Re: evangelize EDP please

[Greg House <ghunicycle@yahoo.com>]

--- Lance Chance <lrc8918@louisiana.edu> wrote:

Not to be argumentative, or to discourage anyone from getting an EDP (which
sounds like a great unit), but you make some statements about the Repeater 
which
I don't understand.

You mentioned the easier foot pedal setup. Well, yeah. The EDP has a 
dedicated
foot pedal that you buy pre-configured. It doesn't get much easier then 
that.
With the Repeater, you have to use a midi controller, which means 
programming it.
That's always going to be more complicated. However, I've noticed that 
many of
the more advanced users of the EDP also use a midi controller with it, to 
make
more options and more control immediately available. The difficulty of
programming a midi controller will be about the same whether you're 
controlling a
Repeater or an EDP, so I don't really see this as a big advantage.

And yes, while you can buy that simple dedicated foot controller for the 
EDP,
they charge you almost as much for this basic metal box (which consists of 
just 7
switches and a handful of resistors) as you might pay for a nice Behringer 
MIDI
foot controller, which is infinitely more versatile.

Now, I -really- like the fact that you can plug an expression pedal 
directly into
the EDP and control feedback (and other parameters?). That's a really nice
feature.

>   i find the repeater more
> difficult to use in a studio environment, where it's stutters and 
>fluttery
> artifacts are much more apparent than in a live venue.

I've never heard any "stutters or fluttery artifacts" when using my 
Repeater. It
plays back what I play in. Is there a specific sequence of events or 
functions
you use which triggers this?

> if i had to drop one, i guess it would be the repeater, because though it
> can do a whole lot more, the work that i have done with my edp and just 
>my
> guitar is much more professional sounding than the work  i have done with
> the repeater.   so, despite not being able to even twist the durn delay 
>time
> (grrrr) on the edp, for me it finally came down to sound quality.  

Given that the Repeater has higher fidelity then the EDP, I don't 
understand this
comment. I've never had any problems with it's sound quality, as long as 
it's run
at the right signal levels, it's line level, and if you try to run it at
instrument levels, it'll be noisy. That's not unique to the Repeater. Most 
studio
effects are like this. 

Or are you talking about the slight ticking sound some people get on track 
1 when
using the CFC? Apparently that varies in intensity from unit to unit, mine
doesn't do it. 

> the edp
> sounds awesome.  no doubt.  it is warm and full and loops without the
> slightest hint of a pop.   i make a lot of textural soundscapes and this
> thing about pops at the loop point is almost a tie breaker right off the
> bat, for me.   if you are an ebow player, i bet that you know what i am
> talking about.

I am, and I don't. I hear a very slight change (usually a little surge) in 
volume
around the loop point on the Repeater, never a pop. It's never bothered me.

> i say get the edp.

I don't necessarily disagree, depending on what someone wants to do, and 
how they
like to work. 

For me, the Repeater works in a very intuitive way and it allows many many
flexable options for manipulation which the EDP doesn't (time
stretching/contracting, pitch manipulation, panning, time shifting, 
multiple
tracks for realtime mixing, effects loop, etc). The EDP, on the other hand 
is
extremely powerful in other respects. 

Compare what you like, how you work, the level things need to run in your 
rig,
and what features you want to use while playing, and the choice will 
probably
become clear.

Greg

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/