Bluesky with fuzz?

General Gear Discussion - effects, synths, etc.

Moderator: Ghost Hip

Post Reply
User avatar
CaptainWampum
experienced
experienced
Posts: 655
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon

Bluesky with fuzz?

Post by CaptainWampum »

I've been bit by the Strymon bug, gonna start saving pennies for a Bluesky, but I can't find any clips and was curious if any of you fuzz fiends could tell me how she handles nasty fuzz, pre or post reverb, cuz I likes em both. I'll probably end up getting one no matter what people say, like I said I'm sick, but it'd be cool to know. Thanks in advance you ragamuffins. ;)
User avatar
bronzetalon
FAMOUS
FAMOUS
Posts: 1983
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 5:06 pm
Location: STL

Re: Bluesky with fuzz?

Post by bronzetalon »

Well for me verb is always last in my chain but when I had one it handled fuzz just fine. Even though I harp on it but I just found the Wet to be a better sounding reverb overall...the Blue Sky is seriously cool though.
User avatar
MEC
HERO
HERO
Posts: 4651
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:04 pm
Location: Old North State

Re: Bluesky with fuzz?

Post by MEC »

bronzetalon wrote:Well for me verb is always last in my chain but when I had one it handled fuzz just fine. Even though I harp on it but I just found the Wet to be a better sounding reverb overall...the Blue Sky is seriously cool though.

How would you compare the Stereo Wet to the original Wet?
I know the main difference is that the stereo one is stereo but is the tone knob a useful addition?
Image
http://youthministry.bandcamp.com/
http://remainstheband.bandcamp.com/
Achtane wrote:FUZZ ALL DAY MAN FUZZ IS GOD ALL OTHER EFFECTS ARE SHIT
Caesar wrote:Dude, can you get the fuck out of my b/s/t thread with your bullshit.
PumpkinPieces wrote: This isn't America, this is I Love Fuzz.
Mudfuzz wrote:Remember when we were all just a bunch of weirdos that liked fucked up shit and not just a bunch of nerds buying bling to impress each other online?
User avatar
bronzetalon
FAMOUS
FAMOUS
Posts: 1983
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 5:06 pm
Location: STL

Re: Bluesky with fuzz?

Post by bronzetalon »

MEC wrote:
bronzetalon wrote:Well for me verb is always last in my chain but when I had one it handled fuzz just fine. Even though I harp on it but I just found the Wet to be a better sounding reverb overall...the Blue Sky is seriously cool though.

How would you compare the Stereo Wet to the original Wet?
I know the main difference is that the stereo one is stereo but is the tone knob a useful addition?


To me the original wet didn't need a tone knob. But being able to control the depth via expression is nice. Also the stereo wet can be updated to have less modulation and you can even load the chroma chorus software on it to try it out. Unless buying used I think the stereo wet is a no brainer if you are going used then go for a older one unless you think you might need more flexibility in the future.
User avatar
MEC
HERO
HERO
Posts: 4651
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:04 pm
Location: Old North State

Re: Bluesky with fuzz?

Post by MEC »

Thanks. I liked the original too but I would have liked it more if I could made it a touch darker sounding.
If I decide to get another it'll be the stereo version, it's seems like it would easily be worth the extra $30.
Image
http://youthministry.bandcamp.com/
http://remainstheband.bandcamp.com/
Achtane wrote:FUZZ ALL DAY MAN FUZZ IS GOD ALL OTHER EFFECTS ARE SHIT
Caesar wrote:Dude, can you get the fuck out of my b/s/t thread with your bullshit.
PumpkinPieces wrote: This isn't America, this is I Love Fuzz.
Mudfuzz wrote:Remember when we were all just a bunch of weirdos that liked fucked up shit and not just a bunch of nerds buying bling to impress each other online?
Post Reply