Initial impressions of the Behringer FCB1010

[Matt_B]

I received my FCB1010 last week (for use with my GT Pro) but had to wait for the UnO firmware to arrive today.

Installing the firmware has made me intimate with the interior of the FCB1010 and all I have to say is if I was gigging out and not just using it at home, I would have purchased the FC200 instead. There's a $200 price difference between the two for a reason.

Some folks know that the FC200's expression pedal is better built than the FCB1010's. I can attest to the external differences and now, the internal differences as well. The FC200's expression pedal uses a standard potentionmeter whereas the FCB1010 use an LED and photo receptor (I think I'm calling it the right thing) vary their control signal. While the potentionmeter can become dirty over time (which can cause minor problems), the LED/photo receptor set-up can be affected by bright lights (e.g. stage lights) and relies on a flimsy plastic film (between the LED and the receptor) to act as the potentionmeter in the circuit.

In order to install the new firmware, I had to remove 16 screws off the pedal's underside. 6 of these screws are attached to little threaded metal plates that snap into the plastic ends on both sides of the pedal. I had two of these plates come out and one of them fell inside one of the pedals! After removing the ground wire that goes to the bottom plate. I tipped the whole pedal board upside down and shook it until the plate came out. What a pain in the butt.

Anyway, the point is you get what you pay for. I'm sure the FCB1010 will work out fine for me home recording. But if I was gigging, I'd either get an FC200 or a spare FCB1010. YMMV of course.

[Mincer]

I would support the Roland pedal if it did half of what the FCB is capable of. If you control anything other than the GT-Pro, the Roland pedal is not as friendly.

I have huge problems with the method of firmware updating in the FCB(why not make a software update?!?!) and the fact you can't set the exp pedals' midi channels per patch.

Never had a problem giging with the FCB, and I use it a lot. Never had lights screw up the receptors. Never had it fail once. The Roland is better built, but the limited programmabilty and lack of a 2nd exp pedal are worse crimes.

[Guitarreverend]

I have a FCB1010 with the UNO version. I think it's a very reliable tool. I dropped it a couple of times, spoiled drinks on it etc., and everything still works. It is a stage-worthy unit. The problem with stagelights? It is very unlikely they would interfere with the receptor. I would have absolutely no idea why I would buy a much more expensive FC200. The only thing that misses is a bigger display with the patchname in it. But of course that's also MHO.

[Matt_B]

I finished the intial programming of FCB1010 and, as I expected, I love how it works. Please understand that just because I feel that the FCB1010 isn't as well built as the FC200 doesn't mean I don't like the FCB1010 better (for my needs). For what the FCB1010 costs compared to the FC200, you really can buy (2) FCB1010 and keep one as a spare.

I do hope in a future version of the UnO firmware, you will be able to configure all 10 pedals as stomp boxes. I'll have to drop an e-mail to the gent that writes the UnO firmware to see if he might do it. I'd be willing to give up another PC slot for that capability.

[talius]

I do hope in a future version of the UnO firmware, you will be able to configure all 10 pedals as stomp boxes. I'll have to drop an e-mail to the gent that writes the UnO firmware to see if he might do it. I'd be willing to give up another PC slot for that capability.

Hi Matt_B.

Why would you want all the pedals functioning as stomp boxes?
You will be limited then to only 10 Patches for the whole entire FCB and there will be no point in having banks (from 00 to 99) because what you store in patch 00 to 09 will be valid for the rest of the patches as well (10 to 19; 20 to 29 an so on). In other words, banks will not be operational. There will be no banks, which means, you are limited to 50 PCs and 20 CCs which will be very difficult to utilize due to midi channel conflicts. However if this idea is to be realized, then there should be possible to specify unique midi channel for each and every stomp. In such case that would be quite useful setup for gigantic racks stacked with sound modules, samplers and effect processors, but still limited to only 10 patches (with 5 PCs, 2 CCs and 2 ExPed per patch).

The way I see it, it doesn’t make sense, because there will not be banks and even if you are able to scroll banks, pressing a stomp while in any bank will be the same as switching to a normal patch while operating the FCB in normal (not stomp box) mode.
I am sorry if I have misunderstood the whole idea. Could you be a little more specific? It sounds interesting but I couldn’t get the whole picture somehow.

talius :)

[Matt_B]

If I could have all the pedals as Stomp Boxes, I could assign (2) pedals for patch increment and decrement. That being said, I forgot to mention that I would also like the Bank Up and Bank Down buttons to be Stomp Boxes too. All of this would allow the FCB1010 to work just like the FC200 does in its CC mode.

[talius]

Ok. Thanks for your quick respons.
I don’t know anything about FC200 apart from that it is a FC designed for the GT-Pro. Your idea is for sure something that deserves attention, I just don’t know the concept of FC200 good enough to discuss that.

Thanks buddy.

talius :)

[slyumc]

I ordered the FCB1010 with my GT Pro, but recently picked up a Roland FC 200 at Sam Ashe. While it is over priced, it's ease of set up hooked me. I don't need all of the functions of the Behringer unit, plus I don't have a clue about midi programing. I was able to plug in the FC 200 and make the changes I needed in no time. I'm a recent swticher from the GT-8, so maybe that explains my comfort with the FC 200. I don't like the price, but for someone who doesn't know much about midi, it sure is nice.

[talius]

Hi.
As far as I know, there is nothing FCB1010 can do that can't be done by the FC200. However, compared to FCB1010, FC200 is limited when it comes to EXP.Pedals and CTRL switches, but it is much easier to setup. So for someone like you not being very familiar with the midi concept, FC200 is probably the best choice.

Good luck with it.
talius

[Matt_B]

I guess is comes down to money vs. learning MIDI. I've been dealing with MIDI since 1985 so I've never really thought twice about it. I picked it up pretty quickly to begin with.

I too considered the FC200 for its simplicity but with editing software, I've found the FCB1010 very easy to use even if having to program it and the GT Pro can be a wee bit confusing at first.

[sith]

ok guys, since we are discussing FCB1010 i have a question...
I suck at midi programming but I managed to set it this way upper 5 switches work as stompboxes. the problem is when i want to turn on one of this stomps I have to press it twice (same to turn it off), can this be reduced to one press?

excuse me for bad english :oops:

[Matt_B]

Yes Sith. In your GT Pro Assigns you need to set the Source Mode behavior to Normal instead of Toggle (which is the default behavior. This is because the FCB1010 controls the toggling behavior.

BTW, are you running the UnO firmware or the stock Behringer firmware?

[sith]

thanx for such qiuck respose :)

I didn't upgrade it, it's exactly as I bought it.
stock it is :wink: