Why effect pedals are preferred over multi-effect junks

[alexa.]

I use both cuz I'm cool like that.
The portability to carry my whole modulation/delay/pitch shifting/synth-like sounds in an M9 and being able to loop drone madness too, awesome.
But nothing can replace a rusty box

[dubkitty]

i prefer pedals both because i can get more sounds/sounds that aren't available on a multi-EFX menu, and for reasons of redundancy/survivability. if you're running everything on a multi-processor/modeller and it dies, there goes your entire bank of effects; if you use discrete individual boxes and one dies, you yank it out of the chain, patch the gap, and continue as if nothing happened.

[rfurtkamp]

Thing is that a lot of the multi-fx hate are from the ''never spent quality time learning to program them or used better than $100 units" - if you're not wiling to learn to tweak the unit, you're not the intended functional audience.

It's like the blues rock guys who don't grasp oscillating fuzz.

And the argument as it's presented is a false dichotomy; no reason to not use both if you're so inclined.

Yea, pedals are "easier" but when you can switch radically between sounds with one buttonpress, and tweak delay feedback while reducing reverb level and fading in the harmonizer, it's a different world.

Units that let you assign anything (anything at all, even non-useful seeming stuff) to midi controllers or the onboard expression and switches and the ability to program/use them are amazing.

I love a good pedal and a good multifx, and a good rack unit too.

[dubkitty]

certainly...i didn't say i don't/won't use multi FX, just that i prefer discrete FX because i trust them more. i've spent a PAINFUL amount of time twiddling patches for my PodXT and rack multi-FX, and used to use the Pod as a one-stop effects board (the Fuzz Face model is adequate when run through a small tube amp).

[Ghost Hip]

Only effects I use for guitar are fuzz/dirt pedals, delay pedals and a phaser. Multi-fx units have more than I would use. Single effects are more visual and tactile for me to use. I also hate turning "knobs" and adjusting shit on computers on digital devices to make it sound good. GIMME THE REAL KNOBS.

But synth users I'm sure go through digital effects menus all the time I'm sure. Multi-fx can't be all that bad if you know how and are willing to use them.

[cheesecats]

i've never liked any multi-effect box i've heard. they have all sounded too artificial and sterile for some reason. and too much fiddling about. i'd much rather stack a bunch of pedals, step on the gas, and go.

[bigchiefbc]

I've owned a few multifx and tried a few more over the years. I've found that the delays, reverbs and pitch-shifts are good, the modulations are usually passable, and the dirt/dist/fuzz are always awful.

[Gunner Recall]

The problem with multifx is that it was only until recently that companies started taking them seriously. In the past companies were content with just stuffing features in without worrying much about the sound.

I think the Line 6 M series made great strides in improving sound quality while focusing heavily on workflow (something multifx designers frequently overlook).
As far as pure sound and flexibility something like the axe fx is unmatched (if you take the time to program it).

I think strymon is also helping the push to take digital seriously... I hear they might have a do all mod multi (like the timeline) in the works.

[Derelict78]

I LOVE my M13. It did take a few weeks for me to get really comfortable with it but since than If I want a certain kind of sound its really easy come up with it. Also the dist./o.d./fuzz really isnt as bad as most people seem to think I have a feeling most people that trash "all multi fx distortion" have not tried the m series or never really gave it a chance. I own A DS-1 that has been HEAVLY moded and I can totally nail the sound with my m13. I only keep the actual pedal because its sounds completely different when driven a boost or another OD and I like that sound. I use the Fuzz Face model all the time Its big and beefy. It does help that my signal is split and im running 2 amps one clean.

[bigchiefbc]

I LOVE my M13. It did take a few weeks for me to get really comfortable with it but since than If I want a certain kind of sound its really easy come up with it. Also the dist./o.d./fuzz really isnt as bad as most people seem to think I have a feeling most people that trash "all multi fx distortion" have not tried the m series or never really gave it a chance. I own A DS-1 that has been HEAVLY moded and I can totally nail the sound with my m13. I only keep the actual pedal because its sounds completely different when driven a boost or another OD and I like that sound. I use the Fuzz Face model all the time Its big and beefy. It does help that my signal is split and im running 2 amps one clean.

I did try my guitarist's M13 a few times, and I wasn't impressed with any of the dirt, but no disrespect to anyone who likes it. But also remember that I hate the sound of clean blended dirt and won't use it. And that goes for single effect fuzz and distortion pedals, too.

[Derelict78]

my clean amp always has a little dirt via a DB I should say cleanish

[theavondon]

I love my M9, and I love individual pedals. The M9 allows me to do a lot of crazy shit that I could never afford, or figure out how to do with only individual pedals. Plus, Particle Verb. Aaaaaaand a looper.
.
But, I would never only use a multi. I mean, unless ILF gets together and makes one. Fuck->Elements->AB-Synth->Disaster Transport would be a pedalboard in a box for me.

[Gearmond]

Thing is that a lot of the multi-fx hate are from the ''never spent quality time learning to program them or used better than $100 units" - if you're not wiling to learn to tweak the unit, you're not the intended functional audience.

It's like the blues rock guys who don't grasp oscillating fuzz.

And the argument as it's presented is a false dichotomy; no reason to not use both if you're so inclined.

Yea, pedals are "easier" but when you can switch radically between sounds with one buttonpress, and tweak delay feedback while reducing reverb level and fading in the harmonizer, it's a different world.

Units that let you assign anything (anything at all, even non-useful seeming stuff) to midi controllers or the onboard expression and switches and the ability to program/use them are amazing.

I love a good pedal and a good multifx, and a good rack unit too.

basically this.

I still use my multi fx pedal because it allows me to do things and tweak settings that i'm literally unable to achieve even with most high end stand alone versions of the effects present, and my main example is always my own track:

[soundcloud]http://soundcloud.com/gearmond/winslows-tree[/soundcloud]

the arpeggiation there is something that you can only do on a specific line of multi-fx pedals, and probably just this one kind.

for me, the implimentation of the expression pedal on a multifx unit is what separates it from an all-in-one quick fix with the ability to MAYBE layer delays and reverbs specific to a modulated effect, but with the expression pedal, and the ability to assign almost anything to be controlled by it is where the creative aspect comes into multifx units. which is somethign they did a good while before most builders were adding expression jacks.

yes, multifx usually sound noticably worse or have weird/dumb as hell onboard volume and EQ settings but i'm going to stand by my bedroom vs. stage argument (also i'm not always a fan of having things be "warm" and i don't mind some clinical and electronic sounds, and personally think electric guitar would be better to welcome that instead of just treat it as a forgotten era from the 80's, but i digress).

i think hazelwood and I talked about this the last time multi-fx came up and their main problem is that they're basically made by people who want to drag the guitar world out of the 70's for an audience that more or less refuses to leave it, and a few avant-garde guys who can actually afford it. i mean, for all the axefx CAN do, how many owners use it for little more than amp modelling?

with an equal knowledge and competence with both pedal and multifx, the latter is HANDILY the more flexible of the two, however the guitar world at large isn't really a fan of exploring all that much. and yes, i include a decent amount of pedal geeks in there too.

but i still have more pedals and plan on primarily owning them instead of a multifx because 1. im makin me a seaboard, and 2. there are still some things that are best done by pedals (namely dirt and fuzz) and/or are still unique to pedals like say randomized flange

[dubkitty]

my favorite thing about multi-effects is the ability to substitute different effects without having to remove boxes from the board, rewire things, etc., as well as being able to use models of things i don't have like Leslies, Space Echoes, weird amps, and tube-bias tremolo. however, the flexibility of multi-FX is totally dependent on the often-arbitrary implementation of the processor(s) and software. i wish Line6 stuff, e.g., had the kind of multi-parameter settings for reverbs that older rack-mount multi-FX like the Yamahas have; the relative lack of flexibility when you're running several effects simultaneously can be frustrating. i've resorted to burrowing way down into the microphone and cabinet selection and percentage of mic-to-room in the amp models to try and get them to sound as natural as i can...i spent WEEKS at this.

[rfurtkamp]

Yea, that's the thing, the good multi-fx units (and including rackmounts) encourage lots of time spent under the hood tweaking things; it's a matter of how wet you want your feet to get and try stuff out.

And I know what you mean on the amp/mic/cab virtualization, I've spent way too time on the same stuff in the GR-55 and various other units over the years. It's not what the model says it is, it's how it sounds - I have this horrible thing where on the L6 derived units I like the 1x8 cabs on metal amps etc.