lamestain v2.0 (2x Muroidea / Dream Fuzz)

DGWVI

Well-known member
Just finished this one today.
Starts with a Simple JFET Buffer into an LM301 equipped Muroidea tuned for low gain, with a Nanolog N3 for clipping.
Next, is mostly stock Muroidea, also rocking the N3 and running with a UA308.
Finally, a Dream fuzz with a few tweaks to get even more fuzz, clarity, and output gain.


received_174586131142498.jpeg received_735339380512309.jpeg received_212873543912950.jpeg received_832152284006594.jpeg
 

dawson

Well-known member
Holy hell!
Not sure whether to comment on the enclosure, or that hardware, or those Nanologs!

How do you like the Nanolog? I've been curious about them since they came out but not curious enough to invest in the answer.
 

DGWVI

Well-known member
Holy hell!
Not sure whether to comment on the enclosure, or that hardware, or those Nanologs!

How do you like the Nanolog? I've been curious about them since they came out but not curious enough to invest in the answer.
I like them for hard clippers. Id say they're similar to LEDs, with a lot more dynamic range. Like on the low gain rat, I can go from clean to crunchy fuzz with just varying my pick strength
 

dawson

Well-known member
I like them for hard clippers. Id say they're similar to LEDs, with a lot more dynamic range. Like on the low gain rat, I can go from clean to crunchy fuzz with just varying my pick strength

I'm all about the LED sound- I believe you've just sold a Nanolog N3, my friend!
Thanks for the description
 

Chuck D. Bones

Circuit Wizard
WOW! Nice job on everything.

I've got a pedal with a Nanolog in it (not my design) and it sounds better than diodes. For $20 each it had better! I have it on good authority that those nanologs are fragile as Hell (electrically).

Can we get a bit more info on what you did with the Dream Fuzz, a schematic perchance?
 

DGWVI

Well-known member
WOW! Nice job on everything.

I've got a pedal with a Nanolog in it (not my design) and it sounds better than diodes. For $20 each it had better! I have it on good authority that those nanologs are fragile as Hell (electrically).

Can we get a bit more info on what you did with the Dream Fuzz, a schematic perchance?
Just going off memory and the pic, as I seem to have tossed the build notes. Nothing too drastic

R1- 47k
R4 - 470k
R7 - 470k
R8 -47k
R10 - 4.7k
R13 - 1M
R14 - 3.3k
R15- 2.2k

C3- 1n
C4- 4.7n
C7 - 100p

Tone Pot- 100kB

And, then the diodes, which are just 2 Zeners of some sort into the red LED. I tried it without diodes, and the sustain was weird, while the Nanolog N3 just killed the output volume (might be faulty)
 
Last edited:

Chuck D. Bones

Circuit Wizard
I'll address your last comment first. Something that the guys at Nanolog don't like to advertise is the leakage in their product. They are suitable for hard clippers, like a Rat, Distortion+, Klon, etc. but are not suitable for use in a feedback loop like a BMP, TS, Timmy, etc. because the leakage kills the gain.

Most of the subs you made look like they came out of necessity. Don't have a 56K, use a 47K, that kind of thing.
It's odd that you changed R2 and not R3 because the pair sets the bias voltage for the first two stages. In any case, unless you cause IC1 to saturate, changing R2 and/or R3 has no effect on the sound because they are not in the signal path. Looks like you got away with it this time.
Be very careful about changing values in an active filter (C3, C4, R7, R8) because it's all too easy to turn it into an oscillator.
 
Last edited:

DGWVI

Well-known member
I'll address your last comment first. Something that the guys at Nanolog don't like to advertise is the leakage in their product. They are suitable for hard clippers, like a Rat, Distortion+, Klon, etc. but are not suitable for use in a feedback loop like a BMP, TS, Timmy, etc. because the leakage kills the gain.
Kind of a shame, but at least they work well for hard clipping. Luckily for me, the only soft clipping circuits I really care for are the OA Muff, and the Cream Puff
Most of the subs you made look like they came out of necessity. Don't have a 56K, use a 47K, that kind of thing.
It's odd that you changed R2 and not R3 because the pair sets the bias voltage for the first two stages. In any case, unless you cause IC1 to saturate, changing R2 and/or R3 has no effect on the sound because they are not in the signal path. Looks like you got away with it this time.
Be very careful about changing values in an active filter (C3, C4, R7, R8) because it's all to easy to turn it into an oscillator.
That was a typo, I meant R4, not R2. I wanted to set the gain through the circuit higher for more saturation, while taking care not to substantially raise the noise floor.
As for the filter, I have an extra muff board I use for experimenting. These values were about as high as I could get it before it just started sounding like the filter wasn't even there. I also use This calculator quite a bit
 
Top