H9 why no control over non accesible parameters in Factor pedals?

[javiceres]

I’ve always wanted to tweak things like the frequency cut off of the finters in my TimeFactor Band Delays to better match my guitars, amps an any other source… or to simply extend the usability of that effect/algo.

Thats a simple example of a parameter that’s simply unavailable in a Factor pedal, wich is fair I guess.

The question is, with the endless possibilities that the H9 editor has, why not opening that door? Even if these changes can’t be writen into the Factor pedal’s current preset memory. But it would give them renewed value, in the studio and forlive tweaking.

And if not doing it with the Factors, why staying the same with the H9? I’m struggling not to get an Ecliplse because it’s form factor doesn´t suit my needs like the pedals do when travelling etc. I have to say I really expected deeper editing posibilities o the FX for the H9, at least s for the further H9 exclusive FX. I jus can’t understand this limitation.

By the way, when loading a Facto algorythm in the Eclipse (TF or MF) can you still use the second DSP/Block to load anothe FX? I read that you cant load another TF or MF algo, but what about the rest of the Eclipse algos?

… I guess I’m leaning towards the Eclipse, o perhaps an old PCM to complement my Factors and SpAce…

Best regards.

[nickrose]

Our belief is that most of our users find our products to be complex enough already, so we are not usually inclined to add to this. Sorry.

Regarding the Eclipse, the TF and MF algorithms take up most of the processing power, so no other algs can be loaded at the same time. Sorry again.

 

[javiceres]

Thanks for the response.

I see, so a future H9 algorythm with deep editing capabilities in the vein of the rack units (albeit with more limited power) is out of question, right?

Best regards.

[nickrose]

javiceres wrote:

Thanks for the response. I see, so a future H9 algorythm with deep editing capabilities in the vein of the rack units (albeit with more limited power) is out of question, right? Best regards.

Actually, we would like to do this, but (believe it) these algorithms are so complex and carefully tuned, that we don't think that there will be,much demand for this. As an example, our rack units have totally editable algorithms, but disappointingly feẃ people take advantage of this. To be fair, this is partly because it is rather difficult, but I think this is where we came in.

[javiceres]

nickrose wrote:

javiceres wrote:

Thanks for the response. I see, so a future H9 algorythm with deep editing capabilities in the vein of the rack units (albeit with more limited power) is out of question, right? Best regards.

Actually, we would like to do this, but (believe it) these algorithms are so complex and carefully tuned, that we don’t think that there will be,much demand for this. As an example, our rack units have totally editable algorithms, but disappointingly feẃ people take advantage of this. To be fair, this is partly because it is rather difficult, but I think this is where we came in.

 

I understand, but there’s always middle solutions. For instance, in Harmodulator being able to select the modulaition depth of each of the two voices separately.  Or in Band Delays and FilterPong: a control over the cut off frequency of the filters, even if it’s just fine tuning. Those are simple and handy parameters that extend the capabilities, for an “expert mode”. I’m sure that a couple of algos in the vein of the H3000 Mod factory and such with a simple graphical interface would get to be classics and could be marketed as a leap in the world of pedals (another). And best of all, rightfully so!

I understand though that getting down to the very core with most algos would be out of the whole “pedal” idea.

Anyway thank you for listening indeed. I greatly decided on basing my FX on Eventide devices due to the history of long term support and innovation in your creations. Unlike, I would say, the rest.

Best regards.

[monkoustic]

as someone who just bought an H9 because it was touted to be extremely editable. then when i start to dig into it, i see that it’s considerably less editable than my mid-90’s PCM70. why can’t i adjust the panning on the delays? or the feedback levels? if you have a 1/4 note delay on one side and an 1/8 on the other, the 1/8 side needs more feedback to match the 1/4 side. it just seems kind of lazy or something? or is there something i’m missing? [also, just for reference, I’ve been professional touring and recording guitarist and arrranger for almost 30 years. i was really excited by the possibilities of being able to really program some amazing stuff into here, but without being able to choose the times of the multi-tap (see cpm70) etc. it starts to seem like another Guitar Center “wow-box”.]

i love TC products (i’ve had at least 2 2290’s over the years) but i pray that you don’t slip into the consumer market too deeply and abandon those of us who need some of those parameters to be successful. maybe for an extra $50 you offer a “pro”editor?

thanks

[javiceres]

monkoustic wrote:

as someone who just bought an H9 because it was touted to be extremely editable. then when i start to dig into it, i see that it’s considerably less editable than my mid-90’s PCM70. why can’t i adjust the panning on the delays? or the feedback levels? if you have a 1/4 note delay on one side and an 1/8 on the other, the 1/8 side needs more feedback to match the 1/4 side. it just seems kind of lazy or something? or is there something i’m missing? [also, just for reference, I’ve been professional touring and recording guitarist and arrranger for almost 30 years. i was really excited by the possibilities of being able to really program some amazing stuff into here, but without being able to choose the times of the multi-tap (see cpm70) etc. it starts to seem like another Guitar Center “wow-box”.]

i love TC products (i’ve had at least 2 2290’s over the years) but i pray that you don’t slip into the consumer market too deeply and abandon those of us who need some of those parameters to be successful. maybe for an extra $50 you offer a “pro”editor?

thanks

 

 

I agree regarding the panning, although the A/B delay Mix goes a long way. The feedback is settable per delay by the way.

I’m also extremely interested in deeper editing.

[javiceres]

Funnily lately I’ve been missing the ability to set different wet/dry levels for output L/R so I can use an almost wet/almost dry setup, where you don’t loose the stereo field effect but have a one amp almost dry so you have the Guitar-cable-Amp feeling

[macgee]

Indeed I agree with the thread starter, I don’t like that i can’t change the low end of a delay, it just gets all muddy and there’s nothing I can do about it

Instead of a highpass/lowcut and a lowpass/highcut you could do this with a single knob that went through different delay tone shapings. In fact strymon pedals do this and it’s great to get near any flavour.

I go to the vintage delay for some middle ground but not configurable

Don’t be afraid to give end users some power – have an expert tab in the effects for those super users, they won’t be disappointed

On another note, looking forward to get an H9000 in a month that will let me do this

[Author]

Posts