Boss GX-100

[Elantric]

OK, I've been play through stock GX-100 presets using a Line-6 Catalyst 200 as a powered 212 cabinet

I observe I get best experience by setting GX-100 output mode to Line/Phones. Then for every patch I want to use, I edit the AMP Block, and page right three times to access the Speaker Cab Sim control (knob#3) and rotate full counterclockwise to turn the GX-100 Cab Sim = OFF. I also turned off the GX-100 Noise Suppressor , as when it's engaged it kills sustain

I'm reasonably impressed with this rig

The Boss BT-DUAL wireless adapter on GX-100 connects wirelessly as a BLE MIDI device for Boss Mobile Tone Studio on my Android Samsung Galaxy S10+ Phone - and maintains a steady drop free connection to the BTS editor.

This combination of GX-100 & Catalyst Amp works well, but requires custom GX-100 patches to accommodate the dark sounding Catalyst 200 Power Amp Input /212 Speakers.

If you leave GX-100 Cab Sims engaged, whrn feeding Catalyst Power Amp input- it's mud city.

I found editing the "U09-1 WindWard" patch after disengaging the choking Noise Supressor and Disabling the GX-100 Cab sim in the AMP Block yielded great results, and cleaned up when rolling guitar down to 4

I tried changing the GX-100 Output Select to Katana 212 Return , Katana 100 Return , and other Amp Return options

In typical Roland/Boss fashion this only yielded a terrible boosted midrange Tone and sounded sub par
I set GX-100 Output Mode to Line/Phones

And I've read how other GX-100 owners simply change the GX-100 SPKR Sim to "8x12" and call it a day

here on this setup, that yielded a muffled Tone with no sustain

So as always, test your theories on what settings "should sound good" , with the genuine amplification system hardware and at gig volume - to prevent a disappointing live performance.

Still exploring if the Catalyst XLR Out still sends audio output when Catalyst is used as a power cab , with the rear "Power Amp Input switch engaged and feeding GX-100 Left Mono Output into the FX Return Input

But using above steps with crafting GX-100 patches. I'm getting better than stock Catalyst 200 Tone

The GX-100 I find a breeze to edit, and much deeper "Manual Mode" on every patch -where I can work all Stomp FX on the patch, beyond the intial CTL1, CTL 2 two pedal limit (which I incorrectly assumed was max CTL onboard prior to watching demos on YouTube

To be continued

OK another day,

Both my GX-100 and Catalyst 200 were purchased used, and today I did the following

* played the Catalyst 200 on 100 watt setting for 4 hours. broke in the Catalyst Speakers and that opened up the Amps response big time.
Then took a 4 hour break (reset my ears)

* Performed a Global Reset of the GX-100, just to start with a fresh Slate

* Discovered that the Catalyst Power Amp Input thrives with +4dB Line Level signals, so I Set GX-100 OUTPUT SETTING to +4dBu Line Level

* Began trying different GX-100 OUTPUT SELECT Settings - and darn if the "KATANA -100/212 RETURN" setting yielded very good results - allowing the GX-100 to use stock presets including the GX-100 Speaker Sim activated on every patch, this combo has great tone and can fill any stage with great tone
Very happy , and much better experience after breaking in the Catalyst 200 Speakers

 

[Elantric]

Boss GX-100 Knowledge Base at Zendesk

https://rolandus.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&category=200180729&query=Gx-100

 

[Elantric]

I'm not here to push the GT-1000. It's a valid discussion between the two units and I'm staying, sorry. The GX-100 has the GT-1000 beat in a couple of areas, such as the touch screen and the flexibility of the signal chain. But for someone to say the GX sounds better, that is simply not true. That's like saying the POD GO sounds better than the full Helix. When it first came out (before oversampling update) the hype was that they sounded exactly the same. They do not sound the same and neither do the GX and GT.

Owning both GX-100 and GT-1000, imho they are close, I hear a bit more clarity on the 32 bit A/D>D/A GT-1000.

The GX-100 user interface provides better organization to access ALL the features, and color display helps. Using the GX-100 is a bit like "training wheels" -less confusion wading through layers of GT-1000 parameters which can be overwhelming., but after a week of GX-100 use, move back to the GT-1000, suddenly all the GT-1000 settings and parameters are easier to understand ( as if I had a Vulcan mind meld with GT-1000 guru "PAH" ) as both employ common naming convention for each feature

I do think in the end between these two Boss units I prefer the GT-1000, as it has more footswitches and access to 5 presets and three CTL assignments without need to enter MANUAL (Stompbox( MODE

If you rely on a Looper, Both require separate Looper purchase - at 19 seconds max stereo Looper time, and zero access to looping without 1st building specific patches with the Looper block accessible means neither GX-100 or GT-1000 provide useable Looper solutions - today every competing MFX , the Looper is less than 2 footswitch taps away -from any patch , not so in GT-1000 or GX-100

The Mobile Boss Tone Studio is a bit of a let down. As it takes 12 seconds to read all patch values on EVERY patch change - (ridiculous) because in my bands I'm changing patches every 20 seconds , so the plan of having a tablet running Mobile Boss Tone Studio to tweak tremolo depth mid song actually becomes impossible because the mobile BTS screen is a spinning beach ball most of the time as I play.

It's the slowest data transfer exchange of ANY editor

Thought Id try the GX-100 HB (Humbucker ) patch set from Boss Tone Central
it took over 4 minutes to import those 16 presets into GX-100


I'll dive back into my Kemper Stage , and wifi iPad Rig Manager - just wish Kemper had a USB Audio interface, as I play and record demos, ideas all the time and built in USB Audio interface means less gear to drag around in my "Guitar Go bag"

 

[JCW308]

Owning both GX-100 and GT-1000, imho they are close, I hear a bit more clarity on the 32 bit A/D>D/A GT-1000.

The GX-100 user interface provides better organization to access ALL the features, and color display helps. Using the GX-100 for a week is a bit like "training wheels" -less confusion wading through layers of GT-1000 parameters which can be overwhelming., but move to the GT-1000, suddenly it's settings and parameters are easier to understand as both employ common naming convention for each feature

I do think in the end between these two Boss units I prefer the GT-1000, as it has more footswitches and access to 5 presets and three CTL assignments without need to enter MANUAL (Stompbox( MODE

If you rely on a Looper, Both require separate Looper purchase - at 19 seconds max stereo Looper time, and zero access to looping without 1st building specific patches with the Looper block accessible means neither GX-100 or GT-1000 provide useable Looper solutions - today every competing MFX , the Looper is less than 2 footswitch taps away -from any patch , not so in GT-1000 or GX-100

The Mobile Boss Tone Studio is a bit of a let down. As it takes 15 seconds to read all patch values on EVERY patch change - ( ridiculous) because in my bands I'm changing patches every 20 seconds , so the plan of having a tablet running Mobile Boss Tone Studio to tweak tremolo depth mid song actually becomes impossible because the mobile BTS screen is a spinning beach ball most of the time as I play.

It's the slowest data transfer exchange of ANY editor

I'll dive back into my Kemper Stage , and wifi iPad Rig Manager - just wish Kemper had a USB Audio interface, as I play and record demos, ideas all the time and built in USB Audio interface means less gear to drag around in my "Guitar Go bag"

My findings exactly. GX-100 went back, kept the GT-1000 (and bought a second as a backup since they are going so cheap on the used market).

 

[Nightbreed]

Owning both GX-100 and GT-1000, imho they are close, I hear a bit more clarity on the 32 bit A/D>D/A GT-1000.

The GX-100 user interface provides better organization to access ALL the features, and color display helps. Using the GX-100 is a bit like "training wheels" -less confusion wading through layers of GT-1000 parameters which can be overwhelming., but after a week of GX-100 use, move back to the GT-1000, suddenly all the GT-1000 settings and parameters are easier to understand ( as if I had a Vulcan mind meld with GT-1000 guru "PAH" ) as both employ common naming convention for each feature

I do think in the end between these two Boss units I prefer the GT-1000, as it has more footswitches and access to 5 presets and three CTL assignments without need to enter MANUAL (Stompbox( MODE

If you rely on a Looper, Both require separate Looper purchase - at 19 seconds max stereo Looper time, and zero access to looping without 1st building specific patches with the Looper block accessible means neither GX-100 or GT-1000 provide useable Looper solutions - today every competing MFX , the Looper is less than 2 footswitch taps away -from any patch , not so in GT-1000 or GX-100

The Mobile Boss Tone Studio is a bit of a let down. As it takes 12 seconds to read all patch values on EVERY patch change - (ridiculous) because in my bands I'm changing patches every 20 seconds , so the plan of having a tablet running Mobile Boss Tone Studio to tweak tremolo depth mid song actually becomes impossible because the mobile BTS screen is a spinning beach ball most of the time as I play.

It's the slowest data transfer exchange of ANY editor

Thought Id try the GX-100 HB (Humbucker ) patch set from Boss Tone Central
it took over 4 minutes to import those 16 presets into GX-100


I'll dive back into my Kemper Stage , and wifi iPad Rig Manager - just wish Kemper had a USB Audio interface, as I play and record demos, ideas all the time and built in USB Audio interface means less gear to drag around in my "Guitar Go bag"

That extra "clarity" in the GT-1000: I'm just not buying that it's due to the converters. I'll take your word for it, regarding clarity between the two, but there's got to be another technical reason. Maybe the engines themselves are just voiced differently, IDK. Some people claim it's due to a difference in input impedance, but when I checked the specs, the units both have 1Mohm. The CORE has 2Mohm, but it also has stereo inputs, so I'm assuming each input is also 1Mohm. So, despite what others claim (earlier in this thread) I really don't think it's the input impedance either.

The 24-bit/48k converters of the GX-100 are already powerful enough to generate audio well beyond the audible hearing range of humans. Fractal and Helix products must lack some clarity too then if 24-bit/48k is that inferior (but obviously they are not lacking). So back to the drawing board as to why the GT-1000 has more clarity. All that said, The GT-1000 is obviously the superior product (except for the screen). That extra high end "clarity" is something I'd probably dial out most of the time, but it's nice to have when you need it.

The Mobile Boss Tone Studio was not designed to be used live and in real time. That would be awesome if it worked that way (and hopefully someday it will), but as of now it's just a more convenient way (albeit slower) to edit the parameters so you don't have to bend over and futz around on the floor. As for tweaking things like tremolo depth mid song...that's where Assigns come in. That's a perfect function to have assigned to the Expression Pedal.

I don't mean to be overly critical; these are just my honest thoughts and opinions based on these topics.

 

[JCW308]

That extra "clarity" in the GT-1000: I'm just not buying that it's due to the converters. I'll take your word for it, regarding clarity between the two, but there's got to be another technical reason. Maybe the engines themselves are just voiced differently, IDK. Some people claim it's due to a difference in input impedance, but when I checked the specs, the units both have 1Mohm. The CORE has 2Mohm, but it also has stereo inputs, so I'm assuming each input is also 1Mohm. So, despite what others claim (earlier in this thread) I really don't think it's the input impedance either.

The 24-bit/48k converters of the GX-100 are already powerful enough to generate audio well beyond the audible hearing range of humans. Fractal and Helix products must lack some clarity too then if 24-bit/48k is that inferior (but obviously they are not lacking). So back to the drawing board as to why the GT-1000 has more clarity. All that said, The GT-1000 is obviously the superior product (except for the screen). That extra high end "clarity" is something I'd probably dial out most of the time, but it's nice to have when you need it.

The Mobile Boss Tone Studio was not designed to be used live and in real time. That would be awesome if it worked that way (and hopefully someday it will), but as of now it's just a more convenient way (albeit slower) to edit the parameters so you don't have to bend over and futz around on the floor. As for tweaking things like tremolo depth mid song...that's where Assigns come in. That's a perfect function to have assigned to the Expression Pedal.

I don't mean to be overly critical; these are just my honest thoughts and opinions based on these topics.

Spend the money and try both for yourself. @Elantric and I have some pretty good credibility after all these years using modelers. We're not making this stuff up. There is something going on with the GT-1000 that the GX-100 is missing.

 

[dollarsandcents412]

I don’t own the gx100 but I do have a gt1000 and I always end up back on it. I have a helix, and fm3, and I’m always back on the gt1000. It doesn’t do everything but man what it does, it does so perfectly. The only thing I need externally sometimes is a sputtery dying fuzz sound, and even then I can get pretty close with the 60s fuzz and Noise gate after the fuzz block.

Gt1000 is a killer piece of kit.

 

[JCW308]

I don’t own the gx100 but I do have a gt1000 and I always end up back on it. I have a helix, and fm3, and I’m always back on the gt1000. It doesn’t do everything but man what it does, it does so perfectly. The only thing I need externally sometimes is a sputtery dying fuzz sound, and even then I can get pretty close with the 60s fuzz and Noise gate after the fuzz block.

Gt1000 is a killer piece of kit.

Same.

 

[mojozart]

After much time and discussion it has been decided by some that the $750 GT-1000CORE is a little better than the $600 GX-100 (which also has a touch screen and an expression pedal).

 

[Mindcrime]

View attachment 528194

Looks like I can't buy it. I have a Nextone

Yeah, I have a Roland Blues Cube Artist & a Tech 21 Trademark 60 .....maybe there's a default select setting..

 

[JCW308]

After much time and discussion it has been decided by some that the $750 GT-1000CORE is a little better than the $600 GX-100 (which also has a touch screen and an expression pedal).

Sound-wise absolutely.

 

[Elantric]

After much time and discussion it has been decided by some that the $750 GT-1000CORE is a little better than the $600 GX-100 (which also has a touch screen and an expression pedal).

Never any doubt that's true , and verified by my own side by side test.

I'm not selling patch sets

Goal of GX-100 is lower entry cost AIRD Modelling platform (shared with GT-1000, SY-1000) and add color touchscreen to compete with third party MFX that already have some or all those features ( Headrush)

 

[Nightbreed]

Spend the money and try both for yourself. @Elantric and I have some pretty good credibility after all these years using modelers. We're not making this stuff up. There is something going on with the GT-1000 that the GX-100 is missing.

Did you actually read what I wrote?? Slow down and really read next time....work on your comprehension skills. I acknowledged the difference in tone, taking Elantric's word for is. I've even heard a tone difference in the demos. I'm just saying it's not because of the converters or input impedance. I said it has to be due to some other reason. You want to introduce another reason that actually holds water? Be my guest.

And no I'm not going to "spend the money and try both" so you can just STOP. Get over yourself.

The GX-100 is a perfectly acceptable and great sounding unit. Does it sound inferior to the GT-1000? You insist it does and that there's a drastic difference, but that's simply not true. Even if the GT sounds "better" it's so close that it's a moot point. In reality they both sound about the same and the tone difference isn't even worth mentioning. I'd be happy with either unit, or the CORE for that matter.

 

[JCW308]

Did you actually read what I wrote?? I acknowledged the difference in tone, taking Elantric's word for is. I've even heard a tone difference in the demos. I'm just saying it's not because of the converters or input impedance. I said it has to be due to some other reason. You want to introduce another reason that actually holds water? Be my guest.

And no I'm not going to "spend the money and try both" so you can just STOP. Get over yourself.

Slow down and really read next time....work on your comprehension skills.

Yes I read it and it can be read in different ways (apparently). Man, go have a Snickers or something!

 

[Nightbreed]

Yes I read it and it can be read in different ways (apparently). Man, go have a Snickers or something!

How can it be interpreted different ways? I wrote in plain English. I could not have been more clear.

EDIT: I even said the GT-1000 is the superior product LMAO. Seriously dude, READ.

 

[JCW308]

How can it be interpreted different ways? I wrote in plain English. I could not have been more clear.

This is hilarious! [ignore list]

 

[Nightbreed]

This is hilarious! [ignore list]

You've been on ignore for a couple weeks until I saw your ridiculous post a moment ago when I was logged out. Back on ignore ya go! LOLOL

 

[Nightbreed]

After much time and discussion it has been decided by some that the $750 GT-1000CORE is a little better than the $600 GX-100 (which also has a touch screen and an expression pedal).

Shouldn't it be a "little better" though? The price reflects that. I really don't know why we're trying to compare these units when they're all marketed for different budgets and are different tiers of the same basic tech. I think the tone quality is a moot point, but there are features that the 1000 series has that would be nice to have in the GX-100, so yeah....a little better sounds about right to me.

Do those omissions really matter to me for what I use the GX-100 for? Not one bit. It's ok to not always have the "flagship" and to have an "entry level" product.

 

[Nightbreed]

Yeah, I have a Roland Blues Cube Artist & a Tech 21 Trademark 60 .....maybe there's a default select setting..

I'm pretty sure he was joking. Try the Line Out setting; it's as close to a "default setting" as most modelers have. It sounds best to me, even when using an amp.

 

[Magic Russ]

Shouldn't it be a "little better" though? The price reflects that. I really don't know why we're trying to compare these units when they're all marketed for different budgets and are different tiers of the same basic tech. I think the tone quality is a moot point, but there are features that the 1000 series has that would be nice to have in the GX-100, so yeah....a little better sounds about right to me.

In the standalone demos they both sound fine, but in the head to head comparisons I've heard, the GX-100 is darker. In the Leo Gibson video, the GX sounds normal and the GT sounds harsh, while in the Jared Gunston videos the GX sounds muddy while the GT sounds clear. It almost makes me wonder if they didn't have a run that left the shop with the global settings set a bit dark.

They shouldn't sound as different as they do considering they are using the same software, but the difference is there. On the other hand, enough people are getting great sounds out of either unit that the fact that they don't sound identical shouldn't be that great of a concern.