The New Tone Thread

I recently moved my tuner to the end so it could mute all the pedals in front of it - comes right after my looper.

Then at my last gig I stomped the looper but my clown foot also caught the tuner and I wasn't sure why I went silent - smoove

That sequence looks good to me. All choruses suck.
 
Greg_L said:
Some delays and modulation are way too excessive for the front of the amp. The front of a tube amp amplifies the signal. A little delay can turn into a big pile of mess when ran through the preamp stage. Some pedals can do it just fine though. Tons of people ran everything in front before effects loops became more common.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's what I thought. I'm just a bit more careful with the application of the feedback on the delay. I can go fucking mental if you overdo it.
My general idea has always been guitar, tuner, drive, modulation, delay, amp. Not sure if the Trelicopter counts as modulation so I just decided to stick it after the flanger
 
I recently relocated my wah to 2nd to last in my pedal chain. It's definitely different to have the wah bandpassing an overdrive or fuzz. I don't think that I like it. It's much more subtle before OD/distortion FX, but it's somehow more natural. If you want that Grinderman kind of over-the-top wah, then stick it after a fuzz. But I think that for most applications, the earlier in the chain, the better...

I definitely always put modulation/time FX at the end. I had a delay/reverb unit in my FX loop for the longest time but got tired of the extra set of cables. I think that the main benefit to having them in the FX loop is that you can control the send/return levels from your amp (if so equipped). But now that I have a delay at the end of my pedal chain before the amp, I can't say that I can tell a difference between it being there and it being in the FX loop.
 
Greg_L said:
Some delays and modulation are way too excessive for the front of the amp. The front of a tube amp amplifies the signal. A little delay can turn into a big pile of mess when ran through the preamp stage. Some pedals can do it just fine though. Tons of people ran everything in front before effects loops became more common.
Click to expand...
^^^^^ this ^^^^^
It depends on the pedal. In my experience most stompboxes are the right output and impedance to sound best loading the front end of an amp.

However, things that put out more of a line level like rackmounts do ( and some pedals do too ) will sound best in the loop.
But even that isn't an absolute .... some amps have shitty sounding loops.

It ends up being trial and error.

I run the tuner last in the pedal order for the reason already given .... mutes everything when it's on.

The rest look about like I'd do it .... I don't use a wah and I'm unsure where I'd go with that.
 
I use long cable runs so I've set up my board with buffered pedals at the beginning, middle, and end. My wah is last, and it's true-bypass, but there's a Boss Tremolo (buffered) right before it. I also pretty much never have more than one pedal going at a time, so the order isn't that significant to me. I just put them where they fit and I can reach the most common ones easily.
 
All the chatter and thoughts about flangers made me think about what mine is like. It's part of the Yamaha FX500 multi effects unit.
A fun unit from the mid 80s which has typically awful distortion.
Here is a clip of ALL of the presets that feature flanger:

It's the same progression all the way through except at the "sitar" in which I used some open chords to let it do its thing.
 
OK - as promised, here are some clips with the modded black russian 'Murica' Muff. I played through the clean channel not very loud on my orange amp (OR100 with V30s in a 4x12) with the treble and bass knobs at about noon and then clicked on the muff, then repeated the riff. I did my best to achieve a consistent performance so that you can really appreciate the delicate subtlety of the pedal:

Here it is with a SM57 at about halfway between the dust cap and cone edge.
View attachment MuricaMuff-SM57.mp3

Same thing with a MD421 (an old one that I fear may be partially broken) on a different speaker.
View attachment MuricaMuff-MD421.mp3

The rest of the chain is an API 3121+ into a Lynx Aurora 16 into Logic X. I sort of level matched the tracks, but other than that they're dry. I like the 421 better myself, fwiw.
 
rayc said:
All the chatter and thoughts about flangers made me think about what mine is like. It's part of the Yamaha FX500 multi effects unit.
A fun unit from the mid 80s which has typically awful distortion.
Here is a clip of ALL of the presets that feature flanger:

It's the same progression all the way through except at the "sitar" in which I used some open chords to let it do its thing.
Click to expand...

Wow, that's akin to my DigiTech GSP 21 Pro. My first FX processor, circa 1991. The distortions are of about the same quality, maybe the Yamaha edges it out. Although the wild FX on the last few examples, while certainly not usable on most songs, would be a fun weird thing to throw into a mix a time or two.


antichef said:
OK - as promised, here are some clips with the modded black russian 'Murica' Muff. I played through the clean channel not very loud on my orange amp (OR100 with V30s in a 4x12) with the treble and bass knobs at about noon and then clicked on the muff, then repeated the riff. I did my best to achieve a consistent performance so that you can really appreciate the delicate subtlety of the pedal:

Here it is with a SM57 at about halfway between the dust cap and cone edge.
View attachment 94322

Same thing with a MD421 (an old one that I fear may be partially broken) on a different speaker.
View attachment 94321

The rest of the chain is an API 3121+ into a Lynx Aurora 16 into Logic X. I sort of level matched the tracks, but other than that they're dry. I like the 421 better myself, fwiw.
Click to expand...

Holy shit, that thing is brutal! I hear that same mid scoop that my JHS Firefly has as well. I don't have much experience with fuzz pedals, so maybe that's just the way they are? Lots of highs and lows, not much mids. The MD421 definitely tames the highs and accentuates the lows quite a bit, I like how it sounds on that over-the-top fuzz much more than the SM57.
 
OK, here's a quick and dirty clip of the new 2204S dimed out. It's not nearly as painful as the DSL40C was on full blast, since it's not as searingly bright. I put an Audix i5 on one of the speakers, and felt it was missing something. So I put an Audix D6 on another speaker just to present the low end more like it feels in the room. This probably wouldn't work in a mix, but it does kind of represent the "chunk" a bit more. Forgive the drums, I just can't seem to come up with a riff without some sort of drum line any more.

Gibson LP Classic
Marshall JCM800 2204S
Presence: 1.5
Bass: 6
Mid: 8
Treble: 4
Master: all the fucking way
Preamp: ditto

Audix i5 at dust cap edge, pointed inward
Audix D6 at edge of cone, highs rolled off in Reaper (had some comb filtering going)

 
Ok, catching up on these tones here guys....

Ray: Wow man, that thing is pretty wild!!! I actually liked the 5th little clip part, it could very usable in my humble opinion dude....

Antichef: Sounds good, but it's a little bright, even for me, but I will say both those clips sound very much like early 90's stuff to me (which I happen to like quite a bit of), in particular it reminded me of Billy Corrigan/Smashing Pumpkins sound for some reason...

Tadpui: Cool man, sounds like a Marshall to me...:). What speaker are you using here man??? I know you got a 4x10 cab with the amp, but I don't remember what speakers you said were in it...I'd like to hear that same setup with a clean boost to give it some more hair, like always, but it does sound good man...
 
Trying to get caught up here.....

rayc said:
All the chatter and thoughts about flangers made me think about what mine is like. It's part of the Yamaha FX500 multi effects unit.
A fun unit from the mid 80s which has typically awful distortion.
Here is a clip of ALL of the presets that feature flanger:

It's the same progression all the way through except at the "sitar" in which I used some open chords to let it do its thing.
Click to expand...
Wow, that sounds kind of rough, but I like the effect on section 1 and 8. That's some okay flanging to me.

antichef said:
really appreciate the delicate subtlety of the pedal:
Click to expand...
:laughings:

There aint nothing subtle about that pedal. Sounds pretty raw and raunchy. I like it though. Going from clean to raunch like that really has a 90s feel to it. It kind of reminds me of my Rat.

Lt. Bob said:
Greg ..... here's a possible flanger for ya'

Mercury Flanger: The Official Source Audio Demo

looks like they're around a buck and a half
Click to expand...
Wow, that is a pretty good sounding flanger. I like that it doesn't sound too metallic and that first section in the video is just about right to me.

Tadpui said:
OK, here's a quick and dirty clip of the new 2204S dimed out. It's not nearly as painful as the DSL40C was on full blast, since it's not as searingly bright. I put an Audix i5 on one of the speakers, and felt it was missing something. So I put an Audix D6 on another speaker just to present the low end more like it feels in the room. This probably wouldn't work in a mix, but it does kind of represent the "chunk" a bit more. Forgive the drums, I just can't seem to come up with a riff without some sort of drum line any more.

Gibson LP Classic
Marshall JCM800 2204S
Presence: 1.5
Bass: 6
Mid: 8
Treble: 4
Master: all the fucking way
Preamp: ditto

Audix i5 at dust cap edge, pointed inward
Audix D6 at edge of cone, highs rolled off in Reaper (had some comb filtering going)

Click to expand...

Haha, that's pretty cool, and it's really fat. Is that the low input? It kind of sounds like low input, and I noticed in your pics you were plugged into the low. Have you tried the high input? That's a whole 'nother level of awesomeness.
 
Lt. Bob said:
yep .... that first part is where it sounds like the Ross to me.
Click to expand...

I do like it. I'm having trouble convincing myself to buy something though. I love a good flanger, but goddammit I don't use them enough to spend a bunch on one. For once in my life, I'm trying to be reasonable with my spending. :laughings:
 
Greg_L said:
I do like it. I'm having trouble convincing myself to buy something though. I love a good flanger, but goddammit I don't use them enough to spend a bunch on one. For once in my life, I'm trying to be reasonable with my spending. :laughings:
Click to expand...
can't help ya' man ...... I'm dirt poor and even to me $149 is petty cash.
I may have to get one and I HAVE a Ross!! :D

Sometime in the next few weeks I'm getting that Catlinbread RAH and maybe this flanger.

I DO love spending money!!!

:laughings:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top