Search results

I have not, and wouldn't be able to speak to the difference, but maybe post this in Chuck's build report below, because he definitely would be able to do so. More than me, anyway.

Just for posterity's sake and because sometimes it's hard to find stuff on the site: Originally I was getting a tad of fizziness on the break up. Still an awesome pedal, but I thought--"I bet this would sound better if I would've asked questions and breadboarded. It's too simple, too...

Originally I was getting a tad of fizziness on the break up. Still an awesome pedal, but I thought--"I bet this would sound better if I would've asked questions and breadboarded. It's too simple, too straightforward for a Charles David Bones build--no measurements, no staging--there has to be...

And thank you. Will go measure and futz around if needs be. I just hope I didn't make things totally inaccessible to myself.

DANG IT!

Just so I can assuage my regrets about lack of breadboarding and testing prior to PTPing this circuit and maybe to address potential issues in my ignorance--are there any selection/staging requirements for the JFET/Transistors in the first circuit block? No, right? It's just an amplification...

... is this the same build that you fixed in the build reports?

Yeah man! Check out Chuck's mods. I would highly recommend

I will also recommend this more traditional but also more complex think-along here for those of you interested in trying PTP: https://forum.pedalpcb.com/threads/biggus-dickus-ptp-think-along.25347/

Dang it! I was tired at work today. Thread title edited

Published!!! I see the collabs listed on the "coming soon" PPCB page. Pretty rocking and about time.

Ohhhh did not realize. That's approved, then.

Hell yeah. Ain't nothing wrong with that there PTP dude. As long as everything sounds good, it's all good. I have no notes for you. You used spatiality, solder was judicious. I even like the enclosure decor. Actually, -1 point for side jacks. That's it!

Anyone have any idea how to kill the "shhhh" in the background? I was hoping it was RF interference in my breadboard that would be blocked out by the enclosure shielding, but no.

Thank you! Yeah, the original was an experiment that turned a bit too rat's nesty. If anything, the new one looks better, even though its function so far is messed up. Interestingly, the diagonal thing just happened organically out of necessity and spatial orientation. I did not plan on it...

Soooo... I decided to revisit this one because after playing it, I was like--is this REALLY what it's supposed to sound like? It sounded... okay. A bit weird. Not Iommiesque enough. Plus, I also saw that @Chuck D. Bones had published some mods on the circuit, and I love me some Boneyard...

Thank you! although I think I prefer the looks of my diamond peak guts. I sacrificed internal harmony for looks haha

I should have mentioned, the characteristics of the pedal will also change with biasing. I like the biasing 10K trimpot sub for the 5.1k resistor feeding in from the power line to the collector of Q3. It really allows you to define the characteristics of the breakup and decay. Could be a...

Yes, actually, they are very distinct. The Diamond Peak is much more transparent and open/raw sounding than the Major. It can also get into fuzz with bass control and gain dimed. It has a wider range of tone and gain. The Major is very Marshally--amp-like, pushed mids, compression, big rawk...

might be a hint here: https://docs.pedalpcb.com/project/Schematic-Acrobat.png