Al Krow

53 minutes ago, MichaelDean said:

No, you can do all of the input gain and waveform stuff too!

 

Start at page 73 of the manual. 

Ok thanks! This thing is ridiculously cool! 

Is that a step up from Helix @BigRedX, or pretty much the same on there?

28 minutes ago, TimR said:

 

It applies to all instruments. 

 

Keyboard players who insist on being in stereo and drummers who expect their kick drum to knock down tall buildings. 

One of the massive advantages of having everything going through the desk & FoH? And if the venue says can you turn it down a bit / take it up you can oblige at the push of a slider.

On 26/12/2025 at 12:30, chris_b said:

Lots of good ideas for working with your current gear. . . . but, how about buying a better bass, or a good preamp pedal to add more clarity and definition to your sound.

Agreed that a good pre-amp pedal, whether as a standalone or as part of a multifx, could make a positive difference, particularly if it also has decent EQ options that aren't available on the bass, amp, or desk.

A "better bass" is a can of worms though! Could potentially be money very poorly spent, particularly if the OP is already happy with his current bass.

9 hours ago, jimmyb625 said:

That's the same setup I used to have (except for the 310's). It's a great rig for the price.

I eventually got hold of a 315s as there was a b-stock item going for a ridiculous price (£120 off the top of my head). It's good, but definitely not as easy to move around as the 312s.

We've got a sub on our wish list now that we've got a band member who is able to store and transport it!

I appreciate a single 15" sub is usually considered inferior to two 12". But did you notice a significant improvement of the 15" over a single 12"?

1 hour ago, MrDinsdale said:

A lot of multifx I’ve tried support some form of parameter assignment to midi and physical switches/expression pedals however I’ve not seen any others (or at least worked out how to do it) that allowed parameters to be assigned to input/output levels or oscillators etc.

In the case of our Boss multis it's just the former though, right? Ie assigning parameters to the knobs and expression pedal? 

2 hours ago, MrDinsdale said:

The only one I’ve found that let you do stuff like binding parameters to input levels or oscillating waves was the MOD Dwarf. The Dwarf was way deeper in what it allowed but with a significantly steeper learning curve.

 

The Dwarf also allowed you to do crazy stuff with its CV system allowing to set random value generators and stuff like that.

Ah interesting. For some reason I thought Helix allowed parameter assigns? Do you know if that is the case, if not be very easy to check with @BigRedX who is a bit of a Helix expert?

13 hours ago, MrDinsdale said:

Parameter assigns are great wish more multifx's had similar functionality. Being able to tie parameters to input level or to waveforms is very cool, especially when you want to do something a little out of the ordinary. 

Agreed! Which multi-fx have you come across that don't allow parameter assigns?

1 hour ago, tegs07 said:

I am not sure how much these comparisons really mean. There will be small differences but with the same pickups*, player, rig etc the basses will all be pretty much identical. What really matters is how comfortable the bass is to play, be that weight, shape, neck dimensions etc, then reliably - quality wiring and hardware may save some embarrassment, then aesthetics. An MDF table would serve the same function as a teak or oak one but might not look as nice or last as long.
 

* Even this is relative and subjective. Most basses that are mass produced have fairly similar pickups eg I doubt if I could tell a Mex P from a US P or a Yamaha BB when played through the same rig. They would all sound like P basses.

100% ^^

How a particular bass sounds in the mix may actually not differ that much but, equally, there's an unmistakable signature sound to some of the greats eg John Entwistle. For me, the quality of the pups and electronics makes the biggest difference here. YMMV!

Playability of basses on the other hand is another thing: weight, balance/neck dive, string spacing, neck thickness, how a bass sits on your frame etc. Can individually,  and certainly together, make a real difference to how comfortable and enjoyable a bass is to play. 

Would it be fair to say, as a rule of thumb, that the really budget basses don't major on playability? But also that playability won't necessarily improve much beyond midrange bass prices and you then start increasingly paying for branding and/or craftsmanship of boutique basses?

Also love the fact that some (definitely not all!) of the most successful musicians in the world played basses that many average gigging bassists could have afforded when those basses were in production. And for no other reason than they loved them eg Paul McCartney with his Hofner and Yamaha BB and Tina Weymouth another Hofner player are two that immediately come to mind, and I'm sure we can think of plenty of others?

Could be a fun blindfold test to do at a future bass bash? The clip has had 172k views in 2 weeks - clearly a topic of interest! 

2 hours ago, Al Krow said:

For both of us...

@LukeFRC can you can let us know what line of work you're in? Just askin' for a mate...

1 hour ago, krispn said:

But one pedal looks.so.sad😢

Ah, just add a tuner and a wireless and no one will know!

1 hour ago, LukeFRC said:

Just for clarity …

 

AI as in artificial intelligence, or Al as in short for Al Krow? On my phone a uppercase i and lowercase L are the same.

 

I mean if Al Krow did come steal my job, it would be, to quote him , a game changer’ 

For both of us...

2 hours ago, krispn said:

It’s more that I simply don’t need it 😀 

I have a cab m with loads of great IR’s (really like the Mesa cabs pack) which really sound great for FOH/IEM mixes!

 

Ultimately there’s just the fear of pedal board ego death. If one pedal can do what I need then everything else is redundant which I’ve loving and painstakingly curated over a few years.
 

But yeah I’ll likely just buy one in jan when my Monzo 1p saving challenge finishes. 
I might even nab the matching compressor too.  

"Pedal board ego death" - love that phrase!!

Ah it's not such a bad thing! I think I'm having the same epiphany with a Boss GX10 multifx which, so far seems to be able to do so many things really well, and a number of things well enough (with the one exception so far of synth) that the ensuing pedal board cull is likely going to pay for this new unit multiple times over!

And actually very liberating taking just one, albeit very capable, pedal to gigs!

Interesting to pick up on this. Our singer mentioned on Sat night she only used one ear piece and left the other one out "otherwise she felt disconnected from the band and audience" - which is a classic IEM conundrum.

It doesn't affect me at all in the same way - I enjoy the clarity and comfort of having a tailored IEM mix and no one's complaining about missing out on the experience of a deafening guitar amp - ok maybe the occasional dep guitarist - now we're all going through FoH apart from the acoustic drums.

I don't really fancy the additional set-up faff and need to worry about an additional source of feedback from an ambient / overhead mic, just for the sake of one band member, but was wondering if there's decent ambient IEMs on a par with the KZ ZARs we're using, that don't cost the earth, and she can treat herself to a pair?

Parameter assignment

Nice YT review by this bassist who's a regular on Talkbass. Some really cool things to be done with parameter assignment, which is something I've just started scratching the surface on - was reminded of this clip by @MichaelDean's above post and I think Sean is using quite a lot of the same fx patches to build up his organ sound? I've started the clip at 06.22, to dive straight into the relevant bit re. parameter assignment.

Seems that Sean is also in agreement with me about the Overtone block being decent for polyphonic octave up - and he's definitely got me interested in checking out the Ring mod block! 😊

I'm a complete novice when it comes to midi, but it seems to me that being able to control up to 20 different parameters at one go with any of the footswitches or the expression pedal gives a level of control comparable to most midi set-ups? Be interested if those of you more versed in midi than me would agree? 

Looing forward to finding out if Santa has got anything up his sleeve that's going to make the cut into any of your "best of 2025"?!

Have a fab Christmas all!

I'm using the PS for +/- 1 and +/- 2 semis - works just fine! It struggles with +12 semis for octave up though which is where the "Overtone" fx comes into its own. Still not perfect or as clean as the dedicated Boss XS-1 for octave up, but certainly usable and the full patch, as outlined above, with amp sim and GEQ in the chain is a tasty tone thickener - very Fishman Powerchord!

Actually that kinda summarises some of the key pros & cons of the Boss multi-fx vs dedicated Boss pitch shift pedals:

• Boss XS-1: accurate pitch shifting without undue "flubbiness" for +/- 3 to 4 semis. A number of users have commented it's one of the best octave-up pedals around. But only able to do one interval at a time (albeit can mix wet and dry volumes). Whammy capability with external expression pedal. Couple of presets possible with external footswitch. Compact format.
• Boss XS-100: as XS-1 plus built in expression pedal for whammy-style effects. Multiple presets. Still only one interval at a time possible.

• GX10: decent, but more limited "usable" pitch shift range. Presets plus expression pedal can be assigned to any fx parameter. Fishman Powerchord tone thickening available with Overtone patch.

18 minutes ago, Woodinblack said:

...which the XE-1 can do.

Before folk start wondering, the XE sounds like an old Jag model to me? Time for a bit of Xmas XS? 😅

1 hour ago, Woodinblack said:

 

Yeh, thats the same on the ME-90B as you would expect (same company), just that the pitch shift isn't in the same league as the XE-1, certainly not up to a couple of semitones below a drop D as a solo instrument live.

Just had a quick play on with pitch shift set to -2 semis fully wet, and GX10 seems to comfortably handle taking down the low E by a couple of semis in terms of a usable-in-the-mix bass. What are you finding with the ME-90B?

Being able to assign the expression pedal to dictate the amount of gain on drive patches to take it from mild to full-on drive is also very neat. 

Essentially you have the option of assigning the expression pedal to any parameter of any particular fx in the chain. Possibilities are endless...

All this stuff is obviously do-able on the Core with an external expression pedal, but having one on the pedal itself definitely focuses the mind on the additional possibilities.

6 hours ago, uk_lefty said:

I've been reading this thread with interest... I've been using a Headrush MX5 for a few months now which is the same "form factor" as the GX10 and also has a touch screen. I'm really impressed with it, mainly for the touch screen and how easy it is to create and edit patches. I will probably sell it and replace with a GX10 purely because I prefer the Boss bass amp simulations. This would mean that my ME-90B is going too. I'd be ok with that, while I really enjoy the ME-90B for it's simplicity I hadn't experienced touch screen digital effects. A GX10 will cover me for guitar and bass. I've also got the Headrush on a small pedalboard so I can have my wireless and vocal FX mounted with it, a GX10 would just slot in as a direct replacement...

Have to agree with you - the amp sims on the Boss are very good! My GT Core's main function was as an always on preamp with added fx thrown in for occasional use, with a very decent tuner. Boss do make it easy to get a great bass tone with little faff.

1 hour ago, Woodinblack said:

 

So is your GX10 pitch shift s good as the XS-1 (and 100)?

Nope!

But it's surprisingly usable for +1 / -1 and +2 / -2 semis (using the pitch shift fx) which is predominantly what I'll need to handle key changes between our soprano and alto singers who separately front the band. (Not sure why I didn't discover this on the GT Core?) 

I wouldn't want to go further, whereas with the dedicated pedals you can go down/up a bit further to +/- 3 or 4 semis.

The poly octave down is good!

There's a few options for octave up on the GX10 (which the XS-1 and 100 do very well). I found a couple of them (Harmonist and Pitch Shift) are pretty bad when used for this.

But the "overtone" patch is very usable for octave up. It allows you to simultaneously have octave down and up,  with independent volume levels for each, very similar to the OC5, which gives a tasteful thickening-up of the bass. But additionally on the GX10 you can then also add in a detune and, very neatly, set the expression pedal to control the volume of eg just the octave up (with min and max set which ever way around you want to use the expression pedal), which could be fun / useful live.

On 27/08/2025 at 15:15, Al Krow said:

Anyone managed to get a decent pitch shift +/- 1 or 2 semis on their Cores?

And in answer to my own question, have managed to get some decently usable pitch shift patches on my GX10 ( and making me ponder whether to hold onto my dedicated Boss pitch shift pedals - OC5, XS-1 and XS-100?)

I've taken the liberty of widening this thread to GX10 users given the similarity of the patches and Boss editing software.

2 hours ago, Steve Browning said:

Another brilliant evening with the XR18 and Altos. The sound is just so clear, and fine tuning for the room is such a doddle. 

 

So glad I made the (modest) investment. 

Nice one Steve. Remind me which Altos you're using?