OKAY so obviously this went deep, but if you made it to the end, you unquestionably know more about modulation than 99% of players out there. So taking a BIG step back...which do you prefer-phaser or flanger?
Easy! When I first heard you play the Phaser, I thought "That's A nice easy, breezy, mellow 70's vibe. I like it." But, then you played the Flagged and my brain IMMEDIATELY shouted: "YOU ARE BUYING THAT PEDAL!" No question, the Flanger for the WIN!
I use a Digitech Nautila most of the time. It has so much adjustability that I just think of it as a modulation pedal. I do have a p90 that occasionally gets used on howling leads
I just wanted to say I really, really enjoyed this kind of content. It was really fascinating to understand what's really happening to the signal, and the socioeconomic factor of how these effects were implemented into pedals. I now feel like I have such a better idea of why the Phase 90 is the Phase 90, and where flangers fit into the history of music. Thanks so much! PS my favorite is flanger. It sounds cool and as mentioned can also cover chorus territory. My two favorites are the BF3 for its versatility and the TC vortex for its stereo I/O.
This guy is a legend. Love how he analysed the circuits although you need to have some physics background to really comprehend what he is talking about. Clearing his throat with beer is just class!
That description is so spot on with my accidental discovery of phase. Back in the 80s, I had a double cassette boom box. I once "high speed dubbed" a friend's tape. I wanted to hear if the recording sounded the same as the original. As I was screwing around, I realized I could play both tapes at the same time, so I started them at the same time just to see if the motor speeds were exactly the same. 20 seconds into the song, I heard this windy time warpy sound that sounded so similar to a sound I heard on "into the fire" by Dokken. I kept going back to hear it again. Hearing this history is so cool since I relate to it.
Great! Matt explains the simple differences well, simple but the big reason why my electric mistress sounds so different than my mooger fooger phaser.... course, I love and use my tube vibe a lot more than either of the latter... probably because I love the fullness in tone of not having a lot of phase cancelling going on. Different kettle of fish, but hey, it's all modulation at the end of the day. But the really impressive thing about this video is Jason's expression never glazing over when his mind wanders to whether he remembered to pay the electricity bill or what he should have for lunch. Well done!
Very interesting as a hobby pedal builder. It's crazy to think 50 years later, what was then too expensive and technical to build, we can do it with a $50 soldering iron and less than $20 in parts at our kitchen table. Also, while building pedals, I often think of how I'm doing it the hard way and I could have easily gotten this sound and maybe better in a DAW. It's so fun to build something physical though, and put craftsmanship into it. That's lost in a DAW. Think of what these engineers from the 60's and 70's would think of our digital applications. Many talk about where's the stuff they once thought we'd have by now (flying cars and such, but someone from back then would probably see our digital audio effects as sci-fi level tech.
Props to him mentioning the phaser in Dancing in the Moonlight by Thin Lizzy..I love playing that on bass through my Strymon Zelzah..and of course good to know people are aware of the genius of my fellow Irish countryman and legend Phil Lynott....,
Great interview . Some went over my head, but a lot of it is explained so even I can understand without being condescending with some added dry humor. I also GREATLY appreciate, you allowing the the Matrthew to speak without hardly any interruption, so very rare in interviews where the interviewer does more talking than the interviewees. Thanks!
Amazing amount of interesting history and info! Thank you for this awesome deep-dive into the Phaser, Flanger, and Chorus effects! Would love more interviews from Professor Matthew on other effects.
Thanks for this cool discussion! It took until 35 minutes in but I was glad to hear mention of my longtime favorite Flanger, the ADA, which Pat Travers put on my radar screen in the late 70s and it still sounds amazing to this day. I reach for it when I am feeling psychedelic or trying to cop a Travers vs Robin Trower vibe!
Would have been interesting to see the signals (notches and peaks) on an oscilloscope as he was explaining them for maximum understanding of the shifting of time, amplitude and frequency differences in the method of implementation.
This was way more interesting than I anticipated. I enjoyed it and learned a lot; certainly more than I learned from any other video on the topic. Thanks!
I have been thinking about this exact comparison all week. I always wonder what subtle effect Peter Frampton used when recording the guitar part to Grease (Frankie Valli).
Super cool Flange/Phase/Chorus discussion ! Recent Hardware Analog Polysynth switch ... from decades DAW Home Studio work. Your excellent explanations were critical to purchase of Death-by-Audio _ Disturbance pedal moments ago. Trusting it will complement Prophet 5 and Deepmind 12, for enjoyable time ahead !! ✌🏻 THX guys !
OK, the gist of the delta is they sound similar, but get there in different ways. I’ve got a Boss Flanger and a MXR EVH Phaser on my board. My personal observation is simply the Flanger has ”more of IT.” If the pedals were mixed drinks, let’s say a gin-and-tonic, the Flanger has twice as much booze.
Very knowledgeable, but not correct on the sweet spot for flangers. There is a sound when 2 tapes of the same program material has no delay between them. Through-zero does not sound good on guitar, but sounds good on program material, especially with cymbals. The key to good sounding flanging is to get close to zero time delay, but not there. The sweet spot range is 5 mS to 0.3 mS. Very few traditional flangers can sweep up to the short delay of 0.3 mS. One that can is the A/DA Flanger. When the flanger's delay gets down to 10 mS and less, then is starts sounding like a chorus or even a doubler. The rate at which the delay increases and decrease (the SWEEP RATE) causes the pitch change in the delayed signal.
OKAY so obviously this went deep, but if you made it to the end, you unquestionably know more about modulation than 99% of players out there. So taking a BIG step back...which do you prefer-phaser or flanger?
Easy! When I first heard you play the Phaser, I thought "That's A nice easy, breezy, mellow 70's vibe. I like it." But, then you played the Flagged and my brain IMMEDIATELY shouted:
"YOU ARE BUYING THAT PEDAL!"
No question, the Flanger for the WIN!
I use a Digitech Nautila most of the time. It has so much adjustability that I just think of it as a modulation pedal. I do have a p90 that occasionally gets used on howling leads
I just wanted to say I really, really enjoyed this kind of content. It was really fascinating to understand what's really happening to the signal, and the socioeconomic factor of how these effects were implemented into pedals. I now feel like I have such a better idea of why the Phase 90 is the Phase 90, and where flangers fit into the history of music. Thanks so much! PS my favorite is flanger. It sounds cool and as mentioned can also cover chorus territory. My two favorites are the BF3 for its versatility and the TC vortex for its stereo I/O.
Heart's "Barracuda" is the poster child for the A/DA Flanger. Note the crispy short delay!
This is incredible. I could listen to this guy for hours. Definitely want to pick up that Stompbox book by Art Thompson
Glad you enjoyed it! Matthew is a genius
This guy is a legend. Love how he analysed the circuits although you need to have some physics background to really comprehend what he is talking about. Clearing his throat with beer is just class!
That description is so spot on with my accidental discovery of phase. Back in the 80s, I had a double cassette boom box. I once "high speed dubbed" a friend's tape. I wanted to hear if the recording sounded the same as the original. As I was screwing around, I realized I could play both tapes at the same time, so I started them at the same time just to see if the motor speeds were exactly the same. 20 seconds into the song, I heard this windy time warpy sound that sounded so similar to a sound I heard on "into the fire" by Dokken. I kept going back to hear it again. Hearing this history is so cool since I relate to it.
Great! Matt explains the simple differences well, simple but the big reason why my electric mistress sounds so different than my mooger fooger phaser.... course, I love and use my tube vibe a lot more than either of the latter... probably because I love the fullness in tone of not having a lot of phase cancelling going on. Different kettle of fish, but hey, it's all modulation at the end of the day. But the really impressive thing about this video is Jason's expression never glazing over when his mind wanders to whether he remembered to pay the electricity bill or what he should have for lunch. Well done!
Very interesting as a hobby pedal builder. It's crazy to think 50 years later, what was then too expensive and technical to build, we can do it with a $50 soldering iron and less than $20 in parts at our kitchen table.
Also, while building pedals, I often think of how I'm doing it the hard way and I could have easily gotten this sound and maybe better in a DAW. It's so fun to build something physical though, and put craftsmanship into it. That's lost in a DAW. Think of what these engineers from the 60's and 70's would think of our digital applications. Many talk about where's the stuff they once thought we'd have by now (flying cars and such, but someone from back then would probably see our digital audio effects as sci-fi level tech.
Props to him mentioning the phaser in Dancing in the Moonlight by Thin Lizzy..I love playing that on bass through my Strymon Zelzah..and of course good to know people are aware of the genius of my fellow Irish countryman and legend Phil Lynott....,
Great interview . Some went over my head, but a lot of it is explained so even I can understand without being condescending with some added dry humor. I also GREATLY appreciate, you allowing the the Matrthew to speak without hardly any interruption, so very rare in interviews where the interviewer does more talking than the interviewees. Thanks!
Amazing amount of interesting history and info! Thank you for this awesome deep-dive into the Phaser, Flanger, and Chorus effects! Would love more interviews from Professor Matthew on other effects.
Thanks for this cool discussion! It took until 35 minutes in but I was glad to hear mention of my longtime favorite Flanger, the ADA, which Pat Travers put on my radar screen in the late 70s and it still sounds amazing to this day. I reach for it when I am feeling psychedelic or trying to cop a Travers vs Robin Trower vibe!
Would have been interesting to see the signals (notches and peaks) on an oscilloscope as he was explaining them for maximum understanding of the shifting of time, amplitude and frequency differences in the method of implementation.
An oscilloscope would show the waveform so it wouldn't be very interesting.
This has to be one of the best nerd outs on the internet. It's a good segue into Phil McKnight's weekly Livestream tomorrow 😁
This was way more interesting than I anticipated. I enjoyed it and learned a lot; certainly more than I learned from any other video on the topic. Thanks!
I have been thinking about this exact comparison all week. I always wonder what subtle effect Peter Frampton used when recording the guitar part to Grease (Frankie Valli).
My first pedal was a flanger, as well. An Ibanez FL-9 to be precise. Still love it.
This was a great chat!
this guy knows things (nice Cocteau Twins reference)
Super cool Flange/Phase/Chorus discussion ! Recent Hardware Analog Polysynth switch ... from decades DAW Home Studio work. Your excellent explanations were critical to purchase of Death-by-Audio _ Disturbance pedal moments ago. Trusting it will complement Prophet 5 and Deepmind 12, for enjoyable time ahead !! ✌🏻 THX guys !
Amazing information.Great explanation. Thank you, guys!
FUCKING SUBBED! LOVE THIS FUCKING SHIT
Fantastic description thank you
I’ve been playing almost 40 years and they still sound incredibly similar to me.
Nice. This feels like a 'Demo in the daylight'!
Makes perfect sense to me. But then, I have a degree in electrical engineering :). Anyone know how the effect on the drums was don on Born to Run?
Question: Were those amp circuits ever used in a pedal?
Thank you
I wind up using both equally. I have 6 flangers and two phase shifters.....I just like flangers more.
No demo?
OK, the gist of the delta is they sound similar, but get there in different ways. I’ve got a Boss Flanger and a MXR EVH Phaser on my board. My personal observation is simply the Flanger has ”more of IT.” If the pedals were mixed drinks, let’s say a gin-and-tonic, the Flanger has twice as much booze.
Very knowledgeable, but not correct on the sweet spot for flangers. There is a sound when 2 tapes of the same program material has no delay between them. Through-zero does not sound good on guitar, but sounds good on program material, especially with cymbals. The key to good sounding flanging is to get close to zero time delay, but not there. The sweet spot range is 5 mS to 0.3 mS. Very few traditional flangers can sweep up to the short delay of 0.3 mS. One that can is the A/DA Flanger. When the flanger's delay gets down to 10 mS and less, then is starts sounding like a chorus or even a doubler. The rate at which the delay increases and decrease (the SWEEP RATE) causes the pitch change in the delayed signal.
Isn’t time and frequency domain equal but just another way to visualize the signal! F=1/t
I didnt know that flanger can create chorus phaser vibrato and other weird sounds.
sorry but I think the apparent pitch bend that occurs in this effects is due to a sweeping comb filter
Buy a phase 90 and sound like Thin Lizzy - what more reason do you need ?
So they're basically pretty much the same.
The compression on his voice sounds horrific
Wait, were we not supposed to run the Zoom audio through a Boss CS-3 with all the knobs at max? That's our bad...