Page 21 – Electro-Harmonix

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 301 through 315 (of 426 total)

← 1 2 3 … 20 21 22 … 27 28 29 →

Author

Posts
June 22, 2009 at 6:32 am in reply to: little big muff pi (volume knob and tone switch version) — when was it around? #98219

devnulljp
Participant

Mine has a 1977 pot code and a full size BMP EH1322 board w/ one RC4558 and one LM741CN.
Discofreq’s database just lists it as +/- 1981.

[IMG]”http://i440.photobucket.com/albums/qq123/devnulljp/Fuzz/Little Big Muff/dsc_0009.jpg”[/IMG]

June 21, 2009 at 11:17 pm in reply to: EH PC Wallpaper! #98213

devnulljp
Participant

This is mine…focus on one word in the middle

June 21, 2009 at 11:14 pm in reply to: Cure Noisy Vintage Big Muff? #98212

devnulljp
Participant

Quote:

Modding old big muffs=sacrilege!

It was either that or retrofit it as a coffee grinder — it had the noise down pat. Don’t worry, I kept the wire (and all the faerie dust that came out of it, so I’ll put it back in if I ever decide to take it to the antique roadshow.

June 21, 2009 at 10:16 am in reply to: Cure Noisy Vintage Big Muff? #98207

devnulljp
Participant

So I tried putting shielded cable on input and output w/ shield to ground.Can’t say it made much difference.
But, I also did the noise gate mod: banged in a 100k trimpot (wired as a variable resistor) parallel to the 100k to ground off the second gain stage (R14).
There’s a fine balance between noise and too much gating; the gate does change the sound a bit but it’s kinda interesting. My pre-EHX Foxey Lady (a Fuzzrite) has a bit of a gated sound and this mod seems to lean toward that sound. Not as extreme as the gate in my old Uni-Fuzz though.
(forgot to remove the trimpot adjuster before taking pics)

Before:
[IMG]”http://i440.photobucket.com/albums/qq123/devnulljp/Fuzz/Big Muffs/guts-pre_0010.jpg”[/IMG]
After:
[IMG]”http://i440.photobucket.com/albums/qq123/devnulljp/Fuzz/Big Muffs/bigmuff-3034_0001.jpg”[/IMG]
[IMG]”http://i440.photobucket.com/albums/qq123/devnulljp/Fuzz/Big Muffs/bigmuff-3034_0003.jpg”[/IMG]

June 21, 2009 at 6:07 am in reply to: Vintage (1975) Frequency Analyzer: Volume jump? #97919

devnulljp
Participant

Anyone have one of these?
I’m guessing the volume is supposed to stay the same regardless of 100% dry / 100% wet or anywhere in between, so something’s not right with this one.
Anyone know about that switch? Where could my signal be going? Bad capacitor?

June 20, 2009 at 4:04 am in reply to: Russian Big Muff Mod Question #98182

devnulljp
Participant

They’re non-polar non-electrolytic caps. A pair of conducting (usually Al) plates separated by a paper, ceramic or mica insulator.
Lots of info here: http://www.diystompboxes.com/wiki/index.php?title=DIY_FAQ#CAPACITORS
Lots more (too much?) here: http://www.mikroe.com/en/books/keu/02.htm

These are block caps

These are electrolytics, which are polarised

June 19, 2009 at 8:47 pm in reply to: Russian Big Muff Mod Question #98168

devnulljp
Participant

Good info – thanks
These two? 0.047 uF -> 1 uF (not 0.01 uF?)

June 19, 2009 at 6:41 pm in reply to: Russian Big Muff Mod Question #98156

devnulljp
Participant

Try modding it to green Russian specs to fix the boominess:

Here’s kind of a hybrid Green/NYC I got off the DIY forum (use box caps not electro’s for the 1uF)

Here’s good list of resistor values for different Muff versions from the BYOC cloners http://www.bmfeffects.com/byoc_large_beaver_mods.htm

June 19, 2009 at 5:27 pm in reply to: Vintage (1975) Frequency Analyzer: Volume jump? #98151

devnulljp
Participant

OK, I replaced the op-amp with a TL072 — no change.
Two things I did notice though:
1. When you rotate the Blend pot anticlockwise, as well as the volume dropping, there’s a buzz that comes in so that at full travel it sounds like there’s no guitar on the end of the cable. So the signal is being dropped somewhere?
2. Is it normal for the stomp switch to only have two wires attached? There’s a blob of solder on the third lug but nothing attached and I can’t see any loose wires…
Could it be something as simple as a bad capacitor? What wouldcause th blend to not actually blend — so the straight signal is blended with the effected signal, but in my case the effected signal isn’t really getting through.

[IMG]”http://i440.photobucket.com/albums/qq123/devnulljp/Vintage Effects/frequencyanalyzer/op-amp_0005-1.jpg”[/IMG]
[IMG]”http://i440.photobucket.com/albums/qq123/devnulljp/Vintage Effects/frequencyanalyzer/switch02.jpg”[/IMG]

June 19, 2009 at 4:27 am in reply to: Vintage (1975) Frequency Analyzer: Volume jump? #98143

devnulljp
Participant

Quote:

Could be a bad 4558 IC.

Cool — all the ICs in there have the IDs scratched off though. Which one (or two) is the 4558? There are two of the right size.
Also, I realised I totally messed up that explanation of the problem. It’s more like with the blend pot fully clockwise (11 oclock) I get full clean un-effected signal, but turning the pot leads to a progressive drop in volume along with an increase in ratio of effected signal until fully anticlockwise (1 o’clock) it’s fully effected but very very low volume. So the op-amp isn’t amplifying the effected signal?
Will a TL072CP do in place of the NE4558N? (I have a bunch of those on hand).

June 17, 2009 at 7:23 am in reply to: Riddle/Enigma QBalls #97987

devnulljp
Participant

Quote:

Also, I really prefer official videos… but I know it can’t be cheap to have guys like Peter Stroud demoing gear.

I just wish you guys would teach him an adjective other than “legendary” to describe the pedals…(But boy can he play — don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone with longer fingers either).

June 16, 2009 at 6:42 am in reply to: Wondering how this would be (Looking for a Gilmour tone) #97952

devnulljp
Participant

I’d still stick the flanger after the dirt boxes. You’re going to need some delay too though…
(And for Echoes-era Gilmour you’ll need a non-TB Clyde McCoy-derived wah with the cables plugged in backwards for the seagull noises )

June 15, 2009 at 10:23 pm in reply to: Muff Fuzz Wiring? #97947

devnulljp
Participant

Quote:

It’s hard to tell from the pics what’s there.

I took some more pics — any idea? Thanks

June 13, 2009 at 7:50 am in reply to: Another collection of fictitious pedals… #97837

devnulljp
Participant

Quote:

So there you have batch one. Imagine what you could do with those three pedals alone… Polymod with envelope controlling trem for a volume swell effect, with the LFO CV controlling the Synthbox’s oscillator pitch while the other LFO controlls volts on the TMP..

I getthe feeling you’d like the Pigtronix stuff…especially the Envelope Phaser

June 12, 2009 at 7:37 am in reply to: Before Or After #97781

devnulljp
Participant

Quote:

However… what I wanted to say is: With silicons, if your wah acts as a buffer, put it before and fuzz after. If the wah is true-bypassed, the MXR Classic Fuzz has a “buffer” switch to avoid the high-freq chaos so it can be kept at the same position, but is the only exception I know.

As I’ve tried with other friends’ gear: With true-bypassed wah, silicon fuzzes act better if placed first and wah after. But I always like the wah first because my wahs are buffered (not TBP), and despite once I considered the idea of making them TBP, finally I’ve decided to keep the buffer. Most times I use wah without distortion or fuzz, so that’s another reason for me to keep the wah closer to guitar.

Different type of buffer AFAIK. The stock crybaby has a buffered bypass, but it won’t help with the impedance matching problem on the output. And a true bypass wah with an impedance buffer on output will work well with a Si or Ge fuzz. The MXR is different as you say because it is buffered itself.
Good info here
A Dunlop crybaby can be made to sound OK by true bypassing and ripping out that dreadful input buffer, then chucking in a decent inductor, and maybe vocal mod, changing that 33k resistor in parallel with the inductor for a higher value.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 301 through 315 (of 426 total)

← 1 2 3 … 20 21 22 … 27 28 29 →

Forum Replies Created

COMPANY

PRODUCTS

SUPPORT