| Leo Kottke Special Effect [4] |
|---|
From: GBH333 <gbh333@aol...>
Subject: Leo Kottke Special Effect
Date: 10 Jan 2000 01:26:52 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Can anyone tell me what effect Leo Kottke is using on "Corina Corina"? It
sounds like his guitar is run through an amp, and also through some possible
midi effect unit that traces his notes adding a slight almost-organ sound.
Very haunting, He also uses the same effect in a lighter way on a few songs on
his new album "One Guitar, No Vocals". There is something slightly shadowing
the notes other than chorus and reverb. Thanks!
From: Robert Newton <RPNEWTONNOSPAM@SPAMLESSprodigy...>
Subject: Re: Leo Kottke Special Effect
Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2000 21:15:23 -0500
Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com
GBH333 wrote in message <<20000109202652.05796.00001151@ng-cm1...>>...
>Can anyone tell me what effect Leo Kottke is using on "Corina Corina"? It
>sounds like his guitar is run through an amp, and also through some
possible
>midi effect unit that traces his notes adding a slight almost-organ sound.
>Very haunting, He also uses the same effect in a lighter way on a few
songs on
>his new album "One Guitar, No Vocals". There is something slightly
shadowing
>the notes other than chorus and reverb. Thanks!
It's a Roland VG-8 box. I recommend you read the Acoustic Guitar interview
from a couple months ago. He outlines clearly his view on using effects,
especially chorus, which he does not use.
From: jtougas <jtougas@ix...>
Subject: Re: Leo Kottke Special Effect
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 04:44:16 GMT
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
On Sun, 9 Jan 2000 21:15:23 -0500, "Robert Newton"
<<RPNEWTONNOSPAM@SPAMLESSprodigy...>> wrote:
>snip He outlines clearly his view on using effects,
>especially chorus, which he does not use....
Anymore. ;-)
jtougas
What doesn't kill me, probably didn't aim very well...
From: Robert Newton <RPNEWTONNOSPAM@SPAMLESSprodigy...>
Subject: Re: Leo Kottke Special Effect
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 08:40:01 -0500
Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com
jtougas wrote in message <<38796367.25199162@nntp...>>...
>On Sun, 9 Jan 2000 21:15:23 -0500, "Robert Newton"
><<RPNEWTONNOSPAM@SPAMLESSprodigy...>> wrote:
>
>>snip He outlines clearly his view on using effects,
>>especially chorus, which he does not use....
>
>Anymore. ;-)
Right. He said in the interview that chorus is very seductive and people
get addicted to it, but after a while he came to the conclusion that "it
just sucks."
| Boss Chorus Pedals? [4] |
|---|
From: Kate Ebneter <ebneter@ix...>
Subject: Re: Boss Chorus Pedals?
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 15:10:04 -0800
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
The CE-5 is definitely more versatile; the CH-1 is an analog chorus and might
sound a little warmer than the CE-5. You might try to find an older CE-2 or
CE-3 used ... they're both great old analog choruses and can usually be had for
a relatively low price, and both are better than either of Boss's current
offerings.
Kate Ebneter
Collector of Noise Toys
ponder wrote:
>
> Can anyone tell me the difference between the Boss CE-5 chorus ensemble
> and the CH-1 Super chorus? They cost about the same and I'm wondering
> which is the preferred of the two.
>
> Thanks,
> Ange
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
From: David Kilpatrick <david@maxwellplace...>
Subject: Re: Boss Chorus Pedals?
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 00:09:52 +0000
Organization: Icon Publications Ltd
John Renbourn is one player who uses the analog model from preference. DK
Kate Ebneter wrote:
>
> The CE-5 is definitely more versatile; the CH-1 is an analog chorus and might
> sound a little warmer than the CE-5. You might try to find an older CE-2 or
> CE-3 used ... they're both great old analog choruses and can usually be had for
> a relatively low price, and both are better than either of Boss's current
> offerings.
>
> Kate Ebneter
> Collector of Noise Toys
>
> ponder wrote:
> >
> > Can anyone tell me the difference between the Boss CE-5 chorus ensemble
> > and the CH-1 Super chorus? They cost about the same and I'm wondering
> > which is the preferred of the two.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ange
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.
From: Dave Brichler <dave@lone-wolf...>
Subject: Re: Boss Chorus Pedals?
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 16:45:46 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
Slightly OT, but the CH-1 has been a mainstay in my Telecaster rig since
it first came out, inline mono no less. Helps to warm up that bright
Tele 'chirp'. A bit too warm ('dark') for my tastes on acoustic. Look
for a used one -- I see them frequently in music classifieds & pawn
shops.
--Dave
In article <<388CE9C4.2EACF968@maxwellplace...>>,
david@maxwellplace.demon.co.uk wrote:> John Renbourn is one player who uses the analog model from preference.
> DK
>
> Kate Ebneter wrote:
> >
> > The CE-5 is definitely more versatile; the CH-1 is an analog chorus
> >and might sound a little warmer than the CE-5. You might try to find
> >an older CE-2 or CE-3 used ... they're both great old analog choruses
> >and can usually be had for a relatively low price, and both are
> >better than either of Boss's current offerings.
> >
> > Kate Ebneter
> > Collector of Noise Toys
> >
> > ponder wrote:
> > >
> > > Can anyone tell me the difference between the Boss CE-5 chorus
> > > ensemble and the CH-1 Super chorus? They cost about the same and
> > > I'm wondering which is the preferred of the two.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Ange
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
From: Troubleman (Jay Brown) <troublemanNOtrSPAM@rocketmail...>
Subject: Re: Boss Chorus Pedals?
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 13:22:27 -0800
Organization: http://www.remarq.com: The World's Usenet/Discussions Start Here
My 2 cents worth - if you must have chorus, instead of getting the Boss
save your money and bide your time, wait until you can afford a tc
electronics chorus - you'll be happy you did. That said, if you really
like Boss (I've a CH-2 that's okay), get one of the big silver ones
(CH-1 maybe? can't remember the model number) that they made years ago
- the first of their chorus series. It's analog, and steadily
increasing in price on the vintage market, but it's the best chorus
Boss has ever made.
peace,
jb
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
| Pierre Bensusan's PA [2] |
|---|
From: David Kilpatrick <david@maxwellplace...>
Subject: Pierre Bensusan's PA
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2000 22:10:56 +0000
Organization: Icon Publications Ltd
For those of you who work with PAs and house PAs, we had the task of
being sound engineers for Pierre on Saturday (my son Richard did the
console control during the performance, and we both chipped in to rig up
Pierre's complex requirement).
Without revealing any of Pierre's secrets, his basic idea of having a
'dry' channel for both voice and guitar, plus stereo 'wet' mixes through
his magic combination of FX rack stuff, proved most effective. One good
dynamic mike for voice was put through a splitter box, and half the
signal fed through his voice processing kit for reverb (etc), half going
dry direct to the console. One top-line condensor mike was right-hand
sunrise positioned aimed at the guitar bridge, and used dry, while his
under-saddle Highlander was put through stereo FX. Pierre painstakingly
programmed a unique reverb, EQ and modulation, named and dated, to suit
the auditorium so that if he returns to the same venue, he can recall
it. He said his settings were a result of 25 years of experience.
His set-up needed six channels for one solo guitarist-vocalist but
proved fully justified. Obviously the FX he puts in line are very
important but the principle of splitting the signal then using the desk
to remix it, rather than the usual way of using FX loops and altering
return values, worked so well I'm going to play around with similar
ideas - especially the splitting of one vocal mike into one dry mono and
one stereo FX.
David Kilpatrick
From: David Kilpatrick <david@maxwellplace...>
Subject: Re: Pierre Bensusan's PA
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 18:11:31 +0000
Organization: Icon Publications Ltd
Things we would have to have noted down in detail - yes, we could have
written down exactly what rackmounts he had, but as he covers these with
a cloth and positions them so even the audience can't really see, it
would not be fair to have picked his brains. I was pleased to see he
uses the same Boss stereo volume swell pedal as I do, and he uses it to
bring in the bridge pickup with its heavily processed signal 'over' the
miked dry sound. That way he can tune up, play a few notes which the
audience hears, and all of a sudden as the tune starts properly the
sound lifts off like a airplane. It works very well. You don't really
notice the volume change, just the effect of being transported into a cathedral.
I will reveal that he sets his reverbs as bright and zingy as he can. I
have sold reverb units for producing the kind of treble rushing hiss
that he likes to be able to hear - just hear. He takes the reverb to the
point of excess - his assistant said it sounded like playing a cymbal in
a cavern - then just eases off one notch below. In the empty auditorium,
it sounded too much. When the audience was in, it was remarkable how
much of that zing was absorbed. He got it just perfect. And he monitors
the dry signal, mainly, for foldback.
David
John Youngblood wrote:
>
> I found your post to be quite interesting, as I am getting back
> into playing after many years of layoff and am finding the ways of
> amplifying the instrument to be quite fascinating. Its interesting
> that he's using the Highlander which doesn't seem to be a product that
> is getting as much attention as other pickups. I guess if you're
> blending a high quality mic the transducer quality becomes a lesser
> factor, not that I know anything about the relative quality of
> transducers.
> Your post left me wondering, however, about just what secrets of
> Pierre's you were withholding....
>
>
> -- John Youngblood
>
> Youngblood Photography
| Can someone reccomend effects for acustic |
|---|
From: Mort at Fastbreak <fastbreak@my-deja...>
Subject: Re: Can someone reccomend effects for acustic
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 12:32:58 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
In article <NPYq4.18868$<LC4.364417@bgtnsc04-news...>>,
"fred" <rufis99@hotmail.com> wrote:> I've got an Alvarez Yari WY 1 electric acoustic. Can some one
reccomend an
> effects source. Thanks
Depends what you want it to sound like and how much you want to spend.
The only effect I routinely use on an electro is reverb. Many people add
a touch of chorus for a fuller sound. I use delay for a specific effect
in one or two pieces; I use this to create atmosphere as a decaying
echo.
I use an Alesis Microverb, which is a very flexible rack-mount unit.
This has an enormous range of different reverb, delay and chorus
settings. Reverbs include a host of different room, hall and plate
settings, all of which are adjustable for "size of room" and magnitude
of effect. The chorus and delays are equally adjustable. Combinations
are equally good. The Microverb is really intended as a small studio
unit, but I have found it very effective and straightforward for use in
live playing. It lists for $329 but you can get it for $250 at
http://www.zzounds.com/love.music?p=p.ALEMIDIVERB4&f=1776&a=adHCeffects
A cheap and effective alternative is the Zoom 504 acoustic stomp-box.
This has a good range of usefull effects, as well as the obligatory Zoom
silliness. It costs about $60. The cheaper Zoom units like this are
rather noisy, with a distinct hiss on most settings, but for this amount
of money they are really incredible value. You can look at the thing at
http://www.zzounds.com/love.music?p=p.ZOM504&f=1776&a=adHCeffects
For recording you will probably need a compressor. Many people use them
live for a tighter punchier sound. I don't. This is probably more
because I find the things bloody confusing and can never get the sound I
want, rather than because they are inherently a bad thing. I do
personally like using a wide dynamic range though, which is somewhat
defeated by compressors. The best compressor I have tried either for
live use or recording is the RNC (Really Nice) compressor from FMR
audio.
The sound quality is astounding for the price ($199). It also has the
great advantage of being easy to use.
Hope this helps.
Have fun,
Mort
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
| how's the zoom 504? [2] |
|---|
From: Dan Mirolli <dmirolli@runet...>
Subject: Re: how's the zoom 504?
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 13:49:24 -0500
Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA
fred wrote:
> for only $100.00 does it do the job it says?
Not sure what it claims to do but from what I've heard, they really
sound bad and you can get something better for the same price. Alesis
Nanoverb.
Dan
From: Hojo2x <hojo2x@aol...>
Subject: Re: how's the zoom 504?
Date: 18 Feb 2000 19:27:26 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Fred asked about the Zoom 504:
>for only $100.00 does it do the job it says?
Yeah. Kinda. Not particularly well. I have one here on loan from a friend
who bought it, thinking it'd be an end-all and be-all.
It wasn't.
I've plugged it in a few times, but none of the sounds are all that great. I
happened to like using the well-chosen effect once every so often, but I didn't
find anything particularly likable on this pedal, despite all the different
sounds it offers.
But with other ears, other fingers, other amplifiers it might be better. It
just didn't work well for me or my buddy.
Wade Hampton Miller
| Volume Pedal & Acoustic Instruments |
|---|
From: Adrian Legg <Commercial-Free@Speech...>
Subject: Re: Volume Pedal & Acoustic Instruments
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 23:48:06 +0100
Organization: (Posted via) U-NET Internet Ltd.
On Mon, 27 Mar 2000 19:16:51 +0100, Unsung96 wrote
(in message <<20000327131651.11720.00003533@ng-ci1...>>):
> Has anybody had luck with any particular brand of volume pedal and an
> acoustic
> instrument?
I've used all kinds, but stick to cheapo plastic keyboard ones - they're
light and easy to replace...
Use the vol. pedal _after_ buffering,compression, envelope filters and so
on, but before reverbs and echoes.
Most guitar volume pedals have a log or audio taper pot - everything happens
in a sudden lump at the loud end. To get an even volume roll-off without top
loss, you need a linear taper after pre-amping has dropped the signal to low
impedance, hence the keyboard type unit.
--
--www.adrianlegg.com
| Oberheim Echoplex [2] |
|---|
From: future perfect <artmusic@gte...>
Subject: Re: Oberheim Echoplex
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 16:22:16 GMT
<<aideas@pasonline...>> wrote in message news:8dcjit$v9o$<1@nnrp1...>...
> In article <8db37o$e59$<1@nnrp1...>>,
> <flashfingers@my-deja...> wrote:
> > Can anyone tell me where is a good place to get a good deal on one of
> > these units or what a good price would be? Are the effects pedals and
> > 200 second memory included with the unit or are these to be bought
> > seperately? Has anyone used these with acoustics and had success?
> > This might be a stupid question, but is the "digital pro" a different
> > model or are they all "digital pro"?
> >
> > Thanx in advance,
> >
> > Greg
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.
> >
>
> Oberheim Echoplex Digital Pro is not made any more. You can still get them
> used in good condition for around $500-$700. Standard memory is 12.5 secs.
> but upgrades to 198 secs is easy with simple, inexpensive SIMMS. The foot
> pedal comes with the unit or one can use certain midi pedals with it. For
> detailed information on this device, check out:
>
> http://www.annihilist.com/loop/tools/echoplex/echoplex.html
Indeed they are being made- Gibson has started up production again-
standard memory is 50 seconds (like it has been the last few years), and the
foot pedal does not come with the unit. Midi pedals don't all work with it
(in fact, few do) due to the limited nature of most pedals sending only
program change messages.
I have been an Echoplex user for about 3 years and no other single tool has
helped me grow as a musician. I have some info about the Echoplex and how I
use it on my pages.
Dave Eichenberger- guitars.loops.devices
http://home1.gte.net/artmusic/dave
From: future perfect <artmusic@gte...>
Subject: Re: Oberheim Echoplex
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 19:52:24 GMT
Yes, but this won't get you an Echoplex...Gibson ditched the entire Oberheim
line except the Echoplex, renamed 'Gibson Echoplex Pro' made by their
Trace Elliot division. The # to call is Shane @ 1-800-544-2766 x206.
Dave Eichenberger- guitars.loops.devices
http://home1.gte.net/artmusic/dave
'Future Perfect' - art music
http://home1.gte.net/artmusic/
"Marc Horowitz" <<mhoro@flashcom...>> wrote in message
news:<38FC57FA.CD908A27@flashcom...>...
> The Oberheim line is no longer distributed by Gibson. The new distributor
is
> Armadillo Enterprises of Florida, who also distribute Dean guitars, Nord
Lead
> synths, and ddrum. Armadillo's number is 813-796-8868.
> MH
>
> future perfect wrote:
>
> > <<aideas@pasonline...>> wrote in message
news:8dcjit$v9o$<1@nnrp1...>...
> > > In article <8db37o$e59$<1@nnrp1...>>,
> > > <flashfingers@my-deja...> wrote:
> > > > Can anyone tell me where is a good place to get a good deal on one
of
> > > > these units or what a good price would be? Are the effects pedals
and
> > > > 200 second memory included with the unit or are these to be bought
> > > > seperately? Has anyone used these with acoustics and had success?
> > > > This might be a stupid question, but is the "digital pro" a
different
> > > > model or are they all "digital pro"?
> > > >
> > > > Thanx in advance,
> > > >
> > > > Greg
> > > >
> > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > > > Before you buy.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Oberheim Echoplex Digital Pro is not made any more. You can still get
them
> > > used in good condition for around $500-$700. Standard memory is 12.5
secs.
> > > but upgrades to 198 secs is easy with simple, inexpensive SIMMS. The
foot
> > > pedal comes with the unit or one can use certain midi pedals with it.
For
> > > detailed information on this device, check out:
> > >
> > > http://www.annihilist.com/loop/tools/echoplex/echoplex.html
> >
> > Indeed they are being made- Gibson has started up production again-
> > standard memory is 50 seconds (like it has been the last few years), and
the
> > foot pedal does not come with the unit. Midi pedals don't all work with
it
> > (in fact, few do) due to the limited nature of most pedals sending only
> > program change messages.
> > I have been an Echoplex user for about 3 years and no other single tool
has
> > helped me grow as a musician. I have some info about the Echoplex and
how I
> > use it on my pages.
> >
> > Dave Eichenberger- guitars.loops.devices
> > http://home1.gte.net/artmusic/dave
>
| Opinions on Boss AD-5 |
|---|
From: BrettGV <brettgv@aol...>
Subject: Re: Opinions on Boss AD-5
Date: 10 Mar 2000 05:27:00 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Hey Nick,
I'm using the Ad-5 with a Taylor C612 with Taylor's Fishman made active piezo
and a Martin 0001 with the Fishman Rare Earth humbucker. The only time i find
I get background noise is with the Rare Earth. I find I have to roll off the
presence a touch, and add a bit more ofthe "mic" knob t regain a sense of
brightness to the sound.
Other than that, I don't get any noise.
Brett
>Hi
>I'm using a boss Ad-5 with a sunrise in a Taylor 412.
>Is any one else using one of these (boss) units ?
>
>My main concern is the background noise of the ad-5.
>The noise is not great but it does concern me when I'm playing to a quiet
>audience. Apart form the noise the over all performance of the unit, I find
>is quite good.
>I'm after some input so see if anyone else has found this with this unit
>and may know of some ways around it.
>thanks nick
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
| How Does Bensusan Do This? [2] |
|---|
From: Robert Newton <RPNEWTONNOSPAM@SPAMLESSprodigy...>
Subject: How Does Bensusan Do This?
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 22:03:29 -0400
Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com
The "Nice Feeling" CD has been playing in my car nonstop for the past four
weeks. I find I drive a little faster with it on, because Pierre B. is such
an exciting musician. I saw his most recent US concert in Rhode Island in
April, sat 12 feet away from him and fibrillated for two straight hours. It
was great to be able to really see his awesome playing up close.
There are two techniques that he uses that just mystify me, and I wonder if
anyone knows how he does them (I'd guess that Larry Pattis might know
first). First is the whole chord vibrato, used frequently but especially
strong in the tune, "Santa Monica". Is that a neck bend, or a vibrato of
the whole hand, or something else?
Second is the very piercing harmonic he uses sparingly but with great
effect, as in "Falafel" on this CD and "Shebeg an Shemore" on the Blarney
Pilgrim CD. It almost sounds like feedback, much louder than ordinary
harmonics, and seems to have a bend or vibrato in it. When I saw him do it
in concert he didn't seem to have any special electronics around, so I
imagine it's in the playing.
Does anyone know if there are human techniques that can make these sounds,
is it effects, or just that ineffable Pierre B. magic?
Thanks.
Bob N.
From: David Kilpatrick <david@maxwellplace...>
Subject: Re: How Does Bensusan Do This?
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 11:20:20 +0100
Organization: Icon Publications Ltd
In article <8jh1ef$4026$<1@newssvr03-int...>> , "Robert Newton"
<<RPNEWTONNOSPAM@SPAMLESSprodigy...>> wrote:
>
> The "Nice Feeling" CD has been playing in my car nonstop for the past four
> weeks. I find I drive a little faster with it on, because Pierre B. is such
> an exciting musician. I saw his most recent US concert in Rhode Island in
> April, sat 12 feet away from him and fibrillated for two straight hours. It
> was great to be able to really see his awesome playing up close.
>
> There are two techniques that he uses that just mystify me, and I wonder if
> anyone knows how he does them (I'd guess that Larry Pattis might know
> first). First is the whole chord vibrato, used frequently but especially
> strong in the tune, "Santa Monica". Is that a neck bend, or a vibrato of
> the whole hand, or something else?
Pierre rests his elbow close to the end block of the guitar, and while
holding the chord, momentarily lifts his fingers off the strings and
'shakes' the instrument using his leg/chest as a fulcrum so that it bends
very slightly. He does this quite elegantly and effortlessly, with very
little physical movement visible for the amount of vibrato you hear. At the
same time, he presses the swell pedal (a VITAL part of the Bensusan
armoury!) which is in the second, split channel of his PA system. This swell
pedal feeds through to a very powerfully EQd and reverbed channel. In
effect, he extends the sustain of the chord by swelling its volume as it
fades, but the bright reverb and EQ emphasise the high frequencies, which
are critical to our impression of a sustained note.
You will also note that Pierre moves the guitar to and fro relative to the
narrow-reception angle pencil condensor mike he uses for the pure, acoustic
sound (another channel) and this produces a slight volume tremolo.
When Pierre demonstrated this vibrato using no electronics, it was still
impressive. I was asked to try to do it and reduced Pierre to a big grin
because of the way I was waving my Lowden around frantically yet producing
no audible vibrato! Since then, I have learned that you need to be quite
brave, and not be worried about damaging the guitar. If you rock your arm
slightly on to the area of the top behind the bridge on a Lowden, and press
this down, you get a damping of the volume combined with a vibrato - you can
see the bridge move, the top is so flexible. Pierre has got a combination of
slight neck/body bending plus this damping/tone changing/pitch changing
effect of pressure on the top, though he keeps well away from the bridge
(doing this close to the bridge just kills the sustain). Obviously it has
worked for him on his guitars, but I think his French guitar was based on a
Lowden anway. I can not achieve the same effect as well on my O-10, but I
can get closer to it with the Lowden than any other guitar.
>
> Second is the very piercing harmonic he uses sparingly but with great
> effect, as in "Falafel" on this CD and "Shebeg an Shemore" on the Blarney
> Pilgrim CD. It almost sounds like feedback, much louder than ordinary
> harmonics, and seems to have a bend or vibrato in it. When I saw him do it
> in concert he didn't seem to have any special electronics around, so I
> imagine it's in the playing.
Watch that swell pedal again! We were asked to help Pierre rig up his sound.
The split-feed principle he uses is quite vital. He works with twin pickup
sources - his condensor mike and his saddle pickup. Most of the time, you
hear a true sound from the condensor mike, with a fixed amount of EQ and
reverb which he tailors to the room. When you hear that incredible 'wail'
and resonance he produces, he has swelled in more of the sound from the
bridge pickup. If he takes this to an extreme, it would be too loud - he has
the levels set so that the pedal half-depressed gives enough volume for
normal effects. With the harmonics, he is careful to pick the string RIGHT
next to the bridge - he demonstrates this in workshops, and shows that there
are a couple of places where fingerpicking a harmonic work better than
others (on another node, or full ponticello). He then uses the swell pedal
which really boosts the high end of the harmonics with that zingy reverb and
bright EQ.
Pierre does everything in stereo, using twin 31-band EQ in addition to
whatever the house PA can offer. All of his sounds are very, very carefully
crafted and while they are not easy to re-create, if you can begin to
approach his split-channel method (i.e. by splitting a feed from one pickup,
keeping half 'raw' and the other half through a swell pedal and reverb) you
may get closer to some of his style hallmarks.
>
> Does anyone know if there are human techniques that can make these sounds,
> is it effects, or just that ineffable Pierre B. magic?
>
Hopefully anyone else who has attended one of his masterclasses and helped
with his sound will also have learned this. Pierre does not hide things -
though he does put a cloth over his gig rig so nosy audience members are not
constantly trying to find out what rackmounts he uses instead of listening
to the music.
For the record, Pierre also insists on a precise orientation of himself, the
audience, his playing stool, his footswell pedal, mikes, amp rig, and the
main speakers and marks everything out in gaffer tape on his 'stage rug'.
This way, he can close his eyes and his playing position NEVER varies, at
home, on tour, in the studio. He is in the same exact space no matter when
he plays, for performance purposes. We talk about muscle memory - well,
Pierre has complete environment memory at work for him. I think this
contributes a great deal to his performances. He also uses headphone
monitors with a greatly reduced level of the 'wet' mix; what Pierre hears as
he plays is close to the acoustic sound of the guitar, though he can of
course hear a decent amount of stage sound past the headphones, which are
not the sort that exclude all external noise.
David Kilpatrick
--
Subscribe to our magazines by secure CC transaction - get Freelance
Photographer, The Master Photographer or Minolta Image:
http://www.freelancephotographer.co.uk/
Make me rich! Buy my CD or listen to my songs and instrumentals:
http://www.mp3.com/DavidKilpatrick
Personal website: http://www.maxwellplace.demon.co.uk/pandemonium/
| Alesis Nanoverb - What's the concensus? [4] |
|---|
From: MKarlo <mkarlo@aol...>
Subject: Alesis Nanoverb - What's the concensus?
Date: 24 Aug 2000 04:09:59 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Basically just for gigging. I find I've committed my MPX100 to the recording
set up. If this little dude does a decent job I'd be thrilled. Someone wrote
sometime back that they saw them going for $60 plus shipping. Anyone know if
that's still the case?
If it makes any difference, I'd be going into the loop on a Raven Labs PMB-1,
out to the house and possibly to the Ultrasound powered extension (still
waiting for Mr. Dorgan to let me know if 50 watts is going to be enough).
Thanks all.
Your in Pickin',
Mitch
From: Robert McArthur <rtmca@yahoo...>
Subject: Re: Alesis Nanoverb - What's the concensus?
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:40:02 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
It seems to be a pretty nifty little toy--useful presets. Very small.
High quality sound. I personally like the Microverb III (I think it is
III) that has a dial with about 50 presets. Be wary of too many sound
effects for acoustic guitar--you may end uop sounding like an electric
guitarist playing an osetnsably acoustic instruiment (A. Legg, for
instance).
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
From: Larry Sprigg <gsprigg@aol...>
Subject: Re: Alesis Nanoverb - What's the concensus?
Date: 24 Aug 2000 16:41:55 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
I have used a NanoVerb for a couple years. Really like it for subtle effects.
My philosoply in general is: If you hear it, it is too much; but if you notice
the absence of it, then it is set right.
Usual price is about $100 give or take a few bucks. Great deal for that price.
I paid a lot more when they first came out.Larry
To reply via E-Mail, please remove the "nojunk" from my address
From: Andrew P. Mullhaupt <smullhau@home...>
Subject: Re: Alesis Nanoverb - What's the concensus?
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:02:43 GMT
Organization: @Home Network
"Larry Sprigg" <<gsprigg@aol...>> wrote in message
news:<20000824124155.01755.00000582@ng-cg1...>...
> I have used a NanoVerb for a couple years. Really like it for subtle
effects.
> My philosoply in general is: If you hear it, it is too much; but if you
notice
> the absence of it, then it is set right.
This is a really good philosophy for cheap reverb units. It's not a bad
philosophy for better reverb units, but those can better stand to be exposed
when used for dramatic effect.
Later,
Andrew Mullhaupt
| Improving performance of inexpensive reverbs (was Alesis Nanoverb - consensus [3] |
|---|
From: Rick Ruskin <liondog@isomedia...>
Subject: Re: Improving performance of inexpensive reverbs (was Alesis Nanoverb - consensus
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:37:18 GMT
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Assuming you have the signal path and equipment available, I suggest
trying any or any combination of the following :
1. Send a signal with different EQ settings to the reverb. Chances
are, if you added high end to the dry signal, you don't want/need that
same boost going to the reverb. If you have a nice full sound on the
dry signal, that same fullness will tend bloom out too much once it
hits the reverb so roll some low-end off on its way in.
2. Delay the send to the reverb with an outboard device. This
separates the "wet" a bit more from the original signal allowing for
less reverb while still maintaining its presence in the mix. How much
delay is a "to taste" judgement.
3. EQ the reverb return.
4. Compress the send to the reverb. Some echo devices sound really
artificial and "sproingy" if they are hit too hard. I had an
Echoplate III that sounded great on everything but finger-picked
steel-string guitar and had to compress ANY guitar so played to the
max before it went to that chamber. Smoothed that sucker right out.
5. If you have separate input/output controls on the reverb, set
them for the best performance with your system. On my units the
output is set for minimum noise before setting the input level. These
are not where the manufacture suggests, btw. the end result is there
is virtually no noise added when the chambers are engaged, whether or
not signal is going through them.
Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WA
http://www.isomedia.com/homes/liondog
http://www.itrstudio.com/rruskin.html
From: Chris Stern <chrisstern@mediaone...>
Subject: Re: Improving performance of inexpensive reverbs (was Alesis Nanoverb - consensus
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 14:37:48 GMT
I used a little Microverb II for about 10 years and more recently have used
a Nanoverb. I have always used just enough reverb that I can tell it's there
but have to point out the sound difference to others. Same principle for
vocals and acoustic guitar.
Amazingly good quality for the price.
Chris
"Rick Ruskin" <<liondog@isomedia...>> wrote in message
news:<39a558a1.2529735@news...>...
> Assuming you have the signal path and equipment available, I suggest
> trying any or any combination of the following :
>
> 1. Send a signal with different EQ settings to the reverb. Chances
> are, if you added high end to the dry signal, you don't want/need that
> same boost going to the reverb. If you have a nice full sound on the
> dry signal, that same fullness will tend bloom out too much once it
> hits the reverb so roll some low-end off on its way in.
>
> 2. Delay the send to the reverb with an outboard device. This
> separates the "wet" a bit more from the original signal allowing for
> less reverb while still maintaining its presence in the mix. How much
> delay is a "to taste" judgement.
>
> 3. EQ the reverb return.
>
> 4. Compress the send to the reverb. Some echo devices sound really
> artificial and "sproingy" if they are hit too hard. I had an
> Echoplate III that sounded great on everything but finger-picked
> steel-string guitar and had to compress ANY guitar so played to the
> max before it went to that chamber. Smoothed that sucker right out.
>
> 5. If you have separate input/output controls on the reverb, set
> them for the best performance with your system. On my units the
> output is set for minimum noise before setting the input level. These
> are not where the manufacture suggests, btw. the end result is there
> is virtually no noise added when the chambers are engaged, whether or
> not signal is going through them.
>
>
> Rick Ruskin
> Lion Dog Music - Seattle WA
> http://www.isomedia.com/homes/liondog
> http://www.itrstudio.com/rruskin.html
>
From: Rick Ruskin <liondog@isomedia...>
Subject: Re: Improving performance of inexpensive reverbs (was Alesis Nanoverb - consensus
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 17:00:16 GMT
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
On Fri, 25 Aug 2000 16:27:10 GMT, No Busking <<nobusking@yahoo...>>
wrote:
>Thanks Rick,
>
>I've been pretty unhappy with the Alesis Wedge that I picked up cheap
>on closeout. I'll try some of your suggestions this weekend.
I have on of those, too. Don't use it very much because I have
several others to choose from but I've found it pretty good. It has
pre- delay function in it, which can be handy. My biggest complaint
is that I hate scrolling through menus to get it set-up to my liking.
That's a problem with a lot of microprocessor controlled gear, though.
Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WA
http://www.isomedia.com/homes/liondog
http://www.itrstudio.com/rruskin.html
| Compressor for Acoustic? [6] |
|---|
From: JPAltes <jpaltes@aol...>
Subject: Compressor for Acoustic?
Date: 23 Oct 2000 20:40:49 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Any ever use a compressor for live gigs, to give your acoustic a little more
sustain and "ooomph?".
What kind of compressor?
I am considering using one at church for our worship band....
Patrick Altes
From: Bill Thompson <bt3@pan...>
Subject: Re: Compressor for Acoustic?
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 17:35:09 -0400
Organization: Newsfeeds.com http://www.newsfeeds.com 73,000+ UNCENSORED Newsgroups.
well... I suppose it depends on what you are trying to accomplish... or what
kind of sound you are after.
As a general rule, I really don't like compressors as an audio effect, which is
what I think of when you say sustain and oomph. BUT... I also spend most of my
time recording guitars these days, so my viewpoint may be a bit skewed.
They really are two topics!
In the studio I have the luxury of selecting the right guitar and microphone,
and experimenting with the microphone placement. so I don't generally reach for
a compressor until mixdown time. (And this depends heavily on the player... if a
player is really uneven I may end up tracking with a compressor, but at that
point I am trying to even out the dynamics of a performance!)
The thing is, in the studio I am almost always going for a pretty faithful
reproduction of the guitar.
Playing live is a different story all together, and when I play live I don't use
a microphone, I use a pickup system of some ilk. And I generally have a DI box
(the LR Baggs Para DI is my current favorite), a chorus (yeah, guilty as
charged... it's the little TC Electonics one with flange and pitch shift - I
usually use the pitch shift for the chorus effect), and I have my faithful MXR
Dynacomp or an old Ibanez compressor that came out of the UE-405 multi-effect
box.
Now this doesn't sound anything like a guitar anymore... it sounds like a piezo
pickup equipped guitar through a chorus and compressor... but that seems to
work, or it's what people expect. (I don't actually use the chorus when I play
in church!)
All that rambling to say... if you are trying to get the compressor effect check
out just about any of the compressor pedals available for electric guitar. I
like the MXR as far as current products go. But it will take you a little
farther on down the road from an acoustic guitar sound<G>!
If you just want to even out the dynamics you need a pretty transparent
compressor, and I'd recommend the RNC, available at www.mercenary.com, with lots
of info at www.fmr.com.
Have fun...
Bill
JPAltes wrote:
> Any ever use a compressor for live gigs, to give your acoustic a little more
> sustain and "ooomph?".
>
> What kind of compressor?
>
> I am considering using one at church for our worship band....
>
> Patrick Altes
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
From: <mikecloud@my-deja...>
Subject: Re: Compressor for Acoustic?
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 22:25:04 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
In article <<20001023164049.02961.00000806@ng-cf1...>>,
jpaltes@aol.com (JPAltes) wrote:> Any ever use a compressor for live gigs, to give your acoustic a
little more
> sustain and "ooomph?".
>
> What kind of compressor?
>
> I am considering using one at church for our worship band....
>
> Patrick Altes
>
Patrick:
I'm not sure that you'll get more sustain and "ooomph" from
compression; but, I have on occasion used one live to smooth out my
under-saddle pick-up. I suggest the RNC (Really Nice Compressor).
They're inexpensive and quiet, and work well on an acoustic when used
sparingly--you have to be careful not to eliminate all the dynamics!
They have a website and I'm sure you can easily locate it.
Mike
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
From: Bill Kirke <hickwnd@cs...>
Subject: Re: Compressor for Acoustic?
Date: 24 Oct 2000 16:53:00 GMT
Organization: CompuServe (http://www.compuserve.com/)
For a fatter sound, try a little delay live. As you are playing (if you are
playing with others) you will barely notice it until you take it away.
Compression is great if used sparingly or only as needed to smooth out the
piezo sound. What I like about the piezo is the ease with which the sound can
be manipulated. Properly used it beats everything else out there so far.
Bill
From: <the_troubleman@my-deja...>
Subject: Re: Compressor for Acoustic?
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 16:05:54 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
I've just recently started running through an all-in-one mic
preamp/instrument preamp/compressor/EQ unit before going to the PA, a
Joemeek VC6Q British channel. The main PA at my church is okay but not
spetacular. I'd been using a Baggs ParaDI in conjunction with an ART MP
mic preamp. Actually that combination worked well, but I want a
compressor to tame some of the transients that the PA didn't handle too
well. The VC6Q had a mic preamp/instument preamp and the compressor in
one unit and sounded great to boot. Using the Joemeek box I've been
extremely pleased with the results.
peace,
jb
In article <<20001023164049.02961.00000806@ng-cf1...>>,
jpaltes@aol.com (JPAltes) wrote:> Any ever use a compressor for live gigs, to give your acoustic a
little more
> sustain and "ooomph?".
>
> What kind of compressor?
>
> I am considering using one at church for our worship band....
>
> Patrick Altes
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: Compressor for Acoustic?
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 16:02:27 -0400
Organization: Cornell University
<mikecloud@my-deja...> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure that you'll get more sustain and "ooomph" from
> compression; but, I have on occasion used one live to smooth out my
> under-saddle pick-up. I suggest the RNC (Really Nice Compressor).
> They're inexpensive and quiet, and work well on an acoustic when used
> sparingly--you have to be careful not to eliminate all the dynamics!
> They have a website and I'm sure you can easily locate it.
I'll second this recommendation; the RNC is remarkably affordable considering
its incredible quality. It can compress an amazing amount without your
signal getting that unnatural, pumping, too-much-compression sound. It
has a "Really Nice" setting that emulates having multiple compressors in
series that is especially good at taming your signal in an unobtrusive way.
I mainly use my for vocals, but it works well on guitar if you need
compression.
Its one downside is that, though it is a stereo unit, it cannot be used
as 2 separate mono units. If you need only one channel, you can't use
the other for something else. But it is relatively inexpensive and
small (1/3 rack width), so I really can't complain....
If indeed sustain and "oomph" (standing out in a mix?) are what you are
after, a compressor can help. But if you want to tame the infamous
piezo quack, a full-band compressor is probably not the best tool. Better
would be a compressor that targets just the nasty area (somewhere from 1 to 3
kHz
for most instruments). Most such compressors are expensive, but I believe
the "smooth" control on the Fishman Platinum preamp is such a beast in
an affordable package. I think Trace used to sell such a compressor
specifically
for acoustic use, but I don't think it's available any longer. When it came
out I was surprised it didn't make a bigger hit.
Peace,
Tom Loredo
| Acoustic Volume Pedals? |
|---|
From: Bob <bob@mcro...>
Subject: Acoustic Volume Pedals?
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 01:24:48 GMT
I'm comparing Morley PVO vs Boss 50h volume pedals for my live gigs. My
Dunlop wah/volume (I only use the volume) is so noisy and I'm dumping it.
I'm playing a Godin Multiac Duet through a Boss AD5 and a Boss Delay. Any
thoughts or good successes with either of the volume pedals mentioned above.
$40 difference in price with the Boss being more. Both have a minimum
volume settings which is must. Thanks for your help in advance.
Bob
--
Coconut Joe
http://www.coconutjoe.com
http://www.mp3.com/coconut_joe.html
"It's all right ma, it's only tropical folk rock!"
| Boomerang Phrase Sampler for the guitar |
|---|
From: Richard <huddler@earthlink...>
Subject: Re: Boomerang Phrase Sampler for the guitar
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 15:06:35 GMT
Organization: No Place You'd Want To Be
In article <<972239173.27888.1.nnrp-08.c1ed31fc@news...>>,
<david@maxwellplace...> says...
> In article <<mike-anderson-2110001513220001@dhcp083174...>> ,
> <mike-anderson@nwu...> (mike) wrote:
>
> > In article <B61768FF.3A5%<Ivanmilic2000@yahoo...>>,
> > "<Ivanmilic2000@yahoo...>" <<Ivanmilic2000@yahoo...>> wrote:
> >
> >> Please visit the auction of my Boomerang Phrase sampler it is the coolest
> >> piece of guitar equipment I have ever used.
> >
> > not too convincing if you are geting rid of it.
>
> Most people do after 3 months. I did. It is quite the coolest piece of gear
> to play with - but if you want to gig with it, it calls for 100 per cent
> commitment to Super Noodles... and no other band members. In short, it's a
> highly self indulgent way of making a remarkable solo performance subject to
> stylistic limitations which it rapidly imposes on the player, unless the
> player is a genius.
>
> Not being a genius, I sold mine and went back to purity and innocence.
I've kept mine for over a year--but I think that's because I don't try to
gig with it, and simply use it as a very flexible/convenient way to set
up ad hoc backing tracks to practice over.
You can record a tricky chord passage, and work on it for 3 hours
straight if you'd like--revising which sections of it you're working on
as you make your way through it. Try getting one of your buddies to do
that for you. (More than once. :)
The thing paid for itself in the first week, in my opinion.
--
When fighting monsters, take care not to become one.
ObURL: http://home.earthlink.net/~huddler
This post contains personal opinions only.
| Review needed please....BBE Sonic maximizers plus my Larrivee commentsssizers [3] |
|---|
From: Rick Ruskin <liondog@isomedia...>
Subject: Re: Review needed please....BBE Sonic maximizers plus my Larrivee commentsssizers
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 04:59:37 GMT
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
On Sat, 04 Nov 2000 04:25:38 GMT, jeff davis <<alembic54@home...>>
wrote:
>has anyone out there used this type of equipment with their acoustic
>rig? I wonder if it would help to sweeten and or soften the quack from
>the piezo in my Larrivee LV-02E. I am looking to make the sound of my
>rig better. I play it through an Acoustisonic JR and go into a direct
>box to the pa
>
>after 2 weeks of playing the Larrivee my initial euphoria has mellowed
>somewhat. It's still a great guitar for the price; probably none better.
>
>No offense to Fishman, but the Fishman SC system on the guitar is merely
>ok. The amplified sound is good but not great. true the signal is
>hotter than on my acoustic matrix-equipped 1996 taylor 814ce, but I'm
>starting to wonder.
>
>For the experts out there......is there another under the saddle pickup
>that i can put in to replace the Fishman
>piezo, and still have the use of the volume eq etc? Or if not........ is
>there a better preamp, eq pickup combo that can go into the hole where
>the Fishman was or am I stuck with the Fishman system as is. I guess i
>could put a mike in there. Bottom line....is this Fishman SC system
>upgradable in any way in this guitar? This SC system seem top be unique
>to Larrivees; its not mentioned on the Fishman website.
>
>
>
>And I know many people love the Elixirs because they really last much
>longer, but i think you really sacrifice certain brilliance and
>clarity. It' back to the DR's for me!
>
>As always thanks for the help!
>
>Jeff
>
Sonic maximizers and their ilk are total pieces of sonic garbage.
Don't waste your time or money.
Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WA
http://www.isomedia.com/homes/liondog
http://www.itrstudio.com/rruskin.html
From: robohop <rjand@ix...>
Subject: Re: Review needed please....BBE Sonic maximizers plus my Larrivee commentsssizers
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 11:53:38 GMT
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
On Sat, 04 Nov 2000 04:59:37 GMT, <liondog@isomedia...> (Rick Ruskin)
>>
>Sonic maximizers and their ilk are total pieces of sonic garbage.
>Don't waste your time or money.
>
>
>Rick Ruskin
>Lion Dog Music - Seattle WA
>http://www.isomedia.com/homes/liondog
>http://www.itrstudio.com/rruskin.html
>
And Rick would know .. but if your a numbskull like me and you're
playing acoustic in a loud rock band on a fairly regular basis, they
seem to sound pretty good. And all my bandmates, though of limited
sonic intelligence, like the sound too when I A/B it for them.
But I'd go with Mr. Ruskin's assessment.
regards,
rob anderson
From: MKarlo <mkarlo@aol...>
Subject: Re: Review needed please....BBE Sonic maximizers plus my Larrivee commentsssizers
Date: 04 Nov 2000 14:31:38 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
The BBE SM and others like it are basically, toys. They're fun to play with.
If you try to solve your problem by going that route the buying and trying will
never end. Strike at the root and try to do something about the pickup system.
If that's impossible, a Baggs Para Acoustic D.I. would be a much betterinvestment and would help you EQ and notch out the offensive sounds of your
pickup. Hope that helps.
Mitch
"Restore Beauty Where There Is Ugliness."
| Volume Pedal? [7] |
|---|
From: John Sorell <jsorell@bouldernews...>
Subject: Volume Pedal?
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 16:47:34 GMT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net
Does anybody use a volume pedal with their acoustic guitar amplification
setup? What are the pros and cons?
TIA
John
From: Larry Pattis <LarryPattis@NoSpamOnRMMGA...>
Subject: Re: Volume Pedal?
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 13:04:33 -0700
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
> Larry Pattis wrote:
> >
> > <jsorell@bouldernews...> wrote:
> >
> > > Does anybody use a volume pedal with their acoustic guitar amplification
> > > setup? What are the pros and cons?
> > >
> > > TIA
> > >
> > > John
> >
> > Pierre Bensusan uses a volume foot pedal as sort of a swelling effect.
> >
> > The main drawback I see (for you, John) is that if you have a dual-channel
> > external pre-amp you lose your "balanced" signal capabilities as soon as
> > you go to the foot pedal....unless someone is actually making a combined
> > DI/volume pedal combination these days. Hey Doc Ultrasound, are you out
> > there listening...?
> >
> > Larry Pattis
<jsorell@bouldernews...> wrote:
>
> Bummer! Where do you connect it?
>
> John
Let me rephrase this.
All the pre-amps you're considering have both 1/4" and XLR (balanced)
output jacks. The XLR output is, as I said, balanced, so it operates just
like a DI...you can go many, many feet to your mixing board without signal
degradation.
A volume foot pedal will only have 1/4" input and output jacks...again,
unless someone is making some gear that I am unaware of. So you must come
out of your external pre-amp via the 1/4" output, and of course the foot
pedal only has the 1/4" output...so if you want to (or have to!) go some
distance to your mixing board you then have to add a DI....
Now, the only thing that might remedy this (that I can think of) is to use
your send/return loop on your pre-amp for your foot pedal...but I don't
know how well this will work. Anyone ever try this on a dual-channel
external pre-amp?
Larry Pattis
"Misery is optional"
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: Volume Pedal?
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 16:23:56 -0500
Organization: Cornell University
Larry Pattis wrote:
>
> Now, the only thing that might remedy this (that I can think of) is to use
> your send/return loop on your pre-amp for your foot pedal...but I don't
> know how well this will work. Anyone ever try this on a dual-channel
> external pre-amp?
This works fine, and is exactly how you should do this. But make sure
your effects send/return is for the mix, and not just for a single source.
Unfortunately, if you own a B-band Entity, you have two effects loops---one
each for the pickup and mic---but no loop for the mix. It's almost the
only thing I wish was different about the Entity (the other is that I
wish the input jacks had power switches in series with the pushbutton
power switch on the back panel, so it would automatically shut off when
you unplug your guitar---I killed a battery because I forgot to hit that
button after unplugging once).
One option with the Entity is to use the effects loops and a stereo volume
pedal. My volume pedal (which I seldom use with my acoustic) is stereo,
but I haven't tried this with the Entity.
Finally, if you don't have a long cable run to your mixer, just use
the line out of any Blender-like unit. Send that to the pedal, and
take the output of the pedal to the mixer.
Peace,
Tom Loredo
From: <chrisc@blueridge...>
Subject: Re: Volume Pedal?
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 20:47:49 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
Actually I highly recommend the Ernie Ball volume control pedal.
The only negatives for this particular pedal are weight (pretty heavy),
space (pretty big) and cost. A good Ernie Ball pedal can set you back
$125 new. And more for top of the line models.
The Ernie Ball pedal works in a continuum from all the way off to what
seems to be maximum gain. Some of these pedals come in stereo, so you
can plug in either two guitars, or one guitar with two types of pickups.
The only catch here is that when you raise the volume on one pickup or
one guitar, you raise it as to either the other pickup or guitar.
I've never noticed mine as being "noisy". Plus they're built like a
tank. I've had mine four years.
Other advantages: you don't have to install a volume control on the
guitar, or use a belt mini mixer (such as Baggs) or stand by the preamp
or mixer.
I can run two different sound sources into the Ernie Ball stereo pedal
(such as microphone or magnetic into Input A AND piezo or SBT into
Input B), then run A AND B out to the each of the two inputs in my Boss
AD-5 (which takes two inputs). The Boss then goes out XLR cables in
stereo (if desired) or mono to the sound system.
The top of the line version even comes with a line out to a floor tuner.
Plus, you have hands free volume adjustment.
Chris Callahan
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
From: Rodney Turner <rturner4@cox...>
Subject: Re: Volume Pedal?
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 14:41:07 GMT
Organization: RoadRunner - Cox
I agree with Chris here...The Ernie Ball pedals are the best that I have
seen if you are going to use a volume pedal. Very quiet...Of course, the
big and heavy part comes with that too. I saw the mono pedal with the tuner
out jack in the store yesterday for $89. Not too bad if that is what you
really want....I have not used it as much on the acoustic. I mainly use it
for the electric when you change effects it really helps to have a volume
pedal.
Those people that use a lot of effects with an acoustic will run into the
same issues.
Rodney
<<chrisc@blueridge...>> wrote in message news:90m8lj$s8t$<1@nnrp1...>...
> Actually I highly recommend the Ernie Ball volume control pedal.
>
> The only negatives for this particular pedal are weight (pretty heavy),
> space (pretty big) and cost. A good Ernie Ball pedal can set you back
> $125 new. And more for top of the line models.
>
> The Ernie Ball pedal works in a continuum from all the way off to what
> seems to be maximum gain. Some of these pedals come in stereo, so you
> can plug in either two guitars, or one guitar with two types of pickups.
> The only catch here is that when you raise the volume on one pickup or
> one guitar, you raise it as to either the other pickup or guitar.
>
> I've never noticed mine as being "noisy". Plus they're built like a
> tank. I've had mine four years.
>
> Other advantages: you don't have to install a volume control on the
> guitar, or use a belt mini mixer (such as Baggs) or stand by the preamp
> or mixer.
>
> I can run two different sound sources into the Ernie Ball stereo pedal
> (such as microphone or magnetic into Input A AND piezo or SBT into
> Input B), then run A AND B out to the each of the two inputs in my Boss
> AD-5 (which takes two inputs). The Boss then goes out XLR cables in
> stereo (if desired) or mono to the sound system.
>
> The top of the line version even comes with a line out to a floor tuner.
>
> Plus, you have hands free volume adjustment.
>
> Chris Callahan
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
From: <the_troubleman@my-deja...>
Subject: Re: Volume Pedal?
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 18:49:25 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
I tried using the Morley that I use for my electric rig, and some of
the high end when bye-bye. Me trusted buddy Larry Sprigg hipped me to
what I needed, and he's absolutely correct. I'd strongly recommend
getting a low-imped model type of volume pedal for acoustic guitar.
They're the type that keyboard players use. They double as an
expression pedal. I use one made by BOSS. It's a stereo volume pedal
with dual inputs and outputs. It has a very smooth taper, is built like
a tank, and doesn't require batteries.....
Season's Greetings,
jb
In article <<3A2E6DCC.4F6FB6CE@bouldernews...>>,
jsorell@bouldernews.infi.net wrote:> Does anybody use a volume pedal with their acoustic guitar
amplification
> setup? What are the pros and cons?
>
> TIA
>
> John
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
From: David <pickups@rmi...>
Subject: Re: Volume Pedal?
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 09:14:00 -0700
Organization: RMI.NET
<<chrisc@blueridge...>> wrote in message news:90m8lj$s8t$<1@nnrp1...>...
> Actually I highly recommend the Ernie Ball volume control pedal.
>
> The only negatives for this particular pedal are weight (pretty heavy),
> space (pretty big) and cost. A good Ernie Ball pedal can set you back
> $125 new. And more for top of the line models.
>
> The Ernie Ball pedal works in a continuum from all the way off to what
> seems to be maximum gain. Some of these pedals come in stereo, so you
> can plug in either two guitars, or one guitar with two types of pickups.
> The only catch here is that when you raise the volume on one pickup or
> one guitar, you raise it as to either the other pickup or guitar.
>
> I've never noticed mine as being "noisy". Plus they're built like a
> tank. I've had mine four years.
>
> Other advantages: you don't have to install a volume control on the
> guitar, or use a belt mini mixer (such as Baggs) or stand by the preamp
> or mixer.
>
> I can run two different sound sources into the Ernie Ball stereo pedal
> (such as microphone or magnetic into Input A AND piezo or SBT into
> Input B), then run A AND B out to the each of the two inputs in my Boss
> AD-5 (which takes two inputs). The Boss then goes out XLR cables in
> stereo (if desired) or mono to the sound system.
>
> The top of the line version even comes with a line out to a floor tuner.
>
> Plus, you have hands free volume adjustment.
>
> Chris Callahan
>
I have the stereo version of the Ernie Ball, and like it a lot. I do not
however think it would be a good idea to run an un-buffered piezo pickup
into it. The impedances would be all messed up. We have developed a dual
cannel pre-amp for mixing two high impedance sources, but will discuss this
in a new thread.
David Enke
Pick-up the World
www.pick-uptheworld.com
<pickups@rmi...>
800-375-2656
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.