It looks like they updated it with effects from the B1on plus some new ones I hope they import to the B1on.
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
Why not just load up the B3n with all of the extra effects/amps/cabs in an improved way, then?
Also, who knows when or if they're planning to do any updates on the B3n any time in the near future? It just seems like a $200 unit should have at least the same amount of stuff under the hood as a $100 unit.
Has anyone done the firmware update on the MS60B yet? If so can someone walk me through it step by step? I'm slow.
Let me add a few considerations and comments to the discussion on bypass, coloring tone, or even tone suck, whatever you wanna call this topic.
First a few general points:
- This thread and its predecessors have the tradition of being courteous. Let's continue to upheld that tradition, we have done so far quite well and I trust therefore that we will continue to follow this tradition. Everybody should always feel welcome and enjoy "sticking around".
- Being courteous becomes a bit more difficult as one starts to disagree, and no obvious and simple explanation can be found for the issue quickly. Id' like to remind us that remaining courteous in case of disagreement means to well respect the other views, in particular when views are not lightheartedly thrown in, but are based on facts, observations, and genuine impressions sincerely voiced.
Here my contribution as a first step along above lines: Perhaps the reason for the different views is not the B3n, but something else. I write this also, because I fear a big test setup might actually not shed the needed light on the issue. Why? Perhaps the reason is the bass combined with the B3n, or the B3n as connected to amp/cab/headphone, i.e. the signal chain from the instrument to what one hears at the end.
I believe all of us use very likely a quite different signal chain, while we may all be using a B3n. So it seems logical to me that the reason need not necessarily be the B3n, but something else, and it may well be the interplay between the B3n and the rest of the signal chain, even if the tone coloration or tone suck can be heard only while the B3n is in. It need not be the B3n itself when the tone loses grit, clarity and sounds attenuated, perhaps including changes in the frequency spectrum. It can well be merely the interaction between the B3n and the other equipment.
When connecting two devices, many parameters affect that connection: First, impedancec must match (source device with low output impedance, receiving device with high input impedance). Secondly, the output level on the source device should be sufficiently high, so that thirdly not too much gain is needed in the input section of the receiving device, all preserving a good noise signal ratio. As a result the signal in the receiving device comes through clean, powerful, and with its full spectrum.
For all these reasons my current hypothesis is that when all level adjustments are well done, it may be an impedance issue, e.g. when plugging a bass into the B3n. When plugging the very same bass into the amp, no such impedance issue may arise and impedances may match well. Or there is a lack of impedance match between the B3n and the amp or headphones in use. Thus, before setting up a huge test set, why not first making a simple test by inserting a DI between the bass and the B3n? Is the tone still as bad? Is there still attenuation in lows and highs? Or use headphones with differing impedances directly plugged into the B3n.
I have to admit I need here help, since I have no formal sound engineering background. But some of us I understand are quite proficient in this respect. Could impedance problems be the culprit for the reported attenuation and tone coloring as I hypothezise here? According to my experience, my answer is yes, but others with more knowledge may disagree. Then, please teach me. What devices could be used to address an impedance mismatch? Is a DI box here really useful?
Cheers,
Andreas flf
Not yet, I am traveling soon and won't be able to do it for quite a while. But I believe this should be straigthforward:
- While pressing both the up and down cursor keys, use a USB cable to connect the USB connector to the computer.
- Launch the firmware update application on your computer, and execute the update.
All taken from the manul p. 23 and 22
Cheers,
Andreas flf
I performed the MS-60B firmware update exactly as Andreas described without issue.
Cheers!
@andreas_flf
Your post ^^ is well worth the time to read. Thank you.
I'm in the middle of sorting out a direct bass vs B3n bypass bass tone comparison. I've already done this in a very informal manner, and the result being that I couldn't hear, feel, or "see" a difference.
I'm going at this with more finely tuned method, that should be able to highlight these differences (whether they be very subtle or obvious, we'll see) to the best of my ability given the gear I have available. The signal paths are boiled down to be as simple as possible, with the only quality variables being that of the cables used (I'm not using high end cables), and the A/D converters of the mixer (XR-18, as opposed to something with much higher grade converters).
I'll be using my Wal bass. This bass has both a standard 1/4" output, but also an XLR output, allowing for two discrete signal paths from the bass itself (one of the benefits of owning a very expensive bass of this quality, beyond words awesome!).
The balanced XLR (10 ft cable) will feed a channel of my Behringer X-Air XR-18. The 1/4" out (10 ft cable) will feed the B3n and then proceed 1/4"out (3 ft cable) to 1/4" to a channel in the XR-18. Each of these signals will use their respective input channel attenuator to match the levels. These signals will proceed to my DAW via USB 2.0 connection to be recorded on their own discrete DAW tracks for evaluation. The tap from each channel of the XR-18 to the DAW will be taken AFTER THIS INITIAL attenuation stage and will NOT pass through any channel strip or other processing (this is key).
The performance will include aggressive playing, pop/slap, finger style, pick style, raking across all strings, in addition to some simple, non-aggressive passages.
I'll scrutinize each track closely to make sure that the levels match as closely as possible so that I won't need to do any normalization or other post-processing. Finally, I'll submit each one as a .wav file, but I won't say which is the B3n bypass and which is the direct XLR feed. I'll leave that up to the forum to weigh in as to which is which, and the extent to which you believe there is a tone suck difference, and if it matters in your world.
As @andreas_flf has proposed, this series of recorded tests should be representative of situations that closely emulate a direct-to-console interface with no further interconnection with an amp head or other outboard gear (pedals, etc.).
Your post ^^ is well worth the time to read. Thank you.
I'm in the middle of sorting out a direct bass vs B3n bypass bass tone comparison. I've already done this in a very informal manner, and the result being that I couldn't hear, feel, or "see" a difference.
I'm going at this with more finely tuned method, that should be able to highlight these differences (whether they be very subtle or obvious, we'll see) to the best of my ability given the gear I have available. The signal paths are boiled down to be as simple as possible, with the only quality variables being that of the cables used (I'm not using high end cables), and the A/D converters of the mixer (XR-18, as opposed to something with much higher grade converters).
I'll be using my Wal bass. This bass has both a standard 1/4" output, but also an XLR output, allowing for two discrete signal paths from the bass itself (one of the benefits of owning a very expensive bass of this quality, beyond words awesome!).
The balanced XLR (10 ft cable) will feed a channel of my Behringer X-Air XR-18. The 1/4" out (10 ft cable) will feed the B3n and then proceed 1/4"out (3 ft cable) to 1/4" to a channel in the XR-18. Each of these signals will use their respective input channel attenuator to match the levels. These signals will proceed to my DAW via USB 2.0 connection to be recorded on their own discrete DAW tracks for evaluation. The tap from each channel of the XR-18 to the DAW will be taken AFTER THIS INITIAL attenuation stage and will NOT pass through any channel strip or other processing (this is key).
The performance will include aggressive playing, pop/slap, finger style, pick style, raking across all strings, in addition to some simple, non-aggressive passages.
I'll scrutinize each track closely to make sure that the levels match as closely as possible so that I won't need to do any normalization or other post-processing. Finally, I'll submit each one as a .wav file, but I won't say which is the B3n bypass and which is the direct XLR feed. I'll leave that up to the forum to weigh in as to which is which, and the extent to which you believe there is a tone suck difference, and if it matters in your world.
As @andreas_flf has proposed, this series of recorded tests should be representative of situations that closely emulate a direct-to-console interface with no further interconnection with an amp head or other outboard gear (pedals, etc.).
A guy plugging a really expensive Wal into a cheap multi effects box and doing rigorous testing to figure out if there is tone suck that arguably nobody must be able to hear if they need that kind of testing is absolutely the pinnacle of TalkBass'ness.
SirMjac28
Patiently Waiting For The Next British Invasion
There is already a theory brewing in my brain. Not so much a theory as a thought. "who says the XLR and 1/4 inch out on that bass sound exactly the same??".
Given that, I suggest you do the test the way you suggested, but then repeat it with the bass plugged directly into two channels of the mixer, and have two pairs of tracks for us to listen to. To make it extra fun, don't tell us which of those is which either.
Can you hear the zoom? Can you hear the 1/4 vs xlr?
Given that, I suggest you do the test the way you suggested, but then repeat it with the bass plugged directly into two channels of the mixer, and have two pairs of tracks for us to listen to. To make it extra fun, don't tell us which of those is which either.
Can you hear the zoom? Can you hear the 1/4 vs xlr?
I would suggest you only take one input to the mixer (XLR or 1/4") and then use the mixer to send the direct signal to one output and use an aux or similar to send to another output and then the B3n. My thinking being the XLR and 1/4" outs on the Wal may have different levels and thus require different amounts of gain to level match in the mixer.
The cool thing is that that cheap effects box is actually a computer. We all know that cheap computers are able to make incredibly good sounding music these days given a good operator, so I would argue that at this point, the human is the weakest link in the chain
I don't think price is a good metric. Cheap multis (by which I mean under $100, let alone what the B3n costs) are better than the best of twenty years ago. And around 1995 you could pick up a used Wal for under £400 (I nearly did... Twice) and a Boss ME6B was mid range and around £120.
Last edited:
The cool thing is that that cheap effects box is actually a computer. We all know that cheap computers are able to make incredibly good sounding music these days given a good operator, so I would argue that at this point, the human is the weakest link in the chain
A word of caution is that they aren't general purpose machines, but use DSPs, but you can still write the algorithms in computer code, e.g. C ir C-like languages, or even DSLs (domain specific languages)
YES IT IS! LOL
I've already reached my own conclusions on the matter re: the B3n. I could plug in my Schecter Studio Elite 4 string if that seems more in keeping with Zoom.
Latest posts
-
Need Recommendation for Repair Shop In Western Connecticut
- Latest: averagejoe53
-
-
-
-
