Dispelling myths

fretfinder

So are the buffers any good in an old Japanese CE2 and DM2, and what about the buffer in the TS9 reissue? Thanks.

randomhandclaps

 

Pyroman said:

    On a related note,  you could also do what TC does:  Give the owner the option of TB OR buffered via an internal switch.

That's just the lazy option - it's like no-one could be arsed making a decision at the R&D meeting and just went 'meh, let them decide!'.  It's like those pedals that let you use battery or PSU..... 

Serious though I think in the world of TB vs high quality or highly dubious buffers then this is probably the best marketing option.  The obsession of the TGP crowd over pooh-poohing something because it's buffered without actually having tried it is insane, especially when the next page features fawning over a £100+ buffer pedal.

 

ChrisMusic

Commercial interest will always distort the argument, just the same as personal interest does.

There is always a political spin in everything (using political as in  politi = people).  Wherever people express an opinion there is inevitably an editorial bias, whether intentional or not, depending on ones world view.

The TGP thing about true bypass is a little frightening, "sheep like to the altar", it's so much more complicated than that in the real world.  A little understanding goes a long way, and saves hard earned cash as well as your tone being sacrificed on the same altar: of hope, ignorance, and blind faith to the "snake oil" merchants.

It would be so much better, if as @Sporky said, everything was done properly in the first place, by people who understand and care, but commercial interests don't always understand that, let alone even care (thats ignorance and the "bean counters" to thank I recon).  I do share that somewhat Utopian vision though.

One major contribution which the VS Myth Busters make is to make people open their eyes and question things, instead of blindly following the marketing or vested interest lead sheep.  For that alone I applaud then, it shows another path, of enquiring mind over blind faith.

I agree that these videos are not bias free, neither would I expect them to be.  There are a multitude of interesting visual and sound cues supporting their own world view, but I still think they have done a pretty good job overall, and made a valuable contribution for the open minded musicians amongst us.

The whole VS series of; 2 Myth Busters, 5 pedal shootouts and the background to the test methodology are here, if you want to take a look (or listen).

There are so many other variables which have an influence too, but I recon top marks to VS for a damn good try, and keeping it simple.

The guys obviously care about their product and making things better, are playing in the real world, and are not afraid to put it out there for comparison. 

Nice to see its not just crass commercialism for a fast buck, you only have to look at the rest of the music business for that, (for the cynics amongst us).

- As a side note - I liked the Myth Busters TV series on Quest too (some on YouTube FYI).  They tried hard, were entertaining, and occasionally were open to criticisms (usually of methodology or of "show boating"). - But boy what a fantastic day job, getting covered in spit and snot = nul points, >> blowing up a huge American cement truck so that nothing identifiable remains = priceless.  ( We all enjoy a good bang after all )  -  "gis a job guvnor"

edit: to try to make YouTube link work the way I had intended, think that's right now.

@martinw, @Dave_Mc, @randomhandclaps

Cirrus

Could someone let me know whether true bypass or buffered pedals were used in the making of the following songs;

All along the Watchtower - Hendrix

Back in Black - ACDC

Plug in Baby - Muse

Where the Streets have No Name - U2

Be Quiet and Drive  - Deftones

What's the Frequency Kenneth - REM

Paranoid Android - Radiohead

Because I've been enjoying all the above but need to know which ones it's ok to carry on liking.

monquixote

Cirrus said:

Could someone let me know whether true bypass or buffered pedals were used in the making of the following songs;

All along the Watchtower - Hendrix

Back in Black - ACDC

Plug in Baby - Muse

Where the Streets have No Name - U2

Be Quiet and Drive  - Deftones

What's the Frequency Kenneth - REM

Paranoid Android - Radiohead

Because I've been enjoying all the above but need to know which ones it's ok to carry on liking.

I phoned up my buddy the audiophile and told him I'd heard a great joke. 

"Wait until you see me in person" he said "I won't find it funny over this low bitrate phone codec"

Dave_Mc

^ lol

^^^ +1 on what ChrisMusic is saying, that's all I'm trying to say. There are a lot of things you can do to influence people- even the choice of the pedals for the test is important.

You'll note that all those pedals were more expensive than the Visual Sound one- that set the thing up, from the start, as a win-win situation for VS. Now, happily for them, the people liked the VS one the best (the cynic in me wonders how many vids they had to make before that happened, though admittedly as they said, they're all pretty similar pedals apart from the centaur so it's entirely possible that people liked the VS one better; I'd be the first to admit that dearer pedals aren't necessarily better)- but even if they hadn't, Bob Weil also got them to admit that they all sounded pretty similar. That being the case, even had people not preferred the VS, he could say, "The VS pedal wasn't quite as good, but could certainly hang with the others and it's a lot cheaper". It'd have been nice to have a few cheaper pedals in there too (Boss SD1, Digitech Bad Monkey, something like that). But then it's no longer a win-win for VS if the people thought those cheaper pedals could hang, too...

Even deciding how to dial in the pedal- how do you decide that? How do you decide that without bias?

Etc.

I mean, Bob Weil has a degree in business administration (according to VS's site), so if you think he hasn't thought of these things (or been taught these things)... A cynic might also say that more reasonable-sounding, less obviously biased propaganda/advertising is often more successful than more overtly biased stuff, because people are much more suspicious of obvious bias (e.g. totalitarian propaganda versus democratic propaganda in e.g. the cold war and beyond), and anyone with any sense realises that.

So yeah. A good vid, better than most? Sure. A completely ideal, fair, perfect test with no bias? Nope. If such a thing is even possible (and if it is, it'd probably be 8 hours long and put me to sleep).

randomhandclaps said:

Pyroman said:

    On a related note,  you could also do what TC does:  Give the owner the option of TB OR buffered via an internal switch.

That's just the lazy option - it's like no-one could be arsed making a decision at the R&D meeting and just went 'meh, let them decide!'.  It's like those pedals that let you use battery or PSU..... 

Serious though I think in the world of TB vs high quality or highly dubious buffers then this is probably the best marketing option.  The obsession of the TGP crowd over pooh-poohing something because it's buffered without actually having tried it is insane, especially when the next page features fawning over a £100+ buffer pedal.

Yeah the option of both would really be the thing. I suspect what's stopping that is the same thing that's stopping them putting decent buffers into (most) pedals- it'll cost them more, and very few people will notice or care.

And yeah don't even get me started on TGP. Yet another $500 "it's probably a clone" pedal is being fawned over as we speak.

steamabacus

I'm a TC Flashback user and use it with the buffer switched on (in the amp's fx loop) - it's far more consistent and click-free.
I also post occasionally on the TC Electronic user forum - I've seen numerous users with 'problems' relating to bypass balance problems which, when you suggest they switch the unit to buffered bypass, 'mysteriously' disappear!

It makes me wonder why TC don't have the default setting switched to buffer on? True bypass certainly has it's uses but I think, for the average uninitiated hobby guitarist (who buy 99% of the products), a good buffered circuit is a much better option.

Dave_Mc

Also, for example, in the buffer test, they only compared the VS buffer to true bypass- they didn't compare 5 different buffers. It's gonna be a pretty poor buffer which isn't better than none at all, lol.

I guess the gist of what I'm saying is, just because I broadly agree with the findings doesn't mean I necessarily agree with the methodology.

randomhandclaps

Dave_Mc said:

It's gonna be a pretty poor buffer which isn't better than none at all, lol.

In a way that is exactly what they are demonstrating because a host of crap buffer designs have convinced the vast majority that a no buffer is better, hence true bypass's popularity.

Dave_Mc

Absolutely, but I'd still say a fairer test would be a couple of buffers tested, too (in addition to TBP). I mean, they had a klon there, that also has a well-regarded buffer circuit. They could even put a couple of the crap buffers in the test, too.

jimmyd

monquixote;31244" said:

viz said:

And what would happen when the electricity failed?





You take advantage of the darkness to slip out the back. 

As the actress said to the bishop

ICBM

In my opinion the bulk of the reason for the popularity of true bypass is the word 'true'. It *must* be better if it *truly* bypasses the pedal, right?

Language can be a powerful and emotive tool, especially if your market doesn't understand concepts like cable capacitance and emitter-follower gain drop.

hywelg

ICBM said:

In my opinion the bulk of the reason for the popularity of true bypass is the word 'true'. It *must* be better if it *truly* bypasses the pedal, right?

In my case its because it removes one variable. As has been stated already, not all buffers are created equal so what if I buy a pedal and the pedal is great but the buffer is crap? I prefer to remove that from the decision making. If I need a buffer I'll get a standalone unit.

fretfinder

So, what is a good buffer and are the buffers any good in old Boss pedals (CE2 and DM2) and how good is the buffer in a reissue TS9? Thanks in anticipation...

Sporky

hywelg said:

 what if I buy a pedal and the pedal is great but the buffer is crap?

What if it isn't?

More to the point, what are you going to do if the switch fails in a TB pedal?

ICBM

fretfinder said:

So, what is a good buffer and are the buffers any good in old Boss pedals (CE2 and DM2) and how good is the buffer in a reissue TS9? Thanks in anticipation...

Not that good. They're typical single-transistor emitter-followers with slightly less than unity gain - fine in isolation, not so good if you stack half a dozen.

A good buffer should have unity gain (and theoretically an infinite flat frequency response, although that's both technically impossible and not really necessary as long as it covers the normal 'guitar' audio range) and can be easily implemented with either a couple of transistors or an op-amp.

Sporky said:

More to the point, what are you going to do if the switch fails in a TB pedal?

This is one of my main dislikes about true bypass - the 3PDT switches just aren't that reliable... not even as good as the old DPDTs usually used for 'half-bypass plus LED' or 'true bypass with no LED', although contrary to popular belief *can* be used for true bypass with LED as long as you use an extra bit of circuitry, which most boutique builders seem to be unaware of or unwilling to implement.

randomhandclaps

ICBM said:

 

This is one of my main dislikes about true bypass - the 3PDT switches just aren't that reliable... not even as good as the old DPDTs usually used for 'half-bypass plus LED' or 'true bypass with no LED', although contrary to popular belief *can* be used for true bypass with LED as long as you use an extra bit of circuitry, which most boutique builders seem to be unaware of or unwilling to implement.

This is totally a cost cutting exercise.  Personally I hate working with 3PDT as they are almost pre-programmed to fall apart if any rewiring is required - you really need all your ninja soldering skills.  They also crack over time which can cause a breakdown.  However I open up certain boutique pedals to find a 'top of the range' 3PDT footswitch, which are available for around 2/3 of the price of a high quality DPDT.  Then add in the cost of the mosfet, diodes and resistor etc to pull of true bypass with a DPDT.  Yet folks still seem to see a big blue chunk of 3PDT and feel reassured it is the best.  IMO it was not chosen as the best, it was the cheapest and simplest.

Sporky

ICBM said:

This is one of my main dislikes about true bypass - the 3PDT switches just aren't that reliable... not even as good as the old DPDTs usually used for 'half-bypass plus LED' or 'true bypass with no LED', although contrary to popular belief *can* be used for true bypass with LED as long as you use an extra bit of circuitry, which most boutique builders seem to be unaware of or unwilling to implement.

I tried that a few times and never got it to work (though I know of plenty of people who did). PCB layout isn't, from what I've seen, regarded as particularly important by most of the boutiquers - note the number of expensive pedals made on stripboard, or where the PCB isn't even secured in the pedal. I have a whole folder full of PCB design guides - the physical layout isn't as critical as in a valve amp, but can make a difference. Thus for a lot of builders adding another couple of components is a major nightmare.

randomhandclaps said:

  IMO it was not chosen as the best, it was the cheapest and simplest.

The original Fulltone ones and the EHX Blues are actually fairly well made - it's the rush-to-the-bottom that followed that's resulted in 3PDTs turning into crap. But that's what happens when you take a switch that should sell for around £10 and value engineer it down to £3...

hywelg

Sporky said:

More to the point, what are you going to do if the switch fails in a TB pedal?

Never had one fail yet and I'm pretty heavy footed.

The only one I've had problems with was a cheap one I fitted to my Cry Baby to make it TBP with an LED, The replacement Alpha one has been fine so far but I don't rule out my overly hot iron and clumsy soldering technique in the failure of the first one.

ICBM

Sporky said:

I tried that a few times and never got it to work (though I know of plenty of people who did). 

It seems to work well enough in the original ProCo RAT II... I wonder why it didn't for you? Puzzling!

Sporky said:

The original Fulltone ones and the EHX Blues are actually fairly well made

I've had a lot of trouble with Fulltone switches - out of the four Fulltone pedals I owned, three switches broke. To be fair, I also had a three-switch Supa-Trem which didn't... but I didn't own it very long.

I just had to repair another one last week for someone else as well. I actually blame Fulltone for a lot of the marketing crap that goes along with true bypass, as well as the shitty switches. He was one of the first to trumpet it as the cure for all evils.

I've also come across a couple of broken EH ones, but they actually more commonly fail for other reasons, unlike all other true-bypass pedals!

randomhandclaps said:

This is totally a cost cutting exercise.  Personally I hate working with 3PDT as they are almost pre-programmed to fall apart if any rewiring is required - you really need all your ninja soldering skills.  They also crack over time which can cause a breakdown.  However I open up certain boutique pedals to find a 'top of the range' 3PDT footswitch, which are available for around 2/3 of the price of a high quality DPDT.  Then add in the cost of the mosfet, diodes and resistor etc to pull of true bypass with a DPDT.  Yet folks still seem to see a big blue chunk of 3PDT and feel reassured it is the best.  IMO it was not chosen as the best, it was the cheapest and simplest.

The other problem is that buyers have been programmed to not believe it's true bypass unless they see a 3PDT, since it's "known" that you can't do true bypass and an LED without three poles. So it's actually counterproductive from a marketing point of view.

Either this or the cost - or the double whammy - may be why ProCo have switched from their system to a 3PDT on the new RATs.

Personally I really dislike having mechanical switching in the signal path at all, it's a recipe for reliability problems and switching noise. Properly-implemented soft switching is the right way to do it, and just because some companies don't do it quite properly doesn't negate that.