Conference napalm::guitar

    What's the street price of a DP/4 these days?  I seem to remember that
    the list is around $1600, am I right?
    
    It sounds like a nice unit for someone who needs something that does a
    lot of different things well (and likes to do a lot of programming). 
    If I were in the market for new studio effects units, this would be one
    I'd seriously consider.
    
    Tell us more about how it'd work in a guitar rig, Dave.
    
    Greg

    I'd be curious about the noise/headroom spec on it. When you say the
    distortion algorithms are good, I can understand how they could beat
    Alesis, but how about something that uses tubes. To me, those solid
    state distortion patches just don't sound like tube distortion. I may
    be spoiled though, because I just got to hear the Mesa Tri-Axis.
    
    The only EFX unit I use is a Roland SDE-3000 which is not MIDI, but
    claims 100 db of headroom. I wouldn't trust anything less in the signal 
    path. 
    
    I'll have to audition the digital reverb though; I have yet to hear one 
    that beats decent springs.
    
    Paul 

    >I'll have to audition the digital reverb though; I have yet to hear one 
    >that beats decent springs.
    
    I think this is just psychological.  I's just that we've been listening
    to spring reverbs in guitar amps for so long that it's become the sound
    we *expect to hear*.
    
    Spring reverbs tend to sound pretty crappy, but they have *their
    sound*.  When I record guitars at home, I just use the amp reverb all
    the time.  But I have to say the digital units (well the good ones)
    sound way better as *general purpose* reverbs.  
    
    On the other hand, grungy ones like the Alesis Micronoise, I mean
    Microverb, are so trashy that they come close to that garbagey spring
    sound we've grown to love.  
    
    >The only EFX unit I use is a Roland SDE-3000 which is not MIDI, but
    >claims 100 db of headroom. I wouldn't trust anything less in the signal 
    >path. 
    
    Huh? You say you love tubes and springs then ask for 100 db dynamic
    range? Good luck...tube circuits aren't that quiet!  If they were,
    you'd think the sound was sterile without all the hum and hiss  8^) 
    8^)
    
    						Brian

    I put some money down on one Tuesday night at the big Daddy's sale.
    
    I think the sale price was just under $1200.  I didn't pay much
    attention to the price because I'm still not sure I can afford it.
    
    I have something that contains DP/4 Specs but I just loaned it out - I
    will post it when I get it back.
    
    re: distortion
    
    It would appear that the thing has algorithms to simulate tube-amp
    distortion.  At the demo, Bob Stillman made a point of pointing out
    that you could even dial in the amount of tube bias!
    
    The best way to describe it is that on a tape, you might well be fooled
    into the thinking it's a real tube amp.  However, playing it live,
    it still has that enough of that tell-tale compression such that it's
    not quite in the league of the finest tube amps.  Note, that I didn't
    say I was also going to sell my Mesa Boogie.
    
    On the other hand, it is a step above most of the other units I've
    heard.
    
    This is something you really just have to try out yourself and make
    your own decisions on.  But in my opinion, it's REAL high end stuff
    and while it definitely COSTS more than a Quadraverb-quality reverb,
    it's a lot less than a lot of Lexicon/Eventide/etc stuff.  ANd you also
    have to remember that this is also a patch-bay/mixer
    
    AND... how could I have not remembered to mention that not only can it
    do multi-effects, but you can apply them to 4 independent inputs and
    send them to four independent outputs|!!!!
    
    I.E.  It's really 4 independent single-effects processors (actually
    each processor can run "algorithms that do more than one effect so
    they are technically more than a "single effect") that can be strung
    together into one multi-effect processor.
    
    So when you're not using it live for multi-effects, you can use this
    ONE box in your studio to add reverb to your mix, compress a track,
    add chorus to the keyboards, and delay on the vocals!!!!   Lest you
    misunderstand, you can do SIMULTANEOUSLY because it has independent
    processors!
    
    I don't any other unit that can do that.

>    So when you're not using it live for multi-effects, you can use this
>    ONE box in your studio to add reverb to your mix, compress a track,
>    add chorus to the keyboards, and delay on the vocals!!!!   Lest you
>    misunderstand, you can do SIMULTANEOUSLY because it has independent
>    processors!
    
    Yahbut...as I understand it, the better sounding reverb, chorus, etc
    algorithms use more then one of the effects processors.  There's a
    vocoder patch that uses all four of them.  If you do all four of the
    things you described, you'd only get the cheezy versions of the effects
    (probably still pretty good, just making a point).
    
>    I don't any other unit that can do that.
    
    I'm pretty sure that the high-end Zoom processor works like that.
    
    Greg

    Greg,
    
    I don't think any of the reverb patches require more than one
    processor.  I know for sure that the SD-1 (which has one ESP processor
    in it) gets absolutely to-kill-for reverb.   
    
    I think the very best chorus algorithms use multiple processors
    but I think it's overkill: there's something like a "32 voice chorus"!
    
    Also note that many of the algorithms provide TWO effects with ONE
    processor.  
    
    I've heard them - they are not "cheesey" IMHO.  On the other hand, I
    find all Alesis reverbs "cheesey" so I suppose it's a matter of
    preference.
    
    There two things I definitely look for in reverbs: a sort of "breathy" 
    quality (which might be nothing more than EQ but it sorta sounds like
    an "ah") and an even more difficult quality to describe any better than
    to say that it must sound like a "room" and not a "reverb".
    
    Amazingly enough, some plate-type reverbs are better at this than a lot
    of low end digital reverbs, but to me the "class" of reverbs are
    ALL Lexicons, the Roland SRV-2000 and the DP/4.
    
    In all the patches in those guys, I hear a "room".

    You're definitely partly right about the way we've "come to expect"
    reverbs to sound. There a lot of awful spring units out there. I
    haven't heard many (Alesis, Peavey, Yorkville[ugh], Art, that I can
    recall) digital ones, but I've yet to hear one that sounds as good as my 
    spiffed up Mesa MK-IIB.
    
    If what you're saying about the DP/4 is true (and it's partly a matter
    of psychoacoustics & personal taste) then I want to hear it. One of the
    biggest disappointments for me was when my rhythm guitar player got a
    Quadraverb Plus. It does some things well, but reverb ain't one of
    them, nor is tremolo, which is wicked simple in the analog world.
    
    Now let's get back to 100 db noise floors in tube equipment. The setup
    I use sounds only as good as its weakest link, which *may* be something
    in the tube section, but I've yet to put anything else (besides the
    SDE-3000) in there that doesn't color the sound in some way. I haven't
    tried them all, but I've been repeatedly let down by the way these
    gadgets typically interact with the overdrive &/or the clean clarity.
    
    My tape machine is a Tascam 488 cassette which doesn't have much room
    to spare, so I've gotten gun shy around digi-stuff in general. I keep
    thinking that the next new generation of digital multi-effects will
    sound so clean that these problems will not be significant, but so far,
    no such luck.
    
    I may have to design a "gadget master" that basically isolates the EFX
    loop from the rest of the world impedance wise & signal level wise. Of
    course it would have to have a minimum of 120 db of headroom  !
    
    Paul 
    
    
    

    re: db

    First off, my note on the number of processors was, of course, written
    from the "devil's advocate" position.  I have yet to hear anything that
    I considered to be a valid negative comment on the Dp/4
    
>    I don't think any of the reverb patches require more than one
>    processor.  I know for sure that the SD-1 (which has one ESP processor
>    in it) gets absolutely to-kill-for reverb.   
    
    That's interesting, I thought I read that the really dense reverb
    patches required two of the processors.  That's very good to know.
    
>    I think the very best chorus algorithms use multiple processors
>    but I think it's overkill: there's something like a "32 voice chorus"!
 
    Perhaps.  I'm sure it is for me, my favorite chorus for guitar is still
    the old mono Boss CE-2 stomp box.
       
>    Also note that many of the algorithms provide TWO effects with ONE
>    processor.  
 
    That's an interesting twist, I wasn't aware of that.
       
>    I've heard them - they are not "cheesey" IMHO.  On the other hand, I
>    find all Alesis reverbs "cheesey" so I suppose it's a matter of
>    preference.
 
    Well, FWIW I also consider the Alesis (and ART, Digitech, most of the
    low/mid-line gear) reverbs "cheesey".  Doesn't mean they're not usable,
    just that they're not the best I've heard.  They all seem to have this
    sort of "gritty" sound to them that isn't particularly flattering. 
    
    One thing I consider to be a very positive attribute in a guitar
    processor is something the DP/4 definitely has and that's multiple
    inputs and multiple outputs.  One thing I never liked about most of the
    previous multieffect processors is that they had one input and one
    output (maybe that i/o was stereo, but it was still single point), so
    there was only one place you could put it in your signal path and that
    doesn't work for me.  I want things like compression, distortion, and
    sometimes other stuff to happen BEFORE the preamp on my guitar amp, and
    stuff like reverb, chorus, delay to normally happen after the preamp
    (as in the effects loop).  So you take your Quadraverb+ and you put it
    in the effects loop so that the time based effects sound good, then the
    distortion's unusable (sounds even worse then it does to start with)...
    You put it before your preamp and it distorts the crap out of your
    reverb and stuff.  No win.
    
    That's not a problem with the DP/4, you just assign a loop through one
    of the input/output sets for your pre-preamp effects, and another set
    for your post-preamp stuff and it's happy.  It's this capability that
    makes it a viable option as a single effects unit for a guitar rig in
    my mind (and probably at this point, the only one that *I'd* consider
    for that, were I in that market).
    
    Greg
                                     

    FWIW - I thought my Alesis had decent effects until I tried my Lexicon
    in place of it.  Now I need a Lexicon for my guitar rig, as well as a
    couple more for my studio.  :-(
    

    Greg,
    
    In re-reading my note, I think I definitely over-spoke.
    
    I wrote from the knowledge that the DP/4 uses 4 of the same chip
    that does the effects in the SD-1 and VFX/SD.
    
    In the SD-1 you can get very rich, dense reverb with just the one chip,
    however that does not imply (as I did) that there aren't reverb
    algorithms in the DP/4 require more than one processor.  Although, I'd
    say, it does imply that those algorithms must be "beyond killer".
    
    Also, in the SD-1 there are algorithms that do two effects at once.
    I implied you could do that on the DP/4 but I don't know that.  The
    SD-1 architecture has basically two inputs into the effects processor
    and it's setup like (I think):
    
    		input1 (FX1) =====>[Effect1]===
    					      ||
    		input2 (FX2) =================+=====>[Effect 2]====>
    
    	Note that these are stereo signals
    
    I don't know if the DP/4 has that (I'd guess that it does though).
    
    Interestingly enough, the (new) TS-10 can do 3 simultaneous effects
    with one processor.  From the quick glance at the manual I managed,
    it sounds like the FX1 L and R are sent to different effects although
    I forgot to see if the FX1 effects are in parallel or in series.
    
    Maybe Bill Powers can answer that.
    
    The TS-10 also has a LARGE number of new algorithms (btw, the DP/4 as
    more than the SD-1 which had more than the VFX/SD).  Isn't software
    wonderful?   I wouldn't be surprised if you could add all the TS-10
    algorithms to the DP/4 by just replacing a ROM - that may not be
    true for the VFX/SD series for reasons not worth going into.
    
    BTW, the price I got for the DP/4 was (I think) $1169.

>    FWIW - I thought my Alesis had decent effects until I tried my Lexicon
>    in place of it.  Now I need a Lexicon for my guitar rig, as well as a
>    couple more for my studio.  :-(
    
    Coop, you ought to look into the DP/4.  One DP/4 gives you, IMHO,
    2-4 reverbs of Lexicon quality at far less than 2-4x the price
    of any Lexicon stuff.
    
    Or look thru the Want Ads and see how many SRV-2000's ($300!!!) you
    can snarf up.
    
    FWIW - I hated my MIDIVERB II from the first day I unpacked my
    SRV-2000.   It's now the "road reverb" (i.e. gets banged around
    going to gigs in the PA rack).
    
    	db

    Is the SRV-2000 made by ART ? (They have something called '2000.)
    
    In the diagram, what you're calling Effect 1 & Effect 2 are really
    *groups* of effects, right ? Are they identical, or are there some
    things in group 1 that aren't in group 2 or vice versa ?
    
    The 4 independent channel configuration may allow me to solve the "EFX
    loop blues" problem. Maybe I'll send for the manual on this thing.
    
    With a little (very little) soldering, I bet you could configure the
    DP/4 to run with *either* ROM selectable by a switch, or possibly a
    preset, but that would require "software".
    
    Are there any expansion capabilities on the DP/4 ?
    
    Paul 

    re: db

>    Coop, you ought to look into the DP/4.  One DP/4 gives you, IMHO,
>    2-4 reverbs of Lexicon quality at far less than 2-4x the price
>    of any Lexicon stuff.
    
    Umm...which Lexicon quality?  All Lexicon equipment isn't created
    equal.  I've heard a couple of the LXP series and I've heard a PCM-70,
    and I can definitely say the PCM-70 is a much finer reverb.
    
    For the budget minded who don't need MIDI, Lexicon has a new low priced
    reverb called the "Alex".  From the description, it sounds to me like
    one of the LXPs without the MIDI support and it costs even less then
    those.
          
>    FWIW - I hated my MIDIVERB II from the first day I unpacked my
>    SRV-2000.   It's now the "road reverb" (i.e. gets banged around
>    going to gigs in the PA rack).
    
    I also had a reaction like this about my old ART reverb.  I thought it
    sounded good until I got my first SRV-2000 (I've since purchased a
    second one 'cause I liked it so much).  I hooked it up and ran one of
    my mixes on the 4-track through it and was blown away with how much it
    sounded "real" to me and not like an "effect".
                                                  
    re: Paul
    
>    Is the SRV-2000 made by ART ? (They have something called '2000.)
 
    No, it was made by Roland.  They're no longer made, but there's a new
    product they have which sounds like a followon to it.  When they first
    came out, they sold for around $1500, but you can find them used as low
    as $250 now.  They still sound great and I think it's an incredible
    bargain at that price.  (But...I still like the PCM-70 better, but who
    can afford that?)
       
    Greg

>    Is the SRV-2000 made by ART ? (They have something called '2000.)
    
    Nope, Roland.  Roland just came out with a new unit with a model
    # that seems to suggest it's related to the SRV-2000.  Not sure if
    it's as good.
    
    ART is another Alesis IMHO when it comes to reverb and effects:
    cheesey.   You ears may disagree.  Although I will say that some
    of the ideas in the SGX-2000 are pretty cool - that's a unit I'd
    like to have if I had limitless finances.
    
>    In the diagram, what you're calling Effect 1 & Effect 2 are really
>    *groups* of effects, right ? Are they identical, or are there some
>    things in group 1 that aren't in group 2 or vice versa ?
    
    No, they are busses that feed into ports in the ESP chip and the
    algorithm in use.   The way it works on the VFX series is that
    what comes in the FX1 buss has effect 1 applied to it, and then
    the output of that is mixed with what comes in on FX2 and effect
    2 is applied to that.
    
    The ports they are connected to aren't really groups of effects either
    because they can only do one effect per se.  
    
>    With a little (very little) soldering, I bet you could configure the
>    DP/4 to run with *either* ROM selectable by a switch, or possibly a
>    preset, but that would require "software".
    
    My guess is that newer ROMs contain everthing the older ROMs have
    and if that were the case, there'd be no point in doing this.
    
>    Are there any expansion capabilities on the DP/4 ?
    
    Don't know.  I doubt it.
    

    re: .13 G_House
    
>   Umm...which Lexicon quality?  All Lexicon equipment isn't created
>   equal.  I've heard a couple of the LXP series and I've heard a PCM-70,
>   and I can definitely say the PCM-70 is a much finer reverb.
    
    I'm speaking of the LXP series.  Coop has a PCM-70????
    
>   I also had a reaction like this about my old ART reverb.  
    
    As I said in .-1 - ART and Alesis are pretty much on the same place
    on the "db scale".   I give ART an edge in that they do have some
    cool products in terms of features and layout, but for sound quality
    it's definitely low-to-mid end - at least to these ears.
    
    > I thought it sounded good until I got my first SRV-2000 (I've since
    >purchased a second one 'cause I liked it so much).  I hooked it up and
    >ran one of my mixes on the 4-track through it and was blown away with
    >how much it sounded "real" to me and not like an "effect".

    Yes, that's a good way to put it.  I have the same reaction - as I've
    said, to me it sounds more like a "room" than like a "reverb".
    
    ----------
    
    By the way Greg, I had never thought about the pre-amp vs. post 
    advantage of the DP/4.  And it's not even just an advantage of
    signal quality but tonal as well because I like having certain
    things like the reverb and compression after the pre-amp, but
    other things like delay and filters before.
    
    I.E.  good point!
    
    
    

>Coop has a PCM-70????
    
    In his dreams, maybe.  I do know more people then just Coop, y'know... 
    :-)
    
    FWIW, the LXP series sound very good, especially considering the price. 
    I think they're better then anything else available in their price
    range (and several things that cost more, as well), but they're not the
    best reverbs I've ever  heard.  Even though the reverb is nice, and
    realistic sounding, there's still a bit of a gritty edge to it. 
    There's a richness and smoothness that the PCM-70 has that's just
    wonderful (and I guess it'll do nice chorus's and delays too, but I've
    never heard 'em).
    
    That said, I'd love to have one of the LXPs (or two) if I had the extra
    loot someday, but there's things I need a lot worse.
    
>    By the way Greg, I had never thought about the pre-amp vs. post 
>    advantage of the DP/4. 
    
    That was the one problem that I always had with multieffect units in
    general (in the past).  They all wanted to do everything for you, but
    they weren't flexable enough to do it the way I wanted it, so I'd have
    to have two of 'em to get the sounds I want.
    
    Greg

    > In his dreams, maybe.  I do know more people then just Coop, y'know... 
    
    Yeah, but remember the context here (Coop's note):
    
    	FWIW - I thought my Alesis had decent effects until I tried my Lexicon
	in place of it.  Now I need a Lexicon for my guitar rig, as well as a
    	couple more for my studio.  :-(
    

    It's a baby Lexicon...  ;^)

    But it rules!
    :-)
    
    While it's no PCM70, I've never played around with a PCM70... And
    PLEASE don't let me...  :-)

    Coop,
    
    How'd the Ensoniq clinic go?  Was the guy giving it Bob Stillman?
    
    	db

    db
    
    	you still got one of these?  How is it going?
    I am thinking of getting one for my studio.  I thought I read somewhere
    that it was impractical as a I live tool do to switching delay when
    changing patches (something like 3 seconds delay time with no noise!)
    
    
    P.K.

    Nope, never ended up with one.   Bought the TS-10 and really couldn't
    buy two major-bucks items like that at once.
    
    I still want one, but I don't have one.
    
    I bought a GSP-2102 also which is a multi-effects guitar processor.
    Probably better for my guitar needs, but the DP/4 is a much better
    piece of studio gear.
    
    As luck would have it though, these days I'm doing a lot of recording
    (studio) and almost NO guitar playing.
    
    Who knew?
    
    	db

    RE -1
    	Thanks db.
    
    P.K.