Learn to Program Roland/Boss MultiFX Processors

Started by Elantric, January 25, 2008, 05:49:04 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

mbenigni

#25
Elantric, I'll run your test over the weekend if no one has beaten me to it.  I haven't actually been that methodical about it, but I'm pretty confident from my early tests that the output mode affects the full mix of COSM and PCM signals, i.e. it's very late in the signal chain.

I can probably get by alright by developing patches panned hard left (PCM) and right (COSM) as suggested above.  But this always turns into a PITA when you later decide you do want stereo for your synths and have to develop new versions of your patches routed differently.  No question that making the guitar out more flexible would make things better organized in the long run.

(musicman65 - agreed that amp simulation is ideally run to a flat monitor system; I am more referring to the use of guitar effects in configurations where a physical guitar amp is preferred. And pjmuck seems to be interested in this and the possibility of routing COSM amp models to a monitoring solution independent of the PCM signal, be it full range or otherwise.)

Elantric

Since the internal final output Para EQ in the GR-55 lacks separate controls for left vs right, in addition to the wide range of GR-55 patch gain issues, I may find it best to place my DEQ-2496 between the GR-55 and the PA.

The benefits to this strategy is the the DEQ-2496 can work as a stereo leveling amp/limiter to make the patches more uniform in gain level, plus I can apply separate EQ left vs right, and send COSM AMPS to one PA mix channel and PCM tones to another - and apply different EQ to each from the stage, and not have to train the dude running the FOH PA.   

mbenigni

Quote from:  gumtown on February 16, 2011, 05:41:07 PM
Stereo mix, but again you could pan your modelling and synth apart.
If only there were a third channel for dry, to allow for potential re-amping. 

Over USB I'm more likely to track dry audio and MIDI and rely on plugins from there, so I'll have a single patch configured for recording to PC.

Kevin M

Thanks!  The heavy guitar recipe from the first link was pretty decent.  I like the adjustment-by-adjustment clips.

musicman65

Quote from:  Elantric on February 17, 2011, 07:47:50 AM.....and not have to train the dude running the FOH PA.

Hehe...are those guys even trainable? I've had no success finding a good soundman and have resorted to mixing from the stage while monitoring FOH through my earbuds. That means no "more of me" mix like the other band members get.

btw, I have several DEQ2496's and think they are great eq's for the money. The real time analyzer actually works well in clubs where we can shoot the room. And being able to store and recall settings by venue name is soooo nice.

musicman65

mooncaine

Thanks for the bump, Elantric. Didn't notice these the first time 'round.

bri2u2

Getting back to the guitar out, as said before, with a gr-33 it made sense. I'm in a cover band and love the sound of my stage amp, Fender SS 22. I'd like to kept it simple. Use the guitar out for mod & mag guitars only into the Fender. If Roland would put a s/w switch in the signal routing so you could route the f/x to the Guitar out or not. Maybe a software upgrade V2? It would be nice. The molded guitars all sound great thru the Fender if setup right. Just my 2 cents.
Strat w/Ghost sys
Fender Super Sonic 22
Roland KC-150
Gr-55
GT-6

A2theT

Agreed, no idea how I missed this thread!
HEAVY on the METAL
Axe-Fx II, Roland VG-99 + FC-300, Roland GR-55, Digitech Jamman Stereo, Ibanez/ESP/Jackson Guitars

aliensporebomb

Quote from: Elantric on March 11, 2008, 05:38:56 PM
Boss_GT-8 Brilliance.pdf

I feel this brilliant document is definitely a  "must read" as it represents many years of COSM Knowledge of Roland GT-8 Processors - explains many COSM AMP. and FX Routing ideas which the VG-99  / GR-55 inherited.

The person who put this together was brilliant. 

I think the reason this person got so much mileage out of the device is that he recognizes it was Japanese built and has a distinctly asian functional philosphy - right down to not giving up its secrets easily.  Even down to the horoscope.   

You'll notice in asian countries how they want to know your horoscope and blood type too. 

I printed this out because the guy definetely was 100% regarding just about everything and it could be applicable to a lot of different devices.
My music projects online at http://www.aliensporebomb.com/

GK Devices:  Roland VG-99, Boss GP-10, Boss SY-1000.

Appalachik

I'm glad to have found this thread and associated links... It should be required reading for folks trying to get a fast start on understanding COSM.

Elantric

#35

If you want to obtain more incite and better explanations of how Roland gear works - review the OWNERS MANUALS for the earliest examples of current gear.

http://www.gitaar.net/forum/index.php/file/7/14419/20030641-Boss-GT-x-Set-Up-v02.pdf












Elantric

#36







admin


Elantric

Old thread - just a reminder for anyone with Roland COSM gear who wants more incite on achieving the best sound  to read ALL documents in this thread below

Roland COSM Reference Library
https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?topic=88.0

Elantric

#39
Search on  "Patch" will take you to these areas of VGuitarforums

Boss GP-10 Patches
https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?board=151.0

Boss GT Series (older models) - Patch Exchange
https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?board=161.0

GR-55 Guitar Mode Patch Exchange
https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?board=67.0

GR-55 Bass Mode Patch Exchange
https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?board=84.0

Roland VG-8 Patch Exchange
https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?board=122.0

Roland VG-88 Patch Exchange
https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?board=121.0

Roland VG-99 GK 13 Input Patch Exchange
https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?board=35.0

Roland VG-99 Mag PU 1/4" Input Patch Exchange
https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?board=48.0

Roland VB-99 Bass Patch Exchange
https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?board=59.0



Litesnsirens

I am loving the amp tones that I get out of this device.  For those using the modelled guitars, I have recently learned that setting the Modeled tone level to 50 as opposed to 100 gives you a much more realistic representation as to what you would expect re: amp model settings.  In other words you can go into the Clean Twin amp model and not having it overdrive with settings that you would expect to be clean sounding on a real Twin, and this is leaving the amp gain on mid.

On the amp model side, I got around the ice pick high frequency issues by turning the mic sim to Flat (no mic sim). So from here, on the amp model Bass, Middle, Treble all set to 50 is a fair starting point on most amps, the exceptions are the amp models in which the real amp wouldn't sound realistic with these settings (Boogie which seems to have loads of bass).  My EZ edit settings are straight down the middle and my global EQ is set to off.  It's all done within the amp model as far as EQ goes.  If I'm going for a little departure or it doesn't sound right, I may try and cab sim change.  But typically for the 59 Marshall I'll use the 4X12 for Twin 2X12, Tweed 4 X10.. etc.  But I will experiment with the 8X12 on some Marshall and rectifier settings.  "Presence" settings are also worth looking at.

I should note that I play through either Line 3 L3t speaker alone or through the complete Line 6 dreamscape PA system.  This could affect my success in getting what I would call great amp tones, but whatever it is the combination is working for me in spades.  I love the guitar tones I am getting and the versatility I get from patch to patch.

DreamTheory

#41
To my ear the danger of simulations in general is that they are too tame, too clean, too perfect, so I am looking for more organic results, for instance that enhance the difference between voicing notes lower or higher on the neck, or that respond to picking technique with some extra emphasis when called upon. I want to be able to get dirty or clean based on playing technique alone, on the fly. If I play legato, I want that splashy noise tamed down. If I pick hard, I want a more splashy attack. I get all of that right out of GR-55 amp models in abundance.

I prefer the amp sims for overdriving the sound rather than the stompbox sims. I have been delighted at how much the amp sims create lovely growls at just the right places in my solos. And there are fluffs of noise and incidental artifacts that seem quite realistic to me. Mixing in some of the modeled guitars makes for interesting blends. The L4 adds crunchiness and feedback in a good way, so if you are not a jazz player, don't overlook mixing some of it in.

It is true that the amp sims are sometimes a bit hard to tell apart. Probably Roland does that for the marketable brag of how many they offer. I am gradually getting to know them as individuals. Early on I gravitated to the Blues Amp because it gave me the dirties and the cleans just with my touch, as I was saying.

It is pretty obvious that you can emulate certain famous sounds by matching the guitar model to the amp model and reverb type and so on. Read the gear list of the musician of your choice and dial up the parameters. Does it matter if mic placement is set at 5 or 6? In most cases it only matters collectively, as grouped with other parameters. Sometimes you find a threshold or sweet spot. So I usually try to set stuff to neutral and only change if I have a reason. Think about where you want the sound to come from, or be colored by, the most. The model, the amp, or the stop boxes? Give that stage the highest volume ("level") setting.

If you were playing a real amp with exactly the same settings but in different recording situations, it is going to sound different. Non aficionados listening will just hear "electric guitar sound" and not sense tone differences that seem momentous to us. So I think to a large extent, I have a tolerance for variation. As long as it works in that room or recording mix, and as long as I get the expressiveness I want for that song, I can be happy with differences in coloration. Sure, the ice pick in the ears is a problem. But it is kind of fun to explore different styles -at least in a limited, pretend way- for a much lower cost than buying stacks of amps.

You gigging pros have every right to demand more. You actually need those signal routing options and so on. Causal consumers like me are quite happy with so-so models and jack-of-all-trade boxes.

Some of the outlying parameter combinations are proving to be quite interesting. I don't know why but I have a fascination with doing the things you are not supposed to do. Exaggerated signal processing is like discovering analog synthesis. Sort of the opposite of the quest for realistic modeling; instead, trying to make the guitar sound improbable. Quite unbelievable the variety of squiggles, swooshes and detuned alien zithery things GR-55 can create without any PCM/MIDI.

Well you guys pretty much sound like you are higher functioning than I when it comes to gear, so you probably know this, but I will say two things anyway: 1) If it bugs you that the solo switch is buried, then assign it to the CTL or GK-3 button or whatever. Of course that costs you a valuable assign. 2) The redundancy of gain options at different stages just gives different users the option of working at the stage in the chain where they feel most comfortable. Of course we do not have to use features just because they are there.

Last thought- just when I thought I would never ever use a certain preset or tone or amp model, I have found that low and behold it is just the ticket for a certain-specific use case. I collaborate with a number of people in different genres, and am learning that what the song calls for is of pretty high significance. I have read people in the forum talking about their "bedroom tones" vs. the tones they really use in bands/recordings. The crunchy rhythm or harsh lead that a certain song needs might not be something I enjoy listening to by itself, unsupported by bass and drums. So a tone or patch -or model- is only good or bad in a certain context (Except the acoustic and electric guitar PCM tones, which are the Gollums of the GR-55, that is, 99.9% hopeless).
electric: Epiphone Dot semihollow body, acoustic: mahogany jumbo, recording: Cubase Artist 11 or Tascam DP008

Fusion

#42
Something else I do since I tend to put the amp switch on my expression pedal switch if I use one, I reduce the switch sensitivity to make it easier to turn it on and off. I found the default to be really hard to press. I tend to keep my GK1 and GK2 on bank change as I do not like using the units pedals to change banks, pressing on two at once and getting it to release are more problematic, just easier to use the GK3.
"Long ago in days of old when magic filled the air..."

Litesnsirens

Hey Fusion, interesting that you mention that.  I also adjusted the sensitivity on the exp. switch.  I use the exp. switch for all of my solo boosts for guitar sounds.  The CTRL pedal, is just for bringing in totally different sounds, like sax or harmonica or maybe going from electric guitar to acoustic.   My ipad controls all my presets so I don't have to worry about banks, right now, until I figure out what I want to use them for S1 and S2 are just sitting there available for re-assignment.

Fusion

If you have them free makes for a couple more assign switches which are the core feature of the unit. The ability to actually switch tone numbers and some of the COSM params via the switches much less the million params available makes this unit extremely versatile. I do not own any sort of IPAD device and my wife has the cell phone. All I have is my laptop and I only hook that up when I want to do some editing work or moving my patches and banks around.
I keep an Excel spreadsheet on my wall and a clip board which has all my locations and patch names. That is how I keep up with it.
"Long ago in days of old when magic filled the air..."

Kevin M

Interesting statement in the physical modeling wiki:

"COSM has been superseded by "SuperNatural", which is also based on physical modeling techniques"

Wonder if Roland will transition their guitar based modeling to SuperNatural.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Elantric


Elantric

#47
QuoteInteresting statement in the physical modeling wiki:

"COSM has been superseded by "SuperNatural", which is also based on physical modeling techniques"

Wonder if Roland will transition their guitar based modeling to SuperNatural.

Just as likely they will call it ACB
http://www.roland.com/aira/whatsaira.html
Behind the authentic sound and responsive behavior of the AIRA products is the newly developed Analog Circuit Behavior (ACB) technology.
ACB faithfully captures the sound and feel of living, breathing instruments, including some of Roland's most revered classics.






I suppose its better than "Tone Capsule"


http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/BC-TC-EJ


Elantric

#48
Roland US created a decent 19 page Workshop manual PDF for the old Boss GT-10 that walks you through setting up Control Assignments - same paradigm is employed on other Roland gear (VG-88 / VG-99 / GP-10/GR-55 /SY-300)

so its worth reading

GT-10 Realtime Effects Control
https://www.boss.info/us/support/by_product/gt-10/support_documents/c7cb8139-c609-4010-9105-7d73d0ac52de/


jonathanf106

#49
Quote from: Elantric on April 08, 2015, 03:46:53 PM
Tutorial on EQ

http://web.archive.org/web/20070117182136/http://www.digitalprosound.com/2002/03_mar/tutorials/mixing_excerpt1.htm

OMG this is what I been looking for and tried to explain to people, you can achieve any modern tone you want by just understanding the frequencies, I created some PRS model guitars by just using these tips for gr-55