ilovefuzz.com

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHQodkfFFL0[/youtube]

Not sure why I still don't have one of these

Jero wrote:Not sure why I still don't have one of these

I was just thinking the same thing.

Must. Resist. Need. More. Fuzz.

I'm still tempted by one... I need a tremolo pedal but I want something amp sounding, and quite smooth. The hummingbird is really choppy but when andy played how soon is now? it sounded really good and now im sold :D

Is "percussiveness" a word?

Jenesis wrote:Is "percussiveness" a word?

Andys too cool to abide the rules of the dictionary.

Hey guys..A question for earthdevice or anyone else who has experience with the Hummingbird vers. 2.
I know that there have been several "repeat percussion"-style tremolo pedals released over the last few years (Catalinbread Valcoder, Seppuku Repeater, etc)
Was just wondering how the Hummingbird compares to these, and if there is anything the Hummingbird does that the others don't (and vice versa?)

hummingbird can go much faster it seems
it preceded those two as well

Would it be fair to say that they also differ in the way you can 'shape' the waveform? As far as I can tell, the hummingbird just has control over the depth (or 'height') of the square-wave pulses, while, in the upper-ranges of its sweep, the Repeater seems to be able to control the 'width' of the pulse as well.

StudioShutIn wrote:Would it be fair to say that they also differ in the way you can 'shape' the waveform? As far as I can tell, the hummingbird just has control over the depth (or 'height') of the square-wave pulses, while, in the upper-ranges of its sweep, the Repeater seems to be able to control the 'width' of the pulse as well.

i dont wanna seem stupid, but isnt 'witdth' the same as 'rate'?

I mean the width of each individual "square" of the square-wave, not the distance between them (which would be the rate)