effects pedals

fred432

What guitar effects do people here use? I'm looking out for something new. The boss pedals always do a good job but do any of the other cheaper brands come anywhere close. Anything good in the racks or boards?

rcaz

Here's my board as it was a few weeks ago;



As far as cheaper brands go, a lot (maybe even all, I don't know for sure) of the Behringer pedals are just clones of other well-known pedals. The VD-400 delay is apparently a great copy of the Boss DM-2/3, the Vintage Distortion is a Big Muff clone (I've heard one guy say he even prefers his to his real Big Muff). Danelectro also do great cheaper pedals. Electro Harmonix are a little more expensive, but I think they're one of the VERY few music companies that are both pushing the envelope (and they really are doing that) and keeping prices reasonable. Also, check out Made By Mike, affordable and very well-regarded clones.

I would say, however, that your pedal buying shouldn't be at all based on brands. Decide what sounds you'd like to get, find out what kind of pedal you need to get it, and then see who makes those pedals. Sound is the most important thing, not the name on the box!

Don't know much about racks. By 'boards', do you mean multi-effect units? If so, I don't like them at all. They take away all the flexibility and the modular nature of a proper pedal board that I love so much. And, though this is a generalisation so YMMV, they won't do any effect as 'well' as a dedicated pedal.

-=al=-

shops are gettin better at stocking pedals so lots to try out + the good ole web gave us access to the best of the best pedals and all sortsa jazz, personally i havnt bought a pedal in this country in a long time, but i know what i like and happy with my setup... proguitarshop have tonnes of videos on pretty much everything

Forest Master

fred432 wrote: »

What guitar effects do people here use? I'm looking out for something new. The boss pedals always do a good job but do any of the other cheaper brands come anywhere close. Anything good in the racks or boards?

Only a wah, which I use sparingly. I try not to hide behind effects.

Bootsy.

I use:

- ProCo Deucetone Rat. By far my favorite distortion pedal. It's got four Rat pedals in one, and two channels.
http://ratdistortion.com/products/deucetonerat/.

- Fender FDR-1, '65 Reverb Deluxe amp sim pedal. Decent enough. Nothing to get too excited about. Really good tremelo, poor reverb. I use it mostly as a boost or sometimes leave it turned on all the time with a bit of gain.
http://www.roland.com/products/en/FDR-1/

- Danelectro Dan Echo delay pedal. A really excellent delay pedal.
http://www.guitargeek.com/gearview/103/


I'm starting a new funk-style band so I need a wah! I'm going for a Fulltone Clyde Deluxe, as far as I'm concerned, the bee knees of wahs. Expensive though. If anyone is selling one let me know.
http://www.fulltone.com/CDW.asp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qbqn8-GmQwU

I'm also looking for a EHX Microsynth. Again, if anyone is selling, let me know.
http://www.ehx.com/products/micro-synthesizer

With these two and a good fuzz, I'll be all set. A Whammy would be great too!

By the way, 'boutique', hand-made pedals are usually well worth the extra few quid over a Boss etc.

rcaz

Bootsy. wrote: »

By the way, 'boutique', hand-made pedals are usually well worth the extra few quid over a Boss etc.

Some are very very good (those Earthquaker Devices spring to mind! :eek:), but you could just as easily fall into a total 'premier pricing' scam. Over €300 for a Fuzz Factory, which is just a modded Fuzz Face, $150 for a Death By Audio Total Sonic Annihilation (a feedback loop you could build with no previous electronics experience and €20 worth of parts)... Let the buyer beware!

Forest Master wrote: »

I try not to hide behind effects.

Hmm, a lot of people seem to think playing with lots of pedals is 'hiding' behind effects. I think it's quite the opposite. Anyone can play the guitar, and so many people just reach for the same gear that so many other musicians play, and copy their playing - not many people try to look for a new or interesting sound. And yet the ones who go out looking for new ways of doing things and try to move away from mundane guitar sounds get called out as 'hiding'. :rolleyes:

Funkfield

El Pr0n wrote: »

Hmm, a lot of people seem to think playing with lots of pedals is 'hiding' behind effects. I think it's quite the opposite. Anyone can play the guitar, and so many people just reach for the same gear that so many other musicians play, and copy their playing - not many people try to look for a new or interesting sound. And yet the ones who go out looking for new ways of doing things and try to move away from mundane guitar sounds get called out as 'hiding'. :rolleyes:

+1

Innovate, don't replicate.

By whatever means

Seziertisch

El Pr0n wrote: »

Some are very very good (those Earthquaker Devices spring to mind! :eek:), but you could just as easily fall into a total 'premier pricing' scam. Over €300 for a Fuzz Factory, which is just a modded Fuzz Face, $150 for a Death By Audio Total Sonic Annihilation (a feedback loop you could build with no previous electronics experience and €20 worth of parts)... Let the buyer beware!

http://www.guitarguitar.co.uk/pedals_s.asp?brandname=ZVEX

The cheapest (non-American) place I've found selling ZVEX. As for the Fuzz Factory being a modded Fuzz Face, this is true, but the same can be said for most other fuzz pedals taking inspiration from other sources. The Fuzz Factory is also one of the most versatile fuzz pedals I have played. It can do lots of different regular fuzz sounds as well as being capable of getting completely over the top.

rcaz

Seziertisch wrote: »

http://www.guitarguitar.co.uk/pedals_s.asp?brandname=ZVEX

The cheapest (non-American) place I've found selling ZVEX. As for the Fuzz Factory being a modded Fuzz Face, this is true, but the same can be said for most other fuzz pedals taking inspiration from other sources. The Fuzz Factory is also one of the most versatile fuzz pedals I have played. It can do lots of different regular fuzz sounds as well as being capable of getting completely over the top.

Forgot about the Vexter ones when I posted that They're really cool, without a doubt, I'd definitely find a use for one, but it has no low end.

Of course, pedals are derived from others all the time, but there's 'taking inspiration from' and then there's 'replacing fixed components with variable ones, hand-painting it and charging a bomb for it'. The Vexters are probably exempt from this though.
I have a bit of a problem with that side of the 'boutique' market.

Seziertisch

El Pr0n wrote: »

Forgot about the Vexter ones when I posted that They're really cool, without a doubt, I'd definitely find a use for one, but it has no low end.

Of course, pedals are derived from others all the time, but there's 'taking inspiration from' and then there's 'replacing fixed components with variable ones, hand-painting it and charging a bomb for it'. The Vexters are probably exempt from this though.
I have a bit of a problem with that side of the 'boutique' market.

Yeah, the low end thing makes it kind of unsuitable for bass, but for guitar I haven't really found it to be an issue. With something like a Big Muff, in a live situation you usually need to eq off low end to get it to cut through, and even then it can be just too muddy depending on the guitar/amp and the quality of the PA. In the studio it is usually standard practice when recording guitars in a band setting that there is a pretty extreme roll off below 50-100 hz. Seeing as the Fuzz Factory is bass shy it just means that it requires less high pass filtering to get it to sit.

As for the cost, you are as much paying for the hand painted work of art as the pedal. I think its good they offer both options.

Sandvich

Hmm, a lot of people seem to think playing with lots of pedals is 'hiding' behind effects.

This. I HATE this school of thought, because the same guy that says this goes off and plays some SRV "licks" through his "Sweet" Fender Princeton reverb while letting the "tone" come from "His fingers". Those kind of guys drive me nuts.

As fun as it is to make fun of the Edge, I think what he does is better than a lot of generic blues/metal/classic rock ****. Like Daniel Ash says, some guitarists have no interests in showing how well they can run up and down a scale. Ash often played 8-bar blues during warm ups, but wouldn't play anything like that live.

rcaz

Seziertisch wrote: »

Yeah, the low end thing makes it kind of unsuitable for bass, but for guitar I haven't really found it to be an issue. With something like a Big Muff, in a live situation you usually need to eq off low end to get it to cut through, and even then it can be just too muddy depending on the guitar/amp and the quality of the PA. In the studio it is usually standard practice when recording guitars in a band setting that there is a pretty extreme roll off below 50-100 hz. Seeing as the Fuzz Factory is bass shy it just means that it requires less high pass filtering to get it to sit.

I bet they wouldn't suit bass at all, but there's still so much lost on guitar. A Big Muff is tons more useful than a Fuzz Factory - you can always roll off the bass on a Big Muff, but you can't turn it up on a FF. I don't think you should choose your gear to suit a studio practice.

Sandvich

The Fuzz Factory has this "cheesy" effect on it too you can't turn off. When I listen to older tracks I've done with it, it sounds too much like a Kazoo through a mobile phone.

Seziertisch

El Pr0n wrote: »

I bet they wouldn't suit bass at all, but there's still so much lost on guitar. A Big Muff is tons more useful than a Fuzz Factory - you can always roll off the bass on a Big Muff, but you can't turn it up on a FF. I don't think you should choose your gear to suit a studio practice.

I've owned and used a number of Big Muffs (and clones, copies, variations thereof) and I would be slow to say that they are tons more useful than the Fuzz Factory. Different, yes, more useful, no. Big Muffs tend to have huge low end, which means that your sound tends to get lost when playing with bass and drums. The Fuzz Factory tends to naturally cut through more.

Off the top of my head, Matt Bellamy from Muse and J Mascis from Dinosaur Jr. both use the Fuzz Factory as (one of their) their main distortion/fuzz tones. I haven't noticed any particular lack of body or fullness to either of their sounds.

As for a studio practice, high passing is a general rule of thumb for electric guitars, either in the studio or playing live. The Fuzz Factory has its own high pass filtering going on, but not so extreme that it sounds thin. The only time I could foresee this being an issue is if someone were playing on their own and looking for a really full sound.

Seziertisch

Sandvich wrote: »

The Fuzz Factory has this "cheesy" effect on it too you can't turn off. When I listen to older tracks I've done with it, it sounds too much like a Kazoo through a mobile phone.

What guitar/amp were you using? How was it miked?

Sandvich

Seziertisch wrote: »

What guitar/amp were you using? How was it miked?

I don't remember to be honest. But I've used it with several different amps since and it's had the same effect.

rcaz

Seziertisch wrote: »

I've owned and used a number of Big Muffs (and clones, copies, variations thereof) and I would be slow to say that they are tons more useful than the Fuzz Factory. Different, yes, more useful, no. Big Muffs tend to have huge low end, which means that your sound tends to get lost when playing with bass and drums. The Fuzz Factory tends to naturally cut through more.

My Big Muff can get plenty trebly for my needs. Part of the reason I love it is the huge low end - makes a great texture underneath my band's other guitar and bass.

I really don't care for Matt Bellamy's guitar playing, and I HATE the whole "squeel on the Fuzz Factory for a while" part of Plug In Baby (actually, I think that's 'hiding' behind an effect). And isn't J. Mascis one of the biggest Big Muff users going? This is his collection:

Seziertisch

El Pr0n wrote: »

My Big Muff can get plenty trebly for my needs. Part of the reason I love it is the huge low end - makes a great texture underneath my band's other guitar and bass.

I really don't care for Matt Bellamy's guitar playing, and I HATE the whole "squeel on the Fuzz Factory for a while" part of Plug In Baby (actually, I think that's 'hiding' behind an effect). And isn't J. Mascis one of the biggest Big Muff users going? This is his collection:

Yeah, horses for courses really. Though if I remember correctly you are also a big Nels Cline fan, afaik the Fuzz Factory is the only fuzz he uses (at least on his live board). As for Matt Bellamy, I ain't a fan either, but his tone definitely isn't thin.

I'm not even sure what a Big Muff is supposed to sound like in the flesh, I have used the black Russian and the US reissues, as well as boutique clones of the original and the green Russian one. They all sound quite different. Swapping between them you would not even know that they were necessarily supposed to be essentially the same circuit.

Seziertisch

Sandvich wrote: »

I don't remember to be honest. But I've used it with several different amps since and it's had the same effect.

You've used it with several guitars and amps, but can't remember what they were? I know from my own experience that problems with nasty frequencies with fuzz pedals are usually down to the amp and speaker being used.

rcaz

Seziertisch wrote: »

Yeah, horses for courses really. Though if I remember correctly you are also a big Nels Cline fan, afaik the Fuzz Factory is the only fuzz he uses (at least on his live board). As for Matt Bellamy, I ain't a fan either, but his tone definitely isn't thin.

I'm not even sure what a Big Muff is supposed to sound like in the flesh, I have used the black Russian and the US reissues, as well as boutique clones of the original and the green Russian one. They all sound quite different. Swapping between them you would not even know that they were necessarily supposed to be essentially the same circuit.

Nels has (or at least had, his own site is way out of date) a Fulltone '69 too. He uses the fuzz factory mostly for its self-oscillation (rolling his volume knob up and down to change the note of the oscillation and then using the whammy pedal after it), I'm not sure how much he uses it for 'traditional' fuzz though. Like i said, I'd definitely find a use for a ff, I'd probably do some Nels-copying with one.

Good point about the Big Muff, it seems like 'big muff' is used to describe any big bassy fuzz that doesn't oscillate sometimes.

Sandvich

Seziertisch wrote: »

You've used it with several guitars and amps, but can't remember what they were? I know from my own experience that problems with nasty frequencies with fuzz pedals are usually down to the amp and speaker being used.

Well, I would have used it with my Roland Microcube and Vox DA5, as well as my ZT Lunchbox, Vox AD30VT, and probably my Vox AC4. Pretty sure I've used it through other people's amps too. Most of those amps are pretty small, but you shouldn't need a bit amp for it to sound good.

Sandvich

El Pr0n wrote: »

My Big Muff can get plenty trebly for my needs. Part of the reason I love it is the huge low end - makes a great texture underneath my band's other guitar and bass.

I really don't care for Matt Bellamy's guitar playing, and I HATE the whole "squeel on the Fuzz Factory for a while" part of Plug In Baby (actually, I think that's 'hiding' behind an effect). And isn't J. Mascis one of the biggest Big Muff users going? This is his collection:

I think Matt Bellamy is pretty good, I don't mind the squeel at all, it kinda gets you riled up.

He actually rarely uses the FF though, he mostly uses his Marshalls.

rcaz

Sandvich wrote: »

I think Matt Bellamy is pretty good, I don't mind the squeel at all, it kinda gets you riled up.

It annoys me the way it's so aimless, just noise to fill a gap while he poses. I thought it was cool when I first heard it, then I realised there are way better guys who use weird noised to much better effect and can actually put their noises in context.

Sandvich

I suppose yeah but I think you can fall into the trap of thinking it needs a context. It was just a cheesy "tuning in the radio to the song" effect and I think it works well in the context and feel of the ablum.

Seziertisch

Sandvich wrote: »

Well, I would have used it with my Roland Microcube and Vox DA5, as well as my ZT Lunchbox, Vox AD30VT, and probably my Vox AC4. Pretty sure I've used it through other people's amps too. Most of those amps are pretty small, but you shouldn't need a bit amp for it to sound good.

There's your answer. Non-tube amps (for the most part) with smaller speakers. The shortcomings you are hearing are the amps and not the pedal. In particular I have found modelling amps to be particularly unsuited to any kind of dirt pedal.

Sandvich

The AC4 is an all tube amp, and it has plenty of bass response for a 10" speaker.

To be honest it's not much better at taking pedals than my modeler was. The Microcube is good at taking pedals but has a tiny speaker. Keep in mind using those amps I was recording direct out, so speakers didn't really matter.

Usually the problem with modelers is that they get too muddy with distortion - not too sterile. It's not the 90s anymore.

Seziertisch

DI'd fuzz guitar won't give particularly pleasing results in most cases. Even with amp modelling and speaker simulations it is more than likely going to have too much fizz.

Sandvich

Seziertisch wrote: »

DI'd fuzz guitar won't give particularly pleasing results in most cases. Even with amp modelling and speaker simulations it is more than likely going to have too much fizz.

I don't know what modellers you've tried. Often with modelers the problem is that they overcompensate for the fizz and round everything off too much. The PODs are a good example of this as they aim for a very "Produced" sound out of the box - one reason why it can be awkward using them live.

The Valvetronix stuff can get a bit fizzy but it depends which setting you have it on.

Seziertisch

Sandvich wrote: »

I don't know what modellers you've tried. Often with modelers the problem is that they overcompensate for the fizz and round everything off too much. The PODs are a good example of this as they aim for a very "Produced" sound out of the box - one reason why it can be awkward using them live.

The Valvetronix stuff can get a bit fizzy but it depends which setting you have it on.

The modeller isn't the source of the fizz, the pedal is. Otherwise, the big problem with modellers is the lack of body to the sound. It is like a photo of a sound as opposed to the sound itself.

The POD is particularly bad, fine for jamming at home but otherwise fairly unusable. I know a number of mix engineers (both live and studio) that groan inwardly when they are given POD guitar sounds to work with.

Either way, you want to hear what your Fuzz Factory can do, plug it into a tube amp with a good 10 or 12 inch speaker. When Zachary Vex designed it, he tested it through tube amps and voiced it accordingly. As I said before, if a reputable fuzz pedal isn't delivering the goods, the problem is elsewhere. Owing to the nature of fuzz it can easily accentuate problem frequencies resulting from eleswhere in your set up.

Sandvich

But like I said - most modelers filter out that fizz to compensate for their own fizz.

When Zachary Vex designed it, he tested it through tube amps and voiced it accordingly.

It's not good just because it's a boutique pedal and Zvex designed it.

It's not even "fizz" that's the problem - it's the voicing of the pedal in general.

Seziertisch

Sandvich wrote: »

But like I said - most modelers filter out that fizz to compensate for their own fizz.



It's not good just because it's a boutique pedal and Zvex designed it.

It's not even "fizz" that's the problem - it's the voicing of the pedal in general.

You've used it with small modelling amps for the most part. This is not how it was intended to be used. The pedal is not voiced for such an application nor are modelling amps voiced to take dirt pedals. Unlike a tube amp, overdriving the input does not cause the amp to compress more. Furthermore, I can't imagine that any of the amps you mentioned come with what could be called a great speaker, functional at best I would say. Cheaper guitar speakers can have unpleasant frequency characteristics that certain pedals/amps just exacerbate.

In terms of the how good the Fuzz Factory is, quite literally Zachary Vex went around from city to city presenting the pedal at various guitar shops. Most places said it was cool, but they couldn't really see it selling. Eventually an employee at one place in New York came after him and asked him to sell him one privately (after saying that he wasn't interested in taking an order for the shop). This one guy showed it to someone else he knew who also wanted one and it took off from there. Supposedly Kirk Hammett from Metallica played one and was so impressed with it that he bought all of the Fuzz Factories that the shop had in stock, saying he wanted to use it on the record he was in the middle of recording (either Load or Re-load) and didn't want someone else to beat him to getting a recording of it out there. If you go onto Wikipedia and look at all the names that own/use the Fuzz Factory, you will see the names of some of the best guitarists out there, guys that have great tone, who don't seem to have any issues with the voicing of the pedal.

rcaz

Your arguments imply there's a 'right' way to do things. Who cares if modeling amps aren't 'voiced to take dirt pedals'? Maybe someone will like the sound of a dirt pedal into a modeling amp. What if someone happens to like the particular 'frequency characteristics' of a cheap speaker? What if I don't like the 'tone' that those 'best guitarists' have? Seems like a lot of tunnel vision to me.

Seziertisch

El Pr0n wrote: »

Your arguments imply there's a 'right' way to do things. Who cares if modeling amps aren't 'voiced to take dirt pedals'? Maybe someone will like the sound of a dirt pedal into a modeling amp. What if someone happens to like the particular 'frequency characteristics' of a cheap speaker? What if I don't like the 'tone' that those 'best guitarists' have? Seems like a lot of tunnel vision to me.

The reason that tube amps are so popular for guitar is soft clipping e.g. when they are pushed into distortion there is a smooth curve from clean to distorted. Plugging a dirt pedal into a tube amp usually means bumping the input gain somewhat (or a lot, depending on the design of the pedal). In doing so it is not just about the amp reproducing a distorted input signal but about the input signal interacting with the amp e.g. the harder you push the amp the more it overdrives/compresses. Modelling amps don't do that in my experience. An extra wallop of gain usually produces some pretty miserable results.

As to whether someone could like the sound, personally I don't know anyone who does. I didn't like it when I tried it myself. Sandvich doesn't like it either. If you can point me to any records made using this method I would be interested in hearing them.

As for cheap speakers and their characteristics, again, I don't know anyone who has taken the time to listen who prefers them to "better" speakers. None of the music I like has/is been made using these speakers (at least as far as I know) As someone who has/has had amps with both dirt cheap and very expensive speakers, I know which one I prefer. Again, if you can point me in the direction of any bands that are getting great sounds out of dirt cheap speakers I would be interested in hearing for myself.

In my experience modelling gear such as the POD is fine for jamming/throwing down ideas quickly but doesn't cut it as a platform for evaluating pedals. Sandvich's experience coincides with mine, except that he thinks the pedal is at fault.

I am also a bit perplexed about your comments about you not liking the tone that the "best guitarists" have. In this case I was referring specifically to the guitarists listed on the Fuzz Factory wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z.Vex_Fuzz_Factory If I remember correctly, you posted at some other stage talking about how Nels Cline and the Flaming Lips are two of your biggest influences/inspirations. Both are listed there. Weird that you would cite them as influences but not like how they sound.

rcaz

Seziertisch wrote: »

The reason that tube amps are so popular for guitar is soft clipping e.g. when they are pushed into distortion there is a smooth curve from clean to distorted. Plugging a dirt pedal into a tube amp usually means bumping the input gain somewhat (or a lot, depending on the design of the pedal). In doing so it is not just about the amp reproducing a distorted input signal but about the input signal interacting with the amp e.g. the harder you push the amp the more it overdrives/compresses. Modelling amps don't do that in my experience. An extra wallop of gain usually produces some pretty miserable results.

As to whether someone could like the sound, personally I don't know anyone who does. I didn't like it when I tried it myself. Sandvich doesn't like it either. If you can point me to any records made using this method I would be interested in hearing them.

As for cheap speakers and their characteristics, again, I don't know anyone who has taken the time to listen who prefers them to "better" speakers. None of the music I like has/is been made using these speakers (at least as far as I know) As someone who has/has had amps with both dirt cheap and very expensive speakers, I know which one I prefer. Again, if you can point me in the direction of any bands that are getting great sounds out of dirt cheap speakers I would be interested in hearing for myself.

In my experience modelling gear such as the POD is fine for jamming/throwing down ideas quickly but doesn't cut it as a platform for evaluating pedals. Sandvich's experience coincides with mine, except that he thinks the pedal is at fault.

I am also a bit perplexed about your comments about you not liking the tone that the "best guitarists" have. In this case I was referring specifically to the guitarists listed on the Fuzz Factory wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z.Vex_Fuzz_Factory If I remember correctly, you posted at some other stage talking about how Nels Cline and the Flaming Lips are two of your biggest influences/inspirations. Both are listed there. Weird that you would cite them as influences but not like how they sound.

Nels uses the Fuzz Factory for a very particular effect, which I already said I thought was cool, and Steven Drozd of The Flaming Lips, to the best of my knowledge, has only been using a Fuzz Factory on the last two albums (before that, the guitar wasn't really the main instrument, and his guitar playing was rarely very fuzzy), neither of which would be near the top of my list of influential albums.

Ronald Jones, ex Flaming Lips guitarist, used one of the my-first-amp type practice amps (something like a Squier 10) on I think two of their albums. (There's absolutely no information on his gear to be found, other than recognising sounds and seeing pictures/video for yourself, but that amp and his wah pedal can be seen in some footage from the recording of Clouds Taste Metallic, but anyway), and this got some (in my opinion) GREAT distortion sounds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woKyGavzW0Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n62w20H5foM

I don't know of anyone particular who uses modeling amps, but that isn't to say someone wouldn't enjoy that effect. I'm only trying to stress the point that there is no right way to get a guitar sound.

Sandvich

. If you go onto Wikipedia and look at all the names that own/use the Fuzz Factory, you will see the names of some of the best guitarists out there, guys that have great tone, who don't seem to have any issues with the voicing of the pedal.

No offense but you come off as a real fanboy. Popular != good, and the main reason it's popular is down to Matt Bellamy anyway.

-=al=-

not a big fan of zvex but they are a little bit of fun, but rahter $$ little bita fun, as for me i use a fulldrive 2 and a keeley baked ts9... seems to cover all areas of my overdrive/distortion needs

Seziertisch

Sandvich wrote: »

No offense but you come off as a real fanboy. Popular != good, and the main reason it's popular is down to Matt Bellamy anyway.

I have owned about 7 or so fuzz pedals over the years and I can say without a doubt that the Fuzz Factory is the most flexible I have used, from standard fuzz sounds to more over the top stuff.

I have also used a number of these pedals with small practice/modelling amps and they have sounded like ass. I have also tried a number of other distortion/overdrive pedals in this scenario and they performed similarly poorly. If sounding good through a (small) modelling amp was the main criterion for judging their sound, I wouldn't own any of them. I have also used all these pedals with a number of largish tube amps and to my ears they have sounded great and have justified the rave reviews I read prior to purchase.

Regarding Matt Bellamy's role in the popularity of the FF, he did introduce the sound of the Fuzz Factory to the masses (in Europe at least) but seeing as the Fuzz Factory was released in the mid 90s and Muses first album (which I don't think has any Fuzz Factory on it) was released in 2000 it doesn't really make sense to say that it was all down to Muse. They were obviously doing perfectly fine before Matt Bellamy decided to adopt it as one of his signature sounds.

Sandvich

I have owned about 7 or so fuzz pedals over the years and I can say without a doubt that the Fuzz Factory is the most flexible I have used, from standard fuzz sounds to more over the top stuff.

Which Fuzz Pedals? Some of the larger Devi Evers are more versatile and still a bit cheaper, though I'm not a huge fan of either Vex's or Devi's interest personas. The Univox Superfuzz is pretty versatile, as is the Musket Fuzz for a Big Muff-style fuzz. The Boss FZ-2 also has a lot of different options.

No offense but the Fuzz Factory has a bit of a reputation for being a n00bish choice for "Best FUzz ever".

The FF is mainly a glitchy/oscillating FF clone - you can't really get proper Big Muffy sounds out of it, it can barely do any Octave tones and it tends to go mental if you put a Wah before it.

Regarding Matt Bellamy's role in the popularity of the FF, he did introduce the sound of the Fuzz Factory to the masses (in Europe at least) but seeing as the Fuzz Factory was released in the mid 90s and Muses first album (which I don't think has any Fuzz Factory on it) was released in 2000 it doesn't really make sense to say that it was all down to Muse. They were obviously doing perfectly fine before Matt Bellamy decided to adopt it as one of his signature sounds.

Boutique builders usually don't expect to ship many units.

Seziertisch

Sandvich wrote: »

Which Fuzz Pedals? Some of the larger Devi Evers are more versatile and still a bit cheaper, though I'm not a huge fan of either Vex's or Devi's interest personas. The Univox Superfuzz is pretty versatile, as is the Musket Fuzz for a Big Muff-style fuzz. The Boss FZ-2 also has a lot of different options.

No offense but the Fuzz Factory has a bit of a reputation for being a n00bish choice for "Best FUzz ever".

The FF is mainly a glitchy/oscillating FF clone - you can't really get proper Big Muffy sounds out of it, it can barely do any Octave tones and it tends to go mental if you put a Wah before it.



Boutique builders usually don't expect to ship many units.

The fuzzes I tried with POD/Roland modelling were the American and (black) Russian Big Muff reissues, MJM Foxey Fuzz (Big Muff clone), OLC Chunky Cheese (Lovetone Big Cheese tone) and Barge Concepts BP1 (Roland Bee Baa Fuzz clone). All sounded a bit pants and in every case I preferred the sound plugged straight in and using the on board distortion effects. I also tried a modded DS-1 and a Menatone TBIAC. In both cases I thought the built in distortion sounds were better.

Also, the Fuzz Factory, like a lot of fuzzes, likes to be before the wah. The problem is not so much with the FF but with the buffered outputs of most wahs interacting with the input of the fuzz. I know that Dave Fox from Foxrox has a wah mod that allows them to be used before fuzz pedal without the sound going to sh1t. Also experiment with where you put it in your chain, some fuzzes don't mind what is put before them but the FF is generally pretty sensitive.

As for its glitchiness, I find it ok, just keep the "stab" knob all the way up, back back the "comp", bump up the "drive", dial in the "gate" to suit your needs and it gives a fairly standard fuzz tone.

Seziertisch

Sandvich wrote: »

Boutique builders usually don't expect to ship many units.

I think Zachary Vex should also be praised for bringing out the Vexter versions of his pedals and making them a bit more accessible to the masses.

Seziertisch

http://www.analogman.com/fuzzface.htm

Read the disclaimer at the top of this page. Seeing as the Fuzz Factory is part Fuzz Face I think the same holds true.

rcaz

Seziertisch wrote: »

the FF is generally pretty sensitive.

Just 'cause I think it's interesting, that's apparently why Bellamy decided to mount his Fuzz Factory in his guitar, 'cause it didn't like being put after his wireless gear.

I'd like to give Dwarfcraft Devices a mention for really versatile fuzz pedals.

Forest Master

For all of the talk that Seziertisch is doing, I wonder if he can actually play, or is he just one of these gear-heads who reads magazines & buys the latest gear.

Just a theory - would be curious to hear some audio of him playing, because I've met a lot of people who talk the talk about the tones of certain amps & pedals, and the "feel" of certain wood in guitar bodies, etc - and they can't even play. Makes it all moot.

Empty vessels, etc....

Seziertisch

Forest Master wrote: »

For all of the talk that Seziertisch is doing, I wonder if he can actually play, or is he just one of these gear-heads who reads magazines & buys the latest gear.

Just a theory - would be curious to hear some audio of him playing, because I've met a lot of people who talk the talk about the tones of certain amps & pedals, and the "feel" of certain wood in guitar bodies, etc - and they can't even play. Makes it all moot.

Empty vessels, etc....

You tell him, girlfriend!!!

Forest Master

Yep - just as I'd suspected.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNrwH_FPDCI
Horrible clean tone with too much reverb, fuzzy weak distortion, lame lead, and fred durst-esque bends.

And after all that waffling, eh? Keep reading Sound on Sound & regurgitating it on here...

Seziertisch

Forest Master wrote: »

Yep - just as I'd suspected.

Why are you even posting on this thread? The title of the thread is "effects pedals", you by your own admission don't use any except for a little wah occasionally. Some people like to use (hide behind, in your opinion) effects, you don't, fair enough.

The only reason I listed the pedals I had used was because I was specifically asked to do so. I wasn't repeating something I read somewhere else, I was talking from my own experiences. My point is that for someone starting out, a lot of "classic" pedals require an appropriate platform to deliver the performance the buyer might be expecting. If someone had said that to me when I started playing, I would have been very appreciative, and would probably have postponed purchasing some pedals until I had a proper amp.

As for my playing ability, I really don't see how that is relevant to a discussion of effects pedals. You consider the use of effects pedals to indicate a lack of playing ability anyway. If any of my points have been incorrect or inaccurate, or if your experiences have differed from mine then by all means feel free to contribute/correct me.

Otherwise, I find your tone of address inappropriate. I don't know what other forums you post on, but that isn't how things are around here (for the most part). Your second post on the Instruments forum is basically to insult another poster. Not exactly what could be called worthwhile contribution.

Seziertisch

Forest Master wrote: »

Yep - just as I'd suspected.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNrwH_FPDCI
Horrible clean tone with too much reverb, fuzzy weak distortion, lame lead, and fred durst-esque bends.

And after all that waffling, eh? Keep reading Sound on Sound & regurgitating it on here...

That was recorded with a Westone Strat clone into a POD into a M-Audio interface. Then it was processed with Guitar Rig. I was at someone elses house, they asked me to play, that was what was there, I used it. The video was posted over at the MP forum as a bit of a laugh. Though, seeing as you are into posting links, when can we expect to hear your superlative tones and playing in action?

Sandvich

Forest Master wrote: »

For all of the talk that Seziertisch is doing, I wonder if he can actually play, or is he just one of these gear-heads who reads magazines & buys the latest gear.

Just a theory - would be curious to hear some audio of him playing, because I've met a lot of people who talk the talk about the tones of certain amps & pedals, and the "feel" of certain wood in guitar bodies, etc - and they can't even play. Makes it all moot.

Empty vessels, etc....

You know, I find more often than the alternative the people who go Guitar -> Amp with the occassional wah or delay are unimaginative twats who are stuck playing Stevie Ray Vaughan or Guns'N'Roses, or something along those lines. Blues, cock rock and maybe a bit of by-the-book punk or "indie". Creative players with minimalist/traditional set ups generally don't feel the need to rag on the way other people do things, and get on with it. They don't need to bring down others to make themselves feel more proper, after all.

This is phenomenon I'm actually pretty interested in; I like to call it "Inversion Impulse"(but that's probably because I'm a Type Moon fan). People seem to be obsessed with the idea that the opposite of what might apparently be true is true; due to the presence of some kind of "shallow front".

For example, people will also insist people who dress differently or oddly are "compensating for something", or just looking for attention, and the real weirdos you can't spot. In real life of course this is bull**** as at least as many people are going to dress normally to fit in as people dress differently purely for attention - it's just the way people work. But this attitude seems to be "common knowledge now", and low and behold, people dress like ****, and it doesn't make them any more interesting, if anything less so since it gives them more of a comfort zone. It's taking the idea that "People who look the same can still be interesting and different" and perveting it to "People who don't dress the same are not interesting and different". Are people just **** at logic or something?

With effects it's the same thing. Someone that uses lots of effects probably does so because they look at most guitar based music and realise that it's heavily based just on a simple mix of clean and distorted guitar tones, with mostly rather sparse and cheesey use of effects and want to do something different. You can do a lot of cool stuff with guitar effects, but even most alternative bands still stick to plain old tube amp distortion(or maybe a Big Muff). I really like the sounds Orgy make even though the style of music isn't my favourite, they have some awesome use of guitar effects. Their cover of "Blue Monday" is great actually, and I think a great lesson in how guitar effects can make or break a song.

Ironically of course, a lot of the "classics" people emulate were at the foremost of guitar effects use - Jimi Hendrix for example. Using a wah nowadays doesn't mean the same thing it did back then - it was edgy. The Univibe, the Fuzz Face, the Octavia, even a Flanger. Nowadays we have more available to us - emulating what was done before, doesn't mean you're appropriating what it was like then - since they were moving forwards, and you're moving backwards.

People that are using effects aren't trying to cover up their playing - does anyone ever offer any proof for this ****? Like take a good measure of bands that use effects and bands that don't? It's just an assumption because it SEEMS clever, it seems like the opposite to what's obvious so it's OBVIOUSLY true. It brings down people who are trying to do something different, as with all these Inversions. Quite frankly it's a bit pathetic and the last we need is more guitar -> amp fret ****.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

Forest Master wrote: »

Yep - just as I'd suspected.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNrwH_FPDCI
Horrible clean tone with too much reverb, fuzzy weak distortion, lame lead, and fred durst-esque bends.

And after all that waffling, eh? Keep reading Sound on Sound & regurgitating it on here...

so lets hear your shi.t dude , since you threw someone else out there

you have to do it now or never show your face around here again

or are you chicken ?

BWUAWK ! BWUAWK !

rcaz

Sandvich wrote: »

Ironically of course, a lot of the "classics" people emulate were at the foremost of guitar effects use - Jimi Hendrix for example. Using a wah nowadays doesn't mean the same thing it did back then - it was edgy. The Univibe, the Fuzz Face, the Octavia, even a Flanger. Nowadays we have more available to us - emulating what was done before, doesn't mean you're appropriating what it was like then - since they were moving forwards, and you're moving backwards.

This is the point that I like most. I was thinking about it a good bit just the other day actually, with respect to synthesisers. Like when the Minimoog came out, it was embraced because it was the latest thing and nothing like it had ever been around before. And now computers are getting better and better and so many people are thinking that computers have 'no mojo' or whatever, and that you need to go and get a monophonic analogue synth if you want to be any good.

But I think with synths it's not such a big deal, the guys who are really at the cutting edge of electronic music (YMMV, of course, but I'd think of people like Autechre, Aphex Twin, etc.) use a mix of everything they can, with notable use of old gear and new stuff. It REALLY wrecks my head with guitars. Seems like 97% of guitarists just don't pay realise what it means to be original, clever, they don't understand the context of themselves vs. the context of their heroes, and even worse, they don't want to try to figure it out.

punchdrunk

well i dunno...

I'm pretty much on the fence about pedals...