Blind Pedal Shootout on YouTube

[frank_p]

Good example of gathering information and putting out exposure for your products at the same time.
I enjoyed it !

[d95err]

Great and very ambitious project! Very carefully planned and executed. A/B testing is very difficult to do right, and you really took it as far as practically possible here.

As a comparison, there was a show on Swedish TV recently where they did A/B tests between cheap/expensive instruments and had some celebrities try to tell the difference. Now guess what - one of Swedens most seasoned guitarrists couldn't tell the difference between a vintage '56 Les Paul and a cheap $100 clone. How is that possible? Well, the actual test had a guitarist with very moderate talent slam each instrument for about 10 seconds through a Peavey 5150 with really high gain, drenched in delay and reverb...

[carrejans]

I totally enjoyed this shootout, what i noticed in both the overdrive and dist vids was that most people were more impressed with the more bassy sounds (including me). The one point  i would make about this is that in a full band situation the results could be more positive towards the trebly sounds.

I am massively impressed with the noise floor in the hyde pedal when it is in series with another pedal.

I totally agree with this! You hit the nail on the head. 

Also, I would use a system, where the voting could happen anonymous.

Maybe, it was better if the name of the pedal was on the screen for us. It's hard to follow.

[GREEN FUZ]

Overall an interesting and fun demonstration. In the field of overdrives all came across as remarkably unremarkable; that is, all sounded very similar. Among the more dramatic presentations were the Visual Sounds`s buffering qualities on the Myth busters true bypass section and the impressive low noise floor when in series with another high-gain pedal.

10,000.000 hits stomp switch sounds good too. The guy who tested it must have blisters on his bunions.

[R.G.]

... you should have used a true bypass loop for each pedal, as buffers before or after a pedal definately change the tone of the adjacent pedals. For example, running two TS9s in a row, the 1st one will sound different than the 2nd one. (kurtlives was hinting at this). I saw him pressing the pedals' buttons directly so it seems that all were connected.

It certainly affects pedals that do not have a high input impedance. Pedals with an input impedance over some threshold tend to be less affected. Then there's the issue of inter-pedal capacitance in the wiring and connections. Buffered versus true bypass affects tone? You bet it does. That's the point, and one of the points of the true bypass mythbuster. True bypass lets your pedal input and output get loaded with all the cable either ahead of or behind it, as well as the buffer changing things, as some people claim. I think it becomes a point of discussion, and even better testing, as some have noticed here, whether it's the buffer affecting tone or the buffer UN-affecting tone compared to true bypass. Then on top of that there is pedal sensitivity too. I'd like to do that test someday.

I totally enjoyed this shootout, what i noticed in both the overdrive and dist vids was that most people were more impressed with the more bassy sounds (including me). The one point  i would make about this is that in a full band situation the results could be more positive towards the trebly sounds.

That's probably true, and I suspect it's a built-in bias of guitar players. When we play alone, we like full sounding guitars. When we play in a band, we're looking for something to cut through the mix and be heard, and that's often more treble heavy. I have caught myself at this several times in my own playing, such as it is.

On the other hand, all of the pedals being tested had more available treble in the tone pots to go. None of them were running at full-treble setting, so all of them could be zooped up that way.

Also, I would use a system, where the voting could happen anonymous.

Yeah, that's one of the things that we just couldn't manage within the range of the available time and money. Something like a personal voting pad for each audience member, or interviewing them all one at a time (eeek! Run the test sixty times??)

Maybe, it was better if the name of the pedal was on the screen for us. It's hard to follow.

It was hard to follow if you were there, too. That's one reason I think the test tended toward unbiased in that respect. It would have been hard to memorize a sound and look for it to vote for it to nobble the results. You really did have to think about did the most recent tone sound better than the last one.

10,000.000 hits stomp switch sounds good too. The guy who tested it must have blisters on his bunions.

Yeah. The guy who had to do that lost a bet with us...   
Actually, we use an ALPS brand switch that ALPS says is good to 10M operations. We figure they know more about it that we do.

[reverbie]

So where in the pedal order did you put the Visual pedals?

[R.G.]

Hmmm... I realize that I don't know that detail. I could ask Bob where they were. Bob was the guy working the board, and would be most familiar with it.

I was focusing so hard on the external part - the blind, coaching the guitar player not to favor or disfavor one, stuff like that, I left the board and operation to Bob and so I don't have a clear picture of which pedal was where compared to the others.

Should I have controlled or randomized that?

[Pedal love]

RG, you know I am normally very critical especially with these comparison things. Having said that I think you did a pretty fair and decent job. I have experience of years with commercial pedals and my only criticism is not with the guys here or the public response, but sadly the larger companies feeling threatened might feel they need to come down on you for this. Again it is really sad, as I know you did your level best to make the whole thing as unbiased as possible. The good news is other companies might not be threatened yet, but as you continue to succeed a response might be in the offing. Anyway well done RG and I commend you for your efforts.

[tehfunk]

thank you, it really is a valuable resource, and I'm sure I will refer back to it many times.

[reverbie]

hmmmm....besides being skeptical of these type of commercial ads, i also come from the same school of thought as analogmike... after watching the youtube clips, it did appear that the visual pedal was second in every chain of pedals if counting from guitar. I could be wrong. Placement surely would have an impact on tone, specially since i saw it running directly after a buffered boss pedal, etc. I know your boss knows this and remember some of your amazing insights into this, so that doesnt seem like something that would be overlooked. Randomization of that experimenting parameter would help the results, as would not letting the riffmaster see which pedal he was using, which were well within his peripheral sight...that is clear from watching the video. Also a show of hands is not very scientific either...you see guys looking around for affirmation before they vote...how about filling out some surveys and then tallying at the end...and how can you extrapolate winning results if you are going head to head one at a time? did he just do visual vs. A, visual vs. B, etc and declare Visual the winner if it beat the majority of them in a head to head or did it only have to beat one pedal head to head? He even double checks one of the results when it appears the Visual pedal might have barely lost...man this is psychology 101. Lastly, is the one that beat Visual in any given test the overall winner for that category? And the thing about 10,000, 0000 hits on the footswitch...come on people, this is a rating given when tested from a machine that taps the switch repeatedly in succesion in a completely "unhuman" way...those crapp blue toggle switches are rated for like a million latches, and i can guarantee you they would never last that long under actual playing conditions. I would focus more on the ease of replacement and less mechanical parts, which are both positives.

I am very critical when it comes to these type of things (ala my degree). Why not do it right the first time? This wouldnt even pass the very basic criteria for a valid scientific experiment with statistically significant results...i hate to be the total %^&*ah here but let's call a spade a spade. This is an informercial for Visual with all due respect to RG. We have all seen this type of "blind" experiment with soda, food dehydrators, magic cleaners, leg hair removing wax, you name it.  It's a ploy to sell pedals while simultaneously giving a "shout out" to the very pedals that were the inspiration for the Visual pedals in the first place. Obviously the CEO is a decent man, but it's equally obvious he's a business man too.

But it definitely did teach me how similar some of these pedals sound which was very cool. For that alone it was valuable. Especially the overdrives. Also, I have played Visual pedals and am impressed with the way they sound, which is no surprise. Thanks for the link. Cool post nonetheless.

[george]

But it definitely did teach me how similar some of these pedals sound which was very cool. For that alone it was valuable. Especially the overdrives. Also, I have played Visual pedals and am impressed with the way they sound, which is no surprise. Thanks for the link. Cool post nonetheless.

I was just blown away by how discriminating professional musicians were ... hell all the overdrives sounded the same (and just as good as each other) to me. 

[DougH]

I agree with some of the previous discussion that some fx may have unique "distinguishing features" that others don't share, which won't necessarily show up in a comparison like this. But regardless, I think as general "consumer education", these videos are really a great service (with the understanding that Visual Sound has a vested interest in you choosing their product, of course).

But IMO the two "mythbuster" vids were the most effective. They did a great job of demonstrating the fallacy of deifying one narrow aspect or piece-part of a circuit like this. If nothing else, these are systems of components. Everything depends on everything else.

It's great to see the education taking place. Especially in a place like Nashville, one area in the U.S. anyway where a lot of the intense hype seems to be generated.

[petemoore]

  Well I did notice a telltale Workhorse hubcap on the wall, was the speaker in the wall?, hard to tell the shape of what the hubcap [there's a better name, I'm having fun with...it looks like a hubcap and that's the only best way I can describe so you know exactly what I'm talking about]...
 and that the bass response of the amplification was quite smooth, yet well defined.
 Not exactly typical, more like what I'd choose when I'm choosin' though.

[Paul Marossy]

I agree with some of the previous discussion that some fx may have unique "distinguishing features" that others don't share, which won't necessarily show up in a comparison like this. But regardless, I think as general "consumer education", these videos are really a great service (with the understanding that Visual Sound has a vested interest in you choosing their product, of course).

But IMO the two "mythbuster" vids were the most effective. They did a great job of demonstrating the fallacy of deifying one narrow aspect or piece-part of a circuit like this. If nothing else, these are systems of components. Everything depends on everything else.

It's great to see the education taking place. Especially in a place like Nashville, one area in the U.S. anyway where a lot of the intense hype seems to be generated.

Yeah, the mythbuster videos were great. It's funny how people in general so readily buy into a bunch of hogwash like a JRC4558 opamp being better or worse than an RC4558 opamp. They're the same thing! But I already knew that. 

[analogmike]

But IMO the two "mythbuster" vids were the most effective. They did a great job of demonstrating the fallacy of deifying one narrow aspect or piece-part of a circuit like this. If nothing else, these are systems of components. Everything depends on everything else.

I watched the IC test (coudn't bear to watch the bypass vid, conclusion is predetermined). Of course 4558 chips will sound about the same. I don't know what that video amplifier chip was (probably VERY similar to a 4558 but higher slew rate for higher frequencies?).
But why not test the TA75558 chip which is the one that everyone removes from the ts9?

I can tell the difference betweem the JRC2043 chip and a 4558 chip even at a noisy guitar show, and so did everyone
who listened when I demod it back in '94 at the first Classic American Guitar Show in NY. If you can't hear that, other hobbies beckon

Have fun!

[Boogdish]

Perhaps instead of coaching the guitarist to not visually cue people about his taste you could give him a stool to sit on and have him face away from the audience (and the pedals) when he's playing.

Also, while it wouldn't be feasible for how you were doing this test, it might be cool to mic the amp and give everyone an identical set of headphones, I imagine that a lot of those pedals are going to sound better in the front row than in the back row.

I think it would be cool if you got together with some other manufacturers and did another one of these at one of the big guitar shows or other industry events and had an impartial team (maybe guys from industry magazines or retired designers or psych students/music instructors at the local college) running the experiment.  I think it would be fun to attend one of these.

[DougH]

I can tell the difference betweem the JRC2043 chip and a 4558 chip even at a noisy guitar show,[...]

I hear differences between TI4558 and JRC4558's (and TL072's, LF353's, etc) as well in my tube driver circuit anyway. The question is, are they spellbinding tonal nirvana differences or are they noise level?  The differences are not equivalent to the hype generated or golden tone promised by changing one component.

People tend to believe what they feel they need to in order to rationalize their last purchase...

[analogmike]

I can tell the difference betweem the JRC2043 chip and a 4558 chip even at a noisy guitar show,[...]

I hear differences between TI4558 and JRC4558's (and TL072's, LF353's, etc) as well in my tube driver circuit anyway. The question is, are they spellbinding tonal nirvana differences or are they noise level?  The differences are not equivalent to the hype generated or golden tone promised by changing one component.

Good question, the 2043 and 4558 have about the same amount of noise. (For those of you who are not TS homos, the 2043 was used in many original 1980s TS9 pedals).  Try a 2043, I think you will agree it might be good for garage rock sounds, or something like the FACES sound, as it has a very gritty, slightly nasty tone. The 4558 is a lot smoother and better for blues, classic rock, jazz etc.

What I meant to convey in my post, is that the outcome of the opamp mythbuster is not the definitive conclusion, as they failed to test chips that I know would sound different in the VS OD pedal (meaning, NOT all op amps sound the same).

[jimma]

It's great to see the education taking place. Especially in a place like Nashville, one area in the U.S. anyway where a lot of the intense hype seems to be generated.

You hit the nail right on the head-I'm in Nashville and can attest to that. There's a lot of "trendy" users here, too. For example, in my circle of musicians I was the first cat to build and gig with my own bypass boxes- basically got laughed at. Then when those same people caught up to the concept, it was all about who has brand-a or brand-b looper on their board (AND they started "educating" me about it!). I reacted by taking mine off and using as many cheap, buffered pedals as I could (for a while, at least).

[DougH]

I figure anywhere there is a big recording scene, lots of studio musicians, performers, etc, the hype will be spun up into high gear.