Tone Bender MK1.5 vs. Fuzz Face

[clapointe1]

Which do you perfer and why ?

 

[stopreferencing]

Mk 1.5 - less boom/wool/mush in the low-end.

 

[FF71]

Fuzz Face. It's more dynamic than a Tonebender.

 

[stratguy23]

This is tough, I have a D*A*M MK1.5 that I really like as well as a really good silicon Fuzz Face from the early '70's. MK1.5 is definitely less woolly, boomy on the low end, but the Fuzz Face cleans up better. I guess I would say MK1.5 by a small margin.

 

[kelvinator60]

With a Pigdog Fuzz 1.5 you don't need a Fuzz Face OR a MKII.

 

[TrainBridge]

Fuzz Face. It's more dynamic than a Tonebender.

Of course you would say fuzz face.

 

[analogmike]

I'm really liking the MK1.5 lately.

 

[Painasusual]

Fuzzface. I don't really like benders.

 

[4nd3h]

Never tried a bender; can anyone compare? How's the cleanup?

Lovin' my Sunface.

 

[stopreferencing]

Never tried a bender; can anyone compare? How's the cleanup?

Lovin' my Sunface.

The Mk1.5 I use exhibits a cleanup that's reedier/dirtier/more mid-range-y, whereas a fuzz face can (read: should) be more sparkly/glassy.

 

[analogmike]

The Mk1.5 I use exhibits a cleanup that's reedier/dirtier/more mid-range-y, whereas a fuzz face can (read: should) be more sparkly/glassy.

Right, it doesn't really clean up like a fuzzface. But it's got a great usable fuzz sound even with the fuzz knob set low or your guitar backed down. Very cool.

 

[wingwalker]

Despite the similarities in the circuits, the sounds are just too far apart to pick a fav...

 

[thesooze]

I've loved my Lunar Module longer, but my new EQD Tone Reaper is pretty stinkin rad. More raspy/bitey than the LM, and can get a lot brighter/cutting. Sometimes the LM is toooo smooth, you know? They make a great pair, IMO.

 

[teleclem]

It's close. But I'd say Fuzz Face.

 

[voorhiessa]

Good thread

 

[dewey decibel]

Fuzz Face sounds great at home but just gets swallowed up by a band (unless you're in a trio or something). MK 1.5 is very similar, just not as woofy and cuts better. IMO in a band mix the MK1.5 sounds like a Fuzz Face does at home. But what do I know, I went with a Vox...

 

[clapointe1]

I still think with a MK1.5 you get the best of both worlds ! Plus I think the MK1.5 has more gain !

 

[Stratm69]

Fuzz Faces are able to clean up better and you can blend them into your tone much easier, such as a slight boost or grit. You can dial in full-on nastiness, a slight boost, or everything in between.

No matter the period of Tonebender, each one is very similar sounding and you can always tell when they are engaged. There's really no wiggle room when it comes to them, they are basically on or off. They pretty much boost the treble frequencies and add a hairy bombardment of grit and fuzz. Unless you can find one with a tone or bias control, they are more or less a one trick pony.

The two are night and day. But at the end of the day, your comparing apples to oranges. Both have their purposes and they are equally fun and amazing sounding.

 

[Kev O)))]

I'm really liking the MK1.5 lately.

Do you think that AM might make a Tonebender type pedal one day?

 

[jkokura]

I chose the FF. I chose it because based on what I play, it's more useful for me. I like that running my volume pot can really affect the way the Fuzz reacts, and it's a stupid simple and very durable circuit. Add a Bias trimmer, and Fuzz Faces will give you what you need for fuzz pretty much everytime.

Jacob