Wish Boss CE1

Chiguete said:
I always read that it used a triangle waveform...
Click to expand...

it might be triangle, the TC dude explains that a triangle wave would make that same sound as a square wave if it's attached to delay time, since it only changes the delay time at the top most and lower most peaks of the waveform, since the slope is smooth in between the delay time doens't change or something, the audible effect sounds just like a square wave, alternating basically between two pitches

 
Last edited:
reclavea said:
According to some research I just did:

https://www.tonehome.de/boss/ce-1-chorus-ens/

The CE-1 is based off the JC-120 circuit.

The CE-2 is the exact same circuit as the JC-120 but is mono.

The DC-2 Dimension is stereo but based off of a Roland rack mount effect Roland SDD-320 Dimension D.

Its name refers to a 3D effect by adding thickness, depth and a width to the signal; stereo outputs give an even wider sense of 3D effect.

The Dimension looks cool as well! Just wondering if it approaches that notable chorus stereo effect the JC-120 amp produced and is known for.
Click to expand...

According to Roland, the Dimension isn't even a chorus.
 
Admin M@ said:
The CE-1 sound you can achieve with the CE-2 model is perfect. Lower the default delay time to between 3-4 ms. Then, the only thing "missing" is the ability to separate the signal into wet on the left and dry on the right. To do that, run the chorus in parallel to a volume block.
Click to expand...

what's still missing is the preamp section, it's a big part of the sound. Maybe the SDD could work for that.
 
Chiguete said:
But is the delay time in the real CE1 a fixed value or it moves around like the recreation that a user made ago using the Flanger block and adding a LFO To the 3-5 ms delay time?

Also why exactly would one need that volume block?
Click to expand...
No insult intended, but I don't think you quite understand how a chorus works. A chorus is a delay where the actual delay time is always changing. The "delay time" parameter sets the minimum delay time (aka the the top of the sweep). The depth parameters sets the maximum delay time (aka the bottom of the sweep). Hooking up a LFO via a modifier to the "delay time" parameter is just a more complicated way to control the actual delay time. It's useful when you try and dial in an exact maximum delay time rather then using the depth parameter.

The volume block is for panning all the wet signal to one side of the stereo spectrum, and the dry to the other (left and right). Matt did find another way to did it within the chorus block though.

Jan Geerts said:
According to Roland, the Dimension isn't even a chorus.
Click to expand...
It is most certainly a chorus, regardless of any other claims by Roland.
 
Jan Geerts said:
what's still missing is the preamp section, it's a big part of the sound.
Click to expand...

It's really not in my opinion, and I'd rather have it be adjustable. EQ is EQ and you can apply it anywhere. Dial it in however you like it. If you're running this into two amps as you should be, dial the "wet" side in to be darker.

The raw magic of the classic CE-1 setup (in my opinion) is the left-right split between wet and dry and the particular quality of modulation. The shape of its sound is somewhere between triangle and astable, so just choose the one you like. Or, if you want to blend creativity and fidelity, use the method I described earlier with a volume block, and then use the flanger block with a sequencer and some damping on delay time, as I did in my first version of this effect.
 
I think the irony here is that if M’s setting where added as part of a FW update saying it was a ce1 model everyone would be all “FAS is amazing, this sounds fantastic, I’m selling my pedal”, but when you tell folks how to get the exact sound it’s like “yeah that sounds nice but I’d really like the real thing”......

I guess the CE1 is rare/pricey, so it makes a buyer feel good about their purchase to see a setting that specially says “ce1”

all about what are eyes are telling us, not our ears
 
shatteredsquare said:
it might be triangle, the TC dude explains that a triangle wave would make that same sound as a square wave if it's attached to delay time, since it only changes the delay time at the top most and lower most peaks of the waveform, since the slope is smooth in between the delay time doens't change or something, the audible effect sounds just like a square wave, alternating basically between two pitches

Click to expand...

A square wave LFO would produce no pitch change whatsoever. It would instantly alternate between two fixed delays. The guy in the cap knows what he is talking about, but his explanation is not clearly worded in parts.

The LFO in that video sounds to me like something between a sine and triangle; a triangle with smoother (rounder) transition points.
 
Last edited:
Admin M@ said:
It's really not in my opinion, and I'd rather have it be adjustable. EQ is EQ and you can apply it anywhere. Dial it in however you like it. If you're running this into two amps as you should be, dial the "wet" side in to be darker.

The raw magic of the classic CE-1 setup (in my opinion) is the left-right split between wet and dry and the particular quality of modulation. The shape of its sound is somewhere between triangle and astable, so just choose the one you like. Or, if you want to blend creativity and fidelity, use the method I described earlier with a volume block, and then use the flanger block with a sequencer and some damping on delay time, as I did in my first version of this effect.
Click to expand...
The preamp plays at least some role for me, as do other minor idiosyncracies of the original analog hardware. The UAD plugin sounds more authentic to my ears (i.e. perfect). But the difference is subtle, and not really worth worrying about.
 
lqdsnddist said:
I think the irony here is that if M’s setting where added as part of a FW update saying it was a ce1 model everyone would be all “FAS is amazing, this sounds fantastic, I’m selling my pedal”, but when you tell folks how to get the exact sound it’s like “yeah that sounds nice but I’d really like the real thing”......

I guess the CE1 is rare/pricey, so it makes a buyer feel good about their purchase to see a setting that specially says “ce1”

all about what are eyes are telling us, not our ears
Click to expand...

By the same logic, you could think it must sound the same in the Axe because you paid a lot of money for that. On a youtube clip, differences might seem subtle, irl, not so.
 
steadystate said:
The preamp plays at least some role for me, as do other minor idiosyncracies of the original analog hardware. The UAD plugin sounds more authentic to my ears (i.e. perfect). But the difference is subtle, and not really worth worrying about.
Click to expand...

I have used a real CE1, and I used it as a preamp all the time. It's impact was anything but subtle, depending on how hard you drive it.
 
lqdsnddist said:
I think the irony here is that if M’s setting where added as part of a FW update saying it was a ce1 model everyone would be all “FAS is amazing, this sounds fantastic, I’m selling my pedal”, but when you tell folks how to get the exact sound it’s like “yeah that sounds nice but I’d really like the real thing”......

I guess the CE1 is rare/pricey, so it makes a buyer feel good about their purchase to see a setting that specially says “ce1”

all about what are eyes are telling us, not our ears
Click to expand...
I know this for sure. When I used to post effects matches without clips, I would get people who thought I was off etc, and then post their own tweaks of my settings which always took it further from "the real deal". This stopped completely as soon as I started posting A/B clips with "the real deal" ;) People often have no idea what the real pedal sounds like, but more of a unicorn image of it. They seem to need proof or it being "official".
 
Delay block and chorus blocks have a "drive" parameter, but I don't think it's modeled specifically off of the respective unit internals, except for the actual SSD preamp drive block. The drive parameter in the effects blocks just adds a little hair, but all in the same generic way. I've wanted for so long to have the input of the effects units modeled as-is, so when you slam the front end with 50dB of signal they all actually fall apart in their different ways, based on their respective input circuitry. That's also what imparts their respective sonic signature, differing implementation of input and switching and output circuitry, there is a lot of inadvertent equalization that happens between designs, and if the effects blocks were component modeled end to end like the amps, you'd hear that same sonic imprint show up. The first time I tried to match the small clone when the astable LFO came out, realizing the small clone was scooping like 9 dB out of the mids, putting a PEQ after the analog astable chorus and start laughing like a psycho :laughing:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom