There's no Whining in Tonebenders RIGHT?

[Pyr0]

yes, it can sound excellent even at those voltages, but be aware that it is almost impossible that it will really sound like a Tone Bender.

100% agreed.

honestly, among the common Fuzzes, I think this one may be the most difficult to get to sound the way it should, since you have to experiment with leakages of at least two (Q2, Q3) of the transistors....and the leakage of Q1 does also matter, but to a lesser extent. The fact that your leakages are so far off is the reason you aren't close to the classic Tone Bender voltages.

TO make things a bit more difficult, the hfe's of Tone Bender transistors vary heavily from (60, 60, 90) to (40, 40, 200) to (200, 200, 200...my favorite), etc....so, honestly, the best thing to do is to make multiple ones. That circuit can be so killer, it's worth it!

I made up a test box that really helped me learn my tastes in MKIIs with regards to HFE and Leakage. You can get masssive differences with the same device type (ie OC75, etc) but with different HFE/uA attirbutes. I persoanlly find leakage to be more important than any specific HFE as long as there is enough gain to get the fuzz happening.

So rather then post ideal Hfe's for the transistors, how about some ideal leakage's for Q1, 2 &3 ? Any recommendations Lucifer ?

[Quackzed]

remember, the 100ohm is not set in stone. You never (at least I don't) want to remove more fuzz that you have to (sacrilege). Simply place a 500 ohm pot there, start at 0 ohm and turn up until the oscillation stops. I used a 70 ohm and 110 ohm in my last two, respectively...

testify!
actually, i had originally omitted the fuzz pot and used a 1k resistor and 15uf cap in parallel. in order to set/forget it to where i usually set the fuzz knob (just a hair back from full) i added a 220 ohm resistor before the pseudo fuzz pot...
i was surprised to find that this little 220ohm stole too much gain/fuzz. 100 as well was a bit too weak, in the end(before i re-included the fuzz pot and stepped back from the brink) i settled on a 22ohm. this was before the 'tonebender' addition and not intended to remove whine /oscillation just to set the fuzz amount.
just a personal observation and re-assert the truth of your comment,' you never want to remove any more fuzz than you have to' a 100ohm, may seem small, but it may in fact have more impact on the amount of fuzz available than you realize.
point taken.
I have seen the light!

[LucifersTrip]

So rather then post ideal Hfe's for the transistors, how about some ideal leakage's for Q1, 2 &3 ? Any recommendations Lucifer ?

...and that's one of the biggest problems with ge fuzz threads here. hfe is only half the story, sometimes less. I try to post leakages in my build reports, but when quickly replying to a post, I rarely remember more than hfe.

Firstly, there's a good thread at FSB and tons of great info at DAM...plus Electric Warrior probably has a database of info.

That being said, unlike a Fuzz Face where you're basically shooting for lowest leakage possible, on the MKII I've had good luck in the 200 - 300uA range and rarely use anything with leakage less than 150uA

My favorite had surprisingly low leakage for the high gain

hfe/ uA
192 / 210
201 / 150
230 / 150

These are Peak Atlas readings which brings up another problem. Though the hfe's are usually close to what you'd get from the RG test, I've realized there can be a much bigger discrepancy in leakage readings.

Bottom line...just like with any vintage Fuzzes, start with working voltages and shoot for close to those voltages with STOCK values. If you have to alter the resistors too much to hit the "correct" values, it's usually not as good.

[LucifersTrip]

just a personal observation and re-assert the truth of your comment,' you never want to remove any more fuzz than you have to' a 100ohm, may seem small, but it may in fact have more impact on the amount of fuzz available than you realize.
point taken.
I have seen the light!

think about what percentage 100 ohm is of 1K!