I own lots of nice boutique pedals, but none of them have the "transparency" that the Fulltone pedals seem to have. What I mean is that Fulltone pedals sound like a part of your amp -- like they are actual components inside the amp. A lot of other pedals -- while they sound great -- sound like they are simply attached to the front of your amp. Think of it like powdered drink mixes -- the stuff that fully dissolves in the water is Fulltone, and the stuff that stays suspended are the other pedals.

What other pedals have that Fulltone transparency? There must be some . . .

RD

If transparency is the word we're gonna use, I don't really think it fits here, but who cares!!

RGW Bad Bob feels like it becomes a part of my amp, as did the Klons I have owned.

That's about it for me, I play way to many tubescreamer type pedals to say that they become a part of my amp, LOL The only 808 clone I could say that about is my 2 channel Blues Devil.

quote:

---

"transparency"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dosmun:

quote:

---

"transparency"

---

---

OOPS -- I forgot that was a four-letter word around here!!! :-) Perhaps that is why I felt compelled to explain what I meant.

RD

When I think of transparency the 1st thing that comes to mind is the wrath of TD I've been using my FD2 lately and it's been working great.It's not the end all of pedals but it's a workhorse.

Let's call it, 'mixability', where you can still hear the character of your amp and guitar even though the pedal is on.

Fulltones are great. I still have the FDII as my "take it and go" OD. I think the TIM and some Menatone pedals are mixable. RC booster, Banzai stuff.

My FD-II sounds very natural with my 59 BMRI, it's My favorite OD but would like to try the Barber LTD that one sounds like it would be very natural sounding.

Well, I hope the whole the Fulltone thing doesn't get out of hand. I know Mike can be "controversial." It seems everytime someone starts a Fulltone thread, it get's ugly.

I've been a Fulltone user for about 6 years. I have at least one of every Fulltone pedal. (no TTE yet.... and prob won't) I find that Fulltone's are very well built, and very consistent, and sound great. Yes there are guys now that spend time analyzing every little part of the circuit, and are making some very cool stuff. Mike doesn't have that kind of time anymore. Fulltone isn't out breaking new sonic ground, but they make great "re-issues" of older designs.

I've had both great, and somewhat rude service from Mike. When he's in a great mood, he's an awesome guy. Sometimes he can be kirt, and I understand.

I'm not a Fulltone purist. I actually don't have any Fulltone pedals on my board currently. Here are some of my favortie Fulltones:

FD-2: Took the TS-9 to a whole new level. A great overdrive, but too midrangy for rhythmn work. I'm actually going to rip a FD-2 apart and mod the heck out of it, just to see what I can come up with. I have a early Orange model that is simply awesome for smooth lead tones.

Soul Bender: Great Fuzz! Really big and fat. I love this for thick leads.

'69: Nice fuzz sound, and awesome cleanup with the volume knob.

Cylde wah: It takes a little while to get used to the different sweep, but a very toneful wah pedal. Smokes my Crybaby.

Other highlights: Octafuzz, Deja 2, and Choraflange.

Head

TD will you take care this and set the lad straight

Chow,
Seegs

Fulltone makes good stuff imo.

Just had my older cf-1 updated, went very smoothly.

I have never had any problems dealing with them. I suspect he has little time to deal w/ things so I have kept my communication brief and to the point and have gotton great service everytime.

quote:

---

Originally posted by felken:


Just had my older cf-1 updated, went very smoothly.

---

What are the updates?

I think Mike's overall design is a benchmark. Real durable, workhorse cases, good paint-jobs, great solid & sizable knobs/pots... they feel like you are getting your money's worth when you pick 'em up and behold.

As far as sounds go, they are definitely better than any mass-produced pedal but they fall short of many of the exotic, smaller builders that are out there....
which is not an issue really as I feel their tone is just 'vanilla/chocolate/strawberry' enough to fit with their 'next step up' niche that they're already at.

Mixable is def. more accuarate than transparent, imho.

from an email with fulltone teck support

"there's an update available for the older CF-1.

1. heavy duty footswitch

2. more head room

3. more balanced tonality



The cost is $40 with shipping (only available for 48 states)"

It does have more balanced tone to my ears, ie: less apparent low end loss.

I use it in a loop ususally so wanted more input headroom.

If you do it get a return authorization form from ft and send it with.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rockin_Dachshund:

quote:

---

Originally posted by felken:


Just had my older cf-1 updated, went very smoothly.

---

What are the updates?

---

If I should descripe my impressions with Fulltone in one word .. it would be generic. That is the reason I only use the Soul-Bender, the rest of them around here ... don't see much use.

quote:

---

Originally posted by felken:
from an email with fulltone teck support

"there's an update available for the older CF-1.

1. heavy duty footswitch

2. more head room

3. more balanced tonality



The cost is $40 with shipping (only available for 48 states)"

It does have more balanced tone to my ears, ie: less apparent low end loss.

I use it in a loop ususally so wanted more input headroom.

If you do it get a return authorization form from ft and send it with.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rockin_Dachshund:

quote:

---

Originally posted by felken:


Just had my older cf-1 updated, went very smoothly.

---

What are the updates?

---

---

I'm interested. But when did Mike change the specs? What's the turn around time?

Heh, if a Fulltone sounds generic, what does a BOSS or DOD pedal sound like?

I generally agree with Sofus though. At one point Fulltone was fresh on the market with authentic sounding, vintage re-creations. Now that everyone and their brother has hopped on the boutique bandwagon, those sounds are getting a little played out - if you've heard one great sounding Ge Fuzz Face, haven't you heard them all? What more can you squeeze out of such a simple circuit? Same thing with all the 808 derivatives. Give them the credit though, if you come up with a great one (like the FD2) it becomes a benchmark, and becomes bland.

Then again, people still use BF & Tweed Fenders and 4-input Marshalls - but amps have a lot more tonal variety than a pedal. Especially put in context - both the Sex Pistols, BB King, and the Smiths used cranked up Twin Reverbs, but could they all use a fuzz, overdrive, or octave?

Then again (again), look at someone like Tom Morello. He still uses the same old beat up, POS (to most people) pedals - RATMs greatest tones are a 50 watt Marshall with a digital flanger, delay, DOD EQ, Whammy, and a wah.

In the end you can only go with what your ear (and gut) likes.

I had an ok experience with fulltone service, it took a while, and communication lacked, but eventually it returned.

But I don't know, I've had a supatrem, a '69, and now an older dejavibe (which I really like). But they weren't gold to me. I am probably gonna pony up for a mini dejavibe though. Mine is too humongous for the board. In terms of 'transparency', i don't find them any more or less integrated into the sound than many of the other good boutique pedal guys. Barber, lovepedal, bjf - all have natural amp like sounding pedals (at least the ones i've had/heard).

Gotta give props to Mike here. Every encounter I have had with him in regard to service on his products has been exceptional. Once I threw a custom idea at him and he balked, but that's understandable.

I have the Clyde pedal myself which is fantastic. I originally chose it over an RMC3 when I went wah shopping 4 years ago. The fulltone got the nod because of the response in the high end that the regular RMC3 couldn't reproduce. I did end up getting an RMC3LE though because I did miss some of the cool stuff the RMC3 did on my original auditions.

My conclusion is out of the box :
Clyde for clean
RMC for dirty

Now with the HALO conductor and extended high end I have been tweaking the RMC3LE for months to try to match my Clyde and may finally be able to let it go. There is always something still missing from the RMC in comparison. The fact is the sweep on the Clyde is just sweeter, better and really sucks you in! With some learning curve though I think I will get just as much enjoyment from the RMC3, if not more.

I know this is a long tangent at this point and one may ask, "Why not just keep the Clyde if you like it so much?" The answer is if I can get the RMC3LE nearly identical to my ears, then I like to offload what becomes redundant gear.

~peace~