Digital Bigsby on H9?

[krcassid]

I am a Bigsby/ trem addict.  Unfortunately, I have a number of guitars that don’t have them.  On those guitars, I constantly find my right hand reaching for the missing trem/ Bigsby arm.  It strikes me that it might be possible to get close to the “wavering” sound (I don’t divebomb) with an H9 and expression pedal.  I played with the vibrato algo a bit and it wasn’t bad.  But, it strikes me that I might be better off with a pitch algo.  What I am trying to do it to create that gentle wavering in pitch, but not perfectly like vibrato does.  I was thinking that maybe using an expression pedal to control the pitch across a very narrow range (the range of a Bigsby, maybe 50 cents, primarily down).  But, to make it more realistic, I need some modulation in the rate.  A Bigsby/ Trem is not fixed.  Typically your rate of pitch change (as opposed to depth in cents) varies.   So, I’m looking for an algorithm that will do both the pitch and the rate w/ 1 exp pedal. 

 

Any ideas how this would be best done?   The vibrato/ pan algorithm wasn’t bad, just a bit too mechanical.   I’m going to post same to Rack Forum as my Eclipse might be a better option but I’d prefer the H9.

Thanks!

[DGillespie]

Hi krcassid,

 

If I understand you correctly you want a pitch wobble that trends down and gets bigger and slower the further you push the pedal?  You should be able to do this with the harmodulator algorithm by assigning the pitch amount, mod depth, and mod speed all to the same expression pedal.

 

Dan

 

[spaceJam]

I tried to replicate that with Harmodulator before and it was somehow close but not as close as the cheap Behringer pedal that I had, it sounded really beautiful. 

 

Key is to set the expression pedal and the Envelope values right.

[brock]

krcassid wrote:

I am a Bigsby/ trem addict.  Unfortunately, I have a number of guitars that don’t have them.  On those guitars, I constantly find my right hand reaching for the missing trem/ Bigsby arm.  It strikes me that it might be possible to get close to the “wavering” sound (I don’t divebomb) with an H9 and expression pedal.  I played with the vibrato algo a bit and it wasn’t bad.  But, it strikes me that I might be better off with a pitch algo … 

  Your first consideration here is that – if you’re going for realism – the pitch algorithm will have to be 100% wet, or have the ability to switch instantly from dry to 100% wet.  I’d go through all of the pitch algos, with the pitch controls set to unison, and MIX at 100.  Then decide if you can live with the tonal change as (somewhat of) an ‘always on’ effect.  Some algos will do this better than others.  And the change in tone may be exactly as intended for other types of effects.

krcassid wrote:

 

… What I am trying to do it to create that gentle wavering in pitch, but not perfectly like vibrato does.  I was thinking that maybe using an expression pedal to control the pitch across a very narrow range (the range of a Bigsby, maybe 50 cents, primarily down).  But, to make it more realistic, I need some modulation in the rate.  A Bigsby/ Trem is not fixed.  Typically your rate of pitch change (as opposed to depth in cents) varies.   So, I’m looking for an algorithm that will do both the pitch and the rate w/ 1 exp pedal … 

  I can think of several pitch algorithms that will get you all or part of the way there.  Each one is going to have its own advantages & disadvantages.  After ‘testing for tone’ with the algorithms, let me know if any particular pitch algo is more acceptable to you (at 100% wet).  Then we can work out the specifics on how close you can get to your requirements here.

Some Leading Candidates:

• HarModulator
• MicroPitch
• H910 / H949
• PitchFlex

  A few of these are going to be too coarse (100 cents / m2), or jump from a +/- 30 cent increment to m2, but there are ways around that.  MicroPitch meets most of your criteria, but the +/- 30c modulation has locked symmetry over the 50c up & down pitch shifts.  The FLEX switch doubles the current pitch shift values (up to +/- 100 cents).  PitchFlex is the better option for polyphonic whammy, but you’ll have to manually control range and wavering modulation with your foot.  There are choices and compromises to be made.

krcassid wrote:

 

… Any ideas how this would be best done?   The vibrato/ pan algorithm wasn’t bad, just a bit too mechanical.   I’m going to post same to Rack Forum as my Eclipse might be a better option but I’d prefer the H9.

Thanks!

  The Vibrato algo might not be ‘deep’ enough for what you’re after here.  Setting the TYPE to RETRO can get you some wide wobbles; especially with more STAGES.  But this mode does fold in more of a phase-shifting effect.  And your lowest SPEED limit bottoms out at 1.00 Hz, which is still too fast enough to disguise its regularity.

  There are ways to get around the ‘mechanical’ aspect, though.  The ModFactor algorithms have that hardwired, double-layered modulation.  It causes confusion among traditional effects users, but it’s tremendously versatile … once you wrap your head around the concepts.  In the example below, DEPTH and SPEED are increased heel to toe by an expression pedal.  They are both modulated up to 25% by a RANDOM waveshape.

  This pitch modulation-on-modulation can get a whole lot more RANDOM than that: [https://www.eventideaudio.com/community/forum/stompboxes/some-random-h9-presets] 

  But whole intent here is to dial up the DEPTH, change the SPEED, modulate both parameters regularly, plus add random variations, and put it all under control of one foot pedal sweep.

  I should note that I ranged DEPTH from 1 to 50 here.  Sometimes having the Heel position at 0 will produce a noticeable ‘jump’ to engaging the effect. (… You just happen to hit a deep RANDOM position, while kicking in the expression pedal, and … )  The SPEED is varied from 1.00 Hz. (should be lower) to 4.00 Hz. ( A slow, ‘natural’ vibrato rate, but maybe a bit too fast for this application).  The idea is to give more range to the expression pedal than you actually may need, then use the pedal with active dynamics & tight control.

 

 

 

[krcassid]

Thank You!  This is awesome!  I tried the Harmodulator idea abpve and that just doesn’t do it.  I do note tha the “always on” aspect, when pitch is set to unisaon, doesn’t seem to be an issue.   It’s really getting the right pitch, speed, depth and modulation of these 3 variables that is the challenge.  A bigsby or Trem is a lot more complex than one might think, even when just using it for that “quavering” sound in the decay phase.  Simply attaching Exp pedal to pitch and modulating speed or depth doesn’t do it.  I am thinking that it may require seperate modulation of multiple parameters, something the H9 can’t do, but my Eclipse and H8000FW can.   But, I’d really like to stay away from the rack mount gear for this.  I’ll work on your ideas and report back.  I can’t imagine I’m the only guy who would like to nail this.  It seems so simple.  A Bigsby/ Trem does nothing more than vary ptch, right?  It’s not simple.

[brock]

Yeah, I think that our ears are most sensitive to changes in pitch; even miniscule ones.

And even more so after we’ve put in the hours training them to hear it.

krcassid wrote:

… I do note tha the “always on” aspect, when pitch is set to unisaon, doesn’t seem to be an issue.   It’s really getting the right pitch, speed, depth and modulation of these 3 variables that is the challenge.  A bigsby or Trem is a lot more complex than one might think, even when just using it for that “quavering” sound in the decay phase. 

I’m right with you there.  If you’re good with the tone at 100%, then it can be done.  I’m a bit of a pitch modulation fanatic myself, but I don’t use the physical whammy bars much anymore on my equipped guitars.  Fretboard control, supplemented by electronics.  The challenge with DSP-generated pitch changes is getting it to sound ‘natural’ (if that’s what you’re after).  Or embrace the pitch variations that are impossible by physical means.  Both are valid approaches, and one type doesn’t exclude the other.  Let’s face it: the current technology behind pitch FX is just getting better & better.

krcassid wrote:

… Simply attaching Exp pedal to pitch and modulating speed or depth doesn’t do it.  I am thinking that it may require seperate modulation of multiple parameters, something the H9 can’t do, but my Eclipse and H8000FW can.   But, I’d really like to stay away from the rack mount gear for this. …

Yes, and no.  I have no doubt that you could pull this off with that rack gear.  It might even be easier, because you’ll have finer control over pitch and modulation.  You can build the effect using individual modules.  But I still think that you can pull it off with the H9.  You just haven’t hit on the right combinations (or algorithm) yet to ‘crack the code’.

Eventide’s take on expression pedal control is amazingly deep.  No less than morphing through intermediate ‘presets’ with parameter changes, range limits, and reverse directions.  But there are some limitations that can be problematic with advanced mappings.  For example, the ‘taper’ of DEPTH decrease may not align nicely with an increase in SPEED.  Difficult to explain in text, but easy to demonstrate in practice.  There’s nothing ‘wrong’ with the implementation.  The nature of the beast is that certain parameter values don’t line up well with each other when trying to obtain a specific result.

An AUX switch can supplement your expression pedal, but this is supposed to seem second-nature, right?  Tap dancing needs to be at a minimum.  I don’t know if you use MIDI, but it’s an extremely powerful option.  I can’t tell you how many ‘impossible’ H9 effects I’ve come up with via MIDI.  One caveat is that you can only throw so much MIDI complexity at the H9 before it starts freaking out.  You’ll know when you’ve pushed it too far.

krcassid wrote:

… I can’t imagine I’m the only guy who would like to nail this.  It seems so simple.  A Bigsby/ Trem does nothing more than vary ptch, right?  It’s not simple.

No, it’s very complex interaction.  And it’s a tactile interaction between hand & brain.  You’re going to lose something with trying to substitute a foot over a pedal with a completely different response.  So you’re going to need an ‘assist’, and that could be the algorithm’s internal modulators, MIDI, or some other external influence.  A combined approach that uses the expression pedal for the ‘main’ effect, plus MIDI or internal / external modulators as the ‘helping hand’.

While I do lean heavily on MIDI, there are ‘smart’ expression pedal devices out there that can automatically modulate your expression pedal input.  EHX 8 Step Program is incredibly deep, as is the Source Audio Reflex pedal.  There are other good ones, but I’m most familiar with these two. I actually use the 2nd device as my through-pedal for the first.  Bottom line is that either one can be a universal modulator for your expression pedal programming.  And your current expression pedal becomes the foot-modulator-for-the-automatic-modulator.

I find multi-modulation expression to be one of the better options:

• Easy to program and tweak in H9 Control.
• Automate the parameters that you need.
• Maintain manual control with a foot pedal.
• Build your own modulation shapes in the external device.
• Avoid the potential MIDI headroom limitations on a complex data stream.

All that said, this is an interesting pursuit, and I’d like to help you get there, if I can.  I have a number of other pitch shifting options on my ‘board, so those might trigger some ideas or comparative results.  But I’m pretty much convinced that there isn’t much that you can’t recreate with a MAX-ed out H9.

[krcassid]

Thanks Brock!  This is amazing stuff and I really apprecdiate it.  Although I have yet to try all your ideas above, what I have found is that I underestimated the dificulty of modulating the rate with my foot via exp pedal.  My initial thought was that I could simply set pitch to unison, modulate rate (speed) with my foot and then use internal modulation in the algorithms to introduce a little randomization of depth & rate.  But, the  reality is that you can’t move your foot like you can your hand, not even close.  I’ve found that, most often, I am changing the pitch with my hand at a rate of anywhere from 80 to 180 BPM to get that subtle sway.  You can’t do this accurately with your foot.  It’s way too crude.  Yet, I remain convinced that it can be done with the H9 or rack EFX.  I actually have 2 x H9 Max but I’d prefer to use only one to achieve this effect. 

So, if I can’t use my foot to modulate pitch via Exp pedal, then I’m incined to reverse the equation and set pitch to modulate around a sine wave and use the exp pedal (or additional modulation internal to the algorithm) to introduce a more organic feel in depth and rate.  So, going from this perspective, what do you think would be the best method/ algorithm to:

1.) Set pitch to unison & modulate via sine wave at a given depth (I think + or – 50 cents is a good starting point) and rate

2.) Introduce some way to randomize or modulate the above parameters slightly via exp pedal (maybe even envelope?).  Envelope  might work as you are typically fading the vibrato effect (think Gilmore chords/ notes) where the bigsby/ trem effect is stronger at 1st but your hand naturally fades it.

Ideally, if algorithm could accomplish all of above, you could use pedal for mix only.  Then, you would not have the always on effect.  You could bring it in via the Exp pedal (or maybe a switch?)  I’m really just brainstorming here but my original premise that foot could control rate was wrong.

Thx!

[Author]

Posts