Strymon BigSky MX vs Strymon BigSky - Does The New Version Sound Better?

[@AntoineMichaudGuitarLooping]

►► Get the new BigSky MX here (this affiliate link supports my work at no extra cost to you!): → sweetwater.sjv.io/xkMJaR ►► A Beginner's Guide To Ambient Guitar: Free Mini-Course 🎁 → www.ambientguitaracademy.com/ambient-beginners-course

[@michael_caz_nyc]

Loving my Big Sky. I've learned to "Stop Chasing Technology" (you can't win). I was doing that with: Synth's, Drum Machines & Guitar-pedals . . . (stopped) = now I've got a bigger Bank Account.

[@balamsky]

But hey technology in the last years is getting better. Digital pedals of today are far away from those of 80’s or 90’s. Just like compare two phones. Although in this case I agree, BigSky is already good enough

[@User37717]

Hard lesson

[@JTB--]

Impossible to not want the next newest thing. But I get what you're saying

[@machettman]

Same here. The one major advantage the old timers had over us is their limitations forced them to focus on their playing and technique and then unique and great sounds was just a natural result of that hard work and practice

[@meilstone]

Yeah, the way to go is spend as much as you can on monitors, synths and mixers and then stop rather than surfing budget gear. But you only know that after the fact! :-)

[@DAZ0204]

There ya go. Now THIS is the video people want. Thanks, Antoine!

[@joejohnson8966]

Well said.

[@elyssa.c90]

Minus the 2 minutes of unnecessary talking in the beginning, I completely agree.

[@electricwhiterabbit]

I could hear a difference between the two on headphones but couldn't really tell if I like one more than the other. I think the spring on the old one sounds more like a spring reverb than on the MX. In a live situation, nobody will know the difference and probably they won't care lol.

[@Jason75913]

In a live situation, I doubt anyone will care if you just use a TCE Hall of Fame 2.

[@AmiliaCaraMia]

That’s where you’re wrong. Non musicians with no technical training always care about whether or not someone is using algorithmic vs convolution vs real spring reverb. Probably.

[@user-cs3pm5mu8s]

I think the MX sounds less pumped and more natural, with the reverb no longer enveloping the note, but following it, in my opinion the positive correction. Shimmer is better in the old one with a more organic tone, with the MX the frequencies are too high, but can it be adjusted?

[@Jason75913]

Both versions have tone controls. Did the old one still envelop notes despite cranking up the pre-delay?

[@ichibandude]

Thanks for the comparison. At least at this moment, it's not necessary to buy the new model if we already own older model unless you have some specific needs.

[@CloudyNoodling]

not sure why, but for my ears most pleasant sound came from mx in classic mode

[@markthomas5030]

Yes same here, alot smoother

[@user-sh4tn7iv9f]

Agree, It’s the upper overtones of the MX that make it sound too tinny.

[@hardinberger3514]

In allen Disziplinen gefiel mit das alte Big Sky besser - selbst wenn der Classic-Modus beim MX eingeschalten war. Das alte Big Sky klingt einfach wärmer und die Gitarre ist bei manchen Beispielen noch präsenter.

[@ramon2008]

I’m fine with my original big sky. No need to spend 770 bucks

[@italoop7850]

So... I'm listening thru an ESS ES9038Q2M DAC (@24/48) and a Sennheiser HD600 headphones set. Granted that KZbin audio is a bloodbath in poor quality. Thank you for your work here but it would be REALLY nice if you had the original non mangled audio files available somewhere for download. Now.... nowhere in the manual Strymon says that VOICE parameter (MX vs. CLASSIC) provides the previous Big Sky algorithms and tone. It's a different thing and it's about reverb density. The CLASSIC voice has less density which means there are lesser delay lines used in the reverb matrix. That's a common DSP design technique in digital reverberation, depending on the chip(s) power. So... listening closely, carefully and over and over again, I find the usual "issue" I have found in higher density modern algorithms, that is a slightly brighter tone and less energy in the reverb, overall a bit less musical character. The energy loss is something I have noticed alsewhere too and designing reverbs with variable number of delay lines myself, it's a common issue. The input sound energy is a bit lost in the matrix. Overall I find the BigSky V1 more musical in the shared algorithms. The value of this new product to me is definitely the dual reverbs option, where amazing creativity and colorations are possible. Right there is the really nice thing of this pedal. I have explored these techniques on many high end reverbs (Lexicon PCM91 and M300, Eventide Orville and H8000) and there are many, many creative options there. I'm not impressed by the convolution thing, a technique that came out with a big fanfare in the early 2000s but never delivered anything special. A big MINUS for Strymon is removing the MIDI SysEx dump of single presets which IS a professional feature in any pro-level machine. One should be able to backup/restore/manage his own presets on any computer, using any generic MIDI SysEx program like MIDIOX (Windows) and SYSEX LIBRARIAN (Mac). I can even use my smart phone with a similar app and manage all my programmed work wherever I am. You shouldn't really need their own application at all, which by the way doesn't seem to support presets sharing. This is a big step back in true professional setups. Hopefully Strymon will restore MIDI dumps as SysEx code is already there for their Nixie2, so why not just offering the capability of selecting a preset or a range of them and dump to a computer. Last but not least... in EU this thing goes for about 750€!!! That's absolutely crazy money for a pedal not able to run true line levels audio on balanced I/Os, let alone the absence of any digital I/O format. Bad choice. For that kind of money one can get a PCM81 or 91... and let me tell you... there's no game there. Lex wins flat out.

[@hardinberger3514]

Was den Klang betrifft, ging es mir genau so wie dir - ich würde das alte Gerät in jedem Fall vorziehen. Auch wenn das MX nun noch mehr kann - aber das nützt mir nichts, wenn es mir einfach zu dünn klingt. Da habe ich lieber weniger Funktionen - obwohl die im alten Gerät ja auch schon sehr reichlich vorhanden sind - aber dafür einen Klang, der mich befriedigt. Wie ich beim Lesen hier im Kommentarbereich feststelle, sind da viele so taub und schreiben ausgerechnet dem MX die warmen Klangeigenschaften zu. Wo haben die ihre Ohren gelassen? ;-) Vielleicht orientieren sich deren Ohren am Preis oder weil das Gerät einfach neu herausgekommen ist. Aber neu und teurer ist nicht immer besser, wie man am Beispiel des Big Sky sehr gut sehen kann. Wäre das MX besser und würde nicht so steril klingen, würde ich auch den Preis dafür zahlen, doch das ist einfach nicht der Fall.

[@Brucewayne-tj7kj]

I love my big sky I understand a new buyer would want the new model , I don't think I would replace mine Merci pour la vidéo

[@hardinberger3514]

Ein sehr gutes Video zum Vergleich! Mir ging es allerdings anders als Antoine - ich fand das alte Big Sky durchgehend wärmer im Klang und manchmal drang die Gitarre auch noch besser durch. Wegen dieser Qualitäten gefiel es mir besser. Natürlich war das nur ein kleiner Ausschnitt aus den Möglichkeiten, welche beide Geräte bieten - aber sofern nicht andere Erfahrungen mit den Geräten hinzukommen, würde ich mich glatt für das ältere Modell entscheiden.

[@TheDooLees]

Thank you so much for this. Am a little surprised the Mx does sound a fraction richer. Probably great for a studio but the old one still killer on a board.

[@hardinberger3514]

Nein, das MX klingt doch eindeutig viel dünner! Das alte Big Sky klingt eindeutig voller und wärmer.

[@matt_ttam]

@@hardinberger3514I bought two of the MX and use them live. They sound bigger and fuller. Cheers. (That’s after using big sky for many years)

[@hardinberger3514]

@@matt_ttam Aber meine Ohren hören spielend leicht, dass das alte Big Sky wärmer klingt und die Gitarre viel besser durchkommt.

[@mrc2662]

Really love the playing here - tasteful, beautiful

[@empathysgone96]

Glad you are back!! Have you tried the meris x? Wondering how they compared

[@josephballew]

The old and new sounds are close. I think the big thing is you can run two effects at the same time. Reverb into delay, Reverb into tremolo, and Reverb into Chorus. It is like the Eventide H90 Two algorithms at the same time. This and the H 90 would be a good pair. Strymon is bad at having preset that have too much mix in them or sounds way over the top. I like the way Eventide did it better. They put all their effects in one box and you can use any two algorithms.

[@markthomas5030]

Iam so still happy my with my classic original Big sky ,it's like when they try remake movies there never better

[@FatherRabbitt]

I wish the MX would have given us a couple brand new reverb algorithms or something. It’s a great update from the OG, but to me it feels like it’s missing something to make it really exciting and special

[@michaelaugust9021]

They updated the algorithims. Also dual engine for true stereo

[@clayteasouth]

Close enough why get the mx?

[@Gibson1976uk]

I personally think the best strymon reverb is the nightsky :) bring out a mark 2 version for 500 and I’m there :) not crazy 700 tag

[@KyleLaulo]

Thanks for sharing. I hear the differences but I don't think one is better than the other.

[@AutisticCuriosity]

$700 is bordering on immoral

[@andrewburridge5958]

I love all the options but I can't say it sounds very different to other reverb pedals

[@Gibson1976uk]

I think 700 is over the top! Way too high for most guitar players to afford! There is plenty of reverbs that cost half that will get the job done! I use a cloud burst but don’t need every sound out there :) I do like Strymons reverbs the most but not for 700

[@LemonMeIon]

I’ll stick with my SA Collider - any 2 algorithms together for $300

[@Musicislife668]

Nothing really mind-blowing on the MX

[@JackSole17]

I think they would make more money in the long run if it was cheeper!

[@M3dicinePYT]

I'm definitely not agreeing w/ the comment that some of the previous algorithms being better. I think there is definite improvement across the board in the reverb unit. I purposefully am using an analog reverb unit so I don't use digital reverb because I can hear the "i'm standing in the middle of a concrete room" infinite decay slap-back-ish quality of the digital reverbs. I won't say it's perfect, but interesting improvements from one of the "analog cork sniffers"...as far as reverb is concerned.

[@Doady1337]

I think with the price of the Big Sky MX versus the Big Sky, I'd be hard pushed to purchase the MX, unless it has some feature that I absolutely needed. They made the Big Sky so good, that it's nearly unbeatable, even for Strymon.

[@littleblue995]

Yes, my thoughts too. And I prefer the look of the older as well. The knob layout is nicer IMO

[@hardinberger3514]

Vor allem klingt das alte Big Sky viel besser als das MX.

[@rep1979]

The MX sounds beautiful, and the standard does as well, but I think that with playing live, unless you have the best sound engineer in the world and the best mics, it wont really make a difference. For a Professional Studio I think the MX would be wicked though. It definitely sounds better, but for a live performance I dont see a need to replace my original BigSky.

[@asynchronicity]

Looking forward to a Mobius MX.

[@marianoboetto]

I think the biggest difference between one and the other is the ability to play a dual reverb with the MX, specially in parallel mode, but to me indeed these 2 are the best sounding reverb pedals out there.

[@olsza6969]

Hi Antoine Can you compare new MX with Neunaber Ilumine?

[@Jason75913]

Neunaber is nice, but not Strymon-tier nice. Nope.

[@olsza6969]

@@Jason75913 did you compare?

[@PhillipMoita]

MX in classic voice! Beautiful. 😍

[@markdouglas8073]

I’m in the market but wonder if we are about to see the original one (used) drop in price?

[@GeorgReiterer]

Both are great.

[@citrusspanner]

I have the Big Sky and the Mercury X. I'll be good for quite some time. 👌

[@greenman9123]

No bro, spend 800 dollars on the mx...now

[@citrusspanner]

@greenman9123 Now I have the Darkstar V3 (pink)

[@greenman9123]

@@citrusspanner you got the wrong pedal bro, go spend 800 today...now. it's the mx ...

[@citrusspanner]

@greenman9123 Spend your Mom chuck mason theodore.

[@greenman9123]

@citrusspanner how about I have your father come over here and wax me off. Now go spend 800 on the mx or you're going to have a new dad.

[@bennyharderguitar]

Sounds good. But I like my Illumine so much more.

[@NomaDL2224]

The Wet in my opinion sounds just as good as the cloud algorithm. The Illumine is like a quarter of the size and runs on only 100 mA. I will never understand these oversized bricks! 🤣

[@JJDon5150]

@@NomaDL2224 Yea, I also have the Illumine and can't imagine having the Big Sky when you get as much for a third of the size and power. I used to have a Mobius, and sold it to get an H90. For the price of this, you're actually better off getting an H90 which has 10x way more features and is still a bit smaller.

[@EricSabag12]

Do you feel the classic voice of the mx really sounds the same as the older version?

[@hardinberger3514]

Nein, das klingt sie nicht. Das alte Big Sky klingt besser, weil es wärmer klingt und die Gitarre etwas besser durchkommt.

[@Subtronik]

Very difficult to compare the two, but the MX sounds slightly richer. I’ll be keeping my BigSky though.

[@hardinberger3514]

Nein, genau das Gegenteil ist der Fall!

[@drummerboy1296]

Could yoy compare the cloud verbs?

[@aaron.s.robinson]

Your fret buzz is killing me

[@johnp.hayden1099]

They are both delicious. 😊

[@marcusstrymon693]

Since I moved out from home 2 yrs ago and have zo buy food I cant afford to blow extra 800 bucks on something that sounds a bit better than what i allready have and sounds wonderful AND I use nightsky mostly anyway bc og hands on and live sound tewakability fun

[@hardinberger3514]

Das MX klingt doch nicht besser! Im Sound ist es ein Rückschritt zum alten Big Sky. Das alter klingt, wärmer, voller und die Gitarre kommt besser durch.

[@marcusstrymon693]

@hardinberger3514 Wie kommst denn da drauf? Das MX hat ja alle alten Algorithmen auch drauf. Also was mir drann imponieren würde ist, dass es true stereo ist. Aber 700 sin mir zu viel

[@NicholasAmpazis]

Old one (and classic voice on MX) sound more good to my ears than the new algorithms in MX

[@hardinberger3514]

Genau so ist es - aber die meisten Kommentatoren hier scheinen taub zu sein und behaupten etwas anderes.

[@strato4925]

super sound !!

[@tbgtbg6311]

Still not able to run true line level audio on balanced I/Os.😒

[@neilvg1551]

line level overloads big sky mx?

[@bon2yan88]

skip to 1:48

[@ValNanovsky]

It feels to me that they changed the entire sound of the basic algorithms… not necessarily worse or better. Just different. Maybe just a notch more refined... But that in itself does not constitute any desire on my end to sell my BigSky, lose money and buy this ultra expensive new one.

[@邱キュウ实ジツ]

声音区别是不是真的值这么大的价格差距呢，我觉得老款更好听，一直想买，借着这个机会买一个二手的老款。

[@Jason75913]

Sound difference? Very little. You get more sound design parameters and can run two effects at once, like having two Big Sky pedals in one.

[@Robinho89]

Which guitar and ampli has been used ?

[@dodgedandle8311]

The Flint has all the Reverb any Guitarist should need , these are great units but it’s all getting a bit Overkill 🤷‍♂️

[@danyjr]

The dilemma for Strymon is that they released BigSky 11 years ago and it has since been the benchmark for reverb pedals in terms of both sounds and features, to the point that even Strymon themselves have found it impossible to top it with a 'better' product.. BigSky MX is not better than BigSky. It has more features but none of them really make sense. Yes, the extra processing power allows you to run 2 reverbs at a time but have any of us ever wished to do this? I get running two delay pedals at a time to create interesting textures but two reverbs just don't work the same. The ability to load Impulses also feels puzzling...like who would buy a Strymon to run impulses? You buy a Strymon specifically for that Strymon sound.

[@neilvg1551]

Some use cases: One verb is a room type sound which spatializes your guitar (subtle room, etc...), especially if you are going DI. The second one does a more traditional verb. OR - you have one verb that's doing a cloud/shimmer type effect, but you want another verb first that pushes the signal back and has tails so the shimmer doesn't suddenly dry up between notes, etc... In general, in the studio, we use multiple verbs to create a cascade of reflections that adds to the depth and complexity of a tone. It can be quite subtle. We can also pan both verbs in different directions which is also a common studio trick. This verb and its price point in general make the unit more like a studio level rack piece of gear in pedal format. So.. think more of a guitar recording workstation and less just a simple guitar verb pedal... of which there already are plenty.

[@astrarivm]

They almost fixed fake stereo in MX. Sounds significantly better in all modes. Thanks

[@littleblue995]

Just bought the original a few months back. Ah well 😀

[@Emanuelassies]

I like the classic one better

[@hardinberger3514]

Mir auch!

[@stulora3172]

I like that they created a Mexican version of this pedal.

[@Jason75913]

LOL!

[@craiglizt8074]

Ha ha

[@georgerichardson7728]

Strymon are proving they've run out of ideas and are just chasing cash

[@netzarim1277]

$700 is insanity! Strymon should stop producing the blue sky v1, lower the blue sky v2 price to the v1 tag. Lower big sky $80-$100…lower this new one to $525.

[@lofijunky]

completely agree with all of this

[@Jason75913]

The original is worth ~$643 in today's money versus 2013 when it released, but they never raised the price over time together with inflation. And then the new MX version is also basically two Big Sky pedals in one. Or just grab a Cloudburst or Blue Sky V2? You don't have to spend $700+ unless you really want to.

[@netzarim1277]

@@Jason75913 you are not wrong…I just don’t think it will sell well at that price bc at the current inflation prices…people don’t have as much disposable income compared to 12 years ago. The features other than 2 rev are not radical. And it’s just a reverb unit…next to say a QC is about 40% the price and it doesn’t do 40% what a QC does. I understand it may not be a fair comparison since they are different units…but it’s my way of comparing value for the money.

[@Jason75913]

@@netzarim1277 to each their own, but Strymon fans will not be discouraged, and together with Strymon's reputation, I think it will sell. Personally, I might grab a Cloudburst at some point, but I doubt that. I just collect reverb pedals whose sound I enjoy at home with my synths. Strymon is awesome, but I hardly care. Plus I've got a handful of other badasses like Boss RV500, Walrus stuff, and the GFI Specular Tempus, so I'm fairly happy.

[@flobodenhammer3512]

I just by 2 Big Sky Pedals for 600€ ans but two Reverbs together and i Save 170€:)

[@kinada2603]

oh good talking video

[@playmoreguitar5393]

At that price they can keep all their Big Skys. Absolutely ludicrous

[@robertlevasseur8896]

Hell yes the MX is better. Clearer, more headroomy, more vibrant.

[@savanaviolenta]

The chasis of original BS is more aesthetically pleasing.And it sounds as good as the new one.

[@strato4925]

mx is more power , warm !

[@boblove2912]

Its not worth £699 to get the new one. The original sounds just as good.

[@abelinolopez1957]

$770 is criminal 😮

[@zacharykim295]

MX sounds more clear

[@RyanMcQuen]

I prefer the original.

[@ShaighJosephson]

The MX and its ridiculous price soured me on Strymon... They have the Eventide syndrome with regurgitating algorythms without any real innovation and the greed to match... Now I want to get rid of all my Strymon pedals... ☹️

[@DanBires]

The old one sounds cleaner less muddy to my ears.

[@carminelombardi9575]

The MX is actually better fidelity and smoother.

[@mortenhansen5341]

Chase Bliss CXM 1978 is still the winner

[@JoeyBoey-ri3jq]

mx was clipping on some of those algos. definitely could hear it on the left channel. definitely warmer and can guarantee it probably cant have the hell driven out of it without crackles snaps and pops. I thought the classic on mx sounded probably the best except for shimmer where mx shined. I Would never pay $700 for nothing new as far as innovation goes. For Cripe Sake, Meris X is the best dam reverb right now. It has an amazing screen, controls, will have an app editor, and just sounds amazing for cheaper. Strymon will go the way of the dodo if they continue this kind of crap. i have Been pretty die hard with strymon over the years. Definitely disappointed by this.

[@alberthluchito69]

La única diferencia es la pantalla y la entrada c

[@Sergiostoychev]

old one much better

[@dmitriygritsenko22]

Seriously?? You didn't bother to compare the cloud?? Dislike from me dude

[@Axeyard]

Same thing. Marketing.

[@antonyfaulkner8649]

It would help if he could play guitar. Mind you, Heavy Reverb can hide a lot of sins. Maybe that's why he's such a fan.

[@RobinYee-xc9vf]

Sold out ...by now...save ...your $$$

[@hartlee1160]

Strymon.... it should be like 250 bucks

[@dcastillogzz]

Meris mercury x hands down

[@marekurbanowicz]

Can u elaborate?

[@dcastillogzz]

Totally my friend. I’ve owned both now. I started with the Bigsky and always liked it, but there is some artificial feeling to all these BS sounds. And it’s funny in the new videos that they involuntary me tio that they now feel more “natural/real” in the Mercury X, you have total control of what you can do. Sometimes that is good or bad. What I do is follow @thepedalcollaborative to achieve my favorite tones. The person shows you how to use each parameter and I eventually learned how to make my own. They also share the final parameters or you can get all of them for a few bucks. But overall mercury x sounds more natural.

[@Jason75913]

A Meris pedal sounding natural? It is likely just _your_ listening setup. For natural reverb, try a Hall of Fame or Fender Marine Layer, and listen them through treated speakers. I wouldn't recommend Strymon, Eventide, Meris, EHX, and most others for natural(-like) reverb. Most folks don't want that, either, that's why ethereal/unnatural reverbs are so popular and so much more common.

[@uluiepra]

мне очень не понравился big sky в качестве плагина - не натурально.

[@ACIDGREENTECHNO]

sound of the mx is flat and lacks character.. period..

[@philamaia]

If this had been released in 2007 it would've been amazing, but in 2024...

[@Jason75913]

Of course, you could always just grab a Boss RV500 and have another great dual-reverb pedal for much less than this Big Sky MX.

[@ah_serezhka]

фигня фигней

[@nembeasialv2013]

Basically, sounds the same the both

[@marcusstrymon693]

nope. studio Technology wisey the new one is a milestone as it hasbtrue stereo, dual chanel stereo processing, that makes the big sky a full worthy studio equipment

[@kevone-eo6pq]

@@marcusstrymon693 it's not worth 700 pounds though.

[@DalelCampbell]

The CB CXM is 900, Meris X 600, and H90 is 90. Pedal manufacturers have been pushing prices on these flagship pedals for a while now.

[@tbgtbg6311]

@@marcusstrymon693 not able to run true line levels audio on balanced I/Os.

[@mrchrisbeaver]

I'm hearing distortion on the left speaker throughout. It's in the background but gets louder once you notice it. Is this the pedal doing this?

[@Earthwormjimm]

$700 so you can lose the C foot switch for an infinite setting already in the big sky on the ABC switches if you just hold it down, routing nobody needs (who tf needs a hall on the left and a slap on the right? Why? Oh you’re pretentious got it.) You’re basically stacking two big sky’s. You wanna save $700? Buy a second big sky for $300 and run the presets with global midi so they always switch together as you want them, boom big sky Mx. gtfo strymon. Impulse responses woooooow that’s why I buy a strymon big sky, so I can upload my own reverbs 😂😂 and we lost the cab filter option which to me is key

[@youwantthis7607]

You must be mistaken upon what an IR is compared to a cab filter....

[@matteomidas638]

Strymon has taken a really bad path--the usual outdated products in a new package.