Al Krow

If Handbox did an R-600 or R-750 I'd get one tomorrow as I typically play without PA support. So my hesitation is 8 ohm cab = limited to around 200W with the R-400. Wat can't you put in a word? 😉

+1^^ for old school Mesa. Only small "disagreement" is that for me the Mesa M6 is fantastic: I've not come across anything better yet; but clearly my cleanliness doesn't match up to thodriks...😁

Congrats on the new bass!! Looks great and I bet it sounds and plays great too. Even more so if this is a step up from your previous Elrick Evo5 which you're going to no disagreement from me when you say it "was a wonderful bass"! 😊 Must admit I'd not really come across the Elrick brand before your previous Evo5 ad, but Rob Elrick's workmanship is definitely worth folk checking out if they get a chance. The quality and sound is right up there with the very best.

@Sarah5string you've just made my day! It's not 'cos you're using a beatbuddy mini for practicing, but rather because I've often wondered who the BC'er was who started this fantastic and enduring thread, which you'd not been on for a long while: What are you listening to right now? - General Discussion - Basschat And also 'cos Cannock is up the road from where I grew up 😊

Very useful to get this balanced perspective / alternative view from @andruca

None of the Zoom models will provide a sequence/arpeggiator with a tap tempo function but they do cover a lot of other ground and they're all very good value. I've had a couple of MS-60Bs, a B3N and a B1-4X along the way but have finally settled on the B1-4 which is sitting at the heart of my board and I'm enjoying a lot (plus a spare for use as a portable headphone amp & preamp). I posted a fairly detailed comparison of the MS-60B and B1-4 at the start of this thread, if it's of any interest.

Hah! I knew you would pick up on that, hence my including the word "otherwise" 😊 You can have the same CPU but with different amounts of memory, right? I mean, mobile phones do that all the time. We need to bring in the cavalry here! @jimfist - do you have any insight / gossip on whether the same CPU with same DSP is in both the B3n and B1-4?

Cheers Woody. The B3n has larger form factor metal housing, 3 displays, larger patch memory storage, more flappy padels and 3 Stomp switches plus the option of stereo out (not requiring a TRS). I would have thought that would have accounted for a big chunk of the price difference? My understanding has always been that the B1-4 was otherwise using exactly the same chipset as the B3n. If it's not, that would be interesting news.

Yeah, agreed. I was just trying to think of how/where someone might actually make use of the stereo in a band mix, which is how the discussion arose,: But I think we've concluded that's likely to be a non-point based on the fact that we have a full mono output with a normal (TS) bass lead to an amp which is how most of us have it set up for live use. The storm in my tea cup has certainly subsided, and the tea now satisfyingly consumed! All good.

A lot? 😂 My knowledge is pretty limited on TRS cables, defo not my specialist subject - haha! I know that I need to use a TRS cable to connect an expression pedal or additional foot switches, and that I've had a Y cable that was TRS to tip and rim, but that's about it really! But I think there are a couple of useful takeaways from the discussion: 1. If we're using a "stereo" effect in any of our B1-4 patches with a normal (TS) cable then you're not going to have an issue. (This is relevant to most of us). This was the concern (not specific to the B1-4) you raised about us being lost in the mix - I think based on the discussion it's safe to conclude that this shouldn't be a problem for us if we're using a normal bass lead or wireless. 2. If you use a TRS cable you might be able to get stereo output if you are bi-amping. (I guess this may be relevant and of interest to some users, but certainly not something I'll likely be doing any time soon). That would seem to limit the benefit of any possible stereo out quite a lot, for folk looking to make use of it. But it's been an interesting / useful deep dive on this point, so I'm glad you brought it up.

Thanks John - must admit I haven't come across anyone mentioning that the B1-4, or its stable mates, is capable of anything as sophisticated as you're suggesting. The manual indicates it's stereo for headphones as Woody has noted above: "OUTPUT: Standard stereo phone jack (combined line/headphone) Maximum output level: Line +2 dBu (10 kΩ or more output impedance) Headphones 17 mW + 17 mW (32 Ω load)" But given that it can provide stereo for headphones it does raise the interesting question of whether stereo might also be available via TRS as you suggest? But that's well above my pay grade to answer! 😁 The flip side is for those of us using normal TS cables to mono rigs: we shouldn't need to be concerned about using individual stereo fx in our patches i.e. just choose whichever individual effects we best like the sound of.

Ok. But as there is only a mono output from the Zoom B1-4 (and I'm guessing with most of the Zoom multifx pedals) so I'm not entirely clear whether your point would still apply? i.e. I don't think the stereo fx are "truly" stereo - more simply trying to emulate what a stereo fx might sound like through a mono rig. So I'm not sure we need to be worried about using the "stereo" Zoom effects in our patches? But happy to be corrected it that's wrong!

Fantastic! Terrible! 😂

You raise an interesting point about stereo effects going into mono rigs. Must admit I've not come across any phase issues so far - I find it's, for example, swamped by the phasing on the chorus effect itself, but I'll keep an ear out for it. Has it been particularly noticeable on any particular patches you've created? I guess similar to concerns which have been raised about "comb filtering" arising when running a digital effect in parallel to an analogue one or when using fx loops - in practice I've struggled to hear anything noticeable, but I guess these things can all incrementally add up.

Fyi I use the term "presence" to mirror the usage by a number of amp and pedal manufacturers i.e. a boost to the high mids and treble, so the Presence patch in the OP library is doing exactly that. For what you're after, I think you're looking for something a bit more "Royal Blood". Which Zoom model do you have? If you have a B1-4, you could try the Atreides patch from the patch library. If you have a different model, you can put one together using the following individual effects: [Start of chain] Comp --> Ocatve down --> RAT (Squeak) --> Stereo chorus --> Zoom noise reduction (ZNR) [End of chain].

@moley6knipe nice board. Have you tried the tuner on the Lekato looper? Just wondering if it's on a par with your Boss?

Thanks for sharing those John. I'm away from my kit right now to try these out, but looking forward to auditioning both patches, and I'll, of course, include them in the OP patch library. I need to refresh my memory about the Free & Bad Company patches, was that a while back?

You're completely welcome! I almost daren't ask, but that sounds like a happy news story you're sharing with us? If so, that's fantastic news!

Not encountered any real issues at all switching between active and passive basses, in fact I'm loving the WL-20s. Only drawback is that it won't fit some of the front recessed jack sockets, in particular my Ibanez SRs, so I'm using a lead with those.

Si just sold me a bass I didn't need at a price I couldn't refuse! It's a superb, lesser known, bass and one that I wouldn't have dared buy new. Transaction was very smooth including meeting up in person. Been a pleasure dealing with Si.

Sold PJ a gig bag. Whole process was super smooth, including the usual dodgy time honoured BC meet-up in person routine, but this time as a moderated threesome (four if car passengers included). I would have no hesitation transacting with Patrick again.

@JohnDaBass - as promised, I've uploaded a big chunk (twenty) of my user created patches onto a patch library. Please see the opening post. Any fellow BC'ers should please feel free to add any that they would would like to share - please simply upload as you go along and I'll add any B1-4 patches into the OP or provide a link to your post there in the case of B1-4(X) and B3N patches. Hope this becomes a useful and fun resource for us!

Yeah I guess you need to watch out for that, but as I pretty much only ever tune up before we start playing live and then a quick check during a set break, it's not something I've ever had to worry about. The led metering is really helpful though for dark stages!

Nope - I'm saying the BB NE1 and NE2 bore his name. On the onboard preamp you don't get a choice of "shallow", "deep" "flat" options so if Nathan had to pick one EQ curve for his NE model bass you'd guess his favourite? I'm not really saying anything about the 604/605, other than if the 604 recently sold was a "604 NE1" (as described) then it may well have the same pre-amp NE circuit as on the BB NE1 / NE2.

The BB NE1 and NE2 onboard preamps don't have the Q control allowing different EQ curve patterns i.e. they have a fixed Q. Our previous thinking on this was that the basses that bore his name would very likely have hardwired the "Deep-4" setting given that this was his favourite. You ask why would Yamaha put the same EQ into the 604/5 as their other high-end basses? Good question. But no different as to why is a BB1025 almost identical to a BB2025, but costs a fraction of the price, I guess!