.

One can certainly grapple with the quality of amp modeling and cabinet simulation of Zoom, older Line 6, and other digital modelers. In the end, you do tend to get what you pay for. Otherwise...umm...no. Disagree.

If I implement a technology successfully, to my liking and to the liking of others with qualified ears and tastes, that only means that this technology can work for me, but certainly not everyone will like or prefer it. To say that you've never gotten good results from the same technology and therefore it is a smoke-and-mirrors "gimmick" is taking a very narrow view, don't you think? Heck, I SOLD my Ampeg SVT Classic all tube head (blasphemy) because I was so convinced I'd never miss it (and I haven't, really). I've all but moth-balled my SVT 8x10 cabinet, too.

When all is said and done, you may never change your opinion on this, but in the meantime I'm sure there are some very capable musicians, engineers and producers (using the Line 6 Helix, Fractal AxeFx, Kemper Profiling Amp, Atomic Amplifire, et al) who might take issue with your assertion.

 

[BunchyMutt]

Agreed and finally there is grind on the amp models!

Sweetwater and MF have already stopped offering the B3 on their websites and I cannot wait for the B3n pre-order link.

As a happy longtime user of the B3, MS-60B, and MS-70CDR, I agree

 

[ShadowImage]

One can certainly grapple with the quality of amp modeling and cabinet simulation of Zoom, older Line 6, and other digital modelers. In the end, you do tend to get what you pay for. Otherwise...umm...no. Disagree.

If I implement a technology successfully, to my liking and to the liking of others with qualified ears and tastes, that only means that this technology can work for me, but certainly not everyone will like or prefer it. To say that you've never gotten good results from the same technology and therefore it is a smoke-and-mirrors "gimmick" is taking a very narrow view, don't you think? Heck, I SOLD my Ampeg SVT Classic all tube head (blasphemy) because I was so convinced I'd never miss it (and I haven't, really). I've all but moth-balled my SVT 8x10 cabinet, too.

When all is said and done, you may never change your opinion on this, but in the meantime I'm sure there are some very capable musicians, engineers and producers (using the Line 6 Helix, Fractal AxeFx, Kemper Profiling Amp, Atomic Amplifire, et al) who might take issue with your assertion.

I'm not saying you can't get a good sound with modelling and I'm not saying it shouldn't replace your SVT as long as you're happy with it. I also use MultiFX through a power amp so I'm certainly a proponent of what ZOOM and Line 6 is doing.

I'm saying that modelling is falsely represented and that you could get the exact same sound using EQ and compression in the MF unit. The modelling essentially acts as a preset, but often lacks the fine tuning you can then do with your own EQ/comp settings. It fools the consumer by offering a false representation of what it's doing.

Case in point, modelling a SVT amp/cab through one class D and speaker is going to sound different from another set of class D and speaker. More than likely their modelling was designed and tested on studio monitors, so what the end user is getting running a sim through any given combination of real amp/cabs is a crap shoot.

So for example, using a modelled SVT amp/cab, through an ART preamp, through a Mesa class D, into a Ampeg 410 is going to sound completely different than using that same modelled SVT amp/cab through an Aguilar tone hammer into a Hartke 410. So yes, it is smoke and mirrors because what does the modelled SVT really "sound" like?

It's a gimmick. Personally I don't care if a comp is called "Ross" or "Grey" or "ZOOM comp #2" as long as it sounds good but expecting the same results as a real Ross is a gimmick.

 

[ChubbyJerk]

DSP and algorithm programming are two different animals. You can write hundreds of different algorithms to accomplish the same process, all of them executed by the same DSP.

Just to nitpick a little...DSP is used as an acronym for both Digital Signal Processor, as you're using it, and Digital Signal Processing, as he is essentially using it.

 

[CharlieC]

Hmmm if this is true I may give this a miss. My dream of replacing a pedal board containing some always on and some switchable effects is seemingly not to be be found in this unit.

To help clarify, the B3n supports up to 7 effects per patch arranged in any order within a chain. One may switch any effect On/Off in real-time, but know that only 3 effects are visible to do so at any one time. Real-time scrolling allows one to overcome this physical limitation. To help minimize scrolling, the hardware also stores one's optimum scroll position along with the saved patch.

Here is this depicted on a Zoom G5n, but on a larger scale (notice the top display vs. below displays)