mini-TAFM... yay or nay?

[skullservant]

PUSH PULL ALL THE WAY!

[jmoote]

The more I think about it the more I feel a mini TAFM is just what my PT Nano needs. As long as it has top jacks

[guitarslinger21]

Even though I voted yay, I don't want something more geared toward bass fuzz.

I think the Mini-TAFM should be a 3 knob, wall of sound fuzz for guitar with a toggle for scoop/non-scoop.

[coldbrightsunlight]

But the TAFM IS that if you just turn off the clean volume!

[Achtane]

Maybe it's because I have an older TAFM, but it seems like the mid switch barely does anything, is it a dramatic difference for you guys?
I don't suck at setting my amp; it's not very noticeable
Anyway, so down for a mini-TAFM. I might even have to rock the twin-taffim.

[coldbrightsunlight]

For me it was very noticeable but not crazily dramatic on bass, did nothing on guitar, which makes sense I guess. Miust be a different bass/amp/older circuit thing.

[amnesiac305]

I have an older vertical TAFM and the mid switch is very subtle to me as well. So much that I don't really even consider it. I still long for a Blarg.....

[smallsnd/bigsnd]

yeah mid-switch is subtle on most settings, but to me it makes a big difference through a guitar amp...
this thread has been really good for me to read through as far as thoughts on how the TAFM may change moving forward. i'm restless in terms of circuit design so i like to try and refine things over time, change features to suit users and the TAFM, being my first ever release, has endured that more than any of the others. i still need to do a lot of thinking...

anything i do with this won't necessarily interfere with other projects, so no fear there.

[excane]

Fantastic idea.

[Ghost Hip]

I can't say the idea thrills me at all, I'm not sure how it would progress the ss/bs arsenal.

I also can't say I notice a change with the mids switch, I've had a ver. 2 and currently have the newer version with gate. But I play through a english Muff'n pre-amp so that might be suppressing any EQ change.

[JuJo]

I voted nay. Partly because with the options you listed I think I would rather step up to a full size, but mostly because I really want to see new 4545 and Blaarg first,

[electrical]

Mids switch is VERY noticeable for me on guitar. I couldn't live without it - it gives LOADS of flexibility to me.

I could do without input gain and fuzz, as I always have those maxed out, and I could do without the clean blend, on guitar the clean blend makes everything sound overly muffled (even with the boost on) when both fuzz and blend are on, I imagine because of the inverted signal.

In other words, in order to get me to buy a mini-TAFM, I'd essentially need: input gain permanently equivalently maxed, gain permanently equivalently maxed, fuzz and tone knobs, mids switch, and NO CLEAN BLEND CIRCUIT. Oh, and top mounted jacks. GOTTA have them top mounted jacks. And I don't really need a gate switch (mine doesn't currently have one so I've never experimented), maybe have gate as a mini toggle?

Actually, this sounds kinda useful... Brian, I might be hitting you up soon about a custom one-off for this.

Like it's been said above though, I'd rather see the Year4545 come back to production than have a mini TAFM introduced to the lineup.

[Jwar]

I vote Nay as well. The TAFM is fine how it is. No need to keep changing it IMO. Not into mini pedals either. I don't get the whole saving footprint space anyway. Just get a bigger board!!!!!!!

[sylnau]

Same for me.

I voted nay. Partly because with the options you listed I think I would rather step up to a full size, but mostly because I really want to see new 4545 and Blaarg first,

[Doctor X]

smaller enclosure, top mounted jacks, 1 stompswitch, 4 knobs.
clean volume, fuzz volume, fuzz, shape.
goodidea/badidea?

from my guitarist point of view i wouldnt be interested in that with the options listed. (although i did see that you were aiming it at bass players)

i might be interested in a mini version that was minus the whole clean blend section but no internal trimpots they are just annoying, and should be for calibration things only.
as a straightforward mini fuzz i would need to keep input gain, fuzz gain, shape and volume. so thats 4 knobs + the mid switch nestled in the middle
its just a great sounding fuzz and the input gain and mid switch are essential to it, i dont want to be unscrewing the back plate to have to change sounds.

in terms of the other things mentioned in the thread - the altered/improved gain range and a better clean blend - they sound good improvements and can they not just be an evolution to the current pedal?
at the moment the 'clean' part is pretty drastically degraded but without any control on my part about how that sounds.
i would rather have the clean part left completely clean so that i can input the sound i want and then just add the fuzz parts i want, or have some separate control over the clean drive, not shared with the fuzz. (although that may be a vital part of the circuit and essential for the phase switching, i dont know)
if it was possible to have the separated hi-fi clean sound with a minifuck like bias control to soften the attack and break it up, that would be handy
but thats major tafm not mini tafm ...

(and my preference would be for a clean/fuzz blend knob + master volume, over the 2 separate volumes)