kenvalleydc
New member
Is there a way to reduce the amount of treble in the Depot Fuzz pedal? Even when messing with the treble pot, it still seems very treble heavy. Any suggestions?
Reduce Depot Fuzz Treble Response
- Thread starter kenvalleydc
- Start date
mdc
Well-known member
You could try decreasing C7 and increasing C6 to make the notch less notch-y; the pedal would have a lot more mids which would make it sound a little more balanced. The interaction between the treble control and the "voice" that comes after it is beyond my pay grade, but taken on its own, that is a notch of about 30dB at 1K.
If you wanted to keep the notch in the same place...
5.1n / 22n would put it around -10dB
2.2n / 47n would put it around -20dB
Again, this is just considering the mid-notch in a vacuum, and the treble control seems like it probably interacts with the notch to some degree. I'd socket those two caps and see what sounds good to you.
That said, the pedal is supposed to give J&MC vibes, isn't it? I would think shrill / glass shattering noise is the order of the day with that one.
If you wanted to keep the notch in the same place...
5.1n / 22n would put it around -10dB
2.2n / 47n would put it around -20dB
Again, this is just considering the mid-notch in a vacuum, and the treble control seems like it probably interacts with the notch to some degree. I'd socket those two caps and see what sounds good to you.
That said, the pedal is supposed to give J&MC vibes, isn't it? I would think shrill / glass shattering noise is the order of the day with that one.
kenvalleydc
New member
These are great suggestions! Thank you! What effect would changing the potentiometer values/taper have? I guess I'm just looking for as many options to tweak as possible.
Last edited:
finebyfine
Well-known member
I did this and it hits like a fucking freight train. I tried 4n7 and it was a forgettable fuzz build, then swapped it out and loved it. It's my favorite EQD fuzz.
Here's a very quick demo of mine 1) all at noon 2) treble dimed 3) treble at 0. Forgive my playing! Not in the demo but when I play it I personally swap between 0-1 voice and 8-9 treble and vice versa.
zeropluszero
Well-known member
Just built a depot fuzz, man, I know Robert was just tracing what EQD provided him, but like C3 at 47nf is like, night and day better.
Laundryroom David
Keyboard Cowboy 🤠
I have an EQD Terminal. Curious to see what’s in it because I’ve never found it overly trebly. Curious now.
falco_femoralis
Well-known member
Laundryroom David
Keyboard Cowboy 🤠
Took some doing, but here!
473!!!
Attachments
Ginsly
Well-known member
Well, I’ll be… there it is
(Robert rushes to correct build doc; completes all other pending build docs; leans back in roll-y chair and mimes a "swish")
Laundryroom David
Keyboard Cowboy 🤠
I think he might mime a different action towards me lol
Laundryroom David
Keyboard Cowboy 🤠
Robert
Reverse Engineer
Confirmed.
Transistors are P2N2222A and C3 is in fact 4.7nF.
Transistors are P2N2222A and C3 is in fact 4.7nF.
Robert
Reverse Engineer
I'm going to take your word for it on this one though, because if I recall correctly I didn't actually have that pedal in my possession and looking at the photos now, I'm not 100% convinced 472 is what I'm seeing and your photo is much clearer.
One out of three ain't bad.
One out of three ain't bad.
Laundryroom David
Keyboard Cowboy 🤠
I dmm’d it in circuit and it reads 50 ish nf … caveats abound, but I’m confident the marking says 473 - it’s really hard to get a clear shot, but in person, under lights and through a magnifier, it’s a lot clearer.
Laundryroom David
Keyboard Cowboy 🤠
That’d make a catchy song lyric
Robert
Reverse Engineer
No, I have no doubts about yours, that's definitely a 3.
The original trace from FSB had it marked 472, and the owner of the pedal I posted the pic of in the other thread says "for sure" 472, but the picture doesn't give me the same level of confidence looking at it now.
Since the overall consensus is that 47nF is better I'll update the doc and make a note that 4n7 can be used for those seeking a less enjoyable experience.
The original trace from FSB had it marked 472, and the owner of the pedal I posted the pic of in the other thread says "for sure" 472, but the picture doesn't give me the same level of confidence looking at it now.
Since the overall consensus is that 47nF is better I'll update the doc and make a note that 4n7 can be used for those seeking a less enjoyable experience.
Similar threads
