Supercollder vs. Bass Big Muff heavyweight battle

[Thunderscreech]

I now have both. And, so far, it seems the Supercollider (the one with the mids switch and not knob) is winning. The Bass Big Muff doesn't seem to have "it". but then again, the "it" could be had by putting the XXL in series with the Supercollider.

Don't get me wrong, there is something sinfully loud and nasty about Supercollider >BBM in "Dry" mode, but I will explore this later this week.


Further bulletins as events warrant.

[FreaqyFrequency]

Now THIS is something I want to hear.

[bovine mind]

yeah, jesus, where are the clips?

[warwick.hoy]

I see your "BBM Vs. SC thread" fail and raise you a "don't have photoshop" fail






This Thread Sucks Without Soundclips

[grygrx]

Considering that the BBM is half the price of the SC and easy to get ahold of, I'm not sure this is a fair fight!

I found them both to be muffish. The SC is a higher gain pedal, that sounds awesome when just rocking out. The BBM cuts better in the band because of the way clean mode was implemented and does 'lightly fuzzy' a bit better (IMHO).

[dannybuoy]

The Supercollider is most definitely muffish; the circuit is almost identical except for a few different component values and a tweaked tonestack. I've been drawing out the circuit using Eagle and am nearly done but it's taking me a while as I've never attempted this before!

[RCCollins]

Originally Posted by grygrx

Considering that the BBM is half the price of the SC and easy to get ahold of, I'm not sure this is a fair fight!

I found them both to be muffish. The SC is a higher gain pedal, that sounds awesome when just rocking out. The BBM cuts better in the band because of the way clean mode was implemented and does 'lightly fuzzy' a bit better (IMHO).

yeah, i would love to have a supercollider (with mid knob) but in the final analysis, the BBM is a lot more flexible. I'd never use a supercollider for "vintage" fuzz sounds, for instance, while the BBM does that surprisingly well for a muff.

Keep in mind that I value compact, multipurpose pedals above larger (and often pricier) ones that I would use for only one general sound.

[icarussmicarus]

The BBM is just ridiculous value. In terms of working in a band context - you won't get a more useable muff derivative. You don't have to drop serious cash on a great sounding pedal only to be adding EQ and blend pedals to your chain just to hear it.

[RCCollins]

Originally Posted by icarussmicarus

The BBM is just ridiculous value. In terms of working in a band context - you won't get a more useable muff derivative. You don't have to drop serious cash on a great sounding pedal only to be adding EQ and blend pedals to your chain just to hear it.

particularly when you could get darn close to that pedal's sound with preamp and amp eq settings

[icarussmicarus]

I think it's great something like the BBM exists as an introduction to bass fuzz/blended fuzz and muff style fuzzes. It's something I wish had been around when I first started buying fuzzes willy nilly

[Grimoire]

I've only had it a week, but the Supercollider really is everything I need in a fuzz. The depth control adds a sub signal that is simply phenomenal. The price at the time I bought mine was about the same as the BBM, thanks to the strong £. It's plenty versatile - perhaps not very low gain, but it's not only about raging geological devastation, there are a whole bunch of varied sounds to be found in the tiny box (I have a 1290).

[Chronicle]

Like I said before, my v2 Supercollider cuts through the mix with some boosted mids. Sounds fantastic.

[Thunderscreech]

Originally Posted by Chronicle

Like I said before, my v2 Supercollider cuts through the mix with some boosted mids. Sounds fantastic.

I can't boost my mids.



Despite that, I'm wishing the Mids switch had been a seperate stomp switch....


Hmm...is there a modification that is possible?

[Chronicle]

Originally Posted by Thunderscreech

I can't boost my mids.



Despite that, I'm wishing the Mids switch had been a seperate stomp switch....


Hmm...is there a modification that is possible?

In theory, it should work. Just switching the switches.

[Thunderscreech]

Okay, well, after a few rounds of playing (with no interference from Informational Fields) I've found I like the Muff on the Dry setting. Althought my clean sound is a bit boomy (courtesy D'Addario and their wimpish five string set. What? do you think that most people who buy a five string set DON'T ACTUALLY USE THE LOW B? seriosuly. I could use that .130 as a C#. It sounds way better. Give me a .140 in my five string set you pantywaists) but that's okay, improvements are on the way.

[RCCollins]

Originally Posted by Thunderscreech

Okay, well, after a few rounds of playing (with no interference from Informational Fields) I've found I like the Muff on the Dry setting. Althought my clean sound is a bit boomy (courtesy D'Addario and their wimpish five string set. What? do you think that most people who buy a five string set DON'T ACTUALLY USE THE LOW B? seriosuly. I could use that .130 as a C#. It sounds way better. Give me a .140 in my five string set you pantywaists) but that's okay, improvements are on the way.

if the dry setting is the only one you like on the BBM, you might consider just putting the supercollider in a blend loop

[Thunderscreech]

Originally Posted by RCCollins

if the dry setting is the only one you like on the BBM, you might consider just putting the supercollider in a blend loop

I also like the Bass Boost setting. The BBM is, on my rig and at my EQ setting, not as thick as the Supercollider, so the clean blend makes it more thicker.

This is only after having the pedal less than 24 hours, you see.

[J. Crawford]

If you end up selling the BBm Thunder, PM me.

[warwick.hoy]

Originally Posted by warwick.hoy

I see your "BBM Vs. SC thread" fail and raise you a "don't have photoshop" fail






This Thread Sucks Without Soundclips

Since that wasn't very constructive....here is a soundclip I just made. WARNING: You may want to turn your speakers down. I'm one of those obnoxious bassists. I'm pretty much just noodling...but I find a groove there at the end.

http://soundclick.com/share?songid=7554503

As you can see I'm doing more than just sludge/doom stuff with this pedal and it starts to get a little sludgy there towards the end of the clip.

Signal Path = 98 Warwick Thumb Bolt-On Five String (active) > Supercollider (version 2) > Gallien Krueger MB2-500 (DI Out) > Soundcard.

This Pic shows the settings. I took the picture last night but the settings haven't changed.



Everything is pretty much wide open except the volume. Depth is all the way left which is deeper sounding than all the way right. Gain and Tone are all the way right (up) and the Mids knob is a hair away from all the way up (right).

These aren't the be all end all settings. If T.Screech doesn't mind the slight thread hijack; I'll take clip requests.

Hope you enjoy.

PS. This was the preliminary clip which rides a lot on the low B string.

http://soundclick.com/share?songid=7554548

[whoatherechunk]

i have a SC and love it. which muff variant is it based off though?