Big 'Mojo Components Debunking' thread

[DougH]

With regards to pots....

I absolutely believe that pots make a difference for a couple reasons....

1) durability...AB, Clarostats, Bournes, etc all are better built and will last better than the "boutique fx industry standard" Alpha's. I can literally break the Alphas into pieces with my bare hands.

I agree, however I don't see myself ever spending the ridiculous amt of money they want for those pots for a pedal circuit. An amp, a *nice* amp maybe, but not a 9v pedal.

The only problems I've had with alphas has been with soldering/resoldering when breadboarding/prototyping/swapping-around. The lugs can become internally disconnected or intermittent and cause a lot of problems. As for normal day to day operation of a normal installation though , they have been trouble-free for years, for me. Tolerance and taper can be an issue though at times for an amp (which is why I've investigated the more pricey mfrs). But for pedals, alphas work fine for me.

[modman]

There is a real difference in quality of pots, but for boxes, like alpha's are ok. Different from guitar pots, let alone amp pots that should have correct taper.

A great deal of builders list this as a feature Alpha Pots. You CAN still get CTS pots no? At a local music store they said they could order them for 13EUR/piece.

Don't these Alpha pots come from Taiwan? I always get the feeling they call them Alpha, because in fact that Beta's, factory seconds...

----
Steve Bench's Article on caps:

http://members.aol.com/sbench102/caps.html

[analogguru]

If there wouldn´t always be the mojo-resistors inside....

analogguru

[soulsonic]

If there wouldn´t always be the mojo-resistors inside....

analogguru

Oh, c'mon, mojo resistors are fun! Don't you like to have fun with your circuits? If I have some expensive or rare parts available, I love using them; it gives me a sense of pride for having built something interesting.
It's not like it's covered in goop or anything.

[Whoismarykelly]

What is up with the DIY community being so anti-carbon comp. Theyre damn fun to work with a they look cool. They come in 5% just like carbon films so the tolerance isn't like it was in 1955. Nothing wrong with making a vintage sounding fuzz with vintage-style parts.

[vanessa]

The difference in sound can be in some circuits like having a wet blanket over your amp (a bit of an exaggeration but you get the point). Why not do this with your tone knob on your guitar?
They are also less stable over time and there values tend to drift.
Not so much and issue in stompboxes but metal film are not flammable.

[soulsonic]

The only thing I don't like about carbon comps is that their values drift over time and with heat. Sometimes they also get noisy over time, but they really aren't very noisy when they are new.
All I can say is that when Fender used 1/2 carbon comp plate resistors, in many positions their working voltage was likely exceeded which caused them to break down and get noisy over time. In contrast, my vintage Dynaco Stereo 70 hi-fi amp has big 2 watt carbon comp plate resistors and it's quiet as a mouse - my solid state amps have more hiss than that beauty.
It's all in how it's used!

[Whoismarykelly]

Im not suggesting that anyone use them in delays or modulation pedals or anything like that but theyre great to work with in fuzzes where you aren't exactly looking for flawless fidelity and a little high end damping isn't a bad thing.

[vanessa]

It's one of those "to each their own" things. Personally if I build a fuzz face I put carbon comps in it. I think it helps make 'that' muddy tone their known for, etc., etc.. Other applications I would not think of using them.

[Skreddy]

Carbon comps and ceramic caps were on the first Big Muffs, and it's only natural for me to use them also in my copies/derivations/tweaks of the same. The same reasons CC's sound good in FuzzFaces also apply to BMPs. I mean, think about it; you've got 4 silicon gain stages and 2 silicon clipping stages, all happening within the transistors' ability to keep up. So there's no squishing of the wave form from overdriven amps here; just lots and lots of nasty, trebly fuzz with loads of spikey harmonics. Even after all the filtering of the 1st 3 stages and the fairly lossy tone control, if it weren't for those carbon comps lending their own smooth character to the sound, you'd still end up with the sound of broken glass and fingernails on the chalkboard. And then you'd have to adjust your amp to compensate. But then your bypassed tone would then be too dark. Using the guitar's tone knob does not solve the problem. Adding more filtering to the effect reduces the guitar attack and articulation.

Yes, mojo resistors. Because they serve their purpose. Not to sell products, but because they do the job of making the effect sound like I want it to sound. Oh yeah; I guess that does help to sell effects. Sorry. Can't help that, I guess.

Since there's no significant current load and hence no heat, there's little to worry about as far as drifting. As for noise, my experience shows that the transistors themselves are about 100 times more significant a factor; and not only that, but the smoother tone of the cc's in the end serves as a noise reduction, not an additive. Of course your mileage may vary, and this whole topic mainly applies to fuzz circuits anyway, doesn't it?

But still, for basically any guitar effect, I can't see a very large number of places where I'd prefer a 100% clean, full-bandwidth signal anyway. This includes things like delays and choruses and phasers and even eq's. Just my personal take. Not that everyone will agree with me. But I find that when I hear a sample of something that was created with the intention of providing the cleanest possible signal, it does not sound musical to my ear; it sounds harsh and unnatural and contrived and forced.

[soulsonic]

I'm with Skreddy on this one!

[analogguru]

I'm with Skreddy on this one!

I know this....
I will not engage in this worthless discussion again...
we already had a thread about this with experts...

analogguru

[Skreddy]

I'm with Skreddy on this one!

I know this....
I will not engage in this worthless discussion again...
we already had a thread about this with experts...

analogguru

But you just did. And who are the "experts" and why does their opinion count more than mine? How am I not an expert in my own right, or anybody else with their own two ears for that matter?

Oh I guess it's "wrong" to use carbon comps. We should intensively calculate tiny capacitors to add to our circuit instead.

My bottom line is this: if it ain't broke, why fix it?

[soulsonic]

I probably end up using the plain-Jane carbon films more than anything else.
But I do have bags full of both carbon comps and military metal films that I got in a grab bag deal. I just use whatever, it's not really any big deal to me. I did a treble booster recently with all RN55 and RN60 metal films. The results were..........


it sounded like a treble booster!

[seniorLoco]

My bottom line is this: if it ain't broke, why fix it?

difficult with curious people !!

[analogguru]

I'm with Skreddy on this one!

I know this....
I will not engage in this worthless discussion again...
we already had a thread about this with experts...

analogguru

But you just did. And who are the "experts" and why does their opinion count more than mine?

Skreddy, you are really a nice guy.....
you are selling pedals like many do.... and I could get an impression of your electronic skills and experience here:
http://www.phpbbserver.com/freestompbox ... stompboxes

In this thread:
http://www.phpbbserver.com/freestompbox ... hp?p=13456
we were talking with R.G. about the nonsense of carboncomp too.

And I think that R.G. - from which I am sure that a part of your knowledge comes from - has more electronic skills and experience than you.... agreed ?

How am I not an expert in my own right, or anybody else with their own two ears for that matter?

I am not talking about myths or subjective impressions, I am talking from a scientific viewpoint. As long as you cannot proof (me) on a scientific basis - reproducable and measurable - that the use of carbon comp resistors in a 9V fuzzcircuit has a (significant) influence on the sound result of a fuzz-circuit (the material and not the tolerance of it) the claim is unproven and bullshit.

If there would be a smoother sound it would be measurable - at least with fourier-analysis. So proof it, or accept that I won´t waste my time in such a worthless mojo-discussion. What YOU believe that you can hear is not important in such a discussion even when another also BELIEVE that they could hear something - without a double-blinded-test.

BTW, how many BMP resistors did you dissect and analyze to ensure that they are really carbon comp and not carbon-film resistors - which were produced in a similar case at this time ? How many now ?

analogguru

[vanessa]

BMP's with carbon comps = fizz and mud

Maybe cool for the masses that love the mojo but not for me.

[super velcroboy]

Mojo is like a religion, which is based on faith.
Mojo is not science, which is based on empirical measurements and observations that are hypothesis-driven.

It's hard to let go of mojo, because that is like not believing in santa claus and the tooth fairy.

[vanessa]

Mojo is like a religion, which is based on faith.
Mojo is not science, which is based on empirical measurements and observations that are hypothesis-driven.

It's hard to let go of mojo, because that is like not believing in santa claus and the tooth fairy.

Or that Santa Claus can make you play guitar like Jimi Hendrix!

[analogguru]

Mojo is like a religion, which is based on faith.
Mojo is not science, which is based on empirical measurements and observations that are hypothesis-driven.

It's hard to let go of mojo, because that is like not believing in santa claus and the tooth fairy.

Or that Santa Claus can make you play guitar like Jimi Hendrix!

Roger Mayer, Dunlop and Co are Santa Claus now ?

analogguru