Hello,
This is my first posting though I have used DIYSB in the past. I have made a few pedals (fuzz, boost, a/b switches, effects loop, etc...) but would not consider my knowledge of the subject great--I know there are some gifted people on this site. I have a strange question that I will try to make as clear as possible. I'm trying to create a set of pedals for the sax player in my band.
THE QUESTION: What kind of of fuzz or distortion would work well with alto sax without feeding back?
THE PROBLEM: In order to get a distorted sound from the sax signal we have to turn the pedal (we've tried a couple--see below) up so much that the sax feeds-back.
OTHER INFO:
1. We have tried cheap distortion/fuzz pedals (DOD, homemade stuff, etc...) so far because we are still experimenting.
2. We have tried it with the Boss noise gate and noise suppressor.
3. We are using a Telex Telethin Earpiece (125 ohm) to get amplify the sax we call it a pickup. The "pickup" is screwed into the mouthpiece and is nearly identical to the Maestro "pickups" from the late 60's. Ed Harris used to play on one.
4. The sax signal is going into a guitar amp.
5. Currently, we are having great success with delay, wah, and flanged effects....
I would be open to making a pedal (I've made fuzz and boost pedals) or modifying a pedal for this but don't really know where to begin to fix the problem. I don't know if the problem can be fixed.
Thanks in advance for your help.
--Kevin
not familiar with the pickup you refer to. i would suggest using an sm57 ( small field will help ) mic into some sort of mixer, line out of the mixer to the fuzzbox, see if that gets you a better volume to feedback ratio. if you get a better ratio, but still want more, you probably will need to begin to precisely eq certain freq's to weed out feedback.
the advantage to a mixer is you can do a mix of clean to fuzzed, which might be essential to getting enough stage volume.
Maybe a gated, splatty kind of fuzz, like the Big Cheese or Woolly Mammoth might be able to work.
Worse comes to worse, you could adapt any distortion pedal to have a momentary switch, that is normally off, that mutes it when it isn't being pressed down, like a CB radio.
Yeah, it's certainly not the SAXOPHONE feeding back, it's the microphone and PA system. With the compression of something like a fuzz, you're taking all the tiny little sounds that normally wouldn't be loud enough to cause microphonic feedback and amplifying them to a wild level, which means that if anything is loud enough to cause feedback, EVERYTHING will be loud enough to cause feedback. If you really have your heart set on running a saxophone through a fuzz, you might have to isolate the sax player from the PA system/monitors so the microphone won't pick them up.
reed instruments are already pretty fuzzy and fat 'waveforms' if you will, on their own, with all kinds of distortion available just from embouchure (sp?) and the reed. Skroooonk! Filtering and modulation can be potentially just as crazy will being subtractive rather than distortion...A wide ranging wah, resonant synth filter, or other effect will be great for you, providing tone shaping without causing feedback...
Have you checked out gristleizer? search for it on this forum...
- Strategy
I think the reed/mouthpiece is the way to go for live use. Assuming the mic
is somewhat far from the amp. Several feet at least. You don't need a lot of gain.
Something without a lot of compression would seem to work well.
The sustain of the sax is enough, you probably just want to add some
chunky distortion right? So something without a ton of sustain would
seem to be best. Maybe even something with an envelope that opens
and closes smoothly would be good for cutting down on feedback.
SO an envelope fileter minus the filter and adding a fuzz.
Bass Fuzz ish should sound cool.
You're on the right course thinking about Eddy Harris. What about looking into
the gear he used?
Yeah, maybe the Gristlizer would be one to check out.
hey, what about a simple boss oc2, run the fuzz on the octave down, could be lots of fun and might solve the feedback problem.
A wave wrapping (rather than clipping) effect might work, such as an octavia effect like the green ringer, as it sounds like distortion but there is no high gain happening. An alternative type is a frequency tripler effect, like Tim Escobedo's "Triple Fuzz", or Zvex Machine.
Yeah, that does sound like a way to go. Get some harmonic/octave action going on there.
Like Joe mentions as well. With the octave up is will bet note together and create some
harmonics much like distortion but without the compression or feedback causing gain.
Although the feedabck iwill directly related to the resonanct frequency of the mic and
the acoustic suroundings and proximity to the amp/PA etc.
On a different path but similar theme
As a simple route, maybe even a slightly misbiased fuzz the gates
when you fall below a certain threshold, variable would be best to
tune it in. Depends on the style of music and dynamics as well though.
Back in the day, the Conn Multi-Vider ruled the reeds. You saw ads for them in Downbeat all the time, and the horn players in the Mothers of Invention used them.
Seems to me that a Blue Box is likely the way to go since it has both the lower octaves available as well as the fuzz you seem to want. Moreover, reed instruments offer that holiest of grails for octave dividers: a sustained fundamental.
It may be that the envelope control of the BB needs some tweaking, but the basic device seems appropriate.
Thanks Mark - I've been racking my brain trying to remember what this effect was called and who made it.
I heard one used by an alto sax player in a jazz ensemble back in 1970 & was very impressed.
Tracking was perfect !
Yeah, I could not remember the name either...Conn!
I misread, I thought it was
Sex Effect Distortion or Fuzz
:icon_razz:
As far as the feedback problem - have you tried a "feedback eliminator"? Behringer makes quite a few of these in a range of prices.
A waveshaper might be useful with a sax.
http://folkurban.com/Site/SimpleSquareWaveShaperMadeSimpler-712.html (http://folkurban.com/Site/SimpleSquareWaveShaperMadeSimpler-712.html)
There was also a Maestro reed/winds FX unit, of course- just the kind of thing they would make- I can't remember the name but it should be on DiscoFreq Effects Database. Its in the same 'era' as the Rhythm n' Sound, Universal Sound Synthesizer, etc. IIRC it is like the Conn with EQ/filter aspects to it available as presets on organ-tab-like rocker switches.
- Strategy
Quote from: Strategy on February 16, 2010, 11:41:59 AM
There was also a Maestro reed/winds FX unit, of course- just the kind of thing they would make- I can't remember the name but it should be on DiscoFreq Effects Database. Its in the same 'era' as the Rhythm n' Sound, Universal Sound Synthesizer, etc. IIRC it is like the Conn with EQ/filter aspects to it available as presets on organ-tab-like rocker switches.
- Strategy
I think Eddy harris used that too If I'm not mistaken.
http://www.effectsdatabase.com/model/conn/multivider
These were generally devices worn with a belt clip so that the player could access them easily. I guess nobody thought that horn players might ever use a pedalboard.
There WAS also a Maestro unit, as noted, and I think some may have used it, but the unit was a floor-based device, not something you could clip to your belt.
Then there is stuff like this thing: http://www.effectsdatabase.com/model/maestro/frb1 Not an octave divider as such, but has switch-selectable bandpass filters for instant flick-o-the-finger revoicings.
Neat, effectsdatabase logs 3 "Sound Systems for Woodwinds" products! W-1, W-2, W-3.
I love the 1970s era of electric jazz where every player has pedals on everything...all the post Miles Davis music...ECM label...CTI label...I play rhodes/organ/synth in a heavy improvising band, I wouldn't call it throwback fusion, but inspired from this era. We haven't found any horn players in our community here who will really "go all the way" with pedals and electronics unfortunately.
"pedals that sound good with instruments other than guitar" is a whole thread/subforum waiting to happen I think...
- Strategy
The W-1/2/3 are essentially more complex versions of the FRB-1. In many respects these are all slight variations of what was common in home organ technology, and 1st generation all-in-one synths, at the time: a simple filter labelled with an "instrument" equivalent, based on the bandwidth covered and resonances.
I don't want to convey that these were corny or 3rd rate features. When combined with suitable envelope changes, they turned out reasonable approximations of instruments in the days before sampling and more complex digital modelling.
I might point out as a sidenote that Craig Anderton had a circuit in Electronic Musician about 24 or 25 years ago which used the same approach to "model" different pickups. The signal was split amongst ten bandpass filters, which the user could select for mixing with either a dipswitch or toggles if they chose. A broad-band highpass filter and some inverted-and-unaltered clean tone could also be blended in at a mixing stage. The intended end-result was different pickup sounds.
Quote from: Mark Hammer on February 16, 2010, 01:17:52 PM
The W-1/2/3 are essentially more complex versions of the FRB-1. In many respects these are all slight variations of what was common in home organ technology, and 1st generation all-in-one synths, at the time: a simple filter labelled with an "instrument" equivalent, based on the bandwidth covered and resonances. I don't want to convey that these were corny or 3rd rate features. When combined with suitable envelope changes, they turned out reasonable approximations of instruments in the days before sampling and more complex digital modelling. I might point out as a sidenote that Craig Anderton had a circuit in Electronic Musician about 24 or 25 years ago which used the same approach to "model" different pickups. The signal was split amongst ten bandpass filters, which the user could select for mixing with either a dipswitch or toggles if they chose. A broad-band highpass filter and some inverted-and-unaltered clean tone could also be blended in at a mixing stage. The intended end-result was different pickup sounds.
Fixed filters are very powerful and I'm surprised to some extent that in the pedal scene there aren't pedal projects that have appeared in this type of effect- the fixed filters we have here don't much go beyond the graphic and parametric EQ projects. You mention the "modelling" effect these can give; Its really fun to play with. There is a recent project issued by Juergen Haible (more info available on the electro-music.com forum) which is the fixed filter section of the Polymoog- With it you can very carefully model brass and string section type sounds. Other than the fact that it requires mains power and a transformer, it would make a killer pedal for "voicings" effects like this - a resonant EQ, essentially.
It would be great to see a 'fixed filterbank with resonance' project appear on this forum available to the 9/12 volters among us...The Anderton project might be a good one to dig up provided that there aren't ancient obsolete parts specced in it, etc.
I was given an ancient Krohn-Hite tube bandpass filter by a friend who goes to HAM radio hobby fairs. The thing sounds absolutely incredible on guitar, organ, wurlitzer electric piano, etc....as a stationary filter for voicing effects plus tube sound.
- Strategy
- Strategy
Nothing magical about the Anderton project....and no layout either. Just a bunch of garden variety op-amps and standard-topography bandpass filters.
Think of it as a "frozen vocoder". :icon_wink:
I built the "Peakmaker" & have a layout - it requires a 9 volt bipolar power & my layout wasn't made for a stomp box enclosure (but it could be shrunk down quite a bit & could probably be made to fit).
It uses 2 LM4136's & a TL071.
I'll start a new topic with pics this evening.
Thanks for this tip and the layout jimbeaux and mark. look forward to checking that out!
- Strategy
Wow!!! Thanks a lot. I've got some work I'm looking forward to doing.
QUESTIONS:
1. How does using a mixer help?
2. How do I go about making a momentary switch? Links?
3. What is a sustained fundamental? Why does it matter for pedals.
4. Are there projects/kits that utilize heavily gated, enveloped, and (or) octave down fuzzes?
RESPONSES:
1. I looked up the Conn Multivider( http://www.effectsdatabase.com/model/conn/multivider). The pickup we are using is identical to the one bottom of the picture.
2. We are going to use the pickup for now (instead of the mic) because we get better response across the frequency range, less feed-back, and less ambient noise (sometimes we are loud). Though I appreciate the SM57 suggestion.
3. Eddie Harris used the Maestro pickup. It looks a lot like the Conn. http://www.effectsdatabase.com/model/maestro/w2
4. The amp has a feedback eliminator on it. I don't know if a pedal/rack mounted version will help.
TO DO LIST FOR ME:
1. Research the following stuff:
a. Octavia and Green Ringer kits from GGG.
b. Heavily gated fuzzes.
c. Synth filters and the gristliezer.
d. Fuzz pedal with an envelope.
e. Octave down stuff.
f. "Triple" Fuzzes
g. MXR Blue Box
h. Square Waves/Wave Shaper
i. Feedback eliminator.
Thanks again. I'll do some research and let you all know how it goes.
--KH
Quote from: jimbeaux on February 16, 2010, 03:38:38 PM
I built the "Peakmaker" & have a layout - it requires a 9 volt bipolar power & my layout wasn't made for a stomp box enclosure (but it could be shrunk down quite a bit & could probably be made to fit).
It uses 2 LM4136's & a TL071.
I'll start a new topic with pics this evening.
Thanks! My guess is that the Peakmaker could be adapted to a simple +9v w/Vref supply.
With all this talk about 1970s "effected horn" records I went to the record store on my lunch break. I didn't find any Eddie Harris, but I did find Bob James "3" - we'll see if it yields any effected-out-horns funky fusion sounds!
- Strategy
I work with a sax player lately and he uses a lot of effects.
You need a mixer of some kind to boost the signal to stompboxes levels (well, at least adapt both levels and impedance)
and for sure a gate on fuzzes to avoid feedback and improve note separation. The funny thing is with such sustaining
notes FX will react in a different way than a guitar
A whammy 1 is a must.
You could use a mic installed in the mouthpiece too, it will not feedback as much.
Quote from: tomtom on February 16, 2010, 06:38:59 PM
I work with a sax player lately and he uses a lot of effects.
You need a mixer of some kind to boost the signal to stompboxes levels (well, at least adapt both levels and impedance)
and for sure a gate on fuzzes to avoid feedback and improve note separation. The funny thing is with such sustaining
notes FX will react in a different way than a guitar
A whammy 1 is a must.
You could use a mic installed in the mouthpiece too, it will not feedback as much.
My sax player will love the Whammy 1. Any real difference vintage vs. new model? We will play around with the mixer on practice Thursday. We have a "pickup" installed in the mouthpiece. Not a proper mic. What kind of mics would fit in the mouthpiece?
The WH1 sounds way better and got a better tracking, but it's getting old and need some repairs now and then (at least if you use it on stage)
Maybe a good choice would be to find a wh1 for the studio work and use the last one for gigs (I'm trying to repair it as I speak).
I don't know a lot about the mouthpiece pickup, it could be some kind of piezo but it works nicely, it's made by a shop in Paris, I will try to
find more infos about it
You could try :
Reverb (infinite ones are nice)
Delay
Gated fuzz
Wha
Whammy
Filter
Octaver might work but the tracking might be an issue, the whammy does the trick nicely without
having to find a sweet spot volume wise.
From there you have to experiment, it'a a different texture than the guitar so it's a bit hit or miss
This post may be large but I don't know how else to say everything. Some things are working and some aren't. Maybe I'm in over my head. Below I'll try to clarify a little. We tried a lot of things at practice last night. We had some successes but we are continuing to have issues with distortion and fuzz.
MORE BACKGROUND:
I'm in a band that is trying to create music in the spirit of Morphine. Dana Colley the sax player from Morphine is our current inspiration. He ran some effects in Morphine and is running a lot more effects in his current band A.K.A.C.O.D. I'm fairly confident he is using some kind of mic/pickup running directly out of his mouthpiece for his wet sound.
pics: http://liveon35mm.wordpress.com/2009/07/14/members-of-morphine/
He also has a pretty extensive pedal board
pic: http://www.akacod.com/sounds.html
Samples of some of his more current sounds (with effects) can be found on the current A.K.A.C.O.D. album "Hapiness" Songs are below. I'm sure you can find them online:
"Spanish Fly" Sax Solos start at 3:50
"Bad Weather" Sax Solo 2:45-3:55
I'd be interested to know how he gets that sound.
SUCESSES (you won't be surprised):
Here's what is working so far....
1. Reverb sounds great...
2. Delay sounds great (running two delays at the same time sounds very cool...)
3. Tremolo...awesome...
4. Flange...awesome...
5. Micro Pog..sounded just like you thought it would...Octave Down Sounds better than Octave Up but both work.
Almost Successes
1. Q-Tron...it was working but had a really harsh tone...it didn't sound very "musical"...
NOT SUCCESSFUL
I tried a few of your ideas regarding fuzz/distortion last night at practice and no dice. What was the most interesting is we had some of the fuzz/distortion pedals roaring. We could get plenty of effect (and some feedback) when our sax player wasn't playing. When he would play, the distortion and feedback would stop although the tone of the sax was altered a little. Mostly, it sounded like his clean tone was just "hotter" but it really wasn't "dirty" or "distorted" It was very strange...it's like the fuzz wouldn't "stick" or effect the signal when the sax tone was coming through.
Mixer->Fuzz=No Dice
Pog Octave Up -> Fuzz = No Dice
Pog Octave Down -> Fuzz=No Dice
GGG late 60's Botique Fuzz, tried all settings, adjusted the trim pot=No Dice
The only way we got any kind of dirt was by clipping the mixer. I have not tried a gated fuzz but somehow I'm not convinced it will work. I'm afraid to buy one until I know more. I Somehow I feel that there is something about the sax signal that makes it not work with fuzz/distortion. WHAT AM I MISSING?
Keep in mind that guitar players have traditionally used fuzz to make the guitar sound more like a tenor sax. No great surprise then that adding fuzz to a sax doesn't get you a whole lot more than what you started out with! :icon_wink:
Quote from: Mark Hammer on February 19, 2010, 01:08:04 PM
Keep in mind that guitar players have traditionally used fuzz to make the guitar sound more like a tenor sax. No great surprise then that adding fuzz to a sax doesn't get you a whole lot more than what you started out with! :icon_wink:
great point...I didn't know that....
...maybe I was wrong about what I was hearing and looking for...listen to the clips below and tell me what you think...the sax player is Dana Colley from Morphine
Samples of some of his more current sounds (with effects) can be found on the current A.K.A.C.O.D. album "Hapiness" Songs are below. I'm sure you can find them online:
"Spanish Fly" Sax Solos start at 3:50
"Bad Weather" Sax Solo 2:45-3:55
I'd be interested to know how he gets that sound.
(http://file://///kcollege-srv01/staff/KLHiller/Desktop/Dana%20Colley.jpg)
(http://file://///kcollege-srv01/staff/KLHiller/Desktop/Dana%20Colley%201.jpg)
Maybe with these pics you can help give me some ideas....
Apparently I don't know how to post pics....
Have a good weekend...
Went on youtube and found a live version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWsthjWlFvU&feature=related
The guy seems to use a wah wah in there too. The wah shapes the tone and when kept in the lower position it lessens the chance of feedback. Anyways, it sounds quite extreme! :icon_biggrin:
edit: just saw that you guys had mentioned a wah...
John
Well, i was surprise at first when we tried Fuzz/distortion because the attack or onset of the sax is pretty different from a guitar or bass
and somehow heavier distortion didn't mean heavier saturation. The harmonic content of the sax seems pretty complex already so you have
to saturate a lot to hear something but by then feedback and noise is a concern. A mouthpiece pickup is the first thing you need because
it got more fundamental, it's more precise and it feedback less but when you reach the saturation level you need, you will need a gating
action both for noise when you don't play and for articulation because it will create a more percussive sound i.e. more attack.
We worked almost a year to buid some kind of mixer for the system and it was a pain. You need to find a way to blend mouthpiece pickup
and classic pickup at least be able to select a mouthpiece pickup for distortion then bring the level to stompboxes level (blending is nice too)
then bring it back to line level.
If you don't have enough levels, you won't be able to trig filter and octavers correctly and you won't exctract the gain you need from distortions.
Think about impedance too, because once you work with line levels you could forget about classic fuzzes, at least most of them;
BTW, I love Morphine, listen to them almost everyday.
The Sax is Guillaume perret, the band Electric Epic :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tY_Oas_6lg&feature=player_embedded# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tY_Oas_6lg&feature=player_embedded#)
the guy with charlie hunter on this video got an amazing sound for a sax. check out the fills at the 1:00 mark, and then in his solo around 4:30.
i also think he was screaming through the sax later in the solo.
hunter is pretty damn cool on this song as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmUeZkr9H4k
Try an octave down pedal, like BOSS OC-2/3 or Mini POG set for full direct sound plus a 12 o'clock position of octave down sound, put it before an analog octave up pedal, a Octavio/a version, with low gain/boost. On guitar it gives some kind of "Clavinet" flavour. On the voice it is very interesting annd hard to describe.
I think some Ring Modulation could be great...
I've been doing some more research. Is it possible that impedance is an issue? The average guitar pickup is somewhere in-between 4K and 20K ohms (correct me if I'm wrong). But the sax pickup we are using is something like 125 ohms. Maybe this is having an effect on how the pedals are triggered?
Quote from: joegagan on February 19, 2010, 10:00:49 PM
the guy with charlie hunter on this video got an amazing sound for a sax. check out the fills at the 1:00 mark, and then in his solo around 4:30.
i also think he was screaming through the sax later in the solo.
hunter is pretty damn cool on this song as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmUeZkr9H4k
This is way cool thanks...
Quote from: bluehevy75 on February 22, 2010, 10:52:35 AM
I've been doing some more research. Is it possible that impedance is an issue? The average guitar pickup is somewhere in-between 4K and 20K ohms (correct me if I'm wrong). But the sax pickup we are using is something like 125 ohms. Maybe this is having an effect on how the pedals are triggered?
yes, hence the recommendation to get the signal to a mixer, then distribute from there.
Quote from: joegagan on February 22, 2010, 11:25:15 AM
Quote from: bluehevy75 on February 22, 2010, 10:52:35 AM
I've been doing some more research. Is it possible that impedance is an issue? The average guitar pickup is somewhere in-between 4K and 20K ohms (correct me if I'm wrong). But the sax pickup we are using is something like 125 ohms. Maybe this is having an effect on how the pedals are triggered?
yes, hence the recommendation to get the signal to a mixer, then distribute from there.
We tried the mixer. Maybe there is something else we are doing wrong.
SUCCESS!!!!
Last night we played around with pre-amps, compression, mixers, pickups vs. mics etc...some stuff sounded good but nothing triggered the distortion.
What finally did it was running a Flange and (or) the Q-Tron before the distortion. If anyone has any ideas why these kind of effect triggered the fuzz I'd love to hear it.
We will need to some work to keep the feedback from going crazy but it was difinetly working, usable, and sounding exactly like we hoped it would. Thanks for all or your time peeps.
Julian at the EHX forum sent me this that explains the situation nicely:
"A square wave is a signal full of harmonics, a sine wave is one devoid of harmonics.
Distortion adds harmonics, making a signal closer to a square wave. (additive synthesis)
Filtering removes harmonics, making a signal closer to a sine wave. (subtractive synthesis)
A saxophone is already very close to a square wave, so I didn't think distortion would effect it very much. So if you make it less like a square wave, the distortion will have a better effect on it."
This is why filters worked so well in front of the distortion/fuzz and this is what Strategy was saying earlier in the post. What should I search to just look up filters without modulation? Like a filter without the flange or without the envelope.
The Tim Escobedo 9V sallen-key filter looks cool. I haven't gotten around to building it yet. His circuits are simple but hugely fun and flexible. He has several filters, I think at least one of them is not envelope based. The Sallen-Key/MS20 filter does not have an envelope, his circuit assumes you will add your own modulation options. Search "escobedo circuit snippets" in this forum or Google.
A lot of the envelope filters should have an 'amount' for the envelope that allows you to turn that down. Some of them you could probably mod the 'frequency cutoff' control to accept an expression pedal input, making the filter accessible similar to a wah.
Also look at the wah circuits. Some of them are very interesting filters. The parapedal for example is a pretty extreme filter, very synth like I think.
I'll try to think of more filters. Without modulation they can be very static sounding but, utilitarian too if what you'd like to do is just roll off highs or lows...Used as such they are like "extreme EQing"
- Strategy
Stone Audio (UK) made a preamp and an analog multi effect for sax too:
http://www.effectsdatabase.com/model/stone/sax/preamp
http://www.effectsdatabase.com/model/stone/sax/fxunit (filter, octave & double tracking, my unit needs repair)
and probably one of the Vox Octavoices (not sure which one) was also meant to be used with sax:
http://www.effectsdatabase.com/model/vox/octavoice
http://www.effectsdatabase.com/model/vox/octavoice/brass
http://www.effectsdatabase.com/model/vox/octavoice/woodwind
Quote from: Renegadrian on February 16, 2010, 11:01:12 AM
I misread, I thought it was
Sex Effect Distortion or Fuzz
:icon_razz:
:icon_mrgreen: