¶David's version
Use pure free software stuff.
Build a dedicated, replicable device on reliable hardware.
Document it well!
Use pure free software stuff.
Build a dedicated, replicable device on reliable hardware.
Document it well!
¶Nacho's version (2016)
http://www.woundedpaw.com/fx/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=2
http://www.runoffgroove.com/splitter-blend.html
Some things i thought about this are: This first link pedal is cool to "swell" between two sounds. Doing them to blend between input and loop would be easy after seeing the guts of that loop blender. Then you could just have one big splitter (say 4 channel) or looper, and vol pedals on each line, then blend like that those four loops that are plugged in the returns of the looper or the inputs of the blender. I see more practical to have one looper with sends and returns than having 2 boxes. Also those wounded paw pedals (clones) for specifically do that between two.
In the blend section your gotta have a 180º phase reversal switch (i think it's done with diodes) to keep sound full (or not) ). 90º or 270º phase shift seems to be difficult to do. Also would be cool to have pan knobs for each chanell been blent and stereo outs in case you are using two amps.
In the split section is where it really could get tricky. There are many active designs that should work alright almost everywhere. Passive ones drop off volume and tone i think so they are specially bad for drives. But! Germaium fuzzs after buffers, you know probably, are a bad combo. I know because of wahs, the low output impedance overloads the fuzz, who likes guitar like high output impedance. So! Usually a boss pedal is placed there, even off, to fix the overload (because of the kind of buffer i think). I have a variable impedance buffer which works nice usually. I've been asking about this to get the right sound for each fuzz. Some say to put a transformer there, others that i should put another fuzz there but some told me about pickup simulators
http://www.muzique.com/news/amz-un-buffer/
http://www.madbeanpedals.com/forum/index.php?topic=11520.0
http://forum.musikding.de/cpg/albums/userpics/17486/alembic-like-state-variable-filter-schematic.jpg
http://www.muzique.com/lab/pickups.htm
http://www.diyrecordingequipment.com/products/ppe
That way, you could have tone and vol controls before you hit the pedals you plug in to get them in their sweet spots. Then blend them at taste
It's experimenting with different circuits to get the idea i guess
I'll probably have a splitter also to send different sounds to different amps. Then make whatever i want to hear
And well, having this in midi as you said and changing the tempo of one delay in one chain via expression pedal to create different rythmns with the other (parallel and series delays) would be awesome.
MIDI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-T8kcSRLL0
i'm certainly rethinking stuff, been mixing more fresh and fun, and started messing around with granular syntheis (which is truly amazing) just before meeting you
so! you talk me about DIN and the berzier curves (which sounds like the way to go)
And then the midi ideas, and you know, one thing that bothers me about mixing is been slow with computers, keyboard and mouse don't feel musical to me, knobs do, just the same way i prefer to play strings over keys...
Automatization is probably one of the most useful things (and probably annoying to do) with DAWS, enabling accuracy in real time so i imagine to control parameters on 2 or 3 of those things, or other musical "triggers" , to play them as instruments. controlling fqs on eq, reverb time or damping, slowing down and speeding up a file with a granular synth and chopping it at different rates...you know, infiinite list... Making midi possibilities playable like an instrument is what stops it from being cold/digital (hahahaha you know) In fact the only thing i found that i like about the analog world is it's unpredictability but that's something you may not want in every situation. (heard that analog stuff is usually dynamic responsive, makes sense from my little knowledge)
http://www.woundedpaw.com/fx/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=2
http://www.runoffgroove.com/splitter-blend.html
Some things i thought about this are: This first link pedal is cool to "swell" between two sounds. Doing them to blend between input and loop would be easy after seeing the guts of that loop blender. Then you could just have one big splitter (say 4 channel) or looper, and vol pedals on each line, then blend like that those four loops that are plugged in the returns of the looper or the inputs of the blender. I see more practical to have one looper with sends and returns than having 2 boxes. Also those wounded paw pedals (clones) for specifically do that between two.
In the blend section your gotta have a 180º phase reversal switch (i think it's done with diodes) to keep sound full (or not) ). 90º or 270º phase shift seems to be difficult to do. Also would be cool to have pan knobs for each chanell been blent and stereo outs in case you are using two amps.
In the split section is where it really could get tricky. There are many active designs that should work alright almost everywhere. Passive ones drop off volume and tone i think so they are specially bad for drives. But! Germaium fuzzs after buffers, you know probably, are a bad combo. I know because of wahs, the low output impedance overloads the fuzz, who likes guitar like high output impedance. So! Usually a boss pedal is placed there, even off, to fix the overload (because of the kind of buffer i think). I have a variable impedance buffer which works nice usually. I've been asking about this to get the right sound for each fuzz. Some say to put a transformer there, others that i should put another fuzz there but some told me about pickup simulators
http://www.muzique.com/news/amz-un-buffer/
http://www.madbeanpedals.com/forum/index.php?topic=11520.0
http://forum.musikding.de/cpg/albums/userpics/17486/alembic-like-state-variable-filter-schematic.jpg
http://www.muzique.com/lab/pickups.htm
http://www.diyrecordingequipment.com/products/ppe
That way, you could have tone and vol controls before you hit the pedals you plug in to get them in their sweet spots. Then blend them at taste
It's experimenting with different circuits to get the idea i guess
I'll probably have a splitter also to send different sounds to different amps. Then make whatever i want to hear
And well, having this in midi as you said and changing the tempo of one delay in one chain via expression pedal to create different rythmns with the other (parallel and series delays) would be awesome.
MIDI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-T8kcSRLL0
i'm certainly rethinking stuff, been mixing more fresh and fun, and started messing around with granular syntheis (which is truly amazing) just before meeting you
so! you talk me about DIN and the berzier curves (which sounds like the way to go)
And then the midi ideas, and you know, one thing that bothers me about mixing is been slow with computers, keyboard and mouse don't feel musical to me, knobs do, just the same way i prefer to play strings over keys...
Automatization is probably one of the most useful things (and probably annoying to do) with DAWS, enabling accuracy in real time so i imagine to control parameters on 2 or 3 of those things, or other musical "triggers" , to play them as instruments. controlling fqs on eq, reverb time or damping, slowing down and speeding up a file with a granular synth and chopping it at different rates...you know, infiinite list... Making midi possibilities playable like an instrument is what stops it from being cold/digital (hahahaha you know) In fact the only thing i found that i like about the analog world is it's unpredictability but that's something you may not want in every situation. (heard that analog stuff is usually dynamic responsive, makes sense from my little knowledge)
¶FV-1
https://electric-canary.com/fv1start.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-SGJObDsqk
"""
You're maybe wondering how all these pedal companies are making crazy complicated effects in a small footprint. The answer is almost always digital processing.
One very popular Digital Signal Processor (DSP) amongst pedal makers is the Spin-Semiconductor's FV-1. It is easy to integrate it into a pedal design and coding was made relatively approachable. There're far more complex DSPs out there, with a lot more option like Analog Device's SHARK DSP used by Strymon, but the FV-1 will be able to handle most guitar effects.
Getting into digital signal processing is not an easy task, especially if you're not used to a digital workflow. The good news is that there's fantastic tools and documents here to help. I made this article to help you put everything together and follow the steps in the right order.
"""
<--------------------- ((new))
https://electric-canary.com/fv1start.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-SGJObDsqk
"""
You're maybe wondering how all these pedal companies are making crazy complicated effects in a small footprint. The answer is almost always digital processing.
One very popular Digital Signal Processor (DSP) amongst pedal makers is the Spin-Semiconductor's FV-1. It is easy to integrate it into a pedal design and coding was made relatively approachable. There're far more complex DSPs out there, with a lot more option like Analog Device's SHARK DSP used by Strymon, but the FV-1 will be able to handle most guitar effects.
Getting into digital signal processing is not an easy task, especially if you're not used to a digital workflow. The good news is that there's fantastic tools and documents here to help. I made this article to help you put everything together and follow the steps in the right order.
"""
<--------------------- ((new))