instant access VS presets

[J.Paul]

I am putting together a new rack and pedalboard. The pedals are mounted in the rack and the pedalboard is only for controllers (midi, volume, wah, expression). I am using the Voodoolab Ground Control Pro as my midi controller. In the past I have always used presets for my

[Zachman]

I am putting together a new rack and pedalboard. The pedals are mounted in the rack and the pedalboard is only for controllers (midi, volume, wah, expression). I am using the Voodoolab Ground Control Pro as my midi controller. In the past I have always used presets for my

[boogieman_dan]

^

Indeed.

 

I've been using both for years, (mid 90's) for creative/musical versatility it's the way to go.

[Spacehog26]

I used just presets up until very recently, but a rethink of my rig caused me to go along the IA route - I use my All Access in 10 preset per bank mode, with 5 IA switches. I don't really like changing banks unless I have to during a gig, and 10 presets gives me my basic sounds to cover most gigs. I'd love to have more IAs, but short of buying a 2nd All Access (which I'm considering if I find another cheap on eBay) then I'll stick where I am!

[petejt]

I'm planning on using both methods. Later on I want to get a TC Electronic G-System, which has 5 buttons for presets (with plenty of banks), plus four loops for pedals, and instant access buttons for the in-built effects.

[Zachman]

 

I'm planning on using both methods. Later on I want to get a TC Electronic G-System, which has 5 buttons for presets (with plenty of banks), plus four loops for pedals, and instant access buttons for the in-built effects.

 

 

NO, don't do it...

[elfroi]

I'm using only presets, because in the end I've found that when I'm playing live the only thing I want is not worrying about this or that effect, but to go straight and quickly to the sound I want.

 

I don't mean it's not worth it having inside of your presets every single effect to choose from, that surely gives you more options, but that means one more pedalboard (or less presets in favour of CCs) and by the moment, I'm alright with a little analog pedalboard (mostly distortions and ODs) and the Control 2 in 10 presets mode to control my Digitech GSP1101. That makes all easier for me.

 

Just my opinion.

[Zachman]

I'm using only presets, because in the end I've found that when I'm playing live the only thing I want is not worrying about this or that effect, but to go straight and quickly to the sound I want. I don't mean it's not worth it having inside of your presets every single effect to choose from, that surely gives you more options, but that means one more pedalboard (or less presets in favour of CCs) and by the moment, I'm alright with a little analog pedalboard (mostly distortions and ODs) and the Control 2 in 10 presets mode to control my Digitech GSP1101. That makes all easier for me. Just my opinion.

 

 

My pedal board is a bit large (48" X 17")-- 8 presets per bank, and 22 direct access switches. I don't know what the hell I was thinking. I may end up making an interface and making 2 boards... I dunno

 

 

[petejt]

 

 

 

Why not?

 

 

It seems to perfectly fit my situation. The only thing better would be to ring up Bob Bradshaw and ask him to custom build a CAE switching system like you have, and that's way too expensive and cumbersome for me to organise. Plus I'd still have to get another separate multieffects system, whereas the G-System has everything in one (apart from extra switching loops, hence the requirement for the GCX) and I can keep my pedals on the floor where I like them.

 

I re-designed it all tonight. Tomorrow or Wednesday I'll post the diagram so you'll see how it all fits together.

 

I still don't know why the G-System should be avoided?

[Zachman]

Why not? It seems to perfectly fit my situation. The only thing better would be to ring up Bob Bradshaw and ask him to custom build a CAE switching system like you have, and that's way too expensive and cumbersome for me to organise. Plus I'd still have to get another separate multieffects system, whereas the G-System has everything in one (apart from extra switching loops, hence the requirement for the GCX) and I can keep my pedals on the floor where I like them. I re-designed it all tonight. Tomorrow or Wednesday I'll post the diagram so you'll see how it all fits together. I still don't know why the G-System should be avoided?

 

A friend of mine did something very similar to what you're doing, and I thought the same thing that I did when I saw your plan, "don't do it" because while the G-System sounds good, it's potential to lock you into a scenario weighs heavily on my mind. Long story short, my friend ended up discovering this was true for him. He wasn't happy with the way the G-System interacted with some of his other effects.

 

I guess I figure for the same $$$ as a G-System will set you back, you could get a bunch of individual processors.

 

With my old rig- I used a TC 2290 as the main controller and used a TC 0144 pedal to control it, and 2 rane mixers, with a DBX 160X Compressor, Yamaha SPX90II, and a Rocktron Intellifex, and a Rocktron Hush IIC. It was a stereo rig w/ a rack mounted MKIII head and I used my MKIII Coliseum as the other stereo amp, and just ran one of the outputs of the mixer into the MKIII Coliseum's fx loop return. The Loops of the 2290 4 mono, and 1 stereo controlled pedals and amp channel switching. It worked GREAT! BUT... there's more than one way to skin a cat. I'm sure the G-System will work well and sound good too. TC stuff is FANTASTIC!!!! I guess I have just learned that it ends up more costly later down the road, to change and revamp a system, then to... Oh hell-- don't listen to me, I'm insane. LOL

[JMPMarshall]

Zachman is right. (I never thought I'd say that considering how sure I thought that I was right when I first came here)

 

Buy once buy right. Anything that locks you into anything is bad.

 

With the G-System you can't upgrade foot controllers, you can't change loops switchers, you can't mess with routing outside of straight series/parallel.

 

I bought a Ground Control Pro which locked me into a GCX or into something that works well with that interface. ie (Axess GRX-4, Sound Sculpture Switchblade (which is where I'm headed)

 

Not only that now that I have the GCX I'm locked into something that works well with that interface; ie: (Ground Control Pro or Axess FX-1 (Which is where I'm headed)

 

Case in point: Those issues I have aren't a brick wall, with the G-System they are.

 

I used to use only presets but that doesn't allow for spontaneity either when you're playing out (if that's your thing) or if you're writing/jamming with people you don't normally play with.

 

When you're playing out if you just play straight ahead normal parts and never deviate from that presets work great. However if you tend to like to be spontaneous and if you are into making weird noise instant access & presets is the only way to go.

[Zachman]

 

Zachman is right. (I never thought I'd say that considering how sure I thought that I was right when I first came here) Buy once buy right. Anything that locks you into anything is bad. With the G-System you can't upgrade foot controllers, you can't change loops switchers, you can't mess with routing outside of straight series/parallel. I bought a Ground Control Pro which locked me into a GCX or into something that works well with that interface. ie (Axess GRX-4, Sound Sculpture Switchblade (which is where I'm headed) Not only that now that I have the GCX I'm locked into something that works well with that interface; ie: (Ground Control Pro or Axess FX-1 (Which is where I'm headed) Case in point: Those issues I have aren't a brick wall, with the G-System they are. I used to use only presets but that doesn't allow for spontaneity either when you're playing out (if that's your thing) or if you're writing/jamming with people you don't normally play with. When you're playing out if you just play straight ahead normal parts and never deviate from that presets work great. However if you tend to like to be spontaneous and if you are into making weird noise instant access & presets is the only way to go.

 

 

Nicely put... I AGREE 100%

[petejt]

I get what you JMPMarshall & Zach are saying, but still, I feel that the G-System would serve me best for what I want.

 

I could get more stuff, that would possibly do a much better job, but it'd be way too cumbersome and also take up more space.

 

The G-System does have instant access buttons for its effects, plus the Loop buttons are 'instant access' buttons for my effects pedals. The only thing that is limiting is that there are no instant access buttons for the GCX loops, so I can't say for example call up the Rhythm2 channel on my MarkIV and then make presets "as I'm going". So that bit of flexibility is not present, which of course means as you said the G-System locks me in to a set way of doing things.

 

But yet I could still make bunches of "bland" presets to cover all of the possible selections on the GCX, and just select them and then from there, make presets as I go. It's a rough loophole, but might work.

 

 

About the "spontaneous" part- well that's why I want to keep the effects pedals on the floor, and instantly access them via the Loop buttons.

 

For 'normal' pre-programmed stuff, I just select a preset. And when I want to be spontaneous, I can instantly call up that Loop, and then muck about with the pedal. That's the whole purpose of keeping my Boss DD-20. I can use delay presets in the G-System for particular delay effects, and for spontaneous stuff, use the delay pedal.

[JMPMarshall]

Much the same way I used to use my DL-4 and the way I'm going to use my Time Factor when I can afford it. Very different from how I plan to use the TC D-Two I want to buy. The Time Factor will go in front of my amp primarily for insanity and the D-Two will go in a mixer post gain for traditional delay.

 

 

 

You might ask why have both?

 

Let's say I have a section of a song to go nuts over, I have a post gain delay and a whammy pedal turned on. What if I wanted to switch from the whammy and wanted to make those delay time tweak crazy warbles into a distorted amp and continue to delay that post gain? With the system you're proposing I would be {censored}ed. You would have to have another preset entirely to switch from the whammy unless I stuck it in one of the loops in the G-System but that would sacrifice something else possibly more valuable like an overdrive pedal. In my system all I'd have to do is turn off my whammy's loop and hit the on switch for the timefactor.

 

This example makes sense for my playing but maybe not for yours. Think about how you play and these problems might pop up for you as well.

 

I think of spontaneity more in essence of different channels on your amp, modulation effects, special insanity effects, and fuzz/overdrive pedals for the way I play.

 

Can you be certain of the G-System being enough for the long term?

 

The G-System could wind up being a very expensive mistake to make.

 

The final decision resides with you but I've seen people walk down that path and greatly regret it.

 

Guitar Center didn't like the idea of accepting a return on a $1,500 piece of equipment because the friend of mine they sold it to realized the certain eventual reality of outgrowing it despite it being well within their return policy often described as "The Guitar Center Rental Policy"

[Zachman]

I get what you JMPMarshall & Zach are saying, but still, I feel that the G-System would serve me best for what I want. I could get more stuff, that would possibly do a much better job, but it'd be way too cumbersome and also take up more space. The G-System does have instant access buttons for its effects, plus the Loop buttons are 'instant access' buttons for my effects pedals. The only thing that is limiting is that there are no instant access buttons for the GCX loops, so I can't say for example call up the Rhythm2 channel on my MarkIV and then make presets "as I'm going". So that bit of flexibility is not present, which of course means as you said the G-System locks me in to a set way of doing things. But yet I could still make bunches of "bland" presets to cover all of the possible selections on the GCX, and just select them and then from there, make presets as I go. It's a rough loophole, but might work. About the "spontaneous" part- well that's why I want to keep the effects pedals on the floor, and instantly access them via the Loop buttons. For 'normal' pre-programmed stuff, I just select a preset. And when I want to be spontaneous, I can instantly call up that Loop, and then muck about with the pedal. That's the whole purpose of keeping my Boss DD-20. I can use delay presets in the G-System for particular delay effects, and for spontaneous stuff, use the delay pedal.

 

That is what matters...

[elfroi]

I loved the G-System, I think it sounds great and the loops are a great plus. If there would be another similar multifx, we could compare, but there isn't (as far as I know).

 

I don't think, buying the G-System second hand, that is an expensive mistake, because you could sell it again not losing money (or not losing much). I know what JMPMarshall & Zachman mean, but maybe petejt doesn't need all that features in a pedalboard (nor do I).

 

Another option could be, in the future and only if you need it, expanding the G-System with more midi devices.

 

You'll be thinking... If you liked so much G-System, why did you sell it? Well, at the time I didn't need it and needed other things, but if I shouldn't had found the GSP1101, surely I'd be using the TC again.

[JMPMarshall]

That's case in point to what I'm saying regarding a all in one box being made obsolete: You just found something that for you works better than the G-System which doesn't lock you in the way the G-System does.

[Zachman]

I loved the G-System, I think it sounds great and the loops are a great plus. If there would be another similar multifx, we could compare, but there isn't (as far as I know). I don't think, buying the G-System second hand, that is an expensive mistake, because you could sell it again not losing money (or not losing much). I know what JMPMarshall & Zachman mean, but maybe petejt doesn't need all that features in a pedalboard (nor do I). Another option could be, in the future and only if you need it, expanding the G-System with more midi devices. You'll be thinking... If you liked so much G-System, why did you sell it? Well, at the time I didn't need it and needed other things, but if I shouldn't had found the GSP1101, surely I'd be using the TC again.

 

The main point I think I was trying to get across was based around the truism that the longer I've played-- the more I learned, and as I became aware of what was possible, my tastes/expectations from/of my gear changed as well, so I was merely trying to point out that having the options to upgrade when/not if-- the time comes, is prudent.

 

I figure it's better to have more (options) and NOT need them than to need them and not have them, or rather in this scenario be forced to totally revamp the system, as I've done MANY MANY MANY times-- in order to achieve what a change in direction/preference may bring.

 

The positive in having changed directions several times (re: the design of my previous rigs) is that I did learn a lot along the way, that otherwise may have been missed.

[petejt]

I loved the G-System, I think it sounds great and the loops are a great plus. If there would be another similar multifx, we could compare, but there isn't (as far as I know). I don't think, buying the G-System second hand, that is an expensive mistake, because you could sell it again not losing money (or not losing much). I know what JMPMarshall & Zachman mean, but maybe petejt doesn't need all that features in a pedalboard (nor do I). Another option could be, in the future and only if you need it, expanding the G-System with more midi devices. You'll be thinking... If you liked so much G-System, why did you sell it? Well, at the time I didn't need it and needed other things, but if I shouldn't had found the GSP1101, surely I'd be using the TC again.

 

Thanks for your help .

 

 

Honestly, I gotta admit that even when I first considered the G-System, which was months ago, I knew it would be limiting to some degree. In a way I kinda want to be limited, because I feel like only then will I really know all the many permutations and combinations I'll want to utilise while making music. At the moment I already have some crazy ideas ( ), and I think that the next best thing to a proper efficient system like what Zach has (and I considered a Bradshaw switching system before I knew what the G-System was) is the G-System.

 

Zach has HEAPS more gear experience than me, in fact more than a lot of the HarmonyCentral population. And he learnt that for him, after all those years, the best system was the one he now has. But it did take that journey for him to come to that conclusion.

 

I know the G-System is likely to be a bit limiting, but yet, for starters I ain't actually too fussed with having the best of the best effects- that's why I want a multi-effects unit in the first place. The effects that I am fussy about (the chorusing in particular)- I already have. That's why they're a crucial part in my guitar rig, and why I want them on the floor where I can access the.

 

I think it's fantastic that I can have a big bunch of decent effects in one box, and where that box and can also operate other parts of my rig all at the hit of one button. That's why I think, at least at this stage, that the G-System would suit my needs.

 

 

I have an inkling that down the track, my ideas are likely to evolve. I'll probably go W/D/W or something, ring up Bob Bradshaw, who knows? Right now I'm quite particular about what I want and I think this way would be the best.

It'll make more sense once I finish this gear diagram.

 

Anyway, if I do get the G-System it will have to be second-hand, as it's way too expensive to buy new ($2695!! ).

 

 

I do say that I appreciate all feedback about the G-System . It all helps me to sort this stuff out, and hence why we discuss this stuff here.

[jimosity]

I'm using both via Behringer FCB1010 with Uno Firmware.

[elfroi]

That's case in point to what I'm saying regarding a all in one box being made obsolete: You just found something that for you works better than the G-System which doesn't lock you in the way the G-System does.

 

Yes, maybe because of my bad english (sorry) I agree, but I didn't made it clear trying to explain myself. I haven't gone through all the gear Zachman and you have gone, so I can't make an opinion so good like yours, but I think we all agree at some point.

 

The best, obviously, is having more options (talking about presets and instant access), which I should do if I could carry more weight (now I'm only gigging with a 1U space rack, its pedalboard, an analog pedalboard, and a couple of small combos). I'm only saying that G-System (or, believe it or not, GSP1101) it's a good sarting point to get a good sound and it can always be upgraded via midi or with another pedalboard (analog or not).

 

But if petejt or anyone thinks he needs (or will need)more options, the better way is starting doing things well, like both of you said: getting better gear piece by piece than not trying to get everything at once (one more time, I don't know if my english is good to explain things well...).

 

I'm trying to improve my "girlie" gear adding distortions and fuzzes apart from my rack and pedalboard, but I'm very very very tempted by the M13...

[Zachman]

Yes, maybe because of my bad english (sorry) I agree, but I didn't made it clear trying to explain myself. I haven't gone through all the gear Zachman and you have gone, so I can't make an opinion so good like yours, but I think we all agree at some point. The best, obviously, is having more options (talking about presets and instant access), which I should do if I could carry more weight (now I'm only gigging with a 1U space rack, its pedalboard, an analog pedalboard, and a couple of small combos). I'm only saying that G-System (or, believe it or not, GSP1101) it's a good sarting point to get a good sound and it can always be upgraded via midi or with another pedalboard (analog or not). But if petejt or anyone thinks he needs (or will need)more options, the better way is starting doing things well, like both of you said: getting better gear piece by piece than not trying to get everything at once (one more time, I don't know if my english is good to explain things well...). I'm trying to improve my "girlie" gear adding distortions and fuzzes apart from my rack and pedalboard, but I'm very very very tempted by the M13...

 

There are many directions to the road that leads the way.

[petejt]

here's my rig diagram, finally

 

[Saturnine10]

How in the hell are you gonna fit a rotary in your 4x12 cab??? I wanna see pics!!!

[petejt]

 

How in the hell are you gonna fit a rotary in your 4x12 cab??? I wanna see pics!!!

 

 

I had to cut a hole in the front baffle, because the cab isn't deep enough to fit the diameter of the horn's revolution.

 

I'm still trying to sus out how to mount it & the motor in there.