Support |
For the record, I love the foot controller. I bought mine used 5 years ago and replaced the switches just as a matter ot course. I also measured all the resistors and replaced one that had drifted pretty far off value. Not a single problem (knock on wood) since then with fairly constant gigging and rehearsing, including five trips to burning man where *everything* one owns gets permeated with corrosive alkali dust. Upon returning home, I blow the switches out with compressed air and spray in some contact cleaner. No problems. I'm actually amazed at robustness off the design. I bought a bunch of replacemnet switches just so I'd have them on hand, and they are still just sitting in a drawer 5 years later. Joe Rut ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kim Flint" <kflint@loopers-delight.com> To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com Subject: Re: EDP Footpedal vs. FCB1010 ? ? Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 01:45:56 -0700 > > At 08:49 AM 9/11/2005, Adrian Bartholomew wrote: > > ITS PERFECT. go with the 1010. > > hmmm, I would say the FCB1010 is ok, but only compared to other > midi controllers currently available. But that is only because most > of the others available today are really horrible. Only the > Rocktron All Access seems better than the Behringer FCB1010, but > much more expensive. > > Compared to some past midi controllers however, the Behringer > FCB1010 is really weak. The Digitech PMC-10 and the Lake-Butler > RFC-1 Midigator were really exceptional, full-featured midi pedals, > and completely blow away anything available today. Both are long > out of production. They are really hard to find today because > people really treasure them. If you can find one, get it. > > It is really sad that nobody makes something comparable. I wish > somebody would just copy the old Digitech PMC-10 architecture. > > > the EDP foot controller response time is good. dont get me wrong. > > but the reliability is NOT. from what i understand, its not > > voltage controlled, its RESISTANCE controlled. maybe that is the > > problem in the 1st place. others may refute me but i have one and > > it sucks. any contamination of the buttons can set off the > > resistances and ur then screwed...ONSTAGE. > > I've seen you make these accusations about our poor pedal design a > few times Adrian, so allow me to explain the design goals we sought > in creating the Echoplex footpedal controller. > > First of all, the people involved in the Echoplex design are all > musicians in addition to engineers. In fact we were all musicians > before we were engineers. We've used many different pieces of gear > as musicians. We've dragged our gear around for rehearsals and > gigs. We've experienced problematic gear over time that irritated > us or broke on us or couldn't be worked around at the last minute, > and we sought to do better with the Echoplex. We designed the > Echoplex pedal to hopefully address many of these problems that we > had been irritated by in other gear. > > So despite what you say, reliability was one of the key design > goals. (I'll come back to the issue of what "reliability" means a > bit later.) > > First, let's cover the design requirements we came up with for the > Echoplex pedal: > > - The pedal should not use a proprietary cable. Cables will go bad. > We've all experienced it. If you can't replace the cable at the > last minute because it is some proprietary special-order thing, you > are screwed. So, the pedal must use a cable anybody can get easily, > or preferably something they likely have anyway. > > - The cable must not be fixed to the unit. Since we don't know how > big your stage is, we want to let you choose how long of a cable > you need. We also want you to be able to replace it easily if the > cable dies. Especially for transporting gear, attached cables get > bent in strange ways and suffer tremendous strain. It will be > better if it is easily detached. > > - There should only be one cable between pedal and rack. More > cables means more points of failure. More cost to the user. More > crap cluttering up the stage. More connections to be made while > setting up before the gig. More things to connect the wrong way by > mistake. More jacks to fail. One cable must be enough for the > Echoplex pedal. > > - The pedal should not require power. Power supplies fail often, > especially power supplies out on stage where they deal with beer, > power surges, booted stage divers and etc., and therefore anything > requiring a power supply is less reliable than a passive device. A > power supply requirement also adds to the inconvenience. This > requires power brought out to the stage, and an additional cable > connection be made to the pedal. > > - The pedal must be very simple in design, so it is easy to repair > on the road. Anything on the floor of a stage will get broken > eventually, so assume field repairable is essential. This pedal > will be getting stomped on, kicked around, getting beer spilled on > it, getting rained on, sitting in the hot sun in the summer, > freezing in the winter, etc. No matter what you do it will break > for somebody. It should be easy for the user to open the pedal up > and fix it. > > - It should be easy for people to make custom controllers. Most > people probably want a pedal, but not all. Some want to make their > own custom pedal. We have no idea what the others may want. It > should be easy for those who want something different to create > their own controller without much engineering knowledge or other > sophistication. The pedal design should be very simple for this to > be possible. > > - The pedal design must be very inexpensive to produce. People are > spending their money on the EDP, the foot controller should not be > a huge extra expense. The target manufacturing cost for parts, > fabrication, assembly, packaging, etc. should be less than $20. > > - The switches themselves must a) be quiet when pressed, b) have > reasonably low force required for activation, c) have a reasonably > short throw length, d) have a good tactile feel. This is so the > musician can easily feel the connection point for tapping loop > functions, which a generally very rhythmic and demand precision. > > In our opinion, these design goals were very friendly towards > musicians, at least according to our real-world experience as > musicians. > > So my challenge to you Adrian, is what would you design to meet > these requirements? You think our design sucks, so I would very > much like to hear your better idea. Perhaps you are a brilliant > engineer, and we can all learn from you! > > Now, given the design goals above, allow me to tell you how we > chose to meet them when we designed the Echoplex Digital Pro. Our > Echoplex pedal design used 7 resistors, 7 switches, one mono 1/4" > patch cable (just like you would use for a guitar, or even a > speaker cable), one cable jack, steel chassis, and no external > power. This means: > - Very few components, so there is little there to break. > - It is really easy to figure out how the pedal works if you open > it, so most anybody can figure out how to repair it quickly if > there is a problem. > - We published the resistor values in the manual, so anybody could > make their own controller if they wished. It's really easy to do. > - The switches are common momentary switches, and there are > numerous options for those if you want to use something different > from what we used. However we did spend a lot of time trying > switches, and we did not find anything that met our goals for > remotely close to the cost of the ones we used. > > We created the pedal itself to be a very simple design to ensure > reliability, while all the smarts are in the rack unit. Simple > stuff has less ways to break. The pedal simply sets a voltage, and > the rack unit reads the voltage with an a/d convertor to interpret > the function. Contrary to recent claims here on the LD list, the > switch is debounced twice. First it is debounced in the rack with a > capacitor before the a/d convertor , and then debounced again in > software, where the value is checked multiple times to ensure it is > correctly read. There is a wide tolerance given to the voltage > range for each function, so even if things are off a bit, it should > still work. > > I thought our design was rather clever, and I was always proud that > we managed to get 7 buttons of control communicated through just a > simple patch cord. But I'm now looking forward to Adrian educating > me on better ideas. > > Our Echoplex design has been working pretty well since 1994. Many > pedals have been working that long without problems (including > mine). The design itself generally does not fail. Usually the only > problems seen are with switches failing in various ways. (like > getting dirty.) A failing switch is a failing switch. Any pedal > will have a problem if the switches fail, so that is not a problem > unique to the Echoplex. > > And that brings up an interesting point. If you are into looping, > you will be tapping buttons and switches a lot. Probably much more > than on any other device you use. Switches wear out when used > frequently. (you may not be used to this.) They get dirty. They > break. They become intermittent. You need to start thinking about > switches similar to the way guitarists think about strings, or DJ's > think about crossfaders, or saxophonists think about reeds, or > drummers think about drum heads, or like the oil in your car. > Looper switches are commodities that wear out and need regular > replacement and/or care. It has nothing to do with it being an > Echoplex pedal or a boss or a digitech or whatever. If you are > stepping on it a lot, the switch will wear out. Be prepared or be > sorry. > > And I can guarantee you - you know those switches on your FCB1010? > If you use it for looping, their gonna break also. It's just a > matter of time. Do you know how to fix them? > > Now, let's talk about reliability. What is more reliable, the > Echoplex pedal, or a midi pedal like the Behringer FCB1010? How do > you determine that objectively? > > Reliability is an engineering science. It is not a guessing game. > It is also not my engineering specialty, but I work with > reliability engineers who are very good. I don't know exactly how > they do their reliability calculations, but I do know what > information I need to specify to them, and what results they > provide back. (another reason why I think it is funny when people > think laptops are a good thing to bring on stage, but that is > another topic.) Here are some parameters that go into a reliability > calculation: > > - how many components are used > - what is the individual reliability of each component in the usage >conditions > - how many component pins are connected > - how many electrical connection points (solder joints, connectors, > sockets, etc.) > - what sort of shock and vibration will it experience > - Is the device powered > - If it is powered, what voltages and voltage tolerances are used > (and how do they affect individual device reliability > characteristics, as each device will be different depending on its > own manufacturing process.) > - if powered, What are the temperature ranges where it operates > - what are humidity ranges where it operates > > All these factors go into calculating the MTBF (mean time before > failure). Half the units made will fail before that time, and half > after, with some statistical distribution. (I think it is gaussian, > but I'm not sure.) > > Now, considering all that, any midi pedal (including the Behringer > FCB) will have far more parts, far more device pins, far more > connection points, will be powered, will have more external > connections, will be more affected by temperature, more affected by > humidity, etc., than the overwhelmingly simple Echoplex pedal. > > In other words, if you really do a serious reliability analysis, a > midi pedal will always prove to be less reliable than the Echoplex > pedal, and probably it is the least reliable device you are using. > > On the other hand, if you do use a good midi controller pedal with > the Echoplex, you will have far more flexibility and access to > commands than you do with the pedal or the Echoplex front panel > (assuming you are using LoopIV in your Echoplex, LoopIII wasn't so > interesting for midi). A good midi pedal is far more useful with > the Echoplex, and that may be an excellent reason to choose the > midi pedal option! > > It is great to have choices, > kim > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > Kim Flint | Looper's Delight > kflint@loopers-delight.com | http://www.loopers-delight.com -- _______________________________________________ Search for businesses by name, location, or phone number. -Lycos Yellow Pages http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10