Jimi Hendrix' Gear and Mods at West Coast Organ and Amp

[Xplorer]

Ok, what am gonna say may sound strange but, anyway.

To me BOG really sound like 2 fuzz... one boosting(with very low fuzz setting) and the latter fuzzing. with the neovibe between the 2 it works wonderfull.
>wah>axis>neovibe>fuzzface>amp set for a little breakup.
Instead to use a cranked amp, i replaced it with the fuzzface and it worked well for bedroom level loll.

I think it does BOG pretty well and amazingly also do woodstock very well if you play with the settings a little.

i see what you mean. the boost fuzz definitely makes "that sound" , with high volume and zero or very low fuzz.
Now there are some Wilder tones sometimes.
one hypothesis would be that he had a fuzz which could play this special boost role ( just like if the pedal wasn't modded ), and thanks to the volume strat and a fuzz mod like Dave's or something else, he could push it into some Wilder sounds.

as we see, there's only one fuzz. Dave's mod can bring a lot of power and sustain but i'm not sure if could get the wildest Hendrix tones.
Anyway, for the whole rest, from my experiments, i don't need two fuzz at all.

https://soundcloud.com/xplorer80/141123 ... ows-fuzz-i

one other hypothesis which could be fun , would be that his fuzz may have been modded this way :

the switch wouldn't work to bypass the whole fuzz anymore, but to simply engage a second fuzz or some boost mod just with his foot - hence some confusions sometimes here, and questions from peoples who point this or that concert and a moment when he kicks the fuzz on thinking it's between dry signal/fuzz but no ... so this could explain it - so he could get some Wilder parts, and the rest of the time it's the fuzz allways ON with just its volume set at max and the fuzz down to zero, acting as this special boost coloring his tone.

Hendrix could be a good client for such mod i think, so he could go from this special boosted tone for the "clean/breakup sounds" , to some amazing feedbacks. so the mod may probably be a second fuzz into one enclosure , why not ?
What do you think Dave ? i know that the mod you did already brings so much power and sustain but for machine gun endless notes and "are you experienced" live , i'd perhaps go for a mix of both : maybe your mod or a simple fuzz using only its volume and controlable with the strat volume, + a second circuit like another fuzz switched ON with the foot switch when needed. both
I suppose that it could explain a few things.

i can imagine Hendrix explaining that he likes his clean tones with one fuzz volume up and fuzz control down, and his Wilder tones when adding a second fuzz in the chain.

i can also imagine that Jimi necessarily experimented by himself sometimes with all the fuzz faces he had, by having two fuzz in the chain and tweaking the knobs of both to his preference.

the "clean fuzz" can definitely produce some nice cleans, and add to that the strat volume, you get every clean Hendrix tones you want, i think.

i can then very well figure that he wanted both in one, switchable just from his foot. it sounds like a very good compromise i think. and there would never be his strat straight to his amp, even for clean sounds.

clean tones with a "clean fuzz" :
https://soundcloud.com/xplorer80/141125 ... c-ladyland

are you experienced live :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfZHGJxv3qQ

btw, i received the 2n525 you were talking about Dave, will test them later.
And edit : i think i remember ( not so sure, maybe just my imagination ), a picture of Jimi with two fuzz in the chain, raising questions, a few years ago.

[Tazin]

Dave,
I know this thread has gone on some tangents lately, so I was wondering if it would be possible for you to briefly summarize the modifications you've mentioned so far regarding Jimi's pedals?

[mathd]

To me, using 2 fuzz is the only way all these little box will sound good.
I really like a clean fuzz into the neovibe/univibe. Fuzz turned up before the neovibe sound really bad to me.

[daveweyer]

Explorer,
I think everyone who worked for Jimi knew he liked to try things. I mentioned before that he used the preamp section of his '66 Guild Quantum amp to drive other amps.
I think I can post some pics of his Guild amp showing the mods if I can arrange it with the owner.........

So two fuzz units better than one? Obviously it works.

You might try continuing with the mods on the one pedal just to see what happens.
Use a pot as the input resistor to the base of Q1 so you can vary the amount all the way to zero ohms.
Then add a third transistor as an emitter follower on Q2. Hook the collector of Q3 to the battery, the collector of Q2 to the base of the emitter follower Q3, use a 15K or 20K collector load on Q2, use about a 10K resistor as the emitter resistor on Q3, then run the feedback resistor (100K) from the emitter of the third transistor back to the base of Q1 like the original circuit except divide the 100K resistor in the middle (2x50K) and hook a 50K pot to a 22uf capacitor to ground at the junction of the two resistors to short out the AC feedback to Q1 when needed. Then permanently bypass the 1K emitter resistor on Q2 with a 22uf capacitor so it will always have maximum gain.
This works like the original circuit except you can have maximum gain on Q2 without having maximum gain on Q1.
With the new controls you will have a lot to play with and will be able to balance the distortion between the devices in the box and the input channel of your Marshall. You will also have more gain where you want it.
Obviously, take the signal output from the emitter of Q3 to your amp.
This is very similar to a West Coast mod.

[Xplorer]

Sure ! We'd love to see this guild amp !

About the fuzz, yes, i'll keep tweaking it, sure.
Did you add a third stage with Q3 ?
I'll try to transcript these recommendations on the paper but if it doesn't bother you, a hand draw layout from you would be awsome, and it'd help to avoid confusions.

Thank you !

Yes, a second fuzz added to a clean fuzz should be working, totaly.
And it could please swankmotee, carlygtr .
I think it's why he got his "clean tone", and his wild sounds, all in one fuzz.

And we didn't get that when he bypassed the fuzz with his foot, he still uses fuzz, giving his special hendrix clean tone.

[mathd]

With two fuzz, i like the 50k input pot on the second fuzz.
X2 for the guild amp picture

About the hendriz fuzz.. maby just rewired the bypass switch to bypass the 22u cap on the fuzz pot(or maby with some resistor in serie for a low fuzz setting or high fuzz setting)?.
Thats a fuzz or clean fuzz option switch with just one fuzz circuit. very easy to do.

That 3 transistor fuzz above look really interesting.!!!

[daveweyer]

If you add the emitter follower to the original FF circuit and change the feedback path, it gives a clean fuzz and a dirty fuzz all in one.
The thing about the original FF which made it so cool is that since the AC feedback controls the gain of the first stage at the base junction of Q1, the gain of Q1 is actually controlled by the volume knob on the guitar. Technically, the gain of a summing amp is R1/R2, or, the ratio of the two resistors, the feedback resistor, and the volume control plus the pickup AC resistance.
If you run your Wah into the FF, the system doesn't work any more since the Wah has a low impedance output. It just takes the gain of the first stage to the near limit. That's why all that squealing happened when Jimi first tried this in Catfish Blues.
So you need that input resistor if you plan to hook a Wah into the FF, it raises the AC resistance of the Wah output by the value of the resistor, so the gain of Q1 goes down to 1 or 2 or 3, depending on the resistor value.
So you need to make that input resistor a pot, so you can adjust for different impedance inputs.
For just a guitar, you want the value lower, or maybe zero.
If you add the third transistor to the circuit, you can still have the guitar volume control set the gain in Q1, but you can have Q2 wide open for tons of sustain and gain.
You might for instance just have the footswitch bypass the input resistance, so when you turned the guitar volume up, the gain of Q1 would go up and it would clip very hard. In this circuit method there is no actual fuzz control, just the guitar volume control. If a Wah is plugged in, the input resistor is left in the circuit, but Q2 still has maximum gain, so you always get that sustain boost without hard clipping and squealing.
Anyway.............

[shakti]

This is all very interesting, but the fact of the matter is that Jimi used one and only one fuzz at any given time (well, except for the Octavio/a), so I think we should still try to pinpoint what type of circuit he used at any given time.

I think I speak for most people when I say that the "big 3" og Hendrix late period tones are Woodstock, Band of Gypsys/Fillmore and Berkeley. Probably because they're well recorded and available. Isle of Wight, while I still like that show and recording, sounds pretty bad. But there seems to have been some strange stuff going on - The Who/Townshend also sounded much worse at that gig than they normally did. Either it's the recording/acoustics, or there was some funny stuff going on with the power (brownout, perhaps).

In any case, those three (Woodstock, BOG and Berkely) do sound fairly different. For me, BOG is *the one*, and I'm always trying to get closer to that tone.

Dave - did you ever see inside any of Hendrix' fuzzes that were moded by Roger Mayer (or custom built by him)? What can you tell us about them? I'm not into the techical side of fuzz circuits, so I really don't understand quite what is going on with your West Coast mods. But how did they differ from Roger Mayer's mods/circuits?

The fuzz on BOG, to me, sounds like it's fairly high gain, but set for only a medium fuzz setting. It remains very tight, yet warm, and doesn't completely overload the amp, yet adds a lot of tight sustain and overtones. Many people have thought that it's an Axis type circuit, but perhaps a West Coast mod pedal gets there as well or better?
Has anyone here built a "complete" West Coast fuzz yet? If I understand this correctly, it reacts differently so setting the fuzz on 0 and volume max on a standard fuzz face will not yield the same results as a West Coast fuzz?

[Xplorer]

Cool !!

great explanations. Now it requires some test for the ears. there are the ways to get more power, and how it works tonewise.

the way the bc108 Dunlop fuzz works with only the volume pleases me a lot for the cleans, and the "clean" bog sounds,
i'm not sure i'd want to alter it, i'd rather add something to it, switchable, which may have to work for the ears too, regarding its mission : getting it wild but beautiful.

i'll try to draw what you described before, and do some tests.
then i'll put in in serie with the bc108 fuzz, to see how it works once combined.
i'll see how your fuzz works for the cleans, alone too off course.

one thing that comes out, IMHO, is the enhanced personnality of the transistors , germanium or silicon.
the germanium first fuzz base works great this way for Woodstock, monterey, some other things too.
the silicon works great for bog, some later albums, isle of Wight, Berkeley ...
considering the timeline, it follows the evolution of transistors quite well i think.

[Xplorer]

This is all very interesting, but the fact of the matter is that Jimi used one and only one fuzz at any given time (well, except for the Octavio/a), so I think we should still try to pinpoint what type of circuit he used at any given time.

yes but this one fuzz visible could have totaly been a "clean fuzz" and "a clean fuzz + a fuzz booster" combined in one fuzz face enclosure, and switchable between both, rather than switchable between a simple dry signal and a simple fuzz ( modded ) .
that could be what fooled us, since we're used to see fuzz working this way.
but when i hear Hendrix cleans, after the latest tests i did, it totaly makes sense to me that his cleans weren't the dry signal to the amp at all, and he could push his special "cleans to the wildest tones, letting us think he switched between dry and fuzz signal ..... exactly what everyone did, and that's how everyone never sounded like Hendrix ( soul and fingers appart ) .

The fuzz on BOG, to me, sounds like it's fairly high gain, but set for only a medium fuzz setting. It remains very tight, yet warm, and doesn't completely overload the amp, yet adds a lot of tight sustain and overtones. Many people have thought that it's an Axis type circuit, but perhaps a West Coast mod pedal gets there as well or better?

did you hear my latest clips ? also, the presence control set very high on the amp is important. i think it works great for the "clean" sounds of BOG ( the major part ) , but not yet for the wildest tones. i'd like to add another fuzz working on its volume, wild but with no fuzz, or a third stage, or something.

Has anyone here built a "complete" West Coast fuzz yet? If I understand this correctly, it reacts differently so setting the fuzz on 0 and volume max on a standard fuzz face will not yield the same results as a West Coast fuzz?

yes i did it, a first base, which will now evolve. did you hear the clips ?

[swankmotee]

Yes I heard the clips and they sound great but, Jimi only had one fuzz and it was obvious when he cut it on and off that is was the only distortion other than the amp when had the guitar cranked to 10. Also there was no second switch for a second stage of gain other than when ran the Octavia together with the FF like on the other performances from the Fillmore BOG show. I'm still scratching my head at the comments that say he had the fuzz set low or off because his fuzz sounds are raging throughout the shows and it's obvious as the nose on your face he was controlling the amount of fuzz gain from the guitar vol knob and that is why you hear different levels of "clean" enhancement of the tone. But if you watch the filmed portions of the show you can see for yourself when he uses the fuzz. All the clean tones remember are effected bythe Univibe ( whether the effect was on or off) being in line and adding it's own e.q. and slight gain boost to the input signal which those original units all did. Also that particular amp head added its own, unique tonal grind and mojo to the overall combinations of the pedals and guitar that created those magical tones and you need to reference the Baggy Sessions to hear it is one in the same. That one red/white knob FF was used at RAH,BOG,Woodstock,and every gig sounded different im sure due to temperature,battery voltage, and condition of cables.

[Xplorer]

i think you missed the hypothesis behind, no disrespect, please re read.
and some live test would get there too. the clips, you liked them, thanks, well they're not the strat straight to the amp, it would have been very different then. it's going through the fuzz volume at max, and zero fuzz gain.

now imagine if to that, we would add something more to get it wild.

then, imagine that all that would be in an enclosure, and the unique footswitch would then be used between : clean fuzz ( the way i used it described on the top ) , OR this clean fuzz + an extra boost getting it wild.

i think he switched between both rather than between the dry signal ( complete bypass ) and a fuzz, modded or not, because this doesn't get there.

the clip from carlygtr shows what i'm describing at 1 : 32 , listen to the before, and the after he kicks his fuzz ON ( actualy, IMO, that's the extra boost engaged ) , and before that, it's not the simple dry signal and amp saturation, and it's not the extra gain from the univibe as you say ( IMHO ) , there's something from the fuzz ( the clean fuzz i'm describing ) .

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2268q ... 8-69_music

he could off course control both positions with his strat vol knob.

it's just a hypothesis but it makes sense to me and it'll get me there, just my way.

i don't think we can explain the big tonal changes just with the temperature etc , conditions of cables ...
especialy since my tests got me there, and the different type of playing or just a few différences on the strat volume or a few differencesin the setting of the fuzz would get me from electric ladyland to band of gypsys tones, which are very different, but they have this "clean fuzz" in common, i think. it engages only me, you're not forced to follow this for sure ; )

bog and Woodstock are a completely different fuzz type, from germanium to silicon i think. that's what i heard with Dave's fuzz first base : Woodstock rasp tone, and the bc108 vuzz : BOG. the first one couldn't get to BOG, very different personnality.

[daveweyer]

Shakti,
You're right, the West Coast fuzz reacts differently with the fuzz at zero and gain at max, and so do Roger's circuits, at least the ones I remember.
So they were both different than a normal FF. Roger had a couple mods, maybe more; one was basically the stock unit with larger resistors on the collector of the second transistor for more gain on that stage, and larger input and output capacitors for more meat, and another mod had a very cleverly used system of different polarity devices in the first and second transistors so he could hook the feedback to the emitter of the first transistor instead of to the base. This allowed the Wah to be plugged in and turned on without taking the gain of the first transistor to infinity. The fuzz control and only the fuzz control determined the gain of the first stage in that mod. Maybe this mod came later, I'm not totally sure.

I liked the West Coast series input resistor because it could control what effect the Wah had on the fuzz gain, and I liked the third transistor idea because it would allow you to have a clean super gain, and a dirty super gain all in one unit. I think Fuller posted an FF mod with a series input resistor.
I only made a few of the three transistor FF units.

With the three transistor unit, you can leave it in the circuit all the time to overdrive your Marshall input stage, and just switch the input resistor value to have automatic fuzz control from the guitar volume control; the more you turn up the guitar, the more fuzz you get, kind of like a multiplier. And with a pot as the input resistor you can tweak the sound and amount of distortion to taste.

So if Jimi was using something like this, it didn't matter where the fuzz control was set, once he pushed the button and the guitar volume became the fuzz control (within the limits set by the input series resistor/pot), the circuit went to the maximum fuzz it could get with that particular input resistor, and then he had both--max preset fuzz, and maximum secondary gain.

Clear as mud??

[Blackburn]

Hi, this is my first post here and just wanted to say this is a great thread! Dave, you've mentioned the Guild Quantum amp a few times and I too would like to know more about it. You say it is from 1966? Would be interesting to find out the manufacturing date. We know that Jimi left for England in September of 66' , maybe it was an amp he already had or purchased soon after signing with Chas Chandler ? With all of the mods that were done he obviously must have liked it!

[daveweyer]

A clarification of the three transistor fuzz;
If the feedback signal is taken from the emitter of the third transistor it must be fed into the emitter if the first transistor, sort of like the later axis fuzz.
It the feedback signal is taken from a small collector load on the third transistor, it can be fed back into the base of the first transistor, like the original FF. This method gives the guitar volume control the ability to regulate the amount of fuzz.
In the former circuit, the input doesn't care what goes in, either a guitar or wah, and there is no input resistor.
My earlier post was completely misleading. I read it this morning and went WTF??
Sorry if I confused anyone...............

The Guild Quantum amp which West Coast repaired and Jimi later gave to Cat Mother, has a serial# of 3165, and has an original electrolytic with a date code of 24066.