Looper's Delight Archive Top (Search)
Date Index
Thread Index
Author Index
Support
Looper's
Delight!!

Looper's Delight Home
Mailing List Info
Looper's Delight
Looper Profiles
Tools of the Trade
Tips and Tricks
Musings
History of Looping
Loopography
Rec. Reading
Mailing List Info
Mailing List Archive
File Library

Support
Looper's Delight!
In Association with Amazon.com

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: EDP Footpedal vs. FCB1010 ? ?



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


Archive Top (Search) | Thread Index | Author Index
Looper's Delight Home | Looper's Delight Mailing List Info
This page is maintained by Kim Flint
contact us
Support
Looper's
Delight!!

In Association with Amazon.com
Any purchase you make through these links gives Looper's Delight a commission to keep us going. If you are buying it anyway, why not let some of your cash go to your favorite web site? Thanks!!