ampage Tube Amps / Music Electronics	For current discussions, please visit Music Electronics Forum.

ampage archive

Vintage threads from the first ten years

previous: zachary vex patents and the big boys -- 5/14/2000 5:12 PM

On-board effects

5/15/2000 4:21 PM
Mark Hammer	On-board effects This is more a comment on the wisdom of on-board effects than anything else. I think I have a good hunch about who is involved, and while I applaud their adventurousness (and your attempt to be discrete), there is some rather nasty industry history to consider when it comes to on-board effects. All of these are accompanied by an 8 or 16-bit sample (your choice) of a WWII fighter plane going down in the Pacific. - Gibson RD - Epiphone professional - Guitorgans (or whatever the hell it was called) from Vox and other companies - Gretsch's Chet Atkins model with the on-board phaser - St. Louis Music's MPC line There are more (I think there is even a Les Paul model or two), but I have yet to see one of these hang in there as a viable model, despite how well-designed they are. There are chances worth taking, and chances not worth taking, and unless there is some wierd quirk of a particular market that can be exploited, and minimal tool-up time and resources required, I'd advise anyone to stay the hell away from on-board effects. My reasons (concurred with by Craig Anderton in a 1979 article I wrote for DEVICE on the same topic): 1) Batteries: Unless battery life is fantabulous, most people will find the need to get into the body to change batteries on a regular basis objectionable. Gigging musicians will invariably circulate stories about reliability issues the first time someone has a battery crap out on them because they left the cord plugged in too long. Compartments that require more than a thumbnail to get into will result in marring of the finish if you have to get in often (admittedly, this latter one is a barrier that can be gotten around with some thought). 2) FX ordering: There is always a first, but I've never seen an FX-equipped axe where the order of effects could be reversed. Even where there is only one on-board effects, that one always comes on first in the signal chain. If you can live with it (e.g., compressor), fine, if not, tough. 3) Switching: Switching FX with your hands instead of your feet is cumbersome. True, you don't need patch cords, but the option to engage an effect for a moment/riff is eliminated by sticking it on the guitar. 3) Limited choice: Anything that fits inside a guitar will, unless the world as we know it changes drastically, be of a proprietary format. I have to like the effects made available by manufacturer X, or else I'm SOL. IF the manufacturer has thought this one out and is ready to introduce a line as extensive as any of the major stompbox manufacturers, then the problem is largely solved, but I can't see that happening. I would expect, at most, 6-8 modules from the developer/manufacturer, and product support for a max of 2 years before it peters out. Imagine the musician reconciled to a single local music store that carries 3 or 4 of the modules. Normally, they could buy whatever wah or phaser was sold in town and be happy with it, but in this case they need specific ones. Yes, I know all about e-commerce, but not everyone uses it or WILL use it (I know I've lost my own enthusiasm for it). If there was a standard created, and second party developers could supply modules without having to pay a license fee or some such rot, then maybe it could survive beyond 2 years. But as long as players who like the guitar as a guitar end up saying "Geez, I wish I could stick my XYZ in there, or buy something that sounded like my XYZ", then expect to see the lifespan of the product grow ever shorter. 4) Limited control: There is a finite limit to how many pots and switches you can stick on a guitar before it becomes a) too cluttered to play with, b) too damn heavy, c) too confusing with a whole bunch of unlabelled knobs, d) too expensive to machine in anticipation of knobs and switches. Many FX are hopelessly unsatisfying with less than 3 controls at one's disposal, some need no more than 2 to be just fine. What happens to the extra holes? What do you do with the extra controls? If what you're working on is an exceptional product (and I think I speak for all of here when I say we have complete confidence in you to do that), then pursue it. Unless the manufacturer has gotten over the hurdles described above, I say back away very carefully, then run. In my view, on-board effects will never get past the point of what you see on an electro-acoustic pre-amp; i.e., stuff you would leave on all the time, and would need regardless of what music you like to play.

5/15/2000 4:21 PM

Mark Hammer

On-board effects

This is more a comment on the wisdom of on-board effects than anything else.

I think I have a good hunch about who is involved, and while I applaud their adventurousness (and your attempt to be discrete), there is some rather nasty industry history to consider when it comes to on-board effects. All of these are accompanied by an 8 or 16-bit sample (your choice) of a WWII fighter plane going down in the Pacific.

- Gibson RD
- Epiphone professional
- Guitorgans (or whatever the hell it was called) from Vox and other companies
- Gretsch's Chet Atkins model with the on-board phaser
- St. Louis Music's MPC line

There are more (I think there is even a Les Paul model or two), but I have yet to see one of these hang in there as a viable model, despite how well-designed they are. There are chances worth taking, and chances not worth taking, and unless there is some wierd quirk of a particular market that can be exploited, and minimal tool-up time and resources required, I'd advise anyone to stay the hell away from on-board effects.

My reasons (concurred with by Craig Anderton in a 1979 article I wrote for DEVICE on the same topic):
1) Batteries: Unless battery life is fantabulous, most people will find the need to get into the body to change batteries on a regular basis objectionable. Gigging musicians will invariably circulate stories about reliability issues the first time someone has a battery crap out on them because they left the cord plugged in too long. Compartments that require more than a thumbnail to get into will result in marring of the finish if you have to get in often (admittedly, this latter one is a barrier that can be gotten around with some thought).

2) FX ordering: There is always a first, but I've never seen an FX-equipped axe where the order of effects could be reversed. Even where there is only one on-board effects, that one always comes on first in the signal chain. If you can live with it (e.g., compressor), fine, if not, tough.

3) Switching: Switching FX with your hands instead of your feet is cumbersome. True, you don't need patch cords, but the option to engage an effect for a moment/riff is eliminated by sticking it on the guitar.

3) Limited choice: Anything that fits inside a guitar will, unless the world as we know it changes drastically, be of a proprietary format. I *have* to like the effects made available by manufacturer X, or else I'm SOL. *IF* the manufacturer has thought this one out and is ready to introduce a line as extensive as any of the major stompbox manufacturers, then the problem is largely solved, but I can't see that happening. I would expect, at most, 6-8 modules from the developer/manufacturer, and product support for a max of 2 years before it peters out. Imagine the musician reconciled to a single local music store that carries 3 or 4 of the modules. Normally, they could buy whatever wah or phaser was sold in town and be happy with it, but in this case they need specific ones. Yes, I know all about e-commerce, but not everyone uses it or WILL use it (I know I've lost my own enthusiasm for it).

If there was a standard created, and second party developers could supply modules without having to pay a license fee or some such rot, then maybe it could survive beyond 2 years. But as long as players who like the guitar as a guitar end up saying "Geez, I wish I could stick my XYZ in there, or buy something that sounded like my XYZ", then expect to see the lifespan of the product grow ever shorter.

4) Limited control: There is a finite limit to how many pots and switches you can stick on a guitar before it becomes a) too cluttered to play with, b) too damn heavy, c) too confusing with a whole bunch of unlabelled knobs, d) too expensive to machine in anticipation of knobs and switches. Many FX are hopelessly unsatisfying with less than 3 controls at one's disposal, some need no more than 2 to be just fine. What happens to the extra holes? What do you do with the extra controls?

If what you're working on is an exceptional product (and I think I speak for all of here when I say we have complete confidence in you to do that), then pursue it. Unless the manufacturer has gotten over the hurdles described above, I say back away very carefully, then run. In my view, on-board effects will never get past the point of what you see on an electro-acoustic pre-amp; i.e., stuff you would leave on all the time, and would need regardless of what music you like to play.

Replies:

Jody Robinson Just a comment on your issue #1...<... -- 5/16/2000 2:43 AM
Eric H q{ Epiphone professional}Da... -- 5/16/2000 6:14 AM
zachary vex too true.you kids, ... -- 5/19/2000 1:54 AM
moocow Guitorgans Forever ! -- 5/26/2000 3:12 AM