Al Krow

Good man! PS there are a few C4 owners on TB who seem to have tried to get their heads around this issue and given up... might be worth you checking the most recent posts on the TB C4 thread to see if what you're proposing is a more usable solution than theirs.

Good to know that you can do that without owning a C4. The SY-1 was a little less effort to on this one point. From the website: "But with the send/return loop and dedicated mix controls, it’s also possible to blend one or more pedals in parallel" Job done. Now wouldn't it be great if SA could just tell you with a simple "yes" or "no" whether you can loop in parallel without having to download PC software on a pedal you don't even own (which I won't be doing btw)! But hey, I'm just a simple bass player and someone who currently owns 3 bits of SA gear, so no point pandering to the likes of me, eh...😂

Posted this on TB as there are a few more users over there, which I thought was worth sharing: Parallel loops - does the C4 provide for this? Guys - it's not clear to me from from the C4 manual whether the C4 provides for parallel looping with other pedals? I have the AS and it seems to me that the AS manual is pretty clear on this - it can do a series loop but not a parallel loop. The two inputs / outputs do allow for stereo in / out and can also act as a splitter for a mono input. But the loop function on the AS (from the manual) is a much less useful series loop and when the AS is bypassed, the external effect will be out of the circuit and inaccessible. Just wondering whether the C4 is the same as the AS or provides for additional parallel looping? Response from: rsmith601 Boston, MA, President, Source Audio The AS has internal mixing and switching options that we hide from you and present them as a high level list of routing options. It makes sense in a distortion box. In the C4 you get access to all the input and output routings and when used with the voices, you can create a huge list of routing options for yourself. I would suggest studying the Desktop Editor. It's very flexible and powerful. Well that does sounds good, but actually doesn't leave me any the wiser as someone who doesn't have a C4.

Loving this thread!

Agreed the C4 manual is a bit short on detail on this point. In SA's defence their C4 manual is a zillion times more informative than the Boss SY-1 manual!! The best place for info on the SY-1 seems to be the website. I'll leave you boys to revert on whether you manage to actually achieve true parallel looping on the C4 as you both have one and I don't 😉 While I have your attention on this point, would I be correct that there is no looping option available on the FI? For me being able to have the synth in a parallel loop with your drive pedals seems to be a very major plus as it allows the 'clean' synth to be clearly heard but with a parallel blended drive to fatten things up. In series, a driven synth tone is much more of 'mush'! It's been the major reason I've been looking into parallel pedal routing these past couple of months. Anyway I'm there on this feature with the SY-1 and I'll leave you to work out, Darren, whether that means I'm going to like this pedal even more or not 😁

Two problems I see with that: The bigger one is that that it still would not be possible to have the AS actually working as a drive at the same time with this other pedal in parallel for a 'clean' blend of the two. You can only have them in series. The whole point here, for me, is being able to do a parallel blend. The smaller one, which may not be discernible, is that you can no longer engage full bypass of the AS but are using a simulated bypass. But the difference between full and simulated bypass is likely to be small we would hope. Agreed?

It would be nice if it could, but I'm just paraphrasing the SA AS manual in my above post. But you and Peter both have the C4, so it should be fairly easy for one of you to set it up with a pedal in a parallel loop if it's capable of doing that. If it is, however, the same as the AS the looped pedal will be in series and not be accessible when the C4 is bypassed.

Had a quick look through the AS Manual. The two inputs / outputs do allow for stereo in / out and can also act as a splitter for a mono input. But the loop function is the much less useful series rather than parallel loop and when the AS is bypassed, the external effect will be out of the circuit and inaccessible. So I certainly can't put pedals into the AS loop as I have just done above with the SY-1 to deliver a parallel blend and accessibility regardless of whether the SY-1 is bypassed. The C4 manual doesn't seem to give much detail on the operation of the twin inputs / outputs but, given the similar physical layout of the two pedals, I am guessing it will be pretty similar in this to the AS?

Some good deals in the FS and worth keeping an eye out for something decent meeting your budget cropping up. This amp is in budget and has had positive comments from other owners (I've not had one myself, so can't vouch either way).

Spent a couple of hours with my board wiring looking like Spaghetti Junction! But it's a definite improvement putting the bitcrusher and a couple of drives in the SY-1 loop and having a clean synth blended with these others in parallel rather than in series. That's going to be my default setup going forward. Progress!

Er hmmm. Can I just remind folk that some people are willing to pay EXTRA money for that 'crapped* on' look! Apparently like fake [insert anything you like] it adds that elusive "mojo" and makes your audience regard you as some sort of minor god.

WOW!! So you've been letting this gnaw away at your soul for the past SIX and a half YEARS?! 😂😁 Glad you've finally found peace with your last post. EDIT I take it ALL back! The truth is that you had completely forgotten about this until @stewblack dragged this thread up from the deepest darkest dungeon from a time when no one had even heard of 'Brexit'!! to find new life in 2019 by giving it a sneaky 'like' 😊

Yup, there's nothing worse than being a frustrated anti-nerd. Other than perhaps being a frustrated nerd? You have my deepest condolences 😂

Actually that's a pat on the back for GAK for being willing to give you a pretty hassle free exchange. They maybe willing to give you a freebie if you say it's going to save on courier costs etc. See if you can sweet talk them! I'm still waiting for a refund from Bax for a faulty pedal I returned and which they've confirmed they had received back 4 weeks ago and this has required several calls from me to progress!

Hope you get that sorted / a decent response from GAK

I know, but I'm trying to feed you ideas in advance so that we don't breach your nerdometer! 😂

Send / return loop "With the send/return loop and dedicated mix controls, it’s also possible to blend one or more pedals in parallel with the SY-1’s synth voices. For example, you can patch drive pedals in the loop, and then send the combined output to mod, delay, and reverb pedals for overall processing. The send can be used as a direct out as well, enabling you to route synth and guitar sounds to separate destinations." @Woodinblack @fretmeister - you guys given any thought to using the parallel loop capability on yours? Going to be a choice of either a drive pedal or a bitcrusher for me. @Quatschmacher does the two input / two output set up on the SA pedals (e.g. the C4 / Aftershock) provide a similar parallel loop. My understanding is that it works slightly differently by letting you route two inputs to two outputs as a 'flow-through' rather than as a loop - be interested to know what you use you've been making / could think of of putting this to?

My experience with cabs is that there is often a very good correlation between price and quality. I've just tallied the cabs I've tried out since starting out on bass and it comes to 11, which I would split into 6 high-end, 3 mid-range and 2 budget; and the high-end cabs have all been better than the mid-range ones which in turn were a step up from the budget ones. In terms of mid-punch / tone I'd actually rank my BF SC #6 out of the 6 high-end cabs I've had, but it's plenty good enough for me. It is, however, #1 for portability coming in at just 21lbs. Of the 11 cabs I've owned and used, I've held onto three and my BF SC is one them.

Sold Isabelle some music software. Transaction went smoothly and she made prompt payment - all good!

For now. Today. Could be the high point of our season. Always particularly good to beat Man U. But then everyone enjoys beating Man U, right? 😂 You can tell I've been through too many seasons of just "staying up" by the skin of our teeth! Why I posted the league table as it stood 2 hours back. ...and btw Mick you're already out of date within 10 mins of your comment!

Soz mate and apologies. You'll need to understand that as a WHU fan, such moments don't come along that often and have to be shared / savoured! And this one has been on live telly unlike the Sat 3pm ko's. Do you successfully get to MOTD 2 without hearing any news? I've tried in the past and it's blo*ody difficult. Even the fact that the pubs are quiet driving home after band rehearsal after an England world cup match is a giveaway that we've lost...

To my fellow WHUFC fans and the OP in particular: Two Spector basses for us both (right?) and two passed Man U. Sundays don't get much better than this do they? 😂

Is that one you've just bought? If so the new 3 series was only announced in March 2017 (and that was the prompt for this thread in fact!), so yours must have been a relatively early production run soon after they were announced. I actually bought my BB 1025 in Jan 2018. But the headstock number starts with HLX which puts its date of manufacture at Oct 2015. Apparently it was the very last of these available in Europe according to the Yammy store, or so they told me!, and they were at least offering them at pretty decent end of line discounts. What got me thinking about this was a recent Spector bass purchase and the retailer disclosing that it was a 2015/16 year of manufacture when I was getting some background information on it. (I've since pinned it down to Sept 2016). Well that gave me reasonable ammo to negotiate, 'cos it was clearly 'New Old Stock' rather than a brand new bass. Certainly something I will be more aware of going forward! Overwhelming view from fellow BC'ers and TB'ers is that they year of manufacture is the relevant date: https://www.talkbass.com/threads/whats-the-relevant-age-for-a-bass.1418849/

Please remind me to sign up as soon I get an FI!

Let's please not get overly technical here. The MAIN point in all this, is that the DG is prettier, right? 😂