ShortScale.org

hotrodperlmutter wrote:i have been under the impression (and it seems wikipedia is too) that the big muff is a fuzz.

Its a Fuzz in my book too, but technically its a Distortion Sustainer..

At home, I use a Marshall AVT thing. The clean sound on that is crystal clean, no breakup at all, which is nice for clarity. But with the band I use a 2x12 HotRod Deville, which I have cranked up to full volume, and use Mike's Salt Booster as an attenuator as sorts, to lower my input to the amp. This allows me to get clean amp sounds, and also the breaking up of the tubes, which I like for some clean sections.

I started using this on Deville when it first started dying after playing it twice, and even the slightest sound came out driven/crackly. Apprently a 'choke' cable had gone? It came back, and I missed the sound, and so I came up with this plan of action!

Jack

hotrodperlmutter wrote:i have been under the impression (and it seems wikipedia is too) that the big muff is a fuzz.

It's a fuzz with, fairly famously, a distortion-like character. A very distortion-y fuzz, or more accurately, a very fuzzy distortion.

And I'm professionally bound to remind you that wikipedia, while useful, should never be thought of as being the authority on anything.

Mike wrote:Fuzzes sounding better into Overdriven amps? That's a new one on me.

I was under the impression many people use them into crystal clean sounds. I guess it depends on the type of fuzz.

The shiva sure as hell sounds better going into a crunchy (at least slightly) amp. Muff types kind of fart out and die for me on a dirty amp.
All the Devi circuits I play with (manglers/aenima) don't give no fuck.

Mike wrote:

Haze wrote:

Mike wrote:Fuzzes sounding better into Overdriven amps? That's a new one on me.

I was under the impression many people use them into crystal clean sounds. I guess it depends on the type of fuzz.

Haze wrote:Its been my experience...?

albeit I use an Eau Claire Thunder as my main fuzz, not exactly typical

That's a Big Muff derivative, more a Distortion than a Fuzz.

It's more of an evolution than a derivative.

benecol wrote:And I'm professionally bound to remind you that wikipedia, while useful, should never be thought of as being the authority on anything.

and i'm non-authoritatively bound to remind you that being a professional turd burglar is without merit, and far less useful to me than wikipedia.

aen wrote:It's more of an evolution than a derivative.

... even if you do say so yourself.

benecol wrote:

Mike wrote:I guess it depends on the type of fuzz.

Generally, most fuzzes sound better into a clean amp except fuzz faces, which prefer something a little dirtier.

Definitely depends on the Fuzz and what you want to achieve. I found the sweet spot is usually a compromise between the two; ie. a Fuzz Face set at 7 on the Gain going into a crunchy amp gives better results than a Fuzz Face set at 10 going into a clean amp. There seems to be less of a blanket effect on the sound letting the guitars character come through with sweet sustain.

Fuzz, Distortion, Overdrive - these are all fairly overlapping things.

However when I think Fuzz I think the classic Fuzztone sounds; FuzzFace, Tonebenders, etc.

I think the Big Muff, with it's cascaded gain stages and soft clipping as far more in common with Distortions and Overdrives than with the more primitive Fuzzes, but this is all just opinion.

I think the Big Muff was called a Fuzz because all pedals that made dirt sounds of that era were called Fuzzes.

When I think of Fuzz I think of saturated transistors - Fuzz Face, Maestro FZ-1, Tonebender. OD/Dist is all about the diodes.

But of course, a transistor is just a diode with three electrodes instead of two. And the overdrive knob on my amp saturates a JFET. AAAHHHHH IT'S SO CONFUSING!!!

The Eau Claire Thunder might be similar to a BMP, but it's its own thing. I know what's in TEH INTERNETZ is nothing new, but I wouldn't call that derivative. It's its own awesome thing.

Whether or not you think fuzz sounds better through a dirty amp or clean one. the dirtier the amp the more fuzzes sound the same and less or there actual character comes through. So you could like the sound of a fuzz though a dirty amp but pretty much any other fuzz would do the same job.
So for that reason its clean all the way for me.

The Tonebender that Benecol now has loves a dirty amp. Infact, if it wasn't so incredibly uncontrollable and messy sounding it would probably be my most favourite sounding gain sound ever. Shame about all the squealing and pseudo-self-oscillation and stuff.

Cool Cat is good with a dirty amp or stacked with a gain pedal afterwards. Same with the StressFX BMP but as aforementioned its more distortiony than fuzzy.

I thought Fuzz + Dirty amp was like the proper done thing, whats all this BS about clean amps?


EDIT: Just read Hurbs post. Will try clean amp stuff - but dirty or breaky uppy amps give fuzzes alot more breadth to my ears, especially in the case of tonebender and BMP which are very focused on certain EQ ranges.

Will wrote:...but I wouldn't call that derivative. It's its own awesome thing.

I think it should be quite clear that I was being in no means Disparaging.

Will wrote: It's its own awesome thing.

... the Box of Rock.

Fuzz into a dirty amp can be fun, mind: you get that weird sort of reverse bloom, where the fuzz tails off a bit and the amp takes over so the note goes ragged, then changes shape. Fun, but I usually prefer to hear what the fuzz is doing by playing it into a cleanish amp.

Rhysyrhys wrote: EDIT: Just read Hurbs post. Will try clean amp stuff - but dirty or breaky uppy amps give fuzzes alot more breadth to my ears, especially in the case of tonebender and BMP which are very focused on certain EQ ranges.

Everything has it's place, and I had fun with the tiny terror with fuzz, but I found although fuzz sounded good enough through a dirty amp most of the character was lost and most of the different fuzz sounded so similar basically because you're hearing the amp being pushed by the pedal rather the pedal. having said that if the fuzz sounds shit you're going to hear that it sounds shit with a clean amp. It would be masked more with a dirty amp.

Mike wrote:I think the Big Muff was called a Fuzz because all pedals that made dirt sounds of that era were called Fuzzes.

Was'nt it later marketed as a Distortion/Sustainer?
I never really viewed the Big Muff as a Fuzz anyway.

Also, just to clarify 'dirty amp', i was suggesting very mild break up not like using your drive channel with the gain on 7 as some people seem to be thinking.

benecol wrote:

Will wrote: It's its own awesome thing.

... the Box of Rock.

Tim have you played a BSIAB II (Brown Sound In A Box) the BOR is supposedly a rip on this (I assume leaving the complicated stuff out!) but the BSIAB does sound really good.

No, I always yawn a bit unless it's a fuzz. Don't get me wrong, I know that people love ODs, but I'll get excited about them when there are no more fuzzes in the world. Plus (bragging alert) having a Matamp with an attenuator means I've got all the lovely amp grind I could ever need, and then some.

</wanker>

Footnote: I forgot the word for "attenuator" whilst writing that, and looked up to my wife and asked if she could remember what they were called. I've never been met with a blanker expression.

Furry chuff. All my amps are pretty clean (even the 12w Musicmaster Bass amp is clean at the volumes I use it at) so amp-like OD is quite a novelty to me.

Build a DLS Tim, they sound the most realistic to me of any I've build so far. I think the BSIAB uses the Mu-Amp style structures in there also.