Boss OC-5 Octave!!!!

[Bagman]

thanks team top thread 

[ped]

13 hours ago, pantherairsoft said:

I was reminded of this thread and thought I'd do an experiment over the last few days. A side by side of the OC2 and OC5, focusing on the -1 octave solo'd (does anyone use any other part of this pedal!), both at home via a small combo, and in the rehearsal room with a powerful rig, and both solo'd and in a mix.

To start, I should point out that my OC2 has the -2 octave disconnected, which boosts the output volume to the pedal. Side by side with an unmodded version, there is zero tonal shift to my ear, but importantly this makes the -1 octave volume absolutely identical to the OC5, overcoming the usual volume dip these pedals suffer. Having them at the same volume really helped this experiment. I should also note that this is a made in Taiwan OC2, that needs the ACA adapter (12v, which is then knocked down to 9v in the pedal) - Note on this at the end.

Also note that the OC5 was set to Bass and Vintage modes (which replicates the OC2). I'd like to give special mention to the fact that in poly mode, with the -1 octave solo'd and the Range knob set to 'lowest', the OC5 is a useful tool for some sub frequencies if you play it as though it was a mono octave pedal still, for those who don't want to destroy the building with a Dod Meatbox. The rest of poly mode is, IMO, very meh, but that one trick is a nice addition.

So, the comparison...

Here is what I did.
1. Side by side solo'd at home via Markbass MicroMark combo - focused on tone and noticeable latency.

2. As above, but into multi effects - OD, fuzz, envelope filter etc. to test how they played with other pedals.

3. Both of the above steps in the studio via a Markbass SD800 and Schroeder 1212L (LOUD). First without the tweeter, then with the tweeter dialled up - solo'd with three other musicians forced to close their eyes, listen and give me feedback. One of them was a drummer, so you can disregard their thoughts

4. As per the previous step, but in the context of a track with drums and keys/synths.

5. Absolutely everything above, in both active and passive mode on my bass.

 

Here are my/our findings....
Latency - Absolutely no difference at all. In fact, I sat and played a few lines with my eyes closed and had others change the pedals so I didn't know which was which... and feeling wise I couldn't tell them apart (again, remembering that I am talking only about vintage mode on the OC2... in poly mode, yes, I can feel the latency).

Tracking - Identical. I've seen lots of folk say the OC5 tracks better, but under a microscope and with clean playing, there is no difference at all. If the OC5 does track better, then my playing style doesn't allow me to highlight it. Both track down to an A on the E string without too much issue, and can track lower if you're very careful and don't mind the additional artefacts in the sound.

 

Tone - When solo'd and studying the sounds very closely, the OC2 has a 'tiny' bit more breakup on the lower notes/E string when you dig in. It's so minor that I had to check over and over to be sure I was hearing it. Aside that, neither I, nor the other folk could tell a difference between the two, with a focus on my playing style, I was able to circumvent that extra breakup. Also note that without the tweeter on the cab, this difference was inaudible. I should note that it's not a pretty overdrive, it's just digital clipping and not something I'd ever 'want' to replicate. Now we're talking ears, not a frequency analyser - and that's what matters - what we all hear. I like to think I have decent ears (former mastering engineer), but I am in no way an authority. To me, however, it was impossible to tell them apart aside that very close study Literally identical on the A-C strings (I play a 5, strung E-C). 

 

Active vs Passive - compared to each other, the OC2 and OC5 sound and respond identically to the passive setting. In active mode, the very slight breakup we mentioned about the OC2 on the low E kicks in with a slightly softer playing. I play soft any way, so I had to force it to make this happen. I usually use the bass in active mode and nothing about this test would make me want to change it. In fact, I'd say the active output form the bass actually helps the tracking of both pedals a bit.

With other pedals - The response and combining of them with other pedals was identical, it even made noticing the OC2 tiny low end breakup impossible when it was run into any kind of drive, filter etc.

 

The feedback above was unanimous from all (only I can comment on latency), no one could hear a difference at all and in fact, I'm the only person claiming there was a touch more breakup in the sound on the E string.

After a few hours of this questionably pointless experiment, here are my pros for both...

OC5

• Easy to find at a reasonable price.
• Nails the OC2 sound with zero latency.
• Has other options, even though you'll likely never use them, but maybe for that one song.
• Still under warranty if you have an issue.

 

OC2

• People think you're cool because you use an OC2.

 

Extra bonus test - I also tried running the OC2 at 9v, even though it needs 12 via a power supply (these ACA ones still use a 9v battery or can run on a 9v if you daisy chain it from another pedal, which is odd). I did this because I know many people out there do this without realising that the ACA version needed 12v and have come to voltage starve their pedal for many years. Aside the dimmer LED and drop in volume, which many folk thought was just the way the OC2 was, this introduces much more noise and breakup into the tone. Being honest, it's still totally usable, and for anyone that accidentally got used to using an ACA OC2 this way, the difference in tone between that and an OC5 is quite notable (and wouldn’t surprise me if this was the cause of some claims of the two being audibly different!).

 

While the voltage starved OC2 doesn't sound great to me, it does 'add something' which is very artificial, which I can see people liking it in its own right. That is, of course, not the point of this comparison though.

So, which one stays on my board? The OC5, but only because it's easier to replace if someone spills beer on it. I could happy pop either on there and no one would know the difference.

Thanks for coming to my TED talk.

 

Call that a TED talk? What did you learn about B2B sales and SEO from your test? 
 

(Actually, I love TED, I’m thinking more about LinkedIn - dare you to post it there)

[pantherairsoft]

3 minutes ago, ped said:

Call that a TED talk? What did you learn about B2B sales and SEO from your test? 

Using the term ‘OC2’ more than 10 times in one post seems to be good for getting ‘likes’… that’s gotta be some form of SEO at work, right!
 

This is MASSIVELY off topic (sorry everyone!), but this is my actual fav TED talk of all time… I first saw this when I was studying for my hypnotherapy diploma, and it’s as great today as it was back then…

 

 

Edited 4 hours ago by pantherairsoft