DIYstompboxes.com

heres a chance to vent

do any of you have any particular gripes with a specific stompbox design?
you know, the little things that company/designer could have added to a box to make it exponentially better for a few cents/pence more.

for example, i love my digitech whammy however my main gripe with it is that it doesn't have a wet/dry mix pot so i can decide how much effect i want in my signal. For me, even though its a classic pedal i cant take off my board, the designer really missed a very important parameter out. Maybe some of you guys have the same issue?

Go vent!  ;)

Kneale

My chrome dunlop crybaby 535 (not 535Q) has an annoying dc jack location, positioned below the 'instrument' jack (i like the dc jack at the top of the pedal, less length needed for dc cable and neater), and also as we know the crybaby has a sloping side, so straight dc plugs fit ok (most times) but right-angle ones don't.  well they go in ok, but get worked free by the sloping side.   

waaa waaa waaa [<--geddit]    ;D

There was this one design that was overly sensitive for the transistors it used, every unit was widely inconsistent due to that. The transistors kept failing and if the thing was even heated moderately it seized to work.

I think it was called the Fuzz Face.  :icon_rolleyes:

Quote from: teemuk on March 28, 2010, 08:04:35 AM
There was this one design that was overly sensitive for the transistors it used, every unit was widely inconsistent due to that. The transistors kept failing and if the thing was even heated moderately it seized to work.

I think it was called the Fuzz Face.  :icon_rolleyes:

that would be the ger version right?  my silicon is fine..so far  :)

  Trusty AC adapter with DC type plug, the destroyer of DC circuits :icon_twisted:.
 I haven't actually noticed a problem other than having to check every time], I just like to vent vicariously, this one's my favorite.
 SMT schtuff, especially the kind with the cheep, failing, embedded bypass switch..wha-d-ya gonna do with this now...cand get it to workin' again very easy, cand find many parts that'll come out easy or be worth saving...toss...looked all solid in the old style metal case and etc. too !
 

Quote from: philbinator1 on March 28, 2010, 08:20:05 AM

Quote from: teemuk on March 28, 2010, 08:04:35 AM
There was this one design that was overly sensitive for the transistors it used, every unit was widely inconsistent due to that. The transistors kept failing and if the thing was even heated moderately it seized to work.

I think it was called the Fuzz Face.  :icon_rolleyes:

that would be the ger version right?  my silicon is fine..so far  :)

Yeah, that's the germy version.

My nominee is the Roktek Distortion pedal. It used just as many parts as a pedal that didn't suck the moose would have, but managed to sound indescribably hideous.

Quote from: knealebrown on March 28, 2010, 07:01:00 AMfor example, i love my digitech whammy however my main gripe with it is that it doesn't have a wet/dry mix pot so i can decide how much effect i want in my signal. For me, even though its a classic pedal i cant take off my board, the designer really missed a very important parameter out. Maybe some of you guys have the same issue?

You know, you can do that yourself by using a miniblender - it's basically a true Bypass looper that allows you to blend in the original dry signal with the wet signal from the loop. I think as the pot turns you go from completely dry signal to completely wet, and anywhere inbetween is a blend between the two.

I've found that with most frustrating pedals, I can find something out there that either fixes the problem, or else I can find a product (or build one) that does the same thing without giving me the frustration.

However, sourcing some parts can be a stupid problem. Like, why is there no cheap, easy to use, volume/expression pedal enclosures out there for sale!?!??!?

Jacob

uh, the Danelectro Cool cat Pedals with the knobs on the top/back of the pedal.  The Trans OD even has a stacked toned knob.  Horrible unless you have dainty lady fingers  :D

Seriously every damn tremolo pedal that does not have a tap tempo (nearly all of them) and every treolo without a wave shape knob. They really missed the while versitility thing. Like bbe came out with the tremor pedal which has two trems in one pedal, yet still not wave shape

Every pedal with more than three knobs...  :)

One gripe with the Whammy: the bypass is terrible.

Quote from: TimWaldvogel on March 28, 2010, 02:36:41 PM
Seriously every damn tremolo pedal that does not have a tap tempo (nearly all of them) and every treolo without a wave shape knob. They really missed the while versitility thing. Like bbe came out with the tremor pedal which has two trems in one pedal, yet still not wave shape

I think you'd be in the minority there. I can't stand tap tempo for LFO-based effects, since they go wrong exponentially over time, unless you're a perfect tapper AND have a perfect drummer.

Just a general gripe about the industry--with all the midi controllers out there, I still have yet to see a polyphonic midi interface for guitar that doesn't involve a hexaphonic pickup. Someone please make it happen.

How come the tracking technology from the HOG has never been used for guitar-> midi?

The polytune and melodyne were a step in this direction i guess.

well, i have seen a few steps forward in non-hex pickup polyphonics. the pog/hog of course, but also the new poly-phonic six string tuner, and i have also seen a few pedals on musicians friend lately where one gives the effect of a capo on the guitar, and the other can do alternate/drop tunings, with just a stompbox.   its out there....

i still get annoyed everytime i look for hours at my board looking for the source of a silent setup. only to find that my russian big muff has the jacks plugged in the opposite way. i mean really come on, just make it a normal jack layout!

As I've posted before, I'm fairly certain that there is no pitch detection going on in the POG or HOG (except for the glissando function, which isn't really tracking in the usual sense) I can elaborate further but check out my posts in this thread:

http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=81999.0

Polyphonic pitch tracking without a hex pickup is insanely complex. This means that it can't be done in real time. It works for a tuner, because you don't care much about latency with a tuner. It also works for Melodyne, because it's not a real-time process. With the tech currently available, it would be possible to do a pedal that you play into, and then 30 seconds later it spits out the stream of MIDI notes, but I don't see many people being satisfied with that.

That said, this is kind of the holy grail of audio processing, which means there's huge incentive to make it happen. It'll happen within our lifetimes. Maybe within this decade.

Quote from: d95err on March 28, 2010, 03:48:18 PM
Every pedal with more than three knobs...  :)

:icon_biggrin:

Quote from: Taylor on March 28, 2010, 05:07:33 PM
As I've posted before, I'm fairly certain that there is no pitch detection going on in the POG or HOG (except for the glissando function, which isn't really tracking in the usual sense) I can elaborate further but check out my posts in this thread:

http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=81999.0

Polyphonic pitch tracking without a hex pickup is insanely complex. This means that it can't be done in real time. It works for a tuner, because you don't care much about latency with a tuner. It also works for Melodyne, because it's not a real-time process. With the tech currently available, it would be possible to do a pedal that you play into, and then 30 seconds later it spits out the stream of MIDI notes, but I don't see many people being satisfied with that.

That said, this is kind of the holy grail of audio processing, which means there's huge incentive to make it happen. It'll happen within our lifetimes. Maybe within this decade.

Pretty interesting, thanks.

I never thought of the BBD style pitch shift idea going on in two chips at once and alternating between then. Whoever came up with that and got it working must have ended up pretty smug.

How does the freeze gliss work then?

Well, keep in mind that all this is just my best guess, so I can't say definitively that this is how it works. But I had a HOG for a while, and the gliss function kind of fell apart when you did a very slow glide. Based on my experience with it and some of my own experiments with this kind of DSP, I think it works by doing a very vague pitch-detect, basically just figuring out "is this new note higher or lower than the last one?". If it's lower, it creates a downward pitch shift combined with a pan from the currently sustaining note to the new one. If it's higher, it does the same but with an upward pitch shift. But it's not that smart. When you set it to go very slow you can hear that it's basically just shifting down and fading out the old note, like a whammy+volume pedal, rather than truly bending from the specific old note to the specific new one. It's very convincing with fast glides, though.

Since it only needs to figure out "higher or lower" and not an actual pitch, it's not as computation-intensive. Also, it gets wrong a lot.  :icon_lol: I would try to do a slow glissando downward, and the pitch would kind of wander up for a while, then realize it got it wrong and plummet downward quickly. So that's not the kind of tracking you guys are looking for.

The Tech 21 Tri-OD sounds good on any one setting, but is unusable live because it has a single footswitch that sequentially switches through three channels or two channels and bypass, and even if you're using just one channel the electronic switching mutes things for a noticeable gap while it is switching.  There's one global EQ but you probably want to change it channel to channel, as the tweed is super bassy, and the others need bass.  Also the marshall setting (my favorite) adds some kind of sub transient to high notes that just make the speakers visually flop around.  Also it has an 1/8 inch power plug right next to the output jack.  And you can't take it apart to service it without desoldering the jacks.

That thing is a nightmare.  But it's the best sounding distortion pedal I've played through my JC-120...

(http://images.quebarato.com.br/photos/big/0/6/A3B06_1.jpg)

QuoteRe: worst commercial stompbox design

Worst?

Just like "best" - define "worst" and we can tell you.  :icon_lol:

I had a fabulous sounding "civil war" Sovtek Big Muff that had the jacks solely supported by solder and the circuit board.   I replaced them twice, and sold it last year for five times what I paid for it in '93!

The Danelectro FAB pedals, the pots are kinda confusing, I never know which way to turn em, plus, they're on the back.

Not too mention the enclosure is plastic and so is the switch, which isn't a big deal, but with the way the switch is setup, sometimes stomping on it isn't enough to turn it on.

They have two PCB's.

And they're cheap, I almost have the full line  :-[

All respect to RG, but I find the shape of the Visual Sound pedals to be stupid. I don't like their shape at all. They're individually creative, good pedal sounds and a great company, I just don't like the pointy bottoms and raised part at the end.

Another stupid idea was the 7 series from Ibanez that featured the push in knobs. I knew some guys who had them permanently stick in the down position.

Also, I like my jacks on the top of the box - I consider all pedals with side orientated jacks to be bad design.  :icon_wink:

Jacob

that cheap SPDT on my v847

don't mind the lack of an LED, cause you can easily tell if its on or not from the sound, but to get a better (IMO) sound, i have to unplug my patch cable from the previous pedal, and shift the guitar cable over every time i stop using wah

Quote from: phector2004 on March 28, 2010, 11:49:23 PM
that cheap SPDT on my v847

don't mind the lack of an LED, cause you can easily tell if its on or not from the sound, but to get a better (IMO) sound, i have to unplug my patch cable from the previous pedal, and shift the guitar cable over every time i stop using wah

The V847, i have only come to realize, is a terrible design. (or should i say old). Problems? it has many.

-No DC jack, on mine anyway.
-The whole treble sucking non-true bypass thing
-no status LED

apart from that it does sound ok and has a spot on my board (until i can buy/build something better). Am i a hypocrite?


Im surprised nobody has said this yet but how about EVERY behringer pedal? they guy who okayed the production of those clearly wasnt a guitarist. Using plastic as a case is dubious but that plastic is from recycled yoghurt pots or something. Yeah they are cheap but you get what you pay for.....three months use and £20 down the drain. I wouldnt even buy the tuner.

Probably those old Dan Armstrong boxes with the input plug connected directly to 'em.

The Behringer tuners are so bad. Totally worthless if you try to tune into B. It doesn't recognise that low B.

Quote from: knealebrown on March 29, 2010, 03:51:29 AM
Im surprised nobody has said this yet but how about EVERY behringer pedal? they guy who okayed the production of those clearly wasnt a guitarist. Using plastic as a case is dubious but that plastic is from recycled yoghurt pots or something. Yeah they are cheap but you get what you pay for.....three months use and £20 down the drain. I wouldnt even buy the tuner.

I know sticking up for behringer isn't the done thing, but tbh I think some people are ridiculously harsh.

-People complain about the plastic enclosures; there are plenty of good reasons to use metal enclosures and I do, but I have never seen a behringer pedal with a broken enclosure
-The quality control is very poor and lots of 'lemons' get shipped; you might have to send one back
-Some of them sound like shit; some of them (the boss-size analogue delay, the vibrato, the super fuzz) sound great
-with a rehouse to get the weak points out of the equation (the switch and jacks) you can get a few gems for very cheap

OFC I think everyone should follow Danelectro's example when it comes to cheap pedal design, but I don't think most behringer haters are prepared to accept that like most companies they have some crap and some alright stuff... Yes, I've had behringer pedals break, sadly not at a time when i was in any place to diagnose, but I've also owned plenty that didn't break.

anything by slade..lol lol lol.... :icon_biggrin: :icon_biggrin: :icon_biggrin: :icon_biggrin: :icon_biggrin:


only joking!..........ha ha ha...

Quote from: kupervaser on March 29, 2010, 05:12:51 AM
The Behringer tuners are so bad. Totally worthless if you try to tune into B. It doesn't recognise that low B.

I always tune with the harmonic at the 12th fret, because tracking is so much quicker with both my Rocktron and TU-12. I have yet to come across a tuner which tracks low B and E lightning quick, I do remember (from a long long way back) that the tuner on the IPS33b harmonizer was pretty quick, even with those low notes.

I've got a boss TU-2, which is chromatic (whatever that means) so it can go lower than you.  It's just as fast tuning my low B as any other string. (Which is to say lightning fast)

I had to laugh at the 535q dc jack gripe, because I've had the same trouble. I think the behringers are decent considering they are budget tone pedals...  I've seen a lot of people using them and enjoying them.  But yeah I don't think I'd trust a cheap tuner.

Quote from: jkokura on March 28, 2010, 11:30:13 PM
All respect to RG, but I find the shape of the Visual Sound pedals to be stupid. I don't like their shape at all. They're individually creative, good pedal sounds and a great company, I just don't like the pointy bottoms and raised part at the end.

I didn't like the pointy bottom when I first saw them, but I thinking more, the 45 degree angles may be to serve a mechanical purpose, to be able to more accurately switch one of the two footswitches off easier, by coming in at an angle, without hitting the other one.  The switches being so close together is for being able to get them both with one foot (on purpose).  I personally would have put a ridge between the footswitches and the knobs (so knob settings can't get messed up by stray feet), but any ridge is a pretty good design if it takes impact from being stomped or dropped away from the pots.

I thought it was interesting they made an indent for the jacks, that makes the mold more expensive, because it requires having a piece slide in from the side.  There's something going on there, maybe it makes the jacks less likely to come unscrewed?  I like the rocker switches rather than toggle switches, which are definitely the daintiest, worrisome part in my DIY pedals.

(http://www.visualsound.net/images/product_images/V2pedals/XL//V2_DT_large.png)

Electronically great, but mechanically challenged, because of having 6 jacks all scrunched together on the sides.  It's terrible trying to get it on a pedalboard, you can't use most right angle jacks patch cords for the middle jacks, unless they stick up weird, so you have this giant waste of space with straight plugs sticking out from both sides.


(http://www.mercadolibre.com.mx/jm/img?s=MLM&f=33701224_1416.jpg&v=E)

dod fx-53   classic  :-X...tube
funny, it's basically a hybrid tube screamer/ds-1. and actually sounds pretty good after either cutting the feedback diodes to remove the ts side clipping, or cutting the diodes to ground to remove the ds-1 side clipping.
with both left in the circuit it is both and neither and sounds muddy and dull or flabby and overblown
if they had turned right towards soft clipping, it would be fine
veered left towards hard clipping, good too...
but no.  this pedal rides the line straight into the n.j. barrier

(http://resource.harshnoise.com/dod_fx53.jpg)

Quote from: jkokura on March 28, 2010, 11:30:13 PM
All respect to RG, but I find the shape of the Visual Sound pedals to be stupid. I don't like their shape at all. They're individually creative, good pedal sounds and a great company, I just don't like the pointy bottoms and raised part at the end.
...
Also, I like my jacks on the top of the box - I consider all pedals with side orientated jacks to be bad design.  :icon_wink:

No offense taken. We do get some strong reactions to the "home plate" style design; we get both of them, some people love it for being unique and different, some people hate it.  

The raised part has provoked both reactions, too. When they first see it, some people are struck by how unutterably ugly it looks to them. A number of those people change their minds when they are shown that it makes breaking the knobs a lot harder to do. Some don't.

We also get a number of people who insist that the double pedals are "too big", something about not fitting on their pedalboard well. Sometimes it's that they only want one of the pedal functions and not both of them that are in the doubles. That's why we brought out the singles. But for others, it's that it's just too wide. They want, and will flatly say that they want the same functions in single pedals that they'll use the same way as the double. What's funny is the look on their faces when I get out a ruler and measure the doubles, which are measurably narrower than two more normal sized single pedals.  :icon_biggrin: It always reminds me of Nigel saying "... but these go to eleven," as a reason for why the dials are numbered from 0 to 11.

As a personal matter, I make a strong distinction between "works" and "looks good". To me, for my electronics, I've worked with too many lab-made boxes over the years to demand that every box have a slick appearance. For me, "works" vastly overwhelms "looks good". Not that looking good is not part of the equation, it's CRITICAL to getting people to actually pay money for the stuff that they need to do the work. Customers need the "works" part, but they will every time buy the unit that looks good and has better intangibles than the competitors. I make a very odd customer, and confuse sales people a lot.  :icon_lol:

Then too, I'm all too aware that the placement of jacks, switches and buttons is primarily advertising and "trade dress". The jacks work the same no matter where you put them, as long as you can get cables to them.

F'rinstance: jacks on the bottom of the box. Good idea, or downright dumb? It might start seeming clever if you are putting the pedals on something like a Pedaltrain pedalboard where the bottom is accessible. In that case, the jacks and plugs simply vanish, as does the rest of the cable mess.

Is jacks on the bottom of a box bad or good? How it works always depends on the context. How it looks always depends on what's inside the head of the person looking at it.

I sometimes frustrate the other guys at the office when I say "OK, where do you want the controls placed with that?" To me, it's almost completely neutral where things go as long as you can get at them to work with them. Yeah, there's human-factors considerations, in that knobs have to be a certain distance apart so you can get at them with fingers to adjust them; switches and knobs have to be where they don't interfere or make usage clumsy. But with those limitations, it's all relatively arbitrary. I once proposed a system where the user could put knobs in whatever order they wanted. Can you imagine how hard that got shot down?  :icon_lol:

This is one of the reasons my stock answer to "What's the best|worst|most|least|yada|yada...?" posts is "how do you define best/worst..?" There's no point to the question unless it's further defined with something other than personal preference. Do you like broccoli better than you like lawn mowers? It depends on what you're defining as "better", and has no meaning otherwise. If you can't define "better", it's like asking "what's the best color?" or "what musical note is the saddest note?"

Quote from: Processaurus on March 29, 2010, 08:21:55 AM

Quote from: jkokura on March 28, 2010, 11:30:13 PM
All respect to RG, but I find the shape of the Visual Sound pedals to be stupid. I don't like their shape at all. They're individually creative, good pedal sounds and a great company, I just don't like the pointy bottoms and raised part at the end.

I didn't like the pointy bottom when I first saw them, but I thinking more, the 45 degree angles may be to serve a mechanical purpose, to be able to more accurately switch one of the two footswitches off easier, by coming in at an angle, without hitting the other one.  The switches being so close together is for being able to get them both with one foot (on purpose).  I personally would have put a ridge between the footswitches and the knobs (so knob settings can't get messed up by stray feet), but any ridge is a pretty good design if it takes impact from being stomped or dropped away from the pots.

I thought it was interesting they made an indent for the jacks, that makes the mold more expensive, because it requires having a piece slide in from the side.  There's something going on there, maybe it makes the jacks less likely to come unscrewed?  I like the rocker switches rather than toggle switches, which are definitely the daintiest, worrisome part in my DIY pedals.

(http://www.visualsound.net/images/product_images/V2pedals/XL//V2_DT_large.png)

what a beautiful stompbox!  love every bit of it, the shape, finish, rockers, and esp. the footswitches and colour.  makes a nice change from the same old rectangle  :)  

RG, when you say 'we', are you a worker for Visual Sound pedals, or do you own it or something?

I never thought of jacks on the bottom!  it would be awesome if you're as pedantic about neatness as me.  I can't wait to get a pedaltrain, or make one based on their design, and when i do i'll consider putting the jacks on the bottom, imagine that - no cables!  just pedal after pedal  :)   thanks for the idea.

re: your last paragraph, there are some really good valid points there.  I'm not saying that to 'get on your side' or something, i just think it's sensible.  I actually read through the whole post twice, just to retain it (esp the last paragraph, i think that it applies to much more than just stompboxes)!  food for thought.

Quote from: philbinator1 on March 29, 2010, 10:10:35 AM
what a beautiful stompbox!  love every bit of it, the shape, finish, rockers, and esp. the footswitches and colour.  makes a nice change from the same old rectangle  :)  

Thank you - it's always nice when someone says your baby is pretty.  :icon_biggrin:

But really, Jacob's comment is just as valid - some people like the way they look, some people hate them. Both are valid viewpoints about the same thing. Beauty is very much in the eye of the beholder.

Quote from: philbinator1 on March 29, 2010, 10:28:33 AM
RG, when you say 'we', are you a worker for Visual Sound pedals, or do you own it or something?

No, I don't own it. I'm just the hired help. I'm the "Chief Engineer", so I direct all engineering. Which means I get to tell myself what to do - I'm the only engineer.  :icon_lol:

QuoteI never thought of jacks on the bottom!  it would be awesome if you're as pedantic about neatness as me.  I can't wait to get a pedaltrain, or make one based on their design, and when i do i'll consider putting the jacks on the bottom, imagine that - no cables!  just pedal after pedal  :)   thanks for the idea.

You're welcome. That one just struck me while I was typing.

I don't own one, but Morley wah pedals. They are GIGANTIC!

Quote from: Paul Marossy on March 29, 2010, 12:20:33 PM
I don't own one, but Morley wah pedals. They are GIGANTIC!

Add most of the older EHX line to that pile. Wasted enclosure space means wasted board space to me. They did it with gusto.

Quote from: jkokura on March 28, 2010, 11:30:13 PMAlso, I like my jacks on the top of the box - I consider all pedals with side orientated jacks to be bad design.  :icon_wink:

This was one of the main driving factors for me getting into DIY'ing stompboxes in the first place. 

Quote from: jacobyjd on March 29, 2010, 12:27:09 PM

Quote from: Paul Marossy on March 29, 2010, 12:20:33 PM
I don't own one, but Morley wah pedals. They are GIGANTIC!

Add most of the older EHX line to that pile. Wasted enclosure space means wasted board space to me. They did it with gusto.

But EHX stuff looks so damn good  :P morley pedals are big AND boring

I once had to repair one of the early Boss multi-effects boards ( ME-5 perhaps ?) that had taken a stage dive.
Simple enough repair as all I had to do was pop some buttons back up and replace a board mounted socket.
I just remember that it involved 43 screws ! -I needed a bigger lid or ashtray to hold them all !

Quote from: philbinator1 on March 29, 2010, 10:28:33 AMI never thought of jacks on the bottom!  it would be awesome if you're as pedantic about neatness as me.  I can't wait to get a pedaltrain, or make one based on their design, and when i do i'll consider putting the jacks on the bottom, imagine that - no cables!  just pedal after pedal  :)   thanks for the idea.

http://img713.imageshack.us/i/img0918og.jpg/ (http://img713.imageshack.us/i/img0918og.jpg/)

@philbinator, I didn't want to re-post the image, as it's already in the pedalboard picture thread, but you can go look at this version of my pedalboard (which is constantly changing). This shows you how it's easy to get tonnes of pedals on when you use top jacks (bottom jacks would be the same). I honestly have a hard time powering everything because I can get so many pedals on my Pedaltrain 2 with jacks on the 'top' rather than the sides! Notice how much more room the boss pedals take up with the side jacks compared to the 1590BB's, 125B's, and 1790NS in the bottom row.

@RG, thank you for understanding my intent. It is truly about personal preference. I love Visual Sounds as a company, you have fantastic products, and I will never disparage the contents of the pedals - they sound good, are workhorse quality, and engineered by the best in the Biz!!!?!

I will say that, along with the goofy design shape, I think it's funny that you didn't go for jacks on top with those big double pedals. They seem like prime candidates for it.

Also, Chief Engineer of a one man engineering team sounds remarkably like you're living out childhood dreams of being like Scotty on the Enterprise...

I watched the Tubescreamer blind test, actually I watched all of those videos on You Tube. I thought to myself during the blind test that you must have had a huge hand in that design, especially considering how much info I have read on your website that seems to show up in practice on that Tubescreamer clone Visual Sound has released. Kudos and such, I think it's a great step to have the only pedal beat out the VS one be that Klon.

Jacob

Quote from: jacobyjd on March 29, 2010, 12:27:09 PM

Quote from: Paul Marossy on March 29, 2010, 12:20:33 PM
I don't own one, but Morley wah pedals. They are GIGANTIC!

Add most of the older EHX line to that pile. Wasted enclosure space means wasted board space to me. They did it with gusto.

Sad but true.  I have a small 'collection' of older EHX stuff.  I love the pedals, but I can never justify the amount of pedal board real estate they take up enough to actually put one on my board.  Except the smaller guys; Holy Grail, Small Stone/Clone, etc

Quote from: knealebrown on March 29, 2010, 12:32:27 PM

Quote from: jacobyjd on March 29, 2010, 12:27:09 PM

Quote from: Paul Marossy on March 29, 2010, 12:20:33 PM
I don't own one, but Morley wah pedals. They are GIGANTIC!

Add most of the older EHX line to that pile. Wasted enclosure space means wasted board space to me. They did it with gusto.

But EHX stuff looks so damn good  :P morley pedals are big AND boring

I would love to have the original version of the EH POG on my pedalboard, but it would take up 25% of the available area I have to use.  :icon_frown:

 I would love to have the original version of the EH POG on my pedalboard, but it would take up 25% of the available area I have to use.  :icon_frown:
[/quote]

I'd way rather have that POG 2. I saw a guy who was using an original POG in series with a Boss RV-3 Reverb on full wet in using a mini blender to blend the original signal back in - super cool effect, very ambient and keyboard pad like. I think it'd be even cooler to through a delay in there too.

Jacob

@jkokura  I think RG meant the bottom, as in the underside, in other words the side you put the velcro on.   Which I think is an amazing idea.  I have a slotted riser (made of wood, i built myself) on my pedalboard, and I wish I heard that idea sooner!   I would design all of my pedals in conjunction with designing the pedal board itself.    That could quickly turn into something like a pete cornish/david gilmour thing. 

Actually, I want to redesign my riser with acrylic instead of wood.  Maybe I should learn how to rehouse all of my boss pedals..... oh man so many ideas swirling in my head now, which I'll never actually do!  :-\

... hmmm...
if it's for your personal pedalboard, maybe put 1/8" inch phone jacks on the bottom plate in parallel with the 1/4" jacks that already exist. They're smaller, and can be installed in addition to the existing ones, maybe.

Quote from: jkokura on March 29, 2010, 01:20:35 PM

I'd way rather have that POG 2. I saw a guy who was using an original POG in series with a Boss RV-3 Reverb on full wet in using a mini blender to blend the original signal back in - super cool effect, very ambient and keyboard pad like. I think it'd be even cooler to through a delay in there too.

Jacob

I haven't tried it. I just know it's a very cool effect.

  Effects don't sound by themselves.    

Quote from: petemoore on March 29, 2010, 04:32:03 PM
 The only thing I've heard effects boxes sound like is a clicking tone.
 But I actually heard an effect circuit in a dream once.
 During waking hours though, the only times I hear effect circuits is when I have an amplifier driving a speaker, sometimes it is a very clean amplifier and I feel that most of what I'm hearing is 'just' the effect.
 Other times it's through a small tube amp and these tones are very fun to play through, at these times it is very difficult to determine how close to reality my thoughts on where the 'effect' is coming from, the 'effect' or the amp or speaker.
 Then I'll often plug in a guitar with a different number of coils per pickup, often a middle switch setting with guitar volumes cut back...it gets complicated here, treble bleed caps on vols, volumes 'balanced' so the bridge pickup 'gonks' during attacks, then there's a rolling towards bridge as the string finds a sympathetic swing.
 When I switch amps, or guitars, the effects that 'work' or just 'sound bad' tend to switch places.
 To feel secure in saying an effect is on any scale, knowing exactly why it 'just sounds bad' is not only empowering [find one that sounds good, or fix the 'bad' one], but makes it easier to define 'bad'.
 "Bad":
 Wah Pots
 Junky jacks precariously placed in pcb's
 Transformer in the line...becomes the 'hammock' weight.
 Plastic shaft knobs 1'' tall, all across the dufus designed front of the Fender mixer/amp/PA...let meee look over the designs, fellas.
 "Good": Track record proves it reliably peforms the intended functions [or sometimes when the keen eye spots design foresight and excellence].
   

sorry pete, i never understand a word you say, although strangely enough i get the feeling you have a endless amount of electronics knowledge  ???

Quote from: jacobyjd on March 29, 2010, 12:27:09 PM

Quote from: Paul Marossy on March 29, 2010, 12:20:33 PM
I don't own one, but Morley wah pedals. They are GIGANTIC!

Add most of the older EHX line to that pile. Wasted enclosure space means wasted board space to me. They did it with gusto.

I've got a gutshot of a Behringer VM1 somewhere on here and MY GOD is that enclosure empty. If you're gonna use surface mount components to make things cheaply, you can at least scale the enclosure appropriately. If it wasnt for the knobs they could fit that circuit in a BB (probably most people here could even with the knobs) but it's in an EHX old style case.

  Many similar statements start with something like "It just sounds bad".
 Keyword which denotes missing subcontext being "sound".
 Effects need amp, speaker and guitar to 'sound, this alone implies that relevant, important to 'sound' context is missing or partial.
 Mostly missing context, it is very easy to just say ''this tire sucks" without stating whether it is downtown bug missions, high speed bumpy corner racing, very high speed racing, or truck shipments involved with ''the tire'' usage.
 When partial-context, a very detailed account of amplifer, speaker, guitar, settings, cabinet type and everything else that ''it sounds'' require.
 When reading about 'a tire' and wondering about the needed contexts to understand anything about the tire usage, I assign the same relevance to 'it' when it refers to the sound someone is hearing through some stuff which is making it sound that way.
 Could very well be the treble control or the speaker limitations make 'it' sound bad, my contention is that since there is no relevant context to most of these 'complaints, it is just as easy for me to think there's more than likely someone who is say, getting a very likable, smooth sounding Fuzz with a 'sponge effect' they might say "sounds absolutely fabulous".
 One persons "Bad sounding" it is another persons 1rst string go to Fuzz.
 This is definitely true of distortions, Fuzzface in particular, but I've seen sounds bad tags put on about 1/2 of them from time to time.
 Just sayin' it's really no matter, [and even with an attempt to subcontext, things like room, surfaces, recording methods...countless scenarios such as a booster in front of the Green Ringer, or setting the input levels of an envelope filter to even make it sound like it 'works'..get left out of the reference to 'it', an effect] for me to just say any time you read 'it sucks' or it just sounds bad, a grain of salt is probably a bit heavy on the creedence, without at least an attempt at capturing a lions share of the rediculously detailed and thorough subcontexts, I find it easy to just say 'probably doesn't suck'.
 Understanding the actual circuit shortcoming in a specific application and scenario is where 'it sucks' would tend toward having measurable 'weight' [IME], or "isn't optimally set up for", or is simply "an inferior design by existing standard".
  Anything less, to my reading skill, is simply truck tires on a bug or some other vehicle, my apoligies to any bug or other vehicle desiner/owners for the analogy.

Quote from: jkokura on March 29, 2010, 12:50:31 PM
@philbinator, I didn't want to re-post the image, as it's already in the pedalboard picture thread, but you can go look at this version of my pedalboard (which is constantly changing). This shows you how it's easy to get tonnes of pedals on when you use top jacks (bottom jacks would be the same). I honestly have a hard time powering everything because I can get so many pedals on my Pedaltrain 2 with jacks on the 'top' rather than the sides! Notice how much more room the boss pedals take up with the side jacks compared to the 1590BB's, 125B's, and 1790NS in the bottom row.

wow i see what you mean!  maybe i'll look into starting to do that next build.  what patch cables do you use?  i use hot lines, and they are generally too long and get in the way.

Quote from: philbinator1 on March 30, 2010, 06:23:21 AM

wow i see what you mean!  maybe i'll look into starting to do that next build.  what patch cables do you use?  i use hot lines, and they are generally too long and get in the way.

D.I.Y your own, much better than buying some.

Quote from: knealebrown on March 30, 2010, 07:33:28 AM

Quote from: philbinator1 on March 30, 2010, 06:23:21 AM

wow i see what you mean!  maybe i'll look into starting to do that next build.  what patch cables do you use?  i use hot lines, and they are generally too long and get in the way.

D.I.Y your own, much better than buying some.

I've done that before. Especially when I want something to be an exact length and/or configuration.

Quote from: Paul Marossy on March 30, 2010, 07:50:41 AM

Quote from: knealebrown on March 30, 2010, 07:33:28 AM

Quote from: philbinator1 on March 30, 2010, 06:23:21 AM

wow i see what you mean!  maybe i'll look into starting to do that next build.  what patch cables do you use?  i use hot lines, and they are generally too long and get in the way.

D.I.Y your own, much better than buying some.

I've done that before. Especially when I want something to be an exact length and/or configuration.

i ended up doing that with some hot lines patch cables the other day...will probably just do it to most of the others.  i don't like how i have to squish them in between pedals so the aren't flailing all around the place  :)

Quote from: knealebrown on March 30, 2010, 07:33:28 AM

Quote from: philbinator1 on March 30, 2010, 06:23:21 AM

wow i see what you mean!  maybe i'll look into starting to do that next build.  what patch cables do you use?  i use hot lines, and they are generally too long and get in the way.

D.I.Y your own, much better than buying some.

+1. I generally use Canare GS-6 and American Neutrik Plugs. I would be happy using a Lava Cable kit too, but when you work out the cost, I save a few bucks going my way. I think it works out to be about 16-18 dollars (Canadian) a cable with Lava Cables, and about 12-14 with the Canare and Neutrik. I would love to find a solderable plug the size of the George L's/Lava Cable plugs - just for the sheer difference in size compared to the Massive Neutrik plugs. It would be way easier routing and assembling a pedal board.

Perhaps I should just offer up all my patch cables at 10 bucks a piece and invest in 15-20 Lava Cables... But that's 3-4 kits!

Jacob

What is good, bad? RG is wise to ask for definitions. But, I think there are some general, if not universal criteria.

Every design is a compromise, a trade-off between competing goods. The traditional triangle of "good, cheap or fast; pick two"  is the usual expression. For us it might be "toneful (as subjective as that is), rugged, inexpensive."

But, whatever desiderata relate to a class of products or are personal to you, it's inevitable that trade-offs be made. It isn't the compromises that make for bad design, it's like any other question of taste, you can't really blame someone for having different priorities than you. I mean that's a good thing, otherwise we'd all be trying to date the same girl  :icon_eek: and only one pedal of each type would ever sell on ebay and the price would be thousands  :o. So it isn't the compromises that make for crap design. It's the stuff that is bad in every possible way, and for no particular reason that is bad.  

Sure trading off price for durability makes sense for a guy who's on a budget and isn't even sure if he wants a particular class of pedals. But there's no reason for it to sound bad, since it takes just as many parts to make a good one as a bad one. Good buffers and switchers don't cost more than bad ones. Now, maybe from the corporate POV a good trade-off was struck "yeah, this one contract designer wanted 60K on a 12 month deal and we just hired someone direct for less and fired him when it was done anyway." But I'll just declare that bottom-feeding and reject it. Good design with intelligent trade-offs doesn't cost that much more.

Anyway, bad is bad and defines itself.

I don't disagree with you, but I think the point of this thread is less "what is bad/good design" and more "what bugs you about specific commercial pedals."

We all need to realize why pedals out there suck, but I really dislike how marketing has taken place over good design.

Jacob

No one for the Ibanez Tube King?  "Let's reverse the jacks!  That'll frustrate 'em!"



Ten years later:  

Mr. Ibanez:  "Did you fix that boys?"  

Nugs:  "Sure did boss!  We just made 30,000 of them, and turned 45 degrees cause we thought...."

Mr. Ibanez:  "WHAT!!?!?!?!?!?"

(http://www.oulunsoitinjatarvike.fi/verkkokauppa/kuvat/efektit/ibanez/tk999ht.jpg)

(And I know, there is no Mr. Ibanez)

Quote from: Ronsonic on March 30, 2010, 01:03:20 PM

What is good, bad?

honestly guys, can we stop being so pedantic for once? i understand the words good and bad are merely subjective when applied to a 'what is the best 'x' pedal' type of question. But i was just asking 'are there any pedals out there that have something that could have been easily changed at the design stage that gets you shouting WHY???????????????'

heres another of my 'pedal gripes', no blend control on the small clone. At minimum thats A LOT of chorus  :o

Quote from: jkokura on March 30, 2010, 01:48:47 PM
I don't disagree with you, but I think the point of this thread is less "what is bad/good design" and more "what bugs you about specific commercial pedals."

We all need to realize why pedals out there suck, but I really dislike how marketing has taken place over good design.

Jacob

yeah thats exactly what i was getting at, like why dont Roland just put the blues driver mods in as standard now? if it makes the pedal so much 'better' then it is worth it for the few .01cents it would cost them to up the specs.....what? like the need the extra profit now? pfffft! they pretty much have a captive audience.......and im one of them.  :-\

Quote from: Paul Marossy on March 29, 2010, 12:20:33 PM
I don't own one, but Morley wah pedals. They are GIGANTIC!

And their volume pedals - and it has a gigantic board too (especially considering it's a pretty simple circuit), which I'm guessing is used to facilitate the use of jacks connected on the board, which in turn tend to be prone to breaking either the jack or board.

My favorite feature that looks cool until you think about it is the indicator LEDs on the snarling dogs wahs being placed right in the middle of the place where you put your foot.  So pretty to look at but so very useless.

Quote from: MattXIV on March 30, 2010, 06:43:05 PM
My favorite feature that looks cool until you think about it is the indicator LEDs on the snarling dogs wahs being placed right in the middle of the place where you put your foot.  So pretty to look at but so very useless.

urgh and the erogenous moan reverse tape simulator pedal........what a waste of time, it doesnt even work

On the boss super feedbacker/Distortion, using the dual purpose switch is really clumbersome. I once watched a guy almost fall over because it was so difficult to balance on one foot whilst trying to gently activate the feedback function, and keep it depressed to get the effect.  Once activated, you have to gingerly leave your foot in the exact position, otherwise the feedback will either drop out, or the pedal will shut off.

Contrasting that, the Line 6 Tone Core pedals were much more rugged.  There is very little chance to accidentally switch off the pedal whilst using the tap function.

So have we all figured out yet that "What's the best/worst/most/least/....?" questions produce at least one opinion per person, several arguments, and very little of real substance?  :icon_biggrin:

I got a double muff a couple of months ago and I can't imagine my pedal board without it now but why didn't they put a stomp for the double / single funtion?! An what is the power supply???!
All stompboxes should be 9v neg tip! ;-)

Quote from: R.G. on March 30, 2010, 08:02:01 PM
So have we all figured out yet that "What's the best/worst/most/least/....?" questions produce at least one opinion per person, several arguments, and very little of real substance?  :icon_biggrin:

Oh yes. But what I appreciate and like participating in when doing these threads is to point people towards bad design ideas that we should avoid when building our own pedals, and also towards good ideas. For instance, the fellow who gravitated to the random idea of putting jacks anywhere other than the sides (bottom or top really). That guy appreciates this thread, and it's given me some laughs (like the Ibanez post).

Jacob

Yeah, it's true that everybody's opinion is different, but that doesn't mean nobody's opinion matters. I think these threads are interesting anyway. I think maybe if it was called "what are some design ideas that you don't like?" it could perhaps have fewer detractors.

In most design "flaws", there's a compromise in there. For example, Jacob, most of my pedals have side jacks. I think most people will agree that top jacks are better than side jacks in the same box, but the real problem is that most of the time using top jacks requires going up to a bigger box. So the question becomes, do I want a 125b with side jacks, or a 1590bb with top jacks? I've opted for the former, just under the assumption that most people would rather a smaller box, even if it means side jacks (and even though it can mean precisely the same horizontal space used on a board, once the jacks are taken into account). The 125b is available in a polished box, which I use without a finish. The 1590bb is not available polished, which means it needs paint. So in this case the choice of where to put the jacks isn't an isolated decision, but actually impacts not only the box size but also the finish.

That's the beauty of DIY, you can do whatever you want, down to the smallest detail. The problems arise when you try to build something for other people and you have to try to balance all these different perspectives, and all these people using your stuff in different situations and with different things plugging into it. There's always going to be something that displeases everyone, which I think is where RG is coming from. Especially since he's a part of a large company (relative to most of us) I'm sure he's heard tons of complaints like these, and they can be very informative, but also you just can't fix each person's concern without creating a new one for somebody else.

I just bought a Marshall reverberator for less than half price on our version of ebay, which I've yet to recieve, but I tried one at the shop before I bought and found the reviews had a point where the signal out cannot be totally wet. It should be easy enough to remedy, well I hope it is, but it would have been easy enough to put in a pot that allowed mix, mix, mix (as we turn) and full wet right at the end. It's almost as if they wanted an amp model without realising pedals can be different from amps...

And I wish my DD-7 had the options of tails or no tails. At the moment it's tails so I have to cut the feedback right back even when I bypass it but I'd like the option to be able to go to no tails and just hit it and have all the squeely feedback disappear.

good points there, Taylor.  Yeah, my last project was side jacks, but i'm gonna try top jacks just cos i've never done it that way before.  also i think if your dc jack is on top, then it's good to have the other jacks next to it - give it some protection once the leads are plugged in.  i've had at least 3 pedals die because of the adaptor plug getting smashed to the side by some drunk patron or other.   >:(

Quote from: R.G. on March 30, 2010, 08:02:01 PM
So have we all figured out yet that "What's the best/worst/most/least/....?" questions produce at least one opinion per person, several arguments, and very little of real substance?  :icon_biggrin:

This beats the typical "What's the best overdrive?" thread by a mile.  :icon_wink:

Quote from: knealebrown on March 30, 2010, 02:44:39 PM

Quote from: Ronsonic on March 30, 2010, 01:03:20 PM

What is good, bad?

honestly guys, can we stop being so pedantic for once?

heres another of my 'pedal gripes', no blend control on the small clone. At minimum thats A LOT of chorus  :o

Thanks for the reminder, let's have some fun.

Worst? It's a tie between all the muddy, buzzy, blurry useless piles of crap that are called "Metal" pedals. They're all useless. Except for the ones that are misnamed because the Mfr thought "metal" was a cool word and might sell more mild overdrives.

Quote from: R.G. on March 30, 2010, 08:02:01 PM
So have we all figured out yet that "What's the best/worst/most/least/....?" questions produce at least one opinion per person, several arguments, and very little of real substance?  :icon_biggrin:

I think you can make a valid argument for keeping the physical size of your product reasonable. I would never ever buy some things just because they are so freaking huge. I'm not going to buy something that would take up 25% of my pedal board, or require me to double the size of my pedal board just so I could have it on there.

Some Morley and EH products are great examples of this. They could be made much more compact than they are. I think EH is catching on to this, thank goodness.

Quote from: DougH on March 31, 2010, 08:14:59 AM

Quote from: R.G. on March 30, 2010, 08:02:01 PM
So have we all figured out yet that "What's the best/worst/most/least/....?" questions produce at least one opinion per person, several arguments, and very little of real substance?  :icon_biggrin:

This beats the typical "What's the best overdrive?" thread by a mile.  :icon_wink:

It rings true; Opinions are like... well, you know- everybody has one.

Not to derail- but what is the best OD?  :icon_lol:

Well, is not a stompbox design, but i think the 4 TDA7293 power section of the marshall mode four is poorly designed. those poor chips work at the limit of their capacity (maybe even beyond) and if one blows, it blows the other 3 ...yikes!

On pedals, i wouldn´t say that the boss metalizer is really bad, but is pretty lousy for the amount of parts it has.

I also don´t like danelectro pedals designs..they look too cheap, almost like those fake chinese made spiderman action figures you can buy for a buck., even behringer plastic pedals look refined beside them.

Quote from: Paul Marossy on March 31, 2010, 12:30:22 PMSome Morley and EH products are great examples of this. They could be made much more compact than they are. I think EH is catching on to this, thank goodness.

I'm quite impressed with EH's XO series pedals. They seem about the same size as a 1790NS, which is great. I think the largest is no bigger than a 1590DD, which is even better.

I agree about the real estate usage of pedals. There's little point to me in giving a lot of space to just one effect. For instance, the HOG from EH. I haven't played with one, but I've been told that they're best used with the extension pedal, meaning that for one effect you need to give pedal board space for the HOG (at least the size of a 1590DD) and the extension (1790NSish) - that's a LOT of space for one effect. If you really rely on it for your sound, and don't need much else, you can get away with it, but I can only imagine the weight of that pedal board.

Personally, I'm trying to go more and more minimal in my setups. I used to exclusively use large boards with all my effects on it. I'd have up to 12 or 13 pedals on my board all the time. I recently got a pedaltrain Jr, and along with my tuner, DI and Volume Pedal it leaves me space for only 3 to 5 pedals depending on the size. I'm thinking about getting a Mini so as to force myself to minimize even farther!

I'll keep the PP2 for when I'm jonesing for a lot of effect stacking, but I'd rather have the stable of 20 or so reliable pedals to choose from when setting up for a gig and only taking 4 or 5 of them.

To me, good design is - utilizing a enclosure that suits the contents (not too big, not too small), ensuring the orientation and accessibility of the enclosure works (jacks on top, horizontal or parallel orientation), and making sure it plays nicely with others (true bypass, no grounding issues, etc.). If a pedal has good design, people will want to use it. I have little desire to use a pedal that takes up more room and makes my wiring more difficult when I can use another pedal that leaves me more space and 'plays' better with others.

Oh, and the best OD has to be the Tubescreamer. I've tried so many and I keep coming back. I've ordered a bunch of others to try and building and have some hope - I'd like to try a zendrive, and an eternity (burst values), and I'll buy a Timmy or Tim one of these days. But I've been told they're (apart from the timmy) all derivatives of the TS anyway. That could be wrong, but I'd really love to see an overdrive that I like more than the Tubescreamer that isn't based on the tubescreamer in some way! I haven't yet.

Jacob

Quote from: jkokura on March 31, 2010, 01:47:28 PM
Personally, I'm trying to go more and more minimal in my setups. I used to exclusively use large boards with all my effects on it. I'd have up to 12 or 13 pedals on my board all the time. I recently got a pedaltrain Jr, and along with my tuner, DI and Volume Pedal it leaves me space for only 3 to 5 pedals depending on the size. I'm thinking about getting a Mini so as to force myself to minimize even farther!

I'm at the exact same place. I find that I only use a few pedals consistently, so there's really no use for me to carry around a large pedal board for that. I still have my older, larger pedalboard but it rarely gets used anymore.

I guess my point is that some pedals out there are too large for me to consider practical as far as using them outside of my four walls. That doesn't necessarily make it a bad design, but it is bad if no one buys your product because the first thing they think of it that they can't make that work with their pedal board. That's great if it does amazing things, is reliable, looks cool, is well designed electronically, etc., but if it won't fit on my pedal board without making huge sacrifices, it's not even up for consideration for me.

QuoteI agree about the real estate usage of pedals. There's little point to me in giving a lot of space to just one effect. For instance, the HOG from EH. I haven't played with one, but I've been told that they're best used with the extension pedal, meaning that for one effect you need to give pedal board space for the HOG (at least the size of a 1590DD) and the extension (1790NSish) - that's a LOT of space for one effect. If you really rely on it for your sound, and don't need much else, you can get away with it, but I can only imagine the weight of that pedal board.

I put my HOG on a separate pedal board I built into an instrument case. When I was gigging, if I needed it I brought it, otherwise I left it at home. That case is pretty small by itself, and since I didn't always need it, it saved pedalboard space and weight to keep it separate.

Quote from: Paul Marossy on March 31, 2010, 03:02:12 PM
...but if it won't fit on my pedal board without making huge sacrifices, it's not even up for consideration for me.

Ditto! And the biggest design factor that most often keeps a pedal from making it to my pedal board is the horizontal space requirement.

I try to design all the pedals I build with a vertical orientation with all the jacks on the top. It makes routing all the wires very straightforward and IMHO is the most efficient use of space. A 1590B oriented horizontally with the jacks on the sides (a la zvex) takes up practically as much horizontal real estate as a 1590BB oriented horizontally with the jacks on the sides. So, in my mind, there is no benefit to using the smaller 1590B in a horizontal orientation like that unless all the jacks are on top.

I like the new EHX pedals in the die cast aluminum enclosures, too. But there is still so much space inside those larger enclosures, like the new bass micro synth, for example. Why the hell couldn't they have put the jacks on the top? With the jacks on the sides, they end up taking up as much horizontal pedalboard space as the old folded steel enclosures. ???

Also, if a pedal can't run on a 9VDC power supply, it's not very likely to stay on my board. I use a small board, usually with no more than 4 or 5 pedals (sometimes less) and power it with a daisy chain. Works for me. Using a Voodoo Labs or similar PSU that can supply multiple different voltages takes up too much additional space.

~ Charlie

The HOG gets away with it a bit  i guess because

a) NOTHING else does freeze-gliss

and

b) It's an all in one octaver/harmonizer/filter with expression control and presets.



I find it funny that electro harmonix use enclosure size as an 'excuse' to go to SMD in XO pedals when you can easily fit a standard muff in a BB case...

Quote from: moosapotamus on March 31, 2010, 03:45:33 PM
Also, if a pedal can't run on a 9VDC power supply, it's not very likely to stay on my board. I use a small board, usually with no more than 4 or 5 pedals (sometimes less) and power it with a daisy chain. Works for me. Using a Voodoo Labs or similar PSU that can supply multiple different voltages takes up too much additional space.

Yeah, I could say the same thing.

Quote from: Hides-His-Eyes on March 31, 2010, 03:48:08 PM
The HOG gets away with it a bit  i guess because

a) NOTHING else does freeze-gliss

and

b) It's an all in one octaver/harmonizer/filter with expression control and presets.



I find it funny that electro harmonix use enclosure size as an 'excuse' to go to SMD in XO pedals when you can easily fit a standard muff in a BB case...

I agree here. There's just so much happening in a HOG, that IMO it's reasonable for it to take up that much space. But I'm not a gigging musician, so my opinion in such a matter is not worth much. I'll always take more knobs and features instead of smaller size.

From what I've seen of the HOG, it almost DOES make itself the keystone of your sound. I don't know many people that have a HOG that don't use it to the fullest extent. I could justify its size there.

I don't have to put my jacks on the top of the enclosure (especially if I'm using a B-size box), but I definitely try to avoid it with a sideways-oriented BB. I can't see the value in the Zvex-style setup either.

I'm surprised more people aren't turned off by the ZVex stomp-to-knob proximity. I haven't owned any ZVex gear, but I would imagine it would be tough for a moderately animated rock guitarist wearing Doc Martins to stomp the bypass without moving the knobs. But I haven't heard much complaint about this.

Quote from: jacobyjd on March 31, 2010, 06:41:35 PM
From what I've seen of the HOG, it almost DOES make itself the keystone of your sound. I don't know many people that have a HOG that don't use it to the fullest extent. I could justify its size there.

I don't have to put my jacks on the top of the enclosure (especially if I'm using a B-size box), but I definitely try to avoid it with a sideways-oriented BB. I can't see the value in the Zvex-style setup either.

Call me tin foil hat man, but here's my theory:

Zvex KNOWS that it's a bad setup; in fact, it's such a bad idea that nobody else would be stupid enough to do it. So they don't, not the DIYers, not other pedal builders, just zack TM.

All of a sudden, everybody recognises those 'sideways pedals with the cool paint' as zvex, and his brand awareness is 10x less of a struggle.

Quote from: Taylor on March 31, 2010, 06:53:40 PM
I'm surprised more people aren't turned off by the ZVex stomp-to-knob proximity. I haven't owned any ZVex gear, but I would imagine it would be tough for a moderately animated rock guitarist wearing Doc Martins to stomp the bypass without moving the knobs. But I haven't heard much complaint about this.

I personally don't like how that bypass switch is so close to the knobs, either. But I haven't ever owned a real Z Vex pedal, so I can't say whether it's a bad thing or not.

Quote from: Hides-His-Eyes on March 31, 2010, 07:09:31 PM

Call me tin foil hat man, but here's my theory:

Zvex KNOWS that it's a bad setup; in fact, it's such a bad idea that nobody else would be stupid enough to do it. So they don't, not the DIYers, not other pedal builders, just zack TM.

All of a sudden, everybody recognises those 'sideways pedals with the cool paint' as zvex, and his brand awareness is 10x less of a struggle.

I think you're pretty much right. I actually don't think that's why he did that - I think he just thought it was an impressive showcase of his skills to cram things into the smallest box he could. However, I do think that that weird setup which is kind of awkward, as well as the SHO crackle, are some of the reasons that his stuff has taken off so well. People see these weird things which are memorable and quirky, and that sticks in their minds more than more generic stuff that's designed "better" (better here is the engineering kind of better, which means more functional, efficient, sensible from a Vulcan perspective).

Quote from: Hides-His-Eyes on March 31, 2010, 07:09:31 PM

Quote from: jacobyjd on March 31, 2010, 06:41:35 PM
From what I've seen of the HOG, it almost DOES make itself the keystone of your sound. I don't know many people that have a HOG that don't use it to the fullest extent. I could justify its size there.

I don't have to put my jacks on the top of the enclosure (especially if I'm using a B-size box), but I definitely try to avoid it with a sideways-oriented BB. I can't see the value in the Zvex-style setup either.

Call me tin foil hat man, but here's my theory:

Zvex KNOWS that it's a bad setup; in fact, it's such a bad idea that nobody else would be stupid enough to do it. So they don't, not the DIYers, not other pedal builders, just zack TM.

All of a sudden, everybody recognises those 'sideways pedals with the cool paint' as zvex, and his brand awareness is 10x less of a struggle.

hey c´mon, i feel insulted, i design my pedals to fit on a 1590b enclosure with 2 stomps and as much knobs i can fit in there because:
- i don´t like waiste of space
- they look "cute"
- it´s technically challenging, i.e rewarding
- it saves pedalboard space
- EH uses all the big enclosures there are...

i spend a lot of time thinking how to fit a versatile circuit into a small box..please dont call me stupid..

Quote from: dschwartz on March 31, 2010, 07:36:33 PM

Quote from: Hides-His-Eyes on March 31, 2010, 07:09:31 PM

Quote from: jacobyjd on March 31, 2010, 06:41:35 PM
From what I've seen of the HOG, it almost DOES make itself the keystone of your sound. I don't know many people that have a HOG that don't use it to the fullest extent. I could justify its size there.

I don't have to put my jacks on the top of the enclosure (especially if I'm using a B-size box), but I definitely try to avoid it with a sideways-oriented BB. I can't see the value in the Zvex-style setup either.

Call me tin foil hat man, but here's my theory:

Zvex KNOWS that it's a bad setup; in fact, it's such a bad idea that nobody else would be stupid enough to do it. So they don't, not the DIYers, not other pedal builders, just zack TM.

All of a sudden, everybody recognises those 'sideways pedals with the cool paint' as zvex, and his brand awareness is 10x less of a struggle.

hey c´mon, i feel insulted, i design my pedals to fit on a 1590b enclosure with 2 stomps and as much knobs i can fit in there because:
- i don´t like waiste of space
- they look "cute"
- it´s technically challenging, i.e rewarding
- it saves pedalboard space
- EH uses all the big enclosures there are...

i spend a lot of time thinking how to fit a versatile circuit into a small box..please dont call me stupid..

Do you put the pedals horizontally with side jacks, or vertically with side jacks like a normal person?

It's not the enclosure size, it's the layout which annoys.

Quote from: dschwartz on March 31, 2010, 07:36:33 PM

Quote from: Hides-His-Eyes on March 31, 2010, 07:09:31 PM

Quote from: jacobyjd on March 31, 2010, 06:41:35 PM
From what I've seen of the HOG, it almost DOES make itself the keystone of your sound. I don't know many people that have a HOG that don't use it to the fullest extent. I could justify its size there.

I don't have to put my jacks on the top of the enclosure (especially if I'm using a B-size box), but I definitely try to avoid it with a sideways-oriented BB. I can't see the value in the Zvex-style setup either.

Call me tin foil hat man, but here's my theory:

Zvex KNOWS that it's a bad setup; in fact, it's such a bad idea that nobody else would be stupid enough to do it. So they don't, not the DIYers, not other pedal builders, just zack TM.

All of a sudden, everybody recognises those 'sideways pedals with the cool paint' as zvex, and his brand awareness is 10x less of a struggle.

hey c´mon, i feel insulted, i design my pedals to fit on a 1590b enclosure with 2 stomps and as much knobs i can fit in there because:
- i don´t like waiste of space
- they look "cute"
- it´s technically challenging, i.e rewarding
- it saves pedalboard space
- EH uses all the big enclosures there are...

i spend a lot of time thinking how to fit a versatile circuit into a small box..please dont call me stupid..

Haha--it's kinda funny--I love your Texas Brownie design, but the only thing I'd change is to put it in a larger enclosure. I don't think your builds are unimpressive--the form factor is just undesirable for me, given my shoe size any my uncanny ability to step on pots :)

Some people seem to like that form factor, but it doesn't make a lot of sense to me, as a live musician to go that route. I wouldn't go so far as to say that it's stupid, though.

I didn't mean to insult anybody! If there's one thing we learn from music gear it's the value of subjectivity.

Sorry to anyone who thinks I was trying to call them stupid, no offense was meant...  :icon_redface:

what do you guys think of the newer (i think) mxr stuff?  the 'blowtorch' comes to mind, it's actually in the shape of a shoe! 

Quote from: philbinator1 on March 31, 2010, 10:06:27 PM
what do you guys think of the newer (i think) mxr stuff?  the 'blowtorch' comes to mind, it's actually in the shape of a shoe! 

edie - i mean, the pots are.   ;D

Quote from: Hides-His-Eyes on March 31, 2010, 07:44:23 PM

Quote from: dschwartz on March 31, 2010, 07:36:33 PM

Quote from: Hides-His-Eyes on March 31, 2010, 07:09:31 PM

Quote from: jacobyjd on March 31, 2010, 06:41:35 PM
From what I've seen of the HOG, it almost DOES make itself the keystone of your sound. I don't know many people that have a HOG that don't use it to the fullest extent. I could justify its size there.

I don't have to put my jacks on the top of the enclosure (especially if I'm using a B-size box), but I definitely try to avoid it with a sideways-oriented BB. I can't see the value in the Zvex-style setup either.

Call me tin foil hat man, but here's my theory:

Zvex KNOWS that it's a bad setup; in fact, it's such a bad idea that nobody else would be stupid enough to do it. So they don't, not the DIYers, not other pedal builders, just zack TM.

All of a sudden, everybody recognises those 'sideways pedals with the cool paint' as zvex, and his brand awareness is 10x less of a struggle.

hey c´mon, i feel insulted, i design my pedals to fit on a 1590b enclosure with 2 stomps and as much knobs i can fit in there because:
- i don´t like waiste of space
- they look "cute"
- it´s technically challenging, i.e rewarding
- it saves pedalboard space
- EH uses all the big enclosures there are...

i spend a lot of time thinking how to fit a versatile circuit into a small box..please dont call me stupid..

Do you put the pedals horizontally with side jacks, or vertically with side jacks like a normal person?

It's not the enclosure size, it's the layout which annoys.

i put the pedals horizontally but with the jacks on the top..saves a lot of space on the pedal board since you can put other pedals right beside them..tough fit though!

Quote from: Hides-His-Eyes on March 31, 2010, 07:09:31 PM

Call me tin foil hat man, but here's my theory:

Zvex KNOWS that it's a bad setup; in fact, it's such a bad idea that nobody else would be stupid enough to do it. So they don't, not the DIYers, not other pedal builders, just zack TM.

All of a sudden, everybody recognises those 'sideways pedals with the cool paint' as zvex, and his brand awareness is 10x less of a struggle.

Maybe, but I don't think it's such a bad idea. The past 2-3 pages of this thread have been full of many peoples concerns on "Realty". Sideways boxes allow for more controls to be positioned in a well spaced out, semi-ergonomic fashion. I think a size-able share of the pedal consumer market would take sideways pedals over slightly more bulky pedals even if they have to have more controlled stomps. Still I see the value in your point. To each his own I guess; that's probably why the modern world makes several dozen brands of practically identical things, and that's not just Overdrives  :icon_rolleyes:

Re: RG's idea about jacks on the bottom, just thought you could put the dc jack on the bottom too.  nothin' but pedals!   :icon_idea:

Yep, then the next evolution of that idea is to have a pedalboard with I/O and power plugs sticking out of it, so your pedals pop into place like an NES cartridge.

 :icon_eek: :icon_eek: :icon_eek: :icon_eek: :icon_eek: :icon_eek: :icon_eek:

THIS:

(http://www.artproaudio.com/images/myspace/audioequip1.jpg)

or anything made by pete cornish, and then that ^

Quote from: Taylor on March 31, 2010, 06:53:40 PM
I'm surprised more people aren't turned off by the ZVex stomp-to-knob proximity. I haven't owned any ZVex gear, but I would imagine it would be tough for a moderately animated rock guitarist wearing Doc Martins to stomp the bypass without moving the knobs. But I haven't heard much complaint about this.

Come on! Just aim before you shoot ;) I've been touring with my own DIY setup for a year, and I cram everything as tight as possible. Most of it is in tuna cans. Never had any problems with stomping with a flat foot completely on top of a pedal and crushing it to death. But maybe that's because I am not wearing any Doc's ;)

Quote from: Taylor on March 31, 2010, 06:53:40 PM
I haven't owned any ZVex gear, but I would imagine it would be tough for a moderately animated rock guitarist wearing Doc Martins to stomp the bypass without moving the knobs. But I haven't heard much complaint about this.

This is exactly the reason I really like the Danelectro Cool Cat setup with the knobs on the side. I find it funny that so many people complain about this but I just find it a lot easier to step on the switch without crushing something. Reaching over the top and turning them and wondering what is more/less, left/right, etc isn't a big deal to me.

One of my pet peeves with form factor is the use of toggle switches, esp when they are mounted near the stomp switch. They are just too fragile to be anywhere near where you are stomping your foot. And they are too fragile to mount on the side where they could get broken from jostling around during transit and etc. The new rule is- NO TOGGLE SWITCHES, okay?  :icon_mrgreen: :icon_wink: If something is so all-fired important to switch on/off- use a stomp switch or go home. :icon_mrgreen:

I like rocker switches, but not as much as I hate trying to make square holes.

  Mini Toggles...hafta say just fine till all bad.
  Like the other 'features' which should come with the directions ''pry gently from the outside to destroy something on the inside''.
  1'' long-thin cylindrical plastic knobs on plastic shaft pots is A-1 design for breakaway componentry, a very light touch can operate and remove them, no longer will you need great force to remove the master volume, this delicate component conveniently located for break-off at the bottom right corner, in the 'bumper guard' position.
  You will however have to melt something into the center of the remains of the plasti-shaft if you're lucky to have enough remains and the internals aren't overly damaged, in order to operate the master volume control [one of 72 new B-Away knob designs installed on the front of the mixer-PA box].
  I could have saved sis a bundle, fender a reputation from self-obsoleting devices, and everyone else could have knobs that make it extremely difficult to damage the pots they allow easy turning of, but don't break off at the first, second or 1,000th soft knock or semi-hard pull at the shaft, not placed in bumper-guard position.
   A heavy transformer with 3' of cord-line on either end, one end won't break [2 prong AC plug will simply disconnect], the other side will break stuff off the inside the mixer case where it's hard to impossible to repair, especially vulnerable to this because it has a transformer 'drop hammer' effect [being strung like in a hammock, in the middle of cord-lines] helping yank on it. {I did manage to reconnect the 17+/Gnd/17- supply wires and wire-stay them with a metal tab-stay and self tapping screw. The crispy hard plastic, 3prong jack sticks out beyond the case pretty far, this helps add leverage force to the drop-hammer transformer, very effective at shattering the brittle jack.
 

Quote from: petemoore on April 01, 2010, 08:34:59 AM
  Mini Toggles...hafta say just fine till all bad.
  Like the other 'features' which should come with the directions ''pry gently from the outside to destroy something on the inside''.
  1'' long-thin cylindrical plastic knobs on plastic shaft pots is A-1 design for breakaway componentry, a very light touch can operate and remove them, no longer will you need great force to remove the master volume, this delicate component conveniently located for break-off at the bottom right corner, in the 'bumper guard' position.
  You will however have to melt something into the center of the remains of the plasti-shaft if you're lucky to have enough remains and the internals aren't overly damaged, in order to operate the master volume control [one of 72 new B-Away knob designs installed on the front of the mixer-PA box].
  I could have saved sis a bundle, fender a reputation from self-obsoleting devices, and everyone else could have knobs that make it extremely difficult to damage the pots they allow easy turning of, but don't break off at the first, second or 1,000th soft knock or semi-hard pull at the shaft, not placed in bumper-guard position.
   A heavy transformer with 3' of cord-line on either end, one end won't break [2 prong AC plug will simply disconnect], the other side will break stuff off the inside the mixer case where it's hard to impossible to repair, especially vulnerable to this because it has a transformer 'drop hammer' effect [being strung like in a hammock, in the middle of cord-lines] helping yank on it. {I did manage to reconnect the 17+/Gnd/17- supply wires and wire-stay them with a metal tab-stay and self tapping screw. The crispy hard plastic, 3prong jack sticks out beyond the case pretty far, this helps add leverage force to the drop-hammer transformer, very effective at shattering the brittle jack.
 

ehm, i didn´t understand a word....

Quote from: petemoore on April 01, 2010, 08:34:59 AM
  Mini Toggles...hafta say just fine till all bad.
  Like the other 'features' which should come with the directions ''pry gently from the outside to destroy something on the inside''.
  1'' long-thin cylindrical plastic knobs on plastic shaft pots is A-1 design for breakaway componentry, a very light touch can operate and remove them, no longer will you need great force to remove the master volume, this delicate component conveniently located for break-off at the bottom right corner, in the 'bumper guard' position.
 

"Breakaway componentry", heh-heh!  :icon_mrgreen: Rip Glitter would be proud...

I was helping my son fix his OP Stingray bass the other night, one of the pots loosened up and broke one of the wires. The "friction fit" knob on the spline shaft pot was so tight, the force required to pry it off also came close to removing the shaft from the pot. It put so much force on the cheap pot shaft that the "stop" no longer worked. So I installed a decent 16mm pot in its place. And of course, no spline shaft, so the original chrome knob no longer fits. So I gave him a blue "pointer" knob I had lying around and he laughed and remarked that his bass now looked "so ghetto". So, it's time to redo the electronics in that thing, including the nasty stock jack. Time to order some knobs too.

I like those old retro knobs; i've got heaps of em from the recycling centre scrounges i do.  some are actually really good quality (well of course they are, back then things were built to last more than a year).  I have 5 beeeautiful turntable screw-ons i'm gonna put on my Dr. Boogey, when i eventually make it.  Your son called it ghetto, i prefer Mojo.  :)  Or Juju, which, my girlfriend informs me, is the 'good' path of spiritual intent in Haiti, 'Mojo' being the evil.  So i guess there are a lot of evil electronic components/stompboxes around here.   ;D  but, i digress...

This is what this knob looks like:

(http://www.smallbearelec.com/catalog/KnurColCap.JPG)

The reason he said it looked "ghetto" was because it didn't match the other two chrome knobs, which look more like this:

(http://www.smallbearelec.com/catalog/MachAlumKnu.jpg)

  :icon_wink:

  Dschwartz, we can start with Mini - Toggle:
  http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=81183.msg672717

  http://www.shopwiki.co.uk/Switch+Mount
  They switch according to the schematic, but are fragile.
  I recommend using them only when default:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Default_(band)
  Values for whatever is switched will be seen when, not if, the switch begins to actup or it's lever
   http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=lever+wiki&fr=chr-offrhap
  is broken 
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken
  completely off.
 
  Transformers:
  http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=Transformer+wiki&fr=chr-offrhap
  They're heavy, if a string from each side supports it, it looks somewhat like a Hammock:
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammock
 
  When the heavy weight swings:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swinging
  It breaks the heart of the connector, and inside the mixerboard.
 
  This makes them self-obsolescent:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsolete_(album)
 

thanks petemoore..

Poor Pete. It must be frustrating to have everyone tell you that you make no sense. For what it's worth mr Moore, I've been able to understand you most of the time pretty well. You have a unique and interesting style, no one could disagree with that, but I get you.

Jacob

  The "Worst Ever" threads invite attack on stupid.
  Tall knobs sticking out of plastic <1/4'' potshafts is stupid or intentionally designed to invite failure. It invites failure. When the master broke off I realized the plastic shafts stupid design, had it been pointed out to the designer, would probably have been successfully defended because the money men who throw stupid money around probably don't even care.
  I don't know if Fender Mixer/PA's still have breakaway control knobs, perhaps no-one who is interested in the least even knows which companies and which models have this attractive, failure prone design.
  My typing may sound stupid to some, certainly someone seens the stupidity in having a knob stick way out so it catches on the back seat material of the car when you let a friend put it in there...he set it in there real sweet really, perhaps a slight touch more acceleration downward than the designers had intended..."anything could take one of these knobs off, I'm glad it was you", and had a good laugh because we don't care either ~!
  YUMV.