the future is now, where's the cool shit?

[cloudscapes]

Look for Earthquaker and HEXE to do next-level granular shit soon, I'm hoping! And maybe a bit after, EHX.

EHX are kind of in a sweet spot creativity<->profitability right now. They're open enough to come up with weird shit every now and then (ring thing, ravish sitar, freeze & superego) but also big enough that they can supply the demand and make money off of it.

I dig Earthquaker, but I wouldn't look to them to shake up the foundations of sound manipulation. They just released an overdrive, an octave pedal with no knobs, and an amp.

EXH just did a Klon clone. They make cool shit sometimes, but even they are vulnerable to market changes. With all the new boutique builders out there, their bottom line must feel that, at least a little bit. If they weren't concerned about it, they wouldn't have released those small pedals.

I didn't mean that they only do cool uncommon shit, just that they are capable of doing it, and do do it.

Earthquaker rainbow machine, afterneath, arpanoid. Not many other builders that do stuff like those. A few, but not many.

[rfurtkamp]

Reason most don't on some of those effects is that there's a very limited market - both in terms of sales and....the doorway effect.

If you love, say an Afterneath - and want to chase that rabbit hole, there are dozens of $50 rack units that put it to shame in terms of chaos and dwell and grain.

Not saying they're not doing a good job at what they do but rather that it's like Fender putting out reissues of silverface amps for more than the originals often cost.

[taco satori]

Although hey maybe you could have a pedal you noodle into and it says, hey man

I'd like to take this opportunity to stop the quote right there and throw out this idea: Korg Broseph Stomp

[resincum]

there are dozens of $50 rack units that put it to shame in terms of chaos and dwell and grain.

like what sensei?

[Jwar]

[/quote]

Asking for the impossible.

Remember the old adage "Cheap, fast, or reliable? Pick two" or variants?

You're asking for things that won't go together. "Mind blowing and complex" isn't going to be simple in a pedal format. Best you can do is make a navigable, sensible app/PC interface for it that lessens some of the sting - Boss/Roland, Line6, etc have done a good job with that in making apps that are visual signal routing with virtual knobs and choices that are intuitive as they'll get.

And I don't have a problem with the H9 at all to be honest - by Eventide standards, it's an extreme budget box. If you want what the big, expensive rack stuff does without micropurchase, you'll be spending $2k+.

[/quote]

I quoted this part as the others didn't really seem to equate to much for me.

I disagree wholeheartedly sir. I believe the technology exists in other facets and is not used in guitar pedals because of A)price B)likelihood that people will use it. You can in fact make simple to use interfaces that are still extremely complex.C)mojo leads people to believe ignorant things int he gear industry

Let's use Eventide as an example. Despite me hating the format of it being in an app form, it is highly complex and extremely user friendly. The app is. The pedal is hideous to navigate without it as are all Eventide pedals. I'd say Strymon is in the same boat, but a bit simpler than Eventide. With Eventide you literally have to read half the manual to understand the device you're using without that app.


So how hard would it be to implement an app like feature into a pedal vs having it on an iPod or iPhone or what have you, not hard IMO. It would just take the right amount of research and development to get it done. My biggest gripe with app based effects, is what if I want to change something on the fly? I can't because I have to get into a stupid app to do it.

I would wager to say that if we used the actual technology available in this day in age and applied to a guitar pedal format, we could have some very, very mind blowing shit going on. But it's not going to happen because there is a HUGE risk involved and the entire industry knows it. Change is bad for most players. They want variations of the same old, same old.


Personally I'd never use rack stuff. Why? Because it's obnoxiously large and that's bothersome. Now if I had a shit ton of space, money...etc. Sure. Why not.

So I agree with you on some level but on others I disagree completely.

I like these discussions because I'm a dreamer and believe that a dream is what it take to truly bring something spectacular to the table.

[spacelordmother]

So is the issue that there is nothing new, or that you refuse to try anything new that doesn't fall into your limited choice of format?

[Jwar]

So is the issue that there is nothing new, or that you refuse to try anything new that doesn't fall into your limited choice of format?

Are you talking to me?


See any of my gear purchase for your answer because that's not even close to true.

My choice of format isn't limited, I just think we are not using technology to the best of our abilities. Why would we when people are happy with less?

I buy fuzz pedals. I mean come on. Obviously I'm not that concerned about it. Doesn't mean I wouldn't jump for joy if something killer came out.

[Jwar]

Also, not only is there nothing "new", most things are lame and lazy variations of the same thing.

I could A/B 50 overdrives and I bet get close to the same sound out of all of them.

Same goes with most pedals I've found.

[spacelordmother]

Your post said you hated apps and wouldn't use racks.

[Jwar]

Your post said you hated apps and wouldn't use racks.

Yes. So? I am forced to use an app for one pedal. One and only one. I hate it because it's a pain in the ass. It's such a vast device but limited to what it can do because of that stupid app. If the app were in the pedal, then we're in business.

It's just my preference. Obviously it's not going to be everyone's.

[rfurtkamp]

there are dozens of $50 rack units that put it to shame in terms of chaos and dwell and grain.

like what sensei?

You have actual control of settings, EQ, length of reverb, etc.

Not hearing anything that something like an old Quadraverb (or + model) won't do.

Little chorus, little delay, some grainy verb, and boom.

Except it'll do more.

Pair it with say, a Midiverb 2, and you're out less than a hundred bucks and in batshit insane verb town.

[rfurtkamp]

So how hard would it be to implement an app like feature into a pedal vs having it on an iPod or iPhone or what have you, not hard IMO. It would just take the right amount of research and development to get it done. My biggest gripe with app based effects, is what if I want to change something on the fly? I can't because I have to get into a stupid app to do it.

I would wager to say that if we used the actual technology available in this day in age and applied to a guitar pedal format, we could have some very, very mind blowing shit going on. But it's not going to happen because there is a HUGE risk involved and the entire industry knows it. Change is bad for most players. They want variations of the same old, same old.

You won't get it in a tiny pedal format. The issue is screen size. Something like, say the GR-55 or the Boss GT-100 will do exactly what you're asking (and you can assign knobs to be tweakable just like a pedal)...but the screens to make that happen are going to be quite large in a meaningful format.

That's why I mention that it's not going to happen as you ask. It already does, just not in tiny standalone units that look pretty.

Personally I'd never use rack stuff. Why? Because it's obnoxiously large and that's bothersome. Now if I had a shit ton of space, money...etc. Sure. Why not.

Would take me far more space to do what I do with just pedals (if I could at all to a level that made me happy) - I'd at that point just use 3-4 big multi units and a couple fuzzboxes (which frankly, is just shift the rack to the floor).

I like these discussions because I'm a dreamer and believe that a dream is what it take to truly bring something spectacular to the table.

I don't disagree with the dream, it's just asking for the physically impossible. You don't get knob-level control, visible screen, and the like in a tiny footprint. Try reading something like a Zoom MS70 in bright light outdoors, or dim club lighting while standing (or even sitting) at eye to floor distance. Even with today's vastly improved backlit displays, the letters have to be a certain size to be visible.

[Eivind August]

I mean, jwar, you're pretty strong, you could easily put a couple of rack effects under your board and carry it around with you.

[rfurtkamp]

For my compact "carry on a bus" rig when I was in Chicago, I stuck a !U rack unit in the gig bag pocket, slung the guitar over my shoulder, and carried the Space Echo and a Champ.

Didn't like to travel that way but....it worked. Could cram a HM-2 and my old 18v Performer-series Phasor in the back too.

[Gone Fission]

If you aren't ruling out a Space Echo, the only remaining objections to rack gear are aesthetic and/or Luddite. If rack means MIDI and menu diving to you, you're ruling all sorts of early knobs-only digital delays with modulation and and extra features that will run you twice as much in a pedal with half the capabilities. It's worth considering what a piece of gear could do for you before categorically eliminating it.

Why the fuck am I mentioning older rack gear in a thread about future sounds? Because a lot of it is versatile enough to still come up with new sounds that haven't been mined to death yet. Current DSP design is largely stuck in recreating old sounds and often giving them in a curated format without much wiggle room for adjustment, where the older stuff was still on the Star Trek mission statement of going where no one has gone before.