Are there many JHS stompboxes based on other circuits from the diy community ?

[eh là bas ma]

If I understood correctly, Lizard queen is based on two circuits, already available in the diy community : Tim Escobedo's push me pull you, and Bazz Fuss.

I wonder if there are other exemples of diy circuits turned into "boutique stompboxes" at JHS ?

And if there are, what are they ? I think it would be helpful to make a list, so we can get a better understanding of JHS circuits.

So far, I know Morning Glory is a Blues Breaker clone with an extra gain stage.

I think Angry Charles is based on MI Audio Crunch box (designed in 2003, released in 2006) ?

https://www.effectsdatabase.com/model/miaudio/crunchbox#pictures

Packrat is a rat.

Bonsai is a modded Tubescreamer.

Muffuletta is a modded Big Muff, supposed to emulate every Big Muff variants.

JHS Overdrive Preamp is a clone of DOD250.

Cheese Ball is a clone of Lovetone Big Cheese

Moonshine is a tubescreamer : https://www.freestompboxes.org/viewtopic.php?p=262125&hilit=moonshine#p262125

Anything else ?

 

[Harry Klippton]

The superbolt is the ROG supreaux yeah?

 

[Big Monk]

If I understood correctly, Lizard queen is based on two circuits, already available in the diy community : Tim Escobedo's push me pull you, and Bazz Fuss.

I wonder if there are other exemples of diy circuits turned into "boutique stompboxes" at JHS ?

And if there are, what are they ? I think it would be helpful to make a list, so we can get a better understanding of JHS circuits.

So far, I know Morning Glory is a Blues Breaker clone with an extra gain stage.

I think Angry Charles is based on MI Audio Crunch box (designed in 2003, released in 2006) ?

https://www.effectsdatabase.com/model/miaudio/crunchbox#pictures

This is not an isolated practice used just by JHS.

There is very little of an original nature out there and these "DIY" circuits are themselves often re-workings of existing things.

 

[phi1]

I’ll push back on that just a bit, plenty of boutique-turned-big companies like Wampler, EQD, Walrus, do a number of original circuits, and I think are more above board about where there ‘inspired’ circuits come from. I’ll agree it’s not isolated to JHS, but I think it’s a fair critique with their success, the percentage of their line that is unoriginal, and their common use of diy resources / small builder circuits without mention of the source (as far as I can tell). And while diy-published circuits may be using existing building blocks, they’re often much more original than JHS just taking the circuit. I find Runoffgroove stuff to be an impressive amount of effort, for example.

 

[eh là bas ma]

Every answers and comments are welcome.

My intention with this thread is to take a step back and get a general point of view on this brand, with as much intellectual probity as possible.

For exemple, I wonder why Boss and EHX need JHS.

Did they make some projects in collaboration with Boss and Electro Harmonix because they are the number one and most influential youtube channel about stompboxes ?
Or is it mostly because JHS engineers are so talented that the most famous brands are happy to work with them ?

Is it a win-win business deal, all about money : Boss and EHX have the designs and the fame, JHS have the clicks and some utuber skills ?

Or is it a genuine artistic and musical collaboration, based on common interest and love for audio electronics : Boss and EHX grant their blessings to JHS, because they recognize it as an equal, a peer, with great ideas and good tastes, and they are proud to be associated with it ?

My question about diy community circuits being used by JHS is only a start to get a better understanding on JHS itself, as well as other stompbox's brands, and how professionals are doing things nowadays.

 

[benny_profane]

I wonder why Boss and EHX need JHS.

They don’t. It’s a business move designed to create an ‘exciting’ new project.

Did they make some projects in collaboration with Boss and Electro Harmonix because they are the number one and most influential youtube channel about stompboxes ?

Boss collab preceded the YouTube channel. JHS has a large market share of pedal sales. It makes sense to work with an ‘up and comer’ instead of an industry peer. It benefits both parties: boss is the established authority; jhs is new and shiny.

Is it a win-win business deal, all about money : Boss and EHX have the designs and the fame, JHS have the clicks and some utuber skills ?

Of course it’s a business deal about money.

Or is it a genuine artistic and musical collaboration, based on common interest and love for audio electronics : Boss and EHX grant their blessings to JHS, because they recognize it as an equal, a peer, with great ideas and good tastes, and they are proud to be associated with it ?

Would you recognize someone as your peer if they repackaged your work?

 

[eh là bas ma]

Boss collab preceded the YouTube channel. JHS has a large market share of pedal sales. It makes sense to work with an ‘up and comer’ instead of an industry peer. It benefits both parties: boss is the established authority; jhs is new and shiny.

Thanks for your replies !

Isn't Angry Driver (2017) the only one JHS-Boss collab ?

Angry Driver info :

BOSS - JB-2 | Angry Driver

JB-2: Angry Driver - BOSS and JHS Pedals Join Forces to Create a New Drive Pedal with Massive Tonal Range

www.boss.info

Boss pedal's tree :

Roland - The History of Boss Compact Pedals

The History of Boss Compact Pedals

www.roland.com

JHS oldest utube video available (2010) :
www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxFCfej9vHs

 

[Harry Klippton]

Pretty sure jhs had a keeley Collab too

 

[benny_profane]

JHS oldest utube video available (2010) :

I assumed you meant the JHS Show deal. They didn't start getting huge numbers till about four years ago.

Pretty sure jhs had a keeley Collab too

Yep. Don't forget the Devi Ever one!

 

[eh là bas ma]

JHS has a large market share of pedal sales.

Are we sure about this ? Isn't JHS a small fly compared to EHX and Boss elephants ?

I tried to have a look, googled "market share of guitar stompboxes sales", and JHS are not even mentioned among the top players in any of the documents I found.

Some exemples :

The Guitar Pedals Market Statistics and Opportunities By 2029| 101 Pages

Mar 14, 2023 (The Expresswire) -- Final Report will add an analysis of the impact of the Russia-Ukraine War and COVID-19 on the "Guitar Pedals" industry....

www.marketwatch.com

Guitar Pedals market is projected to reach USD 5.7 Billion by 2029 : Cognitive Market Research

As per Cognitive Market Research analysis the Guitar Pedals market size is projected to grow from USD 3 2 Billion in the year 2022 to USD 5 7 Billion by 2029 at a CAGR of 4 1 from 2022 2029 ...

www.openpr.com

However, I finally found JHS mentioned in the top sellers in 2020, but only on Reverb, 8th position among ten brands :

www.instagram.com/p/CIYJl78n8Bv/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading

On Thomann, european music equipment number one store, JHS doesn't appear in the top sellers in the biggest category in terms of sales :

Meilleures ventes Thomann: Distorsions / Overdrives / Fuzz

Pour beaucoup de clients la liste de nos meilleures ventes est un guide fiable pour l'achat d'équipement. Elle donne un apercu rapide de ce que les autres clients Thomann ont décidé d´acheter.

www.thomann.de

Morning Glory is JHS most successful product in europe, in 45th position. Who notice the 45th player as "new and shiny" ?

So are you sure JHS share of pedal sales could motivate a collab with the two biggest brands, I mean isn'it something else ?

 

[ThePanda]

Given the amount of similar pedals that are out there, I would imagine that making and engineering a new design from scratch is difficult and requires lots more R&D/money than making a new pedal idea by putting multiple different circuits together (this is expensive R&D as well).
Most pedals fall into pre-existing categories and many new pedals are reworks/reimagined/tweaked older well established circuits.
There are only so many different electronic topologies of boosts, distortions, overdrives, fuzz, etc. out there. So collisions in design are going to happen.
For companies like JHS and others, the combo of different circuits and the mashing of ideas is really all they can do, unless they engineer some new solution from scratch.
Making a new idea with existing pieces is how most things work in industry.

 

[Laundryroom David]

I’ll push back on that just a bit, plenty of boutique-turned-big companies like Wampler, EQD, Walrus, do a number of original circuits, and I think are more above board about where there ‘inspired’ circuits come from. I’ll agree it’s not isolated to JHS, but I think it’s a fair critique with their success, the percentage of their line that is unoriginal, and their common use of diy resources / small builder circuits without mention of the source (as far as I can tell). And while diy-published circuits may be using existing building blocks, they’re often much more original than JHS just taking the circuit. I find Runoffgroove stuff to be an impressive amount of effort, for example.

Agreed.

 

[benny_profane]

Are we sure about this ? Isn't JHS a small fly compared to EHX and Boss elephants ?

That's the point. They have a big name among the 'boutique' status brands. JHS certainly does not have the marketshare of Boss, MXR, etc.—but they are a big player in the other category. They cater to different consumers, so the collaboration allows them to amplify each other.

 

[Laundryroom David]

That's the point. They have a big name among the 'boutique' status brands. JHS certainly does not have the marketshare of Boss, MXR, etc.—but they are a big player in the other category. They cater to different consumers, so the collaboration allows them to amplify each other.

JHS makes a lot (like a lot a lot) of pedals. Enough to afford to amplify the folks JHS was “inspired” by.

 

[coltonius]

I mentioned this on a now-deleted TGP thread, but I think JHS seems to be the target of debate when it comes to non-original circuits when there are other companies, like Analog Man, whose entire lineup are modded clones.

Part of the JHS heat is deserved: many, many years ago they blatantly ripped off a Devi Ever Hyperion with their Astro Mess / Bun Runner fuzzes and tried to gaslight the gear community about it. In this case, two things were true at once: Devi Ever (as a person and a brand) will forever be mired in controversy and drama all by themselves and JHS deliberately misrepresented the origins of the Astro Mess.

To bring it back full-circle to the Analog Man mention, I think JHS was coming up in a time when boutique builders were hammering out the rules of engagement:

• Do we have to disclose a pedal’s lineage or whether it’s a clone?
• Is it okay to clone a pedal that’s still in production?
• How big does the company have to be for a clone to be acceptable?
• etc…

For AM’s part, as far as I’m aware they have always been forthcoming with circuit provenance. JHS was slow to come around to that reality. However, now JHS seems to be on the up and up when it comes to their pedals- generally speaking, they freely disclose associations to vintage pedals and offer novel features on their offerings.

Is that enough to clear their name? Not for some people, and that’s okay. To me, though, it just seems disingenuous to nail them for the Morning Glory when there’s a Duke/Prince/King of Tone being produced. I think nuance and context are always key in conversations like this.

___
And as for Wampler and Walrus.. Isn’t the Mayflower a buffered Timmy? And isn’t the Pantheon a tweaked Prince of Tone? Not even just a tweaked Bluesbreaker, but a Prince of Tone?

 

[Big Monk]

Straight up, the only original circuits coming out today are the bleep bloops.

Any Fuzz/Drive/Distortion is pretty much entirely derivative.

 

[jimilee]

Straight up, the only original circuits coming out today are the bleep bloops.

Any Fuzz/Drive/Distortion is pretty much entirely derivative.

This right here. It’s most likely YATS, a blues breaker, a Timmy or a rat. And that’s ok, I’m not sure why the controversy still every time a new pedal is introduced.

 

[benny_profane]

No one is having a cow about the morning glory. The thing that remains disingenuous (while impressive from a PR vantage), is that they publish weekly infomercials that seemingly dissect circuits to dispel mysticism (whether or not viewers get it is another matter entirely) to foster an image of transparency of themselves and the industry as a whole. The issue is that much of their catalogue is one-to-one versions of classic DIY circuits (or classics/standards). They do not discuss the provenance of many of their circuits. They're trying to have it both ways—and that does not work. That is not to say that they need to talk about circuits like Wampler does, but it would be honest to acknowledge where things come from. Since that was a huge complaint of the past, the 'pulling back the curtain' persona is ridiculous.

They are a t-shirt company for very online gear nerds anymore.

///

In re 'originality', that all depends on perspective, doesn't it? Everything is something that alters an audio signal in some way. There are a finite number of ways an audio signal can be altered/manipulated in a way that is musical/desirable. But, I don't think that we're at the end of Analogue Audio Processing History. Engineering—like creative pursuits—is iterative. Elements from previous designs are folded into something new. Proven topologies become cannon. Elementary blocks are put together to build bigger wholes. Just because things are using the past doesn't mean that they aren't new. This is really rudimentary technology were talking about, isn't it? What would count as 'originality' in this space?

Did pop music stop creating new songs after the first I-IV-V chord progression was put on tape?

Even modern digital effects are just an audio wrapper around an mcu. Does that mean that they are all the same? Is every FV-1 circuit unoriginal because it has the same circuit construction with variations of themes fed into the micro?

Everything is derivative in some way because people learn from the past. No one is expecting a pedal manufacturer to create a whole new type gain stage topology. But, when things are a direct facsimile of something created before, it's dishonest to willfully obscure provenance.

 

[coltonius]

No one is having a cow about the morning glory. The thing that remains disingenuous (while impressive from a PR vantage), is that they publish weekly infomercials that seemingly dissect circuits to dispel mysticism (whether or not viewers get it is another matter entirely) to foster an image of transparency of themselves and the industry as a whole. The issue is that much of their catalogue is one-to-one versions of classic DIY circuits (or classics/standards). They do not discuss the provenance of many of their circuits. They're trying to have it both ways—and that does not work. That is not to say that they need to talk about circuits like Wampler does, but it would be honest to acknowledge where things come from. Since that was a huge complaint of the past, the 'pulling back the curtain' persona is ridiculous.

They are a t-shirt company for very online gear nerds anymore.

///

In re 'originality', that all depends on perspective, doesn't it? Everything is something that alters an audio signal in some way. There are a finite number of ways an audio signal can be altered/manipulated in a way that is musical/desirable. But, I don't think that we're at the end of Analogue Audio Processing History. Engineering—like creative pursuits—is iterative. Elements from previous designs are folded into something new. Proven topologies become cannon. Elementary blocks are put together to build bigger wholes. Just because things are using the past doesn't mean that they aren't new. This is really rudimentary technology were talking about, isn't it? What would count as 'originality' in this space?

Did pop music stop creating new songs after the first I-IV-V chord progression was put on tape?

Even modern digital effects are just an audio wrapper around an mcu. Does that mean that they are all the same? Is every FV-1 circuit unoriginal because it has the same circuit construction with variations of themes fed into the micro?

Everything is derivative in some way because people learn from the past. No one is expecting a pedal manufacturer to create a whole new type gain stage topology. But, when things are a direct facsimile of something created before, it's dishonest to willfully obscure provenance.

Again, I’m not denying that JHS has at times past and present been less-than-forthcoming about their circuits. The Morning Glory was perhaps a bad example because it always gets a pass for some reason, even though it’s always been billed as a transparent, low gain overdrive. I don’t think the BB affiliation was initially declared, but whatever.

The Bonsai was clearly described, and many of the options are long discontinued. Same with the Rat Pack, and the Muffaletta is novel enough that I don’t think it warrants criticism considering their transparency.

For funsies, I just visited the Wampler Pantheon page on their website. No mention of it being a PoT ripoff. Lots of vague wording though! (I’m not against Wampler either. Brian has been a well-respected member of the DIY community since long before I purchased my first soldering iron.)

___
Regarding the Lizard Queen, which is what I believe has provoked this thread: To the best of my knowledge, it was initially created as a fun DIY project between passionate EHX fanboys without intention to mass produce. I could be wrong obviously. It seems to me that the impetus for pitching a collaboration with EHX was the overwhelmingly positive feedback to the episode and demo of the pedal.

Lest we forget, EHX deserves an equal scoop of criticism (if there’s any to be had) for bringing the Lizard Queen to market with full knowledge of what it is. But I don’t remember them getting lambasted for the Soul Food and a number of other rip-off circuits they’ve produced in recent years.

 

[Laundryroom David]

I just don’t like Josh.