If you want a delightful hobby, then I can recommend building your own guitar pedals.
It combines music, electronics, general nerding out (e.g. debating germanium VS silicon diodes), and some visual design if you want to make the enclosures pretty. You might even be able to sell some.
I started by building a kit pedal with one of my kids as a weekend project.
Some search terms to get you started: build your own clone, diy pedal schematics, tag board music effects.
When I starting learning circuit analysis in college in the 80's I would draw out the pedal schematics via hand-inspection of the board itself and try to figure out wtf they were doing. I didn't have access to part #s until I was in college (you couldn't just google a datasheet for whatever 8-pin DIP was on the board, you had to look through giant catalogs of them from each manufacturer).
Two things immediately jumped out at me ... first, that undergrad circuit analysis does not help understanding circuits designed by wizened experts ... and second, that even the simplest circuits require all kinds of considerations beyond the y=H(x) transfer functions (and that linear systems don't begin to describe what i was seeing). Humbling.
It would be interesting to see how the Chorus schematic from 1985 compares to the Chorus schematic of 2023.
The 2023 Chorus would probably be fully digital instead of using a bucket-brigade device.
Even the humble DS-1 has now a digital version which, contrary to its analog counterpart "chugs".
I've always felt that the signal to noise ratio in digita circuits just wasn't there, but perhaps there were some significant advancements over the years in this field which I missed.
Would be great if we could get some actual screenshots of the boards rather than speculating. That's why I'm curious to see if 1985 is the same as 2023. Without data we're just guessing.
I am an electrical engineer that designs a lot of audio stuff including guitar pedals. Today manufacturers certainly would go digital for chorus/flanger/delays unless the appeal of analog BBDs is directly what they are going for.
Digital has one advantage: your one PCB design can become many different pedals. Just change the design of the case, maybe leave the RAM IC out in effects that don't need a lot of memory, put different code on it and congrats: 90% of your product range are the same PCB and the same parts which is nuch more economical than doing a new design for every product.
Exception: Fuzz, distortion, overdrive and everything where you rely on complex characteristics of affordable analog parts.
It is not speculation at all, schematics for many many effects are available online. Manufacturers also freely admit to their pedals being clones of famous pedals. There is even a whole genre of pedals known as Klones because they are clones of a Klon. Have a look on Andertons YouTube and you will see them blindfold testing all the Klones, the Tubescreamer clones, the RAT clones etc. If you watch Josh Scott of JHS pedals he talks through how much they are 'exact same circuit' all of the time. Josh himself became famous due to a mod he made to the Bluesbreaker. Not as famous perhaps as Analogmans King of Tone (with a three year waiting list), which is a modification of a....Bluesbreaker. All the schematics are online. By the way you can buy dozens of King of Tone clones too, like the King of Blues, for 1/10th price.
When reviewing pedals it is common to say 'this is a modified x', or an 'x and y in the same box'
It is not even a secret that the analogue pedal market is selling the same pedals that were invented in the 60s-80's with minor tweaks for component availability. But of course they are, because what do most people want to sound like, of course it is their guitar hero from the 60s to 80s!!! I have a fuzz face for Hendrix, a big muff for Gilmour, and a Tubescreamer for SRV. All available today in exactly the schematic of the original, from multiple makers.
Guess I'll spend the next few days figuring out the diff.
My point is, you've provided just opinion. If you could have told me a thing or two about the actual circuits I might think you know what you're talking about. But rather than helping, you're just filling space with words in an attempt to sound knowledgeable.
Just search for "overdrive pedal" on Sweetwater and you'll see a lot of pedals that have been around for decades. Read up on the newer ones and you'll see they generally just add novelty options and variations to classic designs. You can easily find comparisons of schematics by googling, though it's not as simple as "Tubescreamer 85 vs Tuberscreamer 2023" because of various small evolutions and models. Try "tubescreamer circuit comparison" to get a good start.
Delays are another story, search Sweetwater and you'll see it's dominated by digital options that bundle things modulation, stereo effects, and loopers. You won't see the same analog options as the 80's, or many analog options at all comparatively.
A lot of the analog options are still around because bucket brigade devices are still manufactured. So you can get a Boss CH-1, a Memory Man, or something like that, new from the manufacturer.
To be fair, you might have had an easier time if you were pulling apart scientific equipment. Audio quality is so subjective that the circuits quickly become relatively counterintuitive as designers experiment with all manner of hacks to decrease part count and change the sound.
Couldn’t agree more. I haven’t kept up with it but back in college I used to make replicas of discontinued pedals as gifts for some of my guitar playing friends. Dirt cheap parts, some fun circuit analysis and modeling, soldering practice, and very happy friends.
I was able to get into modular in college with the synthesizers.com monthly payment plan. Each installment you paid, they mailed another module. They start you out with a few modules and a rack with a power supply mounted for you. The whole plan together gave you a bit of a deal on the cost.
It doesn’t look like they offer that anymore, but you could still do the same thing yourself. If I was starting over, I’d probably do eurorack, that seems to be where all the modern innovation is.
As a gigging musician, it’s blown my mind how far digital effects have come, specifically amps and pedals. For years I had a fairly extensive collection of pedals, which has now been almost completely replaced by a Line 6 helix pedal that does absolutely everything. People are never gonna stop using analog pedals cause they’re a ton of fun, but from a purely practical perspective, we’re finally at the point where modelling really is indistinguishable from the real thing.
It isn’t. People saying modeling is indistinguishable from analog gear are just incorrect.
For a touring musician the modeling route is just WAY better. Recalling your sound night after night without working with sensitive and fiddle equipment great.The bottleneck for sound quality is always FoH and never your rig. A Kemper or helix is the better option for nearly everyone.
That being said, I wouldn’t ever use modeling in the studio. Stumbling upon a great sound when exploring doesn’t happen in the same way. Editing patches becomes a chore and analysis paralysis becomes a force of destruction.
>It isn’t. People saying modeling is indistinguishable from analog gear are just incorrect.
I hear this a lot, but I've never actually seen any proper testing done on this.
Personally, I think the early stuff (Digitech 2120, etc) wasn't good enough. I did use it (and loved it when gigging for exactly the reasons you outline) and it was great, but there were some elements of it that weren't as good as the 'real' thing. Ironically the Wah was the weakest part of that particular rack unit, and it was the only analogue thing in there!
However, now I don't think there's any reason why you'd take the stomp boxes over a Helix. I've done some back-to-back testing with some of the pieces of gear, and I can't tell the difference.
I agree about editing - it's certainly not the same experience as a bunch of pedals, but in every other area, it's a no-brainer for me, including in the studio.
To me, most of digital versus analog arguments are more this-is-better-for-me than anything else.
I mean an old friend just linked me their bandcamp. It has a few dozen songs that sound great. Turns out half were made with only a Kaossillator Pro. The other half with only an original Kaossillator.
Working that way wouldn’t work for me, but it works for Sy. And ordinary folks would say that’s a poor way to make songs.
Completely agree. I coincidentally got through the King of Tone wait-list right after the Helix released its update with its own version. I hooked them up side by side and they both sounded great. So I sold the KoT to a friend at cost.
That's actually the opposite of what most guitarists would say from my experience. As a gigging guitarist, modelers still sound weak and anemic in a live mix. I always hated hauling around a 100 watt full or half stack tube amp to my gigs, but it's worth it in terms of mix and tone. Modelers seem to work in a live setting when you need a very clinical sound and are playing large venues with excellent sound systems. Meshuggah is a great example, and there's a trend in progressive/math metal bands to use modelers for this very reason - they do cold/surgical/highly distorted sounds well.
In a studio, I'll use a good modeler all day long. Going direct and modeling in the box is the best - you can change your virtual amp and cab after recording to get the perfect sound/mix. You would never be able to tell the difference in the right hands.
I’ve been using an FM3 through a Fryette Power Station 100 into a 4x12 and it’s pretty awesome. I’ve only used it for rehearsals so far but it sounds better (subjectively) than my main tube amp. This to me is a good option for folks who want to go the modeling option live but aren’t down with running it through the PA.
Definitely. I was talking more about going direct to FOH with a modeler. Using one as a preamp into a tube power amplifier works well in my experience as long as you disable the internal cabinet modeling.
> It isn’t. People saying modeling is indistinguishable from analog gear are just incorrect.
Blind experiments with long time musicians keep showing this claim to be flat out wrong, over and over.
Playing on a Kemper with a Helix, when set up properly (and that's hardly a science anymore, tons of people have done the preset tweaking for us by now), is simply indistinguishable from analog.
It depends on your ears. I specifically excluded the Line 6 because I just didn't like the sound. I can imagine getting on better with more sophisticated modelling, but guitar isn't a main interest at the moment so I can't justify the money or (more importantly) the time.
I really appreciate modeling in a recording setting, at least so far with metal tones. It gives me significantly more control, faster, without getting my head blown off by a 4x12, and without ever leaving my desk. And recall! A dream come true. Editing with the Fractal software is pretty painless, no more of a chore than swapping amps and cabs and mics and preamps in a studio.
> It isn’t. People saying modeling is indistinguishable from analog gear are just incorrect.
It's actually the opposite. Modelling can absolutely reproduce any audible effect you can find or imagine.
What is true is that, for any specific effect or device or technique, there probably isn't a ready-made model for it. Or there is, but it's for some variant of the amp that the software author used and not the one you want. Modelling is expensive in engineering time.
But if you just want a stable of high quality effects from which to assemble audio for recording or performance, analog junk frankly has nothing to offer in the modern world.
> we’re finally at the point where modelling really is indistinguishable from the real thing.
I’d love to experience this, but so far it still seems like the technology is more in the “good enough for most people/situations” rather than indistinguishable.
In my limited experience(and I haven't tried the expensive stuff like Kemper or Neural dsp), the difference is most apparent to the player in the way amp and effects react to playing dynamics. For a blues player sat 'on the edge of overdrive' the effect of injecting emotion into ones playing comes through the amp in a way I couldn't get with a digital amp. This the affects the players response. I feel like a million dollars through my Fender Twin. I close my eyes and channel my Stevie Ray. It didn't happen to me through a Boss Katana. If you were paying to listen to me (as if), you would get better vfm from the tube amp.
If I played metal, or was backing a pop group, one pedal di'd to the desk sounds like the dream
I ditched my amps for Neural DSP VST' and I play somewhat similar stuff.
I recommend trying them out, especially "Tone King Imperial MKII" (there's a free trial available).
I run a mid range POD HD500X, it's really really nice to not have to play around with it a ton (presets are great) and you can still get pretty close to what you're looking for without ever having to buy more gear (at least amps/pedals, guitar still matters a ton).
I think my favorite thing about it is that it just allows me to play more. I run my computer output through the rig, so everything comes out my headphones. This means I can play rock as "loud" as I want, with any song on the planet, and the whole house can be sleeping. Very much worth the trade offs for someone who just wants to play and not geek out about gear.
This was mentioned is a sibling comment, but I’ll 2nd that it matters more on a bluesy/rock style tone. It’s right when the power amp is starting to get saturated.
On a modeling amp, I have not heard one that doesn’t introduce extra digital artifacts into the tone. It’s like the difference between GCI and IRL.
Another is on the other end of the amplitude spectrum, very quiet playing, where I hear extra digital artifacts introduced.
As the other poster mentioned though, these differences may not come across at all in a metal/pop setting.
That is true- this is a good callout. You’re brain does a lot to convince you of the difference when you know the source of what you’re hearing.
But there are always exceptions. As someone that worked as a recording engineer for 7 years, and spent time intentionally training my ears with blind tests, I can tell you that there is a definite aural difference between a real tube guitar amp and a modeling amp. Other recording engineers I assisted could hear it too.
Same! I recently acquired a Fractal FM3, the most basic floor version of their Axe FX3, and it won me over very quickly. I’ve been a tube amp purist for many years but this thing sounds so good and simplified my live and recording workflows dramatically. Even without its magically incredible effects, it was amazing, but I was blown away when I started digging deeper.
Acquired the Fractal FM3 last month as well and it has been amazing. So much to explore and learn! I really feel this is easily the best time to be guitar player. So much awesome gear that is easily accessible. I love it!
> I really feel this is easily the best time to be guitar player.
I tell you what I'll trade you the gear for the chance to play the Marquis club in the 60's! There was so much to learn about what guitars could do back then.
I don't know. I just listened to some it examples on the web and the cleanish sounds still don't match the sound of a real amp to my ears. Although if was in a cover band, I'd definitely use one since it can cover so many different sounds.
Yes. Also there may be much better bass amp simulators out there, but the ones that come with logic don't come anywhere close to the sound I get direct from my Mesa TT-800.
I used an Alesis Quadraverb GT with an ART X-11 midi foot switch since 1991. I love great sounding pedals as much as the next guitarist, but I really didn't enjoy the care and feeding of a pedal board (those were pretty much all DIY in that era). The Alesis is still working 100% at age 32.
While this is an interesting deep dive into Boss pedals, anyone interested in pedals hasn't been looking to Boss for innovation for decades.
Programmable DSPs have led to the rise of innovators such as Chase Bliss, Meris, Hologram Electronics, Fairfield Circuitry and Empress releasing tools in a pedal form-factor that are northern Thai street food compared to Boss' Whopper Junior.
I’d be cautious. I’ve had two friends who bought it, were let down, sold it, thought maybe they weren’t using it right, bought it again, then sold it again.
It’s opinionated granulated synthethesis; it’s a good way to get that sound but if you find yourself not liking something about the sound, tough luck tweaking it.
I bought Quad Cortex quite some time ago, and I don't need amps and pedals anymore. Moreover, sold my over 20 pedal collection and stuff. I highly recommend Quad Cortex, the setup is so much easier now, without sacrificing quality. (amateur guitar player with 20 years amateur experience)
The digital stuff is etremely good these days, but it just doesn't do it for me. I have a Kemper with profiles of every amp under the sun but I still enjoy using my tube amps and pedals more. But yeah, Kemper, Quad Cortex, AxeFX, etc are hard to beat values if you don't mind fiddling.
Recording an album is a totally different experience with a Kemper. No more anxiety about how the tones will sit in the mix... If it's not working, you can re-amp it.
I gladly recommend Alex Ball's high quality free documentary on youtube about Roland. It's not guitar-effect focused (mostly the synths and drum machines) but it shows the many branches of Roland's products over the years.
I’ve been jamming with a drummer for years, just the two of us. A few months back he says “I had this looper in my closet”. I laid down a bass guitar loop, he started grooving over it, then I pulled out my guitar and all of a sudden we were sounding like a power trio. It blew me away.
I don't play guitar, but keys and live looping is incredible fun. I do it in my DAW (Reaper) though and I'm not satisfied with the ease of use but also don't want to have another pedal lying around.
Does anyone know a working software solution that just mimics a basic pedal? Should also be trustworthy, I'm hesitant to install random free VSTs.
If I'm not mistaken, one he does miss out on is Synth1, but then that would be 10 free VST's, and also gives www.kvraudio.com a reason to exist.
*The real problem is, people writing crappy VSTs and installing bits of crud all over my PC (and that inclludes DAW software writers), but hey,that's why backups and rollbacks exist, I guess.
To specifically answer your question "Does anyone know a working software solution that just mimics a basic pedal?" - which particular pedal? The software you may be hesitant to install may have the answer you require: I've found software that sounds better than the pedals they emulate, but aren't as easy to control (with a mouse), and are equally at the mercy of a DAW crash (looking at you Steinberg :-).
I've always been interested in trying to code guitar effects. Just over the break I submitted an 8-band EQ to OBS studio that has yet to be merged. That got me thinking about doing more, but I don't know what the best environment to code for is.
Boss has desktop loopers in the RC lineup, now. The guide in the link is more than a decade. There’s the RC202 and RC505. Not that you can’t put a peddle on a desk and use your hands if the switch design doesn’t actually require a stomp.
RC505 is definitely the gold standard for standalone desktop looping (5 tracks) that are suitable for hand operation. The 202 is just a less expensive 2 track.
There are other hardware options, like Aeros loop studio or even things like Akai MPC One, for example, but these get more complex than just a simple looper.
There are basic looper pedals but I suspect most people want something like an RC202 or RC505 for basic but multitrack simple live looping.
I'm not an expert at recording but in my experience trying to do anything live with a DAW is next to impossible due to latency issues. It would probably just be easier to record into the daw then spend a few seconds in the gui to loop it properly.
> trying to do anything live with a DAW is next to impossible due to latency issues.
It takes a little effort (and sometimes money), but you can definitely get latency low enough to be able to use the DAW live. Consider that almost every electronic artist playing music on stage today is using Ableton Live.
The basic components are:
1. Make sure your OS's drivers aren't introducing too much latency. I hear horror stories about the default audio drivers on Windows but as a Mac user I've never had to worry about this.
2. Make the buffer size small in your DAW. DAWs process audio a block of samples at a time because it's much kinder to the CPU's cache and gives you better overall throughput. But chunking obviously adds latency because you don't hear a single sample from the buffer until the entire buffer is done. Controlling the buffer size lets you make the latency/performance trade-off wherever you want.
At a 48k sample rate, each sample is ~0.02 milliseconds long. So a buffer size of 1,024 adds 21ms of latency, which is low enough for doing things like tweaking effects and arranging live, but high enough that you will definitely notice it if you're playing individual notes on an instrument. Dropping the buffer size down to 128 gets you down to ~2.6ms of latency, which is essentially unnoticeable.
3. Make sure your audio interface doesn't introduce too much latency. You can find sites that measure this precisely. My experience on my Mac is that even my cheap Focusrite audio interface is low enough to work fine. If you really get into this, you can spend extra money and get interfaces with lower latency.
the boss rc series kills. if you're a beginner, i'd recommend the rc-1. it's very basic, but this is a good thing at first. you'll want to get yourself to the point where you can click it on and off in time with the music, making a multi-bar sequence that stays in time without any quantization. don't even worry about midi to begin with, just sync yourself up with your own playing. looping seamlessly is its own musical skill.
once you get to be more of a wizard, you'll want things like backwards playback and multitrack looping and midi sync. you could progress toward more advanced boss pedals, or start looking at things like the electroharmonix 95000 (i have one, i bought it because i saw a video of reggie watts using one)
it's always gonna be a tradeoff between simplicity and complexity, and honestly more complex isn't always better. i find myself reaching for the rc-1 way more than the ehx95000 because it's so simple. just experiment, figure out how YOU like to loop. there's no right or wrong way. the gear should make you want to keep playing. if it doesn't, trade it in for something else. don't burn too much time deciding.
Ableton has an actual looper plug-in it comes with that works just like a pedal, in addition to Session View, which is looping on steroids and one of the key features of it.
I'm just somebody who has used it a lot, not associated to Ableton in any way.
Another popular DAW for loop-based recording is FL Studio (a little less expensive than Ableton with lifetime free updates and plenty powerful). Also a longtime user of FL.
I'm just getting started exploring with exploring DAWs myself and haven't looked at live looping yet. You'd want some sort of MIDI controller for it, and I understand there's hardware for recording samples and MIDI if you don't want to use a DAW.
I've wanted to get a looping pedal but at $100+ I've hesitated because I'd rather just get an adapter to plug my guitar into my PC and simulate pedals in software than spend $100 for every pedal I need. From my research an iRig2 is what I should get but open to any suggestions?
If you are a little patient, you can pick up an Avid mBox3 for ~$50 including shipping off eBay or Reverb (mine was $30). They are USB class compliant, built solid, and have high quality electronics consistent with a $500 price when new...two mic preamps with 70db gain for ribbon mics. They also do direct input and have additional jacks on the front...you could spend a lot more and do worse on an audio interface. [1] Avid is a high end company.
But of course, I am advocating used gear.
[1]: Also makes a pretty good headphone pre-amp that just needs USB power (like from a power brick).
There's $20-30 looper pedals on Amazon and Ali Express that do the job just fine.
Most any USB audio interface will have an "instrument" input/mode that will allow you to plug directly in and will work with Mac/Windows/Linux directly with low latency. Most of the come with some software bundles as well with free amp and pedal models.
All those cables are a hassle and the electronics are a bit like cheating (edit: for lack of a better word). I want an instrument with the effects built-in, physically, mechanically. Unfortunately, it seems to be sort of a lost artform.
Not lost at all. Acoustic music is alive and well. An interesting thing about the arts is that nothing ever become obsolete. Instead, the new just moves in next door to the old, and both coexist.
Whether you prefer electronic or acoustic just comes down to personal preference. I still play alcohol powered instruments (double bass, cello), and ride an acoustic bicycle, though my friends badger me about when I'll switch to electric.
There are a bunch of offerings like that. The GTRS S800 guitars come to mind. If you want to keep your own guitar, the BOSS Waza Air headphones are completely hassle - free.
Haven't had much of a chance to play with Boss pedals, myself. I have a couple of Behringer "knock offs", along with other effects pedals.
Such a dizzying array of options and sounds to be discovered when they're chained together; and I can happily spend hours down the rabbit hole looking for tunes that compliment the distortions that have been twiddled up!
It combines music, electronics, general nerding out (e.g. debating germanium VS silicon diodes), and some visual design if you want to make the enclosures pretty. You might even be able to sell some.
I started by building a kit pedal with one of my kids as a weekend project.
Some search terms to get you started: build your own clone, diy pedal schematics, tag board music effects.