How good is the Zoom B3n? I brought one to find out.

[JohnDaBass]

@jrixn1 you are correct but the "AC Bs Pre" seems to consume quite a fair amount of DSP as I get into a "Process Overflow " when using AC Bs Pre x 2 + compressor  + one Amp Sim. Which was the reason for the original question regarding process overflow on the B3n.

If Zoom add the "Low EQ" HPF used on the B3n and B1Four to the MS60B then your idea maybe very well work. But the simplicity of stepping up and down patches on the B1Four is akin to selecting one of the six footswitches on the VT Bass DI Deluxe. I really do love the analogue tone stack on the Tech21 VT Bass DI Deluxe .

[LukeFRC]

Does this answer your question @JohnDaBass?

Low eq- low eq - dual comp - bass drive (two slots) - SVT model (two slots) 

fine for processor with that setting - No space for anything else personally I would loose one of the hpf for a cab sim but we all do things differently! 

 

[jrixn1]

3 hours ago, JohnDaBass said:

@jrixn1 you are correct but the "AC Bs Pre" seems to consume quite a fair amount of DSP as I get into a "Process Overflow " when using AC Bs Pre x 2 + compressor  + one Amp Sim. Which was the reason for the original question regarding process overflow on the B3n.

Ah, I see... got you now.

If it helps to know, on my older B1on I can set up 2 x Ac Bs Pre, 160 comp, and SVT.  Adding a fifth effect gave "Process Overflow".

I too am waiting for the B1 Four to become available.

[dannybuoy]

I think the newer ones no longer have the Ac Bs Pre, but they do have a dedicated HPF that might be good enough to use one instance of instead of two!

[JohnDaBass]

Indeed @LukeFRC it does answer my question and I agree that just one "Low EQ" would probably be enough. Thank you for your contribution. 

36 minutes ago, dannybuoy said:

I think the newer ones no longer have the Ac Bs Pre, but they do have a dedicated HPF that might be good enough to use one instance of instead of two!

Yes I saw that from the Effects list on the Zoom site. And as @Al Krow has previously said the "Low Eq" works really well when compared to the Thumpinator he has on his board.

I am convinced that the B1Four will be right for me, like @Al Krow I will probably keep my MS-60B. Most suppliers are still quoting 3 weeks delivery. 

[Al Krow]

1 minute ago, JohnDaBass said:

Indeed @LukeFRC it does answer my question and I agree that just one "Low EQ" would probably be enough. Thank you for your contribution. 

Yes I saw that from the Effects list on the Zoom site. And as @Al Krow has previously said the "Low Eq" works really well when compared to the Thumpinator he has on his board.

I am convinced that the B1Four will be right for me, like @Al Krow I will probably keep my MS-60B. Most suppliers are still quoting 3 weeks delivery. 

Just to clarify: the B3n "Low EQ" works as well as, if not better than, the HPF on the MS-60B. 

For cutting out subsonic crud, I would however recommend a Thumpinator every time as it has a steep cut. But the Thumpinator also has a fixed start point (28Hz) so it's a powerful one trick pony. 

If you want the flexibility to be cutting above that (eg from 60 Hz) then the Low EQ provides you with that flexibility. 

[JohnDaBass]

On 17/04/2019 at 08:39, Al Krow said:

Just to clarify: the B3n "Low EQ" works as well as, if not better than, the HPF on the MS-60B. 

For cutting out subsonic crud, I would however recommend a Thumpinator every time as it has a steep cut. But the Thumpinator also has a fixed start point (28Hz) so it's a powerful one trick pony. 

If you want the flexibility to be cutting above that (eg from 60 Hz) then the Low EQ provides you with that flexibility. 

Does anyone know how steep the gradient of the "Low Eq" is on B3n or B1Four? 

Is it 12dB per octave or 24dB per octave. I seem to recall that the Thumpinator is 24dB/Octave. 

[LukeFRC]

Not sure - question though - what kinda tone you going for that a HPF is so integral? You’re using barefaced stuff which I think is designed to be able to take a big bottom? 

[dannybuoy]

A steep low HPF should have no affect on tone, just remove the sub sonics that your amp and speakers waste power trying to reproduce, so you can squeeze more actual audible volume out of your rig without blowing it up.

[JohnDaBass]

6 hours ago, dannybuoy said:

A steep low HPF should have no affect on tone, just remove the sub sonics that your amp and speakers waste power trying to reproduce, so you can squeeze more actual audible volume out of your rig without blowing it up.

Exactly, 

Just trying to get close to a Thumpinator. 

Set "Low Eq" to 30Hz.

Just need to know if it's best to use two in series to get similar performance to the Thumpinator. I use a Thumpinator on my large board so I appreciate it's benefits. 

On my MS-60B  I use two or even three "Ac Bs Pre" to get close to the Thumpinator. 

[dannybuoy]

If it’s not in the manual, I doubt anyone would know. It’d be possible to measure it though! Personally I’d just do a visual test, crank it up and take the grille off your cab if it’s in the way. If you can stop the cones lurching about without having an audible effect, it’s doing the job, then see what adding a second one does.

[Al Krow]

1 hour ago, JohnDaBass said:

Just trying to get close to a Thumpinator. 

Set "Low Eq" to 30Hz.

Just need to know if it's best to use two in series to get similar performance to the Thumpinator. I use a Thumpinator on my large board so I appreciate it's benefits. 

On my MS-60B  I use two or even three "Ac Bs Pre" to get close to the Thumpinator. 

I've taken the really lazy option of...just using a Thumpinator (but then I only have a large board). 😀

In lieu of your mini board - I'm really tempted by the B1 Four X as a stand alone mini gigging board. I think your earlier post about it having the same DSP as the B3n has got me a little excited about this forthcoming pedal (out mid May??). It seems to have combined a compact form with a decent interface and decent DSP i.e. it takes some of the best features of the MS-60B and and B3n and puts them into a very affordable package. Oh yes the X rated version has an expression pedal.

...Shame: I've discovered it's got a plastic chassis which puts a bit of question-mark over how rugged the B1 Four is going to be.

Edited April 22, 2019 by Al Krow

[tauzero]

On 22/04/2019 at 13:04, JohnDaBass said:

Does anyone know how steep the gradient of the "Low Eq" is on B3n or B1Four? 

Is it 12dB per octave or 24dB per octave. I seem to recall that the Thumpinator is 24dB/Octave. 

I don't think it's hugely steep. I've just been experimenting with Low EQ on a B3n - thought I might as well eliminate at least some subsonics. Setting frequency to 40Hz on a 4-string and 20Hz on a 5-string makes no difference to the audible sound. I've put the Low EQ as the very first stage, before a compressor stage, so the compressor isn't getting phantom sounds to compress. I did some experimenting with changing the frequency to see what the effect was, and there didn't seem to be a huge roll-off as I increased the frequency. It may be relevant that I'm doing this through a Line 6 G50 wireless to avoid having to disturb my pedalboard, and that might have some sort of HPF in it.

I really ought to get round to putting together a Sallen-Key filter.

[Al Krow]

1 hour ago, tauzero said:

I don't think it's hugely steep. I've just been experimenting with Low EQ on a B3n - thought I might as well eliminate at least some subsonics. Setting frequency to 40Hz on a 4-string and 20Hz on a 5-string makes no difference to the audible sound. I've put the Low EQ as the very first stage, before a compressor stage, so the compressor isn't getting phantom sounds to compress. I did some experimenting with changing the frequency to see what the effect was, and there didn't seem to be a huge roll-off as I increased the frequency. It may be relevant that I'm doing this through a Line 6 G50 wireless to avoid having to disturb my pedalboard, and that might have some sort of HPF in it.

I really ought to get round to putting together a Sallen-Key filter.

You're not going to 'hear' anything much at all if you have your HPF set to 40Hz on a 4 string and 20 Hz on a 5 string.

The low E on a 4 string is 41 Hz and the low B is 31 Hz. So you're already cutting at below what the bass is putting out (and indeed a frequency range below what most cabs are able to convey with any authority in terms of us being able to hear).

What you should notice is less speaker excursion because the HPF is eliminating the energy diverting sub-sonic 'crud', and thereby allowing the speakers to work more efficiently in the audible frequency ranges.

Fyi - the Thumpinator cuts at 28 Hz. If you've not seen the impact it has on speaker excursion, then the linked video clip is worth watching and listening to through a pair of headphones - you're not going to hear much difference, but you can easily see how much less hard the speakers are having to work!

I use my Thumpinator at the start of my signal chain as a 'crud cleaner' and then into a Spectracomp which can then do its thing on just the audio frequency range and will be, itself, working more efficiently, the benefits of which then flow into the rest of my pedal board --> amp --> cab.

Edited April 23, 2019 by Al Krow

[tauzero]

2 hours ago, Al Krow said:

You're not going to 'hear' anything much at all if you have your HPF set to 40Hz on a 4 string and 20 Hz on a 5 string.

The low E on a 4 string is 41 Hz and the low B is 31 Hz. So you're already cutting at below what the bass is putting out (and indeed a frequency range below what most cabs are able to convey with any authority in terms of us being able to hear).

What you should notice is less speaker excursion because the HPF is eliminating the energy diverting sub-sonic 'crud', and thereby allowing the speakers to work more efficiently in the audible frequency ranges.

Fyi - the Thumpinator cuts at 28 Hz. If you've not seen the impact it has on speaker excursion, then the linked video clip is worth watching and listening to through a pair of headphones - you're not going to hear much difference, but you can easily see how much less hard the speakers are having to work!

I use my Thumpinator at the start of my signal chain as a 'crud cleaner' and then into a Spectracomp which can then do its thing on just the audio frequency range and will be, itself, working more efficiently, the benefits of which then flow into the rest of my pedal board --> amp --> cab.

I realise that I'm cutting at below the bottom frequency of the bass. What I wasn't sure of was whether that was the frequency at which the cut starts, or whether it was the -6dB frequency, or what, and whether any other artefacts might be introduced, so experimented to see if there was any discernible change to the sound. I know what the Thumpinator does, and that's why I thought it would be an idea to put an HPF in my effects line, and why I'd like to eventually build a Sallen-Key HPF (which would actually be two Sallen-Keys, giving 24dB/octave roll-off).

[TPJ]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that a HPF does affect the sound more than you might think. I have a Thumpinator and I get different results with it in the signal chain from passive and active instruments, and I think it's  more a phase issue than any thing else? My bass with EMG pickups loves the Thumpinator more than  my passive instruments. I practice with headphones most of the time and notice quite a tone difference with and without the HPF. I also have a HX Stomp and notice similar tone differences when I employ an HPF with the eq blocks. When I run a pedal board with the HPF into a GK MB800 and Fearless F112, I can also hear a difference. So although a HPF should just cut the stuff we can't hear, I think it can affect the tone more than we realise. So much so that I've taken the Thumpinator out of the chain.

I'd be interested to hear other's experiences with HPF's in their chain, both through amps and headphones.

[Pea Turgh]

Maybe the amplifier/speaker working more efficiently alters the tone, like it’s more honest with the sub muck removed?

I tend to use processing when mixing songs that removes stuff below 20hz - makes a huge difference to the look of a waveform.  Certainly makes compression work betterer.

Edited April 23, 2019 by Pea Turgh

[Al Krow]

1 hour ago, TPJ said:

So although a HPF should just cut the stuff we can't hear...

Appreciate you aren't suggesting otherwise, but it will obviously depend on where the HPF is set to cut from. If you set it to cut in the audio frequencies (and many folk will set their variable HPFs to start cutting at e.g. 80 kHz) it's clearly going to impact what you hear.

53 minutes ago, Pea Turgh said:

Maybe the amplifier/speaker working more efficiently alters the tone, like it’s more honest with the sub muck removed?

Makes sense - you would hopefully expect a tighter sound from your speaker with the sub muck removed resulting in significantly reduced 'unnecessary' speaker excursion.

55 minutes ago, Pea Turgh said:

 Certainly makes compression work better.

And optimise by putting the HPF before the compressor - agreed?

Edited April 23, 2019 by Al Krow

[Pea Turgh]

9 hours ago, Al Krow said:

And optimise by putting the HPF before the compressor - agreed?

Totes - otherwise the sub will influence the overall signal and pull down everything, making it even more uneven sounding!  Unless it’s a multi and comp, but still - best feed it a good signal to start with.  I think I’ve just convinced myself to get the thumpinator.

[Al Krow]

1 hour ago, Pea Turgh said:

Totes - otherwise the sub will influence the overall signal and pull down everything, making it even more uneven sounding!  Unless it’s a multi and comp, but still - best feed it a good signal to start with.  I think I’ve just convinced myself to get the thumpinator.

Cool. Does seem to be the consensus to have the Thumpinator right at the start of the pedal board signal chain (and in fact that's also Thumpinator own recommendation on this). 

As mentioned above, I've got mine set up Thumpinator --> Spectracomp-->rest of board, with those first two pedals 'always on'. 

For the first time, I've been actually able to hear a discernible improvement to my tone from a compressor and have finally (believe me it's been a skeptical journey! 😂) convinced myself that compression could add value. 

[tauzero]

14 hours ago, Pea Turgh said:

Totes - otherwise the sub will influence the overall signal and pull down everything, making it even more uneven sounding!  Unless it’s a multi and comp, but still - best feed it a good signal to start with.  I think I’ve just convinced myself to get the thumpinator.

That was my logic for putting the Low EQ first in the B3n effect chain.

[JohnDaBass]

9 hours ago, tauzero said:

That was my logic for putting the Low EQ first in the B3n effect chain.

Indeed by placing "Low EQ" first in the B3n chain may actually free up some DSP processor capacity as any compressor placed next in the chain will NOT be working so hard. "Process Overflow " may not occur. 

[LukeFRC]

Just now, JohnDaBass said:

Indeed by placing "Low EQ" first in the B3n chain may actually free up some DSP processor capacity as any compressor placed next in the chain will NOT be working so hard. "Process Overflow " may not occur. 

It doesn’t work like that. Each effects block has a value of capacity it takes up wherever it goes in the chain. 

The values are published somewhere 

[JohnDaBass]

6 minutes ago, LukeFRC said:

It doesn’t work like that. Each effects block has a value of capacity it takes up wherever it goes in the chain. 

The values are published somewhere 

Clear, thank you. 

 

[tauzero]

2 hours ago, LukeFRC said:

It doesn’t work like that. Each effects block has a value of capacity it takes up wherever it goes in the chain. 

The values are published somewhere 

If you use ToneLib, the DSP load is shown in the effects list - Low EQ is 5%.