jimfist

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.

Yes, the Bass Mono Pitch effect is where you'd want to start, as @stewblack previously mentioned. I just spent some time mucking around with a semitone drop (to Eb from standard tuning) and here are my thoughts: there is significant tonal coloration of the shifted tone, as well as a bit of latency 'lag' personally, I think the shifted tones only sound reasonable with a LOT of high end pulled-out (low pass filter at 1kHz+/-). Think in terms of old school R&B/Motown. Sounds with a lot of high end tend to accentuate the sonic artifacts, which I find terribly distracting. In the context of a mix, the shifted tone (as treated above) wouldn't likely stand out in a negative way in a live mix, though it would under the scrutiny of a recording session I would only consider using this as an option to an alt-tuned bass IF the musical style for the bass tone made it acceptable. No popping/slapping, no gritty metal with prominent top-end attack. For perspective, I've rejected some other pitch shifters that are considered to be much, much better, and for the same reasons. Granted, the gap has closed recently and I've not tried any of the newer/updated multi-fx to see how they fare. Example shifted patch I created: BaMnPitch > Low EQ (HPF at 140Hz) > OptComp > Bass DRV preamp (amp sim) > High EQ (LPF at 1.0kHz) Good luck with it. Using the pitch shift to drop to Eb tuning might be able to work for you, but IMO is of limited use, unfortunately. Good news is that it certainly can be made to work....depending.....

I think the popularity of the XLR out is underestimated by manufacturers, including Zoom in the "n" series. Getting some nice fat synth tones, too. The sounds you can get from the OC-2 octaver simulation are really interesting. Well done on this by Zoom. I never owned that pedal, but now understand why it's considered to be so cool. The OC-2 followed by a fuzz or dirt followed by an envelope filter/auto wah can yield some great synth-like tones.

Exactly this! I could forgive the lack of balanced/XLR output on a unit as I've been gigging my B3n/G5n for years, but when you don't have any bona-fide synth options? Still a compelling pedal, the GX-100, but lack of synth gave me pause, too.

It's a tough nut to crack without the cost jumping up into the top tier. That's why I mentioned the HX Effects, or even the PodGo, as well as the Zoom B6. They seem to be the only mid-range market contenders that have all of the basic tools (to include synths). Only the B6 has XLR output, if that matters. The Line 6 products all share the same modeling and a fairly vast list of available effects, as well as robust editing capabilities within the effects. I've settled on the B6 for the moment because I really don't need a ton of bells and whistles, and can reasonably work around the 4 button format (stomps or patch banks). I do have my eye on the HX Effects, though, but wonder if Line 6 will be introducing an updated product Line as the Helix format has been around for quite some time.

The GX-100 has some great features. No synth modules, though, so you'd have to concoct them using octaves, filters and fuzzes. I've said before on the GX-100 thread: if it had an XLR output and some basic synth stuff, I'd have gotten in on the pre-order discount.

I'd suspect a matter of clearing time to wrap your head around the Helix. From what little experience I had with the HX Stomp, certainly anyone familiar with multi-fx modelers can get around on it without too much fuss, and even easier when using the software editor. Thinking about the OP's needs, the HX Effects may be the best suited piece of gear, all things considered, and finances allowing. On-unit programming and editing may NOT be the fastest, but otherwise all bases covered, especially since no amp/cab modeling is required. Again, though, the wild card is in the Pitch Shift & Synth type effects: how well they track and whether they meet the OP's needs sonically.

All notes above regarding my experience with the Zoom B6. Especially with the synth and octave tones, there's no magic bullet IMO to getting there without fussing on the unit - or any other multi-fx unit - unless for example, you just want the raw OC2 emulation. When I make octave/synth patches, they almost always have some pre/post treatments (distortion, filtering, sometimes compression, chorus). The good news, though, is that they track pretty well IMO. I can play fast, and go low and the unit tracks fine. I have a difficult time recommending any multi-fx pedal in the low-mid price range for anyone who needs critical performance out of shifts/octaves/synths. These types of effects are really best served by pedals dedicated to the task, unless you're going for a top-end multi-effect. Even then, there's necessary tweaking. That said, IMO there are a lot of solid, good sounding options on the B6, but it's so subjective that I wouldn't want to presume that you'd be good with them based only on my tastes.

Can you give us an specific idea of the types of sounds you need for octave, harmonizer, synth? (Links to songs or pedal demos?) As I'm on the B6 right now (and own the B3n, owned the B3), I can help you sort out whether it's up to the task for these items. I've created some octave, synth, and harmonizer patches with the B6 that I'm happy with, but no idea if it's your cup of tea. Pitch shifted harmonizer stuff is a really subjective thing with multi-fx pedals. Some do it better than others, and the more you spend, the better it tends to be. Fractal Audio gear (the latest iterations FM3, FM9) have made great strides with their pitch shifting according to posts in their forum. Top dollar stuff, though. I think prevailing wisdom is that dedicated pedals do pitch shifting (Digitech) & synth (Source Audio) effects very well. Middle-of-the-market multi-fx is a coin toss. That said, I'm finding the B6 to have plenty good to offer in this department, though there are some things to avoid and tricks to getting these sounds to behave. Perhaps someone familiar with Boss or Line 6 Helix pedals can chime in on this issue.

Looks like you're in the low/mid-range budget? How much switching do you need to do? Do you require a "stomp box" layout for bringing in effects, or do you make few effects changes, thus changing a few patches during a performance will suffice? Another new option is the Boss GX-100, with reduced "wait list" pricing. This is more of a kitchen sink pedal, but has a ton of features. As a B6 owner, I'd say that its strength (as with most Zoom pedals) is its simplicity, ease of use, etc. This does come at the expense of some programming flexibility tweaks. No experience with the Plethora, though it's got a nice feature set if you don't need OD or Envelope filter effects.

One thing I'd like to see with GuitarLab software editor, at the Editor Page, for the virtual knob control area to be re-sizeable within the editor. I have a 2-in-1 laptop with touch screen, which allows you to use finger gestures to edit parameters on the effects. The problem is that the virtual knobs are pretty small and it's fiddly to control with with fingers. Making their footprint scalable (bigger) would help a lot. Or, if you touch+hold an effect, it zooms in on that slot's parameters. Another addition or alternative would be to allow numeric input for a parameter value (touch+hold highlights the parameter value, etc.). Since the app for Bluetooth is only developed for iPhone/iPad, one could theoretically use a cheap Windows 10 tablet to control the B6 via usb. Though not as ideal as wireless, it would still be a reasonable option. I would use my old iPad/iPhone except that the bluetooth app requires iOS 13 or newer, and mine are OS 9. No idea if they'll even take OS 13, but I'll look into it. Even so, a USB connected tablet would be handy even if for the simple task of manually changing banks quickly without doing the riverdance on the B6.

One thing Zoom needs to add for an amp model: the Gallien-Krueger! It hasn't been part of the line-up since they introduced the B3n. Hellooooo? I was pleasantly surprised at how good the amp modeling sounded and responded compared to the B3n. Improved, no doubt. The pedal is pretty easy to navigate, though it's not as quick to tweak on-the-fly as the B3 or B3n. I'm OK with that. I went through the MS-60B in favor of the B3, and then the B3n, and prefer the quality of the B6 over all of them hands-down. Starting with the B3n, Zoom seems to have dropped the idea of quantity indulgence in favor of a limited, but better quality, core models for preamps/amps/cabs/drives. Those looking for bang-for-buck still tend toward the B3/MS-60B, but IMHO the quality suffered for it. Improved quality comes at a price.

On the B6 unit when you save any patch, for example patch 123, it will ask you to save to "123" (the current patch location), and you'll see up/down arrows. You can scroll up and down with those arrows to save to a new location. If you want to duplicate the existing patch, make sure you save it first, then hit save again to copy to the new location. In GuitarLab, you can copy multiple patches, for example the 4 consecutive patches in a bank, using Windows conventions shift (select patches consecutively) or CNTRL (select patches individually). You can save selected multiple patches into the patch pool.

both good ideas, and I've not done either. Will try this tonight.

I found that initially, it took a while for GuitarLab to recognize the pedal. Initially I thought it wasn't recognizing the B6 at all until I just let it sit for a couple minutes. Haven't timed it lately, but connection seems faster than 4 minutes for me....maybe 30 seconds or so. Definitely would appreciate faster connection time. Yes, the touchscreen is picky. I commented on this upon initial use of the B6. It isn't as fast as your typical smart phone, and does require the user to adjust to the touchscreen. This is another place where the B6 could be improved, but I personally am not bothered by it as some of my tablet/iPad based audio apps suffer from this sort of speed/sensitivity issue, so I'm used to it. I think if you consciously go about it with a little patience and deliberate motions, you'll be OK. I'd love to be able to rifle around the screen just like my cell phone, though.

Cool. Please do chime in with thoughts and questions if you need any help.

What effects would you be using, and are they the type of effects that lend themselves to being blended along with your 100% dry bass rig tone? Reason I ask is that some effects are 100% wet by nature, though for all practical purposes, most are mixed wet + dry. If you really are concerned about your dry bass rig sound not being messed with, then use a "wet+dry" approach, with a second amp setup for WET ONLY sounds. This is what many guitarists do for the same reason (a wet-dry-wet stage rig for stereo effects, but 100% pure dry tone in the center). It involves a high quality splitter box and a second rig, on top of the fx pedals you want to use. It's not a great solution, but IMO the "purity" is intact. Short of that, just use only analog pedals with true-bypass. I personally got over the "purity" hurdle a long time ago as a matter of practicality. Nothing wrong with your approach. Some players can stick-and-move with digital processing, others can't.

I think that Boss is more gearing this toward guitarists with switching stage amps or those who use 4-cable method than those who would want to use it as an all-in-one. And a lot of people aren't happy slapping a Whirlwind IMP2 on their board to send to FOH, and will want something better in quality that can add significant cost. Though this type of thing isn't a dealbreaker for me personally (my stage rig has an XLR feed taken pre-preamp, right at the input of the amp), it has been expressed often that it's a drag. But I'd rather have sturdy 1/4" outs than a shoddy XLR which is prone to break down.

Well, it worked for me. You mix it loud, for starters, to excite enough air in the room to wreak havoc. LOL. I'll admit that having done a crap-ton of studio and live mixing - as wall as performing - helped my situation a lot, and certainly not everyone will have worn those three hats to garner enough experience to understand how each can relate to the other. And of course my personal taste in bass tone and how they should sit in a mix are also subjective. I digress. It can also work for those relying on IEM for at rehearsal and performances.