Would you be interested in a bass with a built-in effect?

[Matthijs]

As others said, a programmaleider effect would be you best bet. The main pro lengte in my opinion is the user interface. We would nor like a lot of controls on the bass, but stille would like to switch between sounds in the middel of a song. That's why footswitches are the standard. If you can find a way to do this Just as easy on the bass without it looking like pinball machine
you'll have a winner.

 

[smo]

Bigsby

 

[Dave W]

Onboard effects on a bass? Not even remotely interested.

 

[knumbskull]

Onboard effects on a bass? Not even remotely interested.

isn't that a Wal in your avatar pic?

 

[lfmn16]

ignoring the "effects in a bass" idea for a moment, I would respectfully say that lots of us bass players use effects

I'm not making a value judgment or disparaging people that use effects, I'm simply offering MY observation and most of the time I go into a club the bass player is plugging straight into their amp, or just using a compressor. No need to read anything else into my statement.

 

[iTzPrime]

i would love to have a built in moog synthi in my bass. However that is pretty complex and will take a huge ampount of effort for a small market

 

[knumbskull]

I'm not making a value judgment or disparaging people that use effects, I'm simply offering MY observation and most of the time I go into a club the bass player is plugging straight into their amp, or just using a compressor. Don't read anything else into my statement.

nothing read into it

 

[ga_edwards]

Many basses already have a preamp built in, with two or 3 bands of eq. It would be nice to see a built in preamp be expanded to include such things as LPF/HPF and a narrow band notch filter. I wouldn't fear any dodgy room acoustics with this flexibility.

Otherwise, compression. If you see any built in effect on a bass amp, it's usually compression. But it's more a utility than an effect. It would however be a useful addition, providing it's transparent enough. But a lot of people are fussy when it comes to compression (and most effects in general). What's perfect for one bassist may be dreadful for someone else.

 

[Fuzzbass]

Strongly disagree that onboard FX would not be accepted because bassists are traditionalists. Yeah, there are plenty of vintage/Fender-shaped-object snobs, and FX haters for that matter, but bassists are far more open to new ideas than guitarists.

Also, the idea that bassists aren't FX users is false. Many aren't, but many are, even if it's just overdrive.

 

[iTzPrime]

Strongly disagree that onboard FX would not be accepted because bassists are traditionalists. Yeah, there are plenty of vintage/Fender-shaped-object snobs, and FX haters for that matter, but bassists are far more open to new ideas than guitarists.

Also, the idea that bassists aren't FX users is false. Many aren't, but many are, even if it's just overdrive.

what i think would be awesome is a built in kemper in the bass, with 2 outputs , one with the kemper and one with the standart chord , and you change alll the settings via phone. that would be freaking phenomenal. The kemper profiles are really good ( the premium ones) and it would be awesome, if you could run directly into the pa from your bass without anything, or make it billy sheehan style with 2 different amps.

But that probably cost a huge amount of money and requires a lot of knowledge, where even modern companies would struggle to make a proper product (which is good in sound, ergonomics ...)

 

[Joe Nerve]

Strongly disagree that onboard FX would not be accepted because bassists are traditionalists. Yeah, there are plenty of vintage/Fender-shaped-object snobs, and FX haters for that matter, but bassists are far more open to new ideas than guitarists.

To what then do you attribute Ibanez's failure to? Their effects were actually pretty cool, and they even had the added expression pad.

 

[MCS4]

I think it would need to be a programmable effect, like the TC Electronics stuff, as others have mentioned. Otherwise it seems too likely that a potential buyer would not like the particular effect you chose to install, the effect wouldn't sound good with that particular bass or the rest of the buyer's rig, and so forth. I could see a possible benefit in having an onboard "always-on" effect like a compressor or overdrive as being useful, but it's so hard to find a great compressor or overdrive that suits me that I can't imagine it being possible that a manufacturer would nail it with a preset, non-modifiable effect.

I can imagine a preset effect working in limited circumstances with a well-known pedal and a complimentary bass -- for example, something like a Dingwall coming with an onboard Darkglass overdrive -- but not so much for a new line of basses and effects.

 

[iTzPrime]

To what then do you attribute Ibanez's failure to? Their effects were actually pretty cool, and they even had the added expression pad.

ugly design , practicality. Looks like if you fall over, or the bass falls over the effect could be easily damaged or fall out.
I think only the knobs should be visible and the rest of the effect should be stored relativly safly inside the bass

 

[iTzPrime]

I think it would need to be a programmable effect, like the TC Electronics stuff, as others have mentioned. Otherwise it seems too likely that a potential buyer would not like the particular effect you chose to install, the effect wouldn't sound good with that particular bass or the rest of the buyer's rig, and so forth. I could see a possible benefit in having an onboard "always-on" effect like a compressor or overdrive as being useful, but it's so hard to find a great compressor or overdrive that suits me that I can't imagine it being possible that a manufacturer would nail it with a preset, non-modifiable effect.

I can imagine a preset effect working in limited circumstances with a well-known pedal and a complimentary bass -- for example, something like a Dingwall coming with an onboard Darkglass overdrive -- but not so much for a new line of basses and effects.

you also probably need a dual output (one for clean and the other one with effect) , and the ability to mono both or switch off the effect completly without loosing volume ( so you need something like a limiter , which is really hard to do without destroying dynamics)

 

[Dave W]

isn't that a Wal in your avatar pic?

Yes. Are you saying the filer pre is an effect? I wouldn't consider it one.

 

[MCS4]

you also probably need a dual output (one for clean and the other one with effect) , and the ability to mono both or switch off the effect completly without loosing volume ( so you need something like a limiter , which is really hard to do without destroying dynamics)

I'm assuming the effect would have some type of rudimentary controls that would help with levels, such as volume and effect knobs (if a preset, analog effect) or the ability to manipulate parameters digitally, or at minimum an on/off switch plus trims for volume and possibly other parameters. As to things like dual outputs and limiters, I don't see why those would be any more necessary here than on a stompbox.

 

[Fuzzbass]

To what then do you attribute Ibanez's failure to? Their effects were actually pretty cool, and they even had the added expression pad.

I was currently typing that out (slowly).

The reason onboard FX will probably never take off is practicality. (Note: I'm not familiar with the Ibanez product).

IMO the biggest deal-killer is the instrument. I am not interested in buying a new instrument just to have onboard FX. I have overdrive engaged to some degree nearly all the time, but I'm not willing to give up my current instruments to achieve that. I play five string exclusively, and I'm fussy about string spacing (e.g. I will never buy a 5 string Music Man even though I adore the Music Man tone). And yeah, I'm also fussy about neck profile, appearance, tone (I'm a single-pickup guy). Plenty of other bass players are like me: unwilling to give up their current instruments just for FX.

Nor am I interested in modding one or more of my instruments to hold an onboard FX module, if that's the idea.

If I don't want to buy a new bass for multi-FX, and don't want to mod my current basses, the only thing I might consider is a small box that goes between instrument jack and cable plug, and that doesn't seem practical either. What other options am I missing?

Finally: even though all I ever use is overdrive, I have a dozen pedals of varying flavors. I'm aware of products such as the Source Audio Aftershock, but they don't cover the entire range of flavors (in particular the multi-band overdrives).

Current FX solutions are to use an amp head/rack rig containing FX, or put FX on the floor. I can't see how many players will switch from those to an onboard solution. Onboard has advantages of cleaner stage, and *possibly* controls within easy reach (doubtful though), but too many disadvantages.

 

[johnson79]

The Zon Billy Gould signature has a built in distortion circuit. While it's not something I'm interested in it is pretty cool on that bass. To me this borders on the line of a gimmick and that usually isn't a long lasting prospect, but if done right it's rad.

 

[Joe Nerve]

And lo and behold....

Musiciansfriend stupid deal of the day once again today is the Ibanez effects bass.

$219 dollars.

That's less than most multieffects units on their own.

Stupid Deal of the Day | Musician's Friend (3rd deal down)

 

[Dave W]

Plenty of other bass players are like me: unwilling to give up their current instruments just for FX.

This.

And to spin it another way, I'm not willing to give up my current effects just to have them built into a bass. In order to do that successfully every builder would need to agree on a standard and then build effects based on that so you'd be able to swap them out at will just like we can already do with floor based effects.