Big 'Mojo Components Debunking' thread

Deric · Post by **Deric** » 04 Jan 2008, 04:55

analogguru wrote: I know this....
I will not engage in this worthless discussion again...
analogguru

Yet here we are.........

Skreddy · Post by **Skreddy** » 04 Jan 2008, 04:56

Semantics, labels, and argument framing. You're trying to paint me into a corner by claiming that nothing exists unless it can be "proven."

"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted..."
"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."
--Albert Einstein

"What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning." --Werner Heisenberg

Is that mojo thinking? Is that a religion? No. Science and mathematics can also become an irrational religion if we forget that the map is not the territory. There is no system of logic that can determine the answer to every question. Unless you can measure my subjective experience, you cannot prove or disprove my sensory information. We have language which we can use to communicate subjective feelings. We have the scientific method by which we can test our mental models of the physical universe. But we have no way of verifying whether or not a person hears something.

If it's a worthless discussion, then why are we having it? If there's no difference, then trying to convince me not to use them is like arguing to me about what is the "proper" color for my underwear. So why again are you wasting your time talking about worthless nonsense? Is it because I don't see things the way you see them, even though you've already stated that it does not matter? Then that is proof you are a control freak.

Either there is no difference in using carbon comps or else you are substituting your judgment for mine as to whether the difference is preferable.

Well, I'm sorry I don't waste my precious time dissecting resistors and performing double-blind tests. I'm too busy making things that I truly find pleasing to my own ear and enjoying them. When I build fuzz pedals with carbon comp resistors, it is just my way. I consider pedal making an expression of my artistic nature, and I'll use whatever paints best fit my own mood.

We can agree that carbon comps are different from carbon films and from metal films. We can agree that they have properties which make electrons flow differently from carbon films and metal films. We may disagree as to the actual extent of those differences and whether or not they produce an audible (or a beneficial) effect in a 9v circuit. But to accuse me of magical thinking simply because I hold a view that is different from your own is a very dishonest and reprehensible mode of argumentation.

germade · Post by **germade** » 04 Jan 2008, 06:53

Skreddy wrote:I consider pedal making an expression of my artistic nature, and I'll use whatever paints best fit my own mood.

Scopes and all are great, but using mathematics alone to make music or it's instruments will produce boring results.

Some people just don't seem to have much soul, or it's just buried under a lot of hurt.

Some of the posts on this board crack me up - so if it isn't quantifiable it doesn't exist and is therefore snake oil. I've seen guys like this confronted with the unexplainable magic of human spirit, they have the funniest look of denial on their face.

noelgrassy · Post by **noelgrassy** » 04 Jan 2008, 08:00

Call it soul or call art. These are tangibles in music making. I frequent another site where for 2~3 years now this "measureable quantification" debate has been hotly hammered by both camps. The discussions are about the qualities and properties of Dumble & Trainwreck amps. In the end everyone has agreed that these two builders must have had some great ears, period.

Skreddy · Post by **Skreddy** » 06 Jan 2008, 05:37

You know what? I'm still not quite done.

First of all, the claim that using carbon comps is automatically BS and constitutes a de-facto marketing scam is false, inflammatory, defamatory, and libelous. Want me to prove that? Okay. Who posted the pic of my pedal's guts? Me, or somebody else? Second, my website contains my marketing copy. Do you see any reference to carbon comp resistors there? Am I claiming ANYTHING whatsoever regarding carbon comps or even mentioning them in my marketing copy? No.

Second, the appeal to "experts" is nothing more than an appeal to authority. So I'm supposed to cow to some external authority, because they're called an expert. Sorry, but that's just a backdoor to the age-old practice of managing the beliefs of the masses to the norms of the ruling class. If my ears tell me one thing and an "expert" tells me something else, who do you think I'm more likely to respect? I don't recall asking for any advice.

Oh, and thanks for the condescension and backhanded insult/accusation, vanessa. You're criticizing the sound of my pedal without having heard it.

If you are going to accuse somebody of dishonesty or running a scam, you should line up your facts.

vanessa · Post by **vanessa** » 06 Jan 2008, 05:58

Skreddy wrote: Oh, and thanks for the condescension and backhanded insult/accusation, vanessa. You're criticizing the sound of my pedal without having heard it.

Skreddy, I did not mention any of your pedals in my comment. I think you need to take a chill pill.
I was speaking of the Big Muff Pi. I've never built a clone of your clone of the Big Muff Pi. Honestly why would I when I can build a clone of the original myself?
Seriously, please re-read my post and chill out...

Skreddy · Post by **Skreddy** » 06 Jan 2008, 06:01

vanessa wrote:
Skreddy wrote: Oh, and thanks for the condescension and backhanded insult/accusation, vanessa. You're criticizing the sound of my pedal without having heard it.
Skreddy, I did not mention any of your pedals in my comment. I think you need to take a chill pill.
I was speaking of the Big Muff Pi. I've never built a clone of your clone of the Big Muff Pi. Honestly why would I when I can build a clone of the original myself?
Seriously, please re-read my post and chill out...

So you made a blanket statement with absolutely no factual basis, which just happened to overlap my Big Muff clone product, but you weren't talking about my pedals, even though this is a thread about one of my pedals.

Don't tell me to chill out. I'm reading exactly what you posted.

vanessa · Post by **vanessa** » 06 Jan 2008, 06:08

I was talking about carbon comps in BMP circuits, and many others. I never mentioned your pedals. I don't think I've even seen one of your pedals before that gut shot was posted here.
Re-read the thread. The thread went off on a tangent about carbon comp resistors, not how they sound in your pedals. Geez...

Here's the question I was responding too, not in response to any of your pedals. (I don't see why I'm even putting forth the effort to defend myself).

Whoismarykelly wrote: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.

Maybe a little less Starbucks?

teller · Post by **teller** » 06 Jan 2008, 06:13

Interesting discussion you guys are having. I have to admit, if my ass itches and I feel it itching, when the Medical doctor tells me it does not itch (and he is an expert with a degree), I still will contend that my ass itches...although I will thank him for his professional opinion, and assume he is correct, but continue the scratching.

Analog guru is just that, our grand guru, spat from his viviparous mother with infallible assertions and replete with virulent iron and incontrovertible test equipment, I am not worthy to question the veracity of electronic asseverations, but I am going to ask a question:

Enough of my mindless banter, my dumb question is...Were experts able to prove that their equipment is able to "hear" all things that the human ear can, and that the expert's test devices are equivalent to human hearing in all ways? and of course, how did they scientifically prove it, a simple link to a web page with the answer will suffice to answer my goofy question if lots of typing is a problem. Is hearing just frequencies and decibels, or is there more?

Thanks guys for humoring me!

Skreddy · Post by **Skreddy** » 06 Jan 2008, 06:16

vanessa wrote:I was talking about carbon comps in BMP circuits, and many others. I never mentioned your pedals. I don't think I've even seen one of your pedals before that gut shot was posted here.
Re-read the thread. The thread went off on a tangent about carbon comp resistors, not how they sound in your pedals. Geez...
Maybe a little less Starbucks?

Okay, I understand; thanks.

So, you're saying that when YOU build a clone of a BMP, that if you use carbon comps, it sounds hissy and muddy. But if you use carbon films or metal films, it sounds quiet and articulate? Is this your actual experience? I'm just curious. Have you actually found that, using the same transistors, carbon comp resistors in and of themselves, cause the circuit to sound hissy and muddy?

I'm out of accusation/argumentation mode, by the way; this is a completely non-loaded and honest question.

vanessa · Post by **vanessa** » 06 Jan 2008, 06:37

Skreddy wrote: Okay, I understand; thanks.

So, you're saying that when YOU build a clone of a BMP, that if you use carbon comps, it sounds hissy and muddy. But if you use carbon films or metal films, it sounds quiet and articulate? Is this your actual experience? I'm just curious. Have you actually found that, using the same transistors, carbon comp resistors in and of themselves, cause the circuit to sound hissy and muddy?

I'm out of accusation/argumentation mode, by the way; this is a completely non-loaded and honest question.

Geez...

Not hiss, fizz. You have to admit there's a lot of resistors in that circuit. I've found the bigger the circuit the better you are off using high quality low noise components throughout. The more you put in there that can muddy up the tone, the more mud you're going to get at the output.
I'm not saying that this is not the desired effect, maybe it's something you want? I really like carbon comps in Fuzz Face's, but it's also a much smaller circuit. To me they don't sound like Fuzz Face's without them, but then again Fuzz Face's do not have an e.q. built into them either.

Skreddy · Post by **Skreddy** » 06 Jan 2008, 07:00

vanessa wrote:
Skreddy wrote: Okay, I understand; thanks.

So, you're saying that when YOU build a clone of a BMP, that if you use carbon comps, it sounds hissy and muddy. But if you use carbon films or metal films, it sounds quiet and articulate? Is this your actual experience? I'm just curious. Have you actually found that, using the same transistors, carbon comp resistors in and of themselves, cause the circuit to sound hissy and muddy?

I'm out of accusation/argumentation mode, by the way; this is a completely non-loaded and honest question.
Geez...

Not hiss, fizz. You have to admit there's a lot of resistors in that circuit. I've found the bigger the circuit the better you are off using high quality low noise components throughout. The more you put in there that can muddy up the tone, the more mud you're going to get at the output.
I'm not saying that this is not the desired effect, maybe it's something you want? I really like carbon comps in Fuzz Face's, but it's also a much smaller circuit. To me they don't sound like Fuzz Face's without them, but then again Fuzz Face's do not have an e.q. built into them either.

Eyerolls aside, you didn't answer my question. I was specifically asking about your experience building Big Muff clones using carbon comps vis a vis other types of resistors. Your response sounded more theoretical, and that was precisely what I was trying to penetrate. So it sounds like a "no" to me at this point. You're saying that carbon comps cause a Big Muff to sound "fizzy"... That makes me curious. You're not even saying "hiss" (which would be what I'd expect of noisy parts) but "fizz", which, to me, is more a product of having an inadequate amount of lowpass filtering. But at the same time, you're claiming a "muddy" result. But muddiness and fizziness are not attributes I would ascribe to the circa 1970 Big Muff. Oh, but then again, I haven't dissected the resistors in one! So I may be fooled by that impish Mike Matthews, who no doubt spent thousands having carbon film resistors made to look just like carbon comps. We all know he had lots of superfluous cash lying around at that time.

Thanks for the eyeroll. May I have another?

super velcroboy · Post by **super velcroboy** » 06 Jan 2008, 07:21

admin--can we take some these posts to the catfight thread?

vanessa · Post by **vanessa** » 06 Jan 2008, 07:31

I've built BMP's both with carbon comps and metal film. I'm sorry if I was not clear. I've found that opposite of metal film resistors carbon comps muddy up the circuit more (in many other pedals too), and they tend to leave a fizzy breakup on decaying notes (not to be confused with hiss) much more so than metal films. What I meant about the e.q. is that I found that I could basically get the same tone of the carbon comps with an all metal film version of the circuit by using the tone knob rolling it back a little without having the fizz on decaying notes like a carbon comp version.
That's just me. Everyone has their own tastes and the debate over which is better has gone on and on in many a audio forum and is not really the topic of this thread.

P.S. That eyeroll was more a "cool he's finally chilled out", I guess I was wrong.

Skreddy · Post by **Skreddy** » 06 Jan 2008, 07:47

vanessa wrote:I've built BMP's both with carbon comps and metal film. I'm sorry if I was not clear. I've found that opposite of metal film resistors carbon comps muddy up the circuit more (in many other pedals too), and they tend to leave a fizzy breakup on decaying notes (not to be confused with hiss) much more so than metal films. What I meant about the e.q. is that I found that I could basically get the same tone of the carbon comps with an all metal film version of the circuit by using the tone knob rolling it back a little without having the fizz on decaying notes like a carbon comp version.
That's just me. Everyone has their own tastes and the debate over which is better has gone on and on in many a audio forum and is not really the topic of this thread.

Thanks! I appreciate hearing your experience. That's great, descriptive language, too.

P.S. That eyeroll was more a "cool he's finally chilled out", I guess I was wrong.

So do you always antagonize people when they've just calmed down by rolling your eyes again?

vanessa · Post by **vanessa** » 06 Jan 2008, 07:52

My question is have you ever built one with metal film resistors? And if so what are your opinions on the differences?

Skreddy · Post by **Skreddy** » 06 Jan 2008, 08:02

I found a harsh sound by just using a single metal film. I was going for a specific type of tone, and I wasn't interested in making a "transparent" kind of thing at the time, so that was the extent of my experimentation at the time. I can see in the future, though, going for more of that "audiophile" kind of tone and using parts that lend themselves to that end. Most likely it won't be a fuzz in that case. But I won't say never.

vanessa · Post by **vanessa** » 06 Jan 2008, 08:18

Harsh sound from a single metal film resistor? You must have ears like a deer. Also you are building clones, so maybe that tone is like an ice pick in the ear when you're trying to duplicate the original?

Skreddy · Post by **Skreddy** » 06 Jan 2008, 08:32

vanessa wrote:Harsh sound from a single metal film resistor? You must have ears like a deer. Also you are building clones, so maybe that tone is like an ice pick in the ear when you're trying to duplicate the original?

I don't think I have unusual hearing abilities; I just think I have a strong sense of discernment and strong preferences. Or something. I'm sure my limit is withing normal human range. But yeah; I don't recall exactly what I was making at the time--I was using a precision resistor to make a deviation from a standard value to get something to work better--but, seriously, it assaulted my ears like broken glass.

The same thing happens sometimes with metal film capacitors. I've gone through lots of different "modern" ones to try to find some that sound like the oldschool ones. I don't know why they can't keep making stuff the old way. Orange drops are fine, but they're so big. And there are some great boxed caps, but so many metallic-sounding ones too, with the same material designations by the manufacturers. Anyhow, yeah; this is kind of going a bit off topic. And it's probably a bit like catnip to the mojo debunkers out there.

vanessa · Post by **vanessa** » 06 Jan 2008, 08:54

Skreddy wrote:seriously, it assaulted my ears like broken glass.

I think that could be in order if you're working around carbon comps all the time. I don't mean that in a bad way at all, I just mean your ears are tuned that way. It's the same thing for me when I talk about carbon comps in a larger circuit, but just the opposite. You want the highs rolled off a bit and I want them there even if they do assault some people's ears.