question regarding signals

[humbermg]

hello people.

my quesiton is about a possible way to spilt the signal of my bass in two, have one of those signals go through an effect pedal and the other one be left alone. them recombine both signals in order to have the resolting sound as a "bass with and without effects sounding at the same time"?

or a way to have that result? :S

any advice or comment is welcomed

 

[bongomania]

There is a product called a "blender" which does exactly what you describe. Many of us here in the forum use blender pedals. The popular brands are Barge (inexpensive) and Xotic (more/better features), but there are other blenders by Radial, Morley, Toadworks, and various DIY projects utilizing Sean's BBlender circuit (and variations). Probably a few more that I'm not thinking of ATM, too.

 

[TOOL460002]

or a 2 channel parallel looper with volume controls on each channel. could run 1 channel back into itself clean- other dirty. id take that over a blender- though some of the blenders have a lot of features that might be useful to you- or not.

 

[Smurf-o-Deth]

There's also always the good ol' Boss LS-2.

 

[bongomania]

or a 2 channel parallel looper with volume controls on each channel. could run 1 channel back into itself clean- other dirty. id take that over a blender

What? Why?

 

[pedalguy1]

This is interesting to me. Are you saying you can split your signal and recombine it into one amp adding an effect to just one side?

 

[blondmix3]

I use the Radial Bigshot Mix (http://www.tonebone.com/re-bigshot-mix.htm) to blend in my Big Muff so that I don't lose the bottom... It's a great piece.

 

[cheapbasslovin]

or a 2 channel parallel looper with volume controls on each channel. could run 1 channel back into itself clean- other dirty. id take that over a blender- though some of the blenders have a lot of features that might be useful to you- or not.

I rarely claim to be an expert on much of anything, but I swear you just described a blender.....with extra wire.

OP, you could do this.

I am not doing anything fantastic, but that crappy 'ol mixer is cheaper than most blenders and I've had no problems with it to this point.

 

[bongomania]

This is interesting to me. Are you saying you can split your signal and recombine it into one amp adding an effect to just one side?

Exactly. You get a blend of your clean bass signal and the bass signal through effects. It's not a cure-all for all situations, but it's a great tool to have.

 

[pedalguy1]

Exactly. You get a blend of your clean bass signal and the bass signal through effects. It's not a cure-all for all situations, but it's a great tool to have.

I thought you could only do this through bi-amping. I know chris from muse runs a big muff to his speaker that handles mids and highs, which leaves his lows intact. I'm going to look into this.

 

[humbermg]

considering i am on a quite tight budget... the ls-2 sound good... any reviews on that one?

 

[Jazz Ad]

OP, you could do this.

TB doesn't condone underage slavery, even to take care of your effect setup on stage. :scowl:

 

[TOOL460002]

I rarely claim to be an expert on much of anything, but I swear you just described a blender.....with extra wire.

ya- i described a blender with extra clutter- but the clutter adds function. if you have a 2 channel parallel looper with 2 strings of effects- you can have dirty and clean- or dirty and dirty. with all effects bypass- a channel enabled would be an additional clean signal- assuming you dont have noisy pedals- which may or may not be a deal breaker.

 

[cheapbasslovin]

ya- i described a blender with extra clutter- but the clutter adds function. if you have a 2 channel parallel looper with 2 strings of effects- you can have dirty and clean- or dirty and dirty. with all effects bypass- a channel enabled would be an additional clean signal- assuming you dont have noisy pedals- which may or may not be a deal breaker.

OK, now that makes perfect sense, but above it sounded (to me) like you were trying to describe a completely different solution rather than just a more versatile solution. Now I'm on board.

TB doesn't condone underage slavery, even to take care of your effect setup on stage. :scowl:

I consulted my 1880 copy of 'Corporate Guide to Maximizing Profits' and it assured me that this was OK. In fact, there is a section describing how it is my moral obligation to give these children a backbreaking and hazardous job to help ease their families' financial burden. See, I'm a philanthropist.






Ok, the kids just really wanted to be in the picture.

 

[JanusZarate]

I thought you could only do this through bi-amping. I know chris from muse runs a big muff to his speaker that handles mids and highs, which leaves his lows intact. I'm going to look into this.

Bi-amping produces the best results, and allows you to use very different rigs with ease to handle your clean and dirty sounds. But where you only have one rig to work with, a blend loop pedal (or "blender") lets you achieve a similar effect.

Like Bongo mentioned, though, it's not perfect. Sometimes, depending on the pedal design, you may have phasing issues. Sometimes, if the pedal doesn't have a volume control, you may have volume issues. And because the blended signal goes only to one rig, you're limited in some aspects of tone.

But a blend loop pedal usually costs you around $75 - $150, whereas a second rig could be well over $500. And most of us don't have roadies for that gear, or a means of transporting all of it. Which would you rather have as a hobby musician?