Pssst... you... yeah, you there with the wah fetish

Bow Chicka Wow Wow Love GIF by HULU
 


First comparison. Explorer with '70s T-Tops, bridge position, into Helix preset with delay, reverb & stereo clean AC30s.

Thoughts:

The Vox is nice. It's got a little grit, and a good flow from low to high. I actually did this one last, think I strummed slightly harder.

The Classic with the Red Fasel has a big volume boost: The circuit itself distorts, especially heel down. The advantage is, heel down has a better change of not disappearing in the mix through a combination of sheer volume and distortion generating some grit. I really like the throaty lower half, but subtle it ain't.

The Clyde is clean and has a big range. It's quite focussed and has a very smooth sweep, the best "mapped" frequency sweep compared to the physical position of the pedal. The pedal actually has a few more degrees of movement, so it's got warmer heel and sharper toe down and that actually is a downside for me - live, I like parking it toe down with the neck pickup for repeatability and the Clyde is too sharp/thin like that. I could adjust the pot rotation but then the heel down will be too mellow, and I use that too..,

The Standard; The bottom half of the frequency sweep seems to occur in the bottom 25% of the pedal movement, so it sounds faster. It's kinda clean too, but somehow not as locked in as a Clyde.
 
Second Comparison



Vox - It's a little sharp at the toe down position, and you can hear the slighly dirty character as the heel goes down.

Classic Red - Again, more gain in this wah, so more grit. Toe down, it's not as sharp as the Vox. In fact, there's a certain thickness below the toe down upper mid frequency peak that makes it pretty useable and stops it sounding peaky. As in the first clip, I like that the distortion in the bottom half of the range adds a bit of definition even when it's really woofy and crunchy sounding. It seems to pick out a few more harmonics in the top half as it sweeps back up near the end.

Clyde - Really thin/ harsh at the top - the filter sounds sharper, a higher Q. I think that does, however mean that it almost has a synth like laser precision as it sweeps down and back up the range, it seems to capture every harmonic as it goes equally. It's really, really good, it just has too broad a range for me.

And the Standard - I'd say in range, Q and sweep, it's fairly similar to the Vox, just slightly cleaner. Heel down, I think it drops some volume compared to the others.
 


This is a big one for me. You know that meme, "Haunting Mids" that went around forums a decade or so back? This is haunting mids for me - that distant, evocative sound. Found at the Heel of Wah Pedals.

Vox - Annoyingly, a slight buzz in the background. This one is the noisiest of the four. I can get rid of the Buzz by changing from a standalone supply to my board's DC7, but then it seems to develop a buzz when toe down. Sigh. I like the tone. It's got a vowely, slightly gritty thing going on, and doesn't turn into mush.

Classic Red - Loud. Too Gainy. There are situations where that gain would be good, but this isn't it to me. Seems to go mad on one particular note, which is a shame because some other notes sound nice. It doesn't have as much focus as the Vox, which seems to tuck in the bass end nicely.

Clyde - This sits similar to the Vox, to my ears, but is cleaner. Maybe a little thinner.

Standard - Hmmm. Apart from the Classic which is murdered by its own volume in this comparison, I think there's not loads in it. This one actually seems a bit gainer than the vox, whereas in the previous two comparisons I'd say the reverse was true.
 
Been through the Crybaby drama.
Either not enough volume/BALLS
- or just too noisy,
My answer to everyone of those Crybabies?

Fulltone Supa-Wah.

Man, everyone of those settings in this Wah pedal are SUPA-KILLER
I’m still completely blown away by Fulltone’s last
creation.
The Whacked,Jimi & Shaft settings have been
improved also.
The new additional voicings are INCREDIBLE, SO GOOD!!
The Supa-Wah is now the cat in the bird seat
of my RMC Wheels of Fire & Wizard wah’s

Peace, love & Wah!!
 

Attachments

  • 1E504863-F96A-4E57-B60B-E1ABBA3228E4.jpeg
    1E504863-F96A-4E57-B60B-E1ABBA3228E4.jpeg
    1.7 MB · Views: 22
  • AEDE6845-3ACE-41AA-A2B1-D95E1303274A.jpeg
    AEDE6845-3ACE-41AA-A2B1-D95E1303274A.jpeg
    1.5 MB · Views: 22
Tomorrow: Some distortion.
All those clips are really interesting. I quite like all of the wahs tbh, and would use them for slightly different things. You've inspired me to do a similar thing but with all of the different modes on each of my wahs too.
 
I have not tried a lot of different wahs. My main one for the past 8-9 years has been the EVH sig, which I love. I'm actually thinking of grabbing a second one, as I hear they can wear out? This one has already lost most of its resistance, but still sounds great. I haven't been able to find the Allen key that came with it to adjust/tighten it up.

I was also quite happy with the wahs in the FM9.

Those clips were cool, @Cirrus . I'd love to try a Fulltone.
 
I wouldn't pay that much for a wah. But when it was all said and done, I did pay about £200 for my 90's bb535 rev2 - and it has a dicky power socket that I've not gotten around to replacing yet!

When I stomp it, sometimes it will momentarily lose power and create this really cool but really fucking loud and horrible squeal sound, which is why it isn't yet on my board.
 
Thoughts on Morley switchless?
I used the Bad Horsie 2 for many years. I tried Wah pedals multiple times before discovering that one and they always got tossed aside due to that damn switch!

I liked the Morley a lot. It has a wide sweep and facilitates some interesting "non-traditional" techniques like "bouncing" the treadle using the spring.

Note that it isn't actually switchless - there's an optical switch activated when the pedal moves from heel down and bypassing when it returns (via the spring loaded treadle).

Ultimately I found that I couldn't not hear Steve Vai when using it, though... And I discovered the Crybaby 95Q, which I thought until recently was also an optically switched. Someone pointed out that there's actually a mini switch under the heel of the treadle... But it functions the same way.

The 95Q is a more traditional sounding Wah.

These days I much prefer to use a spring loaded expression pedal with my Fractals and choose the Wah types for a given need, and then tweak them as desired. I could have 8 different wahs in a single preset by switching channels of 2 blocks.
 
I have been distorting away until this very day.

I ended up just with the Clyde because no bastard will buy it. But now I've started really liking it, it's too bright toe down but it's got an insanely nice aggressive sweep thanks to the high q factor. Tried to replace it with a CAE wah, I love that too but it's not got the same character
 
The only two that have really done it for me so far are the old budda bud-wah and the Teese rmc-10. The Teese in particular is the sound that was always in my head that the various crybaby’s I’ve had could never get. The budda was in the ballpark, but the rmc10 is the exact thing I wanted.

D
 
Ultimately I found that I couldn't not hear Steve Vai when using it, though... And I discovered the Crybaby 95Q, which I thought until recently was also an optically switched.
That is a bit funny, as Vai has has been using a 95Q as his main wah for a good number of years now! :D
I just got a 95Q myself, like it a lot :beer
 
Back
Top