Boss TU-3 Tuner is swell.

[Zakor]

I was about to sell my TU-2 and try a Turbo Tuner or some other box when I noticed that the TU-3 had been anounced. Through the marvels of ebay I recevied mine last week. It's definately a step up from the TU-2. The extra LEDs on it do help and it locks on to pitch faster too. I posted a little video clip of both in case anyone wants to have a peek. If you thought the TU-2 was dandy and are in the market for a tuner I would hold of as it's a step forward fore sure. Merry Holidays!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mXPZijaWGc

[Trandy]

Very cool...thanks for posting this.

[JUSTJOB]

Yup, very cool! I plan on getting one after the holidays, seems perfect for me.

[vulcaniza P]

i was curious as to tu3. good to see it's not crap.

i've been pretty happy with my tu2 and have no real reason to replace it... i guess if it ever were to die then i'd get a tu3.

[Blakemore Effects]

Good review. Nice stuff. I'll definitely consider one now.

[Sniper-V]

Cool!

A lot of great tuners out there now.

But,

I don't have a reason to get a new one because my old TU-2 is getting the job done
day after day. It's probably been at least 7-8 years if not more, it just won't go down! If that day ever comes, nice to see some great choices out there.

[thezeng]

the one thing that really really annoyed me about the TU-2 is that it would never stay in the same place, it would always flicker about. its good that they fixed that.

the good thing about boss tuners is that you can go straight through without muting, (i think hardwire has this too?)

Its good if you want to check your notes on an oscillating pedal if you aren't a musical guru.

[wrbush31]

Good review. I still can't decide whether or not I want to get one. Do you feel that this upgrade has made a large impact for you or it's just a case of being more updated?

I feel like I'm looking to convince myself I need the new one:)

Good video, thanks!

[Zakor]

I think the upgrade has made a positive impact for me, 'large impact' would be a bit of a stretch as the TU-2 worked as a tuner. But, it always felt like a bit of a compomise using it which is why I was ready to give a Turbotuner a shot(or some other 'fancier' tuner). It was just not as easy to tune with as a couple of other non-pedal tuners I have.

With the TU-3 I don't feel like that. I find it's quicker to tune up and glad I made the swap. I no longer feel that tuning is suffering because of the tuner. I guess that is a large impact in that I'm happy with my pedal tuner now...

[wrbush31]

Hmm, that seems pretty significant. Who knows, maybe Santa will bring me one...which I doubt so I might just go buy one. Thanks!

[Waxhead]

I was about to sell my TU-2 and try a Turbo Tuner or some other box when I noticed that the TU-3 had been anounced. Through the marvels of ebay I recevied mine last week. It's definately a step up from the TU-2. The extra LEDs on it do help and it locks on to pitch faster too. I posted a little video clip of both in case anyone wants to have a peek. If you thought the TU-2 was dandy and are in the market for a tuner I would hold of as it's a step forward fore sure. Merry Holidays!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mXPZijaWGc

well.....is the new TU-3
1) as accurate as the Turbo
2) true bypass like the Turbo
3) strobe display like the Turbo
4) as fast to tune as a Turbo
5) as cheap as the Turbo

no chance..... so why would you consider anything except a Turbo.
Really.... it's just another no contest. :messedup

[Zakor]

well.....is the new TU-3
1) as accurate as the Turbo
2) true bypass like the Turbo
3) strobe display like the Turbo
4) as fast to tune as a Turbo
5) as cheap as the Turbo

no chance..... so why would you consider anything except a Turbo.
Really.... it's just another no contest. :messedup

1) Don't care. Both are more accurate than I will tune with a pedal tuner
2) Wanted a buffered pedal at the end of my guitar cable (ish) Will always have a tuner plugged in and perhaps no other buffered pedals
3) based on videos Would say i prefer the TU-3 display, but i've not seen one in person
4) TU-3 locks on to notes quickly. I don't know that my brain would be able to respond much faster.
5) don't care much... They are close.
6) Think Boss has an excellent track record for reliability. Not sure about Sonic Research
7) The Boss pedal is taller and easier to step on in the second row of my board.
8) Two outputs for occasional fun

my tick list is not yours I suppose...

[PeterUK]

I was about to sell my TU-2 and try a Turbo Tuner or some other box when I noticed that the TU-3 had been anounced. Through the marvels of ebay I recevied mine last week. It's definately a step up from the TU-2. The extra LEDs on it do help and it locks on to pitch faster too. I posted a little video clip of both in case anyone wants to have a peek. If you thought the TU-2 was dandy and are in the market for a tuner I would hold of as it's a step forward fore sure. Merry Holidays!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mXPZijaWGc

Excellent demo. Thanks.

I've bought one for my son as a Christmas gift so he's going to be well pleased and I'm going to be well jealous with my old TU2!

:) Peter

[aman74]

1) Don't care. Both are more accurate than I will tune with a pedal tuner


What do you mean?

Thanks

[jlagrassa]

Nice demo, definitely looks like it tracks better!

[LouRossi]

buffer the same as the tu-2? thx

[Zakor]

What do you mean?

Thanks

the tu-3 is plenty accurate. I'm not going to spend any more time trying to get the note more exactly tuned than what the tu3 says is in tune. Once it says a string is in tune i'm not doing further fine tuning.

[Dr. Jimmy]

Nice to hear! Still lovin' my Pitchblack though......

[Eagle1]

well.....is the new TU-3
1) as accurate as the Turbo
2) true bypass like the Turbo
3) strobe display like the Turbo
4) as fast to tune as a Turbo
5) as cheap as the Turbo

no chance..... so why would you consider anything except a Turbo.
Really.... it's just another no contest. :messedup

1.yes
2. a buffer so no, some like some don't.(sounds like a different one than in the TU2 (to me)
3. if you set it that way.
4.yes
5. depends where you live.
A good choice .

[Bucksears]

So, is the consensus so far that the buffer/bypass is better on the TU-3 than the TU-2?
I like my Korg DT-10 just fine, but if the TU-3 can be dialed in with better accuracy and sound just as good bypassed, I might have to think about it.

[Bobbyoso]

well.....is the new TU-3
1) as accurate as the Turbo
2) true bypass like the Turbo
3) strobe display like the Turbo
4) as fast to tune as a Turbo
5) as cheap as the Turbo

no chance..... so why would you consider anything except a Turbo.
Really.... it's just another no contest. :messedup

Just correcting some misinformation--someone subsequent to the quoted post answered "yes" to #1 above, which is not correct.

The spec sheet on the TU-3 says +/-1 cent accuracy; the Turbo is +/- .02 cents.

So the TU-3 is 1/50th the accuracy of the Turbo. There may be reasons you'd opt for the TU-3, and there's no disputing that--but accuracy is not one of them.

[Waxhead]

Just correcting some misinformation--someone subsequent to the quoted post answered "yes" to #1 above, which is not correct.

The spec sheet on the TU-3 says +/-1 cent accuracy; the Turbo is +/- .02 cents.

So the TU-3 is 1/50th the accuracy of the Turbo. There may be reasons you'd opt for the TU-3, and there's no disputing that--but accuracy is not one of them.

thanks for correcting that Bobby.
One of the advantages of the Turbo and Strobostomp of course is that you can also use them to do intonation of your guitars. I really doubt the TU-3 would be as fast the Turbo also....but lets leave that one

Another question though - like most Boss pedals the TU-2 is a well known tone sucker. Does the TU-3 have the same problem depending where you place it? Have you guys done comparison tests with the TU-3 plugged in & turned off verses completely removed from your board? That test would also need to be done with the TU-3 placed in various locations because the TU-2 ranges from a mild tone sucker to a terrible one depending where you put it. :)

[sandman]

are they discontinuing the TU-2?

guess so.

[Eagle1]

Just correcting some misinformation--someone subsequent to the quoted post answered "yes" to #1 above, which is not correct.

The spec sheet on the TU-3 says +/-1 cent accuracy; the Turbo is +/- .02 cents.

So the TU-3 is 1/50th the accuracy of the Turbo. There may be reasons you'd opt for the TU-3, and there's no disputing that--but accuracy is not one of them.
but that is not what the display shows
Boss is referring to the display which shows +/- 1 cent not it's ability to keep 0 accurate within +/- 1 cent.(This is what turbo is talking about.)
Not like for like stats .

[aman74]

but that is not what the display shows
Boss is referring to the display which shows +/- 1 cent not it's ability to keep 0 accurate within +/- 1 cent.(This is what turbo is talking about.)
Not like for like stats .

Sure, but we can only ever see what the display shows us, so a "yes" there may be technically correct, but if it's not what happens in practice it's pointless. A less accurate tuner may be best for some if they've done that to facilitate tuning speed if the more accurate tuner is too touchy in practice. That may or may not be the case.

It's like saying my Porsche is faster then your Gremlin, but wait, my Porsche has a governor on it and it only goes 30mph.

[aarondavis]

but that is not what the display shows
Boss is referring to the display which shows +/- 1 cent not it's ability to keep 0 accurate within +/- 1 cent.(This is what turbo is talking about.)
Not like for like stats .

I'm curious how one would go about or the company would go about measuring the cent accuracy of the display? And therefore how do you know for certain that the Turbo Tuner's display doesn't reflect the stated reference pitch accuracy?

[Eagle1]

Sure, but we can only ever see what the display shows us, so a "yes" there may be technically correct, but if it's not what happens in practice it's pointless. A less accurate tuner may be best for some if they've done that to facilitate tuning speed if the more accurate tuner is too touchy in practice. That may or may not be the case.

It's like saying my Porsche is faster then your Gremlin, but wait, my Porsche has a governor on it and it only goes 30mph.
In practice they are about the same so that just leaves the buffer.
It works well in some circumstances and sounds better than the TU2. Having large amounts of true bypass stuff series in the front end isn't great either.(my tuner is never in the signal path.)
I never said it was better than a turbo , It is a lot better than a TU2 though .

[Bobbyoso]

Well, it's possible that Boss has made a breakthrough in needle tuner technology which no one else has yet. But they claim "tuner accuracy = +/- 1 cent" which is in line with the best needle tuners today, or any non-strobe tuners for that matter--and twice or 3x as good as most. Nowhere in the literature do they claim anything else, and I'm sure they would if the technology supported it. Do you see anywhere they claim better than +/- 1 cent accuracy?

For that matter, even if theirtechnology supported better than plus or minus 1 cent accuracy, but their display didn't, that would be the same in practice--and a major problem for their display folks.

The Turbo's accuracy is +/- .02 cents, guaranteed. So yes, it is definitely apples for apples. In general, the Peterson Strobostomp is at least an order of magnitude, 10x, more accurate than any non-strobe tuner out there (the Korg Pitchblack Plus, not the standard Pitchblack, might be an exception to that, based on published specs). The Turbo tuner is 50x as accurate as the best non-strobes.

I don't have any dog in this race, and I know there are all sorts of reasons (buffers, display preferences, etc., even not caring about extreme accuracy) that people choose other options.

But I don't believe Boss nor any other manufacturer claims any needle tuner approaches the Turbo's accuracy.

[aarondavis]

One more question about the TU3. Can you program temperments into it?

[Eagle1]

I'm curious how one would go about or the company would go about measuring the cent accuracy of the display? And therefore how do you know for certain that the Turbo Tuner's display doesn't reflect the stated reference pitch accuracy?
The first indication of +/- on the display is the real world relevant data not the 0.02.(turbo do not give this data.but it won't be 0.02 as that would be unusable in practice with that display.) Obviously you don't want it to be out but what would be the use of 0.02 if the display could only show out by +/- 3cents.
A single teared strobe that showed +/- 0.02 would never stop spinning, +/- 1 cent on the display is a good usable (gigable) tuner.
I used a Peterson old school strobe (for setups) for years and believe me you wouldn't want that on stage with you.

[missing_dave]

hmm.. so for the 4th time anybody know about its buffer? (not that i think boss has redesigned their buffer.)
I highly doubt they did..but i dont know..plus im still happy with my TU2 but it does look like from the video the new features are a cool update/upgrade on the TU2 thats pretty cool.

[aman74]

In practice they are about the same so that just leaves the buffer.
It works well in some circumstances and sounds better than the TU2. Having large amounts of true bypass stuff series in the front end isn't great either.(my tuner is never in the signal path.)
I never said it was better than a turbo , It is a lot better than a TU2 though .

You had said this:

"but that is not what the display shows
Boss is referring to the display which shows +/- 1 cent not it's ability to keep 0 accurate within +/- 1 cent.(This is what turbo is talking about.)
Not like for like stats"

So I thought you were saying it was an apples to oranges comparison and that Boss was stating what the display shows and the Turbo what it's actual capabilities are. So, I'm not sure I follow you, but it's no biggie.

I don't know why any buffer comments or talk of which is better would be directed at me. I didn't bring up either issue and have no preference for either tuner at this point.

[Bobbyoso]

One last clarification--"huge amounts of true bypass stuff" is an oxymoron. True bypass means when switched off, there is a straight wire connection, input to output. No capacitors, resistors, diodes, no gain, Dumbleators, special sauce, etc. Anything else is BS, or at best marketing hyperbole, like non-class A amps being touted as class A.

Also, I believe the display of the Turbo is matched to the internal accuracy of the Turbo, meaning that it rotates one way or the other when tuning is outside the +/- .02 cent window. This does in fact mean that it rarely, if ever, stops moving completely in practice (which does also in fact put some people off--they'd prefer a far more blunt instrument which cannot detect or display minute variations in pitch).

But the display is not +/-1 cent, as was theorized, when the underlying technology is capable of 50x greater accuracy, especially when accuracy is a major differentiator/selling point. Put another way, there's no point in using a VGA monitor to output electron microscope images.

Not trying to be a PITA, just trying to separate conjecture from fact or at least published, and therefore legally actionable, specs.

No theories or facts to advance with respect to the TU-3 buffer.

[Eagle1]

Agreed on the buffer , Need to test it more.

[aman74]

Also, I believe the display of the Turbo is matched to the internal accuracy of the Turbo, meaning that it rotates one way or the other when tuning is outside the +/- .02 cent window. This does in fact mean that it rarely, if ever, stops moving completely in practice (which does also in fact put some people off--they'd prefer a far more blunt instrument which cannot detect or display minute variations in pitch).

But the display is not +/-1 cent, as was theorized, when the underlying technology is capable of 50x greater accuracy, especially when accuracy is a major differentiator/selling point. Put another way, there's no point in using a VGA monitor to output electron microscope images.



This was my understanding as well.

It's hard at times to get good info on a message board. People contradicting each other and even themselves makes it tough.

[Waxhead]

One last clarification--"huge amounts of true bypass stuff" is an oxymoron. True bypass means when switched off, there is a straight wire connection, input to output. No capacitors, resistors, diodes, no gain, Dumbleators, special sauce, etc. Anything else is BS, or at best marketing hyperbole, like non-class A amps being touted as class A.

Also, I believe the display of the Turbo is matched to the internal accuracy of the Turbo, meaning that it rotates one way or the other when tuning is outside the +/- .02 cent window. This does in fact mean that it rarely, if ever, stops moving completely in practice (which does also in fact put some people off--they'd prefer a far more blunt instrument which cannot detect or display minute variations in pitch).

But the display is not +/-1 cent, as was theorized, when the underlying technology is capable of 50x greater accuracy, especially when accuracy is a major differentiator/selling point. Put another way, there's no point in using a VGA monitor to output electron microscope images.

Not trying to be a PITA, just trying to separate conjecture from fact or at least published, and therefore legally actionable, specs.

No theories or facts to advance with respect to the TU-3 buffer.

+1 with Bobby
On the buffer issue. Yes pedal boards with more than say 5 pedals need both true bypass and good quality bufferred pedals to avoid tone suck and/or loss of volume. The big issue with bufferred pedals is the quality of the buffer parts used. Most Boss pedals tone suck cause they're made with poor quality buffers. The TU-2 is infamous for it but the Boss DD and CE series appear to have no issues there. So unless Boss have used good quality buffers in the TU-3 then it'll have the same problem as the TU-2.

Would be nice if Boss ever made just one true bypass pedal. They haven't so far :)

[Crunch Master]

Nice video, thanks for sharing this! :beer

[walterw]

Would be nice if Boss ever made just one true bypass pedal. They haven't so far :)
yeah, that'll happen just as soon as boss starts reissuing their vintage stuff :rolleyes:

i've always thought the newer boss buffers with their 1M input impedance (like the TU-2) were fine.

as for the turbo's "accuracy", the my understanding is that the +/-.02 spec just applies to the internal frequency generator it uses to compare pitch.

the display itself is analog and has no margin of error, it does exactly what the string does in real time, transients, harmonics and all. it indeed never sits still because the string it's reading never sits still either.

it's nothing like the fake "strobe" display on the boss, which is just the same tuning system with a different light pattern.

even at +/- 1 cent, the TU-3 doesn't begin to approach the accuracy of the turbo. (which is not to say the boss won't be a kick-ass and bulletproof stage tuner like its predecessor.)

[oxtone]

Good video - thanks for posting.

I love my Pitchblack, however, it's impossible to read in bright sunlight when I do outdoor gigs in the Summer. So, I bring a really old TU-12H with the mechanical needle.

Anyone know of other tuners that can be read in sunlight?

[walterw]

I love my Pitchblack, however, it's impossible to read in bright sunlight when I do outdoor gigs in the Summer. So, I bring a really old TU-12H with the mechanical needle.

Anyone know of other tuners that can be read in sunlight?
i can sorta see my turbo, since its display is based on movement rather than position, but really, your choices in this case are strobostomp (excellent) or needle (not so much).

[Eagle1]

(which is not to say the boss won't be a kick-ass and bulletproof stage tuner like its predecessor.)
This is the nub of the issue.

[Tonealicious]

I love a good Tuner fight.

[walterw]

(which is not to say the boss won't be a kick-ass and bulletproof stage tuner like its predecessor.)

This is the nub of the issue.
sure, but the turbo is still on a whole different level from any digital tuner; it's just as bulletproof as the TU series, and faster, once you learn how to read it.

[andrewface]

cant wait till some used ones show up in the emporium

[walterw]

i think you'll be waiting a while.

[sfx]

I liked what the TU-2 did to my tone when I had it first/last in the chain, though the accuracy of the leds seemed a bit goofy to me.

Maybe I'll pick one of these up, is it out yet?

[Unadan]

It may not be as good as the turbo but you can probably get a TU-3 (once they're released) for almost $50 less than the TT if you wait for a discount coupon from Guitar Center. I'm not convinced the extra $$ is worth it for the TT. That said I'd likely opt for the Korg Pitch Black vs. the TU-3 since it is true bypass.

[deathbyska76]

i dont understand how one could say an extra 30 or 40 bucks isnt going to be worth having your guitar - a stringed, tuning based instrument - as close to 100% perfect tuning as you can get. thats kind of like saying, well, i reaaaaalllly like my Marshall, but i dont want to spend that extra $40.... I think ill stick with my Crate. dont get me wrong, i've got a TU2, and i use it every day, but i WILL NOT have it in my chain. I used to, but now, i most definitely will NOT. I want a tuner that doesnt suck my tone. I feel like i should order myself a TT for christmas :D

[blackba]

Its nice to see Boss get back in the tuner game. It looks like they are finally at least on par with the other non-strobe tuners. The big question for me still (and to a number of you) is the buffer. I really like the buffer on my Korg DT-10. It does a great job with that and as a stage tuner. I would sure consider the TU-3 if I was looking for another tuner with a buffer.

I have a peterson strobostomp2 as well. Its nice, great for use in my home studio, but I like the speed of the DT-10 when tuning live. I removed the 1meg resistor on the SS2 to make it true bypass. I also had to remove a cap per Peterson's instructions, as the screen was going dead on me. If I had it to do over again, I would get the turbo tuner in place of the SS2.

[BoB/335]

The first indication of +/- on the display is the real world relevant data not the 0.02.(turbo do not give this data.but it won't be 0.02 as that would be unusable in practice with that display.) Obviously you don't want it to be out but what would be the use of 0.02 if the display could only show out by +/- 3cents.
A single teared strobe that showed +/- 0.02 would never stop spinning, +/- 1 cent on the display is a good usable (gigable) tuner.
I used a Peterson old school strobe (for setups) for years and believe me you wouldn't want that on stage with you.


I used a Conn Stobotuner for years on stage. That was the best!

[aarondavis]

but that is not what the display shows
Boss is referring to the display which shows +/- 1 cent not it's ability to keep 0 accurate within +/- 1 cent.(This is what turbo is talking about.)
Not like for like stats .

I'd like to know how you know what accuracy the display is showing?

Since the accuracy is based on the *movement* of the LED's, not the granular level *between* the LED's, the display is actually showing the true accuracy of the tuner.

[andrekp]

I want a tuner that doesnt suck my tone. :D

I'm not sure that someone with an Orange Dual Terror should be claiming to only love good tone.

I'm just sayin'...

[dancehall]

Another question though - like most Boss pedals the TU-2 is a well known tone sucker.

I reject the premise. I don't find that the TU-2 noticeably affects tone at all when bypassed. This is my finding after doing blind tests with a true bypass looper. I did find tone affected by other pedals such as the SD-1 but not the TU-2. Just because it's often repeated doesn't mean it's true and I urge others to challenge their ears similarly before perpetuating such claims.

[Soler]

I reject the premise. I don't find that the TU-2 noticeably affects tone at all when bypassed. This is my finding after doing blind tests with a true bypass looper. I did find tone affected by other pedals such as the SD-1 but not the TU-2. Just because it's often repeated doesn't mean it's true and I urge others to challenge their ears similarly before perpetuating such claims.

+1

Well said.

[cubistguitar]

I reject the premise. I don't find that the TU-2 noticeably affects tone at all when bypassed. This is my finding after doing blind tests with a true bypass looper. I did find tone affected by other pedals such as the SD-1 but not the TU-2. Just because it's often repeated doesn't mean it's true and I urge others to challenge their ears similarly before perpetuating such claims.


I can hear when its in the chain, not happy with that sound.

I always have it away from the chain, even bandmates know the difference. Not making a claim. Just saying I know when Ii have in the chain and when I don't.

[Aaron@FixPedals]

You guys act like guitars don't waiver slightly out of tune...

My professor tells me that nylon strings start changing pitch after 5 minuets of playing. Its so little that no one can really tell unless they have super better then Mozart pitch. So electrics have to change pitch in at least say 15 or 20 min(or less maybe). So the .02% accuracy probably wouldn't matter after a while of jamming since your guitar would waiver some % away from its original pitch anyways.

Also wouldn't equal temperament mess with the tuning as well? I don't know if they place temperament in the equation when building these tuners that tune exactly to the right frequency it can sound weird to our ears because it wouldn't be equally tempered like were used to. For example if you tune a piano perfectly in-tune to a tuner it will sound out of tune with the treble strings sounding flater and the bass sounding sharper the farther you get from middle C. The only way to fix it is to tune by ear or buy a really really expensive piano tuner that has algorithms for % change in the high and low strings which even then they can sound funny.

~Aaron

[HeavyG]

I upgraded from the TU-2 to the TU-3 and I am glad I did. After a few gigs and rehearsals, I just think the TU-3 has a quicker response and gets me ready to play much faster than the old one. I still own the TU-2 and will keep it around for a backup.

[imaguy2]

I reject the premise. I don't find that the TU-2 noticeably affects tone at all when bypassed. This is my finding after doing blind tests with a true bypass looper. I did find tone affected by other pedals such as the SD-1 but not the TU-2. Just because it's often repeated doesn't mean it's true and I urge others to challenge their ears similarly before perpetuating such claims.

Same here.

In my amp's loop, I have never been able to hear the difference between the TU-2 being there or absent.

[Fein Tuned]

I love a good Tuner fight.I know I'm resurrecting an old thread, but +1

[papersoul]

I was about to sell my TU-2 and try a Turbo Tuner or some other box when I noticed that the TU-3 had been anounced. Through the marvels of ebay I recevied mine last week. It's definately a step up from the TU-2. The extra LEDs on it do help and it locks on to pitch faster too. I posted a little video clip of both in case anyone wants to have a peek. If you thought the TU-2 was dandy and are in the market for a tuner I would hold of as it's a step forward fore sure. Merry Holidays!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mXPZijaWGc

So it locks in faster??? Great! Faster tuning! I have always loved the TU-2, tried many others, Peterson, Korg, etc. Always back to the good old Boss. I have never had an issue with the Boss bypass....I don't hear a difference in the signal chain or not. Guess I don't have magic ears, thankfully! LOL.

I have a mix of true bypass, transparent buffered bypass, boss bypass, I have no problem with any of them! I actually love having the TU-2 in the chain because it helps drive the signal. I actually hit my true bypass VOX wah first because on my board it makes sense to hit that pedal first and then the TU-2 and I still hear no difference.

True bypass Vox wah -> TU-2 tuner -> MXR Phase 90 -> Emma ReezaFratzits -> ISP Decimator -> amp. Loop has Monte Allums modded Boss GE-7 -> T-Rex Twister -> MXR Carbon Copy.

[papersoul]

Only thing I might ask is why are used Boss TU-3 tuners going for less than TU-2 tuners on the used market???? That is strange!

[matthornet]

EDIT: Anyone wanna sell me their TU3? :D

[customeffectpedal]

My korg tuner has served me well. I like the mechanical gauge its more informative then just LEDS bouncing around. I get me laser targeted tuning that way

[bani]

hi all! i am new here. i don't know why people argue with a tuner's accuracy or something. i have a boss tu3 and i don't think anybody's ear is more accurate than any tuner. i also don't know why they keep on saying bout tone-suck of buffered pedals. i think some of the greatest guitarists have used "tone-sucking" pedals and i don't think they had issues using them. just my 2cents.;)

anyway, my boss tu3 is a nice tuner and i didn't notice any tone-suck when in bypass. and it is waaaaaay more accurate than my human ears.:bonk

[JUSTJOB]

Been using a TU-3 for about a year now on my main pedalboard, and I have to say it is a fantastic tuner! IMHO, it is the perfect "live" tuner for the pedalboard, as it is plenty accurate, fast, and the display is easy to see, with a great built in buffer too! Love my TT also, (and don't want to get into that debate over "better") but for my pedalboard I just really do prefer the TU-3. For me it was my best pedal purchase of 2010.

[neville5000]

I reject the premise. I don't find that the TU-2 noticeably affects tone at all when bypassed. This is my finding after doing blind tests with a true bypass looper. I did find tone affected by other pedals such as the SD-1 but not the TU-2. Just because it's often repeated doesn't mean it's true and I urge others to challenge their ears similarly before perpetuating such claims.

This. There is an article in a UK based magazine (I can't find a link, but it was said) where Pete Cornish champions the TU-2 buffer saying something to the effect of "it's better to have a buffer than not and the TU-2's is perfectly fine". If it's good enough for Pete. . . I use mine in-line and my tone is better with it than without it because of several other TB effects + cabling. :love:

[DavidLM]

Been using a TU-3 for about a year now on my main pedalboard, and I have to say it is a fantastic tuner! IMHO, it is the perfect "live" tuner for the pedalboard, as it is plenty accurate, fast, and the display is easy to see, with a great built in buffer too! Love my TT also, (and don't want to get into that debate over "better") but for my pedalboard I just really do prefer the TU-3. For me it was my best pedal purchase of 2010.
I agree completely.

[SgtThump]

This. There is an article in a UK based magazine (I can't find a link, but it was said) where Pete Cornish champions the TU-2 buffer saying something to the effect of "it's better to have a buffer than not and the TU-2's is perfectly fine". If it's good enough for Pete. . . I use mine in-line and my tone is better with it than without it because of several other TB effects + cabling. :love:

I've used a TU2 for years and years. Around a year ago, I hooked it up to a single loop box to hear my dry tone with the tuner in the signal path (and off) and my dry tone with the tuner fully bypassed (using the single loop box.)

There is definitely a difference in the tone. Whether or not you care is up to you of course. But there is a difference and I didn't notice it as much when comparing the TU2 in the chain to out of the chain without using the loop box.

Interestingly, I did the same comparison with my Morley Bad Horsie II wah that has some kind of buffer bypass and I couldn't hear a difference at all. It sounded the same.

[labjr]

"i don't think anybody's ear is more accurate than any tuner."

I think the ear is more accurate than many tuners. I've compared a Conn St-11 Strobotuner to the Turbo Tuner. The Conn is +/-1 cent accuracy the TT is +/- .02 cent accuracy. With Conn I can hear beats in the chords. With the TT it sounds much more in tune.

Also the Turbo Tuner has a true strobe display in real time. No lag due to processing time.

[chervokas]

I reject the premise. I don't find that the TU-2 noticeably affects tone at all when bypassed. This is my finding after doing blind tests with a true bypass looper. I did find tone affected by other pedals such as the SD-1 but not the TU-2. Just because it's often repeated doesn't mean it's true and I urge others to challenge their ears similarly before perpetuating such claims.

I'm using a Turbo Tuner these days for tuning accuracy, but I also never had a problem with the TU-2 buffer when I ran one.

I've been looking for many months for a TU-2 schematic to no avail. If the TU-2 buffer is like the buffer in the Blues Driver or the NS-2 gate it appears, from the schematics I've seen online, to be a simple JFET buffer like the second sort of JFET buffer that Jack Orman describes here http://www.muzique.com/lab/buffers.htm
which has high headroom and a 1 meg input impedance.

I think these buffer circuits get a bum rap.

I guess some people might prefer the sound of an op-amp buffer--which will be true unity gain vs. the slightly less than unity gain of a JFET or BJT buffer as well as a lower output impedance. That constitutes technically 'better' buffer performance though the sonic differences are not likely to be enormous and, at least with respect to the output impedance, dependent on what other devices and cable lengths are in the system.

Some other people might like the BJT buffer that you get in something like a Tube Screamer (and I think the aforementioned SD-1) although that circuit has a significantly lower input impedance and I don't really know anyone who prefers it as a result.

But I bet most buffered pedals offer a variation on one of those three types of buffers, and probably the op-amp buffer is least frequently seen.

I don't know what kind of audible differences could be expected between the three except for the slight gain loss in the discrete circuits, unless it's related to differences of input impedance (lower input impedance will lower the amplitude of the resonant frequency of the guitar circuit and lead to a somewhat less bright sound; vice versa for higher input impedance).

I have no idea if Boss has changed the buffer from the TU-2 to the TU-3.

[David Garner]

Just got a TU-3 in the mail today. I didn't notice a difference in the buffer, but I need to play it through my gigging rig to be sure. I do prefer the display and the way the tuner responds when the string is in tune. Very nice touch, and very easy to see.

I got it because it is supposed to be more accurate than the TU-2 and I got it for a fair price. I don't know that I can confidently say it's qualitatively "better" than the TU-2, but I certainly don't think it's one of those upgrades that's really a downgrade.