Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7951
|
Posted: September 25 2015 at 00:10 |
Dean wrote:
HackettFan wrote:
Dean, as you know, I perused your sustainer pickup thread quite awhile ago. I was wondering if you had been following Paul Vo's Vo Guitar. He showed it off at this year's Namm festival. He uses a digitally controlled sustainer pickup mounted on/in an acoustic guitar not just to vibrate the string but to control the vibration so that it produces a square wave or a saw tooth (and with the desired amount of sustain too of course). It controls what harmonics are present and can arpeggiate the harmonics even. It's a whole new type of synthesis he calls acoustic synthesis; purely physical - no signal processing or PV conversion. Talk about tone! They're not available yet. I'm waiting, though. I thought you might also get excited by the technical achievement of it. See www.paulvo.com (if you haven't already). |
I had seen his Wond but not the Vo-96. Interesting. There is signal processing and conversions going on, they're just part of the feedback process instead of being post-processing. Unfortunately the demo video was as dull as dishwater as I didn't care what the presets do or any of that so I didn't watch it to the end, I was more interested in the pick-up/exciter. I had considered a pick-up/exciter per string for my sustainer but that was too complicated for what I was building. Thinking about how the Vo-96 must work and judging by its size, I surmise that he has used (at least) two pick-ups per string so he can control the harmonics and create the tone-arpeggios, giving a total of 24 individual coils.
This has got me thinking... sustainers work by feeding back the picked-up note to a driver coil such that it is in-phase with the note fundamental, the Vo-96 uses two (or more) driver coils so the secondary driver can be a little out of phase with the fundamental and thus control the harmonics. In sustainers such is the Sustainiac and Ebow the drivers are continuously pushing and pulling the string, and unless told otherwise I'm guessing that this is also how the Wond and Vo-96 work (based on the Wond, but he says the technology is the same) but perhaps it isn't... Because this isn't how we play a guitar, we apply the initial impetus to start the vibration and the string oscillates at its fundamental frequency, and without further stimulation
|
This is so interesting, but a lot for a layman to grapple with. I don't understand phase modulation, if that's what you're talking about. One time I was fiddling on paper with combining waves that were out of phase by various amounts and managed to get something on paper that started resembling a sawtooth, but that was only after adding together multiple waves. I'm most likely looking at it all wrong, but I don't understand though how one modulating wave out of phase wave can so thoroughly tweak the harmonics of another wave. Of course they can, but there must be some math I don't know how to apply, or something.
Dean wrote:
Now consider pushing a child on a swing... here we don't continuously run backwards and forwards while holding on to the swing's seat to keep it swinging, we apply a single push at the top of its backward swing and allow physics to do the rest. This impulse function is more efficient and requires less energy from us to keep the kid amused. In fact we don't even need to give this extra impetus on every back-swing, we can do it once every 2nd, 3rd or nth back-swing and the swing will maintain its oscillation.
So what if we applied this technique to a guitar string... this is tricky in pure analogue sustainers but in digital sustainers it would be simple as the DSP analysis has already analysed each string for pitch, phase and amplitude. So rather than driving the exciter-coil with a reconstituted analogue signal (from a D to A, which I'm pretty certain is how Paul Vo does it), "digitally" pulsing the exciter-coil at the peak point in each vibration cycle would be a doddle, we could even pulse the string 180° out of phase and thus dampen the string. This opens up another (technical) possibility - since the coil is only being driven for a brief time during the note's cycle, the rest of the time the string's vibration will be inducing current in its windings, therefore the exciter can be used as a pick-up to give continuous feedback to the control circuitry.
hmm... food for thought. |
I'm not clear if your analogy to a child on a swing is a supposition about how Paul Vo is achieving wave form control, or if you are brainstorming your own ideas. I had been presuming that the Vo sustainer pickup was applying continuous control, but I'm far from knowing anything.
Edited by HackettFan - September 25 2015 at 09:14
|
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7951
|
Posted: September 27 2015 at 19:01 |
I've tried using a wah filter without a sweep, just using it in a static fashion and trying to find a single sweet spot with a nice timbre to play in. I never found a sweet spot that moved me, though. I tried it with a Line 6 FM4 without the expression pedal and just dialed it in, but nothing was very spectacular. Maybe I might try a resonant filter in the future, if I happen to swing the bucks for a Fulltone Clyde Standard Wah, which has a resonance control that I think might make something like this more interesting (or if I ever get around to building one of those Craig Anderton Super Tone Control projects). Maybe someone's aware of a guitarist, perhaps even a Prog guitarist who does this (played holding the wah pedal stationary), or has done it themself? I know it's occasionally been done, but I can't think of specifically who.
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65258
|
Posted: September 27 2015 at 19:58 |
Satch uses tons of wah, and sometimes it sounds like he's got it stuck on stationary, though I suspect most of the time he's footing it.
|
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy
|
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7951
|
Posted: October 11 2015 at 16:20 |
^Thanks again.
HackettFan wrote:
There's a really cool mod for the Boss OC-2 Octave Divider on the net (YouTube). One of these days I'll try to do the mod myself, but I was able to commission someone else to do one for me, and it's become one of my pride and joys. It's latency-free also (because there's no PV conversion). Basically what happens if you bypass the part of the circuit that filters the sound, you get an Atari Punk square wave sound out of it. There's another schematic out there too called a Synth Box, which is based on one of the other octave dividers. I think it was a Rocktron or something. The upshot is I suspect this might be a property of octave dividers generally, which means we could have had monophonic square wave synth sounds from guitars back as early as the 60s! Who knows what could've happened from there. Once you have an acceptable square wave, there are ample harmonics present so that you can filter out some of those harmonics and get other types of wave forms (schematics currently available on the net). |
FYI, If anyone wants something like the Boss OC2 Mod without doing the mod, I just found out the MXR Blue Box is basically already designed that way. That is, it gives a synth-like square wave in a lower octave and simply lacks the filtering that the OC2 Mod seeks to eliminate or bypass. Just turn the output dial all the way up and the blend dial all the way down (or maybe three quarters of the way down). One difference is the OC2 Mod also bypasses the part of the circuit that matches the envelope of the dry signal, which gives it an even more synthey flavor. The Blue Box lacks the filtering of the OC2 to begin with, but it does match the envelope of the dry signal (actually cutting it out a bit early to eliminate some crackling noise. Craig Anderton spoke about that concerning his Rocktron schematic), so it's still a little different, but well worthwhile. It sounds great with a low cut filter or a resonant filter. I was also pleasantly surprised with the sound of the distortion without the lowered octive when turning the blend knob all the way clockwise. It has a very pleasant and creamy distortion that appeals to me.
Edited by HackettFan - October 11 2015 at 16:27
|
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7951
|
Posted: October 16 2015 at 14:21 |
HackettFan wrote:
Dean wrote:
HackettFan wrote:
Dean, as you know, I perused your sustainer pickup thread quite awhile ago. I was wondering if you had been following Paul Vo's Vo Guitar. He showed it off at this year's Namm festival. He uses a digitally controlled sustainer pickup mounted on/in an acoustic guitar not just to vibrate the string but to control the vibration so that it produces a square wave or a saw tooth (and with the desired amount of sustain too of course). It controls what harmonics are present and can arpeggiate the harmonics even. It's a whole new type of synthesis he calls acoustic synthesis; purely physical - no signal processing or PV conversion. Talk about tone! They're not available yet. I'm waiting, though. I thought you might also get excited by the technical achievement of it. See www.paulvo.com (if you haven't already). |
I had seen his Wond but not the Vo-96. Interesting. There is signal processing and conversions going on, they're just part of the feedback process instead of being post-processing. Unfortunately the demo video was as dull as dishwater as I didn't care what the presets do or any of that so I didn't watch it to the end, I was more interested in the pick-up/exciter. I had considered a pick-up/exciter per string for my sustainer but that was too complicated for what I was building. Thinking about how the Vo-96 must work and judging by its size, I surmise that he has used (at least) two pick-ups per string so he can control the harmonics and create the tone-arpeggios, giving a total of 24 individual coils.
This has got me thinking... sustainers work by feeding back the picked-up note to a driver coil such that it is in-phase with the note fundamental, the Vo-96 uses two (or more) driver coils so the secondary driver can be a little out of phase with the fundamental and thus control the harmonics. In sustainers such is the Sustainiac and Ebow the drivers are continuously pushing and pulling the string, and unless told otherwise I'm guessing that this is also how the Wond and Vo-96 work (based on the Wond, but he says the technology is the same) but perhaps it isn't... Because this isn't how we play a guitar, we apply the initial impetus to start the vibration and the string oscillates at its fundamental frequency, and without further stimulation
| This is so interesting, but a lot for a layman to grapple with. I don't understand phase modulation, if that's what you're talking about. One time I was fiddling on paper with combining waves that were out of phase by various amounts and managed to get something on paper that started resembling a sawtooth, but that was only after adding together multiple waves. I'm most likely looking at it all wrong, but I don't understand though how one modulating wave out of phase wave can so thoroughly tweak the harmonics of another wave. Of course they can, but there must be some math I don't know how to apply, or something.
Dean wrote:
Now consider pushing a child on a swing... here we don't continuously run backwards and forwards while holding on to the swing's seat to keep it swinging, we apply a single push at the top of its backward swing and allow physics to do the rest. This impulse function is more efficient and requires less energy from us to keep the kid amused. In fact we don't even need to give this extra impetus on every back-swing, we can do it once every 2nd, 3rd or nth back-swing and the swing will maintain its oscillation.
So what if we applied this technique to a guitar string... this is tricky in pure analogue sustainers but in digital sustainers it would be simple as the DSP analysis has already analysed each string for pitch, phase and amplitude. So rather than driving the exciter-coil with a reconstituted analogue signal (from a D to A, which I'm pretty certain is how Paul Vo does it), "digitally" pulsing the exciter-coil at the peak point in each vibration cycle would be a doddle, we could even pulse the string 180° out of phase and thus dampen the string. This opens up another (technical) possibility - since the coil is only being driven for a brief time during the note's cycle, the rest of the time the string's vibration will be inducing current in its windings, therefore the exciter can be used as a pick-up to give continuous feedback to the control circuitry.
hmm... food for thought. | I'm not clear if your analogy to a child on a swing is a supposition about how Paul Vo is achieving wave form control, or if you are brainstorming your own ideas. I had been presuming that the Vo sustainer pickup was applying continuous control, but I'm far from knowing anything. | Paul Vo apparently confirms that he's using PM synthesis. In the following link, he says in passing that, "It's moving the harmonics in a way that a phaser would move them." https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=psqPViFKkjg I'm still reading up on things and trying to wrap my head around this and still not sure what the mathematical relationship is between phase modulation and harmonics, which is maybe just too bad for me. It works of course. I've just always had a better grasp of additive synthesis, oh well. Anyway, Craig Anderton (Projects For Guitarists pp.55-58) has a phase switcher project that shifts the phase of a signal 180 degrees. It occurs to me that a well placed pot might give variable control over the degree of shift not unlike a cocked wah, and therefore I could maybe do something that's hands on (of course I would have to split and buffer and mix it with the unmodulated signal too).
|
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7951
|
Posted: October 18 2015 at 15:05 |
^The only product I've come across that is capable of producing a manual cocked phase is the modern version of the EHX Bad Stone. I've been interested in the past in having an envelope phaser. They aren't cocked phasers like above, but they have a triggered sweep. Pigtronix has one (but pricey). I got one from Mooer (part of a multi-effect). I was kind of disappointed and lost interest, but this XVIVE Wave Phaser has gotten me interested once again. Here's a couple links to YouTube vids: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MtG-YJIA2Lohttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1mfSXgx6RTcHere's a written review from Tone Report: http://tonereport.com/reviews/xvive-wave-phaserBring this back to interesting distorted tones, I also came across this vid on the Ten Ten Devices Triangle Fuzz, which I find really impressive: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rKueUxZmIv0Here's also a little write up about it on the Tone Report: http://tonereport.com/reviews/tenten-devices-triangle
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65258
|
Posted: October 24 2015 at 00:16 |
Anyone hear about the PRS (Paul Reed Smith) guitar wood scandal-- one of their suppliers of the rare Bigleaf maple tree which yields the stunning wood PRS uses for their instruments is charged with clear-cutting a bunch of the trees. I played several PRS axes back when Paul himself was making them and they were without doubt some of the very finest guitars I've ever handled or heard, but I think I' rather keep some rare trees around.
|
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy
|
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7951
|
Posted: November 12 2015 at 21:54 |
I got a Big Muff for the first time (no jokes, please ). Sounds great. Some settings even sound like a square wave synth. No wonder Hackett always used them.
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65258
|
Posted: November 12 2015 at 23:02 |
MUFF !!!
|
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy
|
|
pitfall
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 22 2012
Location: Essex, England
Status: Offline
Points: 109
|
Posted: November 15 2015 at 16:12 |
There have been many different versions of the Big Muff, and they all sound and feel quite distinctive when you use them. Hackett did use a few versions in the mid '70's, but most of his early stuff was played using a Shaftstbury Duo Fuzz and a Marshall Supa Fuzz. The current Electro Harmonix Big Muff with the red on/off LED sounds OK, but is a bit weaker and more polite than the pre OP Amp versions.
|
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7951
|
Posted: November 25 2015 at 09:22 |
There have been, quite true. I was in the market for an historically accurate early 70s version. I demoed a Big Muff Pi at a guitar store, however, which had some newer frills, with "tone" and "wicker" options, but I fell in love with it and bought it. The tone and the wicker can both be switched off for what I presume is more historically accurate, rightly or wrongly.
|
|
pitfall
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 22 2012
Location: Essex, England
Status: Offline
Points: 109
|
Posted: November 25 2015 at 13:59 |
I find the tone control indispensable in carving the right sound, which depends on the guitar, amp etc. Even during the run of a particular version of the Big Muff components in the circuit, and sometimes, the transistors changed - it's only really apparent when you are A/B'ing 2 or more pedals at the same time that the differences become obvious.
Edited by pitfall - November 25 2015 at 14:00
|
|
Smurph
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 11 2012
Location: Columbus&NYC
Status: Offline
Points: 3167
|
Posted: November 25 2015 at 19:35 |
Tone matters way less to me than composition... unless it sounds like POO POO.
I don't even like the tones of a decent number of bands that I love completely. But if I don't hate the tone composition will find it's way into making me love the album
|
|
|
pitfall
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 22 2012
Location: Essex, England
Status: Offline
Points: 109
|
Posted: November 26 2015 at 14:15 |
For me, tone is extremely important. I once did a version of "Epitaph" by King Crimson on Kazoo, and no matter how hard I tried, it still sounded pants!
|
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7951
|
Posted: November 26 2015 at 14:37 |
pitfall wrote:
I find the tone control indispensable in carving the right sound, which depends on the guitar, amp etc.Even during the run of a particular version of the Big Muff components in the circuit, and sometimes, the transistors changed - it's only really apparent when you are A/B'ing 2 or more pedals at the same time that the differences become obvious.
|
Not terribly surprised about the subtle internal changes. The tone and wicker options, which are later additions, are admittedly what sold me on the pedal. I've followed the Big Muff Pi with an EHX Badstone, and with it switched to manual and the feedback all the way up you can dial in the manual shift to where it sounds like a very synthey sawtooth wave. Yet it's polyphonic with no latency. Very cool.
Edited by HackettFan - November 26 2015 at 14:39
|
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7951
|
Posted: November 26 2015 at 14:50 |
Smurph wrote:
Tone matters way less to me than composition... unless it sounds like POO POO.
I don't even like the tones of a decent number of bands that I love completely. But if I don't hate the tone composition will find it's way into making me love the album |
Yeah, I'd say tone matters quite a lot to me. It's not just tone, though, but timbre more broadly, whether subtle coloring or extreme wackiness. For me, it's the top of my list of priorities. I know the priorities can be quite varied among Prog fans. I started a thread awhile back, titled "What characteristic of Prog do you most prefer?" in order to probe into some of that.
Edited by HackettFan - November 26 2015 at 14:54
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65258
|
Posted: November 26 2015 at 23:18 |
It still sounded pants ? Love them English wordies.
|
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.