Dumping Multi FX

[Laurence Finston]

It is all about your path, and how much or how you want to make money.

Thank you for your comment. Fortunately, I'm retired and out of the rat race, so I don't have to think about making money. It's more of a money-losing operation than a money-making one.

[st.bede]

Thank you for your comment. Fortunately, I'm retired and out of the rat race, so I don't have to think about making money. It's more of a money-losing operation than a money-making one.

That is even better…
then it is truly all about what pleases you. Enjoy

I once added up all the money I spent on music equipment, all the money I spent in lessons… and all the hours I spent practicing music… the price to break even was not possible… it has always been money losing operation.

[jzucker]

Thank you for your comment. Fortunately, I'm retired and out of the rat race, so I don't have to think about making money. It's more of a money-losing operation than a money-making one.

for most professional jazz guitarists this is also true

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

The latency is noticeable, but not enough to bother me.

Any noticeable latency is a problem when you should be locked in with bass and drums or otherwise playing a part that’s rhythmically critical. The secret of a tight pocket is perfect synchrony amount the instruments defining it. If you’re emulating an organ and playing fills, they have to be timed perfectly or the band sounds sloppy.

You can learn to lead the beat enough while playing to be on it when listening. It took me many gigs to get it right on my Roland synth. And if you’re being a guitar and an organ, it’s almost impossible to be perfectly on the beat with both if there’s any audible latency in either one.

[Laurence Finston]

The hours I've spent playing and practicing are some of the happiest hours of my life. I couldn't put a price on them.

[jzucker]

Any noticeable latency is a problem when you should be locked in with bass and drums or otherwise playing a part that’s rhythmically critical. The secret of a tight pocket is perfect synchrony amount the instruments defining it. If you’re emulating an organ and playing fills, they have to be timed perfectly or the band sounds sloppy.

You can learn to lead the beat enough while playing to be on it when listening. It took me many gigs to get it right on my Roland synth. And if you’re being a guitar and an organ, it’s almost impossible to be perfectly on the beat with both if there’s any audible latency in either one.

[edit] Oops, I thought you were replying to my modeling pedal suggestion. I'll leave this here because it's possibly useful for those considering modelers.

Metheny, Rosenwinkel, gwizdala and tons of others use modelers and don't have an issue with locking in. The latency of a roland synth isn't even remotely comparable to the latency with a modern modeler.

[Laurence Finston]

I've never used the keyboard simulator pedals with anyone else but the latency is minimal. It is noticeable, but very slight. Not enough to put anyone off-beat. The product info gives a value for it. If anyone's interested, I could look it up. With the sitar simulator, you don't really notice it.

[jzucker]

I've never used the keyboard simulator pedals with anyone else but the latency is minimal. It is noticeable, but very slight. Not enough to put anyone off-beat. The product info gives a value for it. If anyone's interested, I could look it up. With the sitar simulator, you don't really notice it.

i've found the EH keyboard pedals to have too much latency

[Laurence Finston]

The product info gives a value for it. If anyone's interested, I could look it up.

No, I was wrong. It doesn't.

[Laurence Finston]

i've found the EH keyboard pedals to have too much latency

Okay. I suppose it's subjective.

[gitaarklas]

Thanks for all the interesting thoughts about effects.
I'd also like to add a little one.

For me effects should not interfere with the way I play my instrument.
I come from a classical guitar platform and I like it when the fingers control the sound and the instruments output responds to the fingers.
A lot of effects mask or diminish the fine details you can achieve with your fingers (or pick).

So effects are allowed to change your instrument, but not the way you play it and there has to be a link to what I do and what I hear.

[Laurence Finston]

So effects are allowed to change your instrument, but not the way you play it and there has to be a link to what I do and what I hear.

My classical guitar is my bread-and-butter instrument, so I understand what you're saying. My personal opinion is that it doesn't work that way. An electric guitar with effects is a totally different thing. It's horses for courses. Of course, there's nothing like playing a nylon string guitar. You can play with much finer nuances. It's just a different thing.

Gut is nice, too. I tried out some gut strings, but I don't just always pluck gently so they didn't hold up. Too bad, they sound great, but I'm not going to reserve a guitar just for gentle plucking.

[rsclosson]

The best sounding unit I ever tried was a Carl Martin Quattro. It was actually not a multi effects unit but four analog units combined in one large unit. I was in love until I saw the price. Looking for an inexpensive used one. Quattro | carl

[bluejaybill]

Thanks for all the interesting thoughts about effects.
I'd also like to add a little one.

For me effects should not interfere with the way I play my instrument.
I come from a classical guitar platform and I like it when the fingers control the sound and the instruments output responds to the fingers.
A lot of effects mask or diminish the fine details you can achieve with your fingers (or pick).

So effects are allowed to change your instrument, but not the way you play it and there has to be a link to what I do and what I hear.

Same for me, and that's why I am super picky about what effects stay on my board. Even the bypassed tone is important to me.

And that's why no multiFX has worked for m, there is usually a stand alone pedal that I prefer. Of course the newer ones are better than ever, I just don't have the time or the need to sort through them. I don't use that many effects anyway.

[bluejaybill]

The best sounding unit I ever tried was a Carl Martin Quattro. It was actually not a multi effects unit but four analog units combined in one large unit. I was in love until I saw the price. Looking for an inexpensive used one. Quattro | carl

At least two of those effects are ones that Carl Martin is well known for, no surprise that it's a great sounding unit, and it's analog.

It would be tough to duplicate that with equal quality in individual stomp boxes. I paid over $200 each for my Empress Compressor and Keely delay alone. Plus a power supply.

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

[edit] Oops, I thought you were replying to my modeling pedal suggestion. I'll leave this here because it's possibly useful for those considering modelers.

Metheny, Rosenwinkel, gwizdala and tons of others use modelers and don't have an issue with locking in. The latency of a roland synth isn't even remotely comparable to the latency with a modern modeler.

You're making a very important distinction that may help others avoid problems, Jack. True modeling is a completely different process from MIDI driven instrument emulation. Modeling does not require pitch recognition or conversion of one waveform into another - it's an inherent component of the signal path. Because there's digital processing involved, the best have latency of only 2 to 3 milliseconds, which is not audible.

Here's a table of latencies for several MIDI guitar synthesizers, all using a separate pickup. The Yamaha G50 was fastest at about 12 msec, although it's certainly not the best sounding one. The Roland GI20 (a decent half rack unit that I used for a few years until the GR20 came out) was next at 16 msec for guitar and 40 msec for bass. The 2 or 3 msec of latency in a true digital modeler is not detectable, and none of us is so consistently accurate that we hit each beat within a 2 msec window. But most of us will notice latency above 5 to 7 msec. We may not hear it, but we can feel it as muddy tone and / or a "spongy" beat. This article on how latency affects performers is very instructive. Here's a simple table of latencies in commonly used devices:

• Digital Mixer: 1.5 to 3ms
• Wireless Microphone: 2.5 to 5ms
• Wireless In-Ear Monitors: 2.5 to 5ms
• Digital Effect Pedal: 2 to 3ms
• Amp Modeler: 2 to 3ms

One device with 2 or 3 msec of latency will not affect anything. But with 3 digital pedals and a wireless connection, latency hits 15+ msec. At this point, it's not only palpable in the beat and audible as tonal coloration but also audible as a faint echo. DSP effects add more latency to a modeling amp or pedal. So if you use reverb and O/D in your modeling combo amp, latency may well exceed 10 msec - and the more you add to your signal chain, the longer the latency gets. This is probably why some players think that modeling amps are less responsive than traditional amps (which they are, if there's more than 3 msec of latency between input and output).

Even with bridge saddle pickups, there's more than 3 msec of latency in a guitar synth. Using a separate pickup like the Roland GK, there will be at least 10 to 15 msec, depending on the frequency of the note. Lower is slower, because the circuitry needs at least a full wavelength or three to detect the pitch correctly and the wavelength of a note is inversely proportional to its frequency. So it takes longer for the computer to identify the pitch when the wavelength is longer. The MIDI interface between the pickup and the synthesizer adds its own latency.

All of this affects precision in your playing. Latency of 7 to 10 msec is enough to smear the beat - it can make a rhythm section sound sloppy, loosen up a funk groove, and blur the tight drive that comes from perfect synchrony among kick, accents, walking bass, and rhythm guitar.

[whiskey02]

The hours I've spent playing and practicing are some of the happiest hours of my life. I couldn't put a price on them.

I was asked at a medical appointment "do you use an anti depressant"?.. I said yes, I play my guitar every day.

[st.bede]

Learning how to deal with latency is part of learning how to play music.

There is a feel, and in part that lets me connect to the pules. If it feels sloppy, I tend to need to push the beat a bit (I tend to be behind rather then ahead)… sometimes I have to lay back a bit (sometimes I get excited and have had too much coffee)…

but when you are in the pocket it feels right. This assumes you are playing with a good drummer, and there is communication between me, drummer, bass… communication is the key to feel.

that can get thrown out of sink if there is a singer that is on their own strange journey… as soon as there is a groove a bad singer will pull or push it in none musical ways…

none the less, too much latency, makes things really difficult, if not impossible.

[bluejaybill]

It depends on the music. You wouldn’t last 12 bars trying to play like that with Count Basie, James Brown, Frank Zappa, Parliament, Jon Cleary’s Absolute Monster Gentlemen, or the Academy of St Martin in the Fields.

Not to mention that modern music, affected as it is by dance and funk music, and also all computer derived music, is more inclined to be rhythmically "tight" than music of the past. Audiences raised on modern music especially expect that in many cases. A great example of this was the introduction of the electric Fender bass to music, this enabled a crisper, tighter rhythmic cohesion with the drums as compared to the slower speaking upright bass.In a way, that revolutionized music at least as much as the electric guitar did.

But let's differentiate between digital latency and playing behind the beat. Great players manipulate where they play on the beat (ahead, behind or right on) depending on the musical situation, and what they want to hear to express themselves. Studio musicians are very able to play anywhere on the beat that is needed. In jazz we do the same, if we are capable, and interested.

Digital latency is just that, an anomaly of a type of technology, and as such it is never good, the less the better. I find that if I am recording in a DAW and there is a delay, it really throws off my playing. Even if it just takes your head out of the music that can be a disaster for how well you want to play. Modern DAW's have technology to compensate for that. I would bet that most digital multiFX get close to that now, I'm just not sufficiently interested in them to even worry about that, nor am I interested in whatever degradation exists that is introduced by digital conversion. I want my dry signal to remain all-analog, and as clean as possible. That is a feature of many higher end digital pedals now, they have a clear analog signal path. It wasn't always that way.

[Laurence Finston]

Not to mention that modern music, affected as it is by dance and funk music, in fact all computer derived music, is more inclined to be rhythmically "tight" than music of the past.

Very true. I made some multi-track recordings a few years ago and I did it by playing the rhythm guitar part first and then playing the lead and other parts over it. I didn't find it very satisfying because it was like playing over a click track. I'm working on this again now but I don't want to do it the same way. My preference would be to record with other people and having everyone play at the same time and to use the minimum of studio trickery, but that's unfortunately not an option.

I've never warmed up to drum machines. I recently acquired an udu drum. (That is, I bought it. It didn't fall off the back of a lorry.) It's great. I can play quietly enough so as not to disturb my neighbours and still make interesting sounds.

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

let's differentiate between digital latency and playing behind the beat. Great players manipulate where they play on the beat (ahead, behind or right on) depending on the musical situation, and what they want to hear to express themselves. Studio musicians are very able to play anywhere on the beat that is needed. In jazz we do the same, if we are capable, and interested.

Playing at different points within the space of a beat is artistic and expessive. It's having to play ahead of the beat because of digital latency that creates the problem, especially for players whose styles center on being at the leading or trailing edge of that beat space.

Digital latency mandates leading the beat. As you point out, great players place the attack of their notes to emerge from the speaker exactly where they want it. The latency in a well engineered digital effect these days is as low as 2 milliseconds, which is a mighty tight tolerance that requires no conscious compensation. But when you chain multiple effects with 3 msec of latency each together, it adds up. Running a compressor, an overdrive, DSP EQ, reverb and a noise gate together can give you 15+ msec, which is problematic and requires compensation by the player. You have to overcome that much latency in those effects by leading the beat.

And when your style includes leading or lagging the center of the beat space, you have to learn to compensate for digital latency and still get your notes where you want them. Great players with distinctive styles and huge racks of processors seem to feel it intuitively. But playing with (or listening to) someone who's either new to digital processing or never learned how to use it right can be painful.

[bluejaybill]

Very true. I made some multi-track recordings a few years ago and I did it by playing the rhythm guitar part first and then playing the lead and other parts over it. I didn't find it very satisfying because it was like playing over a click track. I'm working on this again now but I don't want to do it the same way. My preference would be to record with other people and having everyone play at the same time and to use the minimum of studio trickery, but that's unfortunately not an option.

I've never warmed up to drum machines. I recently acquired an udu drum. (That is, I bought it. It didn't fall off the back of a lorry.) It's great. I can play quietly enough so as not to disturb my neighbours and still make interesting sounds.

The problem is that the computer and drum machines force you to play in a rhythmically precise manner, but of course it doesn't have to be that way. You can record a drum and bass track for instance that is looser in feel, maybe not quantize much or at all. But no one thinks to do that, everyone just turns on 100% quantization and then wonders why everything sounds so stiff.

In a former life I composed music for a variety of media, and often had to capture different feels based on what the client wanted. Reduced quantization was one of my favorite tricks. And then playing looser or behind the beat- lots of ways to make DAW recording sound more "real" or have a good feel. I also used to record kick and snare, and then have a drummer come in and do cymbals and tom fills.I just didn't have a good way to record a kit in my small studio. Bigger gigs I could take out to a real studio.

It would be fun for you to record the dud as part of a track. And maybe some other drums will fall off the back of a lorry, errrr...., become acquired by you as well!

[Laurence Finston]

The problem is that the computer and drum machines force you to play in a rhythmically precise manner, but of course it doesn't have to be that way. You can record a drum and bass track for instance that is looser in feel, maybe not quantize much or at all. But no one thinks to do that, everyone just turns on 100% quantization and then wonders why everything sounds so stiff.

The problem is I'm not sure how it will work to record over a track where I play like I normally do. I can keep time, but I intentionally speed up and slow down, as one does. I found it very limiting to play along with the rhythm guitar part. I've recently bought several instruments and I'm occupied with learning how to play them, so I haven't made any progress on the recordings yet.

It would be fun for you to record the dud as part of a track. And maybe some other drums will fall off the back of a lorry, errrr...., become acquired by you as well!

No, they didn't fall off a lorry. I get the joke, but that's how rumors get started. I've started buying percussion instruments that I think I can play softly enough so that I don't disturb my neighbors. No congas or cymbals, unfortunately. The plan was and maybe still is to rent some space for a studio/workshop, but I haven't felt like dealing with it and I think the time for that may have passed.

[Laurence Finston]

In a former life I composed music for a variety of media, and often had to capture different feels based on what the client wanted. Reduced quantization was one of my favorite tricks. And then playing looser or behind the beat- lots of ways to make DAW recording sound more "real" or have a good feel. I also used to record kick and snare, and then have a drummer come in and do cymbals and tom fills.I just didn't have a good way to record a kit in my small studio. Bigger gigs I could take out to a real studio.

This is very interesting to me. A few years ago I thought to myself, there must be a digital version of the old cassette tape recorder available. I searched and found the Tascam pocket studios. I bought the DP006. I've never used the editing features very much, just copied the tracks to a computer (first at the library, then to my own PC) and edited them with Audacity. I don't have a DAW and I'm not even completely sure what their function is.

When I bought the Tascam, I was going to buy a mic but at the music store where I bought it, they told me not to bother, because the mics on the unit were good. That's been my experience. In the meantime, I've got two 10W amps, a mic, two mic stands (table and floor) and a pre-amp for mic, for use without the Tascam. I've tried out the mic but haven't really started using it. I don't care that much about high-fidelity. I still think shellac is coming back. This is all fairly new for me.

A problem for me is that I haven't figured out how to synchronize video and audio. I know it's possible, I've just been busy with a hundred other things. My goal was always to make animated films. I did a couple of simple ones, but without audio. They're here, in case anyone wants to take a look: Laurence Finston - YouTube
I'm thinking of things along the lines of Winsor McCay's animated films or Norman McLaren's films for the National Film Board of Canada and music like early electronic music, e.g., the soundtrack to "Forbidden Planet". Not that I can draw like Winsor McCay.

[st.bede]

(When I record, I monitor the sound going in not the sound coming out… however I either, use my own fx, or just play dry.. but, I have not recorded anything guitar oriented for a long time. I personally Hate, with a capital H, what pro tools have done to music.. even if you listen to most complex African pop tunes, with complex melodies playing in unknown time sigs to me, they have a focus and groove… the word tight (as in musically cohesive) is too lose a definition for the artistry... music is alive… sorry, enough of my rant).