# Fuzz ?



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

Yeah, I know, Billy always has some crazy concoctions, but what fuzz would come close to that tone ?


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Sorry, I have no frigging idea, but DANG that guy always sounds amazing.


----------



## Derek_T (10 mo ago)

Reminds me a bit of Joey's tone on that one. There's a quick pick at the pedal board if it's of any help.


----------



## Hear Ye Music (Dec 19, 2012)

I think he uses the Bixonic Expandora a lot. I understand the JHS Kilt is based on that.


----------



## Sneaky (Feb 14, 2006)

Hear Ye Music said:


> I think he uses the Bixonic Expandora a lot. I understand the JHS Kilt is based on


A lot of Expandoras…


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Not that a mere mortal couldn't nail that tone with _something_, but it's unlikely to be anything specific that one could plunk down a credit card in a store and walk out of there with the few specific things needed. Keep in mind as well that the good reverend uses ridiculously light gauge strings (Joey uses .019 thru .063 !!!), and there are obviously going to be things like ribbon mics and one-off amplifiers involved.

If you stumble onto that sound, great, but don't go looking for it, because you won't find it on a shelf.


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

mhammer said:


> If you stumble onto that sound, great, but don't go looking for it, because you won't find it on a shelf.


Not expecting that, but I can hear that a fuzz is in the chain and fuzzes are in the deepest rabbit hole where I have no intention to set foot in. I can get pretty close with the few OD pedals I have, but I feel I need some of that little square frequency.

BTW, 9-42 gauge strings for me.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

BGood said:


> Not expecting that, but I can hear that a fuzz is in the chain and fuzzes are in the deepest rabbit hole where I have no intention to set foot in. I can get pretty close with the few OD pedals I have, but I feel I need some of that little square frequency.
> 
> BTW, 9-42 gauge strings for me.


1) Those are "heavy gauge" from Billy's perspective.
2) I wouldn't classify what we hear in the video as "fuzz". More like a distortion to my ears.


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

mhammer said:


> 1) Those are "heavy gauge" from Billy's perspective.
> 2) I wouldn't classify what we hear in the video as "fuzz". More like a distortion to my ears.


1- I don't think gauge string are what makes a tone anyway.
2- I find the distortion to dirty to be only that.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Yes. string gauge _doesn't_ make tone. But string gauge yields output level, and output level into clipping device WILL alter resulting tone. Stick a clean booster, set for a smidgen more than bypass volume, into a distortion pedal, and you WILL easily hear the difference. Indeed, the whole basis of the Tube Screamer's design is to provide the same degree of clipping for wound and unwound strings by providing more gain for unwound than for wound.

Personally, I classify overdrive, distortion, and fuzz, based on how long, after the initial pick attack, the pedal maintains the same amount of harmonic content. It subsides quickly in an overdrive, lasts a bit longer in a distortion (often with a bit of treble emphasis to help along), and will endure for quite a while in a fuzz. Indeed, the onomatopaeic name for such pedals tells the story - fuzzzzzz.


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

mhammer said:


> Yes. string gauge _doesn't_ make tone. But string gauge yields output level, and output level into clipping device WILL alter resulting tone. Stick a clean booster, set for a smidgen more than bypass volume, into a distortion pedal, and you WILL easily hear the difference. Indeed, the whole basis of the Tube Screamer's design is to provide the same degree of clipping for wound and unwound strings by providing more gain for unwound than for wound.
> 
> Personally, I classify overdrive, distortion, and fuzz, based on how long, after the initial pick attack, the pedal maintains the same amount of harmonic content. It subsides quickly in an overdrive, lasts a bit longer in a distortion (often with a bit of treble emphasis to help along), and will endure for quite a while in a fuzz. Indeed, the onomatopaeic name for such pedals tells the story - fuzzzzzz.


We all have different ears. Mine wouldn't hear string gauges ... or maybe wouldn't care.

As for clipping, I see an OD as a smooth silky clip, like a cat's purr. Distortion is more of a nails on chalkboard kind of thing. Fuzz image I get is like a car bearing grinding the little metal balls to cubes.

Fuzz...........................................................................OD.......................................................................Disto









Like I said, different hearing.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Perhaps I didn't convey my point clearly. I agree that both our ears would not likely "hear" string gauge differences in tone...from a clean signal into a clean amp. But the very same string gauge, feeding low output vs high output pickups into an amp that is subject to breakup would be heard by both of us, no differently than would the same strings, into the same pickups, into the same amp, BUT with the gain control on a pedal turned up a bit for one of them. What the pickup senses depends on string thickness. The fatter the ferromagnetic body wiggling above the polepieces, the more signal is produced by the coil. A person CAN lower the tension of thicker strings by tuning down a bit, but that only changes the pitch and tension, and NOT the impact of a thicker string on the pickups.

So, one wouldn't hear string gauge differences in tone if the entire rig was set up to be clean, no matter how you strummed. But the moment there is any possibility of clipping, thicker strings WILL generate more, under normal conditions.

In principal, there is usually no electronic distinction between overdrive, distortion, and fuzz circuits. With a few exceptions, they generally differentiate based on how much gain they apply to the signal, how they set up the clipping threshold or otherwise limit headroom, and some toneshaping to move some parts of the spectrum in front or in the back. Many simple drive pedals can be made to be distortions, or even fuzzes, by pushing their front end harder. The same principle that lets a "clean" boost push an amp into overdrive also applies to a boost feeding an overdrive pedal.


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

mhammer said:


> Perhaps I didn't convey my point clearly. I agree that both our ears would not likely "hear" string gauge differences in tone...from a clean signal into a clean amp. But the very same string gauge, feeding low output vs high output pickups into an amp that is subject to breakup would be heard by both of us, no differently than would the same strings, into the same pickups, into the same amp, BUT with the gain control on a pedal turned up a bit for one of them. What the pickup senses depends on string thickness. The fatter the ferromagnetic body wiggling above the polepieces, the more signal is produced by the coil. A person CAN lower the tension of thicker strings by tuning down a bit, but that only changes the pitch and tension, and NOT the impact of a thicker string on the pickups.
> 
> So, one wouldn't hear string gauge differences in tone if the entire rig was set up to be clean, no matter how you strummed. But the moment there is any possibility of clipping, thicker strings WILL generate more, under normal conditions.
> 
> In principal, there is usually no electronic distinction between overdrive, distortion, and fuzz circuits. With a few exceptions, they generally differentiate based on how much gain they apply to the signal, how they set up the clipping threshold or otherwise limit headroom, and some toneshaping to move some parts of the spectrum in front or in the back. Many simple drive pedals can be made to be distortions, or even fuzzes, by pushing their front end harder. The same principle that lets a "clean" boost push an amp into overdrive also applies to a boost feeding an overdrive pedal.


OK.
So, stacking gain pedals would act "about the same" as a boost up front.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Yup.


----------



## player99 (Sep 5, 2019)

I agree.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

I learned all about gain-staging and cumulative gain back in 1974, when I learned how to take an itsy-bitsy teeny-weeny microvolt signal from muscle, and amplify it up to a level where it would drive a solenoid pen recorder on a polygaph. Every stage along the way (and there were several) requires an optimum input signal to behave its best, and the final result depends on the synergistic interaction of all stages.

Same thing with gain-stacking.


----------



## Mark Brown (Jan 4, 2022)

Wait a second... so, you were designing polygraphs a decade before I was born? No damn wonder I am so far behind


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

mhammer said:


> I learned all about gain-staging and cumulative gain back in 1974, when I learned how to take an itsy-bitsy teeny-weeny microvolt signal from muscle, and amplify it up to a level where it would drive a solenoid pen recorder on a polygaph. Every stage along the way (and there were several) requires an optimum input signal to behave its best, and the final result depends on the synergistic interaction of all stages.
> 
> Same thing with gain-stacking.


I have a hard time making the difference between ON and STANDBY on my amp.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Mark Brown said:


> Wait a second... so, you were designing polygraphs a decade before I was born? No damn wonder I am so far behind


I most certainly _wasn't_ "designing" them, but I _was_ being trained in how to use them for my undergrad project. You think maintaining a good S/N ratio is important when your guitar puts out a couple hundred millivolts? Try working with well under a hundred *micro*volts. My first FET preamp was built into the head of a rat in 1976, so we could get decent brain activity recordings 40ft away, but that was just following a schematic. I have no formal training in electronics, but the amount of electronics, signal-processing, programming, and interfacing one has to learn about and use, for psychological research, is more extensive than many realize. And it's not just brainwave or electrocardiogram stuff. If your research involves measuring the effect of some drug or training experience, on a rat choosing and running down an alleyway, there's going to be photocells, and solenoids, hooked up to timers. If a pigeon's pecking pattern, for testing their visual memory is involved, there's going to be microswitches connected to an input/output port. And so on. The days of clipboards and stopwatches disappeared long ago.


----------



## Seance (Jun 18, 2018)

BGood said:


> what fuzz would come close to that tone ?


I think a take on the Kay fuzz could come _close_ to that (but would add a bit more barbwire as opposed to the granular _gritch_ in that clip).

Here is a clip of the Basic Audio Kay fuzz that I made.
In the past I've participated in a few TGP tour boxes with BA fuzz pedals.

__
https://soundcloud.com/caesarshift%2Fasparagus

I have a BA Marq Won, but I think its "grit" is a bit more tightly packed (like wet sand on a beach).

__
https://soundcloud.com/caesarshift%2Fmarq-won


----------



## NationalDuo (3 mo ago)

Gotta love Fuzz !


----------



## NationalDuo (3 mo ago)

Derek_T said:


> Reminds me a bit of Joey's tone on that one. There's a quick pick at the pedal board if it's of any help.


This guys good…first time I’ve heard him….


----------



## paraedolia (Nov 26, 2008)

Tonebender Mk 1 or a 1.5 into an expandora or at last a cooking amp maybe? 
Not quite as gated as a MkI but fuzzier round the edges than a MkII


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

I just don't want to dive into the fuzz rabbit hole. If one is deep, that is the one. 

I would need a multi faceted fuzz, one that delivers every possible fuzz tone there is, and not a $500 one. But I think I might be able to get close enough by cooking tubes and stacking ODs.


----------



## superfly (Oct 14, 2021)

BGood said:


> Yeah, I know, Billy always has some crazy concoctions, but what fuzz would come close to that tone ?


Get the Foxx Tone Machine in a modern reincarnation.


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

superfly said:


> Get the Foxx Tone Machine in a modern reincarnation.


Hmmm .... more expensive than all of my amps and guitars but one.


----------



## superfly (Oct 14, 2021)

There is a FTM for every pocket (there are other descent clones too). Buy now, thank me later:









Danelectro DJ-13 French Toast Octave Distortion Mini Effects Pedal : Amazon.ca: Musical Instruments, Stage & Studio


Danelectro DJ-13 French Toast Octave Distortion Mini Effects Pedal : Amazon.ca: Musical Instruments, Stage & Studio



www.amazon.ca












Warm Audio Foxy Tone Box, Fuzz+Octave Guitar Pedal | Amps & Pedals | Mississauga / Peel Region | Kijiji


Excellent condition, near mint Barely ever used. Box included. Brand new is $219 + tax = $247. Willing to take $100 hit. Killer pedal but I just don’t use fuzz that often. Lot of videos out there demonstrating this pedal. Will consider trades for a fuzz face or keeley and JHS pedals. Used in the...




www.kijiji.ca












3699 Fuzz in Ontario - Kijiji Canada


Find "3699 Fuzz" in Ontario - Visit Kijiji Classifieds to buy or sell, new & used items. Explore Canada's #1 Classifieds.




www.kijiji.ca


----------



## superfly (Oct 14, 2021)

I forgot to mention, the Reverend used the FTM himself (Mentioned by Elwood Francis (*Gibbons*' guitar tech) in _Fuzz: The Sound That Revolutionized the World_ at 1:19:59)


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

superfly said:


> There is a FTM for every pocket (there are other descent clones too). Buy now, thank me later:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks, I'll do my homework


----------



## Okay Player (May 24, 2020)

BGood said:


> Thanks, I'll do my homework


For reference the guy who runs Danelectro is also the guy who invented the Foxx Tone Machine. So there's a pretty well established lineage.


----------



## Okay Player (May 24, 2020)

BGood said:


> I would need a multi faceted fuzz, one that delivers every possible fuzz tone there is


Outside of a multieffect that's not going to be possible.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

I have a rack unit I built with a dozen fuzzes of various types in two banks of 6, with a three-band semiparametric EQ. The three sections can be cascaded in whatever order you want. Nine of the 12 are two-knbbers, and three of them get all crazy and have three controls. In order, they are:
(Leftmost bank)
A - Knight/Allied Fuzz
B - Heathkit TA-28
C - Muff Fuzz (transistor version)
D - Orpheum Fuzz
E - Jordan Bosstone
F - Roger Mayer Octavia
(rightmost bank)
A - MXR Distortion+
B - Interfax Harmonic Percolator
C - Gretsch Contrafuzz
D - Roland AD-50 (fuzz half of the Double-Beat, with 3 added modes)
E - Big Muff Pi
F - ZVex Box of Rock

Between that and the EQ, I doubt there is any tone you can't get.


----------



## superfly (Oct 14, 2021)

That thing is freaking amazing! Is the Octavia transformer version?


----------



## paraedolia (Nov 26, 2008)

superfly said:


> There is a FTM for every pocket (there are other descent clones too). Buy now, thank me later:


The clown that runs Danelectro now is actually the guy responsible for the original Foxx Tone Machine, so theoretically that little pencil sharpener _is_ a FTM. I dislike him and I dislike cheap plastic pedals so I wouldn't buy one, but YMMV.
I still don't hear that clip as a Foxx though .... no octave.


----------



## paraedolia (Nov 26, 2008)

Okay Player said:


> Outside of a multieffect that's not going to be possible.


Recent incarnation of the Haunting Mids Fuzz (not JHS!) is really versatile. Lots of options -- it can sound like a muff, it can sound like FZ-1 and just about everything else in between. It's pretty cool.


----------



## gtrguy (Jul 6, 2006)

BGood said:


> I just don't want to dive into the fuzz rabbit hole. If one is deep, that is the one.
> 
> I would need a multi faceted fuzz, one that delivers every possible fuzz tone there is, and not a $500 one. But I think I might be able to get close enough by cooking tubes and stacking ODs.


Stacking other gain pedals and boosts and combining those with EQ and overdriven amps can certainly take you to all kinds of fuzz territory. Playing around with how the different gain levels interact and how to get something useable that sounds good and isn't too noisy is a fun exercise that can while away an afternoon or a weekend depending how far you want to go with it. Don't underestimate the power of EQ both pre and post gain or in the middle between drive pedals to sculpt the sounds- even a basic MXR or two can be loads of fun.

I don't know if it's still the case but a 28-band Digitech EQ was a long standing essential in Billy Gibbon's rig that he used to EQ every one of his guitars to sound like Pearly Gates. I have the dual 14-band version and use one side as a pre-preamp EQ and the other as a post preamp EQ.


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

Okay Player said:


> Outside of a multieffect that's not going to be possible.


LOL ... I know. I said that I "would" need


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

mhammer said:


> I have a rack unit I built with a dozen fuzzes of various types in two banks of 6, with a three-band semiparametric EQ. The three sections can be cascaded in whatever order you want. Nine of the 12 are two-knbbers, and three of them get all crazy and have three controls. In order, they are:
> (Leftmost bank)
> A - Knight/Allied Fuzz
> B - Heathkit TA-28
> ...


There's the cellar wall of the fuzz rabbit hole.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

superfly said:


> That thing is freaking amazing! Is the Octavia transformer version?


No, but I wish it was. I've built the Tychobrahe version, which uses a transformer, and the Mayer version, which is all transistors. I prefer the transformer version, but that may well be a result of changes in component tolerances over the past 55 years. One of the Mayer units I made used all the *nominal* components shown in the schematic, but I found I needed to add some series resistance to the Gain pot to achieve octaving that wasn't accompanied by a wall of harmonic hash. Most pots these days seem to be a bit lower than their stated value. So, for example, a nominally 10k pot may be 8k8. In other words, it is closer to 10k than to the next lower-down value of 5k.

This is why I like the Foxx Tone Machine. YOu can throw almost anything in there, so long as the numbers match the schematic, and it just plain *works*.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

paraedolia said:


> The clown that runs Danelectro now is actually the guy responsible for the original Foxx Tone Machine, so theoretically that little pencil sharpener _is_ a FTM. I dislike him and I dislike cheap plastic pedals so I wouldn't buy one, but YMMV.
> I still don't hear that clip as a Foxx though .... no octave.


I have one and:
a) That plastic enclosure is solid as a rock. One may not like how it looks but it will withstand whatever you can throw at it or drop on it. The pots, however, are another matter.
b) It IS a Tone Machine. The big difference is that it uses electronic bypass switching, instead of mechanical switching like the original. Does that make an important difference? Up to you.


----------



## puzz (5 mo ago)

superfly said:


> There is a FTM for every pocket (there are other descent clones too). Buy now, thank me later:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The WA Foxy is very cool in the retro design and fuzzy enclosure. Has a thick muff sound and the octave isn't too overpowering. I also like the old plastic container Danelectro Cool Cat since we're talking Danelectro pedals. My new fuzz is the Atreides from Way Huge, I like pedals with slider controls


----------



## bzrkrage (Mar 20, 2011)

BGood said:


> Fuzz?


Yes please.
All the above tones. Make a BG/Joey/Mayer hybrid ......... (insert evil scientist laugh)


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

puzz said:


> The WA Foxy is very cool in the retro design and fuzzy enclosure. Has a thick muff sound and the octave isn't too overpowering. I also like the old plastic container Danelectro Cool Cat since we're talking Danelectro pedals. My new fuzz is the Atreides from Way Huge, I like pedals with slider controls


Not crazy about sliders, myself, but Mr. Huge has some interesting ideas now and then, and this is one of them. Mixed reviews from what I've seen. How are you liking it, and what does it do that others don't?


----------



## paraedolia (Nov 26, 2008)

mhammer said:


> Not crazy about sliders, myself,


Ha! Two of my favourite old fuzz pedals were the Jen Jumbo fuzz in the old Vox Tonebender enclosure and the Ibanez Standard Fuzz


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Not disputing the sonic, and maybe even visual, beauty of sliders. They're just subject to more sources of dysfunction than rotary pots are.


----------



## superfly (Oct 14, 2021)

mhammer said:


> No, but I wish it was. I've built the Tychobrahe version, which uses a transformer, and the Mayer version, which is all transistors. I prefer the transformer version, but that may well be a result of changes in component tolerances over the past 55 years. One of the Mayer units I made used all the *nominal* components shown in the schematic, but I found I needed to add some series resistance to the Gain pot to achieve octaving that wasn't accompanied by a wall of harmonic hash. Most pots these days seem to be a bit lower than their stated value. So, for example, a nominally 10k pot may be 8k8. In other words, it is closer to 10k than to the next lower-down value of 5k.
> 
> This is why I like the Foxx Tone Machine. YOu can throw almost anything in there, so long as the numbers match the schematic, and it just plain *works*.


(some of) The fuzzes have so little parts that a good idea might be replacing the critical value resistors with some sort of variable device (like rotary attenuation switches), adding several option of tolerance "mishaps" values, and experiment with them. For pots is I guess easier... or just getting hands on a good vintage one, and recreating it, which is the real advantage of modern low tolerance parts. But than again, even with so little parts I guess the number of combinations is impractical...


----------



## NationalDuo (3 mo ago)

mhammer said:


> I have one and:
> a) That plastic enclosure is solid as a rock. One may not like how it looks but it will withstand whatever you can throw at it or drop on it. The pots, however, are another matter.
> b) It IS a Tone Machine. The big difference is that it uses electronic bypass switching, instead of mechanical switching like the original. Does that make an important difference? Up to you.


I’ll be honest I love my Danelectro 3699 Fuzz…sounds good, has a separate octave fuzz section to it…


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

superfly said:


> (some of) The fuzzes have so little parts that a good idea might be replacing the critical value resistors with some sort of variable device (like rotary attenuation switches), adding several option of tolerance "mishaps" values, and experiment with them. For pots is I guess easier... or just getting hands on a good vintage one, and recreating it, which is the real advantage of modern low tolerance parts. But than again, even with so little parts I guess the number of combinations is impractical...


You just described the ZVex Fuzz Factory.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

I love fuzz there days. When I was gigging I never ever used them because that level of dirt just didn't fit in with the repertoire.

I can tell you one thing. The combination of a Sustaniac driver and a Fuzz Face is sonic bliss for this old guy.

Positive Grid Spark model of Fuzz Face





Positive Grid Spark model of Fuzz Face with Sustaniac





Boss FZ-5


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Nice. Seems like the time you saved by not shaving has been wisely invested in practicing. Good tradeoff!


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

mhammer said:


> Nice. Seems like the time you saved by not shaving has been wisely invested in practicing. Good tradeoff!


It was just a passing fuzz.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

What compression algorithm did you use?


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

mhammer said:


> What compression algorithm did you use?


I used the Gershwyn algorithm


----------



## superfly (Oct 14, 2021)

Milkman said:


> I love fuzz there days. When I was gigging I never ever used them because that level of dirt just didn't fit in with the repertoire.
> 
> I can tell you one thing. The combination of a Sustaniac driver and a Fuzz Face is sonic bliss for this old guy.


Amazing tone!! very gilmourish, on steroids!


----------



## superfly (Oct 14, 2021)

mhammer said:


> You just described the ZVex Fuzz Factory.


too cool! I was looking for a germanium fuzz, and this could very well be it. just today I was reading a bit about the kingtone's fuzzes, and I really like the idea of putting the bias on a pot and tweaking to either mess up the sound (is there such thing?) or match the bias to compensate for the temperature reaction of the transistors... I think that, combined w the zvex FF, would be really cool to have...


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

I started as cheap as possible with a Behringer. I actually like what I hear.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Behringer copies from the best, so I'm not surprised when something of theirs sounds decent. A;though some balk at the plastic enclosures - equating plastic with 'flimsy' and prone to breaking - they're actually quite sturdy and reduce the overall weight of a pedalboard. That said, I find the feel of the switching and treadle mechanism not as smooth and solid-feeling as on pedals using a metal enclosure.

Bu some of these demo videos assume very little knowledge or understanding on the part of consumers. Imagine a Youtube that said "Getting a job means you can have money to buy things you *need*. And if you have _enough_ money, you can buy things you* want*. In most jobs, the more hours you work in a week will give you more money, and some jobs will pay you more money than other jobs. But you won't get money right away that same day. You'll usually have to wait until the end of the week, and sometimes even two weeks. So get a job and buy stuff!".


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

mhammer said:


> Bu some of these demo videos assume very little knowledge or understanding on the part of consumers. Imagine a Youtube that said "Getting a job means you can have money to buy things you *need*. And if you have _enough_ money, you can buy things you* want*. In most jobs, the more hours you work in a week will give you more money, and some jobs will pay you more money than other jobs. But you won't get money right away that same day. You'll usually have to wait until the end of the week, and sometimes even two weeks. So get a job and buy stuff!".


Huh ?


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

BGood said:


> Huh ?


The idea was that such demo videos will concentrate on the painfully obvious and ignore everything else.


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

mhammer said:


> The idea was that such demo videos will concentrate on the painfully obvious and ignore everything else.


I don't see anything wrong with turning knobs and moving switches to show the tonal possibilities. That is basically what most pedal or amp review videos do, isn't it ?

Who wants to know what secret gizmo arrangement lies inside that little box ? Isn't Behringer's clientele one that want no frills effects that should fill the niches they think needs filling ? I don't think they are looking to impress the tech geek that saw it all.

I am new at the fuzz game and that video showed very well that I didn't need to spit $200 on a fuzz to explore the fuzz tones I think I want.

I also looked at this one before and the one we're discussing confirmed that I might be happy with the Behringer.


----------



## Speck_WFTR (2 mo ago)

mhammer said:


> 1) Those are "heavy gauge" from Billy's perspective.


... anyone try these? holy!
(too funny if maybe in order to get "that fuzz" teenie threads are actually required)


----------



## NationalDuo (3 mo ago)

Fuzz is by far my favourite effect …


----------



## Sneaky (Feb 14, 2006)

NationalDuo said:


> Fuzz is by far my favourite effect …


Me too. I hardly ever use any overdrive or distortion pedals anymore.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

The boundary between "distortion" and "fuzz" is quite vague, with many things being described as the one that could easily be pitched as the other. That's not a criticism of anyone or anything, merely a recognition that what someone says they like, and classify in this or that category might be exactly the sound that someone else likes too, but wouldn't consider because of the label attached.

I make the distinction between overdrive, distortion, and fuzz in a way that not many other people do. It may or may not be helpful to people. I'll let you decide.

Guitar signal is not constant. In a sense, guitar is a percussion instrument. You apply force to the string when you pick or strum, and the string starts out providing lots of energy, declining quickly thereafter. Not only does the overall *amount* of energy decline with time, but the *content* of that energy changes as well. The initial pick attack contains lots and lotsa of harmonic content, and as the string comes to rest, that harmonic content quickly dissipates. The shorter the string length (by fretting higher up), the faster that loss of harmonic content occurs.

When we push any stage past its headroom limits, it will result in clipping, and that clipping generates "harmonic distortion" (i.e., more harmonic content - multiples of the original - in the result than what was included in the original). Just how long and how much will depend on a number of factors, but the general principle is that the more gain is applied, the more harmonic distortion will be produced. Just as importantly, though, that additional harmonic content will be produced for a _longer period_.

Consider the following three scenarios. A string is picked/plucked/struck, and the signal strength rises almost immediately, then declines over time (I won't say I've drawn the *actual* rate of decline accurately; this is just a Q & D drawing for discussion). If the clipping threshold, relative to the signal, gain, and circuitry, is set at A, then the additional harmonic content generated will last only for a short period. If suitable filtering is used, it may sound only like a little bit of extra initial "bite". If the clipping threshold is set at B (and again, it may take greater amplification, and/or a change in circuitry to achieve that), the duration of that extra harmonic content will be longer. And finally, with threshold set at C, the duration of the extra harmonic content may extend for almost the entire "lifespan" of the note, with the player actually cutting off the string's vibration through muting, before the point when the string would have come to rest enough to be mostly note fundamental, with very little harmonic energy. There is a reason why we use the onomatopaedic term "fuzz" to describe scenario C. The "zz" indicates that the additional strong harmonic content lasts a long time.








There is certainly more to it than that, but the basic principle is that we distinguish between clipping that just adds a bit more bite to pick attack, clipping that last somewhat longer so as to be raspier sounding, like a distressed infant cry, and clipping that seems to change the _ongoing_ sonic quality of a string. Naturally, all of these can be modified by whatever filtering is introduced. So, a fuzz could be shaped to introduce mostly lower-order harmonics for a longer period, with very little "fizz". Signal dynamics also play a role. Sticking some compression before any of these will yield a more consistent degree (and duration) of clipping, by holding the signal amplitude somewhat constant, relative to the clipping threshold. As well, it also means that adding gain anywhere in the signal path can alter the final result. Some of you have drive pedals with an optional independent booster stage, or perhaps have used "gain-stacking" of some form. If the booster is set to push your drive stage hard, you can easily end up with something that crosses the boundary of drive into "distortion", or even distortion into "fuzz".


----------



## BGood (Feb 20, 2015)

mhammer said:


> The boundary between "distortion" and "fuzz" is quite vague, with many things being described as the one that could easily be pitched as the other. That's not a criticism of anyone or anything, merely a recognition that what someone says they like, and classify in this or that category might be exactly the sound that someone else likes too, but wouldn't consider because of the label attached.
> 
> I make the distinction between overdrive, distortion, and fuzz in a way that not many other people do. It may or may not be helpful to people. I'll let you decide.
> 
> ...


Thanks for that mhammer.

I fond that stacking gain pedals or boosting one or more will have it stretch the harmonic quite a lot and with a lot of meat to it, but it will not, to my old ears, bring it to the squared wave of a fuzz.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

I'm not so sure that a great many fuzzes actually DO produce a square wave. We certainly like to_ think_ they do. That's not a criticism of anything or anyone, just a recognition that the target is really more one of the order, proportions, and duration of harmonics added, rather than any particular waveshape. And again, remember that the plucked string itself generates harmonics - that's how we can hear the difference in timbre between guitars - and that the distortion is multiples of what we feed the circuit. So what we get to hear is *electronically*-produced multiples of _naturally_-produced harmonics. And, as the naturally-produced harmonics of the note/string subside, the resulting waveshape on a scope will change. I suspect that most folks would be quite surprised by what "fuzz" looks like on a scope. It sure as heck ain't square, and if it chances to be square for a brief instant, it won't stay that way for long.

Billy Gibbons uses crazy light strings, as has been noted earlier. The thinner the string, the more "compliant", and more amenable to producing at least more lower-order harmonics, just from the string alone. But the thinner the string, the quicker the decay, because it loses energy faster (think tiny drum head vs. big kettle drum). That can play a big role in the elusive Gibbons tone.

Conversely, SRV would use heavier gauge strings tuned down a step or half step. Thicker strings, at the same scale length, have less harmonic content, but more energy. So, they push the pickups a little harder, which in turn push the drive pedal circuits a little harder, but do so with a bit less high-frequency content. And, extending that, one of the rationales for fan-fret/multiscale necks/guitars/basses is that giving a thicker string a slightly longer scale allows it to "wiggle" a little more and deliver more harmonic content than what it provides when the scale is the same as the thinner strings.

Mark


----------



## Speck_WFTR (2 mo ago)

Sneaky said:


> Me too. I hardly ever use any overdrive or distortion pedals anymore.


... am just discovering & realizing fuzz (treble boost as well) for myself, how a bit of silicon fuzz could come into play. Further, can't help but wonder how the pedal saga would have unfolded had i started with a fuzz first, and not a distortion pedal.

More specifically just a fuzzy overdrive/boost pedal driving the front of the amp, like a Hybrid Fuzz Driver am considering. That would cover a LOT of ground.


----------



## mrfiftyfour (Jun 29, 2008)

Billy has a signature fuzz pedal.
Dunlop - Billy Gibbons Siete Santos Octavio Fuzz Pedal


----------



## gary_harrington (1 mo ago)

My skreddy p-19 is right there for that plus much more.


----------

