Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Effects, Pedals, Strings & Things' started by Pao, Mar 8, 2017.
Oh, I was tricked? Drats!
I just read that analog polyphonic octave thread and it's HILARIOUS. Damn.
No one can patent THOSE circuits anymore since Tom revealed the novel designs in his patent and had 20 years of exclusive use. They are now free for anyone to use since they have expired. Other novel circuits can be patented and there are new audio circuit patents every year. Patents cover property, which can be electronic circuits, new chemicals, a novel mousetrap and so on. Even a computer algorithm can be considered property since it can be implemented and used in real world applications.
Copyrights are protection for an artistic work, such as literature (short story or novel for example), paintings and drawings, music, photographs, graphic designs, and so on. The bar is set very low for what constitutes an artistic work and therefore eligible for a copyright.
Did anyone mention the Alpha Drive aka Joyo Ultimate Drive? This board was singing the praises of the Alpha Drive. It was pricey but the tone was to die for. Then it was found to be an Ultra Drive. Lol!
And when the board preferred the Behringer DMM clone to the EHX genuine DMM pedal. That was pretty funny too.
I consider most blind tests inadequate when it comes to guitar pedals - those would be more appropriate for sound systems and not for circuits that react to your playing and have a certain feel besides sound.
Think of Miku. Sounds terrible yet in all the demos that i ve seen people seem to have fun. And in a blind test most people would have trouble telling it apart from a real Japanese singer.
I was laughing at this post: (It doesn't help that the Dumble fanbois had a meltdown upon discovering they chosen in a blind test, as the best sounding Dumble amp, a treble-boosted Hiwatt.)
Couldn't find the actual link myself either
playing the damn guitar?
154,332 members can't be wrong.
Thank you. Thank you very much.
Yes, I'm positive.
NASA was one of the pioneers of surface mount technology, and even employed it in the IBM-developed Launch Vehicle Digital Computer used in the Saturn V rockets way back in the 1960's (it's funny how some people still seem to treat SMT as some brand new, untested technology).
NASA even went so far as to introduce its own propriatary standards for the use of surface mount technology, including an entire section on use in "Mission Hardware and Mission-Critical Ground Support Equipment", before adopting industry wide aerospace standards.
Similar story with submarine systems, though a bit harder to produce examples of due to the nature of military classification. A broad overview of the technologies involved, however, can be seen here. The insides of a PSU for a typical Siemens PLC employed in the control system as described in the article look like this:
As you can see, it's full of surface mount components; all whilst meeting a much higher standard of reliability than would ever be required in an audio application.
Fascinating, but I fear we're getting a bit off-topic.
A blind test doesn't mean you can't play while testing. It just means that you don't know which pedal you're currently hearing (or playing), which removes your bias.
A double blind would imply that both the person performing the test (either by hearing or by playing), and the scientist don't know which pedal it is, removing two sources of bias.
He needs to look at his hands.
Yeah, as TGP epic mass hallucinations go, I'd say that's the clear winner by a wide margin.
I dont know if it was a TGP trend, but I remember a few years ago "racks" were coming back and pedals were gonna phase out. Its now 5 years later and Racks are about as popular as they were back in 2000
I preferred my VTM to a Big Box Double MN3005 DMM. Was very pleased about that as I managed to sell my DMM for a nice profit
turns out tone is not in the fingers
and the groove really is in the heart
I was just talking about the most common blind test taking place today which uses youtube as a platform.
Thanks for clarifying!!
you know I was joking right?
See I think thats a common misperception. People that argue against super accurate tuners are suggesting you cant hear the difference in the audience. Yes this is true but for those of us who use a Turbo or a Peterson, its always been about getting closer to perfect tune faster and easier. If you are recording, theres no contest. You can absolutely hear the difference and you want the accuracy of a strobe for continuity.
Bottom line is that a TU-2 is one of the greatest pedals ever made for speed and ease of use. But using one and then having to fine tune by ear is not acceptable for many players including myself and that was the reality of using one. I still use one sometimes and find it acceptable in many situations.
The ability to have strobe accuracy in a TU-2 sized package but with speed is unquestionably better but it doesnt make the TU-2 or similar tuners bad.
I've just always felt the two sides are arguing completely different points on that one.
Sorry, I'm a simpleton. My bad.
Things TGP (or at least me!) get wrong; not recognising sarcasm.
I'm not arguing against "super-accurate" tuners from the audience perspective.
I'm commenting on the TGP hype regarding tuner resolution below 1/10th of a cent.