EQD Tone Reaper vs Analogman Astrotone

dniederkorn · Post by **dniederkorn** » Fri Nov 11, 2011 6:13 am

I am looking into getting one of these but I am not sure which. Does anyone have either of these and could help shed some light on them for me?

MEC · Post by **MEC** » Fri Nov 11, 2011 1:09 pm

dniederkorn wrote:I am looking into getting one of these but I am not sure which. Does anyone have either of these and could help shed some light on them for me?

Tone Reaper.
There is a lot more info in the EQD Hosted Forum: viewforum.php?f=176

Zounds Perspex · Post by **Zounds Perspex** » Fri Nov 11, 2011 3:36 pm

they're very different. Tone Reaper has a lot more gain on tap, for starters.

Rob Fossil · Post by **Rob Fossil** » Fri Nov 11, 2011 5:22 pm

I'll throw another vote to the EDQ Tone Reaper. I haven't played the Astrotone, but from the reviews, it doesn't seem to have a lot of gain on tap. I use the Reaper with a P-90 equipped guitar and it really brings out the 70's punk style raunch. Plus the Reaper is less $$$.

theavondon · Post by **theavondon** » Fri Nov 11, 2011 9:31 pm

I literally heard the Astrotone described as "a characterless fuzz" one time. Just, kinda, fuzz.

dniederkorn · Post by **dniederkorn** » Thu Nov 17, 2011 5:44 am

Thanks for the input. I recently just bought the EQD speaker cranker for some mid gain distortion and wanted a fuzz box for some high gain.

hbombgraphics · Post by **hbombgraphics** » Thu Nov 17, 2011 12:30 pm

If you want a fuzz for high gain go with a tone reaper:
I own one (green box)
It is insane, my main fuzz, super versitile and has pretty much crushed every other fuzz I have ever owned.

Rygot · Post by **Rygot** » Thu Nov 17, 2011 12:46 pm

I've built the sam ash fuzz boxx a handful of times, they just aren't the same fuzz.

sam ash or astrotone tends to get kinda harsh when cranked imo, I like it at slightly lower gain settings for apreggiated chords and whatnot.

dniederkorn · Post by **dniederkorn** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:18 pm

I might look into that once I get some cash dollars. I also think the Sound Shank might better for the applications I am looking at now that I have done more research into the matter. Are there any clips of your Sam Ash Clone I can hear?

dubkitty · Post by **dubkitty** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:05 pm

from what i know of them the Reaper and Astro Tone really aren't equivalent at all...the clips i've heard of the Astro Tone remind me more of a Distortion+ than anything else (in a good way), which isn't at all like the Reaper's 3-knob Bender-derived sound. i have a Reaper and a Sound Shank, and tend to use the Shank more at the moment, but use the Reaper more when playing outside the house.

Fuzzy Picklez · Post by **Fuzzy Picklez** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:31 pm

Yeah.
I've owned the Tone Reaper and two Sound Shanks, but I tihnk the Tone Reaper stuck out in the mix a bit more.

dniederkorn · Post by **dniederkorn** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 6:30 pm

which ever one I choose will be running into a EQD Speaker Cranker. Right now I have a satchurator in that spot but its not true bypass and has to much gain for me. I currently set the gain full counter clockwise.

dubkitty · Post by **dubkitty** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 7:39 pm

to me the Shank has more absolute gain, i.e. it clips the signal more, but it's smoother-sounding and less trebly than the Reaper. the Reaper sounds more raucous and rock-and-rolly on just about any setting, and has a more open, vocal, slightly nasal tone; the Shank tends to compress the attacks and bring up the sustain more. i love this, but if you aren't careful with your amp/EQ you can disappear in a band. the Reaper also has a wider effective range; it works as a screaming fuzz or as a dyspeptic overdrive, while the Shank seems most comfortable in Death Vulture mode. really, the only answer is to have both.

dniederkorn · Post by **dniederkorn** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 7:50 pm

I would agree Fuzz is something that I love and want to collect but dont really have the funds right now so I will get things that I need first and then stuff I want. Plus I am picky so that doesnt help at all.

devnulljp · Post by **devnulljp** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 10:54 pm

Rygot wrote:I've built the sam ash fuzz boxx a handful of times, they just aren't the same fuzz.

sam ash or astrotone tends to get kinda harsh when cranked imo, I like it at slightly lower gain settings for apreggiated chords and whatnot.

Sam Ash is a very crunchy, grindy, low gain kinda fuzz -- the only way to use it is cranked. Just turn everything to 10 and leave it there. I like it -- used ot have an original, and I have a clone jerms built for me years ago. It's the Tommy Bolin fuzz.
Very different from the Tone Reaper whic his a MkIII Tone Bender I think -- almost muff-ish high gain, kinda scooped (bit not muff scooped).

No idea about the Astroman, but I've played a few of this circuit. edkoppel has a super rare original Astro the jammy bastard!

Sam Ash/Astro kinda sounds like this

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqSmLf5as_4[/youtube]

ilovefuzz.com

EQD Tone Reaper vs Analogman Astrotone

EQD Tone Reaper vs Analogman Astrotone

Re: EQD Tone Reaper vs Analogman Astrotone

Re: EQD Tone Reaper vs Analogman Astrotone

Re: EQD Tone Reaper vs Analogman Astrotone

Re: EQD Tone Reaper vs Analogman Astrotone

Re: EQD Tone Reaper vs Analogman Astrotone

Re: EQD Tone Reaper vs Analogman Astrotone

Re: EQD Tone Reaper vs Analogman Astrotone

Re: EQD Tone Reaper vs Analogman Astrotone

Re: EQD Tone Reaper vs Analogman Astrotone

Re: EQD Tone Reaper vs Analogman Astrotone

Re: EQD Tone Reaper vs Analogman Astrotone

Re: EQD Tone Reaper vs Analogman Astrotone

Re: EQD Tone Reaper vs Analogman Astrotone

Re: EQD Tone Reaper vs Analogman Astrotone