Is a G Major 2 still the best buy for rack fx?

[guitarbilly74]

Well... you kind of shifted your statement. I'm not a big fan of those TC racks, particularly the G major and its variations as they never sounded good to me, being VERY cheap products. The G-Force is a little better but still isn't on the same level as other TC products of higher quality.
You say "more transparent"... now that's the major criticism moved to all these new units as they have no character at all; the cause of this is the removal of the analog input stage (preamp/filters/compander/etc.) which in classic rack units were what created their character, the reason why people love them and still use. I mean... go to the Capitol record in Hollywood, Studio A and B and you'll find a PCM70 in both studios, not a Strymon or a G-dude. Same for all Eventides from H3000 to H8000, TC2290, all Roland, Yamaha, Korg delays, all Lexicon PCMs delays and multi-fx, let alone the glorious Prime Time I/II/III monster delays... and the list goes on and on....
The cheap stuff made today IS transparent... so transparent to even sound glacially cold, dead. I have a TimeLine and a Volante... no matter how you tweak them... there is still a tone that has not much of an epic musical appeal, compared to others delay I own (2x2290s, Korg SDD1200, a spectacular Bel BDE-2400).. and being pedals they havo no versatility really as they can't accept true line levels signals so you have no way to process the good voltage signals thru them... try a piano or an orchestra thru them and you'll laugh badly.
It is not true that today technology delivers better fx processors. That's one of the big lies we are living today. Choice have been made, the kind that makes more money for the foxy bean counters and let young folks with cruelly characterless toys that won't stand the time test.
The smart move today would be to use some of these older classics as many of them are so damned cheap, even cheaper than a Strymon... and get to know the difference both in terms of sound quality AND versatility of algorithms and effects. There is nothing out there in the new products scene that is minimally capable of doing what many 1990s units can do... and with so much better tone!

The G-Major is not a studio device, so no wonder it's not at Capitol records studio.

It's meant to be a live effects processor with relays for amp channel switching, seamless patch changes and the sound quality is definitely good enough for live applications. As such, it could be found on the live rigs of Metallica, Def Leppard, Iron Maiden, Slipknot and many other top artists.

Sorry but by comparing studio racks with the G-Major, you're comparing apples and oranges. It's a live performance processor and a damn good one at it.

 

[italoop]

Curious to know if you've ever tried the Pigtronix Echolution 2 pedals and if so what your thoughts on them are. I've used them for years now and dig them but I have zero experience with all those rack units nor the Strymon stuff so I'm curious how it compares

The Echolution 2 was one of THE most interesting delay pedals made in the last 10 years... way ahead of many others both in new features AND classic aspects that deliver tonal character. It's amazing how such masterpiece is no longer in production and a lot of less than mediocre delays are around. That tells a lot about knowledge....
The problem for ME is that when a pedal gets into a high price range, even well deserved, it enters a market where the fight is at loss for a pedal anyway. For that kind of money one can get a PCM80 and really talk about multitap delays with surgical parameters adjustment, 42 sec. memory on each of 6 delay lines and reverb... plus there's the true problem of pedals Devin correctly describes in the post before yours... and that is the signal level mutilation. Being able to run at proper line levels with high headroom is what a time_based effect should be made in the first place.

 

[italoop]

The G-Major is not a studio device, so no wonder it's not at Capitol records studio.

It's meant to be a live effects processor with relays for amp channel switching, seamless patch changes and the sound quality is definitely good enough for live applications. As such, it could be found on the live rigs of Metallica, Def Leppard, Iron Maiden, Slipknot and many other top artists.

Sorry but by comparing studio racks with the G-Major, you're comparing apples and oranges. It's a live performance processor and a damn good one at it.

Things work differently. You will find out in time....

 

[italoop]

I wish more manufacturers would make selectable line-level pedals. I hate having to neuter the signal in an amp design down to pedal level and then boost it back up to drive the output stage. It can add additional noise in the signal path that could be avoided.

In my not-so-humble opinion, pedals should be run in front of an amp at guitar level, or they should have a switch to allow them to run at line level in a proper effects loop. That's why I like rack effects, they can run at either level. Then again, I also hate doing the pedal tap-dance, so I avoid pedals. I prefer midi control so the amp channels and effects can all change with a single button press.

I have a G-Major, G-Major2 and an H9, and I like them all. The H9 effects sound best to me, but the interface is so horrendous I can never figure out how to run the damned thing without a computer hooked up to it. I'd love to see a low-cost "H9-R" rack unit with actual buttons and controls for the effects, but I guess the rack market is too small nowadays to make that worth developing. The Eclipse is great, but it is really too expensive to justify for my meager talents.

No, your opinion is not so humble, actually is totally correct, thus deserving higher than humble status!
That's exactly one of the two main problems of pedals... well there are other two but I'll stop at tonal ones.
Line levels default to a +4dBu with an input headroom around +24 dBu or higher these days. A 12 years old decent 24bit A/D converter can work at those specs very easily. An old 1989 Quadraverb kills any and every pedal at input headroom... and that's a 16 bit converter. Kind of putting all current technology to shame. Why is that? Because people don't know what voltage is and what it does to tone and so they're not vocal about specs.
It's like we have gone backwards in time to an era of very low spec_ed devices no matter the fact they could be easily done right.
I completely agree with you. Running an amp or preamp fx loop at -10dBu is the dumbest thing one can possibly do to ruin tone and glory.
The other bad aspect is design... losing the analog input stage not only the character is gone but also the true line level correct input headroom... so the two aspects are tied. What is the point of having 32bit 96KHz conversion in a pedal if its input headroom is worst than many analog pedals of the past (check any old classic TC pedals from the '80s) and just about any rack processor ever made?
Again... the industry prospers big time on removing analog circuitry capable of running good voltage and character... levels are multiplied by DSP in digital domain where everything run at 5 volts. People should understand that we do not live in a 5 volts planet... and that eveyrthing sounding nice... needs more than that.

 

[guitarbilly74]

Thiungs work differently. You will find out in time....

I will find what out?
I've been using one successfully for over 10 years.

Many top pros used them live:

Hammett:

Hetfield:

Brian May:

So what will I find out later?

 

[italoop]

I will find what out?
I've been using one successfully for over 10 years.

So did many top pros:
So what will I find out later?

There is no real distinction in how you build a rack FX processor, whatever it is going to be used for. You are believing the marketing blah blah rather than facts. There are many so called "guitar processors" which never did well because of that. Actually studio processors have been in gtr racks way more than the "gtr" ones for ages.
Generally speaking the ONLY feature that makes a processor "for gtr" is the speed of presets changes. Nothing else. The presence of relays for amps channels switching is a bonus but not exactly the main reason as there are so many other convenient solutions.
Now... when you have fast switching presets the trick is to have all effects ALWAYS running, even though you are not using several of them. So when you change your presets you 're simply activating/turning off some effects and load their parameters new values.
That leads to a very simple consideration... if a DSP is capable of doing a specific work at its best as a 100% capability, that number will always be split across all the effects, even though you are not using them. They are always "alive", taking DSP cycles. That makes switching fast but fx quality really poor. It's like a cake PRE-cut in 12 slices... no matter what... your slice will always be 1/12 of the whole thing. If you use dynamic resources allocation, your efx can be MUCH nicer and better because each one could use different number of resources... simply put... you load a reverb only that may use 70% of the resources... and it will sound spectacular... vs one that always and only uses 15% of the available power-
MIDI realtime control is what has been used for years to work around switching presets "latency" as most of the time a guitarist doesn't need to really change the preset... just reconfigure it differently.
You will find out about studio quality "for gtr" marketed processor.
Take the Eventide GTR4000... look at its manual and features and you'll realize the difference. Guess what? It's a studio machine with a "gtr" dress.

 

[guitarbilly74]

B

There is no real distinction in how you build a rack FX processor, whatever it is going to be used for. You are believing the marketing blah blah rather than facts. There are many so called "guitar processors" which never did well because of that. Actually studio processors have been in gtr racks way more than the "gtr" ones for ages.
Generally speaking the ONLY feature that makes a processor "for gtr" is the speed of presets changes. Nothing else. The presence of relays for amps channels switching is a bonus but not exactly the main reason as there are so many other convenient solutions.
Now... when you have fast switching presets the trick is to have all effects ALWAYS running, even though you are not using several of them. So when you change your presets you 're simply activating/turning off some effects and load their parameters new values.
That leads to a very simple consideration... if a DSP is capable of doing a specific work at its best as a 100% capability, that number will always be split across all the effects, even though you are not using them. They are always "alive", taking DSP cycles. That makes switching fast but fx quality really poor. It's like a cake PRE-cut in 12 slices... no matter what... your slice will always be 1/12 of the whole thing. If you use dynamic resources allocation, your efx can be MUCH nicer and better because each one could use different number of resources... simply put... you load a reverb only that may use 70% of the resources... and it will sound spectacular... vs one that always and only uses 15% of the available power-
MIDI realtime control is what has been used for years to work around switching presets "latency" as most of the time a guitarist doesn't need to really change the preset... just reconfigure it differently.
You will find out about studio quality "for gtr" marketed processor.
Take the Eventide GTR4000... look at its manual and features and you'll realize the difference. Guess what? It's a studio machine with a "gtr" dress.

Yeah except that I said absolutely nothing about "for gtr" racks so don't put words in my mouth.

What I said is the G-major was designed for live work, as an all-inclusive 1u rack with more than enough tonal quality to work in that type of environment. That's a fact evidenced by the vast amount of top players that used/use them in their live rigs and the pictures I posted prove it.

 

[italoop]

B
Yeah except that I said absolutely nothing about "for gtr" racks so don't put words in my mouth.

What I said is the G-major was designed for live work, as an all-inclusive 1u rack with more than enough tonal quality to work in that type of environment. That's a fact evidenced by the vast amount of top players that used/use them in their live rigs and the pictures I posted prove it.

Ask yourself a much simpler question, given the fact you are not listening to the technical aspects which define fx quality...
WHY in the history of LIVE guitar systems the amount of "studio" (as you call them) processors has been way larger and more stable as a choice in time than so called "performance or gtr oriented " (it's the same!) ones?
I won't flood the thread with hundreds of pictures.

 

[guitarbilly74]

Ask yourself a much simpler question, given the fact you are not listening to the technical aspects which define fx quality...
WHY in the history of LIVE guitar systems the amount of "studio" (as you call them) processors has been way larger and more stable as a chioice in time than so called "performance or gtr oriented " (it's the same!) ones?
I won't flood the thread with hundreds of pictures.

Because for the longest time that's all that was available. Many of those racks were replaced by the units like the G-major, G-System, Intellifex Replifex in the 90s/00s and by Fractals later on. These units were put on a LOT of pro racks and for good reason.
By the way, I never claimed a G-Major has the same audio quality as a PCM70, but in a live environment where subtleties are lost, they're great options because of their functionality, easier UI and good sound quality.

 

[italoop]

Because for the longest time that's all that was available. Many of those racks were replaced by the units like the G-major, G-System, Replifex in the 00s and by Fractals later on. Others are set in their ways and that's fine. By the way, I never claimed a G-Major has the same audio quality as a PCM70, but in a live environment where subtleties are lost, they're great options because of their functionality, easier UI and good sound quality.

You buy cheap... you get cheap! No way around it.
No matter who uses it.
The G-units are also known for quite unreliable parts like display and power section, thus the amount of rigs with several iterations of the same machine for backup... just in case.
Anyway... some people believe that audio quality is not necessary in live situations... many others don't care and go ahead with the best they can get. That doesn't change facts about quality.
Some people are happy with cheap because that's all they know or care about! Fine... until they hear something else and eventually switch 'cuz love strikes!
Some people are happy with things their idols use... just that is motivation number one for the,. Fine... if they are happy.
September 11 has changed the whole biz of gear as travelling costs have grown to stellar amounts! I work for a lot of these guys... and consistently they have to face this big problem... THUS... reduction in gear has become a rule > lauch of pedals format > much smaller production of rack units-
These are facts that we don't discuss... it is what it is.
Another fact? Most of these guys have and keep the good stuff home... and do records with it... travelling with the "cheap and expendable".
I don't know what kind of experience you have on these machines but hope you get to listen to a variety of them and give free power to your imagination to what you could do with any of them, well beyond who's using what... as that is a trap.

The 2 racks iterations below are John Petrucci's. I had the pleasure to do programming on some of his units in these systems, both for studio and live work.
As you see... there is no real "performace oriented " vs "studio" issue. Just stuff that sounds great, very versatile and... of course NOT cheap... and other things that are not. He seemed very happy with these things....

 

[guitarbilly74]

You buy cheap... you get cheap! No way around it.
No matter who uses it.
The G-units are also known for quite unreliable parts like display and power section, thus the amount of rigs with several iterations of the same machine for backup... just in case.
Anyway... some people believe that audio quality is not necessary in live situations... many others don't care and go ahead with the best they can get. That doesn't change facts about quality.
Some people are happy with cheap! Fine... until they hear something else and eventually switch 'cuz love strikes!
Some people are happy with things their idols use... just that is motivation number one for the,. Fine... if they are happy.
September 11 has changed the whole biz of gear as travelling costs have grown to stellar amounts! I work for a lot of these guys... and consistently they have to face this big problem... THUS... reduction in gear has become a rule > lauch of pedals format > much smaller production of rack units-
These are facts that we don't discuss... it is what it is.
Another fact? Most of these guys have and keep the good stuff home... and do records with it... travelling with the "cheap and expendable".
I don't know what kind of experience you have on these machines but hope you get to listen to a variety of them and give free power to your imagination to what you could do with any of them, well beyond who's using what... as that is a trap.

The 2 racks iterations below are John Petrucci's. I had the pleasure to do programming on some of his units in these systems, both for studio and live work.
As you see... there is no real "performace oriented " vs "studio" issue. Just stuff that sounds great, very versatile and... of course NOT cheap... and other things that are not. He seemed very happy with these things....
View attachment 74565View attachment 74568

Nice G-Force in the second picture LOL

 

[italoop]

Nice G-Force in the second picture LOL

Yep... he was using that ugly sounding thing believing that was TC chorus!
I showed him the difference... and there you go... a TC1210 got in... the other picture.
As you see no matter WHO's WHO... never believe they do really know!

 

[eecamichael]

Didn't Petrucci move to Fractal now for effects?

https://www.premierguitar.com/artic...am-theaters-john-petrucci-and-john-myung-2019

 

[guitarbilly74]

Yep... he was using that ugly sounding thing believing that was TC chorus!
I showed him the difference... and there you go... a TC1210 got in... the other picture.
As you see no matter WHO's WHO... never believe they do really know!

Dude, you're the effects equivalent of the "only boutique, ptp, handwired, turret board" amp guy.
I get it, you only like the top level stuff. Good for you.
However, there is a large number of world class players using consumer level gear with excellent results.

Talking to snobs is exhausting.

 

[japetus]

Dude, you're the effects equivalent of the "only boutique, ptp, handwired, turret board" amp guy.
I get it, you only like the top level stuff. Good for you.
However, there is a large number of world class players using consumer level gear with excellent results.

Talking to snobs is exhausting.

Sometimes I feel like things are overlooked that make these "inferior gtr" processors desirable for regular gigging musicians. Like for instance, quicker patch switching. It's something I will give up a ton of shit for in a processor and also in amps, partly because I don't need insanely complex algorithms for basic live use. I need a couple decent delay settings, and a couple decent reverbs. This really is one of those things that comes down to "what you need". If I sat in a studio with $35000 monitors creating sound sculptures for fun, I am sure I would think differently.

 

[japetus]

Yep... he was using that ugly sounding thing believing that was TC chorus!
I showed him the difference... and there you go... a TC1210 got in... the other picture.
As you see no matter WHO's WHO... never believe they do really know!

lmao thank the sweet Lord you saved JP.

 

[guitarbilly74]

Sometimes I feel like things are overlooked that make these "inferior gtr" processors desirable for regular gigging musicians. Like for instance, quicker patch switching. It's something I will give up a ton of shit for in a processor and also in amps, partly because I don't need insanely complex algorithms for basic live use. I need a couple decent delay settings, and a couple decent reverbs. This really is one of those things that comes down to "what you need". If I sat in a studio with $35000 monitors creating sound sculptures for fun, I am sure I would think differently.

I agree. And hey, I have no problem agreeing that units like the PCM70 are amazing. They are, no disagreement there.
My biggest issue is with guys that simply refuse to accept other people's opinions as valid even when presented with evidence of the contrary.
Dave Friedman recently had a podcast on rack gear where he had good things to say about the g-major and the rocktron racks. Players like Hetfield, Cantrell, DeLeo, Lifeson, May etc all used these racks and these guys get world class tones...

But no, only he knows what's good and everybody else is wrong or have an ulterior motive because God forbid someone disagrees with the self proclaimed rack master. Give me a break.

 

[italoop]

I agree. And hey, I have no problem agreeing that units like the PCM70 are amazing. They are, no disagreement there.
My biggest issue is with guys that simply refuse to accept other people's opinions as valid even when presented with evidence of the contrary.
Dave Friedman recently had a podcast on rack gear where he had good things to say about the g-major and the rocktron racks. Players like Hetfield, Cantrell, DeLeo, Lifeson, May etc all used these racks and these guys get world class tones...

But no, only he knows what's good and everybody else is wrong or have an ulterior motive because God forbid someone disagrees with the self proclaimed rack master. Give me a break.

I am RIGHT NOW programming Dave's new rack with 2 TC2290s and a Lex300.
Now go play with your G-dude!

 

[guitarbilly74]

I am RIGHT NOW programming Dave's new rack with 2 TC2290s and a Lex300.
Now go play with your G-dude!

You could be programming the next expedition to Mars and that still doesn't change the fact that many top pros use g-majors and rocktron units in their racks with excellent results. You're not getting around that one no matter how much you babble about it.

Regardless of what you think of them, these units were/are still being used on many iconic, world class rigs. Period.

As for playing with my g-major I absolutely will ? it sounds great and if something is good enough for Brian May et al but not for you.. Hey I can live with it. Imagine that LOL

 

[Shask]

Sometimes I feel like things are overlooked that make these "inferior gtr" processors desirable for regular gigging musicians. Like for instance, quicker patch switching. It's something I will give up a ton of shit for in a processor and also in amps, partly because I don't need insanely complex algorithms for basic live use. I need a couple decent delay settings, and a couple decent reverbs. This really is one of those things that comes down to "what you need". If I sat in a studio with $35000 monitors creating sound sculptures for fun, I am sure I would think differently.

I definitely think buying for the features is more important for most guitarists. Most of all these units sound good for what the average person wants..... A unit to throw in the effects loop of an amp and provide some good effects to compliment the amp tone. I also think that knowing how to get the best out of your unit is super important. I was messing around with my MPX-1, Replifex, Intellifex, and G-Major 2 today for a few hours. I still say they all sound good. I have no problem using any of them. Sure, the MPX-1 may sound more lush on detune, but if I combine the detune and chorus on the Replifex or G-Major 2, it can get close. It is all about knowing how to dial in the sounds you want.

I also think context is super important. I have noticed pretty much all of Italo's clips are clean chords played with tons of effects. If those sounds were played through a high gain modern amp it would just be a wall of noise. The minute details of how much Reverb diffusion is used will get lost in the overall sound. A million parameters don't matter to the average person who just wants a few sounds, and wants them easily. Just look at the Axe-FX. It has a million parameters for the amp models, and the only thing people request is a performanace page where you just just place you favorite 5 controls so they dont have to mess with the rest, lol.