MOUNTAIN RANGE poll

[smallsnd/bigsnd]

this will be a pretty straightforward poll about the mountain range. i've had this pedal in the works for awhile now and have been getting a lot of inquiries about it - blurzy has #1, which originally started as the input stage from the year4545. i doubled it up and made a few changes to the circuit and there you have it. sounded pretty kewl - bass-y, yet had some nice high end... blah blah blah

moving forward, i built a variation on that with some different transistor types and the addition of a fixed volume clean blend - since the drive could be pretty subtle and never got too overpowering, it felt very natural with the cleans added - so much that you probably wouldn't realize it was there, aside from keeping the lows. i was pretty happy with this and was considering it for the final design, but then i was thinking about the best friend (upcoming clean blend) and thought there might be some unnecessary overlap between the two...

anyways, i had one other overdrive idea that was pretty different and imo really cool. it would be based on a combination of the ever popular red llama and some other circuit bits of my own, have a full tonestack with active bass, mids, treble which could be switched to either pre-drive or post-drive - but still use the same knobs. this idea came about from some experimenting with different software filters/drives and has a ton of possibilities.

breakdown of each possible mountain range:
#1 - simple controls (input, volume, hi-cut, clipping), possibly more interesting for guitarists, lots of character, $150?
#2 - variation on #1 with fixed clean blend and possibly the same controls, more "transparent" overdrive charateristics, $150?
#3 - complex (gain, volume, ???, bass, mid, treble, 3 toggles), more sound shaping abilities, no overlap between other stuff that's out, $200?

SO, my poll is based on:
the fact that i do not want a large amount of overlap between the circuits i put out
trying to find what would be most useful/interesting to bassists, etc.
curiousity about what people think

i can put out the mountain range as any one of those options or fuck it, i could do the mountain range as #1 or #2 and release #3 as something different... thoughts?

[monkeydancer]

#2 and #3. I think it would be cool if you made the clean blend switchable, making #1 redundant really. #3 sounds totally rad, the EQ being pre/post drive is a great idea.

[hazelwould]

Yea, it's be cool if the OD #2 had a clear/ durrty switch. Clear obviously adding in some clean signal. As long as it's bass friendly I'm sure you'll sell a ton. #3 sounds totally awesome, but in all honesty it'd probably be a hard sell to a lot guitarists. Only cause of the way overdone OD market and semi-overdone Red Llama thing. That said I'd still love to hear it and what it's capable of. Not sure what the Pre/post EQ would do. Not to mention I'm not familiar with the llama or what it's capable of. I love the gain range of the fuck, and if you can hit those ranges (clean to really dirty) an keep the price reasonable. I think it'd do well.

I really love the bass / treble switch on the sparkle motion in addition to the tone knob. You can totally hit what your wanting with those two functions. That would be an awesome feature on an OD with a wide gain range. You could do sparkly to dark cleans, and cutting to super thick gainy sounds.

Just my two cents. I trust your judgement and you haven't let us down yet! I still gas for a TAFM and Blarrg.

[smallsnd/bigsnd]

i'm definitely thinking hard about the fact that the drive market is so obscenely saturated.
the red llama element isn't totally necessary, it's just part of the puzzle. it does go nicely from clean-ish to heavy - similar to the fuck, but with a slightly different vibe.

the pre/post EQ does this - each band (bass, mid, treble) would either cut or boost frequencies, so when placed pre-drive, the controls do totally different things to the signal than when placed post-drive. i'll make a sample using some software plugins to demonstrate the possibilities... you can try it yourself if you have 2 eq pedals and an overdrive or fuzz.

EDIT: here's a pretty rough idea - the boosting/cutting would be variable and the filter frequencies would be slightly different than these - low would be a bit higher, mid would possibly be a tad lower and maybe variable internally (??), high would be slightly lower. the combinations are pretty cool - pre boost the lows, post boost the mids and post cut the highs all at once, etc. etc.

[jrmy]

So is that rough idea roughly the workup of #3? Because that sounds awesome to me. I love the idea of being able to shift the lows, mids & highs between pre, post & cut completely. That takes the pedal beyond the "drive" market and into the "shaping" market, which seems much more interesting imo.

[smallsnd/bigsnd]

So is that rough idea roughly the workup of #3? Because that sounds awesome to me. I love the idea of being able to shift the lows, mids & highs between pre, post & cut completely. That takes the pedal beyond the "drive" market and into the "shaping" market, which seems much more interesting imo.

yeah. #2 is much simpler - basically, just another drive pedal.
#3 is definitely more based around "shaping". you would be able to use it as a 3-band EQ with the drive down.

[hazelwould]

that sounded awesome!

why do you do this to me? I'm trying to stop this constant pedal desire...

What would be cool is if you could choose to switch each band (high mid and low) either pre, post or off. That would be cool! That way, you could achieve what your doing in your clip. with a more choppy feel.

[smallsnd/bigsnd]

hmmm off is a possible... maybe.
already it will be pre or post and when each pot is centered, they will be flat.

[Steam67]

I like the idea of #3 the best so far. Pre/post EQ sounds awesome. I like the idea of each band having a pre/post switch.

[jrmy]

So is that rough idea roughly the workup of #3? Because that sounds awesome to me. I love the idea of being able to shift the lows, mids & highs between pre, post & cut completely. That takes the pedal beyond the "drive" market and into the "shaping" market, which seems much more interesting imo.

yeah. #2 is much simpler - basically, just another drive pedal.
#3 is definitely more based around "shaping". you would be able to use it as a 3-band EQ with the drive down.

Seeeeeeeeeeeeeeet. I'm going with just #3, personally.

[univalve]

Ok, build it and i buy it.
Beside this, #3 is my favorite. This nails the smsnd/bgsnd idea.
And that is, what i Love.
Please, just push the Sounds a Bit too far. That is all i'mexpecting. And this gives me so much Song ideas with my smsnd/bgsnd gear.

[Bellyheart]

I'd probably buy #2 but 3 is pretty tight sounding...people like a lot of options at a good price and that's what ya got going.

FYI I think you should put out a one-knobber sometime, with the knob controlling the "more" function.

[theactionindex]

I'm gonna have to jump on the #3 bandwagon. The amount of versatility available through all of the options is pretty exciting. I like the idea of being able to completely shape my sound.

[magiclawnchair]

sticks finger in ear and shouts THREE!!!

[Haki]

3 only, give me options! One of the things that make the Fuck so great is that it's not just another overdrive pedal.

There's probably people that are intimidated by a bunch of knobs that wouldn't get 3 but might get 2, but fuck those people. You've got too many awesome projects lined up, best friend, delay , that are too cool to be wasting time on something that already has plenty of decent options available.