Re Multi-effect pedals. Are they worth it?
W.T. Walters
EXACTLY what you are looking for.
It has a built in expression pedal. The
Zoom 505 can have one connected, but
those pedals are very expensive. The
AX1G has 69 effects. It only costs
$150.
The Zoom 505 makes a lot of noise, and
the Boss ME-30 is very expensive when
compared to the Korg AX1G. (ME 30 only
has 16 effects).
Visit my website of the AX1G:
http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Plaza/6651/
This site has all the info you'd like to
know, and a patchlist and some
sounds to download.
Johan Walters
apest...@geocities.com
Andrew Martin wrote:
> I am thinking about buying a
multi-effect pedal. I want one with an
> expression pedal for wah, volume, etc,
or at least able to have one
> connected (ie not that Pandora thing).
>
> My favourite music is Rage Against The
Machine, and I am starting to
> like Sepultura as well, in addition to
Jimi Hendrix, and my second
> favourite Metallica.
>
> Since I am a uni student, of course I
dont want it to be too
> expensive...
>
> I dont really need that sampling thing
that can slow down a solo in
> order to learn it, since I can do that
on the computer, but I suppose it
> would be an added bonus.
>
> I was thinking maybe a zoom 505, or
even a boss ME-30. I also saw a
> Digitech RP-6 secondhand, but since I
have heard nothing about this
> unit, I would appreciate any feedback.
>
> Any advice?
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Andrew
>
> "and just in case you couldn't tell, I
was being sarcastic" - Homer
> Simpson
>
> "The tree of democracy shall be
watered by the blood of revolution, so
> go plant a seed producer. Plant at
seed for harvest. Plant a seed for
> harvest producer."
> - Zack De La Rocha
(of Rage Against The Machine)
Patrick F. Coleman
will you please name the 69 effects for us?
I'll start.
compression
equalisation
distortion (tube or analog)
distortion (digital)
reverb
echo/delay
chorus
flange
cabinet emulation
phase shift
ring modulator
pitch shift (detune)
tremolo
wah
that's just 14. You have 55 more, right?
Twang!
Patrick F. Coleman
The below two posts concern how many effects you can say a unit has..
Mr. Walters maintains his unit, the Korg AX1G has 69 effects.. and you
see this in their advertising.
I got an email from him, and as I expected this is simply not the
case.
Mr. Walters and Korgs advertisments are claiming each effect setting
as 'an effect'.
This is, of course, bogus.
You don't get several phasers with this unit, you get one, and it has
just a few presets, neither as many as better multi effects, nor as
many as you can get out of a single unit with knobs instead of
presets.
Korg ought to have their ass kicked resoundingly for misleading people
this way.
It misinforms, misrespresents, and is an embarassment to all
guitarists.
For Mr. Walters I say.. I don't blame you for the mistake.. but don't
believe it.
Twang!
W.T. Walters
effects with
all phasers, chorusses and distortion are counted as one:
Compressor
Distorion, Overdrive, Fuzz
3-band equalizer
Chorus
Vibrato
Flanger
Phaser
Tremolo
Pan
Wah, Auto-wah, fixed wah
Random step filter
Pitch shifter, bender, octaver
volume (by pedal too, yes)
Ring modulator
Resonance filter
Voice modulator
Drone
Delay, Hold, Echo (up to 1 sec)
Room, Hall
Sampler
Loop
Scratcher
Cabinet resonator
Noise reduction
Auto Chromatic tuner
metronome
Still 26... but then 26 fully programmable effects. And then WAY better
programmable as the Zoom 505. These effects have a good sound quality. If
you might think that's another lie of Korg just hear yourself. Go to a
guitar store and play one yourself.
You'd say this list is lying less, but I'd say this list doesn't show the
possibilities properly.
Ciau,
Johan Walters
Patrick F. Coleman
The below post changes nothing.
26 isn't 69.
My RP7 has clean1 and clean2 preamp settings. Is that two preamps?
No, it isn't.
You have two distortion types with it, so you can count two there.
If I called each section of the preamp with it's own name a different
effect, I would say it has 8.
But to call clean1 clean2 blues fuzz dist etc.. all different effects
is stretching things way too far, in my opinion.
Can I say the expression pedal is several different expression pedals
because you can assign it to different effects?
a tuner or a metronome aren't really effects, either.
Again.. saying this is 69 effects, which you've done more than once,
is false information.
Sticking to the argument that these are individual effects after
knowing better is even worse.
If it's better than the zoom, fine.
W.T. Walters
Anyway, whether the advertisement is telling truth or crap, the AX1G still is a very good pedal. It didn't even need a deceptive advertisement. The AX1G is nothing like the Zoom 505, it's just in the same price range. Due to new technologies the AX1G has many effects, many ways of using them, a great sound quality (for a pedal under $300) and a very low price ($150). I could say the AX1G has the best price/quality rate ever. No other pedal will give you more value for your money. That's a fact, not some fiction in my mind. It's not just my opionion, that's the opion of everybody who have played on the AX1G. If you haven't you could impossibly say the pedal sucks. P. Coleman didn't say that, but is creating the impression that because the AX1G has a deceptive advertisement there is something wrong with the AX1G itself. And that's definitely not the case here.
Not A Speck Of Cereal
effect categories. Indeed, Korg seems to be taking advantage of
effect-newbies in the beginners guitar field -- for shame.
Chris
tw...@prairie.lakes.com (Patrick F. Coleman) wrote:
[]
[] The below two posts concern how many effects you can say a unit has..
[] Mr. Walters maintains his unit, the Korg AX1G has 69 effects.. and you
[] see this in their advertising.
[] I got an email from him, and as I expected this is simply not the
[] case.
[] Mr. Walters and Korgs advertisments are claiming each effect setting
[] as 'an effect'.
[] This is, of course, bogus.
[] You don't get several phasers with this unit, you get one, and it has
[] just a few presets, neither as many as better multi effects, nor as
[] many as you can get out of a single unit with knobs instead of
[] presets.
[] Korg ought to have their ass kicked resoundingly for misleading people
[] this way.
[] It misinforms, misrespresents, and is an embarassment to all
[] guitarists.
[] For Mr. Walters I say.. I don't blame you for the mistake.. but don't
[] believe it.
[] Twang!
[]
[]
----
"It is better to debate a question without answering it than to answer a question without debating it."
-- Mark Twain
..............................................................
Remove X's from my email address above to reply
chri...@microsoft.com -- Seattle, WA.
[These opinions are personal views only and only my personal views]
Not A Speck Of Cereal
[] I'm not lying when saying the Korg AX1G has 69 effects. But here are the
[] effects with
[] all phasers, chorusses and distortion are counted as one:
The material Lexicon MPX-1 (retail list price of about $1200-1300)
states the following:
56 Pitch, Chorus, EQ, Modulation, Delay
and world-class Reverb effects.
They say "56", but they acknowledge that there's only 6 effect
categories. There's only 6 buttons on the front to program these
categories. When you consider that Chorus, Flange and Phaser are all
Delay based effects, there's even less.
But Chorus is different from Flange, and Phaser and Delays. There are
different kind of Delay (echo like) effects that cannot be simulated
by changing the time and feedback params--such as the multi-tap and
ping-pong effects--that I feel comfortable grouping together, but not
the others (flange, chorus).
For that matter, Reverb is nothing but a very sophisticated delay, but
it's quite valid to call it a different effect than delay
Compression is compression, but how about the Ducker? That's based on
compression, but it does something distinctly different
EQ and wah-wah, different effects (even tho they're both EQ based)?
On the other hand, the Korg is out of line--it's not 69. 26 is a more
reasonable claim, even though these are all EQ based effects:
3-band equalizer
Voice modulator
Resonance filter
Drone
Cabinet resonator
...these are all amplitude (modulator) effects:
Vibrato
Tremolo
Pan
volume (by pedal too, yes)
...and these are all delay based effects:
Delay, Hold, Echo (up to 1 sec)
Sampler
Loop
...and these are not effects at all:
Auto Chromatic tuner
metronome
Eh?
edge73
calibration every now and then, and the distortions kinda suck on it
Andre
W.T. Walters wrote in message <364966BC...@wxs.nl>...
Patrick F. Coleman
Yeah.. I agree.
Korg knows fully well that this is a beginners unit, and as far as I'm
concerned they are misrepresenting it.
Needlessly, I think, too.
Effect categoris versus different effects.. confusing to newbies and
to some not so new as well.
With the Korg they go even farther than simply saying 69 different
sounds, because they are calling some of the features of the unit
effects when they aren't effects at all.
The trade off on all less expensive multi effects is that you don't
get a separate device, with full paramater modification, you usually
get several things interelated...
but, you get all them in one unit, and the better ones are designed so
that these things work together in good ways.
Man.. there's enough confusion about effects without advertising
gimmicks adding to it.
And the unit probably holds it's own against the competition anyway,
so there's not really even a need.
Twang!
W.T. Walters
product itself. The Korg AX1G is a very good pedal. Korg didn't need to say it has 69 effects, because the
AX1G is so much better than other cheap effect pedals, it will sell anyway.
W.T. Walters
The AX1G has 3 effect-engines: EQ, delay and modulatoin.
You're very right, but that doen't take away the Korg AX1G is a very versatile pedal.
Johan Walters
Not A Speck Of Cereal wrote:
Patrick F. Coleman
>I and mr Coleman came to the conclusion that the number of effects doesn't matter for the
>quality of the product itself. The Korg AX1G is a very good pedal. Korg didn't need to
>say it has 69 effects, because the AX1G is so much better than other cheap effect
>pedals, it will sell anyway.
Well.. I'd amend this a bit.
The Korg appears to be a less expensive mulit effect with some good
selling points, which have been obfuscated if not frustrated by the
companys dishonesty about what it offers.
Twang!
>Not A Speck Of Cereal wrote:
Goose
not a good unit. It is cheaply made, the display sucks, and most of the
effects sucked. I bought it to replace a Korg 411fx pedal(which is a GREAT
pedal for the money), and the 411 blew it away. While the distortions on the
411fx were VERY good(I believe they're the same distortions they use in
their 104DS and 105OD), the distortions on the AX1G sounded like complete
shit. No bottom end, very nasal sounding. Even with the low eq maxed and
the mid and hi off, it sounded like I was playing through an alarm clock
radio. Expression pedal sucked. Wah sucked. Also, it was very noisy.
Any modulation effects were accompanied by an annoying hiss and static that
even the noise reduction couldn't get rid of. I returned it and tried a
different one...same problems.
Honestly, I have to say that even a Zoom 505 sounds better than this thing.
But, if you're gonna spend $99US anyway, just get the 411fx from Guitar
Center. The only limitation on the 411fx is only 2 programs per bank, and
only 10 user programmable banks in all, but the sound quality more than
makes up for it. If you have a little more cash, get a Digitech RP-3. I
just picked up a new one for $239US and it make the AX1G look like a kid's
toy.
Goose
Patrick F. Coleman wrote in message <72hfgc$h1q$3...@supernews.com>...
Mark
created by passing a signal through a certain module within their box. There may be 69 different modules
within the box, and so Korg claims 69 effects. From the outside, it appears as though all of these effects
are based on the same processing sources, so it may appear that there are only a dozen or so effects. I
think it would be safe to say that listening to documentation alone would not be the best way to purchase a
special effects box, so whether the box lives up to it's advertising should not be an issue. If it only has
a couple of effects, people will hear that and they will judge the box based on their perception of what it
is capable of.
Patrick F. Coleman wrote:
> Yeah.. I agree.
> Korg knows fully well that this is a beginners unit, and as far as I'm
> concerned they are misrepresenting it.
> Needlessly, I think, too.
> Effect categoris versus different effects.. confusing to newbies and
> to some not so new as well.
> With the Korg they go even farther than simply saying 69 different
> sounds, because they are calling some of the features of the unit
> effects when they aren't effects at all.
>
> The trade off on all less expensive multi effects is that you don't
> get a separate device, with full paramater modification, you usually
> get several things interelated...
> but, you get all them in one unit, and the better ones are designed so
> that these things work together in good ways.
>
> Man.. there's enough confusion about effects without advertising
> gimmicks adding to it.
> And the unit probably holds it's own against the competition anyway,
> so there's not really even a need.
>
> Twang!
>
> Xchr...@microsoft.comX (Not A Speck Of Cereal) wrote:
>
Patrick F. Coleman
>The issue here appears to be what an effect is. From Korg's perspective, it may be
that one effect is
>created by passing a signal through a certain module within their box. There may be
69 different modules
>within the box, and so Korg claims 69 effects.
It's still different versions of ONE effect. They are not different
effects.
period. exclamation point. !
From the outside, it appears as though
all of these effects
>are based on the same processing sources, so it may appear that there are only a
dozen or so effects.
There are only a dozen or so effects. Otherwise the producers of a
pedal which 'does chorus' could claim their single box is fifty
choruses in one!
That's semantic manipulation and cheap semantic manipulation.
I
>think it would be safe to say that listening to documentation alone would not be the
best way to purchase a
>special effects box, so whether the box lives up to it's advertising should not be an
issue.
I don't like someone saying they have 69 different effects, as if
there were actually 69 different effects, anymore than I like someone
claiming their guitars have 50 different pickups, just because you can
flip a switch or twist a knob.
It's a cheap lie.
If it only has
>a couple of effects, people will hear that and they will judge the box based on
their perception of what it
>is capable of.
Lots of people believe ads... they assume that the ad will, at least
in part, be a true representation of the product.
Korg violates that trust.
Twang!
Venger's Orchids
I agree with Patrick. My RP-12 has 1000's of possible EQ combinations.
But that's ONE effect, not 1000's.
-Rod-
Venger's Orchids
Email ven...@vengers.com
Website http://www.vengers.com/
Basic Culture CD-ROM: http://vengers.com/demo/cd.htm
Listing: lis...@vengers.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mark
chunk of your box, and the EQ's for the high bands were taking up a seperate chunk of your
box, and the signal had to be routed through one or the other depending on the external
settings, you would feel justified in claiming that the total EQ controls could be claimed
to be two seperate effects, although it may sound like one effect to the user. The effects
may not be called EQ, however. They might be called "EQ High" and "EQ Low". There are not
infinite varieties of effects, however, because a change in a high-level EQ to a different
high-level EQ would still pass the waveform through the same module...and my argument is
that one module = one effect.
If you want to consider that waveforms must be transformed in different ways in order to be
different effects, then you will have a problem because all waveforms can only be processed
in one way...pitch/amplitude transformation. So by your arguments, effects boxes are able
to produce only one effect, and all boxes produce that same effect (with different means of
handling the variables).
W.T. Walters
Korg made the interface in a way that you can choose from 69 effects. From their
point of view it's justified saying it has 69 effects.
They don't see a chorus with high volume (and speed controlled by a variable) as a
different effect as a chorus with low volume (and speed controlled by a variable).
If they did, the Korg AX1G would have 80 effects. Those two volumes are
different settings of each other. They counted these two choruses as 1.
(the AX1G doesn't have those 2 chorusses, but has 3 flangers with different volume
counted as one). If they really had intentions for lying they would have said having 80
effects.
However, the Korg AX1G still doesn't have 69 modules, but 69 ways of routing
modules. A chorus controlled by the expression pedal and by a variable can be set up
in two ways: pedal controls the speed of the chorus, the variable the effect depth, and
vice versa. Instead of making another variable for choosing two ways of routing, they
made another 'effect' with another set up of modules.
They did that to improve the simplicity of the box. For beginners it would seem to
difficult if there were 8 settings for each effect (in a box with about 10 effects).
Should a effect box mention the number of different sounds as different effects? Not quite.
As some people have said (like mr Coleman) a diffirent setting is not another effect,
although it produces a different sound.
When getting another sound only by changing a variable, then you've got one
effect. When you've got two different sounding phasers (eg. a vintage type phaser and
a normal one), are these two settings of each other? You could see those two phasers
as a different setting of each other. A variable with two possibilities. Two different
sounding distortions would also be one distortion, you can design you box that way, that
you've got a variable for those two different distortions. Setting A is distortion 1, B is 2.
That way, a multi-effect box can't have more than a limited number of effects. Chorus, flanger,
phaser, wah, distortion, etc. That's about 20 effects. More isn't possible (of course you can
always make up some new ones, but most boxes don't have many of those unique sounds)
Should all multi-effect boxes say they have this number of effects? No. This way the user
can't possibly find out which one to buy.
When mentioning the number of effects of a multi-effect box, you should indicate how
versatile the box is. The AX1G is very versatile, regarding it's price. How do you
express the versatility? It's quite subjective.
Just read this newsgroup and find out which pedal is better. Ask people. When you've
heard many people saying the same thing, you know which is better. That's what
newsgroups are for, aren't they?
Johan Walters
apest...@geocities.com
Patrick F. Coleman
>I think that if you built the box, and found that the EQ for the low-bands were taking up a
>chunk of your box, and the EQ's for the high bands were taking up a seperate chunk of your
>box, and the signal had to be routed through one or the other depending on the external
>settings, you would feel justified in claiming that the total EQ controls could be claimed
>to be two seperate effects, although it may sound like one effect to the user. The effects
>may not be called EQ, however. They might be called "EQ High" and "EQ Low". There are not
>infinite varieties of effects, however, because a change in a high-level EQ to a different
>high-level EQ would still pass the waveform through the same module...and my argument is
>that one module = one effect.
module schmodule.
No I wouldn't feel justified in claiming EQ routing makes two
different effects.
this is techno gobbledegook.
I don't care how it's routed inside.. I expect the manufacturer to
make the EQ work the way EQ works or say... our EQ works differently
which gives you an advantage with this particular unit.. but I would
think he was liar if he said our new circuit really makes this two
EQs.
>If you want to consider that waveforms must be transformed in different ways in order to be
>different effects, then you will have a problem because all waveforms can only be processed
>in one way...pitch/amplitude transformation. So by your arguments, effects boxes are able
>to produce only one effect, and all boxes produce that same effect (with different means of
>handling the variables).
Nonsense.
You don't call tremolo EQ for a very simple reason.. it produces a
specific effect.. same with any other effect.
Is distortion EQ?
Is chorus EQ?
Or is entirely more logical to say.. Here is EQ.. it sets tonal
ranges..
and here is Chorus.. it produces another effect?
If we followed your twisting of my logic, (the logis which has
dictated the different names for all effects since day one, by the
way) then all pedals would be EQ pedals.
How fucking smart is that?
Is this just a troll?
Twang!
You know.. all pickups do the same thing, so there's no sense in
calling them two pickups just because one is single coil and one is
double coil.
ROFLMAO!
Patrick F. Coleman
>before replying read the whole letter first.
>Korg made the interface in a way that you can choose from 69 effects. From their
>point of view it's justified saying it has 69 effects.
>They don't see a chorus with high volume (and speed controlled by a variable) as a
>different effect as a chorus with low volume (and speed controlled by a variable).
>If they did, the Korg AX1G would have 80 effects. Those two volumes are
>different settings of each other. They counted these two choruses as 1.
>(the AX1G doesn't have those 2 chorusses, but has 3 flangers with different volume
>counted as one). If they really had intentions for lying they would have said having 80
>effects.
This is a fair representation as far as it goes.
But they don't have 69 effects, either.
That's still a lie.
Furthermore, they aren't explaining themselves, but are just claiming
69 effects. Ignoring the impression that gives.
>However, the Korg AX1G still doesn't have 69 modules, but 69 ways of routing
>modules. A chorus controlled by the expression pedal and by a variable can be set up
>in two ways: pedal controls the speed of the chorus, the variable the effect depth, and
>vice versa. Instead of making another variable for choosing two ways of routing, they
>made another 'effect' with another set up of modules.
Semantics, still.
variability of control of one effect, is not two effects.
I can vary how my RP7 chorus is manipulated, with or without cc pedal,
but it's still one chorus.
>They did that to improve the simplicity of the box. For beginners it would seem to
>difficult if there were 8 settings for each effect (in a box with about 10 effects).
I could argue this.. certainly I'm no beginner, but choosing from a
menu seems pretty simple to me.
>Should an effect box mention the number of different sounds as different effects? Not quite.
>As some people have said (like mr Coleman) a diffirent setting is not another effect,
>although it produces a different sound.
>When getting another sound only by changing a variable, then you've got one
>effect. When you've got two different sounding phasers (eg. a vintage type phaser and
>a normal one), are these two settings of each other? You could see those two phasers
>as a different setting of each other. A variable with two possibilities. Two different
>sounding distortions would also be one distortion, you can design you box that way, that
>you've got a variable for those two different distortions. Setting A is distortion 1, B is 2.
Digitechs RP7 claims six distortion types to choose from.
They don't imply that they actually have six different effects.. 'to
choose from' means one at a time.
because it's just one distortion.
(ignore for the moment the tube/not tube aspect for claritys sake.)
>That way, a multi-effect box can't have more than a limited number of effects. Chorus, flanger,
>phaser, wah, distortion, etc. That's about 20 effects. More isn't possible (of course you can
>always make up some new ones, but most boxes don't have many of those unique sounds)
>Should all multi-effect boxes say they have this number of effects? No. This way the user
>can't possibly find out which one to buy.
Yeah.
>When mentioning the number of effects of a multi-effect box, you should indicate how
>versatile the box is. The AX1G is very versatile, regarding it's price. How do you
>express the versatility? It's quite subjective.
My opinion is that subjectivity is stretched in Korgs case.
They are not clear at all about their claim. Their claim flies in the
face of industry wide manner of expression. And that, to me, seems
deceptive.
>Just read this newsgroup and find out which pedal is better. Ask people. When you've
>heard many people saying the same thing, you know which is better. That's what
>newsgroups are for, aren't they?
Yes. That and shouting matches.
I agree with most of this, as you can see.
Nice post.
Twang!
Brian Rost
>
> Mark <mcb...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
> >I think that if you built the box, and found that the EQ for the low-bands were taking up a
> >chunk of your box, and the EQ's for the high bands were taking up a seperate chunk of your
> >box, and the signal had to be routed through one or the other depending on the external
> >settings, you would feel justified in claiming that the total EQ controls could be claimed
> >to be two seperate effects, although it may sound like one effect to the user. The effects
> >may not be called EQ, however. They might be called "EQ High" and "EQ Low". There are not
> >infinite varieties of effects, however, because a change in a high-level EQ to a different
> >high-level EQ would still pass the waveform through the same module...and my argument is
> >that one module = one effect.
>
> No I wouldn't feel justified in claiming EQ routing makes two
> different effects.
> this is techno gobbledegook.
> I don't care how it's routed inside.. I expect the manufacturer to
> make the EQ work the way EQ works or say... our EQ works differently
> which gives you an advantage with this particular unit.. but I would
> think he was liar if he said our new circuit really makes this two
> EQs.
>
> >different effects, then you will have a problem because all waveforms can only be processed
> >in one way...pitch/amplitude transformation. So by your arguments, effects boxes are able
> >to produce only one effect, and all boxes produce that same effect (with different means of
> >handling the variables).
>
> You don't call tremolo EQ for a very simple reason.. it produces a
> specific effect.. same with any other effect.
> Is distortion EQ?
> Is chorus EQ?
> Or is entirely more logical to say.. Here is EQ.. it sets tonal
> ranges..
> and here is Chorus.. it produces another effect?
> If we followed your twisting of my logic, (the logis which has
> dictated the different names for all effects since day one, by the
> way) then all pedals would be EQ pedals.
> How fucking smart is that?
>
> Is this just a troll?
> Twang!
> You know.. all pickups do the same thing, so there's no sense in
> calling them two pickups just because one is single coil and one is
> double coil.
> ROFLMAO!
Ever since multi_FX boxes hit the market in the 80s manufacturers have
played specmanship with their tallies of effects.
ALL these boxes have limitations, among them:
1. some effects cannot be used in comjunction with other effects
2. the routing order of effects may be limited
3. the maximum number of effects may depend on which effects you choose
The easiest way to deal with this when making a buying decision is to
make sure you READ THE MANUAL before you buy and find out what the
limitations really are.
--
Brian Rost
3Com Corp.
978-264-1550
br...@synnet.com
*********************************************************************
Playing the bass is like dancing the limbo: how low can you go?
*********************************************************************
Tonefactor
>there were actually 69 different effects
It wouldn't really be 69 effects unless they could use them all at the same
time.
Patrick F. Coleman
who's whining?
>Ever since multi_FX boxes hit the market in the 80s manufacturers have
>played specmanship with their tallies of effects.
Oh. so that makes it ok.
gee scuse me.
>ALL these boxes have limitations, among them:
*snip information not pertinent*
>The easiest way to deal with this when making a buying decision is to
>make sure you READ THE MANUAL before you buy and find out what the
>limitations really are.
Twang!
Not A Speck Of Cereal
[] >make sure you READ THE MANUAL before you buy and find out what the
[] >limitations really are.
[]
[] Twang!
But, these marketing schemes are aimed towards the Newbies. They may
not know to read the manual and even if someone told them, how would
they know what to look for? The only way to make 'em savvy to the
facts is experience or a friend with a goodly amount of time to
explain it all (or threads like this). Without this, the person is
unprepared. . . and the manufactures are taking unfair advantage of
that fact.
Jeff Doucette
Just letting you know that we have some specials on SoundTech gear for
internet customers, please visit my website at:
http://www.smashing-pumpkins.org/sustainpunch/
Thanks very much,
Jeff
------------XxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXx-------------
SustainPunch specializes with:
->Big Muff Pi convertions to the original 69'
series, great smooth sound with more sustain.
->TS-5, TS-9, and TS-10 Tube Screamers mods, many
availible including the "Fullclone" mod.
->Electro-Harmonix "Hot tubes" mod for "Stack"
emulation overdrive.
->Fuzz Face mods for number of enhancements.
I repair, refurbish trade and consign guitar
effects pedals.
Please visit my site at:
http://www.smashing-pumpkins.org/sustainpunch/
Or email me: parad...@usa.net
------------XxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXx-------------
Patrick F. Coleman
>tw...@prairie.lakes.com (Patrick F. Coleman) wrote:
>[]
>[] >The easiest way to deal with this when making a buying decision is to
>[] >make sure you READ THE MANUAL before you buy and find out what the
>[] >limitations really are.
>[]
>[] Twang!
>But, these marketing schemes are aimed towards the Newbies. They may
>not know to read the manual and even if someone told them, how would
>they know what to look for? The only way to make 'em savvy to the
>facts is experience or a friend with a goodly amount of time to
>explain it all (or threads like this). Without this, the person is
>unprepared. . . and the manufactures are taking unfair advantage of
>that fact.
>Eh?
Yah. I put my damn sig in the wrong place.. that's a quote from the
other guy.
Newbies are at a disadvantage for sure, and to me that makes Korgs
manipulation of descriptions even worse.
Twang!
Matthew Gallagher
>>But, these marketing schemes are aimed towards the Newbies. They may
>>not know to read the manual and even if someone told them, how would
>>they know what to look for? The only way to make 'em savvy to the
>>facts is experience or a friend with a goodly amount of time to
>>explain it all (or threads like this). Without this, the person is
>>unprepared. . . and the manufactures are taking unfair advantage of
>>that fact.
>Newbies are at a disadvantage for sure, and to me that makes Korgs
>manipulation of descriptions even worse.
So it's up to non-newbies to help them - right?
After all, isn't the issue not how many effects it does (or doesn't) have, or
even how the manufacturer advertises the thing, but does it have the effects
you want in a package you like (visually and aurally) at a price you're
prepared to pay?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Any opinions expressed are my own (are liable to change) and in
no way represent the opinions, official or otherwise, of my
employer.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBNR+nZlxF0aEv4gSJAQHn6wP+KFZzliy1fbSfcfP1Z/xoDg78SC71N6Xo
LOkit9yhZpx8OLkuk1dNSVZBHwp+D0P2btx1UuPGRGeL3y1AFg4oYOH2p7SQ/TJL
bMIN3mPh8U9Hc8Mrnb825af0DGqSzGJGZphlZpKDWUYyubWgs4r6vo3in8x/J9ey
s/JugyosYWA=
=UkMh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Not A Speck Of Cereal
[] In article <72vr9j$2mj$1...@supernews.com>, tw...@prairie.lakes.com wrote:
[] >>But, these marketing schemes are aimed towards the Newbies. They may
[] >>not know to read the manual and even if someone told them, how would
[] >>they know what to look for? The only way to make 'em savvy to the
[] >>facts is experience or a friend with a goodly amount of time to
[] >>explain it all (or threads like this). Without this, the person is
[] >>unprepared. . . and the manufactures are taking unfair advantage of
[] >>that fact.
[]
[] >Newbies are at a disadvantage for sure, and to me that makes Korgs
[] >manipulation of descriptions even worse.
[]
[] So it's up to non-newbies to help them - right?
As a second course action. Primarily, the manufactures should stop
being such slime-bags (but I reckon that ain't likely)
[] After all, isn't the issue not how many effects it does (or doesn't) have, or
[] even how the manufacturer advertises the thing, but does it have the effects
[] you want in a package you like (visually and aurally) at a price you're
[] prepared to pay?
Again, it may take a person of experience to determine what effects
they've finally decided they need and how much money they're worth.
Eh?
Patrick F. Coleman
>matthew....@bt.com (Matthew Gallagher) wrote:
>[] In article <72vr9j$2mj$1...@supernews.com>, tw...@prairie.lakes.com wrote:
>[] >>But, these marketing schemes are aimed towards the Newbies. They may
>[] >>not know to read the manual and even if someone told them, how would
>[] >>they know what to look for? The only way to make 'em savvy to the
>[] >>facts is experience or a friend with a goodly amount of time to
>[] >>explain it all (or threads like this). Without this, the person is
>[] >>unprepared. . . and the manufactures are taking unfair advantage of
>[] >>that fact.
>[]
>[] >Newbies are at a disadvantage for sure, and to me that makes Korgs
>[] >manipulation of descriptions even worse.
>[]
>[] So it's up to non-newbies to help them - right?
>As a second course action. Primarily, the manufactures should stop
>being such slime-bags (but I reckon that ain't likely)
>[] After all, isn't the issue not how many effects it does (or doesn't) have, or
>[] even how the manufacturer advertises the thing, but does it have the effects
>[] you want in a package you like (visually and aurally) at a price you're
>[] prepared to pay?
>Again, it may take a person of experience to determine what effects
>they've finally decided they need and how much money they're worth.
Yeah. If you can suck in a new guy with claims of a vast number of
effects, he won't worry that he's not getting what he wants or needs.
I don't know what is meant by 'visually', really, I only look down to
step on the button.
If you tell someone you have seven phasers.. and they really are
interested in phase shifting.. but it turns out you just have seven
different settings.. and they could have gotten much better phasing in
a single pedal, or another multi effect, they are going to feel
screwed.
I think it's really important to be as upfront and factual and simple
as possible with entry level stuff.
We all know damn well the guitars sold at Toys R Us or Damark aren't
worth crap.
But the advertising doesn't say so.
Whatever the disagreement on all of this.. I just wish every new
player could log on and see those arguments.
Twang!