It's not meant to go straight into a mixer, it's meant to go in front of an amp, to distort the clean channel.......it is in effect a preamp.
Distortus Maximus
- Thread starter cobhc
- Start date
It's not meant to go straight into a mixer, it's meant to go in front of an amp, to distort the clean channel.......it is in effect a preamp.
For those of you saying it sounds thin and shitty, here's my clip again.
https://dl.getdropbox.com/u/371262/kranktest.wav
https://dl.getdropbox.com/u/371262/kranktest.wav
well, skeksis268 said that, not me. I was saying, that I can not imagine it sounding good straight into a mixer. All I said was, that it sounded shitty through a pod xt.
Is there anyway in the PodXT of turning the preamp off, so you're just modelling a poweramp? If so........is this the way you used it?
Metal Overload
Member
- Sep 8, 2005
- 1,778
- 0
- 36
I actually don't know if you can switch the preamp off in the pod. Never tried that.
As the distortus maximus is supposed to be a distortion pedal and not a preamp, I used it as a distortion pedal infront of the pod and it sounded awful. the built in tube screamer sounds way better.
But anyway, I sold it a long time ago, so don't worry about me
As the distortus maximus is supposed to be a distortion pedal and not a preamp, I used it as a distortion pedal infront of the pod and it sounded awful. the built in tube screamer sounds way better.
But anyway, I sold it a long time ago, so don't worry about me
Metal Overload
Member
- Sep 8, 2005
- 1,778
- 0
- 36
In fact is most a preamp than just a pedal, i know.
And you probably would still owned it if you were using it in a proper way, that thing sound better than a POD.
We are not worring about you, just giving reviews and point of views of an awesome pedal. saying the pedal sounded awful using it in a wrong way isn´t fair. is like using it in front of distorted channel of an amp.
And you probably would still owned it if you were using it in a proper way, that thing sound better than a POD.
We are not worring about you, just giving reviews and point of views of an awesome pedal. saying the pedal sounded awful using it in a wrong way isn´t fair. is like using it in front of distorted channel of an amp.
This statement alone tells me you didn't use the pedal as intended, it was primarily made to make a good clean tube amp sound similar to a Rev. At least that's what the guys at Krank told me when I visited.
John_C
formerly Skeksis268
oliver you really don't seem to be getting this.........listen to cobhc, he knows what he's talking about
That thing is called distortus maximus. How the hell is this not a distortion pedal? Why is it not called preampus maximus then?
So tell me, how else would you use a distortion pedal if not plugging your guitar into it and the output to the amp sim?
I also clearly said in the beginning, that I did not try it on a real amp so I only commented on how it sounds with a pod.
I really don't want to start a fight with anyone because I am fairly new to this forum (which doesn't mean I am new to music) but I really don't like that people think I am stupid if I have a different oppinion.
So tell me, how else would you use a distortion pedal if not plugging your guitar into it and the output to the amp sim?
I also clearly said in the beginning, that I did not try it on a real amp so I only commented on how it sounds with a pod.
I really don't want to start a fight with anyone because I am fairly new to this forum (which doesn't mean I am new to music) but I really don't like that people think I am stupid if I have a different oppinion.
Well, it just so happens that I know the guy who started the company from when he was building amps in his garage. I bought a prototype of his Distortus Maximus when it was still in the design stage and was called a Krankenstein (before Dimebag's amp acquired that title). Here's pics of the casing and guts.
As for whether it's his design, I can't say as I haven't studied the differences between this and the treble booster and smash drive. What I can see is that this prototype is a bit different than the end result DM you buy at the store. Values and placement of some of the components is very different and ALL the pots on this are linear taper. This tells me that there was some experimentation and thought put into the design of this pedal, not just pasting two existing designs together. See for yourself.
Omega_Void
Your Eventual Destroyer
I'd forgotten about this thread. Okay, let's take a look at the circuits...
All the pots in the Smash Drive circuit are marked "B" (= linear) also, so I guess your prototype is showing its roots.
According to Mnorbye's layout, Distortus Maximus uses all log pots for the tonestack, but the actual values are exactly the same as in the Smash Drive tonestack, and the topology (standard Marshall-style) is identical. So changing a linear to a logarithmic pot just changes what position the knobs need to be in to get a particular respones - the range of possible responses remains the same.
Mr Krank has kept the gain-setting 100 ohm resistor and it's DC-blocking capacitor (these components are not seen in the LM386 datasheet circuits, but the possibility of reducing the gain in this manner is mentioned without specific values in the application notes). In Distortus Maximus these are exactly the same values as in the Smash Drive.
Mr Krank has, however, removed the gain pot (i.e. it's just like the Smash Drive with the gain turned right down) and used a volume pot to control the level going into the LM386 instead (preceeded by a series resistor, so some attenuation is always present) - this (very standard) type of volume control requires a log pot.
This change in the way gain is applied should make some difference to the distortion character, with more clipping at the input-stage for a given amount of output-stage clipping.
He's also added a small capacitor in shunt before the LM386 input, to roll off the high-frequency response, a significant difference in tone. Although I note that the turnover frequency will vary a bit depending on the position of the gain knob. Pre-distortion LPF has had some very salutary results for me, so this is a cool tweak IMHO.
The front-end uses exactly the same resistor components as the Screaming Bird, except for the addition of a large-value input resistor (a no-brainer if you plan to plug a guitar into it
). The cap values determining the exact turnover frequency of the high-pass filtering have been changed.
Edit: A different transistor has been used. One small-signal NPN behaves the same as another in this circuit so you could bung in any type you have knocking around. It's arbitrary.
In sum, a different (more standard type) gain control, HPF cap values tweaked, and a pre-distortion LPF implemented. None of these adaptations are rocket science and taking Screaming Bird -> Smash Drive as a starting point (how else to explain the uncannily identical values of most of the components) the circuit could be worked up over a wet weekend.
I've drawn the circuits up as schematics for comparison:
YouSendIt download, you can see where the differences are. And aren't.
While I'm not dissing the pedal itself (I've not tried it), disparity between cost of manufacture and retail price can IME only be accounted for by either R&D which looks to have been pretty minimal, or bare-faced avarice.
But I'm sure he's a great guy if you meet him socially.
All the pots in the Smash Drive circuit are marked "B" (= linear) also, so I guess your prototype is showing its roots.
According to Mnorbye's layout, Distortus Maximus uses all log pots for the tonestack, but the actual values are exactly the same as in the Smash Drive tonestack, and the topology (standard Marshall-style) is identical. So changing a linear to a logarithmic pot just changes what position the knobs need to be in to get a particular respones - the range of possible responses remains the same.
Mr Krank has kept the gain-setting 100 ohm resistor and it's DC-blocking capacitor (these components are not seen in the LM386 datasheet circuits, but the possibility of reducing the gain in this manner is mentioned without specific values in the application notes). In Distortus Maximus these are exactly the same values as in the Smash Drive.
Mr Krank has, however, removed the gain pot (i.e. it's just like the Smash Drive with the gain turned right down) and used a volume pot to control the level going into the LM386 instead (preceeded by a series resistor, so some attenuation is always present) - this (very standard) type of volume control requires a log pot.
This change in the way gain is applied should make some difference to the distortion character, with more clipping at the input-stage for a given amount of output-stage clipping.
He's also added a small capacitor in shunt before the LM386 input, to roll off the high-frequency response, a significant difference in tone. Although I note that the turnover frequency will vary a bit depending on the position of the gain knob. Pre-distortion LPF has had some very salutary results for me, so this is a cool tweak IMHO.
The front-end uses exactly the same resistor components as the Screaming Bird, except for the addition of a large-value input resistor (a no-brainer if you plan to plug a guitar into it
). The cap values determining the exact turnover frequency of the high-pass filtering have been changed.Edit: A different transistor has been used. One small-signal NPN behaves the same as another in this circuit so you could bung in any type you have knocking around. It's arbitrary.
In sum, a different (more standard type) gain control, HPF cap values tweaked, and a pre-distortion LPF implemented. None of these adaptations are rocket science and taking Screaming Bird -> Smash Drive as a starting point (how else to explain the uncannily identical values of most of the components) the circuit could be worked up over a wet weekend.
I've drawn the circuits up as schematics for comparison:
YouSendIt download, you can see where the differences are. And aren't.
While I'm not dissing the pedal itself (I've not tried it), disparity between cost of manufacture and retail price can IME only be accounted for by either R&D which looks to have been pretty minimal, or bare-faced avarice.
But I'm sure he's a great guy if you meet him socially.
John_C
formerly Skeksis268
John_C
formerly Skeksis268
myself, i would every day. As a matter of fact, i do. To my ears it sounds much more convincing, real and meaty than anything i've ever got out of an ampsim
John_C
formerly Skeksis268
I think it's mostly down to the fact that i'm shit with ampsims, but i understand how to work with physical gear. Also probably because i've shaped my playing to the krank so much over the last 2 years that i'm not really in the best position to exploit other gear
John_C
formerly Skeksis268
You're not the only one dude!
it's not a bad thing, i think it's a waste that so much effort goes into making digital imitations of analog gear. Imagine what could be achieved if all that thought was put into creating totally new sounding effects (but not just gimmicks).
For example, tubes are great for sounding like tubes. They have amazing overdrive.
But what if something was made that was effectively a guitar processor but wasn't designed to sound like anything already made, but still had the musical subtleties that a tube amp does.
Digital has given us freedom, but we're still pretty unwilling to really make use of it. What people really seem to want is a recto made of 0s and 1s
