Tretgeraet
Junior Member
- Messages
- 95
Hi folks,
There's a new video, where Aaron shows his pedalboard:
In the end he ask for suggestions for a silicon fuzz face.
Before I dig deeper into this:
My favorite (silicon) fuzz is a clone of the Roger Mayer Axis Fuzz that I build myself. It's not a fuzz face, it's supposedly the fuzz circuit Mayer put in Hendrix' fuzz face enclosures, so Jimi could use his wah in front of the fuzz.
The Dunlop "Band of Gypsys Fuzz Face" is being described as "Octavio® circuit that didn't have the octave up signal" and the Axis Fuzz circuit is exactly that, so they should be similar.
What I like about it is that it cleans up well, never has that "through the nose" buzzsaw sound that the fuzz face has, even with the guitar volume on full and:
It can make that... hot... over-overdriven sound, like there's something boiling inside the amp! Love it!
And now for a deeper dig:
I noticed a couple weeks ago, when I saw a video of JHS about fuzz pedals, that he and I seem to have different definitions about fuzz.
For me, fuzz is just a different word for "sounds bad in front of a clean amp".
Well, bad and good is a matter of taste or opinion, I don't like those torn speaker sounds.
Example:
To me, a Fuzz Face sounds broken and unusable in front of a clean amp, but wonderful in front of a crunchy amp! Same goes for tonebender mk2
A Big Muff π however makes usable sounds in front of a mostly clean amp, but gets muddy and undefined the more distorted the amp is, at least that's my experience.
That's why for me, a Big Muff π isn't a fuzz at all. And I know there are people who share my definition!
But to make the confusion even worse:
When I was starting to learn about pedals and effects, I got interested in fuzz because I read Hendrix used one. Of course I need to try one!
Mistake Nr. 1.:
I bought a used Sovtek Big Muff (great pedal, but I realised that much later), because it was sold to me as a fuzz. Didn't sound like Hendrix at all.
Mistake Nr. 2:
I tested a Dunlop Fuzz Face in a music store. In front of a clean amp. Sounded fuzzy, but not at all like Hendrix.
I started to believe it was all marketing and propaganda and Hendrix rarely ever used a fuzz at all.
It was over 10 years later, that I gave fuzz another chance, this time in front of a distorted amp and - pro tip - the volume of the guitar rolled down slightly...
It was so good that I was pissed why no one told me before!!!
(I must have looked hilarious, playing guitar and saying "this is great!" and "I love it!" while having the most angry facial expression possible.)
I mean honestly: There's so much confusion about fuzz, because that word can mean so drastically different things!
I know for a fact, that there are so many guitar players, who never even considered trying a fuzz, because they think it'll sounds like satisfaction.
And I can't blame 'em, when there are so many other guitar players telling them, that this is what fuzz "is supposed to sound like!".
Let's agree to disagree...
There's a new video, where Aaron shows his pedalboard:
In the end he ask for suggestions for a silicon fuzz face.
Before I dig deeper into this:
My favorite (silicon) fuzz is a clone of the Roger Mayer Axis Fuzz that I build myself. It's not a fuzz face, it's supposedly the fuzz circuit Mayer put in Hendrix' fuzz face enclosures, so Jimi could use his wah in front of the fuzz.
The Dunlop "Band of Gypsys Fuzz Face" is being described as "Octavio® circuit that didn't have the octave up signal" and the Axis Fuzz circuit is exactly that, so they should be similar.
What I like about it is that it cleans up well, never has that "through the nose" buzzsaw sound that the fuzz face has, even with the guitar volume on full and:
It can make that... hot... over-overdriven sound, like there's something boiling inside the amp! Love it!
And now for a deeper dig:
I noticed a couple weeks ago, when I saw a video of JHS about fuzz pedals, that he and I seem to have different definitions about fuzz.
For me, fuzz is just a different word for "sounds bad in front of a clean amp".
Well, bad and good is a matter of taste or opinion, I don't like those torn speaker sounds.
Example:
To me, a Fuzz Face sounds broken and unusable in front of a clean amp, but wonderful in front of a crunchy amp! Same goes for tonebender mk2
A Big Muff π however makes usable sounds in front of a mostly clean amp, but gets muddy and undefined the more distorted the amp is, at least that's my experience.
That's why for me, a Big Muff π isn't a fuzz at all. And I know there are people who share my definition!
But to make the confusion even worse:
When I was starting to learn about pedals and effects, I got interested in fuzz because I read Hendrix used one. Of course I need to try one!
Mistake Nr. 1.:
I bought a used Sovtek Big Muff (great pedal, but I realised that much later), because it was sold to me as a fuzz. Didn't sound like Hendrix at all.
Mistake Nr. 2:
I tested a Dunlop Fuzz Face in a music store. In front of a clean amp. Sounded fuzzy, but not at all like Hendrix.
I started to believe it was all marketing and propaganda and Hendrix rarely ever used a fuzz at all.
It was over 10 years later, that I gave fuzz another chance, this time in front of a distorted amp and - pro tip - the volume of the guitar rolled down slightly...
It was so good that I was pissed why no one told me before!!!
(I must have looked hilarious, playing guitar and saying "this is great!" and "I love it!" while having the most angry facial expression possible.)
I mean honestly: There's so much confusion about fuzz, because that word can mean so drastically different things!
I know for a fact, that there are so many guitar players, who never even considered trying a fuzz, because they think it'll sounds like satisfaction.
And I can't blame 'em, when there are so many other guitar players telling them, that this is what fuzz "is supposed to sound like!".
Let's agree to disagree...
Last edited:
