Intripped wrote: ↑12 Dec 2020, 07:38 It works because there is R7. C9 is just in parallel with it

right, my bad, I was sleeping

Intripped wrote: ↑11 Dec 2020, 14:10 what's the purpose of C9?

agree, that way it doesn't work, it's an open circuit

A plain FF, doesn't it oscillate at max? BC549 are quite high hfe devices

Imho there are 3 main points in every fuzz face build, using JD2F2 schematics they are: C3 - lowering it to 1uF (film) or 0.47uf the sound results less boomy, more open, since less bass hit the input of the first stage C2 - depending on versions it seems that sometimes you can find a 0.1uF for outpu...

CheapPedalCollector wrote: ↑29 Nov 2020, 12:54 They did that to reduce PSU noise.

ok, but how? I don't understand the purpose of adapting the impedance, a buffer doesn't reduce hum by itself as far as I know

I bet the double opamp was cheaper then a single and they thought 'what could we do with the other?' , although I would had use it as output buffer indeed.

what's the purpose of the buffer U1B ?

The od2 has the clipping in the normal section within the feedback loop. More of an overdrive sound that's compressed instead of the clippers to ground in between stages like the bd2. So! Remove diodes to ground and tack them in either feedback loop. I did the first one and used the second stage as...

ppluis0 wrote: ↑22 Nov 2020, 04:20 Using one 1N4148 and one 1N4007 as clipping diodes produces some kind of asymmetric distortion ?

yes, the clipping is slightly asymmetrical

31 db?? it's a huge amount of noise, it's almost a light rain type of level, are you sure of the measurement?

Maybe tailoring the bass on the emitter, like in a Marshall amp first stage? (there is a 2.7K + .68uF on one channel and a 820R +330uF on the other) btw, it worked, but I also had to change C7 (1uF -> 100nF) to cut a bit of bass and R4 (82K -> 33K), now I have fuzz on tight position and overcharged...

YATS with a fixed tone shaping

The guitar pickup is not only a resistive impedance but also inductive and capacitive combined, the fuzz face greatly interact with those element so it sound different on every pickup, you should simulate also the L and C to get a realistic sound. I know, but the simpler solution I proposed (btw I ...

I'm asking my self is tweaking with the fat boost side one can obtain less fuzz and more VH1 type of sound, given the plexi drive by itself could be a great base to start with. Maybe tailoring the bass on the emitter, like in a Marshall amp first stage? (there is a 2.7K + .68uF on one channel and a ...

what about a plain FET , common source buffer feeding a 6.8K in a 250K pot to ground, center to the 2.2uF input cap? that way you can put the pedal anywhere in the chain. the R could simulate the pup impedance, the 250K the guitar volume pot. I think I even tried it somewhere in the past and it didn...

Hi, this is a zombie thread that sometimes got out, but I'd like to share my DS1 mods too. In the VH fever around I was trying different boxes to obtain a decent VH 1 sound with my Fender Princeton and my strat (ok, impossible, but we are here for fun), I tried different things (plexi drive, ocd, ec...

I've seen there is a 100KB pot (like OCD) , maybe a 100KA could cure the problem making the pot more usable ? Ok, I tried by myself (destroying the tiny switch unmounting the board but, whatever, I do like the Hi pos, so a soldered a short) it definitely worked, 100KA is way better to control the v...

Hi, I have one, 2nd hand, very nice pedal (as OCD indeed) I've noticed the Volume rises very quick from nothing to almost full on in the very first quarter of the rotation, making it a bit difficult to use it, is it something other ones notice? I've seen there is a 100KB pot (like OCD) , maybe a 100...

Hi, bought this double switch pedal second hand very cheap, I post the link to my shared google photos album of the inside circuit, front, with different lights, and back: https://photos.app.goo.gl/xvu33ddKnxAn4r7d7 I though it should be a clone of the Analogman King of tone, double independent swit...

I'd like to say that standard size components are better than smd but, really, I can't, smd isn't worse it's just a different kind of engineering, more so, in most cases the S/N ratio is even better: the mechanization of the process permits a reduction not only of time in production but in possible ...