Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
On the other hand, it's hard for me to imagine the "ordinary joe" programming the FCB1010! Kim's explanation of the design of the Echoplex footboard was fascinating, and I think the team succeeded in it's goals. But all in all, I'm a lot happier with the FCB1010 for it's flexibility and expression pedals. Then again, I haven't had a gig in a few years. . . On 9/13/05, Adrian Bartholomew <adrian@bartholomusic.com> wrote: > see? this is what im talking about. > > being a technically minded guy, joe was able to get the best out of his > foot controller. (congrats joe). > could u imaging the ordinary joe (pun intended:-) ) MEASURING > RESISTORS(read: having a probe tester and not worried about not knowing > the color coding) to REPLACE (read: desolder and resolder) them? > > nope. > that thing wouldve been in the trash. instantly. > > this reminds me of my epson C80 printer. if u KNOW about print heads > and how to clean them with alcohol and stuff, ur epson budget printer > would last u a long time. just go online and read the hatemail about > them. > > but HP knows how to avoid printing "lines" WITHOUT needing the owners > to be comfortable with printing machines' insides. > > ...is all im sayin. > ___ > Adrian Bartholomew > Leawood KS > On Sep 13, 2005, at 10:28 AM, joe rut wrote: > > > 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 > > > > > > -- Art Simon simart@null.net http://art.simon.tripod.com http://artsimon.iuma.com