WH-1 vs. Digitech Whammy IV

[arstneio]

Hey all,

This thread may or may not have been done before.

I won't know, because WH-1 is apparently under 3 characters long, so I can't search it.

But anyways, I have a story:

So I got a digitech whammy WH-1 today. I'm not gonna lie, I was pretty flippin' psyched. I drove over an hour and paid $350, and it was in awesome condition. I took it home, and played it. It sounded sick.

But then, I thought, "Hey, why not try the WH-1 and WH-IV side by side?"

I did. And they sounded almost exactly the same. The note tracking, the time that the notes started to break up, everything.

Which brings me to the question, "why are WH-1 so sought after instead of the IV's?" I thought the difference would be mind blowing and would justify the $750 price tag on ebay.

Instead the only difference is a tiny tone difference when the WH-IV was in bypass mode.

Please explain what's supposed to be different, or why one is so much more expensive than the other.

Thanks,

Keigo

 

[Jared Lash]

The only TBer I know of that has a WH-1 is Higgie but he doesn't post a whole lot these days.

I wouldn't expect many here to have experience with it since I think if most were willing to shell out for a WH-1 they'd get a Bass Whammy instead.

In any event, what I've seen online has been that the WH-1 is "less digital sounding" and has a much longer treadle range.

I believe the second part to be true. The first part part could well be another example of a wrong internet opinion that floats around unchallenged because no one else pipes up to disagree.

I remember when I bought my Robotalk, a search brought up a number of posts from people saying that you couldn't have settings in Filter mode that would also work in "Arpeggiator" mode so it was a pain to switch back and forth. Come to find out, the only control those two modes even share is volume. Another example of people just passing on something they heard/read rather than actual experience.

You have both pedals. You give US the review.

 

[arstneio]

hahah I thought I just did.

"Incredibly disappointed by how similar they sounded" would be the review.

But it IS small than the IV, so it's less pedalboard space.

Also, in bypass mode, the I keeps the actual guitar/bass sound a bit better than the IV. But that could be fixed by modding the IV to true bypass.

 

[musicelectronix]

The only TBer I know of that has a WH-1 is Higgie but he doesn't post a whole lot these days.

I wouldn't expect many here to have experience with it since I think if most were willing to shell out for a WH-1 they'd get a Bass Whammy instead.

In any event, what I've seen online has been that the WH-1 is "less digital sounding" and has a much long treadle range.

I believe the second part to be true. The first part part could well be another example of a wrong internet opinion that floats around unchallenged because no one else pipes up to disagree.

I remember when I bought my Robotalk, a search brought up a number of posts from people saying that you couldn't have settings in Filter mode that would also work in "Arpeggiator" mode so it was a pain to switch back and forth. Come to find out, the only control those two modes even share is volume. Another example of people just passing on something they heard/read rather than actual experience.

You have both pedals. You give US the review.

This is my exact experience.. Basicly, the original Whammy worked better with guitar, much better than the re-issue. It sounded less modern and hip, if you know what I mean. It tracked better and when playing chords or intervals, the "ring" of the notes was more natural and less weird sounding.

But with the bass, they sounded almost the same. If I took an A/B test, I might not point out the Wh-1.

 

[Higgie]

While I agree they do sound similar (they are made by the same company and one is meant to be an imitation of the other after all ) the WH-1 does have a more pleasing sound to my ears. It's like the whole Analog vs Digital delay thing, I find the WH-1 somehow warmer, the WH-4 sounds colder and more sterile.

The thing that justifies it for me, as mentioned by TheBigO is the huge treadle range. The WH-4 I find is very limited. The sound goes from minimum to maximum with the tiniest bit of movement. Not too bad with the Harmony settings, but when you want to jump up 2 octaves I find it hard to control.

And hey, the WH-1 is TINY compared to the WH-4...The pedalboard real estate it saves is another great feature

 

[arstneio]

Really? I tried both guitar and bass, and it still sounded quite similar. Maybe I'll give it another go, but everything, even the time it took for the sound to start to get tappy/breaking up sounding

 

[arstneio]

oh, but the jump thing is definitely true. The jump on the IV during 2 octaves is a bit hard to control, compared to the wh-1. But i figured some grease or silicon should take care of that.

 

[OptimusPrime]

I never realized how much smaller the old Whammy is next to the new ones.

 

[arstneio]

ok. Played the two together again. I actually believe the WH-1 has that "breaking up" sound even faster than the WH-4 when I use the 2 octave up setting, which perhaps is the thing that gives it a more analog-like sound.