NPD: Posh DD2.

professorben

I had a DSD-3 which iirc has the DD-2 chip, was a nice delay, didn't sound anything more or less amazing than the delays on my 11r tho. 
I think it's easy to buy into the nostalgia/hype/vibe for certain pedals, but really it's just a delay, it's not gonna make me play any better. 

Teetonetal

professorben said:

I had a DSD-3 which iirc has the DD-2 chip, was a nice delay, didn't sound anything more or less amazing than the delays on my 11r tho. 
I think it's easy to buy into the nostalgia/hype/vibe for certain pedals, but really it's just a delay, it's not gonna make me play any better. 

Disagree, having the right sound does make you play better. There is nothing worse than fighting your sound. Some pedals just seem to work better than others, I find with delay some pedals, I just can't get them to sit right in the mix, or get the amount of  modulation right.

Flight time was a great example of that, by itself I thought it was wonderful, in the band, I felt I was constantly having a battle to get it right at soundcheck. vs the dd500 being more or less plug an play.

GavRichList

Would love to A/B against the Moogerfooger. Congrats - echo the notion that it's worth as much as you think it's worth - the MF104M for example; not as much, but still a huge expense, yet it brings me more joy than any other pedal I've tried by a distance, so to me, it's worth it. 

DesVegas

For that price i'd want Pete to put my name on a bit of dymo at the very least 

slacker

Congrats on the pedal and a little story...

Years ago my i knew someone who played guitar and not being able to afford a delay, rigged up an Akai reel to reel. He then saved up and bought a DM2, which was an improvement. Then then got one of the first DD2's, which was also an improvement. I even agreed at the time.

Tastes and sounds change. The comment about sitting in the mix is spot on. If a 1300 delay makes one play guitar more than play with knobs (sic) then go for it.

mattdavis

slight tangent and apologies for stupidity - are modern dd3s spec'd very differently to older ones? And do the modern dd3s use significantly different components to dd7s? I've had a DD3 for 10 years or so - got very used to it and love it. I tried the dd7 for some more features etc etc but just couldn't quite gel with it (and never used any of said extra features...). I'm certainly not a particular cork-sniffing-tone-hound type but there was discernible significant difference in the basic digital sounds of the dd7 v the dd3. Not 'bad' different, just different, and I never felt quite right playing it..

ICBM

mattdavis said:

slight tangent and apologies for stupidity - are modern dd3s spec'd very differently to older ones?

Yes. Or at least - not 'spec'd', they are supposedly the same, but they use a different delay chip and they do sound different.

mattdavis said:

And do the modern dd3s use significantly different components to dd7s?

Yes, very much - and more importantly, completely different signal routing.

On the DD-2 and DD-3, the *only* part that's digital is the actual delay line itself - all the rest, including even the feedback loop, is analogue. That's why it's possible for Cornish to use one as the basis for a tape-echo simulator by adding filtering in the feedback loop as well as modulating the delay time - which also changes smoothly on the 2 and 3, but goes in little steps on the 7.

On the DD-5 and later the entire wet side of the delay is in the digital domain including the feedback loop - although as far as I know in all of them the dry mix is still analogue.

The DD-2/3 is also 12-bit processing (even on the new-chip ones as far as I know), whereas the later ones are 16.

mattdavis

Cheers @ICBM ;