Hartmut
New member
And when is a Buffer useful? Do they change the sound? 
glpg80
Well-known member
long cable runs, instances where signal integreity might be at risk (crosstalk from other cables, etc)
and yes, most boss pedals use a buffer. its why you see people mentioning true bypassing - meaning the signal is not fed through a buffer.
i would not use a buffer in the front end of an amplifier anywhere - but for post signal/tone and using wet effects - it is great for keeping dB levels the same and keeping the source signal quality high.
and yes, most boss pedals use a buffer. its why you see people mentioning true bypassing - meaning the signal is not fed through a buffer.
i would not use a buffer in the front end of an amplifier anywhere - but for post signal/tone and using wet effects - it is great for keeping dB levels the same and keeping the source signal quality high.
Hartmut
New member
Short and precise! Thanks a lot 
glpg80
Well-known member
Dallas Marlow
Active member
I greatly disagree with glpg80, all though respectfully.
Whether it's a matter of taste, ears, or opinions, it is my personal thoughts that a buffer is damn near a necessity.
I don't run a very long cable run in the front of my amps, it's a 20ft then pedals, then a 12 foot to the amp, this isn't HUGE, but there is 100% definite signal loss, especially on the high end, and the feel changes as well.
Even with all true bypass pedals, IMO it is greatly beneficial to have a buffer as the first thing on your pedal board. It basically greatly increases the signal strength of your guitar (by changing the impedance), but don't confuse this with boosting the output of your guitar. I've tested my rig with and with out the buffer and there is a very noticeable difference with out it, with the buffer quite honestly it sounds near identical to a 12 foot cable directly into the amp, there is a VERY VERY slight change, in the tone, if anything it makes it sound a little warmer... but with out it... it's just nasty.
And just to make everyone whos religious about TBP jump off the ledge, I actually use a boss pedal, in bypass as my buffer, I never actually use the effect... but here's the kicker, I have 3 boss pedals and they all sound different when being used as a bypass buffer. The super chorus is by far the best most neutral and warm sounding one, the TU2 sounded harsh, the compressor seemed to compress even when it was off as well... so neither of those were an option.
People really don't understand buffers, and don't realize they actually are a great thing when used properly. You don't want 10 of them in a row or anything, but IMHO they are truly necessary to retain a good signal from your guitar when running realistic cable lengths.
Whether it's a matter of taste, ears, or opinions, it is my personal thoughts that a buffer is damn near a necessity.
I don't run a very long cable run in the front of my amps, it's a 20ft then pedals, then a 12 foot to the amp, this isn't HUGE, but there is 100% definite signal loss, especially on the high end, and the feel changes as well.
Even with all true bypass pedals, IMO it is greatly beneficial to have a buffer as the first thing on your pedal board. It basically greatly increases the signal strength of your guitar (by changing the impedance), but don't confuse this with boosting the output of your guitar. I've tested my rig with and with out the buffer and there is a very noticeable difference with out it, with the buffer quite honestly it sounds near identical to a 12 foot cable directly into the amp, there is a VERY VERY slight change, in the tone, if anything it makes it sound a little warmer... but with out it... it's just nasty.
And just to make everyone whos religious about TBP jump off the ledge, I actually use a boss pedal, in bypass as my buffer, I never actually use the effect... but here's the kicker, I have 3 boss pedals and they all sound different when being used as a bypass buffer. The super chorus is by far the best most neutral and warm sounding one, the TU2 sounded harsh, the compressor seemed to compress even when it was off as well... so neither of those were an option.
People really don't understand buffers, and don't realize they actually are a great thing when used properly. You don't want 10 of them in a row or anything, but IMHO they are truly necessary to retain a good signal from your guitar when running realistic cable lengths.
Zachman
Well-known member
From Custom Audio Electronics website:
What are buffers and how are they used?
Buffers are extremely important in a multi-component system. They are often misunderstood and often get a bad rap by those who are uninformed. In a CAE system, a buffer is a unity gain (input level equals output level) impedance converting circuit. It essentially protects your high impedance guitar output (or any other high impedance source, such as an amps' effects loop send) from being loaded down by the input it is connected to. In effect, it converts high impedance to low, which means subsequent stages are then driven by a low impedance source (the buffer's output). High impedance sources such as your guitar's output (assuming you have passive pickups) has very little current drive capability and it's signal is subject to a harsh environment once it leaves the guitar. You already know the adverse affect a long cable has on your tone. Same thing happens if you pass your signal through a bunch of effects pedals. Even if they have "true bypass" (an ugly, over-used term), each one will suck a little more of your signal along with the cables and connectors, mainly due to capacitive loading of your high impedance guitar signal. The end result is a muffled weak signal that lacks clarity. But once your high impedance guitar signal hits a properly designed buffer with a high input impedance, the buffer takes over, and uses its higher current capability (remember, its an active circuit that requires a power supply) to drive all subsequent stages, thus preserving your instrument's tone. This brings us to buffer quality. Buffers come in all types of designs, from discrete transistor, op-amp, to esoteric tube designs. All have their own unique sonic stamp. At CAE we use the op-amp approach. It has served us well for years, is low noise, and is extremely transparent to our ears. Buffers often get blamed for causing an overly bright sound, but we feel if its designed properly, any perceived "brightness" is because now the guitar is not being loaded down by subsequent stages! Buffers can cause problems, too. There are some effects devices that don't like to see the low output impedance of a buffer. These are typically discrete transistor designed fuzz circuits (such as the Dallas Arbiter Fuzz Face). They react better to the high impedance output of the guitar. In fact, the guitar output, cable and input stage of the Fuzz Face complete a circuit that is highly dependent of those 3 components to work correctly. Fuzz Faces clean up nicely when you roll back the guitar volume control... not so if a buffer is between the guitar and Fuzz Face input. So if you have a pedal board with a Fuzz Face on it , put it first! Other pedals may react the same way. Experiment to see what works best for you. Keep in mind all active pedals (such as Boss, Ibanez, etc...) act as buffers and will impart their own sonic stamp even when bypassed. This is what started the whole "true bypass" (ugh! that term again) craze. See? Too much of a good thing can be "bad". Which brings us to how we utilize buffers in CAE custom switchers. We only use buffers where absolutely necessary. Typically, in a pedal based system we will not buffer until after the first 4-5 loops, which is usually just prior to sending the signal down to the pedal board (via a long cable run, hence the need to buffer) to hit the wah/volume pedals. Any more than 4 or 5 loops, and the guitar signal may be affected by capacitive loading. So the first few loops is where you would put any impedance sensitive effects. This also means your guitar will go through fuzz, overdrive or distortion pedals BEFORE the wah. We prefer this order because the wah then has a more harmonically rich signal to filter. Try it yourself. Of course, if a specific order is required, we will do everything we can to make it happen. Buffers are also necessary to drive isolation transformers, since the relatively low primary impedance of the transformers may be detrimental to whatever circuit is feeding it. This is also why amp splitter circuits must be buffered. You can't drive multiple amps with a relatively high impedance source. So there usually is a buffer somewhere in the output stage of your custom switcher. That's usually it. 2 places minimum. There may be more active stages depending on your system requirements.
What are buffers and how are they used?
Buffers are extremely important in a multi-component system. They are often misunderstood and often get a bad rap by those who are uninformed. In a CAE system, a buffer is a unity gain (input level equals output level) impedance converting circuit. It essentially protects your high impedance guitar output (or any other high impedance source, such as an amps' effects loop send) from being loaded down by the input it is connected to. In effect, it converts high impedance to low, which means subsequent stages are then driven by a low impedance source (the buffer's output). High impedance sources such as your guitar's output (assuming you have passive pickups) has very little current drive capability and it's signal is subject to a harsh environment once it leaves the guitar. You already know the adverse affect a long cable has on your tone. Same thing happens if you pass your signal through a bunch of effects pedals. Even if they have "true bypass" (an ugly, over-used term), each one will suck a little more of your signal along with the cables and connectors, mainly due to capacitive loading of your high impedance guitar signal. The end result is a muffled weak signal that lacks clarity. But once your high impedance guitar signal hits a properly designed buffer with a high input impedance, the buffer takes over, and uses its higher current capability (remember, its an active circuit that requires a power supply) to drive all subsequent stages, thus preserving your instrument's tone. This brings us to buffer quality. Buffers come in all types of designs, from discrete transistor, op-amp, to esoteric tube designs. All have their own unique sonic stamp. At CAE we use the op-amp approach. It has served us well for years, is low noise, and is extremely transparent to our ears. Buffers often get blamed for causing an overly bright sound, but we feel if its designed properly, any perceived "brightness" is because now the guitar is not being loaded down by subsequent stages! Buffers can cause problems, too. There are some effects devices that don't like to see the low output impedance of a buffer. These are typically discrete transistor designed fuzz circuits (such as the Dallas Arbiter Fuzz Face). They react better to the high impedance output of the guitar. In fact, the guitar output, cable and input stage of the Fuzz Face complete a circuit that is highly dependent of those 3 components to work correctly. Fuzz Faces clean up nicely when you roll back the guitar volume control... not so if a buffer is between the guitar and Fuzz Face input. So if you have a pedal board with a Fuzz Face on it , put it first! Other pedals may react the same way. Experiment to see what works best for you. Keep in mind all active pedals (such as Boss, Ibanez, etc...) act as buffers and will impart their own sonic stamp even when bypassed. This is what started the whole "true bypass" (ugh! that term again) craze. See? Too much of a good thing can be "bad". Which brings us to how we utilize buffers in CAE custom switchers. We only use buffers where absolutely necessary. Typically, in a pedal based system we will not buffer until after the first 4-5 loops, which is usually just prior to sending the signal down to the pedal board (via a long cable run, hence the need to buffer) to hit the wah/volume pedals. Any more than 4 or 5 loops, and the guitar signal may be affected by capacitive loading. So the first few loops is where you would put any impedance sensitive effects. This also means your guitar will go through fuzz, overdrive or distortion pedals BEFORE the wah. We prefer this order because the wah then has a more harmonically rich signal to filter. Try it yourself. Of course, if a specific order is required, we will do everything we can to make it happen. Buffers are also necessary to drive isolation transformers, since the relatively low primary impedance of the transformers may be detrimental to whatever circuit is feeding it. This is also why amp splitter circuits must be buffered. You can't drive multiple amps with a relatively high impedance source. So there usually is a buffer somewhere in the output stage of your custom switcher. That's usually it. 2 places minimum. There may be more active stages depending on your system requirements.
glpg80
Well-known member
Dallas Marlow":25rtprqz said:
thats alot of opinions. and i dont disagree with any of them either
i will say that wireless systems get extremely expensive on this topic, dealing with modulation of the original AC in sidebands and using buffers/RF amplifiers to grab the original tone back again from the carrier.
anyone who uses the volume knob on a guitar or goes for a crunch type of tone will not like the "boost" of a bipolar junction transistor. they do not have infinite headroom and are highly limited by the 9V battery or power supply and its current supply, as well as the transistor type itself. my opinion: it will do nothing but hinder, not help, the original AC from your guitar pickup.
the 1M resistor going to ground in an amplifier is made to be in parallel with the impedance load of whatever you have out front, buffers are messing with this purposely imposed design.
if you are going for high gain and do not care about guitar pickup dynamics - then a buffer will not matter in the signal chain. if picking hard and soft or the type of pick does not matter, a buffer will not matter. if you prefer a wireless over a cable setup, a buffer will not matter. if you cant tell the difference in the type of picking angle you use, a buffer wont matter. if you cant tell the difference in the capacitance differences in cable length, a buffer will not matter. there are so many more variables that are going to ALL be opinionated.
i ran 3 pedals into a low gain/crunch type metroamp, the buffer from a boss flanger, after removing the flanger from the signal chain the tonal difference was night and day - simillar to a string change. a buffer in front of everything still acts as the weakest link.
back in the 80's, charvel used buffers and signal boosting to boost the AC signal in the guitars from the pickup and also add mid-shifting or mid boosting circuitry as well. there is a reason they are not used in every guitar today.
to the OP - in my opinion: buffers should be used for tone re-production, not tone production.
Dallas Marlow
Active member
glpg80":3th2w0x5 said:Dallas Marlow":3th2w0x5 said:
thats alot of opinions. and i dont disagree with any of them either
i will say that wireless systems get extremely expensive on this topic, dealing with modulation of the original AC in sidebands and using buffers/RF amplifiers to grab the original tone back again from the carrier.
anyone who uses the volume knob on a guitar or goes for a crunch type of tone will not like the "boost" of a bipolar junction transistor. they do not have infinite headroom and are highly limited by the 9V battery or power supply and its current supply, as well as the transistor type itself. my opinion: it will do nothing but hinder, not help, the original AC from your guitar pickup.
the 1M resistor going to ground in an amplifier is made to be in parallel with the impedance load of whatever you have out front, buffers are messing with this purposely imposed design.
if you are going for high gain and do not care about guitar pickup dynamics - then a buffer will not matter in the signal chain. if picking hard and soft or the type of pick does not matter, a buffer will not matter. if you prefer a wireless over a cable setup, a buffer will not matter. if you cant tell the difference in the type of picking angle you use, a buffer wont matter. if you cant tell the difference in the capacitance differences in cable length, a buffer will not matter. there are so many more variables that are going to ALL be opinionated.
i ran 3 pedals into a low gain/crunch type metroamp, the buffer from a boss flanger, after removing the flanger from the signal chain the tonal difference was night and day - simillar to a string change. a buffer in front of everything still acts as the weakest link.
back in the 80's, charvel used buffers and signal boosting to boost the AC signal in the guitars from the pickup and also add mid-shifting or mid boosting circuitry as well. there is a reason they are not used in every guitar today.
to the OP - in my opinion: buffers should be used for tone re-production, not tone production.
I understand you have a greater amount of understanding on the electronics side of this than I do but saying that you can't tell the difference in picking angle, type of pick, etc., if your using a buffer, well it's just plain wrong. All of these are blatantly obvious on any of the amps I've run using this setup, whether it's a Diezel, a Marshall Clone, or a Fender Hot Rod, a Randall RM100, or an ENGL.
Are you going to tell me that every guy who plays a Klon can't hear their pick angle, pick, or dynamics from a volume pot change? Because those too are buffered and not TBP from my understanding. There are quite a few pedals that many many people use that are not TBP, and as the CAE site explains, they kind of get a bad rap and a misunderstanding.
I would say maybe there is a fundamental difference in the type of buffer we are talking about, but since you brought up a boss flanger then obviously not. As I said before all the boss pedals have a completely different sound and feel to them, not to mention cables and pickup strength will also play a role in this... I can tell you with my buffer, I actually got high end BACK, I didn't loose any, I would say there is a slight shift in clarity from a direct cable into the amp, but that is going to change from just adding more cable length and pedals.
Currently with my setup I can tell the difference between the kind of picks I use, the angle I pick at, as well as it being very articulate and my volume pot and dynamics work extremely well on top of that... and I'm not just some knucklehead here telling you this, those are all things I focus on, on a daily basis. Even my fender Vibro champ, which is all solid state you can hear all of those things quite easily. Dynamics are a tremendous part of my playing, and saying if your only going for high gain and don't care about them... it's just silly.
Everyone's personal experiences are going to differ, but I've tried my setup with and with out the buffer, and I can tell you that if you are running through anything that isn't TBP such as my Line 6 DL4, or even an original cry baby which is a buffered tone sucker, you absolutely need the buffer up front even more. I got rid of the Crybaby and honestly the DL4 isn't so bad, as I said before, the difference between direct in, and running through the buffer, is marginal at best... it's very difficult to tell, and it's not worth the amount of signal I loose to take it out of the chain.
Recently I was let in on the fact that Two Rock amps actually having a JFET option on the input signal which is actually acting like a buffer, your going to tell me that Two Rock is going to put something like that in an amp if it only matters for high gain, and picking technique and type don't matter? I really don't think so... not with the market they cater to.
I think you should re-evaluate how drastic you make this sound, sure there is a difference, but it's marginal at best and the benefits far outweigh the little draw back. I've run this into various high end amps, using Gibson, WCR, Motorcity, and Suhr pickups, I don't ever use active pickups at all for a reference point... and I actually do use both the volume and tone knobs on my guitars.
The wisest thing I've heard is to treat your pedal board like a separate EQ for your amp, because that is how much of an effect it's going to play on your sound, TBP or not, if were getting this detailed even the highest quality cable still gets run through that little ass piece of wire on the switch which probably isn't anything special, and also runs though both jacks...
Different strokes for different folks and all our ears hear quite differently as well, but I just don't think it's fair to make blanket statements as you did, especially with out a much greater control for the study.
droptrd
Active member
I like to have at least one good buffer in the chain in front of the amp. It is a noticable difference when using pedals. Honestly i think my rig sounds and feels best going guitar straight into the amp.
my $.02
my $.02
Dallas Marlow
Active member
droptrd":ha7ozb2t said:
Mine too, as long as it's a 12 footer or less... but when using pedals it changes things a lot. It's a hell of a lot easier to play an amp just going right into it with a straight short cable, just not very practical...
droptrd
Active member
Right. How am i suposed to play metallica without my wah pedalDallas Marlow":158e75c6 said:
Dallas Marlow
Active member
droptrd":s531g4mn said:Right. How am i suposed to play metallica without my wah pedalDallas Marlow":s531g4mn said:
For sure and how am I supposed to play my brootalz crab core with out this...
PeteLaramee
Well-known member
A buffer is someone who keeps you hard between takes.
...oh wait a minute...you said BUFFER!
...oh wait a minute...you said BUFFER!
Z
zuel69
Active member
I need a buffer when I read glpg80's opinions on pretty much everything he writes. 
glpg80":14xglym0 said:Dallas Marlow":14xglym0 said:
thats alot of opinions. and i dont disagree with any of them either
i will say that wireless systems get extremely expensive on this topic, dealing with modulation of the original AC in sidebands and using buffers/RF amplifiers to grab the original tone back again from the carrier.
anyone who uses the volume knob on a guitar or goes for a crunch type of tone will not like the "boost" of a bipolar junction transistor. they do not have infinite headroom and are highly limited by the 9V battery or power supply and its current supply, as well as the transistor type itself. my opinion: it will do nothing but hinder, not help, the original AC from your guitar pickup.
the 1M resistor going to ground in an amplifier is made to be in parallel with the impedance load of whatever you have out front, buffers are messing with this purposely imposed design.
if you are going for high gain and do not care about guitar pickup dynamics - then a buffer will not matter in the signal chain. if picking hard and soft or the type of pick does not matter, a buffer will not matter. if you prefer a wireless over a cable setup, a buffer will not matter. if you cant tell the difference in the type of picking angle you use, a buffer wont matter. if you cant tell the difference in the capacitance differences in cable length, a buffer will not matter. there are so many more variables that are going to ALL be opinionated.
i ran 3 pedals into a low gain/crunch type metroamp, the buffer from a boss flanger, after removing the flanger from the signal chain the tonal difference was night and day - simillar to a string change. a buffer in front of everything still acts as the weakest link.
back in the 80's, charvel used buffers and signal boosting to boost the AC signal in the guitars from the pickup and also add mid-shifting or mid boosting circuitry as well. there is a reason they are not used in every guitar today.
to the OP - in my opinion: buffers should be used for tone re-production, not tone production.
Dallas Marlow
Active member
I need a buffer when I read glpg80's opinions on pretty much everything he writes.
lol cmon man... he's entitled to his opinion and personal experiences. His rig reacted differently than mine, and that's fine theres so many variables with this stuff you know? I just wanted to make sure people realized his description isn't the norm... not with a proper setup anyways.
Sixtonoize
New member
For some amps and setups, I actually prefer the sound of a buffer, even something as humble as my Boss TU-2.
You see, my Classic 50 has a 470k input impedance, not the industry standard 1M. This means that any cabling you use bleeds TWICE as much treble as it would with a different amp. However, if I use my TU-2, the greater input impedance and lower output impedance minimize the signal loss, and all of a sudden my 40-foot cable run (20' to pedals, 20' to amp) sounds like I'm only using a 5' cable. Also, if you're using a passive volume pedal, it makes a world of difference. Putting the TU-2 in front of my Morley Optical volume pedal makes my volume swells sound MUCH more natural and eliminates my high-end loss when the volume is rolled back.
The only real problem with buffers is when you use a lot of them in a row. I've seen guys with boards loaded with 30 different Boss pedals, and the result is nearly always tone-suck city. But, IMO, one single buffer in your signal chain can be beneficial.
You see, my Classic 50 has a 470k input impedance, not the industry standard 1M. This means that any cabling you use bleeds TWICE as much treble as it would with a different amp. However, if I use my TU-2, the greater input impedance and lower output impedance minimize the signal loss, and all of a sudden my 40-foot cable run (20' to pedals, 20' to amp) sounds like I'm only using a 5' cable. Also, if you're using a passive volume pedal, it makes a world of difference. Putting the TU-2 in front of my Morley Optical volume pedal makes my volume swells sound MUCH more natural and eliminates my high-end loss when the volume is rolled back.
The only real problem with buffers is when you use a lot of them in a row. I've seen guys with boards loaded with 30 different Boss pedals, and the result is nearly always tone-suck city. But, IMO, one single buffer in your signal chain can be beneficial.
jessebondrocks
New member
Most boss pedals are pretty good about not sucking too much tone. I have a tu2 that I run straight into the front and the loss is almost inaudible.
Some other pedals make it much more noticable though... Especially the cheaper pedals like the behringers.
It's one thing to understand the science of it... But the best way to tell is by just using your ears. Go cable into amp and check volume and brightness. Isolate each pedal one at a time and just a/b the result. Most of the time it's not enough to tell the difference.
.... But then some corks smell better than others as well....
Some other pedals make it much more noticable though... Especially the cheaper pedals like the behringers.
It's one thing to understand the science of it... But the best way to tell is by just using your ears. Go cable into amp and check volume and brightness. Isolate each pedal one at a time and just a/b the result. Most of the time it's not enough to tell the difference.
.... But then some corks smell better than others as well....
FastRedPonyCar
Active member
I've owned the axxcess and VHT buffers and I actually like the sound a bit better with no additional buffering.
Then again, I really don't have much going on in my chain..
guitar -> Eden overdrive -> OCD -> EB volume pedal -> amp
FX -> nova system, MXR 10 band -> FX return
I could hear the different with and without the buffers but at the end of the day, my ears just preferred the non buffered signal.
Then again, I really don't have much going on in my chain..
guitar -> Eden overdrive -> OCD -> EB volume pedal -> amp
FX -> nova system, MXR 10 band -> FX return
I could hear the different with and without the buffers but at the end of the day, my ears just preferred the non buffered signal.
ke2
Active member
Also worth noticing is that when using active pickups, like EMGs, you get a low impedance signal. Those aren`t as "vulnerable" to high end loss as a high impedance signal
MARK1970
Active member
I knew somebody would go there. That was the first thing that came to my mind.PeteLaramee":1313ifjj said:
I thought donbarzini would have been the first to respond.
