ilovefuzz.com

All i hear is Bass Players talking about "blends" and "clean blend".

is this close to what you mean/would it be useful?

Hell yes, this looks awesome, it would be great for the multi-amp setups I try sometimes. What are the 2 inputs for though? It would make more sense to me if there was just one input.

I'm not the most technical person....but from what I can understand, it wouldn't help me much. I would need to get something else that could later connect the two signals back together....am I getting this, right? I don't know. I use a Badger Schism parallel looper and it is the most awesome fucking piece of equipment out there. That's what I need in a looper in its simplest form but with the most features.

If I'm reading your question right MSU, no, you would run the effects signal back into the return jack, then you'd have both signals coming out of the wet

Not a bassist, and probably not someone who would have much use for this, but I still think it's a cool idea. Could you even integrate an A/AB switch to go from clean signal only to both tones? Maybe even ad a little flip switch to change it from A/AB to B/AB, if that makes sense (I'm also not a builder).

keep up the awesome greeny! It seems like you always have really unique and interesting but highly practical ideas.

Yes. Yes that would be pretty awesome. Just what I've been looking for after I sold my Boss LS-2. But there is one thing:

Does the buffer have to be in front of both lines?

If it suffice to be place in the direct line only, and the fx loop line will be unbuffered, I can put oscillating fuzz in buffered line and still expect it to work normally.

This is nice... you get the option of the blended signal AND a totally clean signal to do with as you please.

So you can basically blend the blended

Bassus Sanguinis wrote:
If it suffice to be place in the direct line only, and the fx loop line will be unbuffered, I can put oscillating fuzz in buffered line and still expect it to work normally.

Yes, this too.

MSUsousaphone wrote:I'm not the most technical person....but from what I can understand, it wouldn't help me much. I would need to get something else that could later connect the two signals back together....am I getting this, right? I don't know. I use a Badger Schism parallel looper and it is the most awesome fucking piece of equipment out there. That's what I need in a looper in its simplest form but with the most features.

Yeah like it was already said, use the wet/dry out.

Pretty cool litle box.

I guess I'm just not seeing how it's different.

That's not saying much, though. I WOULD be the last to figure it out.

snipelfritz wrote:Could you even integrate an A/AB switch to go from clean signal only to both tones? Maybe even ad a little flip switch to change it from A/AB to B/AB, if that makes sense (I'm also not a builder).

I'd buy it

Yup, that's what a blend would do for me. Maybe with a phase switch, like the runoffgroove one.

I'm the wrong bassist to ask, as I hate clean blend. But this could interest a lot of guys on Talkbass if it had the right features on it.

needs more goop!

bigchiefbc wrote:I'm the wrong bassist to ask, as I hate clean blend. But this could interest a lot of guys on Talkbass if it had the right features on it.

Honestly I was thinking of it more for blended drones and 2 amps than just clean blending all my pedals.

Yeah. My Schism can have two effected channels and a clean channel all running in parallel. There's seperate volume knobs so I can control each channels ratio in the parallel sounds, switches where I can add clean blend into each effected channel, and even switched to invert the sound......that's been on the market for years. I thought the different thing about this was that it had two outs so that it could go to seperate sources. Or have it operate as both a parallel looper and a bypass looper at the same time.