Well, I do have an Eclipse and I also need multi head tape delay some time soon, to cover some early David Gilmour sounds (Binson Echorec II). But I'm lucky enough that Gilmour didn't use that many variations on that stuff as Marvin did, so I guess I will be fine with two head sounds…
I have figured two approaches that could work but still need to be tested…
1. Using TF TapeEcho (#817), followed by a mono looper at 0ms (just to make the dual delay output mono). This would give me the two heads that I need 🙂
2. Again using TF TapeEcho, but for more complex tappy stuff (Marvin is known for) this time followed by a clean multi delay. In this scenario the TapeEcho would provide the coloration only but not the repeats. The multi delay would simulate the multiple heads and I guess there wouldn't be much more additional modulation required.
Still not perfect… the feedback path wouldn't be simulated accurately… but there are chances it could work out.
Somehow it's hard to understand why no company would make a handy unit that can handle both, convincing digital delay sounds as well as convincing analog (especially tape) delay sounds (that would definitely include multiple head options) and has a resonable number of preset slots. The Empress Super Delay has a very interesting multi tap function, but without tape flavour. And I can't believe that Strymon didn't put the ElCapistan multi head options into the TimeLine 🙁 Sometimes I feel like just hooking my EchoBoy loaded computer to my guitar rack… That gave me the delay sounds I'm after but would bring some other pains… Life ain't easy 🙂
I would really like to have more influence on the pannings of the Eclipses' TimeFactor presets. Perhaps the [LEVELS] option in the [PARAMETERS] tree would be a good place for some future update… and would provide panning control on all presets and increase the overall usability A GOOD BIT. Some like:
[FXA MIX] [FXA LVL] [FXB MIX] [FXB LVL] > next page > [FXA PAN] [FXB PAN]
I'm not a specialist here, but i think that way the actual preset algorithms wouldn't need to be touched..?
So, maybe you guys at Eventide could think about my proposal and if it's possible to include it without too much hassle.
I have another idea that is about an additional [IN MODE] routing option "Mono 3", that sums the inputs 1 and 2 and would result in one single mono source. Uhm, I'm going to write a separate post about those two feature requests 🙂Show More...