pedals that miss the point

ICBM

Axe_meister said:

Depends I use the TBX control and the tone knob quite a bit on my US standard.
My bitsa strat has been reworded so one tone knob works on the bridge the other on the neck so they do get used

There's always one .

Seriously, would you miss the second one if there was just one master tone control? Or do you actually preset different tones and switch between them?

To be honest, when I played in a 50s-style rock'n'roll band I did use a Strat exactly as Leo intended - 3-way switch, two separate tone settings and no tone control on the bridge pickup. But that's what Vintage Reissues are for .

For most players I think it's just that they don't look "right" with only two knobs.

Other pedals which miss the point - analogue delays, or simulations of them, which won't self-oscillate.

Shark_Eyes

ICBM said:

Other pedals which miss the point - analogue delays, or simulations of them, which won't self-oscillate.

This! It's the most exciting bit of an analogue delay if you ask me.

Drew_TNBD

^ Agree. If I want an analog delay, I want the squeally noises!

dogload

ICBM said:
Seriously, would you miss the second one if there was just one master tone control? Or do you actually preset different tones and switch between them?

Other pedals which miss the point - analogue delays, or simulations of them, which won't self-oscillate.


I actually use the tone control on the neck pickup of my Strats to get that really muddy tone that sounds so good with fuzz (which is surely the reason that the rhythm circuit of a Jazzmaster was designed ). I wouldn't want to replace the two tones with a single master tone. I can get by with the single tone on a Jazzmaster, but that does have the advantage of that extra circuit. 

I completely agree with you though as far as analogue delays go. I've always thought that putting filters on synths that wouldn't self oscillate was a bit shite too. Such a cop-out.

ThePrettyDamned

I'm with ICBM on the strat tone thing - I'd have 2 volume and a master tone.  My jazzmaster was more an experiment, but I really just use the volume and roll all the tone off on the neck pickup when putting it through my fuzz sometimes.  

Modelling or analogue delay that doesn't oscillate does seem daft - the digitech digidelay was amazing but for that... 

The EHX Metal Muff.  The actual tone is great, works great for fuzzy ish stuff or out right metal.  But the top boost circuit on it is so... Mental.  Try turning it above a quarter and you'll see what I mean! It just needed half as much boost across the whole range.  And less treble added!

guitarfishbay

ICBM said:

Dave_Mc said:

The other thing that annoys me is sticking religiously to vintage-accurate spec even when there's no point. For example, no DC jack or LED status indicator, or sticking to half-assed bypass for vintage accuracy reasons (rather than just cheaping out, which sucks, but at least is sort of rational on a cheaper pedal).

This is very prevalent on a lot of gear, not just pedals.

For example, why do modern Strats have two tone controls? Do you know anyone who uses even one of them, let alone sets them differently?

If it is wired as bridge tone, and neck+middle tone then I use two tone controls.  If it is wired as neck, middle (no bridge) I'd use none, or neck, bridge + middle, I'd use one.

I really like a bridge tone control but like it if it is one that bypasses when on 10 so you can get a traditional strat tone too if you'd like.  But if you can't affect the bridge then I think the guitar can get too unbalanced turning down the already mellower neck and middle pickups.  Having the bridge and middle on the same tone control is annoying because it affects position 4 out of 5 positions!  It is most annoying on pos 4, turning the middle tone down stops you getting as much sparkle with your quack.

frankus

I use two tones on a strat - when I play one.

I wire it so the bridge has no tone control - who wants tone control on a bridge?!

So neck and middle have seperate controls, works well for me YMMV (sorry that entirely misses the point of this thread, but there it is)

I also really like the HLK on strats as a ballsy bridge pickup can make a great H/B-like sound.

crunchman

I've rewired my 62 reissue Strat with the no load tone pot on the bridge.  I still have the other one wired to the neck pickup which is great for those dark fuzzy type things as @dogload said.

Drew_TNBD

Been getting into having a tone control on the bridge recently actually! It's basically the only way to play 'Jimmy' by Tool and have it sound close to the record. Roll it all the way off, roll it back up for the big choruses.

Bidley

I've never seen the point in Les Paul configurations, i.e. a volume pot for each pickup? Why? Is that not what the selector switch is for?

dogload

Bidley said:

I've never seen the point in Les Paul configurations, i.e. a volume pot for each pickup? Why? Is that not what the selector switch is for?

Again, I wouldn't change that layout. In fact, I find a lack of control for each pickup on such guitars quite disconcerting.

guitarfishbay

Bidley said:

I've never seen the point in Les Paul configurations, i.e. a volume pot for each pickup? Why? Is that not what the selector switch is for?

No because sometimes you want to go from one pickup set one way to another set a different way.  E.G. warm clean with neck vol and tone rolled down to driven biting lead with the bridge wide open.

Also it gives you a lot of options in the middle position for balancing the sound.  A bit more bridge position helps it with clarity for driven sounds but a bit more neck is often warmer for cleans.  I've tried some guitars where it was hard to balance to volumes in the middle position though, I don't have enough knowledge about wiring to know why but maybe it is in the wiring.

frankus

I love switching from jazz - blanket over the amp sounds to twangy country sounds, apart from no tone on the bridge (as per my strat and the tele) the 4 knobs is the best way to do it...

it confuses the hell out of me though ... is it tone below or tone behind?

stickyfiddle

Re foot switches close together- that's so you can hit both at once...

As for strats, I run a master tone and HLK on mine and that great. If the HLK could be set not to work as a middle tone when disengaged that'd be perfect

Bidley

guitarfishbay said:

Bidley said:

I've never seen the point in Les Paul configurations, i.e. a volume pot for each pickup? Why? Is that not what the selector switch is for?

No because sometimes you want to go from one pickup set one way to another set a different way.  E.G. warm clean with neck vol and tone rolled down to driven biting lead with the bridge wide open.

Also it gives you a lot of options in the middle position for balancing the sound.  A bit more bridge position helps it with clarity for driven sounds but a bit more neck is often warmer for cleans.  I've tried some guitars where it was hard to balance to volumes in the middle position though, I don't have enough knowledge about wiring to know why but maybe it is in the wiring.

Fair enough, makes sense. I rarely use middle positions and I find setting knobs on guitars mid-song/set too fiddly.

ICBM

frankus said:

I love switching from jazz - blanket over the amp sounds to twangy country sounds, apart from no tone on the bridge (as per my strat and the tele) the 4 knobs is the best way to do it...

it confuses the hell out of me though ... is it tone below or tone behind?

Wait til you try a Rickenbacker! )

I apologise for having so badly diverted this thread, by the way .

Other pedals that miss the point… modulation and delay pedals which have too low headroom to work properly in an effects loop, or which digitise the dry signal path without the option of a 'wet only' setting. (The flipside of this is amps which have too high a loop level to work with most pedals, or parallel loops which don't go to 100% wet.)

frankus

stickyfiddle said:

Re foot switches close together- that's so you can hit both at once...

I love this on my mini bi-comp.

dogload

ICBM said:

Wait til you try a Rickenbacker! )

Ha! You read my mind!

Dave_Mc

Maxi said:

Also the JamMan solo xt is totally powerful a brilliant looper but such a small footprint means it takes up twice as much space once youve bought the remote patch switch . The bigger one has smaller footprint .

Thanks for that- I've been half-thinking of getting a looper recently. If the bigger one actually takes up less room in the long run, sounds like it's the one to go for.

ICBM said:

Dave_Mc said:

The other thing that annoys me is sticking religiously to vintage-accurate spec even when there's no point. For example, no DC jack or LED status indicator, or sticking to half-assed bypass for vintage accuracy reasons (rather than just cheaping out, which sucks, but at least is sort of rational on a cheaper pedal).

This is very prevalent on a lot of gear, not just pedals.

For example, why do modern Strats have two tone controls? Do you know anyone who uses even one of them, let alone sets them differently?

Agreed.

However, I like two tones on a strat. I'd want one for the bridge pickup and the other one for neck and middle, though, since only the bridge pickup really needs it, and it'd be handy to be able to preset it just for the bridge pickup. Actually a tele might benefit from a similar system.

So I disagree with only a master tone on a strat, but I agree with the principle. )

Bidley said:

I've never seen the point in Les Paul configurations, i.e. a volume pot for each pickup? Why? Is that not what the selector switch is for?

It's a bit of a double-edged sword, but it can be handy for switching between clean and dirty on different pickups.

Majorscale

Bidley said:

I've never seen the point in Les Paul configurations, i.e. a volume pot for each pickup? Why? Is that not what the selector switch is for?

Your answer: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gDsbOraiqg