ilovefuzz.com

As I was typing my impressions on the Fairfield pedals I have recently borrowed in the Temp Trade thread (viewtopic.php?f=149&t=48013), I found myself descibing two completely different pedals (ring mod and delay) within one company in very similar terms. The temp trades I have been a part of recently have allowed me to see pedals from a different perspective and escape the vacuum of accumulation. With the intent to review and learn about a pedal instead of storing/owning it with time constraints forcing me to make a reportable and supported opinion, I have been able to work through my vision of my sound; this has allowed me to see a greater vision of sound and build a view of specific companies as to their intent and vision as builders and designers.

UG often mentions that he likes the "ear" of a particular builder. I really find that interesting that some people can clone a pedal, but set a bias slightly different "to taste" or a add a different tone cap and create a name for themselves (ie. Jerms vs. Ghost "sound"). Everyone is tuned a different way and has a "sound" they enjoy and pursue with their equipment and even playing style, but I think it is interesting to view it the other way around and see what the artistic and intellectual directions, explorations, and tastes seem to make a builder's vision cohesive. I also know that any great company, designer, or artist distiguishes themselves from the a large group in a similar field by offering a unique and cohesive view of a greater vision or ideas/vision/etc.

However, I am not speculating that an impression is correct or accurate portrait of the subconscious or conscious act of creation (knowing that some of it is natural/instinctive, trained, taste, or function). This is more about the user's perception of a company's "sound" and how that makes them unique as a whole. There are no wrong or right answers...just what makes a company unique to you in terms of vision, taste, sound, etc. Expand it to amplifiers, synths, guitars, etc.

Example:
Lastgasp Art Laboratories

• via experiences with all except Ripplet, 87, 45, Green Monster v1, and Sakura Booster
  
  To me, LAL's focus is on more on the dynamic side than the versitility side and building specific, concise designs while retaining an overall sound that is equally vintage, noise/harsh, useable (ie not so specific in terms of noise), and unique. Some companies focus more on offering more sonic options with increased features and options, but LAL self-edits a pedal down to a specific purpose and then adds dynamic "playability" for the user.
  
  For example, instead of creating a highly tweakable octave divider with options for tracking, stability, blends, and cleans and fuzz, the Tone Axe has a sensitivity control to set the users level of dynamic influence over the one "Tone Axe" and tone/volume controls to help in a mix. The EXP control is another level of dynamic playability instead of adding more tonal/voicing features over the pedal.

So what I think might be fun is to not review a how an individual pedal sounds, but instead what you feel the builder/company/designer represents sonically, aesthetically, intelectually, and artistically by way of their entire line (or at least the pedals you have used).

Sorry if we already have this thread or something like. I just thought it might help people in a huge, diverse, and crowded market place find a direction to travel to find new stuff or start out. If it is dumb, delete it.

cool thread idea!
posting now to remind myself to contribute later

goosekevin wrote:cool thread idea!
posting now to remind myself to contribute later

OK, let's try. I have never tried any builder's full line and I would love to have something to contribute on a lot of them, Mountainking f. ex. But I've only ever tried a Megalith and a Ruckus and the Ruckus was pretty ancient. So I don't really know since people and their vision and the pedals as a product thereof evolve as well.

Fairfield Circuitry
based off: Four Eyes, Accountant and Randy's revenge. All important pedals to me.

I think he is building pedals that go with your flow. Despite the fact that the 4Eyes is a pretty weird concept and the Randy is a Ring Mod, and as such per se not part of the blues lawyers canon I actually think it is very surprising that his stuff isn't more popular than it is. The whole utilitarian design aesthetics are a good representation of Guillaume's philosophy I think. I mean, the guy builds a super-small footprint compressor! On the other hand he also builds the unpleasant surprise. To me it's great that his pedals can be used in any musical context, the first two Owwl records have the four Eyes always on, it has been my main sound shaper. But I could also easily use it in an open stage blues jam, if people forced me to play in one. The magic with Fairfield is that mostly controls are labeled in an understandable way and stuff is not super-tweakable. Both could be interpreted as playing it safe. But on the other hand you can manage to make the pedals sound great easily and they fit in many musical contexts, especially if you take into account that his offerings are so varied. I think that he appeals to the open minded but essentially conventional player or the noise-dude that likes to play it safe. It means he falls right in the middle between two stools but it also means that he is right where I am too.

OK, now let's wait for Sylnau to rip apart my completely amateur post.

Man, this is a great thread.

As a builder, this is something that I've thought about often. It's the perennial problem of, "This sounds great to me, but how does it sound to you?". It's something that always sends a twinge of trepidation down my spine when I take on a build for someone else. After all, everybody's ear is different, and the difference can vary as much as there are guitar, amp, speaker, pedal component, etc. combinations.

In the end, I simply take solace in the fact that if I build in enough controls, then the pedal may be flexible enough to fit somewhere into the players chain, rather than the other way around. This is the basic criteria that I use for my own builds.

Ok, was about to write something on Fuzzhugger, but way more interesting to hear MLCs take on it. Sooooo

MASF
Seems to materialize the whole "feel" of harsh noise - DIY tapes, crude imagery, a feel of violence and dread, nasty, sometimes random sounds that at first glance seems hard to control. Also, mostly monochrome. Yet, their effects are surprisingly controllable when you get into them, and most seem to fill specific needs in the experimental guitarplayers toolbox. The Raptio for instance covers a lot of ground with a fairly simple concept, taking the idea of stutter and putting it in a dedicated box. The Thornoscillator is a harsh noise wall(y) creator, but beneath the hiss there are more traditional sounds to be had. Watching their demos, dude is equally great at traditional, bluesy stuff as noise rawk, which is reflected in their lineup with more standard fuzzboxes that would appeal to the bl00z guys as well as to noiseicians. But their weirder effects are where it's at, filling a gap in the pedal community - loads of manufacturers have that one fuzz that gets kinda crazy or a delay that does some glitching, but few tailor their lineup to the specific needs of noise musicians in the way MASF does. In short, both their image(ry) and their overall sound sticks out like a sore thumb, covering a niche void of sonic violence.

Also, great thread Galvar, your take on LAL is pretty spot on.

cool idea! i think it'd be even better if it could be done blindly. i think anyone who thinks that aesthetics don't play into their expectation/interpretation of an instrument/pedal/manufacturer is fooling themselves... i would bet a nickel or two that if you had a boss pedal vs, say, a dwarfcraft pedal, with the exact same circuit, there'd be a difference in what you hear (but really, perceive).

also, i'm not saying it's a BAD thing that this happens, but in the end, without some sort of control over it, it is just more marketing.

(note, i'm totally biased towards MIA/MIJ guitars, towards smaller pedal builders, and old/sleeper amps, certain finishes on guitars, etc.... music gear is weird like that).

antennafarm: A circuit with no trim pots and the exact same components would be the same as far as I am concerned. What I am getting at more is that when designing something and creating a line of pedals a builder's personal taste is imposed upon the line. Sure a perfect clone of a fuzz face should sound like a fuzz face, but why did they build a fuzz face to go with their phaser and delay? I am trying to get at the underlying themes and sounds that makes a builder distinct and unique (through various implentations...like circuit choices, component values, tuning, and type of pedals they choose to build). Aesthetics are a major part of it from the perspective of how controls are organized, what controls are panel mounted, and the accessiblity of controls. And I know there is a ton of marketing involved which is why I wanted to stay away from individual pedal reviews (except as illustrations toward a point) so that the focus could be on the representation that the company puts forward.

But what you are also bringing up is interesting about aesthetics. Mentioning a companies aesthetics as a possible influencial force in how you perceive something to sound is important. Looking at a moogerfooger, I delve into the product thinking "synth" and tweaking interactions not "I'm going to riff out with this fuzz". It is all valid, just looking for opinions.

Phanta and Eivind: Great reviews. I really like the different approaches to the descriptions! My own descriptions of both MASF and Fairfield are very similar and that is awesome. It goes to show how a well thought out product line can really drive home a concept and help people approach their own sounds by knowing what to expect.

Also, it is good to have multiple descriptions from different perspectives about one builder. It is healthy criticism when it is well thought out and descriptive. So don't run away from describing the "sound" of fuzzhugger or moutainking because someone else might know more. If the company is small enough (not an engineering team), the builder's taste and personality should come through even after just playing a few of their pedals. Really I got the gist of the Fairfield sound and approach from just jamming on the Meet Maude and Randy's Revenge and I understood Lastgasp from a totally different perspective once I got a few of his pedals (which is a view I never heard in writing or in a demo about lastgasp...but I picked up on the design and sound ideals quickly after getting my first few LAL).

Great descriptions. Really interested to read more!

digi2t: It is awesome to hear a builder's/designer perspective on this. Part of my thinking was influenced by the way you designed/protoyped that buzzaround (by switching npn/pnp). I found it very interesting and neat to kind of watch the thinking going into the choices. Another part of this was that it may help a designer or a builder step out of their own circle and maybe see things from the other perspective...constructive criticism always makes the end result stronger and it is always interesting to see how a work lives and is used/interpreted by differnt users. I mean, you might see just putting the most options possible on something, but somebody else might view your designs as always having "that sound".

I also think it is fun to see how people perceive different companies and effects because it can also help change my view of a builder and maybe open up new sonic territories.

Thanks for all the awesome responces. I got a few descriptions for addition later.

SS/BS:

Making shit sound broken in the most beautiful way possible

lordgalvar wrote: digi2t: It is awesome to hear a builder's/designer perspective on this. Part of my thinking was influenced by the way you designed/protoyped that buzzaround (by switching npn/pnp). I found it very interesting and neat to kind of watch the thinking going into the choices. Another part of this was that it may help a designer or a builder step out of their own circle and maybe see things from the other perspective...constructive criticism always makes the end result stronger and it is always interesting to see how a work lives and is used/interpreted by differnt users. I mean, you might see just putting the most options possible on something, but somebody else might view your designs as always having "that sound".

Yeah, I thought it would be interesting to hear more from a builder's perspective, even though these things might be harder to grasp from the inside. The outsider perspective levels out certain personal decisions and might be able to rationalise and put words to the "this just feels right" that might be involved in the process.
Also, digi2t, putting many options and going for maximum tweakability is a design choice as well. It's like the good old Apple Mac vs Windows discussion. Mac went for an approach of minimum tweakability which makes for a streamlined product that gets praised for "just working" and has been shunned as a "womens computer". Windows on the other hand let you delve deep into the settings and potentially screw everything up which is why it feels unsafe and only for the initiate. OK, this is basically a thing of the past, both OS's have been dumbing down considerably, but the basic principle of design is: useability for as many people as possible = making decisions for them and dumb down controls vs maximum potential useability for each individual user = giving deep control and letting the user be the decision-maker.

If I have the time later on I will attemp some more write-ups.

My favorite builder by far is Alan at Moutainking. His ear is spot on for bass heavy, raspy, insane shit. He can take very simple designs and make them very complex and sound different than I've ever heard. The build quality is amazing and meticulously done. Each pedal I've played from him has had it's own special quality and are fucking brutal as shit.

Dr. Scientist is my second favorite builder and his ear in amazing as well. Ryan has the ability to make things well for active/passive bass and give it a very cool original spin. There is not one pedal I've tried from him that I've thought, I've heard this sound before. Very unique, very innovative. Build quality is higher probably than any I've experienced other than Toneczar, which honestly I think his stuff is on the same level. His pedals are by far the most versatile out there IMO as well.

Fairfield Circuitry

• via experiences with Meet Maude and Randy's Revenge
  
  I feel like there is a level of compression, extended sustain, a tinge of dark voicing, and perceived "cleaness" in the Fairfield designs I have tried (Meet Maude and Randy's Revenge). The focus seems to be on filling space with very well voiced great sounding pedals that add an element of weird without going into harsh, noisy, or over-the-top heavy territory. I also think that the part of the Fairfield sound is filling that space with interesting textures that are influenced by dynamics of playing to let the player come through while still being distinct pedals (ie not transparent). The idea of Fairfield's small footprint compressor, overdrive, and the 4-eyes seem to support how I see their sound without ever playing those pedals (and also the inclusion of the compressor on the MM and the lpf on the RR).

Ghost/Black Country

• via experiences with WEM Rush Pep Box, Bass Pep Box, Warm Jet V, Supa Doom Bender, Mind Rocker
  
  I see Ghost as very accurate intrepetations of vintage circuits tuned to be more bass-heavy and just on the verge of saturation (before a fuzz goes into ultra saturation and compression). I think the focus is on the potential of a vintage circuit for modern music while trying to retain the character as much as possible with the more custom builds because he never smooths out or fixes the gates, but just tunes the eq/tone and adds options there (that are not like just a mid boost or something). The lunar incantation is a brilliant example of this with its nu-fuzz tone and fuzzright fuzz circuit. Futher supporting my claim (haha! it is all opinions) are builds like the bass Pep Box tuned to be heavier and let less treble through while fixing the fuzz at maximum (only having a volume outside). I also think there is a level of respect paid to the variance with vintage fuzzes by Ghost in the way that each pedal, even though it is the same name and case, has different colors, slightly different controls (this one has a tone switch, this one has a bias knob on the outside), which I think supports the idea of potential within vintage circuits that is there to be found.
  
  I also think the choice of controls is influenced by the way people look at vintage fuzzes (sometimes locking them in at max).
  
  Side note: I have played two Ghost WEM Rush Pep Boxes and both were from the same run of tag board builds. One was repaired by Jerms and it was slightly more trebly while the Ghost biased one was slightly more gainy or bassy. Very similar and just a minor/slight difference (like being nitpicky), just the bias trim was set slightly different (but that assumes that the owners haven't haven't messed with the setting).

Like I said before, none of these are the one correct answer. Just about the way we view companies. Phanta, I think that was a pretty good analogy.

jwar wrote:My favorite builder by far is Alan at Moutainking. His ear is spot on for bass heavy, raspy, insane shit. He can take very simple designs and make them very complex and sound different than I've ever heard. The build quality is amazing and meticulously done. Each pedal I've played from him has had it's own special quality and are fucking brutal as shit.

Dr. Scientist is my second favorite builder and his ear in amazing as well. Ryan has the ability to make things well for active/passive bass and give it a very cool original spin. There is not one pedal I've tried from him that I've thought, I've heard this sound before. Very unique, very innovative. Build quality is higher probably than any I've experienced other than Toneczar, which honestly I think his stuff is on the same level. His pedals are by far the most versatile out there IMO as well.

Good stuff jwar! The raspy thing is really interesting about moutainking!

Boss

Boss pedals are designed so that even if they are your first pedal, you can get something usable out of them. Unlike any other builder, when I get a Boss pedal, the first thing I do is set all of the knobs to noon and noodle a bit. With most of their pedals, this results in a pleasant, useful sound. I could probably start an 80's Cure cover band with three Boss pedals and never have to adjust the knobs. The real beauty, though, is that most Boss pedals have some really neat sounds at the edges of the parameters. Sure, boutique stuff can get away with being more out there, but I really enjoy the Boss sound. There may not be a singular Boss designer, but there is a mission at work.

I'm not sure how I'd go about it, as my favorite designers are ones I've worked with, and I only do that sporadically.

One dude who's done amazing stuff for me mostly caters to the traditionalists and blooz lawyers, but he gets where I'm coming from and that I'm not afraid to get blood on the floor.

Could care less what an enclosure looks like - I'm reverse marketing in that respect. I see fancy art and aesthetic and think to myself "I bet I'm going to pay $100 too much for this!"

But I could care less if the thing I need is made by Himalayan monks eating fair trade, free range granola or in a sweat shop in hell to be honest. I'll pay a small premium for someone I know who's doing good stuff, but....there's a limit real fast.