[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

RE: Addressing a single Echoplex in a Stereo Setup

At 07:46 AM 6/18/2006, Clint Goss wrote:
>Thank you all for your input on this subject!

you're welcome!

>Claude's input using SysEx messages was a tad depressing ... The FCB1010 
>pull this off and apparantly Plex's can hiccup acoustically during SysEx
>processing (their admission/apology, in the manual).

As we say in the manual, this is only true for long sysex command streams 
sent to the Echoplex. For a simple sysex command (like one that edits a 
single parameter as Claude was discussing) there is no audible effect.

>There is a suggestion of using separate Source # or MIDI channels and 
>two messages. I wonder if synchronization (when working in stereo) would 

No, there won't be any problem. We designed the Echoplex to support this 
type of use, and tested it to be sure it worked.

>I sense that the Plex designers put a lot of effort into the stereo
>synch issue ... brother synch and intelligent midi piping and all that.

yes, that is true, we did!

And part of the goal was to support exactly the flexibility you are 
for - the ability to switch between addressing two loops as stereo pairs 
as independent loops, and deciding on the fly.

>sending two MIDI messages might degrade that stereo synch in comparison 
>brother sync.

No, BrotherSync is always active whichever way you do this. The 
connection between the two units will lock them together at the sample 
level so they should stay in sync. It has nothing to do with midi 
and you should keep BrotherSync connected for any of the strategies you 
hearing about here.

Controlling the stereo pair by sending a single command to both units on 
the same channel, or controlling them by sending two midi commands on two 
midi channels will work exactly the same. They will stay in sync the same 

>And then there's the issue that the FCB 1010 is not up to the task. Hmmm. 
>using it for a year to control two Plexes and a PCM81. Reprogrammed it 
>times and used it live dozens of times over the last year.

I hate to break the news to you guys yet again, but the FCB1010 is really 
not that great of a midi controller. It enjoys the advantage of being 
affordable, available, and a little better than other available pedals 
utterly suck. But in the larger view of all midi pedals ever made, it is 
the middle to slightly-above-average range. Definitely not at the top.

>In a gig last night, I tried doing the 'punch the panel buttons' thing to 
>the two channels so they played two different parts of an ostinato and 
>reversing one of the channels. Cool acoustic effect, crappy psychological
>effect. I can tap a footswitch without missing a beat, but going over to 
>panel was disorienting and took me way out of the music for like 30 

you might also try the suggested idea of just using the normal Echoplex 
pedal in conjunction with your Behringer midi pedal. That is an easy/cheap 
way to accomplish your goal of switching between stereo or independent 
loops on the fly.

> > PMC-10 for awhile, but, and maybe mine was weird- there was about a 
> 100ms delay
> > from when I pressed the pedal to when the EDP changed its state.
>Yikes! 1/10'th second? That is disqualifying.

There are a lot of people using the PMC-10 with the echoplex and in other 
situations, including me. It is a highly regarded pedal. As I noted, this 
supposed delay is not the experience of the vast majority of pmc-10 users.

The Digitech PMC-10 really is one of the best midi pedals ever. Sadly it 
has been out of production a long time, is hard to find, and at this stage 
in life may be getting a little shaky if not well taken care of. It is a 
sad situation, but users don't demand good midi pedals so no manufacturer 
puts effort into it.


Kim Flint                     | Looper's Delight
kflint@loopers-delight.com    | http://www.loopers-delight.com