ilovefuzz.com

HighDeaf1080p wrote:I guess I could always buy five Bitquests, so that I could actually use all of the different capabilities at once...but that wouldn't save me much money.

Agree to disagree

Agreed.

UglyCasanova wrote:Agree to disagree

HighDeaf1080p wrote:Let's head to Norway and lynch him, boys!!! We can't have a monster like this on the loose!

Don't lynch him, just force him to start his own pedal company.

HighDeaf1080p wrote:Agreed.

Wow, surprised I haven't said anything too dumb yet. Yay keeping my typing quiet.

I see the spin/DSP stuff from a different perspective I guess. It isn't that somebody uses them and/or doesn't include several modes, it is just sometimes that when things get (this is a tough word to pick) more formulaic to develop (more standardized hardware, set code snippets "this is my base delay code"), in combination with consumer demands and branding, designs can somewhat converge into a clouded market place of "sameness" (and possibly even mediocrity). The spread of information and techniques kinda lends itself to this kind of movement toward a horizon (fuzzes, for example, have so many good flavors it is kinda hard to choose something like a dam over a castledine or whatever). On the other hand, things like the spin can be a sandbox for more creative and quick explorations/prototyping (which will come in waves, you know?).

I guess what I am kinda getting to is that there are several delays that shift pitch or do the glitch thing now. The spin itself isn't the problem, it is the designers. Whether they've made something that sells, others want, or something that that they truly enjoy all could possibly mean something or nothing to another consumer in respects toward their opinion of a particular technique (chip, analog, etc). If someone thinks an effect is mediocre, they will demand more value per purchase (especially if it overlaps with another effect that company has made...or a month old version that gets replaced). But then again, this pedal world has a buy/try/flip culture that almost validates many designs (unique or not, the sales are there that drives more development in that direction)

Basically, if you don't like the shared chassis, shared everything design, avoid it and speak with your wallet. When they come out with a program that is truly new and unique that speaks to you and you feel it is worth the cash, pay for it (all of these are personally answered questions...I could think a fart sound button is the most useful new tool in the world...others might not and cite the keychain...). There are so many alternatives today with admittedly tons more value than these "three shot" near $200 pedals, what you are really paying for is what you perceive as distinctly unique. Get a boss dd-500 and make these delays for your self.

Sick of Mr. Black having three super moons now using the spin? Don't spend there. But if somebody like hexe or sonic crayon used the spin and made something supercool (or Mr. Black or Alexander or whoever) does that validate the spin?

Personally, very few companies that do these have caught my attention with making something unique with the spin recently. They all kinda seem like the same twists and recombinations of three different effects. Just doesn't do it for me. I want to see more hybrid designs (don't know how well it lends itself)! I think there is room for things to get a lot better, but consumer demands/musical trends are driving development for a lot of builders now which can make times seem kinda boring.

The other debate I've always had problems kind of getting around in my head is the digital vs. "real" debate. But that is something separate.

Whether you & I (or anyone else) like it or not, digital is "real".

(I still think a lot of 'em don't sound very good, but, as you've said, that's something separate.)

That is a good post Galves but it's missing Ring Modulation.

I'm not sure I could look at my pedal board and tell you what pedals are spin chip pedals. Mainly because I am concerned with what a pedal does and how good it sounds, and not with what internal components were used to accomplish it.

My F.13 flanger...my EQD Arpanoid, I assume...hmmm. Anyone know if the Caroline Meteore is or isn't? I'm guessing it isn't.

I'm just gonna assume that every pedal is digital from now on.

Meteore is Belton.

D.o.S. wrote:That is a good post Galves but it's missing Ring Modulation.

Haha, I actually thought of editting fart example for "crass through a ring mod" but Chankgeez already replied haha. Spin FV-1 that! I assure the builder you'll sell one.

HighDeaf1080p wrote:I'm not sure I could look at my pedal board and tell you what pedals are spin chip pedals. Mainly because I am concerned with what a pedal does and how good it sounds, and not with what internal components were used to accomplish it.

My F.13 flanger...my EQD Arpanoid, I assume...hmmm. Anyone know if the Caroline Meteore is or isn't? I'm guessing it isn't.

Not really the point. I see the anger toward the chip as being misplaced. It might just a clouded marketplace of samey pedals. I think if there where two more TC Electronic style companies, it would be the same (amp modeling 15 years ago is a similar example...not exact, but close) and consumer anger might be direct at their chips...or at something else entirely. It just comes back to how money was spent, what was developed and the variety in the marketplace. The perception is a result.

If those pedals work for you, cool. No problem here. Haha. It's like all an opinion, man.

Chankgeez wrote: Whether you & I (or anyone else) like it or not, digital is "real".

(I still think a lot of 'em don't sound very good, but, as you've said, that's something separate.)

I started typing thoughts of physical work/prototyping vs prototyping on a computer...and it is like getting into a debate if an accountant's labor is more valuable than a plumber's. Not going to get into that, but it is something that drives consumer spending (only buying records vs only buying mp3s). Haha

I do think a lot of digital pedals sound freaking awesome. I still think Digitech does a great job. Hexe does great stuff. I like my zoom.ms100bt. I thought my Mr black dark echo, super moon and Cb Echorec where boring. Not the chips fault on that. Nor always the builder/programmers. I'm the only one I can blame for not liking it. Builders can take what a consumer says and improve, tweak, whatever..but do we really need super moon, super moon chrome, and blood moon all at the same price? Why not make super moon + and add $40 to the price for the extra footswitch. I guess I can see both sides (sorry to Mr. Black, just the first off the top of my head example same could be said with tone bender input cap variation haha).


..uh...

Just make it ring mod before I continue to ramble.

lordgalvar wrote:Get a boss dd-500 and make these delays for your self.

this guy gets it

Man, these spin chips are controversial!! I had no idea.

In light of this news, I've decided to have my Arpanoid and my F.13 reboxed into a single enclosure to double the value of them. (and cut their usability in half)

I'm sure that's how this works.

Should only cost me $300 to do it.