Baloney Balderdash

As far as I can see the information that EHX provides on their homepage for this pedal is actual 100% factual correct. What part of the description exactly is it that you think that they got wrong?

I think what most fear regarding AI, at least people who actually know about AI and as it is in it's current form, is actually not so much the AI itself, but rather people blindly trusting and relying on AI, and in that aspect this would be evident proof of that that indeed would be a very genuine concern to have.

There you go:

I present to you my beloved Ibanez Mikro Bass, "Dud Bottomfeeder" (respectively the most recent shot, and a bit older but much better shot) :

I wrote a song with that title, though no basses, fish, hats or baseball caps included...

Accidentally stumbled upon this blog (when searching for examples of electric bassists utilizing classical upright bass solo tuning (F# standard tuning, two half steps above regular E standard tuning)), that evolves around the age old question of electric bass guitar vs. acoustic upright/double bass... And man what a load of bull... Brimmingly full of gloriously absolutely clueless misinformation, presented as fact, and the author even manage to contradict himself several times during the article as well (with conflicting pieces of misinformation). https://www.fuelrocks.com/bass-guitar-vs-double-bass-which-one-is-better-for-you/

An update. I am still in the process of completely rearranging my pedal setup, so the signal chain listed bellow here is a temporary scrapped down version, only consisting of the always on pedals that makes up my "amp-less" setup, and then my high gain distortion setup. This is how the entire "amp-less" setup currently looks listed in written form: That is: Bass -> Buffer -> Subtle Compression + Tube Preamp Stage -> [octave up effect, used exclusively in conjunction with distortion/fuzz]-> [modulation/various other effects -> dist/fuzz/OD] -> Subtle Reverb -> [reverb/various other effects -> delay] -> Digital Amp Emulation + IR Cab Simulation -> Tube Preamp + DI -> Poweramp -> FRFR PA Speaker And this is how the different parts of this setup look: The bass (though the knob nearest the neck is now red) : The pedals (the ART Tube MP project Series tube preamp is missing from this photo): The band jam/rehearsal / live gig backline (power)amp and FRFR PA speaker:

You can get a small box especially made for combining speaker in either series or parallel to one amp speaker/cab output, like this one, the Palmer CAB M Merger : Doesn't cost much either, a mere 26£ : https://www.thomann.de/gb/palmer_cab_m_merger.htm

Who would have known guessed that a cover of Britney Spears's Toxic could be this freaking awesome:

Looks great, but yeah, details please, what are those? Especially that small long necked 5 string bratsch looking one you got in the strap. What is that, and how is it tuned?

From the album "Kollaps Tradixionales" : From the album "F*** Off Get Free We Pour Light on Everything" :

I don't know anything about the SB12, but i did own the 1968 version of the B-15S, which was a 60W, the highest wattage model of the B-15 amps, loved it, and regret very much being stupid enough to sell it at some point, one of the best amps I ever owned, on a shared 1st place with together with and old Trace Elliot, which I also was stupid enough to sell at some point, though a completely different animal, and fortunately ready available used and for pretty much peanuts too, unlike the B-15S. Don't make the same mistake I did! Though again I know nothing about the SB12, but the B-15 amps are absolutely legendary and sounds genuinely amazing so my vote still goes for keeping the B-15N. Also the 60W of the B-15S I owned were just exactly loud enough to keep up with a loud rock band and play up small bar sized venues without PA support, though I did drive it at it's max capacity. And despite not really giving it any special treatment and driving it hard it never once failed me, and I am quite sure still works flawlessly somewhere out there.

Yeah, not very well isolated, sounds like poo. But also the intonation on Paul's Höfner is painfully off. Great basslines though, and in the actual full mixes it does sound just fine.

Death in June - "Rose Clouds of Holocaust" :

Oh, I do that too. But when composing on bass it almost always starts out with just a single riff, and then evolves from there, sometimes even over a longer period of time. In fact these days I really see myself as more of a song writer/composer/producer kind of musician than really an instrumentalist, that just happens to have bass as my preferred instrument of choice (even if I have done plenty of work not evolving around bass as well). I don't really see composing as work though, the actual work part for me doesn't come until the post-production phase, that is the editing and mixing finishing part of the creation of a finished track/product, which predominantly is just work for me, even if I do kind of enjoy that part of the process as well. Also I do enjoy playing and improvising over the melody parts of non original songs every once in a while as well.

While I occasionally will practice scales, chords and techniques more systematically, mostly neither do I really, not in a traditional sense of the word, as in strict repetitious practicing for the sake of the exercise itself, at least. Usually my practice consist of several shorter jam session, lasting everything from 10 minutes to an hour, during a day, where I will play original stuff written by myself, improvise, and write/compose new riffs and parts, however that obviously implies practicing on improvising and writing/composing riffs, and beside that I will incorporate more traditional practicing as an integrated part of these jam sessions, like for instance using new techniques, as well as I frequently write/compose stuff that I actually have difficulties playing, thus turning into a challenging practicing session as well improving my playing skills, but while working on something actually meaningful and purposeful in itself. I never really got the point of strict repetitious practicing for the mere sake of practicing itself, this way it actually have a practical purpose and gets introduced/incorporated naturally into my playing, all the while I am really just having fun playing. Also it motivates me to actually play and practice more than I otherwise would if I was to do strict practicing of repetitious exercises for any given amount of time just for the sake of the exercise itself, but while still challenging myself and improving my skills at playing bass. It might not seem as effective, but the actual end result is that it turns out more progress and constructive development of my playing than would otherwise had been the case. Why absolutely force yourself to turn playing into, in itself pointless, tiresome hard work and a mind-numbingly boring chore, when you can achieve more by just actually having fun playing.

Shorting hot/signal (I assume you mean) and earth, excuse me for my ignorance, won't short the battery on a bass with an active preamp? Which, if this is indeed the case, would spell disaster. Also why have the switch short hot/signal with earth, rather than just cutting/intercepting the hot/signal connection?

Short scale basses typically won't have this issue, and as said Fender basses tends to be especially bad with this. But yes, it has all to do with how the bass resonates acoustically, which can cause certain frequencies to be partially cancelled out (another strong argument against those who seem to be convinced that the way a bass resonates/interacts with the string vibrations (reflecting both ways) acoustically somehow magically have absolute no influence whatsoever on the signal that the pickups pick up and reproduce, which is just absolutely absurd, and shows a severe lack of understanding on how physics works, but that's an entirely different discussion). And as said somehow changing the mass of the instrument can to some extend help, or at least lessen, or move/remove the issue, depending.

I meant of course

This made me laugh harder than I've had in a long while:

I like drive after modulation, but that's a matter of personal preferences, as is comp, which I like you prefer before drive. However drive before pitchshifter/octaver effects, or after reverb and delay, can turn out problematic, unless you do it for special effects, I for instance got a reverb that I have placed before my drive effects, dedicated for a huge wall of sound effect. I guess in the end it really depends on how you personally like your effects and the context they are used, as well as which drive effects and how you use them in specific. In your case I'd probably place the drive before the Plethora, though if your drives are all low to medium gain overdrive I would consider placing them after instead. I mean for those who use tube amps and like to drive them hard that essentially would be a case of drive after everything else.

Actually by far most serial effects loops will work too, the Effects Send essentially just working as a post preamp output (or in other words a preamp output) as long as you have nothing plugged into the Effects Return, and will only close the loop to the poweramp section if you plug into the Effects Return (that is if you plug a jack plug into the Effects Return socket with nothing connected the signal will be cut off from the preamp to the poweramp, but not if you only have plugged into the Effects Send). As I wrote in a previous reply, before yours:

In that case you ought to try it for bass too. Works great both as a bass preamp and as a bass drive (and a lot of people actually use it as such, either/both).

Only if you plug the cab sim back into the Effect Return of the amp. The Effects Send is essentially just a post preamp output (or in other words as preamp output).

It does... The previous generation of effects that the B3 used, which the current production multi stomp boxes, like the MS-70CDR also uses, are way more tweakable than the newer generation effects of the B3n and B1 Four, also in my opinion they actually also sound a lot better than the newer generation of effect models (and I am not alone with that opinion either), and the B3 got a couple more synth models than the newer B3n as well. If you wanted to duplicate the synth sounds of that video, given it was made on a B3 and not a B3n, you should have gotten the MS-70CDR (newest firmware update got all the synth effects from the MS-60B, but allows for a maximum of 6 effects per patch, vs. the just 4 effects of the MS-60B. Also you could just download the 3rd party Firmware hack, the "Zoom Effect Manager" and load whichever collection of the same generation of Zoom effect models, including the amp emulations, to it), or a used B3, B1on or B1Xon. That said you might still be able to do something somewhat similar with the B3n. Though if I was you I would get a used B1Xon or G1Xon and then load whatever effects you want on it via the 3rd party firmware hack app "Zoom Effect Manager", as both the units share the exact same hardware and operating system, also they would allow easier switching between patches than the MS-70CDR, and both features an actually genuinely great build in expression pedal that can be assigned to control any given one parameter of any given effect of each patch, also they are actually a bit smaller than the B3/B3n, despite the build in expression pedal. In my opinion the B1Xon/G1Xon is the best digital multi effect Zoom ever made (especially if making use of the 3rd party firmware hack app).