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.
Double Bass NS Design WAV4 megathread part II
- Thread starter Gary Lynch
- Start date
These little boss pedals are amazing.
The Fishman aura is really super amazing with guitar
I wish they'd make a double bass models to download to it. Maybe they will eventually.
The Fishman aura is really super amazing with guitar
I wish they'd make a double bass models to download to it. Maybe they will eventually.
Scratch that. Fishman agrees that their aura pedals are not compatible with bass frequencies.
Yes, the market is too small and thus why Fishman ignores it.
Good news for Boss if they work. Boss might grow the market enough for others to follow.
Yes, the market is too small and thus why Fishman ignores it.
Good news for Boss if they work. Boss might grow the market enough for others to follow.
Sounds great! Would you put the Boss AC-3 immediately after the instrument (before pre-amp) or after the pre-amp (such as a Sansamp Para)? Do you notice much of a difference in sound when playing arco?
The boss also only works more ore less for double bass in one or two presets and with some carefull tweaking. A dedicated model would be more than welcome.
Wouldn't it be great to have a simple, small generic modeling pedal you can upload a specific modelling effect to. Like uploading a vst plugin into a stompbox. That would expand the posibilities for niche markets like ours. And I'd prefer this over carrying around a multi effect because of the simplicity.
Wouldn't it be great to have a simple, small generic modeling pedal you can upload a specific modelling effect to. Like uploading a vst plugin into a stompbox. That would expand the posibilities for niche markets like ours. And I'd prefer this over carrying around a multi effect because of the simplicity.
Something like an FPGA, then? One or two audio inputs, one or two audio outs, and a USB or serial port for uploading new firmware. Oh, and a stomp-switch. As per usual, if I only had the time... and DSP expertise. But this has some serious potential, because once you've acquired the hardware, all that remains is to write and swap the software.
Cue usual lament: if I only had the time spare to play around with this...
Thanks. I put it after the pre (fishman platinum). It has a 1meg input, but stil reacts strange to the piëzo. I got the best results by sending a split signal to my amp and mixing the effected en uneffected signal. That sounded better compared to the clip, but I'd need a good microphone to share that. I haven't tried it with arco yet, my bow never comes close to the wav.I will try and let you know.
FPGA, I had to look that up 
Sounds like something that might work though. I'd think a box with one in and maybe two out, a foot switch a hard wired effect level or clean/effect mix control and two or three assignable dials controlling some basic parameters of the uploaded effect and, as you said, a usb to connect to the computer. A device like that, if gig ready, could start a whole open source diy effect industry.
Hey we could start the facebook of effects, make lots of money and sue each other on a weekly basis. Maybe I should revisit the thread of that guy patenting his headstock design and ask for a few pointer before it's to late.
Sounds like something that might work though. I'd think a box with one in and maybe two out, a foot switch a hard wired effect level or clean/effect mix control and two or three assignable dials controlling some basic parameters of the uploaded effect and, as you said, a usb to connect to the computer. A device like that, if gig ready, could start a whole open source diy effect industry. Hey we could start the facebook of effects, make lots of money and sue each other on a weekly basis. Maybe I should revisit the thread of that guy patenting his headstock design and ask for a few pointer before it's to late.
Matthijs, we may need to have a drink together when I get to Amsterdam (hopefully some time next year).
I've bounced the idea off a couple of my workmates, because we're a bunch of IT geeks, and our conclusions were:
- it's probably feasible
- it's probably a *lot* trickier than it looks
- the main niches for this would be effects that haven't already been commercialised, and people who want effects done in a way that none of the commercial outfits are currently doing them
- the commercial outfits like Boss, DOD, Behringer etc. are probably already using FPGAs in their devices, because it's *much* cheaper to use one hardware die and inject the appropriate bit of software on the assembly line
That last point is pure speculation, but if it's true, there's also the possibility that an existing device could be reprogrammed. If that happened on a large scale, though, I'd expect the vendor would crack down on it pretty quickly - unless they were smart enough to buy into it. Lego Mindstorms would be a reasonable example here, where the marketing team managed to stop their lawyers going berserk because they saw what it was doing for their sales figures.
Maybe that's the answer: talk to somebody like Line6 or Behringer about the idea of a device with open firmware. If they bought into it completely and built a community around it, they'd get a *huge* win... among the musicians who actually care about such things. The hard part would be convincing them there's a big enough market to make it worthwhile, and that they'd be able to tap into a large enough pool of people who can design FPGA circuits for DSP, *and* do it well, *and* are willing to do so on an open-source basis. Oh, and that they'd gain more from this than they'd lose in sales of their existing product lines. That looks like a really uphill battle, but one that might just be winnable.
The advantage of doing it that way is that it would leverage an existing production process and marketing machine, which looks quite a bit easier than starting one up from scratch, and then probably getting squelched by the existing pedal-makers if they start getting threatened.
It does look like a really fun idea, though. I'd love to have the time to get into it.
I've bounced the idea off a couple of my workmates, because we're a bunch of IT geeks, and our conclusions were:
- it's probably feasible
- it's probably a *lot* trickier than it looks
- the main niches for this would be effects that haven't already been commercialised, and people who want effects done in a way that none of the commercial outfits are currently doing them
- the commercial outfits like Boss, DOD, Behringer etc. are probably already using FPGAs in their devices, because it's *much* cheaper to use one hardware die and inject the appropriate bit of software on the assembly line
That last point is pure speculation, but if it's true, there's also the possibility that an existing device could be reprogrammed. If that happened on a large scale, though, I'd expect the vendor would crack down on it pretty quickly - unless they were smart enough to buy into it. Lego Mindstorms would be a reasonable example here, where the marketing team managed to stop their lawyers going berserk because they saw what it was doing for their sales figures.
Maybe that's the answer: talk to somebody like Line6 or Behringer about the idea of a device with open firmware. If they bought into it completely and built a community around it, they'd get a *huge* win... among the musicians who actually care about such things. The hard part would be convincing them there's a big enough market to make it worthwhile, and that they'd be able to tap into a large enough pool of people who can design FPGA circuits for DSP, *and* do it well, *and* are willing to do so on an open-source basis. Oh, and that they'd gain more from this than they'd lose in sales of their existing product lines. That looks like a really uphill battle, but one that might just be winnable.
The advantage of doing it that way is that it would leverage an existing production process and marketing machine, which looks quite a bit easier than starting one up from scratch, and then probably getting squelched by the existing pedal-makers if they start getting threatened.
It does look like a really fun idea, though. I'd love to have the time to get into it.
I'm keeping my eye on iPad's and similar devices.
CPU these days seems to have enough power to run complex algorithms. Maybe next generation, we'll see.
And you can carry and view all your charts.
CPU these days seems to have enough power to run complex algorithms. Maybe next generation, we'll see.
And you can carry and view all your charts.
Seamonkey: I'm already keeping PDFs of my sheet music on my Android phone, and a tablet could be a reasonably good display device for it.
I know there are some guitar effects apps for the iPhone, so you're probably right, though I'm not entirely sure I want to put my droid within handy kicking/stomping range on a gig. I'm waiting for my new one to be delivered after the repair shop gave up on my old one, and I didn't even do that much to it.
I know there are some guitar effects apps for the iPhone, so you're probably right, though I'm not entirely sure I want to put my droid within handy kicking/stomping range on a gig. I'm waiting for my new one to be delivered after the repair shop gave up on my old one, and I didn't even do that much to it.
Yep - I use a PC for this. iPad would be next generation for me.
And nice mic stand clips [Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
And nice mic stand clips [Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Well equill, you're welcome to stop by if you're visisting Amsterdam. I was also thinking along the same lines: maybe the best chance for succes would be a regular company adopting this idea. I don't think I-pad's and phones are a real solution for this. When I'm on stage I want something that's completely reliable, simple and I want it on the floor. Especially with a double bass there are no hands available to swipe stuff during a one bar break.
So, wich company would be the best bet for pitching an idea like this?
So, wich company would be the best bet for pitching an idea like this?
What settings ended up working for you on the Boss and other equipment that required tweaking to get such a sound?
I can only get a reasonable resemblance of a db in the piezo model. That is advertised as "that famous cut through the mix direct piezo sound", that's just to show us we are definetely not the target demografic for this product
The carefull tweaking concerns the controls for body and top. A small change makes a big difference and a small change in the sound going in needs adjusting the controls and changes the level of the effected sound compared to the bypass. So you need to adjust everything after making on small adjustment.
I promised you to try it with a bow. I think it does really well, although I was not able to capture that very well on a recording. I recorded it straight into the pc, but it sounded way better through my amp. Hearing myself bow on a recording was also confrontational, I really need to work on that.
Anyway here it is: [Invalid or Expired Link Removed] The first part is without the ac-3, wav strung with obligato's and with both piëzo's in phase (the bowing setting). Tone rolled off al the way. The second part with the ac-3. ac-3 staight into a digitech multieffect, only used as a usb input. I did not use a pre in front of the ac-3 this time.
I may be mistaken, but in a few words that would be a Line 6 Pod-type device specifically for double bass / EUB. It's a fantastic idea, in my opinion, and a market that would probably pay for it.
I practice with my WAV4 through a Pod XT Live (intended for guitar) but with 42 amp models, 95 effects, 24 speaker cabs, 4 mics (for mic'ing the speaker cabs), and the ability to save 128 presets, it works alright. You can download more models and upload through USB, and it also works as a USB recording interface.
That's probably overkill, but you could cut that product down in size and scope and make a really nice device.
Edit: I see I could buy a "bass expansion pak" for my Pod XT Live for $99 including 28 bass amps, 22 bass cabs, and some more mics. Hm.
No it would not be the same, as it would be just the one effect in a box, with the ability to upload another effect when you need something different. And it would add the posibility to design your own effects and exchange them freely over the internet.
I have a multi effect thing, but i hate using it on stage. On stage I normaly only use one or two effects and they are either on al the time or only used for one song or a solo. The multieffect with it's endles options and modes and switches makes me nervous. I'm constantly scared it will go from smooth r&B #12 to space shred#32 in the middle of a song. I think they're good for experimenting at home or in rehearsal, but they're overkill when performing IMHO.
I have a multi effect thing, but i hate using it on stage. On stage I normaly only use one or two effects and they are either on al the time or only used for one song or a solo. The multieffect with it's endles options and modes and switches makes me nervous. I'm constantly scared it will go from smooth r&B #12 to space shred#32 in the middle of a song. I think they're good for experimenting at home or in rehearsal, but they're overkill when performing IMHO.
Right, I'm just saying that the hardware exists - don't reinvent the wheel. Scale it back, pick the models that are relevant, and put it in a nice package. It also has a tuner, and I wish it had a metronome.
The new model, XT3, has two signal paths that can be blended if so desired. Lots of cool hardware these days.
The new model, XT3, has two signal paths that can be blended if so desired. Lots of cool hardware these days.
Jason, do you mean like Behringer's [Invalid or Expired Link Removed] and [Invalid or Expired Link Removed]?
Both Matthijs and I are aware that such devices already exist, don't worry. I think the part that you're missing is that the types of wheel currently on the market aren't necessarily exactly right, and that some types aren't even available on the market. To stretch the analogy to breaking point, what we're talking about here is an axle to which we could fit wheels that we've made ourselves, that exactly fit the need at hand. In fact, I pointed out myself that it's very likely that there already are existing devices that would do the job nicely, if only we could retrofit our own circuit designs into them.
The problem with "picking the models that are relevant" is that you have to answer the question, "relevant to whom?" and that question is currently being answered by the manufacturer's marketing department rather than by the customers themselves. The idea we're discussing here is something that frees the consumer from being stuck with whatever the vendor gave them. I don't mean any disrespect here to the vendors or their marketing departments; they work extremely hard in a competitive market, and they do very well given the constraints within which they're operating.
The crux of the problem is that some effects just don't have a large enough market to make it financially worthwhile for companies like Line6 and Behringer to make and sell them - consider the economics of a production run of 10 units. However, most or all of that collective market could be addressed in a way that is worthwhile, by a device that people could install their own effect designs into. The hardware's there and it is indeed cool; it's the software that we want control over.
Actually, having taken a quick look around, Line6's M5 pedal would be ideal, if only we could install our own designs into it. The technology's already there; it's just a question of talking the vendor into giving us the information we need to use their mechanism. I'm sure there are plenty of people who'd accept that they just voided their warranty, especially if the vendor then took the more successful designs and made official releases of them, presumably giving credit where it's due. It wouldn't even need to be an official manoeuvre, if somebody just happened to accidentally let the specs slip out, and if the company management just never quite got around to pursuing the issue.
Sorry about this turning into a long and rambling comment; to paraphrase the late, great Blaise Pascal, I don't have the time to make it shorter right now.
Both Matthijs and I are aware that such devices already exist, don't worry. I think the part that you're missing is that the types of wheel currently on the market aren't necessarily exactly right, and that some types aren't even available on the market. To stretch the analogy to breaking point, what we're talking about here is an axle to which we could fit wheels that we've made ourselves, that exactly fit the need at hand. In fact, I pointed out myself that it's very likely that there already are existing devices that would do the job nicely, if only we could retrofit our own circuit designs into them.
The problem with "picking the models that are relevant" is that you have to answer the question, "relevant to whom?" and that question is currently being answered by the manufacturer's marketing department rather than by the customers themselves. The idea we're discussing here is something that frees the consumer from being stuck with whatever the vendor gave them. I don't mean any disrespect here to the vendors or their marketing departments; they work extremely hard in a competitive market, and they do very well given the constraints within which they're operating.
The crux of the problem is that some effects just don't have a large enough market to make it financially worthwhile for companies like Line6 and Behringer to make and sell them - consider the economics of a production run of 10 units. However, most or all of that collective market could be addressed in a way that is worthwhile, by a device that people could install their own effect designs into. The hardware's there and it is indeed cool; it's the software that we want control over.
Actually, having taken a quick look around, Line6's M5 pedal would be ideal, if only we could install our own designs into it. The technology's already there; it's just a question of talking the vendor into giving us the information we need to use their mechanism. I'm sure there are plenty of people who'd accept that they just voided their warranty, especially if the vendor then took the more successful designs and made official releases of them, presumably giving credit where it's due. It wouldn't even need to be an official manoeuvre, if somebody just happened to accidentally let the specs slip out, and if the company management just never quite got around to pursuing the issue.
Sorry about this turning into a long and rambling comment; to paraphrase the late, great Blaise Pascal, I don't have the time to make it shorter right now.
