• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

NPD: Terrible Design

Shrink the device small enough, you're just forced into this sort of thing by the relative lack of real estate to place everything.

The older ones . . . . didn't have that problem.
Musitronics-Mu-Tron-Bi-Phase-2_b1ea2893-18cb-4e57-b85d-184c35f5324a.jpg
Yeah, Original Mutron III was big, but that's a bi-phase. Mutron II, top right

mutrons.jpg
 
To be fair, compact pedals are a fairly recent development. It's a little unreasonable to expect a cable end design that was in use during the heyday* of giant pedals to work equally as well with small pedals.

*I don't know how old you are, but I'm in my early 60s, and those plugs were "very common" when I was a teenager.

Oh, and for what it's worth, I agree that on your pedal, the power jack placement is a sub-optimum design.
Given these pedals are the only ones I've had this issue with, I don't get your point ...
 
Given these pedals are the only ones I've had this issue with, I don't get your point ...
I suppose my point would be that if you continue to use those pancake-style cable ends, as you gain more experience with smaller pedals, you're going to run into this problem again.
 
Point being I'm sure the majority of us don't buy new cables every time we buy a new pedal. Ordinarily these cables are no issue, but with Mu Tron they need to let people know these cables which are very common won't work with these pedals.
There are many pedals with this "problem", none of them have a warning that some cables wont work. Boss pedals with multiple input/outputs come to mind, and many multi effects and loop switchers. I have never seen a company publish a cable compatibility list, so I don't think it's reasonable to expect Mu Tron to supply one.
 
Last edited:
I agree about the power jack not being in the best location. For me, though, the restriction on the angled plugs would not be an inconvenience, since I like my cables to angle down anyway.

That’s fair enough, but it’s still a questionable design choice to my mind. A pedal designer should allow for multiple configurations, given that no two pedalboards are alike. The case for top-mounted jacks is that it allows for closer positioning and consequently shorter cable runs, and the positioning of the power jack makes that very difficult.

You make a good point, but it's more of a problem with something like the MuTron pedals in question where there are two footswitches on them. On a pedal of the same size but with only one footswitch on it, it's less of a problem.

Still, that's the essence of the compromise. A pedalboard only has so many square centimeters. Small pedals allow more effects to exist on one board. How small is too small? That's a question each consumer has to answer for him/herself.
I agree about the double footswitches, but that, too, is symptomatic of the entire design, which comes across as a series of badly thought out design features, which render what might actually be a good pedal unnecessarily difficult to connect and place.

I understand that compromises have to be made on occasion when the real estate is limited, but the irony here is there is no need for any. Simply switching the position of the output and power jacks would solve most of the problems and make the pedal vastly easier to deal with.
 
I was able to fit EBS cables into my Phasor III easily enough, but I agree, it's a silly design choice. To me though, the footswitches are the bigger issue with the new small Mutrons. I liked the sound of the Phasor in 6 stage mode, but I found it almost impossible to hit the bypass without also accidentally switching modes as well. I didn't like the 4 stage mode at all, so this was enough of a problem that I ended up selling mine.