moogerfooger low pass filter and lovetone meatball
moogerfooger low pass filter and lovetone meatball
anyone tried them both? which one was better? and why did you pick it?
I haven't tried a 101, but I've got a Meatball. To be honest they're two different beasts, Lovetone pedals tend to be very transparent which is one of the things I love about them while moogers judging from my delay do colour your tone and add their own character to but they do it well.
I imagine if your a mutron kind of guy who wants something really fat, the Meatball may disappoint. Don't get me wrong it's not weak but there's something to it, very nice and organic like an analog pedal should be but with the headroom and transparency of some good digital stuff. It's also very very versatile and can do alot of sounds not associated with envelope filters.
Hope that helps.
I imagine if your a mutron kind of guy who wants something really fat, the Meatball may disappoint. Don't get me wrong it's not weak but there's something to it, very nice and organic like an analog pedal should be but with the headroom and transparency of some good digital stuff. It's also very very versatile and can do alot of sounds not associated with envelope filters.
Hope that helps.
is the moogerfooger low pass filter fat?opeth_669 wrote:I haven't tried a 101, but I've got a Meatball. To be honest they're two different beasts, Lovetone pedals tend to be very transparent which is one of the things I love about them while moogers judging from my delay do colour your tone and add their own character to but they do it well.
I imagine if your a mutron kind of guy who wants something really fat, the Meatball may disappoint. Don't get me wrong it's not weak but there's something to it, very nice and organic like an analog pedal should be but with the headroom and transparency of some good digital stuff. It's also very very versatile and can do alot of sounds not associated with envelope filters.
Hope that helps.
-
Suburban Bather
- Posts: 104
- Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:31 pm
- Location: White Plains, MD
-
vintageabuser
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 4:21 pm
I have both, as opeth said, different beasts.
The moog is easier to get the setting you want is only LP and self oscillates at high resonance settings (I often use it as a noise source).
The meatball is tougher to setup, has LP/BP/HP filters and has many more controls over the sweep (but less control over start frequency).
I use my meatball alot for static filtering because I love crazy textures and with the meatball and a couple distortions/fuzzes you can get some very ugly/interesting textures. The moog is easier to find a sweet spot on, it can sort of perculate (sp?) as the note decays which the meatball can't do.
The meatball also has the effects loop, which is very handy on a filter.
Basically the way I do it is moog for noise and sequences (I use the frostwave fat controller into the moog to make beats of sorts) and the meatball on guitar or as a static filter in my noise effects line.
The moog is easier to get the setting you want is only LP and self oscillates at high resonance settings (I often use it as a noise source).
The meatball is tougher to setup, has LP/BP/HP filters and has many more controls over the sweep (but less control over start frequency).
I use my meatball alot for static filtering because I love crazy textures and with the meatball and a couple distortions/fuzzes you can get some very ugly/interesting textures. The moog is easier to find a sweet spot on, it can sort of perculate (sp?) as the note decays which the meatball can't do.
The meatball also has the effects loop, which is very handy on a filter.
Basically the way I do it is moog for noise and sequences (I use the frostwave fat controller into the moog to make beats of sorts) and the meatball on guitar or as a static filter in my noise effects line.
thanks! i appreciate the info.
lingering questions i have though:
if you have the control processor alongwith the 101, wouldn't this open up a lot more options for the sweep? i don't know much about envelope followers and filters, but i would think you could come up with a lot of complex patches that would open up the 101's versatility.
how does the effects loop with a filter work? i assume that you have the dry sound that goes through the filter and the wet that comes out, so where would an effects loop go and what would it do?
lingering questions i have though:
if you have the control processor alongwith the 101, wouldn't this open up a lot more options for the sweep? i don't know much about envelope followers and filters, but i would think you could come up with a lot of complex patches that would open up the 101's versatility.
how does the effects loop with a filter work? i assume that you have the dry sound that goes through the filter and the wet that comes out, so where would an effects loop go and what would it do?
Re: moogerfooger low pass filter and lovetone meatball
Resurrecting this thread because I'm interested in a CP-251, but am wondering if it can work as a controller for the Intensity of the Meatball the same way it would work for the LPF's filter cutoff. Any feedback appreciated.
Re: moogerfooger low pass filter and lovetone meatball
The Meatball has trigger inputs, not CV inputs. So using it with a CP-251 will be limited at best.
Stephen
.
Stephen
.
Re: moogerfooger low pass filter and lovetone meatball
the mutron/meatball uses leds/ldrs to swing the filter.
if you had a cv to led brightness circuit you could make a mutron filter that swung with cv. you could also use the cv to led brightness circuit for a bunch of other citcuits like the univibe.
check my project based on the mutron
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6lt9qznHx0
cheers
if you had a cv to led brightness circuit you could make a mutron filter that swung with cv. you could also use the cv to led brightness circuit for a bunch of other citcuits like the univibe.
check my project based on the mutron
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6lt9qznHx0
cheers