jimfist

Make that 3 of us! From one "fist" to another (Jim-to-Ham), what you've described is exactly what I go for in compression. I agree that far too many pedals just don't accommodate slower attack times. I went through the Spectracomp, and the Hypergravity is definitely more hands-on friendly. Recently I got the Source Audio Atlas and am really liking the results. Since the Atlas has 3 onboard preset switches, I was able to dial in presets for each of my gigging basses (the Atlas also has EQ). I did need to fuss with the settings in the Atlas software editor to get what I like, naturally. I play equally with pick and fingers (slapping a rarity these days), and the slow attack is really key for pick playing IMO.

Just wanted to chime in here. Got an Atlas a couple weeks ago and finally gigged with it last night. In short, it's a totally legit, high quality compressor/limiter. My 'very good' sound is now even better. Not surprising given Source Audio's track record of producing some very cool pedals. Yes, for tweaking and crafting settings, the software editor is a must-have. I've got my pedal tweaked so that it is essentially set-and-forget.

Glad you're also liking the the B6. I'm using an old laptop bag for my B6. Fits like a glove.

Apologies. My reply was for @Nicholox.

Have you tried messing with the DRY parameter of the FX Loop (or FX Send)? As I understand it, the DRY parameter addresses the volume that passes through to its output (from 0-100).

Most multi-effect modelers include some bass amp models & cab sims, in varying degrees, pretty much across all price points. It's really just a matter of cost and form factor, unless you really need a broad variety of bass amp models to choose from. Most current multi-fx modelers allow you to upload 3rd party Impulse Responses (IR), so if a broad selection of bass cab sims isn't on board, you can purchase those cabinet sim types and load them. I'd recommend you find your price point, then do an internet search for multi-effects modelers, and take a look at the available bass amps/cabs they offer: Line 6 Boss Fractal Audio Systems Neural DSP Kemper Profiling Amp Zoom Nux Hotone Headrush Mooer

Well, certainly the BassBox is for the nuts-and-bolts of the bass tone, with compression & OD boost thrown in for good measure. What is it that you're looking for in a different pedal? The B6 has its strengths and weaknesses, as does the Quad Cortex. I've been gigging with the B6, so it definitely works for me...but....I'm not you. I also find that the BassBox in conjunction with the B6 (as a last-in-chain amp/cab sim) is a powerful combination that won't break the bank.

There are many in agreement regarding using pure DI + EQ + COMP at the mixing desk for bass tone. No doubt this has been done for decades and continues to be done. Cabinet IR technology is just another tool for those who wish to use it, and there are many reasons why one would want to consider it. I can't count how many discussions there have been weighing 'mic'd cabinet' vs. 'DI', or a combination of both, as a means to get their bass sound to a mixing desk. IR technology simply merges the two techniques so you can have a mic'd cabinet in a DI form that is extremely versatile and practical. Like it...or not. Use it....or not.

Yes, except for the part about the IR itself responding to dynamic input. This is not the case. A cabinet IR is nothing more than a tonal overlay filter - a complex EQ footprint, digitally captured as a .wav file, to be used by digital processors that implement IR (player) technology. There may be devices that use the cab IR as an EQ/filter component of a broader cabinet simulation process that is dynamic, but by itself the IR is not a dynamic element. The dynamic elements that help really bring a speaker system (guitar or bass amp) to life can happen between the (tube) head and the physical speaker. For that reason, there are now "load boxes" with IR technology, designed to capture this dynamic interaction, but replacing the real-world mic'ing of the speaker with the cab IR. Fractal Audio Systems - in particular their latest flagship products AxeFXIII and FM9 - has made tremendous strides in modeling the entire 'preamp - power amp - speaker cabinet/IR' signal chain interactivity, to the point where it is scary close to what you get sonically using real-world gear. 10 years ago, not many bassists were much interested in going the cab IR route, but as the technology and quality improves, we're seeing more and more jump on the bandwagon.

No disagreement from me there, and I've found that even with compressors designed or tuned for bass, they may subjectively only "work well" when tweaked and tweaked again. Compression is an evasive beast, sometimes far too subtle (when well-applied) for many to justify using it. My suggestion regarding the SA Atlas is based on a couple of things: Source Audio = high quality gear; it has a lot of flexibility = broad range of compression types. It's also not terribly expensive. It may lack in the visual feedback category, as it doesn't have a full meter bridge. But otherwise a feature-packed, quality comp pedal. Of course, there are a gazillion options. I just felt flexibility might be a good thing....assuming one is dedicated to spending the time on the process.

If you really want to get familiar with the breadth and depth of compressor-dom, then I'd personally lay out the cash of the new Atlas compressor. It has pretty much everything you'd want in a pedal comp, with many different types of comp represented and lots of parameters to tweak. And because of this, I'd spend a good, long time digesting what it can do. Again, if you really, really want to dig in, spend the time to learn. I crossed that bridge long ago, but if I hadn't and were in your shoes today, this is what I'd do.

Yes, I remember when this was going on, and the thread died quite a few years ago. Perhaps I'll reach out. Although it would eat up the control input, I'd be satisfied if Zoom just had a global setting allowing a pair of momentary switches on a TRS cable to control Bank up/down function in lieu of an exp pedal. Not ideal as a solution but a reasonable one, and it would generally work for me.

Some post-gig thoughts... The gig was a restaurant/bar full of people which meant we couldn't do any semblance of a full sound-check, unfortunately. Quick line check, levels and off to the races. It was a mess for a few songs, but eventually things settled in. I found that making on-the-fly changes on the B6 was pretty easy when time allowed. The B6 was great in terms of sound, and the high visibility of the touch screen is really a substantial upgrade that I only really appreciate now that I've gigged the unit. Huge HUGE gripe is the switching of banks while in MEMORY mode. Far too much tap dancing needed to simply go up/down one bank (and I only really need 3 banks for all my sounds). Instead, I opted for the bank up/down arrows on the touch screen in MEMORY mode. Would rather not have to reach down to the pedal to do this, but better than doing the riverdance. All-in-all, though, a very positive experience, even under difficult circumstances and in a venue with not-so-good acoustics.

For me, general rule of when creating sounds at lower volume: avoid the Fletcher-Munson pitfalls - reduce low end and top end. Midrange is where it's at. I've been at this for over a decade, tweaking modelers in full-range speaker systems so that they sound good on stage and in the main PA. With enough gigs and rehearsals under your belt, you eventually get a feel for the tonal ranges that work for your application and style of music. No doubt, there's a significant learning curve that I'm happy not to have to re-live.

Looks like this IR pack has two bass cabinet IRs: 29 JsC15N_1 Jensen C15N - Vintage Series, 50W, Ceramic Magnet. Vintage-style 1x15 Bass Reflex Ported Enclosure, Birch Plywood cabinet and baffle. Dynamic: Cap Edge 30 JsC15N_2 Jensen C15N - Vintage Series, 50W, Ceramic Magnet. Vintage-style 1x15 Bass Reflex Ported Enclosure, with 1" Compression Driver. Birch Plywood cabinet and baffle. Dynamic: Cap Edge Condenser: Tweeter It's nice to have options, and sometimes the guitar speaker IRs can sound good for bass, too. Hopefully this is a sign that someday we'll see a firmware update with some new stuff for the B6, and maybe some operational tweaks. I'm not holding my breath, though, and pretty happy as-is right now.

The B6 performed well for me at rehearsal last night. No issues whatsoever, but did need to do some tweaks to some of the patches to adjust tone and level. It's true, that the best way to create sounds and balance them is in context at full rehearsal/gig volume. There's just no substitute IMO. Gig is on Saturday, so we'll see how things a feeling after a full night of using the new box. So far, so good.

Rehearsal and gig this week. Maiden voyage with the B6 in full band context. Found an old laptop soft case that fits the B6 perfectly. Will report on how it fares as the new kid on the block.

Yes, of course there are endless choices of amps that can be used for bass, and that can sound good DEPENDING ON what it is you're looking for in a tone. But that's never been the issue many have had with Fractal Audio. Bassists have their preferred amp/cab combinations, just as guitarists do. The fact is that with Fractal stuff, if I want the tone of an iconic amp such as an Acoustic 360 or SWR RedHead or GK 800RB, I'm out of luck OR I have to figure out convoluted ways to try to recreate these sounds from scratch. We're not talking about odd-ball choices here. We're talking about some of the most popular and desirable bass amps ever produced, many of which will likely NEVER be part of Fractal's amp model choices. So this is where alternative modelers have appeal vs. Fractal Audio, when they offer a broader selection of bass amps, preamps, and effects/stomps. Zoom and Line 6 offer more for bassists, and with the Kemper or Quad Cortex, you can either profile your rig or use someone else's profile that is shared throughout their community. The reason why this gets brought up about Fractal is that it seems to be a missed opportunity to court the bass community...and it's a shame they don't really seem to care much. That said, I'd love to own a FM9.

I used to own the AxeFxII, from the time it was released up until around 2005. As with just about everything Fractal Audio makes, it was a world class piece of gear. I can only imagine how much better the AxeFxIII is by comparison. From all I've read and heard, it is very much improved, both sonically and functionally. I have my eye on the FM9, though production has come to a halt due to supply-chain issues for components. Patiently waiting. It's very pricey stuff, but worth every penny. Very sophisticated engineering and capabilities. My only gripe, and it's a longtime issue bassists have had with Fractal Audio, is that their bass support (in the form of updates and/or additions to their very small list of bass amps/stomps/fx) has always been lacking. It is rare indeed to see Fractal introduce anything new for bass, and bassists are encouraged to branch out into trying guitar amp models...and quit complaining. If only Fractal had Gallien-Krueger, SWR, Trace Elliot, Acoustic, MarkBass, Sunn and other popular models added to their current list of bass amps (SVT, B-15, Mesa 400, Orange), it would dominate as a preferred bass amp modeler/multi-fx. I'd be very curious to see if the newer modeling algorithms in the AxeFxIII/FM9 have markedly improved since 2005, when I sold my AxeFxII to a guitarist I work with, who is very pleased with it. Really fantastic gear, though. I'd recommend it to anyone who has the money and is serious about modeling as a live performance/recording alternative to traditional stomps-amps-cabs-mics.

And I'd add that the B6 and HX Stomp are very different animals in many aspects: B6 much larger footprint than HX Stomp B6 simpler to program and limited; HX has many options and allows deep diving parameter edits B6 doesn't allow much for programming control switching; HX allows for sophisticated switch programming B6 has a lot more switches with dedicated function; HX has only 3 switches that are multi-function B6 has an XLR output for practicality; HX does not B6 is dedicated as a bass modeler, though you could coax some guitar tones out of it if needed; HX excels at guitar modeling. B6 has separate A/B dedicated inputs with switchable impedance, dedicated switch, volume and EQ for each input; Not sure what HX offers there. B6 is a little less cost than the HX. B6 has no MIDI; HX does MIDI IMHO, you'd get the HX Stomp if you want a very small footprint don't need to do a lot of sound changing via footswitch don't mind menu-diving and appreciate a higher level of complexity of design need very specific programmed control of sounds/effects prefer deep editing of parameters want to integrate within an existing MIDI framework may want to use it also for guitar amp modeling are not concerned with having XLR output have the extra coin to spend All-in-all...different horses for different courses....etc...

Yes, the Atomic BassBox. Me and you both have this nice little toy. Great all-in-one box that covers the hardcore basics. I also have the B6 for those gigs where I need more flavors of effects than what the BassBox provides. In fact, I have some presets that integrate the BassBox last in the B6 effects loop so that I can max out the B6 internal memory on stomp effects. I'll typically use a pitch-shifted chorus, tremolo, a few flavors of OD/distortion, envelope filter/auto wah, synths, and octavers. The B6 does essentially all of what the BassBox does plus all the effects. I find the quality of the modeling in the BassBox to be a little better (but not by a lot). If you don't have a need for effects, then the B6 will have little added value vs. the BassBox. The B6 does have a lot more flavors of amp and preamp, which you might find interesting. I recently discovered their Mark Bass Mini Mark model and cabinet and think it's pretty solid.

Not trying to convert anyone here but I'm with @stewblack on this one. The most I've spent on any multi-fx pedal in the last 7 years was $299 US for the Zoom G5n. ( I did get an HX Stomp but flipped it - can't come to terms with the 3 switch thing...) I had not really considered the B6 in any way due primarily to the size (bigger than the G5n, even without an exp pedal) and cost vs. other known pedals (mainly Line 6). But then I saw the features that I wanted which are missing in the G5n/B3n, some of which are missing on much more expensive multi-fx, too: XLR out 2 discrete inputs each with input impedance switch, with dedicated selection footswitch, each with its own global EQ and level great selection of bass preamps (a bunch of new ones), amps, and dirt box models higher sample rate 88.2kHz IR loading Send/Return (which can be used to pull a feed off of the effects routing anywhere in its path, or as typical for insert FX) DI output simulations (I'm surprised at how much I like these) Bluetooth capabilities (iPad/iPhone) for remote control (not using this yet) The LAST thing I cared about, honestly, was the touch screen. I, too, prefer the WYSIWYG knob controls of the B3n/G5n, but I'm slowly becoming a fan of the touchscreen. As @stewblack said, it is much easier to read than the old LCD screens on the G5n/B3n. In stompbox mode, just touch the effect you want to edit and the edit screen comes up with the 4 knobs to control the effect/model. Not as quick as the G5n, but not bad as far as touch screen editing goes on the unit.

OK. If we're talking about the Bass Analog octaver, then I'm in total agreement that it works great. Might be two ships passing in the night here with our context regarding pitch shifting.... I've been specifically talking about the B6 shifting as a replacement/alternative to using a second bass guitar (for example, down tuned to E flat). For other special effects, octaves, whammy fx, and other stuff of that ilk, I think the B6 shifting is fine, and have created a number of nice sounds with them.

This is a very subjective thing, no doubt. I'm aware of plenty of players who are using various drop-shifting effects and find them perfectly acceptable, using pedals that I've rejected for that purpose, again, based on my personal taste. As mentioned before, I've rejected pitch shifting (as an alternative to plugging in a second drop-tuned bass) from gear that costs 2x, 3x, 4x more than the B6, including dedicated pitch shifters, so not to worry. Others may agree or disagree, which is always going to be the case (YMMV). Let's put it this way: if the B6 actually did live up to my ideal expectations for drop-tune pitch shifting, it would light the bass world on fire for that feature alone. IMO that's just unrealistic. Thus, I'm not suggesting that this diminishes the value of the B6 overall as a multi-fx modeler. I'm simply lumping it in with pretty much every other pitch shifter I've ever tried for this purpose. I do, in fact, find the pitch shifting to be fine within a limited scope (round tones with little top end and soft attack). Unfortunately, I rarely find myself working exclusively within a limited scope of tones that also require drop tuning. Others may tonally live exactly in this place, so they might be perfectly happy. If I find some time, I may post some links to audio clips that tell the story of what I hear.

EHX Pitchfork and AxeFxII are what I tried using quite a few years ago. I'd say that those, at the time, were a little better than the B6 is now. I don't expect perfection out of a pitch shift for bass, but I do need to be able to cover a full range of tones without major distraction or compromise. The B6 shift down simply has too much warble on the attack and noticeable sonic weirdness in the high end. Might be fine for distorted 6 string, though. I've read that the Quad Cortex does shifting for bass well...at least for 1/2 step down to Eb tuning. The QC still does interest me for that alone - assuming the hype is true about quality shifting - but I'm waiting for it to mature a bit, all supply chain issues aside.