Lizard Queen - split the difference

[Mark Hammer]

It didn't take long for the circuit of the over-ballyhooed Lizard Queen to be traced out and posted.  It is essentially a bazz fuss as the front end, followed by a gain stage and then an Escobedo Pushmepullyou circuit.  Decent fuzz, and fun to play, though not any sort of where-has-this-been-all-my-life pedal.

I built up two, installing sockets and playing with different transistors.  Although they don't have to be tightly matched, I found that the NPN/PNP pair that provide the variable octaving should be within handshake distance as far as hfe, to get the most audible octaving.  The sweet spot on the control for audible octave will likely depend on their degree of match, and I find the octaving is roughly on par with the Ampeg Scrambler, whose Texture control is about as twitchy as the Queen's.

  I ended up using a 2N2222 for Q3, and because I didn't really have any PNPs of similar hfe, I decided to go with a germanium, because I have lots of them, and it worked out nicely.  The bazz fuss front end is a 2N5088 on one of them and BC547 on the other.  Both provide quite acceptable sound.

But on to the meat of this post/thread.  I figured that if the bazz fuss is a decent fuzz on its own, then perhaps I could simply tap the output from that stage.  I was successful, but found the output level modest enough that switching between first stage and last stage would always require a volume adjustment.  So, instead I installed a SPDT toggle that takes the input to the last 100nf cap before the volume pot from either the "normal" place on the circuit board, OR the collector of Q2.

Since Q2 provides some gain, and the gain is variable, that provides a signal level more compatible with the output of the full circuit.  I also found that the Balance control on Q2 also provides some nice tonal variation of the bazz fuss portion.  Cranking it on mine gets a delightfully "wooly" tone.

Though it doesn't happen with the bazz fuss half, I find that, when using the full circuit, turning the guitar volume down a bit doesn't provide a "clean" tone, but rather a nice crunchy one, suitable for gritty rhythm work, with overdrive-like definition rather than fuzzy mush.

So, for the cost of a toggle, you get two fuzzes in one.  Some who build one may wish to use a stompswitch to go back and forth between the modes.  That should work, with the caveat that switching the (now disconnected) 100nf cap to two different places on the board will result in switch-popping.  The "big box" unit uses thru-hole components.  I have no idea what the smaller-box version uses, since I can't seem to find any gutshots.

I'll see if I can throw together some soundclips over the next few days.

[Ben N]

It didn't take long for the circuit of the over-ballyhooed Lizard Queen to be traced out and posted.  It is essentially a bazz fuss as the front end, followed by a gain stage and then an Escobedo Pushmepullyou circuit. 

And, of course no acknowledgement of the clear & obvious DIY roots, with JHS instead marketing it as a homage to EHX - even though it bears no similarity to anything out of EHX's past.

[FiveseveN]

But it says right on the website it's a "Unique transistor-based octave fuzz distortion circuit designed by Josh Scott".
Why would someone LIE on the Internet?!

[Steben]

The lizard chapter made me wonder why I still did not finish th3 green ringer. Which seems as one of the top end vintage octaves.

[Fancy Lime]

It didn't take long for the circuit of the over-ballyhooed Lizard Queen to be traced out and posted.  It is essentially a bazz fuss as the front end, followed by a gain stage and then an Escobedo Pushmepullyou circuit. 

And, of course no acknowledgement of the clear & obvious DIY roots, with JHS instead marketing it as a homage to EHX - even though it bears no similarity to anything out of EHX's past.

And unfortunately that is part of a pattern.

[stonerbox]

->I'll see if I can throw together some soundclips over the next few days.

If you would find the time to through together some sound clips I would love to hear it.

[Mark Hammer]

Although the elements are clearly from elsewhere, their combination in this way is relatively unique.  Maybe not a "design", but unique enough to be a product.  If we started listing all the products that were copies of things we collectively knew about here, it would be the longest thread in the forum.  And while it may have resulted from a brand-enhancing push by Scott, and Mike/EHX come out with a lot of pedals that can make you scratch your head as to "Why that?", EHX hasn't been in business this long by underestimating what appeals to players, including whatever hype results in that appeal.

In any event, my intent was not to provide a vehicle for Josh antipathy, but to identify that, with two known circuits contained, two "modes" are available for use, with one trace-cut (at the "input" to that last 100nf cap) and a toggle.

I want to see what Bill Ruppert can do with it.

[amz-fx]

Darn you , Mark!  Your first post sent me down a series of rabbit holes that veered off into ancient DIY history!

However, that gave me a few ideas... so, brain simulation for the win!

Best regards, Jack

[Ben N]

Although the elements are clearly from elsewhere, their combination in this way is relatively unique. 

Maybe not all that unique. https://www.freestompboxes.org/viewtopic.php?p=293082&hilit=Bazz+me+fuss+you
But even if it is, or even if it was independently arrived at, it clearly owes a debt to Hemmo & Tim--these are fairly oddball circuits, at least in this application. How hard would it be to acknowledge that debt?

[Steben]

Although the elements are clearly from elsewhere, their combination in this way is relatively unique.  Maybe not a "design", but unique enough to be a product.  If we started listing all the products that were copies of things we collectively knew about here, it would be the longest thread in the forum.  And while it may have resulted from a brand-enhancing push by Scott, and Mike/EHX come out with a lot of pedals that can make you scratch your head as to "Why that?", EHX hasn't been in business this long by underestimating what appeals to players, including whatever hype results in that appeal.

In any event, my intent was not to provide a vehicle for Josh antipathy, but to identify that, with two known circuits contained, two "modes" are available for use, with one trace-cut (at the "input" to that last 100nf cap) and a toggle.

I want to see what Bill Ruppert can do with it.

I actually like most Josh´s videos and gimmicks. There is no element of disdain whatsoever. And I even love the retro styling of stuff like the lizard. It's just not my cup of tea. But the BD2 isn't either.

[Mark Hammer]

Darn you , Mark!  Your first post sent me down a series of rabbit holes that veered off into ancient DIY history!

However, that gave me a few ideas... so, brain simulation for the win!

Best regards, Jack

SIMulation or STIMulation?
Regards,
Mark

[Fancy Lime]

To clarify my previous post: I didn't mean Josh specifically, although I would appreciate if guys like him who grew (through hard work of their own, no question) a successful business out of the fertile compost heap that is the DIY community were a little more upfront about their sources. The promo materials all too often make it sound like the designers were struck by divine inspiration and came up with this completely new circuit that has been floating around the forums for decades all on their own. That is not meant as a dig at Josh, just a general business observation. Many in similar positions do this and I realize that this is in large part due to commercial pressure and simply "how the game works". The target audience for the ads just would not care or understand it any other way. On the other hand, others are also successful while not playing that game and being upfront and saying "look there is this old DIY circuit by a guy name Tim Escobedo that I like so much I tweaked some component values and put it in a box so everyone can buy it if they want". I guess I just generally dislike how advertising works. Shout out to Brian Wampler though, who it seems handles the "acknowledging the roots" aspect quite gracefully, as far as I can tell.

Andy

[Mark Hammer]

We live in an era when the public's memory is short.

[Steben]

To clarify my previous post: I didn't mean Josh specifically, although I would appreciate if guys like him who grew (through hard work of their own, no question) a successful business out of the fertile compost heap that is the DIY community were a little more upfront about their sources. The promo materials all too often make it sound like the designers were struck by divine inspiration and came up with this completely new circuit that has been floating around the forums for decades all on their own. That is not meant as a dig at Josh, just a general business observation. Many in similar positions do this and I realize that this is in large part due to commercial pressure and simply "how the game works". The target audience for the ads just would not care or understand it any other way. On the other hand, others are also successful while not playing that game and being upfront and saying "look there is this old DIY circuit by a guy name Tim Escobedo that I like so much I tweaked some component values and put it in a box so everyone can buy it if they want". I guess I just generally dislike how advertising works. Shout out to Brian Wampler though, who it seems handles the "acknowledging the roots" aspect quite gracefully, as far as I can tell.

Andy

I find most of Josh's vids actually tell the roots of the design.
Last month he got roasted by some because he akchually explained a bad monkey is a tube screamer with a dual tone control. Which makes it a damn fine pedal.
If you chain up a behringer duo with a tube overdrive and a graphic equalizer you even have more.

[Fancy Lime]

True. And it illustrates what is going on here, I think. In his videos, Josh probably calls all or most of the shots. He does that very well and honestly and gives credit where it is due as far as I can tell without nerding out so hard that nobody except us lot could bare to watch it. He sometimes has a bit of a gearpage pedal fanboy vibe going but that's perfectly ok even though it makes my inner cold hard cynic cringe a little. In a collaboration with EHX or Boss, he likely has a lot less say in what the promo material looks like, which is probably written and designed by a professional ad agency with the purpose of making as much money as possible by all means necessary. You know... business!

[Steben]

I find it heart breaking people with a diy soul would stab someone who had the guts to go for pedals for a living. Not all but mist of us do this as a hobby. It's easy to shoot in a world where you have just fun and food comes on the table with a classic decent job.
They all love pedals. Josh loves pedals. The video's are fed by love for pedals. They do not make the selling run that much.

[Mark Hammer]

But does he have the box?

[FiveseveN]

They do not make the selling run that much.

They sold all 1000 big box versions at $350 during the 1-hour launch livestream. I don't think anyone's running out of food.
I know the thread is not about hating on Josh but he sure didn't make it easy. I think lykwydchykyn put it most eloquently (on the other forum):

I'm not disappointed in JHS the company, who took non-patented, non-copyrighted ideas and turned them into a product, just like every other pedal company.
I'm disappointed in Josh Scott the youtube personality, the self-styled "pedal historian"; who made a feature-length documentary on the history of the Proco Rat and the people who built it; who wrote and produced a freaking musical about the history of the pedal industry; who releases video after video about obscure pedals and the people who invented them. Sure, most guitar players won't care who Hemmo or Escobedo are, but most guitar players don't care who Woodcutter is or why Mike Matthews decide to paint big muffs green for a few years. He's got no issue making lengthy videos about that stuff.
*That* Josh knows these guys deserve recognition and chose to ignore it. Shame on him.

[Ben N]

I know the thread is not about hating on Josh but he sure didn't make it easy. I think lykwydchykyn put it most eloquently (on the other forum):

I'm not disappointed in JHS the company, who took non-patented, non-copyrighted ideas and turned them into a product, just like every other pedal company.
I'm disappointed in Josh Scott the youtube personality, the self-styled "pedal historian"; who made a feature-length documentary on the history of the Proco Rat and the people who built it; who wrote and produced a freaking musical about the history of the pedal industry; who releases video after video about obscure pedals and the people who invented them. Sure, most guitar players won't care who Hemmo or Escobedo are, but most guitar players don't care who Woodcutter is or why Mike Matthews decide to paint big muffs green for a few years. He's got no issue making lengthy videos about that stuff.
*That* Josh knows these guys deserve recognition and chose to ignore it. Shame on him.

This, 100%. I also have zero issue with the product per se. I don't even care especially that JHS & EHX made no mention of the origins of the circuit components. I do resent that JHS chose to talk about origins, which he did not have to do at all, and that in a misleading, dishonest way, seemingly determined to deny Hemmo & Tim credit while falsely ascribing credit to EHX circuits of the past (to which this has no connection whatsoever), despite holding himself out as a pedal historian, enthusiast and connoisseur, entirely apart from his personal commercial interest in his products. THAT was entirely unnecessary and uncalled for.

[Steben]

I see that yes. Makes sense.
I admit my interest in the product (or better lack of) influences my interest in judging. Go go green ringer.