SHOW OFF YOUR PEDALBOARD!

[Sascha Franck]

I like and enjoy the pedalboard planning/goofing around/building part.

I actually like all the planning as well. And partially checking out things, too. But actually building things is a bit different, simply because my pedalboards are my main workhorses which I'm actually using live to make my living, so one of the prerequisites is to have everything absolutely foolproof and secured, fitting in a case and what not. There's no room for errors or so. So each time I set up something new, unless there's no gigs ahead, I have to deal with cable management, cable ties, velcro, differently sized foam blocks and what not. That's the part I absolutely hate.

In addition, there seems to be a sort of rule going like: "What works at home, won't work live!" Of course that's not exactly true, but more often than I would like, some unforseeable things happen, sometimes requiring you to play a half-miserable gig and then fix those unforseeable things as soon as you get back home, which often includes to rip lots of things out again, cut all cable ties and what not.

As a result, once I have a board working safely under all (well, at least almost all) expectable conditions, I just try to stick with "never change a running system".

But then, by now I have so much stuff collected, I could possibly set up an entirely separated board for home/fun purposes.

 

[laxu]

Thats good!

Personally I have discovered in recent time that I like and enjoy the pedalboard planning/goofing around/building part. Almost (shamefully so) to the point it’s more fun than playing guitar. I remember missing that almost from day one when I converted to Helix 2017. I became a sad person (realized that now) that stopped having fun.

For me, my solution is to have a basic board size and a predetermined number and type of pedals. But the “fun” part for me is that most of can be changed, if I want to try a different reverb or delay etc. I think I have found the balance there, to not go crazy on redoing stuff but still have spots that are open for change.

I can agree with that. I've had a ton of fun just figuring out different configurations of the pedals I own using e.g Pedalplayground.

The actually putting the board together part is less fun because it's always the wrong length cables, or something doesn't fit quite right, or there's an issue you have to troubleshoot.

 

[dronerstone]

Finally!

20 minutes in -> it's a messy beast, in the best possible way.

Seems to add kinda Superfuzz-esque havoc to whatever it's fed.

The parallel octave definitely sounds different from a serial one. Deep dive will have to wait until the weekend, and possibly result in a complete board rewiring...

 

[TubeStack]

View attachment 31807

Pretty happy with this, so far! Just set it up, haven’t tried it yet.

Gotta say, the VP4 and HX One on the same board is pretty badass!

Signal is Stowaway buffer > HX One > wah > phase > front of amp, with the VP4 in the amp’s loop.

Ampero midi controller is for changing amp channels on Mark VII.

Ok, here’s the new version.

Fractal’s recent midi w/scenes update allowed me to ditch the Ampero controller and add some drives for boosting the MKVII.

Everything is in front of the amp except for the VP4 in the loop.

Going to set up the VP4 midi control of the VII now.

 

[TubeStack]

With the VP4 only capable of sending PC changes that match the preset # to which you're switching

the HX One not being able to save on/off status,

Both of these issues were fixed in recent updates, making them a much better pair now!

 

[dronerstone]

Wired this beast up last night. Just spent 3 hours with headphones on, playing it through a CAB M+.

I drove to the store and picked up a Palmer PB60, because the old PB40 was getting too small, and I had to kick my beloved POG 2 off board - which ain't a good move, if you ask me. Poor POG! And honestly, this is probably my best build so far. I tried to keep it as clean as I could, and if everything sticks in place, I'm satisfied.

Yes, the input is underneath. It's that angled plug that runs into the Rangemaster.
Reverb is last in chain, after that it's either cab sim or power amp (or both).

Rangemaster > Freqout > Octave Loop Switcher (PDF-1 and Twin Bender in the loop) > POG 2 > 105Q > Belle Epoch > Exegol > Super Spring Theory

The sounds are BLASPHEMOUS!!!

PS: the toanz are in the dog's hair, that's for sure.

 

[newpedals]

View attachment 34200


Ok, here’s the new version.

Fractal’s recent midi w/scenes update allowed me to ditch the Ampero controller and add some drives for boosting the MKVII.

Everything is in front of the amp except for the VP4 in the loop.

Going to set up the VP4 midi control of the VII now.

I have seen this pedal on some boards and I always wondered.

What does the mic mechanic really do, and assuming a singer is supposed to connect it to her/ his mic, can it be connected to a mixer desk directly?

Do you have to connect/ wire your guitar-related pedals separately and have another set of cables connecting the Mic mechanic to the microphone?

Sorry. I am just curious.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Is there a reason to have an FM9 and a VP4? Doesn't the FM9 do everything the VP4 does?

Maybe it's a matter of how to organize things (which I could perfectly understand), but I was kinda curious already, too.

 

[iaresee]

Is there a reason to have an FM9 and a VP4? Doesn't the FM9 do everything the VP4 does?

More is more

 

[Sascha Franck]

More is more

This is the way!

 

[TubeStack]

I have seen this pedal on some boards and I always wondered.

What does the mic mechanic really do, and assuming a singer is supposed to connect it to her/ his mic, can it be connected to a mixer desk directly?

Do you have to connect/ wire your guitar-related pedals separately and have another set of cables connecting the Mic mechanic to the microphone?

Sorry. I am just curious.

It has a great "tone" button that adds EQ, compression, "de-Essing" (reducing sibilance on 'S' sounds) and noise gate. Basically adds a bit of production sauce to vocals that I love, which is the main thing I have it for. Can also add delay, reverb, and even pitch correction that works very well. It's not connected to my guitar pedals, however it is powered by the same supply (Eventide Powermax, which is a re-branded Cioks DC7). It goes in between the mic and the board (2 XLR cables).

 

[Bloody_Inferno]

I recently joined a funk band on bass and have to learn 30 songs by this Saturday. I also assembled a board to necessitate the gig.

 

[Sascha Franck]

I recently joined a funk band on bass and have to learn 30 songs by this Saturday. I also assembled a board to necessitate the gig.

Picture of a bass pedalboard for a funk band:

 

[Sascha Franck]

Ok, maybe this:

 

[gearJunkie]

Ignore the dirty tile, but I'm experimenting with this configuration in 4CM with my custom King Kong 50 before I lock everything down and properly manage the cables.

It's currently wired starting with the PolyTune into the gate sidechain to the fuzz, then down the line through the Magma57 to the amp input. The loop starts (top row from right to left) with the "Key in the Gate" and ends with the BlueSky.

I think I'm going to move the fuzz to the front of the chain for propper impedance loading.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Just a general observation not directed at anyone (or a board) in particular: I see what I think is pretty little loopswitchers in this thread. Why is that so? And no, it's neither a rhetoric nor a provocative question but a genuine one as in: Do you see any advances in not using a loopswitcher? I could actually think of some, but in the end, I would never run an even just slightly larger board without one.

 

[gearJunkie]

Just a general observation not directed at anyone (or a board) in particular: I see what I think is pretty little loopswitchers in this thread. Why is that so? And no, it's neither a rhetoric nor a provocative question but a genuine one as in: Do you see any advances in not using a loopswitcher? I could actually think of some, but in the end, I would never run an even just slightly larger board without one.

My main pedalboard is a Voodoo Lab Dingbat w/ PX-8+ switcher. It's simple, quiet, MIDI controllable, and extremely space efficient.

However, it is presently slightly disassembled and in the process of reconfiguration as I complete the rework of my secondary board shown in the post above yours.

I love the PX-8+ on my main board, but I don't have any issues using my secondary board without a loop switcher. There's a little more tap dancing, but that's half the fun (sometimes).

 

[dronerstone]

Just a general observation not directed at anyone (or a board) in particular: I see what I think is pretty little loopswitchers in this thread. Why is that so? And no, it's neither a rhetoric nor a provocative question but a genuine one as in: Do you see any advances in not using a loopswitcher? I could actually think of some, but in the end, I would never run an even just slightly larger board without one.

You mean multi-channel ones that will do presets etc?

My personal main reasons against something like that, while I'm sure they're convenient:

- huge
- expensive
- messy wiring (double the cables)

 

[Sascha Franck]

You mean multi-channel ones that will do presets etc?

Yes.

- huge

Not really.
On my old board, I was using a Mooer L6. Fairly small. And working very well, even if it's kinda like the cheap skater's loopswitcher.

- expensive

The Mooer is €140. I think that's very affordable.

- messy wiring (double the cables)

That's true (well, maybe not exactly double the cables in case you stack things in loops, which I did).

I do however agree that, while possibly not "huge", they take up space on your board that could otherwise either be saved (bad) or used for more pedals (good!).

But then, once everything is arranged and cabled up, the comfort is just incredible.

As an example: I developed a habit of having all my lead sounds organized that most often they're a variation of a rhythm sound. To get there, the most typical switching I'm going for 95% of all times is to add a sort of pre-boost (either a compressor or a somewhat "hairy" boost), a post-EQ (for the final lead level/frequency balance) and some spatial effect (typically delay/reverb). That'd be 3 switch taps, usually too much if all you want is to play a little fill. With a loopswitcher it's one-switch-goodness.

I also think it's easier to run a sort of hybrid setup, using either multiple (such as drives) or programmable items (such as a delay unit) in the loops, so you would preselect the sounds between songs and then be ready to go - all with the actual switch locations staying the same. For instance, looper preset 3 would always be my dirt rhythm sound, looper preset 4 would be the dirt lead tone, regardless of what I had preselected in the loops themselves. That way you don't need to remember which pedal to step on during a song.

Whatever, in case you don't need rapid switching between pretty different sounds but are more into kinda "gradually" shaping your tone, you possibly don't need a looper. Might even be counterproductive as some pedal combinations aren't easily possible anymore.

 

[dronerstone]

Yes.



Not really.
On my old board, I was using a Mooer L6. Fairly small. And working very well, even if it's kinda like the cheap skater's loopswitcher.



The Mooer is €140. I think that's very affordable.



That's true (well, maybe not exactly double the cables in case you stack things in loops, which I did).

I do however agree that, while possibly not "huge", they take up space on your board that could otherwise either be saved (bad) or used for more pedals (good!).

But then, once everything is arranged and cabled up, the comfort is just incredible.

As an example: I developed a habit of having all my lead sounds organized that most often they're a variation of a rhythm sound. To get there, the most typical switching I'm going for 95% of all times is to add a sort of pre-boost (either a compressor or a somewhat "hairy" boost), a post-EQ (for the final lead level/frequency balance) and some spatial effect (typically delay/reverb). That'd be 3 switch taps, usually too much if all you want is to play a little fill. With a loopswitcher it's one-switch-goodness.

I also think it's easier to run a sort of hybrid setup, using either multiple (such as drives) or programmable items (such as a delay unit) in the loops, so you would preselect the sounds between songs and then be ready to go - all with the actual switch locations staying the same. For instance, looper preset 3 would always be my dirt rhythm sound, looper preset 4 would be the dirt lead tone, regardless of what I had preselected in the loops themselves. That way you don't need to remember which pedal to step on during a song.

Whatever, in case you don't need rapid switching between pretty different sounds but are more into kinda "gradually" shaping your tone, you possibly don't need a looper. Might even be counterproductive as some pedal combinations aren't easily possible anymore.

Size: I'd have a rearrange the whole board, to me personally, this outweighs the benefits.

Price: I give you that, €140 is fairly affordable. I've been looking at rather expensive upper-tier ones a few years ago, compared to the Mooer you mentioned, these would've been far outside of my comfort zone (for a mere QOL tool).

Cables: I currently run a 10-pedal assembly (including a parallel loop blender) using 10 patch cables, all of them EBS Flats. Using 10 pedals in a loop switcher, without stacking, would mean 20 cables.

I see your points, although I guess it's a matter of use case, and if it makes sense for the individual rig.

If I was a touring pro and have better gear budget/resources, along with people to transport my stuff, I'd definitely consider going all-in and putting pedals in rack drawers with a huge switching device, e.g. by RJM or such.